To the Editor,

I am frustrated. Following a no vote for the school referendum by the voters in November, the school board has chosen to go ahead and ask for virtually the same referendum, a mere six months later. I feel it is important to remind the school board that they represent not only the “yes” voters but also the “no” voters. Listening to all the residents is what a school board’s job entails. The no vote doesn’t mean “no voters” are against education, it means we don’t agree with the total plan as presented.

I believe it is also important to note that whether you vote yes or no, you must realize that this referendum is only for a building structure and not directly for curriculum improvement. I agree physical space is needed for instruction and a commons area is a plus, but improved course offerings is what students need to succeed in the future.

In two years, the school board will have the right to ask the school district residents for a levy increase, an increase in taxes once again. This levy could improve technology as well as transportation and in my opinion would be an easier yes vote even though taxes would be increased.

If the referendum does not pass and the board feels it is necessary to once again present a more realistic referendum to the voters, I believe that the referendum should be three fold; One, absolute needs, two, wants, and three, a wish list. In the meantime, care should be taken of the deferred maintenance that should never have been deferred for so many years. As in home improvements, it should have been updated a little at a time, thus this huge referendum request could have been avoided.

As you vote, consider the impact on the next 23 years. The city and county will also have increases in their working schedules. I think we can all agree our young people’s education is important, but what is needed to provide that education is not his referendum.

Paul Friedrich

Henning