MOBILE
Trio leading fight against school bonds
Mailers target CV, Mead proposals
January 25, 2011 - Updated: January 27, 4:41 p.m.
A campaign against proposed school bonds next month in the Central Valley and Mead school districts became apparent over the weekend as some residents received fluorescent yellow fliers in the mail encouraging them to vote “no.”
The opposition is led by a trio who also came out against bond issues in Spokane, Central Valley and West Valley school districts in 2003.
Organized as Citizens for Responsible Taxation, the effort is led by Spokane residents John Beal and Marilyn Montgomery and former Alton’s Tires owner Duane Alton. None of them lives in the Mead district. Alton, who donated $25,000 to the campaign, lives in the Central Valley district, according to addresses they gave the state when they registered the group as a political action committee.
Alton and Beal did not return calls for comment Monday. Montgomery, the treasurer, declined to discuss the campaign but did confirm Alton’s donation.
The group mailed separate fliers opposing the bond proposals. Each one makes several claims labeled as facts: the bond is a multimillion-dollar tax hike; the tax will “destroy jobs & stifle job growth”; and “this new tax will make it even harder to make house payments.”
“The information is inaccurate,” said Ned Wendle, chairman of the Mead bond campaign.
Both bond issues would replace current bonds set to expire. While the Mead bond is a dollar-for-dollar replacement, the CV bond would raise property taxes by 60 cents per $1,000 of assessed value.
Ballots for both proposals were mailed Friday and are due back Feb. 8.
Damon Smith, who’s running the bond campaign in Central Valley, said supporters were taken aback by the fliers but “will not stay silent. We have mobilized to get the message out … with the facts.”
Central Valley’s proposed $69.9 million bond package includes building a new elementary school, renovating Ponderosa and Greenacres elementary schools, and renovating and expanding Evergreen Middle School and Chester and Opportunity elementary schools. It will cost property owners $2.30 per $1,000 of assessed value per year.
Mead’s $59 million bond would allow the district to update Midway and Shiloh Hills elementary schools and Northwood Middle School; upgrade technology; replace roofs and carpets; upgrade heating and cooling systems; and buy property for future schools. The current rate of $2.20 per $1,000 assessed value will remain the same.
A similar effort to defeat school bonds in 2003 was called STOP, for So Tired Of Paying. Voters in all three districts approved the bonds that year.
Anne Hedge, a Mead resident, received her second anti-bond flier in the mail Monday.
“What bothers me is this is what I’d consider sensationalism,” she said. “It’s really almost untruthful because of omission.”
Common sense has to dictate. All one has to do is check their real estate bill. Its apparent the costs for MO and bond issues is excessive. More administrators than teachers. Good place to clean house and get rid of at least half of them and check out other wastes in the budget. I think the teachers need to be looked at and get rid of those that should not have been hired in the first place. Then and only then, the taxpayers might not be so critical.
Take a stand on higher taxes vote NO on the school bonds.
Agreed Coffee & Dick Adams. I am tired of bonds and levys, everyone has to cut back. That means the 100k and higher administrators.
Anymore, “renovating” a school means turning it into a palace. I mean, look at some of these schools that have been renovated/remodeled over the last few years. It’s just ridiculous. Heaven forbid kids use “portable” classrooms like when I was growing up here.
I hope the voters use common sense and vote NO on these bonds.
Administrators will still get raises. It’s the students who will suffer. Hopefully the voters will realize that. This is not the campaign against administrator salaries. If you were concerned about those then you should have attended the board meetings when they were approved. You have no reason to complain unless you exercised that right.
I love how Duane Alton always pimped his family out while marketing his company as one based on old fashioned family and community values. Yet then he surreptitiously (using his wife’s maiden name to register the PAC) tried to defeat a bond levy in the Mead district even though he didn’t live there but owned businesses and the real estate under them that would be impacted by the levy. Now he doesn’t even own those businesses, having sold off his empire in the last few years. What’s his problem now? Is he still mad he could never beat Tom Foley or even win a GOP primary because he’s so far right wing?
I have to ask Duane, what would Grandma Alton do?
Duane Alton and his family are ardent conservatives…so is this a surprise? What I don’t understand is why the Alton family is inserting themselves into a community issue when they don’t even live in the community where the bond is proposed? It’s like when residents of King & Pierce counties vote on initiatives, referendums and state budget bills that impact us in Eastern Washington; Conservatives hate that stuff. But here we have the Alton family doing the exact same thing: Pushing an agenda that impacts a community they don’t live in. Ridiculous…not to mention, hypocritical.
BTW: It was the Alton stores in north Spokane that had “Rush is Right” bumper stickers on the walls behind their registers. Anybody who espouses conservative American values and then supports a draft-dodging drug-addict is obviously phony…thus, we have Duane Alton. He and his family should have stuck to what they know best: Gouging people for unnecessary repairs & selling $29 tires manufactured in China.
