By HILARY EMMER

For The Beachcomber

I am a parent of two daughters who attended Seattle public schools and went on to The Evergreen State College. I have taught in public high schools in New York and Oregon. I believe in public education. I believe that we as taxpayers should pay for public education. That said, I am voting “no” on this upcoming school bond.

The Vashon Island School District has underfunded the maintenance of the schools for years.

In fact, according to a November 2008 report by David Wilke, director of facilities, and Terry Lindquinst, superintendent, “A tour of all VISD facilities, particularly VHS (Vashon High School), presents evidence that a culture of deferred maintenance has persisted for the better part of a decade. Deferred maintenance issues are defined as those that have been purposefully avoided because of cost implications, ignored or missed because of insufficient staffing and resources to stay actively involved in the basic needs of facilities.”

I have never heard of a policy of deferred maintenance. The report continues, “Because of the absence of adequate staffing, no preventative maintenance strategies have been implemented, for any of the facilities department’s divisions. … Preventative maintenance cannot be done on regular or manufacturers’ recommendations for equipment and vehicles due to lack of funds and current staffing levels.”

How can we expect our buildings to last if we do nothing to keep them in a healthy state? The school district says that “renovated buildings should last for 20 to 25 years and new buildings have a life expectancy of 30 to 40 years.” Why should we expect less than our East Coast counterparts, where schools last 80 to 100 years? Are we part of the throwaway society? Build it, don’t spend money to maintain it, let it rot, tear it down, and build a sparkling new facility every 30 years or so? I certainly hope not.

This persistence of deferred maintenance and no preventative maintenance has caused our former administration building to become a work hazard. This building, on the corner of Vashon Highway and 204th Avenue S.W., has sat empty for five years and now needs to be torn down. The administration staff was moved to the Sheffield Building for four years at a cost of $150,000. That money could have been used for maintenance. Now we have moved the administration offices to Chautauqua, taking up classroom space. This illustrates that all our classrooms are not needed. Our school enrollment is shrinking. It is projected, by the 2007 VISD Grade Configuration Task Force, that our on-Island student population will be 1,079 in eight years — almost a 15 percent drop in enrollment.

I was extremely surprised to learn that during discussions on capital facilities planning the school board ranked “reducing demand on the general fund” (known as “maintenance and operation”) as its first priority, while “addressing poor conditions” was third on its list. This leads me to believe that the board is more interested in moving maintenance away from the maintenance and operation line items to the capital budget. To me, this shows the board’s priorities on spending: They’d rather replace an item than repair it because of where the money comes from.

As a consequence our schools, particularly the high school, are in disrepair. So rather than spend a little money on routine maintenance, the district is now asking the taxpayers to pay over $50 million just to fix the high school and upgrade systems. Somewhere along the line the plan changed from fixing the problem to a slew of extras: new classrooms, a secondary gym, added parking, relocating tennis courts, adding synthetic turf, renovating the grandstand, fixing the theater and more. So the initial $50 million has now grown to $75.5 million.

That’s a lot of money. In 1990 we approved a $20 million bond to build Chautauqua and renovate McMurray. In 2005 we approved another $5 million to pay for repairs to Chautauqua for the roof and mold problems that existed because of poor construction. Our yearly debt repayments on these capital bonds have never exceeded $3 million, including interest. Now the district is asking us to approve a $75.5 million bond. When we include interest, our overall debt will be about $150 million. Taking this debt over 20 years, we have to pay $7.5 million a year in loan repayments — a 150 percent increase in our annual indebtedness.

The school district says the capital levy rate will increase by only 21 percent, or $14 a month more for a home of $500,000. However, their calculations fail to take into account increased house values over the past 13 years. By using average assessed house values over the same time period, the capital levy rate increase will be closer to 100 percent, or about $40 a month more for the same house.

In 2009, a taxpayer with a house assessed at $500,000 will pay $325 to cover the costs of capital levy passed several years ago to build Chautauqua. If the proposed levy passes, this taxpayer’s bill will increase $630, to $955. This is almost a 200 percent increase. In addition to the $955 for the capital levy portion, the taxpayer will also pay $515 for the existing “maintenance and operation” levy, for a total of $1,470.

The recession is deepening. Unemployment is rising. Foreclosures are increasing. Our school enrollment has been decreasing. Some Island businesses have closed; others are laying off workers. The economy has affected many families. Now 10 percent of the Island uses the food bank. Our Island is losing young families with children. This year our property taxes have increased nearly 4 percent. This is not the right time to increase our taxes more to pay for a full wish list. I do not want to be responsible for one foreclosure. Let’s be reasonable.

— Hilary Emmer, a tax preparer, is an Island activist.