Fleeing APS schools for FFX County

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voters would happily pay for new schools over aquatic centers and $1M bus stops.

Not every voter would rather that money go to schools than the aquatic center. Especially not senior citizens who are more concerned with their own amenities than with schools, and who turn out to vote in far greater numbers than parents of school-aged children. Million dollar bus stops have already been nixed.

Let's give the voters a chance to voice their opinion. Put to a vote, don't make decisions based on perceived fears.

Put what to a vote? Bonds aren’t either/or.

Put up a bond for school projects.

They are doing that. They do it every two years.

But they are not asking for everything we need.

1. They can’t do that without blowing our credit rating out of the water.

2. Because of 1, the county board won’t approve it, and they have ultimate say in how much of a bond will be put up for schools.

3. You think voters wouldn’t react to a half billion dollar school bond referendum? If the bond gets voted down, that means no additional bond money for two years, and every project relying on that money as well as everything planned for after it gets set back two years. That includes Reed, the CC high school, the Ed Center renovation, the Arlington Tech expansion, the middle school expansion, the new elementary school for 2029, and a bunch of MC/MM. That’s a pretty big risk to take just to figure out how far the voters can be pushed.

Lots of fear talking.

Substantive response?

Sorry. Too many glasses of wine to do any kind of sensitivity analysis around bonds/budgets/etc. Happy to look at numbers in the morning.

But you haven’t provided any real #s either around credit rating, etc. So if you’d prefer to provide a more substantial argument yourself — instead of just sharing your fears — we can discuss that.

If you need me to walk you through the debt ratio and debt service numbers, you haven’t been paying attention. If you need me to pull up the videos and articles where the county says APS isn’t getting more of debt ratio, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m over wasting time on people who don’t put any effort into following these issues and then want their opinions treated as equally valuable to everyone else’s. They’re not.

We can go up - there is still a little more room even if we stick to the arbitrary 10%.

And while we are at it - let's raise property taxes to help offset debt. We already pay a relatively low amount (in terms of rate and $ amounts) compared to many other areas with excellent schools.

If we want to prioritize schools there are ways to do that. The county board isn't doing that. And the school board isn't pushing for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voters would happily pay for new schools over aquatic centers and $1M bus stops.

Not every voter would rather that money go to schools than the aquatic center. Especially not senior citizens who are more concerned with their own amenities than with schools, and who turn out to vote in far greater numbers than parents of school-aged children. Million dollar bus stops have already been nixed.

Let's give the voters a chance to voice their opinion. Put to a vote, don't make decisions based on perceived fears.

Put what to a vote? Bonds aren’t either/or.

Put up a bond for school projects.

They are doing that. They do it every two years.

But they are not asking for everything we need.

1. They can’t do that without blowing our credit rating out of the water.

2. Because of 1, the county board won’t approve it, and they have ultimate say in how much of a bond will be put up for schools.

3. You think voters wouldn’t react to a half billion dollar school bond referendum? If the bond gets voted down, that means no additional bond money for two years, and every project relying on that money as well as everything planned for after it gets set back two years. That includes Reed, the CC high school, the Ed Center renovation, the Arlington Tech expansion, the middle school expansion, the new elementary school for 2029, and a bunch of MC/MM. That’s a pretty big risk to take just to figure out how far the voters can be pushed.

Lots of fear talking.

Substantive response?

Sorry. Too many glasses of wine to do any kind of sensitivity analysis around bonds/budgets/etc. Happy to look at numbers in the morning.

But you haven’t provided any real #s either around credit rating, etc. So if you’d prefer to provide a more substantial argument yourself — instead of just sharing your fears — we can discuss that.

If you need me to walk you through the debt ratio and debt service numbers, you haven’t been paying attention. If you need me to pull up the videos and articles where the county says APS isn’t getting more of debt ratio, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m over wasting time on people who don’t put any effort into following these issues and then want their opinions treated as equally valuable to everyone else’s. They’re not.

We can go up - there is still a little more room even if we stick to the arbitrary 10%.

