[Vision2020] School Levy (Vote No)
Donovan Arnold
donovanarnold at hotmail.com
Sun Apr 3 07:09:37 PDT 2005
Keely,
I thank you for your response and for your dedication to a worthy cause of
our youth getting a quality education. However, I am still confused as to
why this massive construction is necessary, and how you think the Moscow
community can afford the construction and staffing of two high schools.
Especially when the income, and available job opportunities in Moscow have
been significantly reduced.
I agree with you that there are not enough opportunities for students. I
wish I had more opportunities and choices in High School, and wish that we
could hand every child in Moscow the entire world on a silver platter. I
also agree that upgrades to the High School are always necessary. However, I
disagree with you on several other aspects.
First, I disagree that the cost of two pizzas per household will be the
cost. Seldom, if ever, does the cost of construction equal what they say it
is going to equal. Second, your tax only includes the cost of construction
and the bond, not the additional costs of operations of the building. Plus,
we still have to maintain, repair, and staff the old High School as well, as
you stated it would be used for other educational purposes. If the costs of
repairing the old High School is the same as the cost of building a new one,
as you state, then we are looking at least $60 million, not counting annual
operation costs and interest on the bond.
Second, I disagree with the changing of Moscow High School to four grades,
9-12. I have attended both three year high schools and a four year high
schools. The three years are much better for the kids, and much safer. My
main reason for this is because placing 13 and 14 year old girls in daily
and close contact with 17 and 18 year old boys increases the number of rapes
and teenage pregnancies. It also increases stress for youth and pressures
them into doing things that older children do. Hazing and depression, and
lack of community are also more prevalent in larger four year high schools,
so I disagree with what you are proposing to do to my high school. A smaller
community of students with less of an age gap usually is a more pleasant and
safer learning environment.
Third, while I agree eventually we will have to build a new High School, I
do not think the time is now. The economic stability and strength of Moscow
is not strong enough to handle this big expense. UI lost $20 million and had
to cut many jobs. I think building this right now places an undo burden on
many people that cannot afford it. We need to wait a few more years until UI
and our local economy can better handle this huge expense. You do not buy a
new car when you just lost your job, if you must, you repair the old one and
make do until things are better.
Finally, with what small amount of money we do have, we should address
problems facing everyone. We have some pressing issues here that have been
ignored for decades, like not having enough healthy drinking water, safe
cross walks, and affordable housing. All of these factors impact children
and students to a greater degree then if they have a brand new classroom.
Take Care,
Donovan J Arnold
>From: "keely emerinemix" <kjajmix1 at msn.com>
>To: donovanarnold at hotmail.com, auntiestablishment at hotmail.com,
>vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] School Levy (Vote No)
>Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 12:34:10 -0800
>
>Goodness, Donovan, I don't know where to begin:
>
>I appreciate your concerns, and I'll try to address them, although it might
>be better if you contact me off list and we can go over them together. In
>short, though, the high school is not educationally suitable, much less
>physically suitable, for a 21st-century high school and, as you know, only
>can accommodate grades 10, 11 and 12. Remodeling the high school on its
>current site would cost more than constructing a new one and would involve
>using portable buildings for three to four years, and very likely involve
>razing two blocks next to the school. I couldn't in good conscience
>recommend that, nor can I throw my support to a less-than-four-year high
>school, which is what the new one would be. The current building would
>remain district-owned, would house the district's alternative high school,
>and could be used for expanded adult programs as well as voc-tech offerings
>for district students. The county has also indicated its interest in
>renting the '91 annex. The building will continued to be used, and will
>continue to be a good neighbor to downtown businesses and residents.
>
>The cost of the bond would come to about the cost of two large pizzas a
>month for my household, given our taxed assessed value minus deduction; I'm
>estimating conservatively, guessing at the TAV on my house since I haven't
>committed my tax bill to memory. But the district and the FPC have
>released information that anyone can access to see what the bond amount's
>impact on their taxes would be, and I think most people would be surprised
>at how inexpensive their monthly share would be.
>
>I appreciate and share your concern for the homeless, Donovan, and I wish
>that every social need could be adequately funded. But school funding is
>what school districts administer and school patrons approve, and while new
>school buildings don't provide housing for the poor, they do an awful lot
>to remedy and insure against the conditions that bring about poverty. I'm
>proud to support public schools and this bond in particular, and I'd invite
>you to talk further with me if you'd like.
>
>Thanks, Donovan.
>
>keely emerine mix
>
>From: "Donovan Arnold" <donovanarnold at hotmail.com>
>To: auntiestablishment at hotmail.com, vision2020 at moscow.com
>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] School Levy (Vote No)
>Date: Sat, 02 Apr 2005 10:09:17 -0800
>
>Do we need a new High School?
>
>Why? There was nothing wrong with it when I attended it just 13 years ago.
>
>Is it because we have a huge influx of new high school students? Is it
>because we think the old HS cannot be renovated?
>
>Are we going to abandon the old HS, or are we suppose to have two High
>Schools?
>
>How can we afford two high schools when we cannot afford even one?
>
>How much more in property taxes are we going to pay to maintain and staff
>the new one?
>
>Why not just fix the old one if it is breaking down?
>
>Will the new school include bunk beds because many of their parents may be
>homeless with the continued outrageous property taxes being placed on
>people? Rents and housing prices are high enough. I am all for supporting
>education, but this idea makes no sense at all. So I will not support it
>unless they have strong reasons to raise the rent on everyone again and
>they answer my questions.
