Considering that the influx of children of the illegal alien invaders are causing much of the increase in the school budget, this meals tax should be limited to tacos and burritos.

Posted by segeny (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 8:55 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Aye Carumba, segeny ...
.
Brace yourself for the Attack of the Hand-wringers

Posted by OhTheHumanity (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 9:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I originally thought that school meals would be taxed, which would be only fair. Kids can take their lunches to school and I as a non parent wouldn't have to pay taxes for schools I don't want. If the tax passes, I will undoubtedly reduce my spending in Loudoun in restaurants and for prepared meals purchased in grocery stores. People who have kids should be the ones who pay for the schools; not those of us who chose not to have kids, or who have kids grown up elsewhere. I am not getting anything out of more schools, rather more schools will increase my taxes, etc.

Posted by philsusan (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 10:12 a.m. (Suggest removal)

How is "Prepared Meals" defined? Will I have to pay taxes on frozen Prepared Meals like Smart Ones or Hungary Man TV Dinners?

Posted by consulting_ho (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 10:46 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Put another way, Mays said, "Every other year, we'd get a free elementary school.""
--
Typical bureaucrat, considers tens of millions of taxpayer dollars his own personal "free" Monopoly money. Nevermind of course, that this all comes from somebody's wallet - hey, it's not his, so what does he care, right?!
.
And face it, if they really wanted this to be a "tourist" tax, they would put a tax on car rentals or hotel rooms. Nope, they want us to pay more because they - even this reporter - thinks we residents are "rich" because the county is "rich" -- whatever that is supposed to mean. Please, tell that to the tens of thousands of folks living in Sugarland or Sterling - what a laugh! Or at least it would be, if it weren't such pathetic elitism.
.
I will be voting no against this measure, and if it passes, like many, I will get most of my prepared food in tax-free, very-nearby Fairfax Co. No skin off my nose!

Posted by Justthefacts (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 11 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hell I can't afford to eat out anyway. Why do they think a tax is the answer instead of a budget cut? Bite Me.

Posted by Funnyguyva (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 11:19 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Doesn't VA already charge a sales tax on meals, and property taxes for schools? So now they want to add an additional tax on top of those taxes. Just wait, if this passes, soon there will be a tax proposed on using disposable silverware because it clogs landfills. Then a tax for using non-disposable silverware because soap pollutes water supplies. And don't forget, there should be a tax to pay for extra people to collect the tax. Woohoo taxes.

Posted by 1995gt (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 11:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Then a tax for using non-disposable silverware because soap pollutes water supplies."
--
Hey 1995gt, don't forget - they already tax the soap, so next they can tax the water too! Think about how many "free" schools Mays can get then!!!

Posted by Justthefacts (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 12:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Have you considered taxing the people who actually use the schools? Oh -- I forgot, this is the Peoples' Republic of Virginia.

Posted by Apostrophe (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 12:16 p.m. (Suggest removal)

where did previous comments go? hmm

what irresponsible elected body would
approve development of houses without money for a school system or infrastructure?

hello?

Voters should find out what tax incentives were given to developers to overbuild housing and then stick the taxpayer with the school cost.

Did this same board of supervisors waive taxes for AOL even for their tax on equipment and then did AOL move a good portion of its operation to New York?

Posted by JohnAdams1 (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 12:40 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"what irresponsible elected body would approve development of houses without money for a school system or infrastructure?"
--
Um, an electoral body who knows full well that most voters are a bunch of easily-played suckers who would mindlessly rubber-stamp any tax increase that is twisted and pitched as being "for the chiiiiiiiiiildren" :P
.
Sad part is, they are totally right :(

Posted by Justthefacts (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 12:52 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Why is the Board of Supervisors picking just one industry? If they are going to add a tax, why punish the restaurants? Instead of adding a 4% tax to every prepared meal, add 1/2% to every retail purchase at any business in Loudoun County. That is the equitable thing to do.

Posted by tfvdw2at (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 1:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

They need a more well rounded approach to school construction. First, Hatrick needs a huge dose of fiscal reality. Has anyone ever told the guy "no, you cannot have everything in your dream sheet"? How about building schools UP instead of just one or two levels? How about having the developers build them at the same time they are building the houses? Then $$ will be saved on construction costs & busing the rug rats - b/c they are too fat & spoiled to walk anywhere. OMG - that means sidewalks - which are a GOOD thing!!

