PPEL

The election on September 10^th is not just to determine who will be on the school board.  In addition, the voters will be asked whether the existing Physical Plant and Equipment Levy (or PPEL as it is commonly referred to) should be extended for another 10 years.  This is a special levy on property tax bills which generates approximately $8 million yearly which is required to be used for building and grounds improvement, maintenance and repair, the purchase of certain equipment, etc.  Unless the voters approve extending the levy, it will expire in 2015.  If a majority of voters approve the extension, PPEL will be extended for another ten years.

I have heard many concerns about whether PPEL should be extended.  The current board has done little to provide confidence to the public that it is capable of prudently managing money.  The administration has done even less.  For these reasons, many voters I have spoken with have indicated that they may not support the extension of PPEL.  Although I can understand their logic, I nevertheless support extending PPEL and recommend that others do so as well.  My reasons for doing so are two-fold: First, there are safeguards and limitations that are built into the laws which govern PPEL that limit how PPEL funds can be spent.  We have, and will continue to have, building maintenance needs which PPEL funds can and should be used for.  Therefore, since PPEL funds can be used for maintenance purposes, I think that we should utilize the same.   Secondly, I think that a new school board, which I hope includes myself and other new members, should have the opportunity to demonstrate that it has learned from past mistakes, that it has the courage and leadership to effectively manage the administration, and that it is willing and able to once again have the confidence of the public in spending and other matters.  Therefore, I come down in favor of extending PPEL.  

 It is unfortunate that so many people in our district have grown to distrust the board and the administration, which in my approximate 30 years in Iowa City is something that I have not seen before.  I wish I could say that these concerns are unfounded, however, they are not.  I will try to expand on this issue later.