Should School Bond Measures Need Only a Simple Majority to Pass?
State Reps. Kevin Van De Wege and Steve Tharinger are cosponsoring legislation that would allow school bond measures to pass with a simple majority, instead of 60% of the vote as currently required. This bill, HJR 4210, is an amendment to the state constitution and therefore will require a two-thirds supermajority of both houses of the state legislature as well as approval of a simple majority of voters statewide.
Van De Wege said that under the present system, “a minority of people are making bond decisions.”
Van De Wege said that under the present system, “a minority of people are making bond decisions.”
posted by Tom Harper at 3:33 PM
11 Comments:
Crazy stuff. They know that such a bill won't pass, but make the effort to troll for votes from the people who lost the bond issues here.
You know, makes them look like they actually care.
no, bond measures should not be easy to pass, they're usually bad ideas, and especially so when the government isn't being responsible with our money. Look at how high our utility rates area....would be vote, too.
I question the need for high schools anymore being as everything we want or need to know is on the internut.
The Roughriders have long since past their significance. If the Meth ners really want their kids to have a new school they can drag up to a number of districts that are progressive. PA unfortunately has no future.
So, we're just abandoning Port Angeles then?
Must be nice that you have the money to do that.
@ Anon 8:33
You seem to miss the point. A depressed town of 20,000 that is already taxed to the hilt can't afford another $100 million in taxes. Most of us are on fixed incomes, and having a tough times making ends meet.
But, you seem to be able to. Must be nice that you have the money to do that.
Selfish cynical pricks abound.
There is only one way to fix this town:
Invest in infrastructure, i.e. roads, schools, downtown buildings, & a bypass.
After that move the log storage to the airport.
@ Anon 5:45 Am
Selfish pricks abound? Yep, you're right! Look at those selfish dweebs that make up Revitalize Port Angeles, for example. They don't care about anybody but themselves and their businesses. Community? Sure, as long as you frequent their silly shops. How much in beer making supplies and wedding dresses have YOU bought this week?
Or, these people like Meth ner who seem oblivious to the reality of how many people are on fixed incomes. Why should THEY care that people who have worked all THEIR lives, paid so much in taxes for schools their kids graduated out of decades ago, and now have to endure a city who seem to think raising taxes every year for silly projects has no limits?
As it is, 36% of city residents have to have their utility bills subsidized because they can't afford them.
Do THAT math. If you need over 60% voter approval for a $100 million tax increase, and 36% of residents have to have their utility bills subsidized, you're starting off with a really narrow pool, assuming the rest CAN pay more.
Selfish pricks? Yeah, there are a lot of them around.
"The Roughriders have long since past their significance... PA unfortunately has no future. "
I think I got the point just fine. PA has no future, time to move if you can and those who can't have to stay and watch the town fall apart. Nobody wants any progress in this town (because it has no future) and yet taxes and rates keep going up anyway for fewer and fewer services.
I can't afford to move. So I guess I'm stuck in a town with no future. Thanks.
I don't think that Port Angeles is doomed, or that it has no future. I think it IS doomed, as long as we keep swimming in this circle with the same so-called "solutions" espoused by the same circle of people who have gotten us to where we are today.
When are we going to get it? How many times do we have to fall for the same promises, made by the same people, before we realize it isn't getting us where we want to go?
We COULD turn Port Angeles (and the surrounding areas) into a nice, self supporting, self reliant place. Why those words? Look at the situation now. A community totally reliant on chasing grants. The City does it. The various government agencies (of which there are many) rely on grant funding. Community groups chase grants.
Other peoples' money.
And, with these grants is money to administer them. The grants pay salaries. But, they are not permanent. So, we live in a sort of temporary limbo, with only enough money until we figure how and where the next grant comes from. People spend their time trying to find money to pay their own salaries.
Obviously, that doesn't create a livable, prosperous community.
Can we do better? Only if we change course, and work for new goals.
Post a Comment
<< Home