Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Obviously not ideal for the athletes but I'd think it might be possible to work with the county in order to use an existing park or something as a "home" field.
I could see that would work but I doubt CMS does it. They just got the okay and 900+ million to build with they will use every last penny.
CMS will blow through that money and then tell everyone we need more bonds. How many schools in the CMS system have pools compared to how many have swim teams? If they can make swim teams work, they can make football, baseball, etc. work. But, as said, they won't.
CMS has it made when it comes to spending money. They make a few slight changes and show everyone they've "saved money" on the construction costs and anyone who complains must hate children. Even when I was in high school I would look at the building and wonder why the space wasn't utilized better. If a 16-year old can see the problem, why can't anyone else?
I'm all for having enough schools and making sure they have what they need. I am NOT for building something that will serve as a pad for an architect's portfolio. We don't need that. The buildings don't have to have a spartan look to the outside, but they certainly don't need to be as decorative as some are. Bring back the gym/auditorium combo and save some serious money, not just on construction, but heating and cooling costs. do schools really need a practice football field to be maintained along with the regular game field? A dedicated soccer field?
CMS really need to learn to do more with less. The taxpayers are going to get pretty sick of footing the bill for facilities that are overbuilt and not remotely cost-effective. And with the property reval coming soon, there will be lots of complaining.
Obviously not ideal for the athletes but I'd think it might be possible to work with the county in order to use an existing park or something as a "home" field.
Atlanta does this in some areas I think they use one field for multiple schools.
Not a fan of this. I think fans should have a homefield advantage.
CMS really need to learn to do more with less. The taxpayers are going to get pretty sick of footing the bill for facilities that are overbuilt and not remotely cost-effective. And with the property reval coming soon, there will be lots of complaining.
72.69% of voters approved the bond, so I guess taxpayers support updated facilities. This went directly to the voting population for them to have a say and they said yes.
72.69% of voters approved the bond, so I guess taxpayers support updated facilities. This went directly to the voting population for them to have a say and they said yes.
While only 20% of registered voters turned out. If I'm wrong, it was still a very low number.
I understand that the voters approved the bonds. I'm not arguing that point at all. Those bonds will have to be paid back at some point. And there will be more and more bonds, requiring higher taxes. The voters just voted themselves a tax increase not long before we will likely see another tax increase from the county reval coming up.
I'd just like to see CMS be better stewards of the money they are given. Of course, part of that can be blamed on the "use it this year or don't get it next year" budget process.
Last edited by spankys bbq; 11-15-2017 at 09:04 AM..
While only 20% of registered voters turned out. If I'm wrong, it was still a very low number.
I understand that the voters approved the bonds. I'm not arguing that point at all. Those bonds will have to be paid back at some point. And there will be more and more bonds, requiring higher taxes. The voters just voted themselves a tax increase not long before we will likely see another tax increase from the county reval coming up.
I'd just like to see CMS be better stewards of the money they are given. Of course, part of that can be blamed on the "use it this year or don't get it next year" budget process.
Well then the other 80% deserve to pay higher taxes by your logic then and a not showing up to vote was a Yes vote. If they felt so strongly about it they would have showed up. So what's the issue again? That's how democracy works.
While only 20% of registered voters turned out. If I'm wrong, it was still a very low number.
I understand that the voters approved the bonds. I'm not arguing that point at all. Those bonds will have to be paid back at some point. And there will be more and more bonds, requiring higher taxes. The voters just voted themselves a tax increase not long before we will likely see another tax increase from the county reval coming up.
I'd just like to see CMS be better stewards of the money they are given. Of course, part of that can be blamed on the "use it this year or don't get it next year" budget process.
But don't get me started on the reval. If they would have just done an actual reval in 2014-2015 instead of pretending it was still 2011, they would have saved money by not having to send people checks for 12 cents, and been able to delay the next actual revaluation a few years (and now we know the values from 2014-2015 would have been lower than they are now). Although I have heard that supposedly the property tax budget should be revenue neutral so hopefully the increases of the actual bills aren't that drastic.
But don't get me started on the reval. If they would have just done an actual reval in 2014-2015 instead of pretending it was still 2011, they would have saved money by not having to send people checks for 12 cents, and been able to delay the next actual revaluation a few years (and now we know the values from 2014-2015 would have been lower than they are now). Although I have heard that supposedly the property tax budget should be revenue neutral so hopefully the increases of the actual bills aren't that drastic.
Yeah, the tax rates will be calculated so that county-wide, property tax revenue is neutral to the budget. So if the overall value of property is up 40%, you cut the tax rate to get the same amount of tax revenues from the property.
Some people will be winners, most will be net neutral, and some people will see increases in their actual bill. People that lived in areas that were previously rather undeveloped, but have seen their property value skyrocket at a higher rate than the county average will probably get the biggest increase.
Well then the other 80% deserve to pay higher taxes by your logic then and a not showing up to vote was a Yes vote. If they felt so strongly about it they would have showed up. So what's the issue again? That's how democracy works.
My comment was that only 20% bothered to show up and vote for whatever reason. It was not that it was an impied "yes" vote or that they deserve to pay higher taxes. I understand how democracy works.
I do know of a handful of people who didn't bother to vote because they knew the bond would pass. They've more or less just thrown their hands up and said "screw it." For the record, I am not one of those people.
The main thing I want to see is the money being used in the best possible manner, not on useless amenities for what should be a facility designed more for function than aesthetics. Nice stuff is nice to have, but it isn't necessary.
I'm not going to hold my breath. The money to repay them has to come from somewhere. Either from tax revenue or creative accounting that resembles a ponzi scheme. It can't just materialize.
With the growth of Mecklenburg County, there will be a need for a new bond package in a couple years. Probably just as big as this one, if not bigger. We are feeding a beast that can spiral out of control.
I occasionally think of CMS like a college kid who needs a car for school (somewhat appropriate ). The smart decision is to look at the long term and understand that a car isn't required for college, so a reliable cash car, a 2004 Honda Civic if you will, will do just fine. The not smart choice would be to go out and finance a brand new Lexus just for it to sit unused the majority of the time. Maybe CMS would do well to lean more toward a used Honda than a shiny, new Lexus.
I'm sure some people are thinking I'm wanting to deny kids tools for a good education. That couldn't be farther from the truth. I just want to see OUR tax dollars being spent wisely. There is nothing wrong with a little fiscal conservatism.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
). The smart decision is to look at the long term and understand that a car isn't required for college, so a reliable cash car, a 2004 Honda Civic if you will, will do just fine. The not smart choice would be to go out and finance a brand new Lexus just for it to sit unused the majority of the time. Maybe CMS would do well to lean more toward a used Honda than a shiny, new Lexus. 