Posted by ms1234 (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 1:35 p.m. (Suggest removal)

@JohnAdams1 Agreed. The builders proffered land for schools, which is very different than actually having proffered a school, library, community center, etc. But so many failed to realize that when they heard about all the great "give-aways" the builders were offering to get plans approved. In the end someone still has to pay.
Absolutely agree with @ms1234. Our schools are so good, even ones that people think are in "bad" areas, that friends who moved out of state said even their kids noticed their new top charter school doesn't offer as much as Sterling Elementary.
We all have to be conscious of cutting back, not looking for ways to get more people to pay the tab.
With rights comes responsibility. I hope people will take the time to understand the issues and vote. This tax won't pay for fancy programs, teachers or supplies - it is all about construction.
Discussed last week: http://inside-outblog.blogspot.com/2008/...

Posted by insideoutblog (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 2:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

venting here.... independent here who help vote what i considered to be corrupt republicans out of office. now i wonder why. every time i turn around someone is pinging me. i am all about paying my fair share of taxes, utilities, gas prices, etc. i can't contest my over-assessed real estate assessment because it would cost more to fight than i would get out of it. the washington post article reads like the proposed restaurant tax will be paid for by tourists. how many people visit loudoun county?!?! the democratic BOS needs to learn to live within the money available and not try and put the screws on the tax paying (not anyone with governmental assistance) citizens. i keep hearing that all of us need to be good americans and suck it up... well, there are far too many people who are constantly getting fat off people like me and others who don't spend money wisely. the BOS obviously needs to re-assess their core values. it is laughable, that as a single man, i have always voted for every school proposed tax or bond approval, and yet have no children. i am all about the neighborhood, community, etc., but give me some relief here and figure out where all the fat is. if i need to volunteer my consulting assistance, so be it, but stop pinging me. also, build the far reaching fire stations with developer money! why not just raise my assessment more this year in order to get your money. better solution, we can just have our MS13 friends in sterling park take up a 230 am collection with their weapons. they are such good, law abiding citizens, but are no different that the BOS, just with weapons and they don't smile about it.

angry in ashburn

Posted by mallratz90210 (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 3:41 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hatrick and his cronies have a salary and benefits package that would make any CEO proud. Start the cutting with them.

Posted by GenuineRisk (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 4:26 p.m. (Suggest removal)

There is about a zero percent chance of this passing. Live with the existing budget which is already bloated. Guess this one will have to fail so they get the message; we already pay enough in taxes and live within your budget. A budget, what a concept.

Posted by lewandow (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 5:22 p.m. (Suggest removal)

i'll pay more taxes for school construction but i don't like the idea of taxing meals. also the county can look into public-private partnerships to leverage other financing mechanisms to save money over time. if the county is growing, we must act to serve the families moving in. i don't have kids but i still feel it's my responsibility to building the "village" that raises a child. also, let's consider that there may be fat in the budget that can be trimmed to reallocate revenue for this important matter.

Posted by Indie_Watchdog (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 5:42 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I find it hard to believe that there's no "fat" to trim in the school budget. Start with those before increasing taxes.

Posted by mazman128 (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 6:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

This is what happens when you elect nothing but Democrats to the Board of Supervisors. TAX TAX TAX... That all liberals know how to do.

Posted by AlbyVA (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 11:21 p.m. (Suggest removal)

JohnAdams1 ---get a clue. We switched BOS way back in 2007.
mallratz90210--- you, too.
This Board is fiscally conservative, for a change. They did get handed a whopper of a budget because of all the homes the Board before them handed down. They're doing the best thay can with that. I disagree with the food tax, however. Basically, if it were able to be put in a lockbox for the sole purpose of building schools, I'd soften to it. But as it stands, the General Assembly says the County CANNOT seperate it from general funds. It must be put into the general fund.

Posted by honchonumberone (anonymous) on October 13, 2008 at 11:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)

My wife and I wanted to move to Va. but the local governments there are just so corrupt and want to tax anything.

Posted by speedo1 (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 6:09 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Dean/honcho, look up the housing starts for the past few years--the number has steadily decreased, and was doing so during the term of the preceding BoS.

Houses that haven't been built yet (and won't be for years) are not raising our taxes, so hold off on praising the "fiscal conservatism" of this Democratic/VLF board you worked so hard to elect, you Republican GOTV chair, you.

I agree that there needs to be a mechanism for dedicating the funding if the tax is to be more palatable. Here is a drawback of the Dillon Rule, which otherwise by and large serves to protect us from the agenda of whatever group wins the local election.

Now, protecting us from the state pork machine is another story...

