To the editor:

In the Sept. 10 issue of the Call, a writer complained that the Lindbergh Schools are “crying” about a loss of revenue due to the decrease in property values. He also implied that Lindbergh is asking for additional revenue this November. He is wrong on both counts.

By informing the public of its financial status as a public school, Lindbergh is fulfilling its responsibility to maintain transparency by keeping taxpayers informed. Lindbergh did receive an increase in property taxes for 2007. The net increase over the previous year was $5,230,919.

However, since 2007 the district has seen a net loss in revenue of $4,445,900, leaving a net increase of $785,019. During that time, there have been cost increases for state testing, energy, personnel, books, technology, insurance and other necessities that have consumed this net revenue increase of $785,019. Furthermore, due to the every-other-year reassessment cycle, the lowered assessments will continue to be in place for the 2010-2011 school year.

The writer also misunderstands Proposition L, which is on the Nov. 3 ballot. Proposition L is not about property tax, and voting for Proposition L will not increase or decrease taxes. If Proposition L passes, it will allow Lindbergh Schools to continue to receive the full benefit — $4 million — of the state sales tax.

I cannot imagine that any local taxpayer wants Lindbergh to give back state money, which we would have to do without Prop L — see

for more information on Prop L.

Finally, I would like to remind the writer that if his house were in any other school district in St. Louis, Jefferson or St. Charles counties, he would pay more — and in most cases, substantially more — in property taxes. Given the low tax rate and the high quality of Lindbergh Schools, the writer should stop crying about public officials doing their jobs and be thankful that he has an educational best buy in his own back yard.

Kenneth A. Fey

Lindbergh Board of Education president