Letter to the editor: Throwing money at the problem is the worst possible choice

Posted

First, Ridgefield previously abandoned a perfectly good school we now call the Ridgefield Administrative and Civic Center (RACC). The city moved many of its offices into that building. That beautiful brick building is full of classrooms, has a gymnasium, a lovely playground and ample parking. We still own that building. If we are in dire need of classrooms, how about we reclaim that school and require the city to relocate its offices to alternate facilities? It’s for the children, after all.

Next, the cost of school bonds. Many folks don’t understand the difference between a school levy and a school bond. A levy is used for operating expenses. It is short term and the taxpayers have to approve it every few years. It only requires a 50% voter approval because it is short term. A school bond is entirely different. It funds capital projects. A bond will be paid for by the homeowner over decades. In this current case, the requested bond will last for 21 years. A bond requires a supermajority (60%) to pass. The state Legislature set this supermajority requirement for bonds because, in their wisdom, they realized voters were making a generational commitment to pay for capital projects. They knew that consecutive bonds would stack upon themselves just like we now have in Ridgefield taxes upon taxes.

Finally, inflation is up, taxes are up, wages are not keeping up with inflation and folks on fixed incomes are at risk of being taxed out of their homes. Many parents have chosen homeschooling or Christian schools as an alternative to public schools. This is never reflected in the stats touted about how many kids will be in school, attempting to justify new schools.



Our challenge is to find a balance between educating our children and being fiscally responsible. Throwing money at the problem is the worst possible choice.

James Sheppard,

Ridgefield