And while we are at it - let's raise property taxes to help offset debt. We already pay a relatively low amount (in terms of rate and $ amounts) compared to many other areas with excellent schools.

If we want to prioritize schools there are ways to do that. The county board isn't doing that. And the school board isn't pushing for it.

Sorry, hard pass on raising taxes. We don't have a revenue problem in Arlington. We have a spending prioritization problem. If you really insist in increasing revenues, let's stop artificially depressing our tax base by subsidizing affordable housing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voters would happily pay for new schools over aquatic centers and $1M bus stops.

Not every voter would rather that money go to schools than the aquatic center. Especially not senior citizens who are more concerned with their own amenities than with schools, and who turn out to vote in far greater numbers than parents of school-aged children. Million dollar bus stops have already been nixed.

Let's give the voters a chance to voice their opinion. Put to a vote, don't make decisions based on perceived fears.

Put what to a vote? Bonds aren’t either/or.

Put up a bond for school projects.

They are doing that. They do it every two years.

But they are not asking for everything we need.

1. They can’t do that without blowing our credit rating out of the water.

2. Because of 1, the county board won’t approve it, and they have ultimate say in how much of a bond will be put up for schools.

3. You think voters wouldn’t react to a half billion dollar school bond referendum? If the bond gets voted down, that means no additional bond money for two years, and every project relying on that money as well as everything planned for after it gets set back two years. That includes Reed, the CC high school, the Ed Center renovation, the Arlington Tech expansion, the middle school expansion, the new elementary school for 2029, and a bunch of MC/MM. That’s a pretty big risk to take just to figure out how far the voters can be pushed.

Lots of fear talking.

Substantive response?

Sorry. Too many glasses of wine to do any kind of sensitivity analysis around bonds/budgets/etc. Happy to look at numbers in the morning.

But you haven’t provided any real #s either around credit rating, etc. So if you’d prefer to provide a more substantial argument yourself — instead of just sharing your fears — we can discuss that.

If you need me to walk you through the debt ratio and debt service numbers, you haven’t been paying attention. If you need me to pull up the videos and articles where the county says APS isn’t getting more of debt ratio, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m over wasting time on people who don’t put any effort into following these issues and then want their opinions treated as equally valuable to everyone else’s. They’re not.

We can go up - there is still a little more room even if we stick to the arbitrary 10%.

And while we are at it - let's raise property taxes to help offset debt. We already pay a relatively low amount (in terms of rate and $ amounts) compared to many other areas with excellent schools.

If we want to prioritize schools there are ways to do that. The county board isn't doing that. And the school board isn't pushing for it.

Sorry, hard pass on raising taxes. We don't have a revenue problem in Arlington. We have a spending prioritization problem. If you really insist in increasing revenues, let's stop artificially depressing our tax base by subsidizing affordable housing.

Arlington has options to improve (or honestly just maintain at this point) the school system. The School Board and County Board are choosing not to provide funds to do what is required.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voters would happily pay for new schools over aquatic centers and $1M bus stops.

Not every voter would rather that money go to schools than the aquatic center. Especially not senior citizens who are more concerned with their own amenities than with schools, and who turn out to vote in far greater numbers than parents of school-aged children. Million dollar bus stops have already been nixed.

Let's give the voters a chance to voice their opinion. Put to a vote, don't make decisions based on perceived fears.

Put what to a vote? Bonds aren’t either/or.

Put up a bond for school projects.

They are doing that. They do it every two years.

But they are not asking for everything we need.

1. They can’t do that without blowing our credit rating out of the water.

2. Because of 1, the county board won’t approve it, and they have ultimate say in how much of a bond will be put up for schools.

3. You think voters wouldn’t react to a half billion dollar school bond referendum? If the bond gets voted down, that means no additional bond money for two years, and every project relying on that money as well as everything planned for after it gets set back two years. That includes Reed, the CC high school, the Ed Center renovation, the Arlington Tech expansion, the middle school expansion, the new elementary school for 2029, and a bunch of MC/MM. That’s a pretty big risk to take just to figure out how far the voters can be pushed.