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 7:14 a.m. (Suggest removal)

So, in essence, you'd get 5% sales tax, plus 4% meals tax, plus 20% tip... looks like I'll be dining in Fairfax county from now on!
Folks, you're essentially looking at a ten percent tax on food.
It is a proven fact that business will just go elsewhere if you raise taxes. Essentially doubling the tax rate on meals will result in some nice restaurants popping up just over the eastern and southern borders.

Posted by Hoqenishy (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 7:18 a.m. (Suggest removal)

The restaurant business in Loudoun County is already slow. People around here have stopped eating out. Friend works as a waitress in a local restaurant and is averaging $40 in tips on a Saturday night. She worked in Manassas on a Wednesday night at the same chain restaurant and made $100. I think if this tax passes it will help close more business in Loudoun County.

Posted by livingloco (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 7:25 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Put another way, Ben Mays could get a free kick in the nuts when he starts to see overall tax receipts drop and the county is even further in the red.

Our fine county restaurateurs should threaten to close up shop if this passes. Perhaps after a few weeks of eating frozen dinners and toast, Mr. Mays will see the error of his misguided "solution".

Posted by Hoqenishy (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)

"Put another way, Mays said, "Every other year, we'd get a free elementary school"

Or, put yet another way, Mays said "It's like it's free to *me* but some other people, people I don't even know, are forking over money but they're rich enough to eat out, so they really shouldn't mind a bit."

The question is not whether this measure will fail, but by how much.

Posted by dingus3 (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 7:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

We are a couple with no child in school and we like to dine out a lot; so this tax is really going to be hard to swallow for us, so to speak.

Posted by chuckled (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 9:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Tax and spend at its finest!

Note to Supervisors: How about actually MANAGING the budget and look at areas where you can recognize SAVINGS as a result.

It used to be you put anything with 'schools' on the ballot and it would pass, but even this is too much of an obvious FLEECING of the residents.

Surely voters aren't that stupid, are they?

Posted by SavedByZero (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 10:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

This tax is a bad idea. Bad, bad, bad across the board. Watch restaurant revenues shrink, others just pack up and leave.

Love the "I don't have kid's, let the parents pay for schools" comments. What a joke. Are you really that slow? Educating our youth is the foundation of our country moving forward.

Here's an idea: let the non-parents keep their money, then grow old in a nation run by uneducated dolts. At least they'll share something in common with the kids. ;-)

Posted by mdellinger (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 12:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"Educating our youth is the foundation of our country moving forward."
-
I agree with you, but there needs to be a happy medium.
.
First off, I believe that some non-parents have gotten so upset because such an overwhelming percentage (more than 70%!!!) of our property taxes go to schools ... and in Sterling at least, some are overrun by illegal immigrants' children who are in need of expensive ESL education ... further west, we see upper-middle-class elitists strutting into brand-new overpriced Loudoun subdivisions (yes, Belmont, Broadlands, South Riding and parts of Ashburn, I'm talking about you) that most of us couldn't dream of affording a home in - paying nothing towards schools, mind you - and then demanding that everyone else bend over for a tax hike just because THEY knowingly moved to an area where they KNEW their kids would have to be bussed!! The tax dollars we give are *never* enough for supporters of these things, and they want more, more, more from our pockets with each passing year.
.
Then you have the parents (not all, but some) who take umbrage that there are some private schools (Nysmith for example) and GT schools (TJ for example) that knock the socks off anything that is provided at most schools. They believe they are "owed" all the amenities at these schools and join the chorus in wanting more, more, more taxes to try to achieve educational parity with some of the best - and in Nysmith's case, some of the most expensive!! - schools in the country.
.
So I agree, a democratic society functions best when its kids are educated - no argument there!! But somewhere along the line, the vocal parents pushing constant tax increases need to be taught a word that they hopefully are teaching to their kids: "NO!!!"

Posted by Justthefacts (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 12:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I moved out here because I thought I was getting a better deal, come to find out everyone living in LoCo automatically gets bunched in with a status quo "RICH". Where do I get inline to collect my millions because it's far from reality, expensive water, expensive gas, expensive everything. I have a large family yeah 4 kids.. but I pay the price dearly, try living on a grocery budget of 100 per week. We rarely buy school lunches because they are already expensive. Nevermind going out to eat.

Posted by rottym (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 12:56 p.m. (Suggest removal)

justthefacts, if you're going to keep that for your name, you better get ahold of some!

Before you lump the communities of the suburban policy area together as "west", you might want to decide whether you want the transition and rural policy area folks to laugh you out of town, or shoot you.

