LETTER: The LWSD is running a levy in February to raise $65.4 million more than they need to house their growing student population. There is plenty of extra space in existing Kirkland schools to house this growth.
The district says it will consider using that space by rearranging attendance boundaries and bus schedules if the levy fails. They admit they already have enough money to provide more high school classrooms in Redmond and Sammamish. It’s unspent money we entrusted to them for modernizing 30 of our schools. So far they have torn down and replaced 21 of those schools instead of modernizing them. They intend to continue this practice for the remaining 8 schools. The district will consider using some of the unspent money to alleviate the housing shortage instead if the levy fails. The rest of the money would still be available for modernization of those 8 schools.
Bundled in the levy for more HS classrooms is a new small specialized school on the east side to house 6th graders with high school seniors in a controversial 6-12 grade grouping. It would be designed for a STEM program already available in existing schools spread throughout the district. Although it would require the bulk of the levy money, it would only use a relatively small portion of it to provide more classrooms. The major portion of the money would be used for roads, utilities and other major site development costs together with core facilities such as gym, cafeteria, admin, resource centers, common areas, and lot of other non-classroom space. The district could wait until increased enrollment justifies the expense of building a more useful small 9-12 high school instead of a small 6-12 specialized school if the levy fails.
Bond issues are normally used to finance major expenditures for new facilities but the district has decided to gamble on a levy instead because it offers better odds for success in an off year election. A bond issue requires validation with a minimum number of votes. A levy doesn’t require validation so it can’t be defeated by people not voting. A bond issue requires a 60% super majority. A levy will pass with a simple majority. The LWSD levy committee will work aggressively to get out the yes vote. Unless enough people who oppose this proposal actually cast a NO vote, the district could proceed with their questionable building program by default.
Opinion by Paul Hall
Kirkland
425-822-8850
(I also responded to Mr. Hall's letter on Kirkland's blog.)
ReplyDeleteI feel the $100+ per year that this levy will cost me is well worth it.
More new school buildings and possibly a STEM school in our district? Hurray!
Until the district can use the funds they have responsibly, i will vote against every levy bond issue that comes up. This is extortion, plain and simple. Pay up or your kids lose is the message.
ReplyDeleteThe district needs to realize that public schools are not the only game in town and that the increase in homeschool and private school students is a reflection of the districts attitude of monopoly.
Between the $100/year price tag for this levy and all the other increases (need I mention utilities and storm water?) taxpayers have to pay, i'll vote against this levy.
The Feb 8 levy will only cost $140 more per year in taxes, but remember that we authorized the district to borrow $436,000,000 in 2006 for the Phase II modernization. We have to pay that off too. Our next tax bills that we receive in March will contain an increase and our taxes will go up every year until the full $436 million is borrowed. A rough calculation says that we'll be paying $30,000,000 per year for the next 19 years to pay off the 2006 bond measure or about $450 per year for an average house. What about Phase 3 and 4 - will the district be asking for another $1 BILLION to pay for that in the coming years? Plus, the EPO that just expired in 2010 was $42 million and it will be replaced by the EPO that goes from $49 million in 2011 to $60 million in 2014. Add all the taxes together and figure out if you will be able to afford your annual tax bill.
ReplyDeleteSince I had to spend $40,000 to send my son to private high school, I think I have done my part. I voted no. Let's work with what we have first. Even if this doesn't pass, I don't believe that property values will go down because there are only a few school districts around king county that are held in high esteem, Lake Washington and Bellevue.
ReplyDeletePaganne - please define what you mean by "use the funds they have responsibly." Specifics please. You're implying they're irresponsible with spending and I'd love to know why.
ReplyDeleteAnonymous (1/23 at 12:37 p.m.) - other than throwing around big numbers what's your point? The district has a plan of how the previously-authorized $ will be used. Do you disagree with that plan, and if so can you please be so kind as to explain specifics?
Anonymous #2 (1/25 at 10:53 a.m.) - your comment is confusing. Thanks I guess for helping the overcrowding problem (one student less). You didn't say why you pulled your kid from public school; my question is, do you think that perpetuating overcrowding in the schools by defeating this levy would somehow help correct the reason(s) LWSD didn't meet your family's standards? Would love to hear more.
BTW, I put my "yes" vote in the mail the day the ballot came. Chip Kimball is leading the district effectively, and any district that has been able to weather the current economy without laying off teachers is exceptional in my opinion.