We need flood protection, not new buildings

The $46.5 million Kirkwood Community College bond issue came as a sudden, sneaky shock. Haste makes waste. The money should be better used to pay for 26 percent of the cost for west-side flood protection (in Cedar Rapids). It makes no sense to pay for three new experimental Kirkwood buildings when more and more teaching is done online, with much more to come. Besides, there are unneeded school buildings in Cedar Rapids and Highland school districts, next to Kirkwood's proposed new buildings in Marion and Washington.

Cedar Rapids needs west-side flood protection and more sustainable private sector jobs. This ill-advised bond issue provides neither.

The University of Iowa president showed no evidence that UI students coming from Kirkwood were any better prepared, or did better at UI, than those coming from elsewhere. They didn't get more, or better, job offers when they graduated. Voters need to see some numbers showing why spending $46.5 million at Kirkwood is more important than all other spending or tax reduction. Taxpayers need lower taxes, not 15 more years of a continued property tax increase.

Taxpayers have been very generous with Kirkwood and now it is getting greedy. Rather than continue a tax increase, Kirkwood ought to reallocate 1.2 percent of its budget to the city for west-side flood protection. Set an example for the school district, county, Grant Wood AEA and the city. Show flooded taxpayers Kirkwood cares about them. More reasons why the bond issue makes no sense are linked on website http://iowalive.net/.

Dick Fredericks

Palo