FYI, all of those planned communities you lump together as shafting you paid for school sites, public safety sites, park sites, and most of the road improvements we have through increased cost on the homes.

(I understand that a site is not a building, or an operating budget. But it has remained a source of great amusement to me that ten years ago when sites were being offered--and-accepted--the bleat was that a site was not a building. When the CboogeymanPAMs offered to build schools to county specs and include THAT cost in the purchase of any homes built there through community development authority bonds, then the bleat became "but it doesn't pay the teachers!". Let someone offer that, and they'll find something wrong with it too.)

We don't have to look at legitimate private schools or magnets to see inequity in the current system, before we ever get into the most affordable areas of the county bearing the brunt of ESL and other needs: look no further than the "private" public schools we maintain within our own system, costing two, three, four or more times per seat than is budgeted for either your kids or my own.

If you want to talk entitlement, start right there.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 1:25 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Folks, wanted to bring your attention to the new Coalition we just announced today. Check it out...the press release header and link to the full release is below:

“LOUDOUN COALITION AGAINST THE FOOD TAX”
FORMED TO OPPOSE MEALS & BEVERAGE TAX HIKE ON NOVEMBER BALLOT

Group Advocates Defeat of Proposed 4% Tax Increase on Purchases in Restaurants, Beverages, and Prepared Foods in Grocery Stores

Non-Partisan, Independent Coalition Composed of Public Officials, Small Businesses/Restaurateurs, Taxpayer Advocates and Diners

Leesburg, VA – Tuesday, October 14, 2008 – With exactly three weeks to go to Election Day, a group of concerned Loudoun citizens today announced the formation and official launch of the “Loudoun Coalition Against the Food Tax” (LCAFT) in Loudoun County, which advocates the defeat of the November 4 voter referendum calling for an additional 4% tax increase on food in restaurants, beverages, and the purchase of prepared foods in grocery stores.

Read the full release here: http://noloudounfoodtax.blogspot.com/

email: NoLoudounFoodTax@aol.com

Posted by nicholasjgraham (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 1:30 p.m. (Suggest removal)

"look no further than the "private" public schools we maintain within our own system, costing two, three, four or more times per seat than is budgeted for either your kids or my own."
--
You mean schools like TJ? Schools where - honestly - the best and the brightest, the future doctors, the future researchers, the future chemists who will develop green energy are going? You seriously want to cut funding for the kids who will HONESTLY be the leaders of the next generation? If that's your position, it smacks of intense jealousy and resentment. (And if that's your position, you fall into Category #3 of the tax-happy-people that I mentioned above). Just because you don't like the facts doesn't mean they are not ... justthefacts ;)

Posted by Justthefacts (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 1:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)

If I had kids, I would prefer for others to offset the cost of my child's education. Could they pay my mortgage & my bills too?

Restaurants are having a tough time, and many have already closed or soon will. This shortsighted measure is is going to hinder Loudoun's economic growth and hurt our already ailing restaurants. Grocery prepared foods are taxed as well.

I am biased though. I'm too young to want kids, but pay enough taxes to doubt the judgement of our Board of Supervisors.

Posted by chenry3 (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 5:09 p.m. (Suggest removal)

No, justthefacts, you still don't get it.

Of course I'm not talking about the governor's school at TJ!

I'm talking about the schools within LCPS that hold 100 kids or fewer, which already cost four times as much per capita as the cheapest seat in the county four years ago!

Look up the cost per seat by school, IN LOUDOUN. We have $20K per seat public schools right here at home.

(And no, I'm not cheering for the meals tax.)

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 5:13 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hey nitwits, just becuase your kids aren't in school you don't think you should help pay for schools via taxes?!?!?! What a bunch of morons! Do you really want to live amongst a population of uneducated? That would lead directly to increased welfare, jobs moving out of the area, etc. Education is for the greater good. Put another way, if my grandparents and parents are all deceased, why should I have to pay taxes to assist old folks? By the way, I am a conservative republican. But I also understand that somethings are more important than me.

Posted by adam.grotke (anonymous) on October 14, 2008 at 6:12 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara, I'm interested in these 20K/seat schools. Do you have any examples? If so, you're right, and I actually agree with you for once.
Does busing factor into the cost per seat at a school? If not, wouldn't that skew the numbers a bit?
To adam.grotke and others insisting that children are the future and education is the greater good, I agree to a certain extent; however, things have gotten out of control in Loudoun. We should not be expected to provide education that rivals private schools. We should not be expected to provide a ton of services that frankly do not benefit the best and brightest students. Trying to provide "catch up" services to kids who are below average is an object lesson in asymptotic formulas, or "diminishing returns".

