Don’t reward school district’s mismanagement

To the editor:

A $720 million school tax hike (Clark County Question No. 2) should definitely be voted down until our leaders address the real problem: mismanagement by current and past Clark County School Board and school district administrations. For too long, school planning, maintenance and construction policies have been dictated by a cabal of special interest groups, such as architectural and construction firms that placed their own profits over the interests of the taxpayers.

In 1989, I was one of four construction engineers hired from the private sector to manage the construction and rehabilitation/modernization program. What we found was not pretty: A bloated staff of administrators who relied more on architects and contractors to make decisions than their own expertise.

Having to replace 40- to 50-year-old schools is very problematic. If this was standard longevity for schools, then half the schools back East, where I came from, would have to be torn down. My high school was built in 1920 and is still very operational. Proper maintenance, electrical upgrades and air conditioning unit replacements are, in most cases, much more cost-effective than tearing down an existing facility.

Rather than ask for a tax hike at this time, I recommend the school district use the hundreds of millions of dollars it already has more efficiently. This would require the public voting no on Clark County Question No. 2 until the following policy changes are initiated:

- Perform an independent audit of the entire maintenance and construction program to identify waste and mismanagement and come up with required corrective recommendations.

- Use more cost-effective building systems, such as precast concrete tilt-up wall systems and pre-engineered gym/multipurpose buildings vs. the cost of more expensive concrete block.

- Use one-design, cookie-cutter schools, which can easily be adapted to individual school needs, without the expense of custom structures. This procedure would not only drastically reduce design costs but also expensive change orders.

- Strictly enforce the policy of value engineering in the procurement of items such as motorized projection screens vs. manual ones.

In 1995, I had the honor of being appointed to the newly formed Bond Oversight Committee by Lois Tarkanian (who was then a School Board member), and fought for the same changes covered in this letter to the editor. It appears the same powerful cabal of architects and construction companies I fought are still alive and doing very well.

Vote no on Clark County Question No. 2, which would raise the property tax on a $100,000 home approximately $75 per year. Once the school district cleans up its act, we the taxpayers can readdress this question.

John J. Erlanger

Las Vegas

Garbage campaigns

To the editor:

To all the campaigns: OK, we understand the other candidate is a piece of garbage who cheats on his spouse, lies to his mom, kicks the dog and the kids, does drugs and is secretly a Dodger fan. We get that.

But your candidate is a piece of garbage, too. Could you all just put a sock in it for a while? It's just getting old, and it's not funny anymore.

Mark Strussenberg

Henderson

It's about prosperity

To the editor:

The coming election boils down to a choice between social justice and prosperity. Social justice requires a huge command-and-control government that's happy to rob Peter to pay Paul. Both Peter and Paul become impoverished because, as British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher famously said, "eventually you run out of other people's money."

Prosperity, on the other hand, requires a free-market economy with lower taxes and fewer onerous restrictions. Growth ensues, and both Peter and Paul prosper.

As Vice President Joe Biden once said, It's all about "a three-letter word: jobs."

Robert Ritchey

Henderson

Rewarding risk

To the editor:

A few thoughts in response to the Wednesday letter from Richard Rychtarik, "The real 47 percent."

Mr. Rychtarik has a problem with people receiving a return on their investments. First, let me point out that this investing is done with the money left over after losing about 40 percent to federal income, Medicare and other taxes. Prudent adults who take responsibility for their own financial security want the best return to increase the value of their hard-earned savings, and dividends are one way to achieve this. (By the way, these people are risking losing their savings, especially in these uncertain times, but decide that the potential return merits the personal risk.)

These investments provide funds to American companies that will hire more workers and provide more goods and services to the rest of our country. Or these adults can choose to buy municipal bonds, so that roads can be built and services provided to the rest of society. If this source of funds dried up, Mr. Rychtarik could look forward to higher taxes. So much for his statement that "this only benefits them personally, and not the country."

Our country originally provided the freedom for us all to prosper and reap the rewards for our own hard work. Lately it seems popular to demonize successful citizens and advocate the confiscation of the rewards for their success, as if these were wrested from the grasping, outstretched hands of those who think a liquid asset is a six-pack in the fridge.

President Barack Obama and Mr. Rychtarik believe it's better if the wealth of others is spread around. Can our country survive four more years of this?

Robert Pursell

Las Vegas