School spending should be controlled better

Nonprofit bodies such as school districts, government agencies, etc. have a tendency to always outgrow and outspend their budgets. When faced with a deficit they look at every option available to raise more capital and then give you lots of explanations why they can't trim or cut expenses.

On the contrary, a for-profit business knows the ABCs of money management: No increase in revenue means no increase in spending. A decrease in revenue means a decrease in spending.

Measure R is asking for $29 million to spend on the same items we voted no on in June and November 2006.

The two main arguments that instill fear are that the schools would not be able educate to our kids and that our most valuable asset, our homes, will decline in value if we don't have good schools.

Your home value lost its connection to the quality Oak Park schools as soon as the OPUSD accepted kids out of the district. In the past, in order to send our kids to OPUSD we had to purchase a house in Oak Park and this was a factor in the home value and price.

Now we don't have to buy a home in Oak Park in order to send our kids to Oak Park schools. We can reside in Van Nuys or Moorpark and use the Oak Park schools for free. There is no need to buy a home in our quality community to put a child in our schools and therefore the home value in Oak Park is decreased.

Guess what? OPUSD is turning to be a liability. Why would you buy a house in Oak park and pay and additional 17 to 20 percent taxes per year when you can get a comparable house anywhere else?

I received my property tax bill last week for a yearly total of $6,578, of which $1,175 goes to OPUSD This is over 17 percent of the total tax bill. Measure R will add an additional 3 percent for a total of 20 percent of additional taxes.

Vote no on Measure R Moshe Cohen Oak Park