Vote YES on Lake Washington School District levies/bond!
Editorial: I'm going to vote YES for the school levies and bond this election because it's the smart thing to do. Schools are a great investment for our neighborhoods. We know that!
But, let's not lose sight that local businesses count on our schools for a vibrant, educated labor pool. "Being future ready " is more than about leaving town for college. Many students find their future right here, working for local businesses after graduation.
I have personal and financial reasons for supporting the levy and bond measures:
1) My daughter received a first class education (K-12) that prepared her for college. Her life was enriched by a long list of inspiring teachers, outside school activities, and friendships. I've always felt my kid was safe at school.
2) Even though my only child is graduating this year, I still look at the additional $170/year tax tab as a good investment. Why? If we don’t fund all three measures, the school system will lose the equivalent of 612 teachers, 30-year roofs and buildings will deteriorate and classrooms will overflow from the 1200 new students expected by 2014. We can expect no bail-out from the State - actually less from them!
3) If we let our schools go down the tube, so go the neighborhoods and our home values. I see the $170/year payment as "property value insurance protection." Without it, my home and largest asset may never fully bounce off this bottom.
Will you be voting Tuesday, Februrary 9? Please Vote YES on all three LWSD funding measures!
By Bob Yoder
Voter information about the District Levies and Bond is here.
If the school district is looking at 1200 net new students by 2014, they should not hasve been in front of City Council backtracking on the impact fee increase they pleaded for in front of the Planning Commission. If they are serious about meeting their fiscal obligations - and showing the citizens of Redmond that tney're both serious and competent - they should not be sending mixed messages.
ReplyDeleteProposition No. 3 on the February 9, 2010 ballot authorizes the Lake Washington School District to "modernize" Juanita High School. To me, "modernize" means to remodel, but to the District, "modernize" means to tear down and rebuild. We have been told that it would cost more to remodel than to rebuild. I find this hard to believe. When the economy was doing well, voters approved bond measures to replace the oldest schools and build new schools to ease overcrowding. At some point the District decided that the normal life of a school is 30-40 years and set up a schedule to replace all school buildings within the district. By the District's definition, Juanita High School, at age 39 is at the end of its useful life.
ReplyDeleteJuanita High School is located in Kirkland near Juanita Bay. It has two large buildings: a 129,000 sq.ft. school building and a 74,000 sq.ft. field house that contains a gym and a pool. Both buildings were constructed in 1971. The pool and the portable near the east side of the building may have some major maintenance issues, but otherwise, both main buildings appear to be in good condition. School districts around the country would love to have a 39-year-old building like Juanita High School and wouldn't think of tearing it down. When did we become so extravagant to think that JHS is too old and useless?
According to the District's "Capital Facilties Plan 2009-2014", Juanita High School has 52 standard classrooms and 8 portable classrooms that can hold 32 students each. Using 60 classrooms with 32 students per class, Juanita High School can accommodate 1920 students (although the District assumes utilization of each class at 70% to account for teacher planning areas.) Even with the teacher planning areas, JHS can hold 1350 students and that's more than enough room for the additional 300 ninth graders who will be included when the school is converted to the 9-12 grade model.
The main argument I've seen to justify tearing down Juanita High School is so that it will be as new as Redmond High School (2003) and Lake Washington High School (2011). Can we keep spending and building so that everyone is going to a new school? Did the last decade with our "building boom" condition us to believe that we had to tear down and rebuild because everything wasn't brand new or the configuration wasn't quite right? We need to see some more creative problem-solving from the District that doesn't automatically require tear-downs.
I do support Propositions 1 & 2, but I cannot justify approving $234,000,000 for Proposition 3, most of which will be spent to destroy a perfectly good building and then rebuild it. I will be voting: Prop1:YES, Prop2:YES, Prop3:NO
The positive role of local schools on our community is so pervasive that too many neighbors may not connect their irreplaceable influence to our lives. Understanding the potential of schools to become under-contributors – not attracting sustainable employers or employees, not engaging a vested community, not preserving real estate values to underpin city services (and personal investments), much less not turning out qualified graduates – underlies a knowledge often taken for granted on how to continue building the vibrant and valued community we choose to live in.
