Tacoma is not a suburban school district with new schools, new homes and student growth. We are an urban district with older schools, older homes and declining student growth.
Maintenance is mandatory in order to have a safe and educational environment in the schools, as it is in the homes for a safe and living environment. Both the district and the taxpaying homeowners do this on their budget, taking into consideration their fiscal responsibilities.
The Tacoma School District indicated that the schools it wants to replace are from 43 to 106 years old, about the same age as the homes of the taxpayers. As a homeowner in this group, I also would like to tear down my house and rebuild with an new structure, but the bank would not lend me the money to do this.
Proposition 1 does not make good business sense. The last few years we have closed schools due to the declining student population. Now the school district wants to tear down and rebuild two of these vacant schools for $78 million. Who will be using and maintaining these new schools? is there a hidden agenda?
New buildings are not going to increase the graduation rate, nor will they increase the quality of our children’s education. I believe our tax money can be better spent elsewhere.
I believe in refinancing at a lower interest rate, but Prop. 1 has just too much pork and too many unanswered questions.