Who is the anti-school lobby? Consider this.
At the risk of being labeled an “anti,” I submit the following as food for thought. It seems that anyone who doesn’t agree with a particular viewpoint is portrayed in a negative light such as an “anti.” As much as I hate the term “concerned citizen,” I like it better than being called an “anti.”
I had written in a posting three weeks ago about the problems facing residents, retired and working, who might be struggling to exist while watching their real estate taxes climb by as much as 10 percent annually. Some folks (retirees), have paid their dues to the school system for many years and watched their children get an adequate education on much less than today percentage wise, yet the school board is asking taxpayers to pay for yet another bond issue. I have yet to see anyone representing the Lake Washington School District respond to this topic. A response without rancor would be appreciated.
When I was running my company, if I kept going to the bank for loans every year because I couldn’t make ends meet or was unwilling to make hard choices, eventually I would no longer be able to support the debt. Of course the bank would have cut me off long before I got to that point. We the taxpayers, who are the school district’s bankers, can only do this by voting no on the bond issue. We are trying to send a message, it’s our only way to express our frustration with rising costs in everything in our lives.
When running my company I had to learn to be creative and operate more efficiently to counter rising costs and not bury my company with debt. I ask the school board to think of the tax payers as a company who cannot be buried with even more debt. It’s almost like watching kids say to their parents “I can’t buy everything I want on the allowance you pay me, I need more.” So it seems reasonable for all residents to say that as your banker we are asking you to live within your means. Yes, annual costs do rise, it’s to be expected. The challenge for the school board is to figure out how to work smart, be creative while living within a reasonable budget.
The pro bond advocates can’t understand whats wrong with the awful “anti bond” voters and why they aren’t jumping on the “tax and spend” bandwagon.
I ask the advocates to try to understand that according to census figures gleaned from the city of Kirkland statistics.
Fifty-six percent of the households in Kirkland do not have kids in school.
Forty-three percent of our households do have children.
The 56 percent figure of households that do not have children coincides very closely with the percentage of people who voted against the LWSD bond issue.
Is this a coincidence or is it a case where retires and others are struggling to make ends meet? They are faced with the looming prospect of their taxes doubling every ten years and losing their homes.
I only ask that the school district considers living within their means like so many of us are forced to do. Don’t follow the current trend of government bodies taxing the residents of our city and our nation with a debt that neither us or our children will be able to support.
Dennis Schor, Kirkland
