Ditch school plans

Lakeland citizens have spoken and made it abundantly clear that they do not support a tax increase to fund a school at this time. Lakeland Commissioner Clark Plunk and the rest of his colleagues who are now trying to back-door a tax increase for that exact purpose need to understand and accept that fact.

Those who voted against the tax did not need former mayor Jim Bomprezzi and his “gloom and doom followers,” as Plunk called them (June 3 letter, “School essential to Lakeland progress”) to reach that conclusion.

Simply observing the lessthan-transparent process Plunk and his followers used to initially pass the bond issue, without allowing the citizens an opportunity to vote, and then reading the ordinance told us all we needed to know. A $50 million bond for a town the size of Lakeland, for a school we do not “desperately need,” was a bad idea.

As I drove to early vote at Lakeland Elementary, I saw the estate-sized homes surrounding the school and thought, “I bet most of the people living in those homes send their kids to private schools. They’ll probably vote no because all they’ll get out of this is a higher property tax.”

I thought about my neighborhood. It probably has more households with retirees, children in private schools or homeschooled children than children in public schools. Again, a higher property tax is all they get for voting yes. Yes, there may be other potential benefits, but what they saw was a tax increase.

Plunk’s letter was filled with distortions about what Lakeland won’t be able to do without a K-12 school. I hope Lakeland residents will not be duped by the gloom and doom logic of Plunk and his followers.