Support HLWW schools

[concerned parent]

I want to dispel something that I heard the other day. I overheard someone mention that the reason the school was coming out with another levy vote is because the school district can't afford to operate the new high school.

If you ask or read the material that the district sends out you would understand that this would replace an operating levy that expired this fall. It also replaces a lease levy for portable classrooms. By building a new high school and remodeling the elementaries the district was able to expire the leases on the portable classrooms.

I encourage everyone to become informed as you go to the polls.

It is important to educate our kids..

[Citizen]

Why is it that so many people think that it is always a good thing to throw more money at schools? Anytime this issue comes up there is this attitude from the folks promoting it that you are somehow "evil" and "anti-children" if you don't agree that more money is the answer.

How about spending more responsibly? How about fighting the teachers union and the state who force the schools to carry ineffective and expensive programs?

Maybe the district does need more money. Maybe the district needs to be more wise with the money they have.

[thedog]

If people vote no that does not mean that they are against children or are evil, sometimes it just means that they are not educated on the issues or are educated on the issue and just disagree and that is ok too. I guess

[thedog]

Also it is not more money. the school board is just trying to keep the amount that they receive now with a little more for inflation. With the last levy failing it is like trying to do your family budget with less money, but still trying to feed the kids, have fun like going to movies, or birthday parties and buying the birthday child at least a little something for their birthday, that does not come from Wal-mart.s dollar shelf.Public school education is not free, but the board is not asking for millions form us tax payers either.

[outofyourmind]

I personally do not support this levi. I have to agree with others on the issues of seeking hand outs, and living outside of the budget. Good Luck on this.

[4ourschools]

Renewing an operating levy should not be considered "throwing more money at our schools"-it's money that was already being given to our schools with an increase for inflation, as previously stated. It is so hard for me to understand why people would not support renewing this levy, it just makes sense-I would encourage those who are opposed to it to do the research and find out what the tax impact is for you-it's not that much when weighed against the good it does for our children and our communities.

[CheriLynn]

It is very hard to stay in a budget when the money for said budget decreases or is no longer there.

Economically I believe the entire nation is suffering. It is scary to think of voting yes on something that will take a bit more out of our own pockets. And for some, without children in the school system it is easy for them to have the mentality of why should I. * Please note I said "some" here as not all

I believe the answer to be- Our future.

Please Please take the time to learn the facts before voting. It is not just about today and tomorrow...

[caterry]

I support schools, but I don't believe that this levy is something that will get passed. I think that there is too much extra ciriculatory activities, too many sports, too many classes offered that are not needed. If schools would focus on education, reading writing math science etc it would pass in a heartbeat, but schools are getting way out of hand. I think that the schools focus on the wrong things. It seems to me that the most important things in the schools are the sports etc. Every time we turn around you are asking for more and if the shcools don't get there way the first time they keep right on going until they do example the way the building of a new school was accomplished. It was voted down but they couldn't take no for an answer so they just kept right on going till it did pass. Things in the new school are not even up to todays energy efficient cost cutting. Where is the geothermal or other alternative heating and cooling? Where did they utilize solar or wind power. I think it is time to say no to the schools, they need to learn to make do with what they have just like everyone else. Maybe 60 -100 a year doesn't seem like alot to some people but it sure seems like alot to that family that has a 200.00 electric bill, high heating costs, food prices that are going no where but up and gas prices that have almost doubled in the last year. Think about it someone who drives 45 miles to work because there are no opportunities for them here, clears 350.00 per week puts 100.00 of that into a gas tank to get to work, has about 1000.00 left for everything else.
I say no we are paying enough

[HikingStick]

Renewing an operating levy should not be considered "throwing more money at our schools"-it's money that was already being given to our schools with an increase for inflation, as previously stated. It is so hard for me to understand why people would not support renewing this levy, it just makes sense-I would encourage those who are opposed to it to do the research and find out what the tax impact is for you-it's not that much when weighed against the good it does for our children and our communities.

There's a reason levies expire--because they are not intended to be a permanent form of funding.

Also, how can anyone prove (or disprove) that this levy will "[do good] for our children and our communities"?

[HikingStick]

While I do believe in public education, I also believe that many decisions in school districts around the country are short-sighted. One of the previous writers brought up a good point regarding alternative energy for our new high school. Were such options even considered? Perhaps (I don't know), but I'll guess that such options would have been dismissed as too costly. Yes, engineering alternative energy systems into the school would have cost more on the front end, but it may have been possible to save the district much money over the life of the building. If the building included energy generation options (e.g., solar, wind), it may have been possible to sell any excess power back to the utility company.

While I do enjoy seeing athletics offered at our schools, I do agree that academics should be our primary concern. I wish colleges and universities would stop giving scholarships to athletes. Let's face it--most kids don't get the limited number of sports scholarships that are out there and even fewer go pro. In the workplace, I find that each successive generation of employees comes in with (on average) poorer math and reading skills, yet they may have lettered in their sport-of-choice.

Even as much as I love band and the fine arts (for there is a scientific correlation between music instruction and mathematical skill), I concede that even such programs must take second chair to the need to prepare our students in the core areas of science, technology, English, and mathematics.

It's not simple enough to say our schools must cut costs, nor is it as simple as saying that our schools need the levy passed. We need people who are willing to sit down, look at all the facts, all of the activities, and all of the options, and make potentially unpopular decisions regarding the future of education in our district.