Of course School Board members and their supporters want you to stay focused on their $106M Measure CC.
They don't want you thinking about or comparing it with our earlier, fiscally straight-forward Measure T with its sound financing and simplified repayment schedule. That’s because, their Measure CC’s repayment schedule is much more convoluted.
Sales Pitch
Board member Dr. Steve Levin replied to letter-writer John Derevlany (“Nothing Confusing About the Bond Measure”) saying that interest rates are at historic lows. A quick check of municipal interest rates for the past five years show historic lows were actually reached in 2011-12. They have moved up by about 1.5 percent in the last two or three years. At that time, economic climates in California and the nation were not compatible with school districts asking local communities to pass municipal bonds, no matter how great the need.
So Dr. Levin’s statement on the status of interest rates being at historic levels sounds positively encouraging. How else would you expect a School Board member to sound about his own bond? It should be seen, though, as a sales pitch rather than factually correct.
Devil Is in the Details
The bond election committee will continue to drum home their selling point of $48 per $100K until the last vote is cast. They want to indoctrinate voters to get them to pass the board’s $106M bond.
I, on the other hand, want voters to know, beyond the upcoming repetitive bond hype, the overall effect of this bond on our small community. Then they can make up their own minds.
A Bird in the Hand …
There were two approaches our School Board could have taken in choosing the size of their bond: (a) Proposed an amount they knew would easily pass or (b) proposed a higher amount they thought they could convince the community to pass. The latter proposal is where we find ourselves.
Personal Philosophy
Having this School Board choose to put our community into a quarter-billion dollars debt, doesn’t seem to reflect the past fiscal conservatism of Culver City. The public should have quizzed all the Board candidates during the campaign about their own personal monetary principles. They should have asked whether they paid off their credit card balances every month or just paid the minimum monthly balance. Or maybe asked for their personal credit ratings?
The Art of Persuasion
Were some School Board members persuaded by the School District’s bond consultant to go for the higher amount rather than possibly leaving funding on the table? A quarter-percent difference in the consultant’s payout between an $80M bond and a $106M one is about $65,000. That might be worth the consultant's while to convince the Board they should go for a larger amount.
A Fundamental Change
We need to fix our schools, but at what price to our community? Did some Board members, with their pent-up frustrations to get a bond on June’s ballot, lose sight of the community’s overall financial picture?
Measure CC will fundamentally change our community. We will no longer be one of L.A. County's most fiscal conservative communities.
We want to fix our schools, but at what price? It will be more than the $48 per $100K sales-pitch you will be hearing from Measure CC supporters in the next few weeks.
Mr. Laase may be contacted at GMLaase@aol.com