>
>
>Further, there are other issues that are more important than this that
>should warrant a bond levy of $29 million. How about $29 million for a low
>income housing and homeless center instead? Better pay for new teachers? A
>few crosswalk bridges across 3rd street? How about drinkable water? All of
>these issues effect everyone and need to be addressed before we start
>spending money we do not have on brand new schools.
>
>
>Take Care,
>
>Donovan J Arnold
>
>
>
>>From: "Joan Opyr" <auntiestablishment at hotmail.com>
>>To: "Vision2020 Moscow" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>>Subject: Re: [Vision2020] School Levy (was Adolescent Humor)
>>Date: Sat, 2 Apr 2005 01:01:17 -0800
>>
>>I wrote that on this Sunday's show "Brother Carl and I will be addressing
>>Dale's nonsense regarding the upcoming school levy "
>>
>>And Dan asks:
>>
>>What part is nonsensical? The disclosure of the full amount (with
>>interest paid)? You get the same thing when you buy a house or finance a
>>car.
>>
>>What a surprise: bond payments include both principal and interest. Who
>>knew? Thank heavens for Dale Courtney! It would seem that those worms at
>>"The Money Tree" have lied to us again.
>>
>>Listen, Dale is just being inflammatory. When you search through the
>>"Parade of Homes" and read that a house on Mabelle is going for $182,000,
>>is that the figure you present to the bank or do you amortize over 30
>>years to make the price look unreasonable, hoping that the bank will take
>>one look and refuse to lend you the money? This, I'm afraid, is Dale's
>>trick And it's a clever trick, isn't it? $45 million sounds awful; it
>>sounds too painfully high. All that for two renovations and one new high
>>school? Good grief. But the facilities bond is, as claimed, a $29
>>million dollar bond. The voters haven't been deceived; they haven't been
>>lied to. $29 million is the amount that will be spent on school
>>construction and renovation; that's what we'll spend on bricks and sticks.
>> The rest will be paid in interest on the debt. Now, is anyone out there
>>stunned by this information? Is anyone experiencing shock and awe?
>>Dale's "real cost" analysis should be news to no one -- no one who has
>>ever borrowed money at interest. Despite the Bible's prohibitions against
>>usury, I'm afraid it's done nothing but flourish.
>>
>>Dale's $45 million figure is neither the beginning nor the end of his
>>disingenuous, anti-public education hooey. Dale's vast and drafty
>>assortment of charts and graphs (not to mention his manufactured concern
>>about the University of Idaho lay-offs) are a very thin mask for the fact
>>that members of the Wilson-Jones church oppose ALL funding for public
>>education. It wouldn't matter what the Moscow School Board asked for --
>>$29 million for a new high school and two substantial renovations or 29
>>cents for mud and toothpicks -- Doug/Dale would oppose the levy. I think
>>we can dispose of their arguments (such as they are) fairly quickly and
>>move on to more genuine concerns.
>>
>>The most important, I think, is the "urban sprawl" argument. I like and
>>respect Bill London, but I strongly disagree with him on this issue. I
>>don't see building a new high school on the Trail property as in any way
>>contributing to and/or creating urban sprawl. Moscow has been growing to
>>the North and East for some time now, and it is a simple matter of
>>economics that in order to prosper, we must continue to grow. Even with a
>>new school on the edge of town, it will still be possible to park onself
>>in the middle of Moscow, drive in any direction for five minutes, and wind
>>up smack dab in a wheatfield. The Palouse is not the Treasure Valley, and
>>it never will be. Our location is just too damned inconvenient. It seems
>>to me that a greater danger to our town is that we will become simply a
>>bedroom community for WSU. If the state legislature continues to
>>dismantle the U of I, what will replace the college as Moscow's primary
>>engine of growth? What will attract new businesses to Moscow? What would
>>make us an appealing location for, say, a firm like Schweitzer?
>>
>>Oh dear. Best put the cork back in the bottle for now. It's late; I'm
>>freshly back from lovely Missoula (a college town from whom Moscow could
>>learn a lesson or two); and I ought to be saving my school levy rants for
>>Sunday's show. I need to catch up on my Mortal Kombat/Beauty Sleep so
>>I'll feel fresh and invigorated when I open up this week's can of whoop
>>ass
>>
>>Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment
>>www.auntie-establishment.com
>>
>>PS: Janice, I realize that your home borders the Trail property, and I
>>understand why you wouldn't want to live next door to a big high school.
>>Neither would I. I like living out in the middle of nowhere, and I like
>>my privacy. This is an argument I think you could fruitfully expand upon
>>and one that would appeal to many on this list. When I say that Carl and
>>I will be hanging up on anti-levy callers, I certainly don't mean to
>>dismiss people like you whose property/homes will be directly affected. I
>>mean to dismiss Doug and Dale who, once again, are the Friday farts at a
>>Saturday market. Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download :
>>http://explorer.msn.com
>>_____________________________________________________
>> List services made available by First Step Internet,
>> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>> http://www.fsr.net
>> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
>communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Don’t just search. Find. Check out the new MSN Search!
>http://search.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200636ave/direct/01/
>
>_____________________________________________________
>List services made available by First Step Internet, serving the
>communities of the Palouse since 1994. http://www.fsr.net
> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
>¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯¯
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list