NO on Measure L

As is evident from other postings, there is a lot of confusion regarding Measure L. Let's clarify some of the misconceptions.
1. Bond financing is expensive.  The financing and election costs will consume about $200,000 of the $2 million bond.  Then there is the 30-year term, which brings the total payments at 4.5% interest to $3.7 million.
2.  How about fairness?  Long term residents pay a little, while recent arrivals pay a lot. Even if you've never set foot in the building, you pay. And, user fees will go up, so you pay twice - once to improve it and then to use it.
3. What about the necessary repairs? The costs to bring this building into code compliance are not more than $400,000 - a fraction of the total costs. The fact is the KPPCSD is responsible for the building's maintenance, and repairs should be part of the budget and not allowed to accumulate.
4. So why is this costly upgrade with a total price tag of $2.5 million on the ballot? It seems that some people think this building should be upgraded to produce more rental income.  However their own studies show that these improvements will generate only $15,000/yr more in income - a paltry return on invested capital.
5. How will the focus of the building change?  It will create and adult venue, not the kids friendly atmosphere for which it was built and intended.
6. So what are the options? A 2012 feasibility study included an upgrade labeled Option #1 which will take care of all code issues and necessary improvements for $750,000 while keeping the focus on the kids of Kensington and with no bonding required.

A NO vote on Measure L will
allow the less expensive, more sensible option to be pursued.

Jim Watt