Posted by Hoqenishy (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 6:39 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Hoq, the last time the cost per seat was broken out by school was during the 2005 budget process, using 2004 figures. The costs were detailed in a Leesburg Today article entitled "Scool Budget: Markups Begin in Earnest", published January 6, 2005.

Here is the table from the article:

Per-Pupil Operation Costs By School

1. Middleburg Elementary $16,828

2. Aldie Elementary $12,182

3. Hillsboro Elementary $10,820

4. Banneker Elementary $9,799

5. J.L Simpson Elementary $9,659

6. Rolling Ridge Elementary $9,092

7. Sully Elementary $8,976

8. Guilford Elementary $8,937

9. Sterling Middle $8,866

10. Harper Park Middle $8,670

11. Lucketts Elementary $8,627

12. Mercer Middle $8,413

13. Smart’s Mill Middle $8,376

14. Lincoln Elementary $8,295

15. Blue Ridge Middle $8,288

16. Eagle Ridge Middle $8,255

17. Catoctin Elementary $8,245

18. Loudoun County High $8,190

19. Dominion High School $8,056

20. Sterling Elementary $8,005

21. Loudoun Valley High $7,969

22. Park View High $7,836

23. Waterford Elementary $7,772

24. Sugarland Elementary $7,771

25. Round Hill Elementary $7,690

26. Potomac Falls High $7,595

27. Lovettsville Elementary $7,570

28. Harmony Intermediate $7,555

29. Heritage High $7,420

30. Belmont Station Elementary $7,356

31. Seneca Ridge Middle $7,369

32. Farmwell Station Middle $7,363

33. Countryside Elementary $7,276

34. Balls Bluff Elementary $7,213

35. Algonkian Elementary $6,976

36. River Bend Middle $6,965

37. Broad Run High $6,838

38. Frances Hazel Reid ES $6,759

39. Meadowland Elementary $6,745

40. Forest Grove Elementary $6,744

41. Leesburg Elementary $6,730

42. Mountain View Elementary $6,708

43. Emerick Elementary $6,655

44. Stone Bridge High $6,544

45. Belmont Ridge Middle $6,368

46. Hamilton Elementary $6,154

47. Potowmack Elementary $6,131

48. Sanders Corner Elementary $6,131

49. Lowes Island Elementary $5,921

50. Cedar Lane Elementary $5,846

51. John W. Tolbert Elementary $5,807

52. Cool Spring Elementary $5,710

53. Horizon Elementary $5,674

54 Hutchison Farm Elementary $5,666

55. Dominion Trail Elementary $5,472

56. Arcola Elementary $5,453

57. Ashburn Elementary $5,405

58. Evergreen Mill Elementary 5,179

59. Mill Run Elementary $5,162

60. Hillside Elementary $4,854

61. Little River Elementary $4,456

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 6:49 a.m. (Suggest removal)

That was four years ago, hoq. The "average" (really a median) cost of a seat has risen by several thousand dollars since then, so you tell me if the most costly has topped $20K yet?

Similar info regarding transportation was presented during the Lenah SPEX worksessions on transportation: The average cost per child is $221, which I think is pretty reasonable. (What do the 100-mile round trip commuters of "the country" put in their tanks each week?).

They went on to say that the actual cost is higher in low density areas, because more buses with fewer riders travel greater distances.

What burns me is the people who moved into a new home within the last couple years IN THE ZONE of at least one of the top-cost schools, immediately started b!+%#ing about growth, AND protest schools for anybody else in their viewshed.

If their kids cost that much per seat, there's your "entitlement mentality".

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 6:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

I have to digest what Hoquenishy stated in his last comment. However, I would like to point out that the Code of Virginia requires school systems to provide programs for special education and underachieving students. The school system has no choice but to include these programs for the students.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 7:04 a.m. (Suggest removal)

An example of a 20k/seat school: Briar Woods High School. Best kept secret in LCPS.

Posted by livingloco (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 7:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)

okay, backinloco, back it up.

Any fact to support this, or just a feeling?

Momof2, most of those who have a lot to say about schools are clueless on the unfunded mandates with which the system must comply.

No Child Left Behind and Standards of Learning are huge at the federal and state level, and we pick up more of the tab than most because we are "wealthy".

Never mind that our median income is skewed by billionaires who pay minimal land taxes because they raise heirloom beef at $22 per pound as a hobby, or provide "open space".

