Letter: School referendum: I vote for Plan CSomething really got my attention recently. It was an article in the Journal reporting that in April 2011 the River Falls school district taxpayers will be asked to vote on an almost $39 million school referendum.
By: Peggy Steffl, town of Clifton, River Falls Journal
Something really got my attention recently. It was an article in the Journal reporting that in April 2011 the River Falls school district taxpayers will be asked to vote on an almost $39 million school referendum.
I’m wondering if other people in the community are just becoming aware that the school board has been working on such a large referendum, which will have serious implications to the schools, our community, and our taxes.
As adults in this community, aren’t we suppose to be responsible consumers and taxpayers? Answering “yes” to this question, I took the advice of a previous letter-to-the-editor writer, and began meeting with school district representatives, reading reports and studying the details of this referendum.
After much investigation, I’m convinced that several things could be done much more economically.
In the Journal article, a board member is quoted as saying this about the referendum: “There are no frills here. We’re talking about things like new bathrooms, handicapped accessibility, new piping to make it safer. It’s not that exciting.”
Not to besmirch all the planning and hard work that went into assembling this referendum, but it is apparent that the planners went far beyond new piping and necessities, moving into wish-list territory.
Consequently, I respectfully disagree that there are no frills in this $39-million referendum wish list.
I’m asking people to consider studying exactly what is in this referendum, or to wait for updates from other concerned taxpayers.
The original $48-million proposal was called “Plan A” by the school board. The slightly reduced $39-million referendum that the taxpayers will be asked to vote on in April is called “Plan B”.
In the current era of layoffs, wage reductions and tightening household budgets, the taxpayers of this community deserve a more reasonable, cost-effective “Plan C.”