Can we really afford to take on the huge financial responsibility of the schools' Measure S?

We still owe some $80 million on a $110-million bond that we passed in 1997. Because of the mountain of debt Measure S would create, we will be forced into an unfavorable category as a borrower which makes repayment costs excessive and burdensome.

I see the benefits of having Smart Boards and iPads in our classrooms, but what happens in five years (or five minutes) when all this newly acquired technology is obsolete?

Perhaps we should develop a comprehensive plan to manage such a system before we invest in it.

Previously a “yes!” on S, I’m now a loud, resounding no.

I’m an active parent in the Burbank school district and always willing to pay a little more in taxes in order to give our students the best.

I believe we should pass a bond measure of a manageable amount that would cover necessary infrastructure needs. I supported Proposition 30 and realized the urgency for that money. Measure S, however, seems like we’re borrowing money we simply can’t afford. I welcome much of the new technology Measure S would provide but we’ll need a plan for the maintenance, replacement and support for these new technologies.

Where will that money come from? Teacher’s salaries? More furlough days? Another bond?

Mike Moynahan
Burbank