Lots of fear talking.

Substantive response?

Sorry. Too many glasses of wine to do any kind of sensitivity analysis around bonds/budgets/etc. Happy to look at numbers in the morning.

But you haven’t provided any real #s either around credit rating, etc. So if you’d prefer to provide a more substantial argument yourself — instead of just sharing your fears — we can discuss that.

If you need me to walk you through the debt ratio and debt service numbers, you haven’t been paying attention. If you need me to pull up the videos and articles where the county says APS isn’t getting more of debt ratio, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m over wasting time on people who don’t put any effort into following these issues and then want their opinions treated as equally valuable to everyone else’s. They’re not.

We can go up - there is still a little more room even if we stick to the arbitrary 10%.

And while we are at it - let's raise property taxes to help offset debt. We already pay a relatively low amount (in terms of rate and $ amounts) compared to many other areas with excellent schools.

If we want to prioritize schools there are ways to do that. The county board isn't doing that. And the school board isn't pushing for it.

Sorry, hard pass on raising taxes. We don't have a revenue problem in Arlington. We have a spending prioritization problem. If you really insist in increasing revenues, let's stop artificially depressing our tax base by subsidizing affordable housing.

We should stop the tax forgiveness for seniors who are living in million dollar homes and have other assets that could be sold to support the real estate taxes as they are or that could allow them to relocate if they opt not to pay. They aren't poor and they don't need our money to survive. If we're handing out $$, I'd rather help a family that is struggling just to make ends meet and feed their children. And we should definitely not be forgiving estates' taxes. That's a $6-8 million issue every year. Insane. We're making sure that heirs get tax-free inheritances while we can't build a 4th HS. Why on earth are we doing this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voters would happily pay for new schools over aquatic centers and $1M bus stops.

Not every voter would rather that money go to schools than the aquatic center. Especially not senior citizens who are more concerned with their own amenities than with schools, and who turn out to vote in far greater numbers than parents of school-aged children. Million dollar bus stops have already been nixed.

Let's give the voters a chance to voice their opinion. Put to a vote, don't make decisions based on perceived fears.

Put what to a vote? Bonds aren’t either/or.

Put up a bond for school projects.

They are doing that. They do it every two years.

But they are not asking for everything we need.

1. They can’t do that without blowing our credit rating out of the water.

2. Because of 1, the county board won’t approve it, and they have ultimate say in how much of a bond will be put up for schools.

3. You think voters wouldn’t react to a half billion dollar school bond referendum? If the bond gets voted down, that means no additional bond money for two years, and every project relying on that money as well as everything planned for after it gets set back two years. That includes Reed, the CC high school, the Ed Center renovation, the Arlington Tech expansion, the middle school expansion, the new elementary school for 2029, and a bunch of MC/MM. That’s a pretty big risk to take just to figure out how far the voters can be pushed.

Lots of fear talking.

Substantive response?

Sorry. Too many glasses of wine to do any kind of sensitivity analysis around bonds/budgets/etc. Happy to look at numbers in the morning.

But you haven’t provided any real #s either around credit rating, etc. So if you’d prefer to provide a more substantial argument yourself — instead of just sharing your fears — we can discuss that.

If you need me to walk you through the debt ratio and debt service numbers, you haven’t been paying attention. If you need me to pull up the videos and articles where the county says APS isn’t getting more of debt ratio, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m over wasting time on people who don’t put any effort into following these issues and then want their opinions treated as equally valuable to everyone else’s. They’re not.

We can go up - there is still a little more room even if we stick to the arbitrary 10%.

And while we are at it - let's raise property taxes to help offset debt. We already pay a relatively low amount (in terms of rate and $ amounts) compared to many other areas with excellent schools.

If we want to prioritize schools there are ways to do that. The county board isn't doing that. And the school board isn't pushing for it.