Loudin
Dang, Loudin, and all this time I thought you were just training in the skywalk system… It appears you’ve stopped by the library now and then since your glory days on the mat and now that it’s connected to your work out loop.
My problem is with schools asking for more money in hard times when athletic programs still continue to exist mostly at pre-recession levels. I feel it demonstrates a lack of an ability to rank priorities.
Central Valley voters should visit as many of the sites recommended for renovation as possible. They’ll see many of them are facilities that haven’t received upgrades since they were built by the voter’s grandparents. Students will enter a high tech workplace and need to learn in high tech environments. Visit a classroom in one of these schools and ask yourself if it would adequately prepare you child for the future. Then vote accordingly.
Snidely remarking that new facilities resemble “palaces” ignores that most of the schools in the past were much more ornate (think Lewis and Clark) and denigrates the idea that public education is one of a modern nation’s highest ideals. My parents went to public schools that had marble floors and indoor pools and both still stand. Of course that was when the wealthy were being taxed at rates of over 80% and levies and school bonds didn’t need to exist.
@ Loudin,
Your comments were nothing more than a diversionary personal attack, that added absolutely nothing to the conversation, other than a vitriolic spew of name calling and guilt by association remarks.
These two levies are just the beginning of nearly $450 Million in school bonds in Spokane county, and they’re being backed by GSI. It almost looks as if this is being backed by the same parts of GSI that sponsored a breakfast meeting/award presentation to Sen Patty Murray, congratulating her for her votes to increase our taxes in an effort to bring more tax dollars to the area. Those sponsors included a number of construction companies and at least one school. Hmmmmm. Go figure that GSI is now endorsing and sponsoring more tax payer created jobs.
At a local meeting 2 weeks ago, Shelly O’Quinn of GSI indicated they would create 1200 jobs. I’m certain she meant the entire $450 Million, not just these two. I’m also certain she meant temporary jobs. Not sure how that makes our economy stronger.
I’m also not sure how she balances being a paid advocate for increased taxes with her former claims as being a fiscal conservative but I’ll let each of you decide.
I do know that we must end the continued scheme of higher taxation for temporary job creation. It always leaves us with more debt and more government.
Aren’t all construction related jobs “temporary?” You have the job until the project is completed. Then you move on to the next job. Sounds like you are wailing against the nature of the beast. I’ll agree bond companies have a stake in these issues, but it’s how finance capitalism works. Would you just have the district print their own currency?
ZagChuck,
One can not be a true conservative, one that is concerned about fiscal responsibility and American principles, and support the politics of the Alton family. The Alton’s created wealth in our community by purchasing and reselling cheap products made in China; the profits of their business concerns came at the expense of American companies and American workers. As a conservative, if you are dismayed by our trade imbalance with China, then you must be dismayed by the business acumen of the Alton family. Otherwise, you are hypocrite…you can not have this both ways.
Furthermore, for the Altons to try to impress their political views upon a community that they are not a part of runs counter to the viewpoint of the Tea Party and true Conservatives. We are constantly told by those two groups that Americans want government to come from within our communities, not from afar. Thus, when the Alton clan attempts to exercise their will over the people of Mead (and elsewhere), it is no different than when Washington D.C or Seattle or the 9th Circuit Court in San Francisco does so. Again, you can not have that both ways; you can not be angered by one and let the other pass.
It’s your conscience…you can give the Alton’s a free pass or you can show some moral fortitude and stick to the principles of your political movement. This said, I may disagree with your party of choice, but I can respect your arguments if they are true to your beliefs; don’t let the Alton’s agenda, which runs counter to those principles, sway you to hypocrisy.
Loudin
PS: Mead is Alton-free; let’s keep it that way.
Hmmm?… I guess conservatives would rather see 99 children’s education go down the drain rather than see one administrator get a raise and I guess liberals would rather see 99 administrators get a raise rather than see one child’s education go down the drain.
So consider what I do…calculate just how much this will cost you and shut up if these bond issues don’t pertain to you (this means you Alton). So this will add $350-450 per year to your taxes so I’ll use $400. That comes to $7.69 per week…now weigh this against some of the frivolous garbage you might purchase weekly…doesn’t seem like too much to invest in something good for our community.
If you are all fired sure that you want Administrators to take a reduction in pay then get involved with your school board so you know what you’re talking about. But don’t sit back and be a self-righteous sanctimonious blowhard because it’s convenient to complain without a shred of effort or involvement toward the schools issues.
One might try reading the facts for a change.
Every single flyer that has been mailed has falsely referred to a tax increase. This is not a tax increase, but a replacement at the same level as the old bonds which are being retired. This makes these flyers completely, 100% wrong — and the people who supported this organization financially need to take better care of THEIR money (including Duane Alton, who apparently does not care about facts or truth).
