Comments on: School Bond Would Add $3400 Debt To Median Value Home

By: Patrick

Patrick — Fri, 03 Mar 2017 22:31:43 +0000

Wrong Priorities. You are wrong. The building was designed to be above grade, underground was never considered. Soils investigations were done to determine the best place to put the underground fire water storage tank, so the locations of the rock was known. I worked in the architectural firm at the time, but not on that project. I have personally questioned the whole grass and sod on roof movement, even the most modern building materials will eventually fail. Wait for the same issues to show up at the State House underground wings in 30 years or so.

By: Wrong Priorities

Wrong Priorities — Tue, 28 Feb 2017 17:52:28 +0000

The professional educators in America have very successfully turned the topic away from the fact that they really really suck at education. They’ve made it about money. They SUCK so bad at what they are suppose to be doing I think it’s criminal. They force drugs to any kid who figures out our schools are bullshit. Diagnosis made by person with Education degree or less.

https://pjmedia.com/parenting/2017/02/26/maybe-he-doesnt-have-adhd-maybe-your-curriculum-just-isnt-good-enough/

By: Ed U Kate

Ed U Kate — Mon, 27 Feb 2017 03:10:09 +0000

Jennifer,

I not quite sure if you’re referring to the Boise School District mailer or the Yes For Boise Schools mailer. Both mailers provide basically the same information although the Yes group one apparently was mailed to a wider audience.

According to a story in Idaho Ed News (https://www.idahoednews.org/kevins-blog/boise-spends-11400-bond-issue-voter-information/) the Boise School District spent $ 11,400 taxpayer dollars to develop and mail their “voter information” material. So much for not having enough money for the classroom – or for updating the District Service Center (see Bond projects).

I do agree with you that monies received from this Bond, if it passes, would go toward capital improvements and deferred maintenance items, not salaries and field trips. But having those Bond monies also frees up budget monies now going to capital improvements and deferred maintenance items. Those “freed up” monies can be redirected toward salaries and field trips.

You also say “If you believe that if you vote no for this bond that your taxes will be reduced you are also incorrect.” So why won’t taxes decrease if the Bond does not pass? The 1996 Bond is expiring and the 2012 (temporary) Supplemental (operating) Levy is expiring. It would seem the levy rates associated with those would expire also. That would translate to a tax rate reduction.

Please explain your rational for no tax decrease. Looking forward to your response.

By: Cowpoke twice removed

Cowpoke twice removed — Sun, 26 Feb 2017 17:05:25 +0000

I’m not out of line Dave. I reference your comments on the median home value and the additional tax you state the homeowner would have to pay. Based on your figures the median home with a HOE would be assesed about $100 not $170.

By: Wrong Priorities

Wrong Priorities — Sat, 25 Feb 2017 08:48:55 +0000

Did you know Amity school was suppose to be totally underground. The super smart people failed to notice the hardest rock shield on earth is about 5 feet below sod in this area. After excessive blasting they got to the current depth and surrendered. The same kind of wasteful clownish planning goes into the new schools and upgrades. These people should not be allowed to run a hotdog stand.

By: Who?

Who? — Fri, 24 Feb 2017 04:39:58 +0000

Jennifer – who raised the money and from whom?

By: zed

zed — Fri, 24 Feb 2017 04:29:28 +0000

Also, I also would love to hear more about the story of Amity Elementary. It is unique in the district and I’ve always wondered why the school board of the time chose to build such a school.

EDITOR NOTE–In a nutshell it was at the early stages of the “environmental movement” and Boise generally had an inferiority complex. We wanted to “lead the nation” and have an “eco-friendly” school that put Boise on the map.

By: zed

zed — Fri, 24 Feb 2017 04:27:31 +0000

The points about the Idaho legislature are correct. The state has a largely rural electorate who consistently elect a legislature that, in my opinion, reflects their interests. Altering the priorities of the legislature is a difficult task and beyond the reach of a school district or city.

A bond like this can be seen as an opportunity for a local municipality to exert control over its destiny. Does Boise want to do things the same way as the rest of Idaho or differently?

The “down low” marketing campaign is a prudent choice of the bond supporters. It is my opinion that the general electorate is no longer rational and supports their “team” based largely upon insular media consumption, sound bytes, and targeted social media messaging. Competing within that space is not a path to success for a local campaign.

By: chicago sam

chicago sam — Fri, 24 Feb 2017 03:48:43 +0000

The urban renewal districts have plenty of money yet they pay no taxes to support the schools as well as the resource officers, fire protection and other services required. All of the (tax increment) money goes to stimulate growth , yet the products of growth and extra expenses are born by people outside the UR districts. Not much evidence that growth enhances our quality of life or that the growth pays for itself. Impact fees for schools are sorely needed.

By: Jennifer

Jennifer — Thu, 23 Feb 2017 23:18:01 +0000

The flyers and supplemental informational material were not paid for with public funds. They were paid for by money that was raised specifically for the bond information distribution from a variety of local business, organizations and citizens.
The information was sent out to target the audience that they believe to be the most receptive to a vote of ye, that’s just a marketing concept, not discrimination.

If you honestly believe that the money the bond will provide to help repair and expand the resources critical to our students will go to waste or not be effectively utilized then you are incorrect.

If you believe that if you vote no for this bond that your taxes will be reduced you are also incorrect.
Please consider the fact that our children are depending on their elders to provide adequate resources and a facility to maintain the dismal level of educational commitment that Idaho has set forth. It’s not like this bond is being used to raise staff salaries or take the kids on more field trips. Don’t be absurd.

EDITOR NOTE–Two of the prime advocates of the Boise school bond are the Associated General Contractors and the Chamber of Commerce. THE ENTIRE AMOUNT will eventually go to the contractors who build the proposed schools! Much of the material and labor will benefit Chamber of Commerce members. As to your “marketing concept,” we agree it is intended to secure passage, not inform voters. Total bond cost in Boise with interest is north of $236,000,000. If the bond won’t increase taxes, why may we ask, will taxes not decline if the old bond is retired and there is no new expense?