Steve May offers his support for ‘Yes’ votes on Proposition 10 and Proposition 11
Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and do not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com
Regarding the upcoming Ridgefield School District’s bond issue votes. I received the Voters’ Pamphlet and frankly, I was shocked, shocked I say, at the superficiality of Ms Pozzo’s statement against voting in favor of the bond measures. A proper response would take pages — I’ll try to abbreviate this.

If one is trying to convince voters to vote “no” on a contested issue it might be wise to provide more than the superficial generalities she provided if you want to be taken seriously.
“You get no say in the design.” Well, since all the citizens of Ridgefield are licensed architects or urban planners let’s just have everyone submit their own favorite design, complete with all the required mandated facilities systems. Sounds good.
“If passed, more bonds will follow.” Duh. We live in the fastest growing town in Washington, so I’m sure in a few years when these newest schools are bursting with newly arrived students, surely no one will want a new school paid for by bonds. I know — Ms Pozzo and her group can fund the next school(s) and save the voters the expense. Thanks!
Who knew — when you take out a mortgage (or bond) you have to pay interest! If Ms Pozzo’s math is correct (I don’t deal in numbers this large) we’ll pay $40 million over 21 years on a $70 million bond. Do you have a mortgage on your house? A $300,000 mortgage (with a $60,000 down payment) requires about $170,000 in interest. Seems kinda, I don’t know, “normal” to me.
Ms Pozzo says the schools don’t “need all the extras for the community.” I would hope most people disagree with this myopic view — there are very few locations in Ridgefield or any other town where “the community” can interact with one another and schools provide the perfect forum. If not the schools — where? Here’s a suggestion Ms Pozzo may like — let’s just provide basketball courts and football fields with no seating or non-student access since they’re just an “extra” for “the community.”
There could be many more of these — I’ll close with one more. “New roofs? . . . Why not through regular maintenance? Contrary to what Ms Pozzo says almost 1,400 new students have arrived in the past six years. The district is struggling to accommodate them, and some maintenance has been deferred. Perhaps Ms Pozzo will invite all of us over to her house so we can observe how to immaculately care for a home while staying on top of every conceivable household system.
This might be overly aggressive and too long, but if people are going to argue we should not pass good faith bond proposals that benefit our children, they owe us specifics and not hollow statements offering nothing but “No.”
Steve May
Ridgefield
Also read:
- Opinion: Stalin would be proud – Clark County Socialists gathered for ‘No Kings’Reform Clark County’s Rob Anderson criticizes local and national groups for organizing protests that featured Auditor Greg Kimsey as a keynote, raising concerns about public trust and political partisanship.
- Letter: Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle makes several serious and incorrect engineering statementsBob Ortblad critiques engineering claims by Vancouver Mayor Anne McEnerny-Ogle, highlighting cost and safety advantages of an immersed tunnel for the I-5 crossing.
- Opinion: The beginning of the end of anchor babiesLars Larson argues the Constitution excludes children born to non-legal residents, as the Supreme Court debates birthright citizenship and public opinion data shows limited support.
- Opinion: Defend bail now or face more chaos on our streetsA proposed Washington court rule would cap bail for most misdemeanors and allow defendants to bypass bondsmen, raising concerns about accountability and public safety.
- Opinion: Some worker rights get a poster, others get fine printElizabeth New questions why Washington state highlights some workplace protections while Janus First Amendment rights for public employees remain hidden in official materials.







