Letters for Feb. 1, 2024

Vote ‘yes’ for East and West Valley school districts

As a retired educator from the West Valley and East Valley school districts, I am writing to urge both communities to support the upcoming educational programs and operations levy replacements, as well as the bond measure for the West Valley School District that will provide for upgrading outdated facilities, ensuring all students have access to safe, modern facilities. In addition, these measures will provide extracurricular program support as well as educational support for every student, staff member and school.

I may have a unique perspective in that while teaching in the EVSD, I experienced firsthand how the failure of passing a levy and/or a bond negatively affects a school district, while at the same time my kids attending West Valley had the advantage of taxpayer support and enjoyed fully funded educational and extracurricular experiences. I have lived in the West Valley community for over 55 years and my grandchildren are fourth-generation WV students. Our family has greatly benefited from being a part of this school district and community and we will continue to be supportive participants in helping the district move toward the future.

By supporting these measures, we can invest in the future of our schools, our students and our communities.

Peggy Estey

Millwood

A new take on replacement levies

Keep this in mind when you vote for any school levy this year. When they tell you it’s a “replacement” levy and it taxes you the same per $1,000 property value that our property values have increased almost three times since the last time they gouged us with the last “replacement” levy. If you look at your tax, it shows five or six different levies or capital fund or B and I and the like. Schools get a vast majority of our property tax and they get money collected by the state from us as well as the federal level.

Schools have way too much money already. I think we can all agree the more money the government gets, the worse things are. Imagine if we all held government entities like public schools to the same standard we do with private entities. We need to demand they produce the highest-quality product in the most efficient way possible.

Vote no on “replacement” levies until they reduce the amount per $1,000 by at least two-thirds! Also, all extracurricular activities like sports and band should be paid for by those who participate in them, not by the taxpayers.

The best thing we should do for education is allow for school choice. Instead of unions deciding what our kids learn, it should always be the parents. If the public school is the best choice, then the parents will choose to send their kids there. Competition always makes things better, which is why the union is so opposed to it.

Rob Leach

Mica

Rise as one for our schools

In my 18 years as a Riverside teacher, I’ve witnessed the incredible spirit of our community. Our collective strength and unity were especially evident during the Oregon Road Fire, where we came together. Today, I urge everyone to vote ‘yes’ on the Riverside District levy and bond.

Under Superintendent Ken Russell’s leadership, Riverside has become a beacon of educational excellence. Dr. Russell, a steadfast leader since 2016, has balanced academics, work-based learning, the trades and extracurricular activities – making us a leader among rural schools. The dedication of our administrators and staff, many of whom are Riverside graduates, contributes to our success. Now, we need the community to take us to the next level.

We have a variety of great programs. For example, our technical courses – welding and construction – are unmatched and taught by skilled teachers. And, despite being a smaller district, we offer numerous advanced placement and college-in-the-high-school courses, saving families thousands of dollars. This year, Principal Clint Hull secured a grant so that every AP exam is free for our students.

We must replace the current levy and invest in school infrastructure to continue our positive trajectory. As a longtime resident, I recognize that our low tax rates must adapt to inflation. We must uphold our American values of supporting public education. Our community’s resilience during the Oregon Road Fire reveals that when we rise as one, we overcome challenges. By voting “yes,” we invest in the prosperity of our young scholars and our community.

Sheila Alami

Colbert

If it’s printed in The S-R, it affects Spokane

Jeffery Clacy’s letter (“Energy crisis,” Jan. 24) demonstrates that the current Spokesman-Review policy on only printing local-issue letters is an incorrect and foolish policy. Low-information climate science deniers who get their letters printed influence other low-information climate deniers in terms of what they believe and who they vote for. Only by responding to opinion pieces, local and national, which include inaccurate or dishonest statements concerning such things as climate change, as are often printed in your paper, can our local citizens learn information needed for them to form reasonable and accurate opinions. It appears that it is too much to expect people to read up on or view local and national news of abnormal weather events occurring all over our country and learn what is causing these events. And yes, the recent cold polar vortex we have recently experienced, referenced in Clacy’s letter, is due to climate change. The arctic regions of the earth are warming four times faster than the rest of the planet, causing the destabilization of the jet stream, which allows cold air to move out of the arctic regions. We as a region and a nation must make decisions based on science to significantly reduce greenhouse gases soon. If that does not happen, our entire way of life will change, including the economy of our region and our nation. That certainly affects Spokane.

If it is printed in The Spokesman-Review, it affects Spokane, and we should all be allowed to respond.

David Randall

Spokane

Trojan horse legislation

I’m alarmed about HB 2126 and companion bill SB 6029. As a proponent of increased affordable/mixed integrated housing in urban areas, establishment of land trusts, mortgage assistance and expanded first-time homebuyer programs, I think these bills, as well intentioned as they appear at first glance, should be opposed, and not passed as written.

I am not in support of accessory dwelling units in rural areas for the following reasons:

• Lack of infrastructure for transportation, utilities services, strain on water/septic systems

• Inadequate fire, law enforcement and EMS services

• Increased burden on local school districts

• Degrades esthetic reasons many opt to move to rural locations

• Undermines GMA and environment goals to reduce commute times, improve air quality and reduce health impacts of increasing climate disruption

• Increases high-impact risks of loss due to catastrophic fire events

I understand why some rural property owners who want to increase their income potential due to wealth-building opportunities with short- or long-term rentals think this is great legislation (some might even be out-of-state/nonowner-occupied investors with no “skin in the game”). However, most property owners and other residents in rural, suburban and urban areas bear the resulting sprawl development expansion burdens through increased property taxes.

This is “Trojan Horse” legislation and I urge “no” votes on HB 2126 & SB 6029 for these reasons.

Marilyn Darilek

Spokane