Friday, February 5, 2010

Rachel Lagodka's Letter to the Editor 02/05/10: Investing in the Future of the Community

I want to begin this letter by saying that some of my best friends are landlords. And they support funding the Middle School project because as stakeholders they care about investing in the future of the community, and as conscientious people they care about taking real action to create a world they want to see. It is true that the most vocal opponents of the project are landlords, and a frequent speaker at the many public hearings that were provided is a landlord who does not live in New Paltz, but a set of circumstances, self-interested or not, connected to proponents and detractors of the project does not prove or disprove the project’s worth. The project either is or is not a smart move, regardless of who is in favor or against it, and regardless of any details at all about the people with opinions one way or the other. Everybody wants a good school for the children. Nobody wants a tax increase. Unfortunately, at this stage of our existence, we can’t have a good school without paying for it. Defeating the bond won't decrease our taxes. Spending money to defeat the bond is a bad investment because the project, though it involves an initial increase in taxes, will actually cost less than continuous repairs on an inefficient building, or building later when the prices for fuel and labor and supplies are just going up. Detractors of the project have put up signs that double the price, some claiming 100million and others a more modest 80 or 90. If you vote “no,” and they keep having to repair the Middle School, and eventually have to replace it anyhow, the costs will eventually double, but for now, there is no reason to be frightened by the exaggerations of the opponents of the project. They have come before the board again and again and their math has proven to be wrong again and again.

My suggestion would be to vote "yes" for the bond, and then make sure the project is as efficient and effective in the long run as possible, and watch every bit of the construction process to make sure there is no waste. Make sure they hire local people. Check up on the pricing and sourcing of all the material they get. Try to help them do the best job possible by bringing their attention to local resources and expertise. The school board has been very receptive and responsive to public comment. Over the last 5 months they have held public forums at least once and sometimes 3 times a week. The have responded to the concerns of the public and continue to respond. In response to my concern about coming up with yearly payments, they are going to divide the payments up so we don’t have to come up with a lump sum. While they cut out the cultural benefits to the school like the amphitheater and new equipment in the auditorium in response to public comment they did not cut the green energy modifications that will save us money in the long run, also in response to public comment.

If the project comes in under budget, the money would go back to the taxpayers. If it ends up costing all that money, the community still gets the high performance building they can be proud of and the children get the benefits of a wise investment in a healthy school that does not depend on fossil fuels.
There probably are ways that taxes can go down without depriving the students. At least the tax burden could be distributed more fairly. The problem for small homeowners in New Paltz like me is that your property gets taxed instead of your income and many of us here bought houses when they were cheap, still live in the same houses and make the same incomes, but have to pay double and sometimes triple the taxes as we did when we moved here.

That is not a reason to refuse to pay for the middle school. That is a reason to restructure the taxation.

Rachel Lagodka
New Paltz

No comments:

Post a Comment