Voting “No” on Referendum Might Be More Costly Than Projected Tax Hike
To the Editor:
We write in support of the public schools referendum on January 28. As we learned about the proposals, we found that nearly all voices, both for and against, agreed that children and their education are core to what makes Princeton the treasure it is. This unison heartens us. However, reasonable people can disagree on details. Why now? Why this amount? Why this order? No proposal will satisfy everyone. In the past few months, we’ve arrived at our own answers to these questions. We hope they might help inform yours.
Why now? The public schools are already at or beyond capacity and Princeton is adding ~1,000 new housing units in the next five years with more to follow.
Why this amount? $532/year for the average home is a lot. However, voting no might be more costly. Children will be cared for regardless, only without the benefit of $20M in state aid and with the added overhead of hacked together solutions (more details at princetonk12.org/future).
Why this order? The schools truly function as part of a single system. Relieving pressure on bottlenecks (e.g., Community Park in Question 1) relieves pressure on other schools.
We appreciate the challenge with putting forth any proposal. Trade-offs are made, stances taken, and ultimately, we must decide if we believe in the people who took the time to do the work. We emphatically do and hope others will too.