Lindbergh Prop R is ‘deceitful,’ not an investment

Letters+to+the+editor

Letter to the Editor 

To the editor:

The Prop R $100 million bond issue is not an “investment.” It is a deceitful “kick the loan-debt can down the road” ploy that will eventually cost $150 million.

Yes, did anyone mention the $50 million interest and bond acquisition cost added to the $100 million loan? Who will pay this $50 million added cost? An interest rate of 3 to 4 percent adds over $3 million to the annual budget. Where is that coming from? I am shocked that school officials label a “depreciating building” cost as an “investment.” A new school building will not yield one cent in income or increase in value. Typical Washington political jargon. “Investments” yield income or will increase in value. The new bond issue is a $150 million tax increase spread out over 20 years. Any loans the school makes actually use your homes as collateral.

Every new bond debt becomes an additional “hidden lien” on your home.

You should all vote no to this so-called “no-tax-rate-increase” loan. Only salesmen-politicians use such logic. Tax rates are not equivalent to total tax dollars paid or due. Period. Let me explain. Auto salesmen will take your new $25,000 car loan and make the monthly payment “fit” to what you can afford today. How? They simply increase the payment years from 4 to 7 years. So, your payments actually go down. Wow. Now you can buy a $30,000 car with the same original payment you had on a $25,000 car loan. Eventually you pay $30,000 for a depreciating car.

Prop R resembles this typical “pay-me-now or pay me later” tax payment. All previous bond issues required tax-rate increases. This one will be massive.

Let me end, if borrowing $100 million can be labeled a “no-tax-rate-increase,” is borrowing next year’s $70 million school budget a “no-tax-rate-increase” loan?

Heck, we all pay zero real-estate tax next year. Let’s just borrow every year, and we never have another tax-rate increase.

Peter Russo
Affton