ReplyDeleteThough gaining an accurate understanding of how Washington public schools - both K-12 and higher ed - receive funding from the state and local level is not always easy, the legislative reforms in progress are making that understanding easier to come by, as are efforts by our school district.
Our district has an enviable record of publicly involving the community in budget decisions, and for being transparent. The Lake Washington volunteer School Board and district administration have also demonstrated state-wide leadership in fiscal accountability. As the 6th largest district in Washington, LWSD ranks #2 out of the largest 15 districts on dollars per pupil spent on teaching while also being 2nd best at spending the least for central administration per student.
Local community leaders in every arena and industry, many of whom publicly endorse the school levies (readers can check with their organizations of choice for their outlook), join in asking your readers to renew an irreplaceable investment by us, each local voter, for our own futures by voting “Yes” to approve all three Lake Washington school measures on the Jan. 9th ballot.
On the topic of LWSD Proposition 3, has anyone thought about how adding 450 more students to Redmond High School will affect our morning traffic and our quality of life here on Education Hill when Redmond High School converts to the 9-12 grade model?
ReplyDeleteThis year there are 1442 RHS students in grades 10-12. Only 232 arrive at RHS on district buses*. The district's transportation policy seems to be: Drive yourself to school or Get your parents to drive you to school. (The district also tells students to walk to school, but walking up to 2 miles at 6:30 AM when it's dark, cold and raining is unrealistic especially considering how many teenagers have trouble waking up in the morning.) Anyone who has been on NE 104th Street at 7:15 AM knows there are hundreds of cars trying to get into the RHS parking lot. Remember that 9th graders don't drive, so there will be a lot more trips to and from the school parking lot each morning as parents drop their 9th graders off. If you think traffic is bad now, imagine how bad it will be when we add even more cars to the morning traffic jam.
If we approve LWSD Proposition 3, we will be specifically authorizing the district to add classroom space at Redmond High School to accommodate about 450 more students. Wouldn't it be better to have RHS convert to the 9-12 model with the maximum number of students in the school remaining constant at about 1400-1500 students? It would require a redistribution of some students who live farthest from RHS and a redrawing of high school boundary lines. It might require a significantly different model than simply adding 9th graders to all of the existing high schools. (There are 1600 ninth graders in the district - enough for an entire high school.) If we approve Proposition 3 the way it is written, we will be locking our students and our neighborhood into a plan that creates a mega-1900 student high school and all the negative consequences that come with the larger size.
I support the 9-12 high school conversion, but the district needs to think through how to implement this and then come back to us with more than a 1-page summary of how and when it will occur. Reject LWSD Proposition 3 and tell the District to give us a better plan for the 9-12 conversion.
*RHS enrollment total came from the LWSD website; bus rider total came from OSPI website.
In response to the anonymous commenter above on Feb. 4th, "Only 232 arrive at RHS on district buses*. The district's transportation policy seems to be: Drive yourself to school or Get your parents to drive you to school. (The district also tells students to walk to school, but walking up to 2 miles at 6:30 AM when it's dark, cold and raining is unrealistic especially considering how many teenagers have trouble waking up in the morning.) "
ReplyDeletePerhaps the commenter does not remember the 7 million dollars that were cut from the school budget last year by the legislature. There were many oppportunities for public comment and participation in this very painful budget process. The overwhelming majority of participants gave the district the clear message that student learning was a priority and that they did not want the cuts to be in the classroom or teaching staff. Thus we find ourselves with the current transportation issue. In terms of your concerns that the 9-12 conversion is an ill-conceived plan, I have no doubt that the district will apply a similar process of community input and using their professional judgement will do what is best for students. If you reject the bond, thinking that it will send them back to the drawing board,no harm, no foul, you are mistaken. It will result in our district funds being used to run the election again, and we lose precious time. Students only get one shot at their high school education. A delay of 3 years means nothing to adults, but to them, it is crucial. In terms of the interest rates and construction climate being very favorable right now, we will lose that advantage as well. I understand your need to have everything firmly down in writing, but in this instance, we need to trust that our superintendent and administration are going to use their professional judgement and knowledge and community input to make this decision. Vote YES for the levies AND bond.