Supporters of financially strapped Minnesota school districts will watch with interest as Pequot Lakes School District voters go to the polls Tuesday to vote on a $33.175 million school bond referendum.
What’s the mood of voters in the first area election of 2011 as we continue to struggle with high unemployment and a slow economy? How will they gauge the needs of their schools against their own ability to contribute more during a tight economic time?
The Pequot Lakes referendum is identical to one that was turned down by voters by a substantial margin last June. Spread over 231/2 years the bond would be used for repairs and renovations that would help remedy crowded conditions in the schools. Sometimes school district pleas for physical needs such as the repair of a broken boiler or a leaky roof are looked upon more favorably by voters. In this second bid for the school bond referendum will voters look at the request differently.
Vocal opposition to the referendum has been not been very visible, while proponents of the referendum have waged an aggressive letter-writing and informational campaign for the measure. That’s not unusual in a school referendum vote. Those who vote no on school referendums do so for a variety of reasons and may not want their neighbors to think of them as being against education or against the school district. They often remain silent and then quietly go to the polls and vote no.
School district officials figure the bond referendum’s impact on residential homesteads and seasonal residential homes with a taxable value of $100,000 would be $23 a year or $1.92 a month.
We don’t underestimate the economic challenges facing many families, but the majority of us would probably admit that we spend more than $1.92 a month on items we enjoy but could do without — premium coffees, chocolate, cigarettes.
The decision is up to the Pequot Lakes School District voters but support for the bond referendum seems like a good value to the community to us. A well educated work force will go a long way to helping this region when we finally pull out of this economic morass.
Comments (8)
Add commentContinuous School Referendums should be stopped or limited
I don't really care about the right or wrong of this referendum; a $1.92 is not a lot each month and I will probably vote for it.
However, what I think is ridiculous is that this issue was just voted on in June of last year...so, seven or eight months later, here the same thing is being voted on again. I think there should be a waiting requirement of two years before the exact same referendum can be voted on again or if there is an earlier vote, then the terms of what is being voted on should be substantially different. Also, votes should only be conducted on generally accepted election days...in November for example.
I find it disgusting that the school districts can continuously fight the same battle over and over again until they win...and they eventually will win. How can they not win? Public opinion and endorsements will always sway towards the "it is for the children crowd." So, why even have elections on these things.
If this is voted down again...look for it again in seven to eight months...the yes voters just get stronger and the no voters get beat up so bad that they start to fall off. Don't believe me...check out the Audubon / Lake Park debacle. They voted on referendums six times in five years. It eventually went from a wide majority against to a big win for in 2010. I will say, however, that LP/A actually made changes to their plans for each referendum...instead of trying again with the losing plans from before.
SHAME ON YOU BDD
I will be a no vote,thanks so much for putting a label on me!!!
So you will take no more letters on the subject but you can print pro articles and opinions.
Very poor journalism on your part!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Problem
BDD....You do understimate the economic challenges facing families. That's exactly the problem with your opinion, and quite frankly our politicians. If you want to take the $1.92 a month and look at it through a myopic lens, then you're correct...it's not that much. However, add the cost of all the other regulated service fees and increased taxes and it begins to add up quite substantually. So don't pretend as if "we could do without the premium chocolates, coffee's and cigarettes" and we'll be fine. Most people gave up on those a long time ago. The only entity in this game that has not sacrificed a dime are those that keep asking us to sacrifice a "1.92 a month". The public entities in this debate have exchanged nothing that is dispensable for that which is indispensable. Perhaps if they showed a good faith effort in that, they may bring some credibility to this discussion.
no labels given
For those people who compalined baout being labeled by the paper, I find no such name calling towards your view. Where the article says "Those who vote no on school referendums do so for a variety of reasons and may not want their neighbors to think of them as being against education or against the school district", it is simply addressing what many in the pro-referendum camp would perhaps conclude. In no way did the paper say it agreed with this judgement.
In fact, even though the paper seems to support the referendum, it comes off as being sympathetic to those who oppose it. Nobody is calling the anti-referendum crowd "anti-education", but it seems the more that several of these people complain about being labeled as such, they are portraying that label on themselves.
Barnet
you said
"Maybe you and " many in the pro-referendum camp" should shove your conclusions. Your conclusions don't make you any more right than someone that votes no. Talk about knob hill!"
I am against the referendum, just so you know. And I fail to see how the quote you mentioned portrays you in a bad light. In fact, you should be commended for voting, something most people wouldn't do in an off year election.
Please don't let your resolute vision lead you into a blind alley.
BDD OPINON
Where is my last post moderator,did you smoke it on me????