So as indicated below everyone is not happy with my position on the new Marshall. I am just saying be warry of things that seem too good to be true.
There os NO such thing as a FREE lunch. Somebody has gotta pay!
There os NO such thing as a FREE lunch. Somebody has gotta pay!
Hey, I'm g;ad when somebody proves me wrong thay means I got chance to learn. It's just that it's not enough to tell mr I'm wrong. you dotta show ME!
According to the Mayor, "Taxpayers “should not” see increases in the bill from city borrowing costs associated with building a new Marshall Middle School." This is from the article that was in the Item on August 1. She doesn't say "will not" Therefore, if I were a property owner, I would still be wary. Taxpayers will be responsible for 40% of the total project cost, not the 20% they have been being told. If I am not mistaken, I believe the original figure was $17 million that taxpayers would be responsible for, but now that figure has doubled to $35 million.
ReplyDeleteBefore giving opinion that might give wrong information to voters, you should check facts.
ReplyDeletePete Caron, Interim CFO/Assessor has said "Finally, I cannot stress enough that the vote by voters in September will not be a pocketbook vote, i.e., regardless of whether the bonding is approved or rejected, there will be no net effect on tax bill amounts for taxpayers. No taxpayer will pay more if the bonding is approved, nor will they pay less if it is rejected. Unlike the votes typically taken in other communities for school projects, the proposal in Lynn is not a debt exclusion vote as those votes in other communities typically are, i.e., in other communities, voters decide whether they wish to accept a temporary tax increase to fund all of part of the borrowing costs over the life of the bond. The vote is Lynn is required by charter, but neither the school committee, nor the mayor, nor the City Council has proposed to make this a debt exclusion vote. Therefore, under the restrictions of Prop 2-1/2, the Mayor and City Council will need to pay for the borrowing costs out of the existing city budget, i.e., they will have to reallocate resources from elsewhere in the budget to cover the cost without increasing the overall bottom line of the budget.
MEP
Mary Ellen, I don't know if you were responding to me or Stan, but the information stated in my post was not my opinion, it was based on facts. The only opinion I gave was that I would still be wary if I were a taxpayer and I stand by that opinion.
DeleteSo how do we build new schools?
ReplyDeleteWe hacw to work our politiviand. Revere built wgar 4 dchoolds in 20 ueatd? Our sales tax helped pay for those buildings. I know policies have supposedly changed well change them back at least until we get ours. Where is the political will?
ReplyDeleteAnd then there is KIPP/ Say what you will about CHARTER SCHOOLS and I pften do, the fact is they got anice new building up in lightning speed. We should take a lesson from them when iy comes to building/
I don't understand. Is lynn doing this different ly than other cities and towns around us? I don't think so. We are just so caught up in people wanted pay off and recognition and complaining that nothing gets done. Kipps funding was private, it was planned and it was not lightening speed, it was a long organized process. They had a good sustainable plan that crack pots couldn't throw stones at because it was private.
ReplyDelete