Various physical and learning disabilities have huge bars to be met in both construction and curriculum, and again we pick up the lion's share. We're a "wealthy" "rural" county, remember?

Add in total equine excrement like the Environmental Education Act, which requires that each subject be taught with an environmental perspective, and it adds cost to textbooks and other instructional material; you can't just teach math with problems like "The Greens recycle twenty pounds of newspaper and plastic each week. The Browns do not..." (this was actually in my daughter's elementary math book as a word problem seven years ago)--you have to have full color spreads on "the rainforest" (formerly the jungle), sprawl and global warming no matter what subject the text is supposedly teaching.

Then we can add politics: if one interest group receives airtime, facetime, or mention, then they ALL get equal treatment. It's only fair.

It all costs, and the more feel-good it gets, the more exponentially the costs climb.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 10:59 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Barbara,
Agreed. The issue is very complicated and it goes on. I know this comment will bring lots of mocking from some, but Hatrick's goal is to run the best school system possible. That is his job. If he had low expectations for what the schools should be doing or thought that doing an average job was good enough, in any other field he would be fired. Luckily, I believe most citizens recognize the value of providing excellent schools in our county.

Do we need to be mindfull of the costs? Absolutely. But as they say, don't throw the baby out with the bath water!! We are in a tough financial situation, but decisions need to be made very carefully as the effect of those decisions made now will be felt for a long time.

Also, the 9/30/08 numbers are now on the LCPS website. Briar Woods has 1268 students enrolled this year. Next year they will replace the current senior class of 281 with a freshman class of 577. If this school had not been built, where would these students have gone to school? Here are other local HS enrollments: Broad Run-1487,
Freedom- 1407, Heritage - 1807, Stone Bridge-1839.

We need money to build these schools. I am not in support of the meals tax, but there is a clear, demonstrated need here for schools in the Dulles South area. Something needs to be done now.

Posted by momof2 (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 11:51 a.m. (Suggest removal)

Momof2, those enrollment figures, comped to the current adopted CIP, might provide some info Hoq can get on board with:

Aldie, which cost over $12K per seat four years ago, has a program capacity this year of 137.

The 9/30 figures show it has:
1 child in pre-K.
25 in (all day) kindergarten, under a pilot program supposedly targeting at-risk kids.
17 in grade 1.
12 in grade 2.
20 each in grades 3-5.

There are more kids in each CLASSROOM in most county schools than there are in ENTIRE GRADES at this school.

It is not alone in that circumstance. Cross-reference the capacity with the enrollment at some others for a similar result.

Funny, the At Large Rep to Parks and Rec did not mention the cost of her child's schooling at Aldie (nor did she disclose her position AGAIN) when she stepped to the podium last night to speak against the "Greenvest plot" school at Lenah.

Posted by BarbaraMunsey (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 1:01 p.m. (Suggest removal)

Hybrid car owners pay what amounts to no car tax. Airplane owners pay 1 penny.

Show fairness in the tax law.

Posted by RustNeverSleeps (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 2:14 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I wonder how many of these childless posters complaining about education costs:
went to a state school for college?
were homeschooled in k-12?
had parents who bore 100% of the cost to educate their behind?
I wonder how many of these childless posters like driving on roads or using public transportation in which they are not absorbing 100% of the full cost?

Posted by RustNeverSleeps (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 2:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

I agree that 'something needs to be done' to raise money for more schools, but adding tax on tax is not the way to do it ! Begin with all the Illegals we are housing, feeding schooling, jailing and entertaining in our neighbor-hoods at 2AM ( all you MS-13 Boys)!Try, oh let's see, BUDGET CUTTING maybe ?!?!I'm a senior Citizen who can't even afford the Personal Property Taxes on my tiny Leesburg Home, so I had to move in with my Daughter in Sterling ! You think I'm going to vote for MORE taxes ?NO WAY ! I don't care if the money will build a bady needed Senior Apartment Complex, I'm voting NO ! On the RARE occasion I get to eat out, you can be darn sure it will be in Fairfax County, NOT Loudoun !

Posted by selticsmile (anonymous) on October 15, 2008 at 5:27 p.m. (Suggest removal)

hoqenishy,

you forgot to include the 2.5 town of leesburg tax to all the other taxes cited.

i went to nicks in brambleton the other night and 1 family ate dinner between 6 and 8 pm. i am sure additional taxes are going to add to the booming business.

Posted by mallratz90210 (anonymous) on October 23, 2008 at 3:58 p.m. (Suggest removal)