Comments on: Meridian Minority of Minority Prevails

By: Columbo-Just one more question...

Columbo-Just one more question... — Sun, 31 Aug 2014 13:46:31 +0000

I’m all for education receiving the amount of $$ it takes for a first class education. But continuous debt schemes that recycle inflation for a system that can’t even teach kids where money comes from honestly is not just a ripoff, but a slap in the face. It just never ends. Banker designed financing is the ruin of this nation, if not the world.

By: Cowpoke twice removed

Cowpoke twice removed — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 23:08:27 +0000

Dale G

I was not aware that I blamed anyone. I just pointed out that his premise is flawed.
No matter what happened a small minority would decide the outcome. In this case a very small minority bested a larger minority due to the way the law is written. I have to wonder why that is better than a minority beating an even smaller minority of voters.

By: Dale Gribble

Dale Gribble — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:42:01 +0000

Cowpoke,

“a small number of people imposed their will on 100% of the electorate.”

It was an open election. 100% of the electorate could have showed up. How can you blame those that actually did? Do you have any other suggestions?

By: Cowpoke twice removed

Cowpoke twice removed — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 21:04:05 +0000

Your premise is flawed Dave. No matter which side prevailed it wouldn’t change the fact that a small number of people imposed their will on 100% of the electorate. The super majority requirement just allowed 3.7% of the electorate to decide for the 6.3% and everyone else.

By: Dale Gribble

Dale Gribble — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 20:49:47 +0000

Porcupine,

“Maybe the answer is to only let property owners vote on bonds.”

Wow. What’s next, an IQ test and don’t allow women or blacks? You can’t go down that elitist path and call this a democracy.

By: CJ Pet

CJ Pet — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 17:21:07 +0000

Two points made by most of you bear repeating:

–school bond votes must be held on the general (or primary, as a less-attractive alternative) election schedule; and

–legislature needs to provide adequate schools funding; this patching by local districts is patently unfair (e.g., to smaller districts) and results in an unequal physical plant and instruction program across the state.

As it is, the legislature has just shifted the burden to property taxes. I’d argue it’s the job of the state to fund education…state-wide. Maybe they should consider impact fees on large developments?

Until these bonds start to fail the legislature won’t deal with the problem. Send them a message.

By: chicago sam

chicago sam — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 16:18:30 +0000

If I buy a house in Meridian and live in Nampa, I do not get to vote on bond issues affecting my property in Meridian.
If I have a business or other real estate in Meridian and live in Boise I do not get to vote on issues affecting my property–In fact I cannot vote for the people who are taxing my business.
Of course Walmart doesn’t get a vote either–Not all things are fair

By: Grumpy ole Guy

Grumpy ole Guy — Thu, 28 Aug 2014 01:23:55 +0000

One can not limit the franchise to one group, such a property owners, or parents of school-age children, or right-handed pencil users. However, one could, and perhaps should limit the election dates to primary or general election dates in an attempt to get higher turn out. That will not ensure a more highly informed electorate, just a larger turn-out. Barring that, perhaps there should be one date, state-wide for ALL school elections, bonds, levies, school board trustees. Such an arrangement would, at least, mean that all information would get an equal amount of publicity and eliminate confusion about who should vote when about what. I think that, that date should be during the school year, when attention in more likely to be focused of schools and education.

By: Porcupine

Porcupine — Wed, 27 Aug 2014 21:02:23 +0000

Maybe the answer is to only let property owners vote on bonds. Kind of remember that is the way it used to be…

By: Brad

Brad — Wed, 27 Aug 2014 20:36:38 +0000

Guardian,

Thank you for keeping up on the actual participation level of this election.

I, for one, appreciate that a “Super Majority” is required to encumber my home for ten, twenty, or thirty years with a bond issue.

I may be in a minority; but, I have no problem with a 50+% vote if the debt would only be for one year or less. Of course, if given the opportunity to numb our senses with 50+% debt; the school districts might blur the issue for larger debt and for longer periods.

How often have the news outlets and promoters told us that there would be no increase in payments because one debt replaces another bond that is paid off? Thus, reducing our payments if a new borrowing is not happen.

I kind of like the idea that debt is paid in full and not replaced with another borrowing.