The Herald of Everett, Washington
Customer service  |  Subscribe   |   Log in or sign up   |   Advertising information   |   Contact us
HeraldNet on Facebook HeraldNet on Twitter HeraldNet RSS feeds HeraldNet Pinterest HeraldNet Google Plus HeraldNet Youtube
HeraldNet Newsletters  Newsletters: Sign up  Green editions icon Green editions
In Our View/An April 22 vote

‘Yes’ to Everett’s school bond

SHARE: facebook Twitter icon Linkedin icon Google+ icon Email icon |  PRINTER-FRIENDLY  |  COMMENTS
Voters will weigh in again on the Everett School District bond that failed to reach the 60 percent threshold in February. A “yes” vote not only benefits current and future students, but signals to new residents and employers that district families put a premium on K-12 education.
For voters, the charge is to separate the sometimes-acrimonious politics of the school board from the educational needs of area children. To sandbag a bond over the handling of the district’s new administration building is cold comfort to students requiring more classroom space at Silver Lake and Hawthorne Elementary. It’s a form of self-flagellation: Annoy the district by punishing students and, by extension, the community.
District leaders made a tactical decision to revisit the bond as soon as possible and forward an identical package to voters. For some, this reinforces the narrative that the district is a wee listening-challenged. The supposition of supporters is that pro-bond voters weren’t mobilized in February, but they will be come April 22.
We hope that’s true, because another “no” vote has consequences: Flight to private schools and incentive to uproot to better-performing school districts. How will Realtors spin it? “May I show you something in Shoreline or Mukilteo?”
As we noted earlier this year, a measure that preserves a stable tax rate and provides for the next generation of K-12 students defines the public interest.
The bond is the product of a protracted process, with discussions at 14 board meetings since 2011, comprehensive work sessions, long-range enrollment and facilities-planning updates, and a long-term capital facilities review. Public and cross-sector participation underscored inclusion with students, board, staff and the community. The goal was to harmonize the bond with the district’s strategic plan, capacity and enrollment projections, a facilities’ inventory, and anticipation of future needs such as full-day kindergarten and K-3 class-size reductions. It’s a case study in complex planning that puts students and taxpayers first.
The district itself is massive ­— 15 miles long with shifting demographics. Beginning in the late 1960s, administrators began methodical planning to align bonds and levies with forecast needs.
The stable-tax rate plan for $259.4 million ($6.55 per $1,000 of assessed home value, the same rate as in 2013) involves new construction, modernization and new technology. Phase 1 of a new high school (housing approximately 750 students), synthetic turf fields at two high schools, and building upgrades.
Make your vote count on April 22. Vote yes.

More Editorials Headlines


HeraldNet Headlines

Top stories and breaking news updates


Share your comments: Log in using your HeraldNet account or your Facebook, Twitter or Disqus profile. Comments that violate the rules are subject to removal. Please see our terms of use. Please note that you must verify your email address for your comments to appear.

You are logged in using your HeraldNet ID. Click here to update your profile. | Log out.

Our new comment system is not supported in IE 7. Please upgrade your browser here.

comments powered by Disqus