The school board told the county board point-blank in a televised work session that they should look at raising property taxes to help pay for school projects. The county board did not respond, then or afterward. The school board asked the county board explicitly for a greater share of the bonding capacity, the county board (via the county manager) told them no. The school board has basically no leverage with the county board, if we want the county board to change their tune, we have to do the work because we are the ones who can vote them out if we don't agree with their priorities.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voters would happily pay for new schools over aquatic centers and $1M bus stops.

Not every voter would rather that money go to schools than the aquatic center. Especially not senior citizens who are more concerned with their own amenities than with schools, and who turn out to vote in far greater numbers than parents of school-aged children. Million dollar bus stops have already been nixed.

Let's give the voters a chance to voice their opinion. Put to a vote, don't make decisions based on perceived fears.

Put what to a vote? Bonds aren’t either/or.

Put up a bond for school projects.

They are doing that. They do it every two years.

But they are not asking for everything we need.

1. They can’t do that without blowing our credit rating out of the water.

2. Because of 1, the county board won’t approve it, and they have ultimate say in how much of a bond will be put up for schools.

3. You think voters wouldn’t react to a half billion dollar school bond referendum? If the bond gets voted down, that means no additional bond money for two years, and every project relying on that money as well as everything planned for after it gets set back two years. That includes Reed, the CC high school, the Ed Center renovation, the Arlington Tech expansion, the middle school expansion, the new elementary school for 2029, and a bunch of MC/MM. That’s a pretty big risk to take just to figure out how far the voters can be pushed.

Lots of fear talking.

Substantive response?

Sorry. Too many glasses of wine to do any kind of sensitivity analysis around bonds/budgets/etc. Happy to look at numbers in the morning.

But you haven’t provided any real #s either around credit rating, etc. So if you’d prefer to provide a more substantial argument yourself — instead of just sharing your fears — we can discuss that.

If you need me to walk you through the debt ratio and debt service numbers, you haven’t been paying attention. If you need me to pull up the videos and articles where the county says APS isn’t getting more of debt ratio, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m over wasting time on people who don’t put any effort into following these issues and then want their opinions treated as equally valuable to everyone else’s. They’re not.

We can go up - there is still a little more room even if we stick to the arbitrary 10%.

And while we are at it - let's raise property taxes to help offset debt. We already pay a relatively low amount (in terms of rate and $ amounts) compared to many other areas with excellent schools.

If we want to prioritize schools there are ways to do that. The county board isn't doing that. And the school board isn't pushing for it.

The school board told the county board point-blank in a televised work session that they should look at raising property taxes to help pay for school projects. The county board did not respond, then or afterward. The school board asked the county board explicitly for a greater share of the bonding capacity, the county board (via the county manager) told them no. The school board has basically no leverage with the county board, if we want the county board to change their tune, we have to do the work because we are the ones who can vote them out if we don't agree with their priorities.

Let's take it to the County Board then. Vihstadt probably doesn't want to be the sacrificial lamb in November if they don't address this...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voters would happily pay for new schools over aquatic centers and $1M bus stops.

Not every voter would rather that money go to schools than the aquatic center. Especially not senior citizens who are more concerned with their own amenities than with schools, and who turn out to vote in far greater numbers than parents of school-aged children. Million dollar bus stops have already been nixed.

Let's give the voters a chance to voice their opinion. Put to a vote, don't make decisions based on perceived fears.

Put what to a vote? Bonds aren’t either/or.

Put up a bond for school projects.

They are doing that. They do it every two years.

But they are not asking for everything we need.

1. They can’t do that without blowing our credit rating out of the water.

2. Because of 1, the county board won’t approve it, and they have ultimate say in how much of a bond will be put up for schools.

3. You think voters wouldn’t react to a half billion dollar school bond referendum? If the bond gets voted down, that means no additional bond money for two years, and every project relying on that money as well as everything planned for after it gets set back two years. That includes Reed, the CC high school, the Ed Center renovation, the Arlington Tech expansion, the middle school expansion, the new elementary school for 2029, and a bunch of MC/MM. That’s a pretty big risk to take just to figure out how far the voters can be pushed.

