Printer Friendly
The Free Library
4,547,733 articles and books
Member login
User name  
Password 
 
Join us Forgot password?

EDITORIAL CONNING THE PUBLIC LAUSD GAMBLES RECKLESSLY WITH BORROWING PLAN.


WHEN voters bought the $2.4 billion Proposition BB bond measure six years ago, they were conned into believing their higher taxes would pay for 12,000 well-planned projects to modernize and repair schools and add classrooms.

Instead, the Los Angeles Unified School District squandered much of the money, mismanaging the projects. While nearly all of the Proposition BB money has been spent, only one-sixth, or 2,000, of the promised projects have been completed.

Forgiving and perhaps forgetful, voters desperate for quality schools bit again last year and passed Measure K, which imposed $3.35 billion in new taxes to build schools to ease overcrowding.

Even with billions from the state, that's still not enough for the LAUSD. The district anticipates hitting taxpayers up again for more money with a March bond issue to pay for the projects Proposition BB was supposed to pay for but didn't - and a lot of new ones.

And that's where the problem comes in.

The sage minds on the school board can't wait to see if voters agree to yet another massive tax increase so they are turning their attention to borrowing the money from another source. And they say that if they don't get $250 million quickly, the modernization projects initiated with Proposition BB money are in jeopardy.

Specifically, they want to borrow $250 million for modernization projects from Measure K, which under the law can only be used for the promised new school construction projects.

Quick-witted as they are, district officials argue that the Measure K projects aren't ready for construction so the money is just sitting in a bank rotting.

Considering the district's track record with handling taxpayers' money, the raiding of the Measure K fund seems like a very bad idea.

Last fall, in order to get voters to back the Measure K bond, school officials promised that this time, really, the bond money wouldn't be abused or misused. They fussed around putting auditors on the bond expenditure case, and never, ever wasting a penny of taxpayer money again.

What happens if the March bond does not pass? Raid the Measure K fund again? This time with no promise to repay, maybe? Or more likely the LAUSD will do what it did to pay for the Belmont Learning Center - raid the general fund that's supposed to go into classrooms to benefit kids, or teacher training, or better salaries to retain and attract great teachers.

School officials shouldn't be surprised if people feel betrayed once again. The new school board is making decisions that put the students last on the list of priorities, and the decision to use Measure K as a bridge account is just the latest proof.

This plan is tantamount to blackmailing the public into voting for the March bond issue by making dire threats about the consequences of paying back this loan. It's a reckless gamble with the future of public education in Los Angeles.

COPYRIGHT 2003 Daily News
No portion of this article can be reproduced without the express written permission from the copyright holder.
Copyright 2003, Gale Group. All rights reserved. Gale Group is a Thomson Corporation Company.

 Reader Opinion

Title:

Comment:



 

Article Details
Printer friendly Cite/link Email Feedback
Publication:Daily News (Los Angeles, CA)
Article Type:Editorial
Date:Sep 25, 2003
Words:489
Previous Article:EDITORIAL SICKENING TACTICS.(Editorial)(Editorial)
Next Article:NOTEBOOK: WRITE-IN WANNABES ADD TO CANDIDATE ROLLS.(News)



Related Articles
Maura Casey.(Brief Article)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)
EDITORIAL WEEK IN REVIEW.(Editorial)(Editorial)

Terms of use | Copyright © 2008 Farlex, Inc. | Feedback | For webmasters | Submit articles