|
|||
|
This article by Bill Bodden of Redmond was submitted to The Redmond Spokesman in January 2004 As we go into another attempt to pass a school bond there will be remarks made about seniors failing the younger generations by not supporting the school bond. It is in the nature of people to make careless statements at times, and this is one that will be floated by some who haven’t thought it through. Some aspects concerning seniors and schools clearly have not been addressed. (Names used below are solely for illustrative purposes to help readers appreciate the points being made.) Today’s seniors in their late 60s and older paid for the schools they needed. Say Evergreen, for example. Although, many now living in Redmond didn’t pay for the one on Ninth Street, they paid for their "Evergreens" elsewhere. If Redmond had not grown, Evergreen would have remained adequate and paid for and other schools would not have been required. Instead, a wave of people moved in requiring another school. Let’s call them the Obsidian group. They created a need for a new school and asked the Evergreen group help to pay for it. Then came another group, say, the Tuck group, and the Evergreen group had to help pay for that school, too. And, so it went with the Evergreens having to pay interminably for Brown, Lynch, Hartman and Redmond High. Now they are being asked to pay for two yet-to-be named schools. Having been around the block a couple of times, seniors can see there are more to come. Now let’s take a look at seniors who fall into a variety of categories. When most of them retired, they were earning somewhere between $10 and $25 an hour. Some earned more, some less. Now, with few exceptions, they earn less. For the most part they could count on being self-sufficient for their remaining days. Unfortunately, some problems intruded that took the shine off their so-called golden years. Inflation was one. One of the consequences of this has been that prices and fees have shot up. Some of the people asking seniors to pay for new schools for their kids and grandchildren also require seniors to pay them $50 to $85 an hour for technical services. Professionals charge similar sums for just a few minutes’ consultation. In turn, some seniors have to say they can pay for schools or services but not both. Other, less fortunate, seniors have been hit with a second and more serious burden in the form of poor health that means high health care bills. In extreme cases, this translates to deciding whether to pay for medication or food when they can’t have both essentials. Seniors that have paid attention to how the system for funding schools works see it as unfair and corrupt and as a matter of principle will refuse to go along with the program even if they can afford an increase in property taxes. The counter-argument can be made about seniors needing the younger generation to be educated to help take care of them as age takes its toll in various ways. This is true, but it is equally valid to say that if our "Redmonds" had never grown our "Evergreens" would have produced enough graduates to take care of the oldest generations as was the case in previous generations. It is equally fair to say that with growth seniors can enjoy better care because a larger population can support more extensive facilities. But the benefits of growth do not mean we should abandon ethical and fair principles of paying for growth. The problems of growth as currently practiced are now painfully apparent to the point of questioning the benefits. The generations that have not yet reached senior status would do well to support efforts to ensure that any future growth is sustainable and paid for fairly. Otherwise, they may be in a position to find their "golden" years more tarnished than those of today’s seniors. Back to Education Home Page Back to Schools Home Page |
|
||