SHEEHAN Go for referendum

from page 25 convoluted mix of borrowing tools aimed at diminishing or taking away voters’ rights to decide on funding for an expensive project. One board member was quoted in a Chicago Tribune story (12/13/22) stating that taxpayers want to vote on major capital projects:

“Board member John Noble responded later in the meeting that the school district has been at a ‘bottom level’ of finance in ter ms of maintenance of the buildings “The community did not want the school to be a bank account,” Noble said. “They do not want us to hold $45 million, and just sit in a bank account and collect interest. They actually want us to come to the people to have visibility for the initiative and vote on it.”

A Tribune story, dated Nov. 21, mentions that Elizabeth Hennessy is D115’s bond consultant. She is

$10 million more per year. Given the ag reed upon scale and urgency of need, this is incentive enough to determine Project 2 financing now and be gin work.

Perhaps most encouraging from Hennessy’s presentation to the committee is the outline of a funding scenario that would have little to no impact on property tax bills in Oak Park and River Forest when philanthropic contributions are factored into financing.

As we are all concer ned taxpayers and focused on our Cook County property tax bill bottom lines, I invite you to look at the materials presented to the committee and see for yourself that only one plan can both serve the dire needs of our community ’s children and be cost-conscious Materials can be found at: https:// tinyurl.com/3uyv5tyh.

Our community needs educational spaces that comply with current law. The board must move forward with Project 2 and Funding Scenario 4 is the most responsible solution for all Oak Park and River Forest taxpayers.

Laura Huseby Ri v er Forest