OCTOBER 24, 2025
Letter to the Telegraph-Herald Editor
Used with permission by Kim Adams / submitted to the Vote No Dubuque School Bond Committee by Kim Adams
Vote no for better solutions, fiscal responsibility, and transparency.
First and foremost, a “no” vote on the school bond referendum does not mean you do not support our children, our schools, or their future. I have never heard anyone supporting the “no” vote suggest we should “do nothing.” In fact, it’s quite the opposite.
A “no” vote means we believe there are better, more responsible ways to improve our schools without burdening families with higher taxes for the next 23 years. We can look to the beautifully renovated Dubuque Senior High School — an impressive update to a 100-year-old building — completed without bond money. That project was funded entirely through SAVE (Secure an Advanced Vision for Education) dollars.
Did you know the one-cent SAVE sales tax, which supports school infrastructure, no longer requires a public vote for renewal and has already been extended until 2051? This shows there are sufficient SAVE funds to make Washington Middle School renovation safe, efficient and equitable for students — without raising property taxes.
Meanwhile, district enrollment is declining and expected to continue decreasing, meaning difficult decisions about consolidation will still be necessary regardless of this bond vote’s outcome.
Finally, one question remains unanswered: why has the Dubuque Community School Board not explained how a renovation of Washington could cost $100 million when Dubuque Senior — nearly four times larger school — was renovated for $65 million?
Vote no for better solutions, fiscal responsibility, and transparency.
Kim Adams, Green Crest Court
[Paywalled.]
OCTOBER 12, 2025
Letter to the Telegraph-Herald Editor
Used with permission by Paul Kern / submitted to the Vote No Dubuque School Bond Committee by Paul Kern
Why the Vote No School Bond Committee believes you should Vote No on November 4th on the School Bond for Washington Middle School.
The School District would have you believe that the only viable option is to tear down Washington and build a new school for $121.9 million dollars. They reference a cost of $109 million dollars for remodeling the school, but have not provided any details to support that amount. Why do they lack transparency?
It's tough to believe that the School District could remodel Dubuque Senior High for $64 million over two phases, using SAVE Funds, but for a smaller footprint at Washington, the cost would be $109 million. We believe that Washington can be renovated/updated for an amount closer to what was spent on Senior High, with no tax increase, using SAVE funds while maintaining the historic look of the school.
The Vote No Committee has formally requested the comprehensive report from Ms. Hawkins and the School District concerning the potential renovations of Washington Middle School. We specifically requested the following detail:
- The need for additional classrooms
- Any required additions to the existing structure
- Structural updates necessary to improve the facility
- Land acquisitions that may be needed
- Mechanical updates planned as part of the renovation
- Access to the physical reports from the School District. [These should detail all components included in the estimate for renovating Washington Middle School.
- Total number of students that Washington Middle School will need to accommodate after renovation
- Historical data on the total number of students who have attended either Washington Junior High or Washington Middle School in any given year and does the proposed new structure take into account the declining enrollment numbers for Washington/Jefferson Middle School, in comparison to remodeling the current campus
- Current debt load for the District, and how will the proposed bond—combined with borrowing against the SAVE fund—affect the future ability to finance other structural improvements at additional schools
- How the renovation process would impact student attendance, particularly regarding the need for students to attend a different school during the construction period
We are deeply concerned about how a new school will impact the neighborhood. The change in traffic patterns and the impact on those homes that will be removed to make room for the school & facilities are significant. One family, who has lived in their home for the past 50 years, well into their golden years, has remodeled it to make it completely accessible to people with disabilities. They will need to relocate, with no guarantee of sufficient funds from the sale to the District to replace what they have in a neighborhood of their choice.
Lombard and the neighboring streets were never designed to accommodate the increased traffic and parking that will result from the new school. The bus traffic exiting onto Grandview, with limited space between its entry and the stoplight, will only add to the already congested intersection.
