[quote=harvey][quote=ocrenter]
would be true IF PUSD territory was the way it was back 20 years ago, in 1992.
[…]
Harvey, are you just the smartest guy in the world and everyone else are just retarded?[/quote]
Relax dude, I’m basically in agreement with the idea that this bond isn’t prudent, I just think the reaction here is overdone.
I honestly don’t know enough about PUSD and the development potential, I don’t know exactly where the borders are and believed Poway to have some remaining rural sections. But I haven’t studied a city planning map so if you say there’s nothing left to build, then you are probably correct.
As far as how smart I am, I am sometimes smart enough to ask the important questions, and the key question when making any decision is the following:
What are the alternatives and what are the expected outcomes?
So before we can label anything as a terrible choice, it has to put in the context of the alternatives. I don’t know what other choices the city had in this situation but I have noticed that nobody else here has even mentioned a better solution. (From what I can tell from the articles the city had do to something.)
Anyway, I really don’t care that much, as I live in Temecula and our city appears to be managed much better than Poway.
(BTW: My point about making choices amongst the real-world alternatives applies to elections as well. Political discussions here would be far more productive if more people realized that.)[/quote]
First of all, harvey and sdduuuuude, I’m sure you’re aware that it is the PUSD (and not the city) which is in fiscal hot water over this foolishness.
The few remaining rural lots are likely 1-4 AC apiece. Some are situated within HOAs and most have no utilities whatsoever brought to them.
Only deep-pocketed buyers who really wanted to live east of Poway would attempt to buy and build on these lots. The amount of taxes these few lots (1-3 doz?) could generate in the future pales in comparison to the taxes the PUSD collects from all the newer tracts within the it.
I don’t see the taxes collected by the PUSD growing more than the 2% per year, pursuant to Prop 13. And as far as double-digit appreciation coming back to the area served by PUSD in the next 20 years … I don’t see that, either.
In any case, I don’t see PUSD ever being able to make principle payments on this loan without laying off most of their teachers and shuttering schools. OR filing a Chapter 9 BK to get a court order to modify and recast this ridiculous “capital appreciation” loan they voted in.
There are also other ramifications to its students if it chooses to file for BK protection.
