i still don't know how to vote on 4204

[MrCoffee]

i'm all for school funding, but the supermajority requirement makes sense to me for three reasons.

1) it encourages voter turnout (especially those voters with a direct interest in public schools, i.e. parents, and property owners)

2) it reflects the fact that not all property owners have kids in school

3) it maintains some level of parity between "propery-rich" school districts and "property-poor" ones.

[Suich]

1. fwiw, I voted no.

I'm a property owner with no kids in school.

:)

[uppityperson]

3. Yup, no sense helping out kids that aren't your own.

Can always go to Canada or Mexico for decent health care.












:sarcasm:
I'm a property owner with no kids in school and voted yes.

[flamingyouth]

4. LOL

Yeah, I haven't called 911 in a few years. Don't see any need to vote to fund that anymore either. ;)

[uppityperson]

5. I don't read books, always vote against library funding too.

[flamingyouth]

2. Well, I hope everyone who voted no won't be bitching about how we're 42nd in school funding.

And our class sizes are the 47th worst in the nation.