Lots of fear talking.

Substantive response?

Sorry. Too many glasses of wine to do any kind of sensitivity analysis around bonds/budgets/etc. Happy to look at numbers in the morning.

But you haven’t provided any real #s either around credit rating, etc. So if you’d prefer to provide a more substantial argument yourself — instead of just sharing your fears — we can discuss that.

If you need me to walk you through the debt ratio and debt service numbers, you haven’t been paying attention. If you need me to pull up the videos and articles where the county says APS isn’t getting more of debt ratio, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m over wasting time on people who don’t put any effort into following these issues and then want their opinions treated as equally valuable to everyone else’s. They’re not.

We can go up - there is still a little more room even if we stick to the arbitrary 10%.

And while we are at it - let's raise property taxes to help offset debt. We already pay a relatively low amount (in terms of rate and $ amounts) compared to many other areas with excellent schools.

If we want to prioritize schools there are ways to do that. The county board isn't doing that. And the school board isn't pushing for it.

The school board told the county board point-blank in a televised work session that they should look at raising property taxes to help pay for school projects. The county board did not respond, then or afterward. The school board asked the county board explicitly for a greater share of the bonding capacity, the county board (via the county manager) told them no. The school board has basically no leverage with the county board, if we want the county board to change their tune, we have to do the work because we are the ones who can vote them out if we don't agree with their priorities.

Let's take it to the County Board then. Vihstadt probably doesn't want to be the sacrificial lamb in November if they don't address this...

Oh god, please start paying attention to what's going on before you make suggestions like this. If anyone from the county board was on APS's side this past spring, it was Vihstadt. If you vote him out, things will only get worse.

[Anonymous]

Katie Cristol is a problem. She needs to go. Sadly, she was just elected. She has gone on record saying that if Arlignton received an unexpected windfall, she would not give any more to the schools. I’m sure it’s a tune the boomers love to hear, but she’s bad news for people who hope to eventually send kids to school in Arlington.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Katie Cristol is a problem. She needs to go. Sadly, she was just elected. She has gone on record saying that if Arlignton received an unexpected windfall, she would not give any more to the schools. I’m sure it’s a tune the boomers love to hear, but she’s bad news for people who hope to eventually send kids to school in Arlington.

I agree she is a big part of the problem. Libby Garvey is as well, she's adamantly opposed to increasing school capacity.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Katie Cristol is a problem. She needs to go. Sadly, she was just elected. She has gone on record saying that if Arlignton received an unexpected windfall, she would not give any more to the schools. I’m sure it’s a tune the boomers love to hear, but she’s bad news for people who hope to eventually send kids to school in Arlington.

Ditto. I do not understand her at all. She's big on making childcare affordable -- which would make Arlington more attractive to FAMILIES. But doesn't care about properly funding schools for those families? Doesn't make any sense.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Katie Cristol is a problem. She needs to go. Sadly, she was just elected. She has gone on record saying that if Arlignton received an unexpected windfall, she would not give any more to the schools. I’m sure it’s a tune the boomers love to hear, but she’s bad news for people who hope to eventually send kids to school in Arlington.

Ditto. I do not understand her at all. She's big on making childcare affordable -- which would make Arlington more attractive to FAMILIES. But doesn't care about properly funding schools for those families? Doesn't make any sense.

Please that childcare stuff is such BS. It costs her nothing, so why not advocate for it? Is the county looking to create free pre-K for everyone. No? Well then she can STFU and have a seat.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Katie Cristol is a problem. She needs to go. Sadly, she was just elected. She has gone on record saying that if Arlignton received an unexpected windfall, she would not give any more to the schools. I’m sure it’s a tune the boomers love to hear, but she’s bad news for people who hope to eventually send kids to school in Arlington.

I agree she is a big part of the problem. Libby Garvey is as well, she's adamantly opposed to increasing school capacity.

