MURRIETA -- A member of the group overseeing how a $40.4 million school construction bond is spent is criticizing school officials for floating the idea of bringing another bond measure to voters to pay for a third high school.

Richard Ackerman, vice chairman of the Measure K Citizens Oversight Committee, which monitors the $40.4 million bond passed in 2002, said this week that talk by district officials of potentially asking voters to approve another bond so soon is ridiculous.

"It's not realistic," said Ackerman, an attorney who plans to run for a seat on the Murrieta Valley Unified School District school board next year. "The district is not doing a bad job. … It's just are we going to really go back to taxpayers and ask for another $40 million? Any savvy taxpayer is going to ask themselves, 'Hey wait a minute, didn't they ask us for that a couple years ago?'"

He said residents need the money, even if it amounts to only a couple hundred dollars per household. If the district is in need of funds, it should look for places in its general fund to cut, or build a smaller third high school, he said.

The district is considering the bond to pay for a third traditional high school to handle its growing student population. Driving the issue is the escalating cost estimate of building another high school, officials say.

Its initial $60 million price tag has ballooned to $100 million because of steel, cement and overall construction costs, while the district has about $72 million available, including anticipated state matching funds, for the project, officials have said.

But Ackerman said that Measure K was supposed to pay for the third high school, and if the district cannot afford a traditional one then perhaps a magnet school would be acceptable.

A less expensive option, a magnet school typically has a streamlined, specialized curriculum without the full complement of extracurricular activities of traditional high schools and is open to students within a district who volunteer to attend.

"A third high school is a third high school," Ackerman said. "Later we can still acquire more property."

Ackerman said that when officials point to a survey conducted last year that found that 77 percent of respondents prefer a traditional high school, "they didn't put in the survey, 'If we run out of money do you still want (a traditional high school)?'"

District officials have said they plan to conduct another survey on the issue.

Superintendent Chet Francisco wouldn't comment on Ackerman's concerns because a bond is just being considered as an option, said district spokeswoman Karen Parris.

But not everybody on the oversight committee agrees with Ackerman.

"All along I figured there would be another bond. … You gotta be rational and reasonable on things like this," said member Chester Hancock. "Knowing what things cost, I can't imagine they would stretch $40 million."

Moreover, Hancock said he does not support the idea of a magnet school.

"I grew up in the south, and separate but equal is not equal," he said. "I would not send my offspring to a school constructed with the balance of the money when I saw what was spent on Vista Murrieta and Murrieta Valley high schools."

Contact staff writer Jennifer Kabbany at (951) 676-4315, Ext. 2625, or jkabbany@californian.com.