I think it a pound foolish to not support the CV bond. Many valid reasons have been given in support. My children have attended school in CV all their lives and the need is obvious to anyone paying attention. The yellow cardboard flier sent around is full of errors ie “Job Killer”. Please…that makes no sense.
Sending the school districts back to the drawing board to sharpen their pencils is not always a bad thing.I believe we all have to tighten our belts during these tough times.Maybe passing a big construction bond after the economy recovers would make more sense.CV has a track record of not building things big enough to meet it’s future needs.Hence forth,creating the need for more buildings before the new ones are paid for. Remember that Bonds are for building!
The replacement levies should always be passed.Without the replacement levies,school children will be paying a heavy price for the few dollars we would save on monthly mortgages.Short changing our kids and grandkids is NOT the answer.Please vote yes on all school and fire district levies! Please attend a schoolboard meeting and let them know how YOU feel.
ThankYou
“Snidely remarking that new facilities resemble “palaces” ignores that most of the schools in the past were much more ornate (think Lewis and Clark) and denigrates the idea that public education is one of a modern nation’s highest ideals.”
Snidely remarking that those of us who don’t want to pay for wasteful, palatial schools are somehow against the “high ideal” of public education denigrates the idea that kids don’t need fancy schools in order to learn. They need supportive families, good teachers, and MORE TIME in school.
Yesterday, 1/24, was “semester break” for district 81. No school. Are you kidding me? They just had 2 weeks for the holidays and last Monday for MLK, now this bogus “semester break?” No wonder kids aren’t learning and the dropout rate is so high and other countries are surpassing us.
Now’s a perfect time to build - digging out of the recession, lots of folks looking for jobs, building materials are a relative bargain - probably cheaper to build now than at any point in the near future.
Avocet: If you only knew the facts. The state mandates the lengthy of the school year, not the local districts. District 81, like every public school district in the state, will offer 181 days of instruction. That has been the length of the school year for more than 50 years.
Learning environments strongly impact student performance. People who design schools understand this. They are trained professionals who have consulted with other trained professionals in education during the design process.
We do need your help, Avocet, but make sure you know what you are talking about first. Volunteer in one of your schools instead of spreading what amount to lies.
Other nations are passing the U.S. in educational attainment because their kids spend about 1/3 more time in classrooms. People whine and moan about the current cost of schools but are they prepared to shoulder the additional cost it will take to actually compare apples to apples? Reading the reactions to bond measures recently put forth makes my best bet no.
Until the general population of this country figures out that shiny buildings don’t equate to “good” education, we will all continue to pour money down the proverbial rat hole.
Someone please remind me how the last Mead bonds, used to build/rebuild fabulous new buildings, positively impacted student scores, dropout rates and overall achievement. No wait, that would be impossible, as student success continues to suffer despite mega-buildings and outrageous per student spending.
My children attend Gonzaga Prep. You know, that really old building that hasn’t actually changed since their grandparents attended it back in the 1940’s. Amazingly enough, despite the old structure, this school continues to successfully educate high achieving kids year in and year out.(All with rather large class sizes). And for significantly less money than any of our local public schools spend. They do it because they still believe in the three R’s, discipline and loads of hard work.
Over inflated administration, new fangled (and untested)
teaching methods and even more money spent on the buildings will not cure what ails you. Build a school the size of Texas and fill it with marble floors and gold leaf if you choose. But until you finally wake up and understand that raising the amount of money you spend per child really matters not, (beyond a certain point), if you don’t demand real curriculum and less fluff. The children will continue to be ripped off.
By the way, the Washington D.C. public schools spend way more than any of our local districts, and their educational performance is among the lowest in the nation. Hum.
teabone: If you went to a private school, your education was mainly wasted if you really believe comparing students at Prep with those in most public high schools is equitable. Parents who shell out the money for their kids to attend Prep are way more involved in their kids lives than the average student at a public high school in Spokane. They hold their kids accountable. In addition, Prep is allowed to hand pick their students. HUGE DIFFERENCE.
Let’s open Prep to enrollment of students in their immediate neighborhood only and let’s see how they do with the same amount of funding.
I’m sure teabone was at the board meetings when those administrator salaries were approved. I’ll be he go up and ranted about the D.C. schools, the shining light on the hill known as G-Prep and how bible training isn’t considered “fluff” amongst most academics.
Spoketucky,
I didn’t go to a private school, I went to Mead. Let’s hope that my education was not wasted.
I half expected to get the tired old response that you gave. I love the “built in” excuse you give regarding Prep hand picking it’s students. Contrary to popular belief, Prep is populated with students from ALL economic, religious and talent backgrounds. It works because of expectations and discipline, period.