Libby Garvey was on the school board that created many of our current problems.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Katie Cristol is a problem. She needs to go. Sadly, she was just elected. She has gone on record saying that if Arlignton received an unexpected windfall, she would not give any more to the schools. I’m sure it’s a tune the boomers love to hear, but she’s bad news for people who hope to eventually send kids to school in Arlington.

I agree she is a big part of the problem. Libby Garvey is as well, she's adamantly opposed to increasing school capacity.

But both of them are happy to vote for any affordable housing or increased density projects that are put in front of them. Don't ask where the children will go to school or if the developers are contributing money for schools. The developers are only asked for money for public art and affordable housing.

Anonymous wrote:Ditto. I do not understand her at all. She's big on making childcare affordable -- which would make Arlington more attractive to FAMILIES. But doesn't care about properly funding schools for those families? Doesn't make any sense.

It makes perfect sense, there almost nothing the County Board can do to make childcare affordable, but it sounds good as a campaign slogan. Also she wants you to move once you start costing the County money as then she can avoid unpopular decisions that may hurt her chances of getting elected to her next position. If you think being on the County Board is the end of her ambition, you haven't been paying attention.

[Anonymous]

I truly loathe KC

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Voters would happily pay for new schools over aquatic centers and $1M bus stops.

Not every voter would rather that money go to schools than the aquatic center. Especially not senior citizens who are more concerned with their own amenities than with schools, and who turn out to vote in far greater numbers than parents of school-aged children. Million dollar bus stops have already been nixed.

Let's give the voters a chance to voice their opinion. Put to a vote, don't make decisions based on perceived fears.

Put what to a vote? Bonds aren’t either/or.

Put up a bond for school projects.

They are doing that. They do it every two years.

But they are not asking for everything we need.

1. They can’t do that without blowing our credit rating out of the water.

2. Because of 1, the county board won’t approve it, and they have ultimate say in how much of a bond will be put up for schools.

3. You think voters wouldn’t react to a half billion dollar school bond referendum? If the bond gets voted down, that means no additional bond money for two years, and every project relying on that money as well as everything planned for after it gets set back two years. That includes Reed, the CC high school, the Ed Center renovation, the Arlington Tech expansion, the middle school expansion, the new elementary school for 2029, and a bunch of MC/MM. That’s a pretty big risk to take just to figure out how far the voters can be pushed.

Lots of fear talking.

Substantive response?

Sorry. Too many glasses of wine to do any kind of sensitivity analysis around bonds/budgets/etc. Happy to look at numbers in the morning.

But you haven’t provided any real #s either around credit rating, etc. So if you’d prefer to provide a more substantial argument yourself — instead of just sharing your fears — we can discuss that.

If you need me to walk you through the debt ratio and debt service numbers, you haven’t been paying attention. If you need me to pull up the videos and articles where the county says APS isn’t getting more of debt ratio, you haven’t been paying attention. I’m over wasting time on people who don’t put any effort into following these issues and then want their opinions treated as equally valuable to everyone else’s. They’re not.

We can go up - there is still a little more room even if we stick to the arbitrary 10%.

And while we are at it - let's raise property taxes to help offset debt. We already pay a relatively low amount (in terms of rate and $ amounts) compared to many other areas with excellent schools.

If we want to prioritize schools there are ways to do that. The county board isn't doing that. And the school board isn't pushing for it.

The school board told the county board point-blank in a televised work session that they should look at raising property taxes to help pay for school projects. The county board did not respond, then or afterward. The school board asked the county board explicitly for a greater share of the bonding capacity, the county board (via the county manager) told them no. The school board has basically no leverage with the county board, if we want the county board to change their tune, we have to do the work because we are the ones who can vote them out if we don't agree with their priorities.

Let's take it to the County Board then. Vihstadt probably doesn't want to be the sacrificial lamb in November if they don't address this...

Oh god, please start paying attention to what's going on before you make suggestions like this. If anyone from the county board was on APS's side this past spring, it was Vihstadt. If you vote him out, things will only get worse.

He has a few more months to take a stronger stand for APS.