The Arkanssouri Blog.: Response to "Amy."

Thursday, June 03, 2004

Response to "Amy."

One reader emailed me regarding the new Elementary Temple to Socialism. I've changed her name, since I haven't been able to get back to her to ask if it's OK to print this. I've also left out some things that might help in identifying her.

LOL!
Yeah... o.k. I wonder who you are and how you associated my relationship to Thayer... other than I did recognise the ark-piper addy, so I get a connection... vaguely.

Actually... I think there is something that needs to be done, since they went ahead and put that school in such an idiotic place in the first place. I got poo-pooed when I picked the design of the school apart. Not enough bathrooms, no changing room or showers for the gym (I was told that the children only change into sneakers... what???), and no room for same in the future. Exits were a bit sparse for fire safty... Never mind that my training and experience is civil design... I got my head patted just like the other ladies in the garden club as they tried to sell the idea to us. I also asked if the old school is in such rotten shape, how can we trust the new school to be maintained any better?

And where are the freaking 25 mph signs? I encounter 142/63 daily, sometimes multiple times a day. I have yet to see 25 mph signs, flashing lights, you know... the whole ball of wax that's supposed to be around schools, like should already be in place since the highschool is already located there.
And speaking of traffic... the traffic gets idiotic enough through there when school lets out, especially during heavy shopping seasons, like Christmas, what with Wally's World of Rip Offs and Rejects, Wallace and Owens, and the sillyness of highschool traffic as it already is.

Yeah, that crossing is a bit scary. I've crossed it a couple times m'self, and I admit I'm a little cavalier about such things, having made a living working on roadways before I got too old and beat up to resort to such things anymore. I sure wouldn't want a 10 year old kid doing what I do when I cross a road. Anyrate... that is a scary intersection.

Covered crossway?

Well I sure as hell hope the design is better than that idiotic design down town...
... who ever did that took no consideration of turning radiuses, drainage, and ... human nature (Like, really... counting on volunteers to maintain those idiotic planters that have subsoil and concrete chunks in them?).

And those "handicap ramps" are more likely to cause handicaps than assist the handicapped! Geez, ya know, MODOT has those standards for download to any designer in the state, for freebies. I know... I been there... used to do it on a regular basis. Just makes design work soooooo much easier.

Ah well... Hmmm. I might have to go have me a look at this covered crossway design, ... ... doesn't do much for my standing in the good ol' boy system up there.
Enjoy!

"Amy"


Here's my response:

Dear "Amy":

As for how I got your email addy -- I went into yahoo's member directory and searched for Thayer MO.

As for who I am, it's not really important. You probably wouldn't know me even if I told you. What IS important is what I have to say, not my identity.

My big problem with the school is that property owners bear the entire burden of paying for it, yet non-property-owners were allowed to vote on the tax increase. That's why I call it the Temple to Socialism. What is it about owning property that makes little ol' childless me more responsible for paying for a child's education than the child's parents, who don't pay any property taxes if they rent or live with relatives, are?

The kicker is that Thayer could have gotten a grant to build a new school without raising property taxes at all -- that's what Koshkonong did. So now we're paying taxes to build a school for Kosh AND for Thayer.

And didn't you just love all those commercials the good-ol'-boy network kept running before the tax levy election? You know, the ones that implied that if you voted against it, you must want Thayer's children to die? I've got some posts on that in the archives of my blog. Let me see if I can find some:

http://arkanssouri.blogspot.com/2004/04/aftermath.html

http://arkanssouri.blogspot.com/2004/04/thayer-school-board-election-day.html

http://arkanssouri.blogspot.com/2004/04/this-doyle-fink-fellow.html

http://arkanssouri.blogspot.com/2004/04/thayer-school-board-elections-theyre.html




And it's awfully peculiar how before the election their position was that the old building wasn't fit for anything but demolition, but now that they have their new Temple started, they're trying to find buyers for it. I'd wager it winds up in the hands of one of the good-ol-boys for a steal.

I never even looked at the plans for the new school. Nor did I tour the old school. There was nothing in those plans, or in the old school, that made it my responsibility to pay for a new one. But your points about the design flaws of the new Temple don't surprise me. If you build in some deficiencies now, it makes it that much easier to ask for ANOTHER new school in a few years, after this one is "outgrown."

How long do you think it'll be before they try to get a new high school out of this? I can hear their arguments now -- we've got a state-of-the-art elementary school; don't our children deserve a state-of-the-art high school instead of the 20th-century one they have?

I agree about the traffic snarls the placement of the new Temple will create -- it's already a huge problem when school lets out, and it'll increase exponentially when classes begin at the new building. I guess then they'll want even MORE money so they can "improve" that section of road. They could have placed it on the other side of the high school and not messed traffic up too much, but government almost never does things the right way when they can do it the wrong way, so they can "fix" it later. It's called job security.

I'd never noticed there weren't any 25 MPH signs near the high school before. That's gotta be a violation of some state law.

Don't get me started on the "revitalization" of downtown. They got the grant just for the sake of getting a grant. Only after they got it did they begin planning what to do with it. When they repainted the parking space stripes up 2nd Street, they increased the angle of them, swinging the rear ends of parked cars further out into the middle of the road, making it hard for a car to fit through when cars are parked on both sides of the street, and impossible for a delivery truck to do so. And they botched the space next to the planters at the top of the hill, next to the library. It looks like it was designed by a kindergartener.

And what is the point of having a sidewalk if you have to walk all the way up the street to get to stairs to get ON the sidewalk? Younguns can just jump up on them, but those of us with a few years on us can't do that.. This is a perfect example of government planning.

Well, take care, Amy. I hope you liked my blog. Stop by and have a read whenever you feel like it.

www.arkanssouri.blogspot.com


2 Comments:

Blogger Tom Hanna said...

I'm rapidly coming more and more to favor complete and total separation of school and state, but if we're being intellectually honest, not emulating John Kerry and his ilk, we should recognize that everyone pays property taxes or has them paid on his behalf, directly or indirectly. Take the two specific examples you cite. The taxes are paid in the first instance by the landlord who, unless he is an incompetent, figures them in determining the rent he charges. On a macro scale, an increase in property taxes shifts the supply curve and results in higher rents for all properties. In the second instance the property taxes are paid by the relatives; certainly both the tax and the use of the property are charity from the family, but that is a private matter for the family in question. Unless someone lives on a property that is exempt from taxes, in a boat with non-US registry that doesn't ever dock or lives hovering in midair, they use real estate and someone pays taxes on it.

"What is it about owning property that makes little ol' childless me more responsible for paying for a child's education than the child's parents, who don't pay any property taxes if they rent or live with relatives, are?"

5:36 PM  
Blogger The Last American said...

"Unless someone lives on a property that is exempt from taxes, in a boat with non-US registry that doesn't ever dock or lives hovering in midair, they use real estate and someone pays taxes on it. "

Ah, yes. "Someone" pays taxes on it. The problem is that if you're on welfare, living in a government house or apartment, that "someone" isn't you. You're letting the government pay the rent, and therefore the property taxes. And where does the government get the money? From little ol' childless me. Why? Because the act of owning property, in the eyes of our astute state government, somehow makes me more responsible for educating your children than you are.

I wouldn't be against "public education" if it was funded by those who it should be funded by -- through tuition, and maybe a small tax on school supplies.

At least then those who are responsible for educating children would be paying for it. And those of us who aren't, wouldn't.

8:54 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home

Listed on Blogwise Blogarama - The Blog Directory
<<-Arkansas Blog+>>