As I prepare for the New Year, I look at the life style of my community. It is not as good as it was prior to 2007. My neighbors had jobs, school children were getting lower scores on their state education test, school children were getting jobs near their homes, my taxes were being controlled by my new senior citizen neighbors, and I ate prime rib for my New Years Eve party.
Due to sound and fiscally responsible government providing services I was a peace with the world. Since 2007, jobs for my neighbors are gone, my big city is under State Management, and my local governments want to bond for things they want to do. The problem is they forget about my inability to enjoy all of my pre-2007 wants due my lack of increase in my revenue. Now, I am attempting to figure out how to live within the money I have. To do that I reevaluate my wants, then I decided which one’s will be eliminated to stay within funds available.
However, in a recent newspaper article I read about a proposed second attempt to be authorized to sell bonds to fund the restoration of nine classrooms. Does my Regional School District do this? Is this in the best interest of our community?
Does debt, resulting in paying twice the sale price, a good solution for satisfying the wants of my Regional School District? The District wants to fill 9 empty class rooms by obtaining their restoration at a cost of 50+ million dollars? To pay for this filling of these classrooms it will be accomplished with the selling of bonds. The school district implies that this is necessary because we are a growing community. Repayment will be made over the years by a comingling of State and Federal funds. The State, based upon funds being budget by its Legislature, will provide a match. The problem is that this anticipated revenue source is subject to there being State money available for its share of the bond repayment. If the other needs of the State result in money not being appropriated for this reimbursement, does the tax payer have to pay?
Due to the loss of jobs in Atlantic City many families that have children have left the area to have a job, a source of money, to support them. Are these families the one’s who had children occupying these 9 vacant class rooms? Oh! We are growing in population, but the mid-year census says it has been declining. Today, we have less people living here than we did in 2010. ALSO, THE Enrollment data for the Regional School District and its sending districts VAIDATES THIS decline in student population. Another indicator of our growth is that our community housing has a 23 percent vacancy. Oh! People are fighting to move here. That number will be eliminated. When?
We need to think about the ability to sell vacant school facilities that has been recently refurbished. This is a way to pay debt.
Is the wants of the faculty of our school systems expressed the expression of doing less with more. Is this an application of the “Peter Principle of Management and Marketing” to provide our communities needs? Does the school system efficiency provide our children with work skills to get good jobs in their community – or – is this providing them with the ability to leave a home, leave it vacant to rot and move to where the jobs are?
Are the wants of the School District in accordance with the needs of the taxpayer?