Spokane7
54°
February 4, 2012 in Washington Voices
Give children chance to dream big
“You have brains in your head. You have feet in your shoes. You can steer yourself any direction you choose. ” – Dr. Seuss
As parents and members of a community, we care not only about our own children, but for all children. One of the most basic necessities for children to reach their potential is an education.
Our public school system has been giving children this stepping- stone to reach their potential and to achieve the American dream. A good education gives all children, regardless of their socioeconomic background, an opportunity to do and be whatever they choose.
I have been involved as a volunteer in the Central Valley School District and am amazed by the dedication and perseverance of the teachers, staff and administrators. My children’s teachers have not only inspired my children, but they have inspired me as well.
Please remember, this is not a new tax, it simply replaces the expiring levy.
Join me in voting yes for children.
Petra Hoy
Greenacres
Photo: Team players 
flyerd1 on February 08 at 12:14 a.m.
Petra said: “Please remember, this is not a new tax, it simply replaces the expiring levy.”
What?… It most certainly IS a new tax. If the old one didn’t have an expiration date we wouldn’t be voting on a NEW one now, right?… Levies are meant to be one time fill-gap revenue streams that may be necessary once every 10-20 yrs. They’re “NOT” meant to be a “constant” revenue stream… It shows incredibly bad district leadership when districts have gotten to the point of expecting levies as a never ending portion of their budgets.
Anything with an end date (like a “3yr” levy tax or a mortgage) has to have a “new” one started in order to “remain” in place so it’s perfectly accurate to say it’s a new tax. What if, after paying off your mortgage, the bank said “we don’t want you to pay a new mortgage, we’d just like you to pay on this replacement mortgage” for another mortgage term…? How would that go over?
If we paid levy taxes on a monthly basis, and there was a 1 month break between the old and new levy (meaning the tax would be gone for 1 month), would you agree that the new levy is a new tax? In other words, would you have to actually “See” at least 1 month of taxes “without” the levy to agree that the new levy is a new tax? Exactly what would be the difference between that scenario and having no 1 month gap (aside from the 1 month tax savings) in regard to it being a new levy? Just because these new levies take over with no break, as opposed to the 1 month break in the example, doesn’t change the fact that they’re a new levy/tax (it just makes it “less noticeable” than if there was a break period).
The less noticeable taxes may be easier to get people to accept but there’s no disputing that it also makes them the most hidden and therefore tricky/dangerous (ALL somewhat hidden taxes, not “specifically” school levies). Taxes should be extremely noticeable so as not to become forgotten or simply seen as replacements, continuations, etc…