*What I have done in the past with this guide is not compensated and takes dozens of hours of research and interviews. While some time is spent transcribing much of my time is spent constantly trying to contact candidates to get answers to self-designed surveys with questions not typically asked. I did not have time to put that effort in this year so I apologize to any who were expecting that.



I was pleasantly surprised to discover people remembering this site even though I have not advertised it this year and all previous advertising was very limited.


Monday, October 3, 2011

Propositions 1 and 3 School Bonds: Questions to Consider

FNSB Proposition 1 - $9,900,000 General Obligation Bonds for Ryan Middle School Capital Improvements (Ordinance No. 2011-39)

FNSB Proposition 3 - $10,390,000 General Obligation Bonds for Capital Improvements to Salcha & Woodriver Elementary Schools, North Pole Middle School & North Pole High School (Ordinance No. 2011-39)

Fact Sheet link: http://www.k12northstar.org/sites/default/files/2011_school_bond_fact_sheet.pdf

Both bonds are grouped together in the ordinance and fact sheet.

Passage of bond will result in:




Proposition 1
Ryan Middle School:
renovation and system upgrades particularly to gymnasium wing (to include a weight room & dance floor according to Ryan Smith – I have not verified), preliminary design of future phased renovation and upgrade alternatives.


Proposition 2
Salcha Elementary:
Replace and upgrade roof and building envelope.

Woodriver Elementary: Upgrade gymnasium interior, finishes, and mechanical, electrical and other systems.

North Pole Middle: Replace and upgrade roof and clearstories.

North Pole High: Renovations and mechanical, electrical, and other systems upgrades to the vocational wing.


If you’re not sure what a bond actually is read this article first: http://interioralaskavoterguides.blogspot.com/2011/09/repost-bonding-101.html

The estimated additional property tax amount due per $100,000 assessed value of property per year is $5.69. This is based on if the State reimburses 70%. If it doesn’t then the additional tax increase could be $18.96 per $100,000/yr.

I have not had time to research out the answers to the following questions but I believe they have merit to consider in deciding how to vote, especially considering our world economic variations.


  • If my home is valued at $150,000 will my property tax be pro-rated accordingly?

  • When is the state expected to reimburse the 70%? What if the state can’t or won’t reimburse the 70%?

  • What if the number of property owners changes significantly? Is the “approximate amount” taxed redistributed every year?

  • How many years will we be paying for this? When is the bond “due”?

  • Who buys these bonds? What if no one wants to /buy them?

  • How many school bonds are we paying on already?

  • If I vote no can I opt out of the property tax increase and the accompanying “mortgage” responsibility? (I did find the answer to this: NO)

  • According to the ordinance (2011-39) Section 2 it states: “…the Borough will levy ad valorem taxes* upon all taxable property in the Borough without limitation as to rate or amount to pay when due”. I am very uncomfortable with the idea that the borough can levy a tax on me “without limitation as to rate or amount” if need be. Essentially, a yes vote on this is putting up “our” property as collateral.

  • Is the return for my risk acceptable?


Ultimately the bond litmus test question is:
Do I have a right to force a mortgage on my neighbor?


*Ad valorem tax: tax based on the assessed value of property.

No comments:

Post a Comment