The District has stated they expect to save up to $2.5 million in operating expenses with the closure of Jefferson and from building the new school. While this might be true, what they fail to tell you is that the interest rate paid on the bonds will far exceed any savings and will only result in additional expense. Assuming a modest 4% interest rate on the sale of both bonds, this would be $4.876 million on the $121.9 million, offsetting any suggested savings.
- Why isn’t a remodel economically feasible?
- Why do we need a new larger school when enrollments are declining?
- Why do we need to displace current homeowners who don’t want to move?
- Why burden the taxpayers with the increased property taxes when the remodel could be done with SAVE Funds?
These are some of the main reasons why we are opposed to building the new school at a projected cost of $121.9 million.
Visit our Website at https://votenodbq.com or our Facebook page at Vote No DBQ School Bond Issue. We urge you to join us in our efforts to seek transparency and make an informed decision about the future of our community.
Paul Kern, South Grandview
[Paywalled.]
OCTOBER 10, 2025
Letter to the Telegraph-Herald Editor
Used with permission by William Hammel / submitted to the Vote No Dubuque School Bond Committee by William Hammel
Too many questions surround school bond
We are being asked to approve the spending of some $121 million for the combining of Jefferson and Washington Middle Schools. Before we vote, we should consider and demand the answers to the following questions:
- What is the interest cost of $121 million?
- If both schools are experiencing decreased enrollment; where is the need for any additional facilities?
- Since you have made known that Jefferson is closing no matter what; why the need for a completely new facility?
- What, if any, are the costs of additional land for a new facility?
- What are the plans to deal with additional traffic in an already congested area?
- What are the additional costs of increased busing?
- Since the amount of students will be the same, where is there any decrease in the number of teachers required?
- Where is the decreased cost in teacher salaries?
- Since the same number of meals will be required, where is there any decrease in the cost of food preparation and serving?
- Where and what is the cost of maintenance and maintenance personnel?
These are but a few questions that deserve answers.
I, for one, question the need for this facility. The need for and cost of such a facility have not, and I seriously doubt can be, justified.
I urge a “no” vote.
William Hammel, Jaeger Drive
[Paywalled.]
OCTOBER 8, 2025
Voices of the Tri-States:
a Conversation with Cindy Kohlman
This Voices of the Tri-States episode aired on KDTH (1370 AM) with Paul Kern, Chair of the Vote No Committee. Kohlman and Kern discussed some of the reasons why the Vote No School Bond Committee is opposed to the Yes Vote for a $121,9 00,000 new school.
- $70,000,000 General Obligation Bond, and
- $51,900,000 borrowed against future revenue from the SAVE Fund.
Listen below.
OCTOBER 3, 2025
Letter to the Telegraph-Herald Editor
Used with permission by Craig Reber / submitted to the Vote No Dubuque School Bond Committee by Craig Reber
Vote no on Nov. 4. Yes for Dubuque Schools unveiled a slick campaign in August to sell voters on a $70 million school bond. About the same time I received my property tax bill. Wow, what timing!
I recalled the Dubuque City Council voted for a property tax increase in March — not listening to many of us residents who opposed it.
Now we have choice: Do we really want another property tax increase? Yes for Dubuque Schools conveniently doesn’t mention anything about a property tax increase in its campaign to sway the public. Tune it out. Renters aren’t immune either. Your landlord will pass that tax increase on to you. Vote no for common sense.
Craig Reber, White Street
[Paywalled.]
SEPTEMBER 30, 2025
Vote No Group Asks for
a Middle School Renovation Estimate
by John Rhodes
A group of Dubuque School District voters who have organized the Vote No campaign opposed to the $70-million-dollar referendum are asking the Dubuque Community School Board* to provide a cost estimate of what it would be to renovate Washington Middle School.
Vote No campaign leader Paul Kern says they believe remodeling the building would come at a much smaller price tag and cost to tax payers than the estimated nearly $122-million dollars to tear down Washington and build a new facility combining Washington and Jefferson.
Kern cites the recent multi-phase renovation of Dubuque Senior High as an example which cost approximately 64-million dollars and is also a building over 100 years old.