Posted 5/2/01 Wants longer, better look at school referendum options To the editor: Regarding the school issue: Do we need a new school or a new approach to the problem. Was year round schooling even considered? Do we have other options that are worth looking at? If we need a new school, does it have to be this costly (23 million) The estimated tax increase is $269.16 on a $150,000 home. that is on top of the new fire hall, which we are committed to and do need. We are told that with all the new buildings of new homes will bring in new tax payers to pay for the schools. We are told that the state will pay for a goodly portion of the schools cost. Why then is district 911 cutting its budget in light of funding uncertainty? New tax payers? With the slowdown of the economy and job layoffs who will buy the new homes. We are told that we need new businesses and jobs in the area to increase the tax base. Then why when we get a new business and a new building, do we give tax abatements and give back most of the taxes that are needed: I think there is a need for a new school but at what cost? The tax burden is going to fall on the individual tax payer (you & I). But it should be a reasonable and affordable burden. There are a lot of retired people with fixed incomes in the school district. We do not have the potential for increased earnings. What we got is as good as it gets. Where are we going to come up with extra funds to pay for the taxes? I think a longer and better look at all the options that are available should be taken. I don not advocate not building a new school, what I do advocate is more planning and more thought about needs and affordability. Jerry Stelter North Branch ©Post Review