LETTER: Referendum: Where’s the discussion?

To the Editor:

In 2013 the Proposed New Debt pays off no bond principal and incurs interest of $837,000 while the tax levy is only $656,250. How is the district proposing to make up this shortfall of $180,750?

It is coming from the proceeds of the bond. Why? Because they wanted to keep the levy at the $167 level for a $250,000 residential home which was a level the survey they took indicated gave the referendum the best chance to succeed. That’s almost $200,000 not available for the other “wants” and “needs.”

The tax rate increase for each year is different. That very fact alone means that the $167 would be different each year. The tax rate increase in 2013 is 7.1%. The increase in 2014 is 8.2 %. That is a 14+% increase. And, remember, the $167 amount is subsidized by the bond proceeds. The real change comes in years 2023-2028. The school district’s existing debt would be retired by then but with this new debt we continue to pay. That means all the debt in those years is an increase. I believe taxpayers want to pay off their credit cards and burn their mortgages. At this rate, the school district will never do this. We just keep adding debt, kind of like the Federal government. We’ll leave it to today’s first graders to pay for that essential press box we so desperately need. Also, the Ehlers website sited by Mr. Robran doesn’t allow any calculation for years other than 2013. You can check my facts in the Aug. 8 Ehlers documents on the school district website.

The warranty on synthetic turf fields is generally anywhere from 8 to 10 years on the websites I visited. But even if it is 13 years as Mr. Robran proposes we’ll still be paying for this field 3 years after its warranted life. That isn’t the type of financial investment I make. That is my opinion.

To my previous letter: where is the strategic financial plan and where has there been any public discussion at all by the board that $27 million dollars deserves?

Tom Cook