Continue to provide your local district with the excuses of having to educate kids with parents who don’t care. We all, including me, shell out huge amounts of money to the Mead school district. The parents of kids that I know who attend Mead schools care every bit as much about the success of their children as I do. I would venture to guess that the vast majority of Mead parents care and are involved.
As far as opening up the school to the kids from the surrounding neighborhood, it’s done everyday at about a dozen Catholic elementary schools. Most of the kids are from the local neighborhood, all economic backgrounds, and they too succeed. Visit St. Pat’s, St. Al’s, etc.
Of course you could always continue to blame all of the problems on the kids and parents. Continue to keep doing what doesn’t work, time after time, and then wonder why things aren’t getting better. “Geez, we built them bigger and bigger schools and hired more and more administration, over and over, and it’s still not working. I know, they must need more money and an even bigger, fancier school”.
This seems to be your battle cry. Who’s education was wasted?
Contrary to the apparent beliefs of most levy supporters that people in opposition are sinister child haters, there are many anti-levy citizens with no ulterior motives. I, for one, simply appreciate having actual truths presented (rather than fear invoking commentary and distortions I’ve read/heard). Making it appear that 3yrs of levy costs will be paid in a single yr is an example of distortion on the anti-levy side. Similarly, there are many examples distortions & less than true statements from the pro-levy side. Here’s one irt what levy $ will actually be used for:
It’s extremely disingenuous to say “specific funds” are for “specific items” of an overall budget. Basic accounting shows that the net impact of a levy is simply to increase the “overall budget” (even if presented as paying for specific items). Here’s an explanation of why (please try to understand that this simply explains the shell game of saying “where” certain $ goes (regardless of your opinion as to the need for the $) and is applicable in many other situations you may encounter besides this one:
Imagine an $8M budget spread into 10 buckets. If someone decided $8M wasn’t enough and wanted to request more $ they could simply put the entire $8M into buckets 1-8 and say “we need $2M (levy $) but it’s only for buckets 9 & 10” (maintenance & operations, or whatever your specific levy indicates). The net result of the additional $2M would simply be that the new budget is $10M instead of $8M. The shell game here is that they could just as easily have said the $2M is for buckets 1 & 2 or 3 & 5 or 4 & 7 etc. In other words, the “exact” place they “choose” to say the $ goes to is absolutely irrelevant because it’s all part of “one overall budget” that is being spent.
Regardless of your stance irt the actual need for the $ it’s a complete shell game when they say “don’t worry, the money is only for this bucket or that one”. It raises the Q of why do they need to use shell games to sell a levy; shouldn’t the actual need be strong enough so as not to require moving shells around? Could it be because they need to distract you from looking in some of the other buckets?..
Being “civic-minded” includes being “fiscally aware” of where/how the community spends ii’s money. Too many people fall into the word manipulation traps employed by pro-levy supporters as well as the exploitative “heart string” tactics of “it’s for the children”…
What?… It most certainly IS a new tax. If the old one didn’t have an expiration date we wouldn’t be voting on a NEW one now, right?… Levies are meant to be one time fill-gap revenue streams that may be necessary once every 10-20 yrs. They’re “NOT” meant to be a “constant” revenue stream… It shows incredibly bad district leadership when districts have gotten to the point of expecting levies as a never ending portion (1/4) of their budgets.
Anything with an expected END date (like a “3yr” levy tax or a mortgage) has to have a “new” one started in order to “remain” in place so it’s perfectly accurate to say it’s a new tax. What if, after paying off your mortgage, the bank said “we don’t want you to pay a new mortgage, we’d just like you to pay on this replacement mortgage” for another mortgage term…? How would that go over?
If we paid levy taxes on a monthly basis, and there was a 1 month break between the old and new levy (meaning the tax would be gone for 1 month), would you agree that the new levy is a new tax? In other words, would you have to actually “See” at least 1 month of taxes “without” the levy to agree that the new levy is a new tax? Exactly what would be the difference between that scenario and having no 1 month gap (aside from the 1 month tax savings) in regard to it being a new levy? Just because these new levies take over with no break, as opposed to the 1 month break in the example, doesn’t change the fact that they’re a new levy/tax (it just makes it “less noticeable” than if there was a break period).
The less noticeable taxes may be easier to get people to accept but there’s no disputing that it also makes them the most hidden and therefore tricky/dangerous (ALL somewhat hidden taxes, not “specifically” school levies). Taxes should be extremely noticeable so as not to become forgotten or simply seen as replacements, continuations, etc…
––
Actual levy rates and Levy Equalization Funds (LEF):
The levy rate most often used by school districts is the smaller, LEF assisted one. However, with our current economy, this is a time when LEF funds could go away and people should plan accordingly (plan worst case scenario). That would cause the amount taken by these levies to be approximately 22% more than the school dist claims.