In the past, our community has shown that it will pay to support our children’s education. We passed Measures T (80 percent) and EE (74 percent). But we don't want to spend more than necessary.
When a School Board member tells us not to give Measure CC’s financing a second thought, he sounds like a fast-talking salesman urging you to sign his contract and not worry about the fine print.
Second Bond Needed
Mathematically, with $165M in School District needs, even with passage of the $106M Measure CC another bond must be passed. Why did School Board members choose to propose their larger, more costly $106M bond figure now and not the simple, straight forward, more predictable, $72M sweet spot? Had they proposed the sweet spot first, 10 years from now, after the first $72M had been spent, our assessed valuation would have had a chance to grow another 50 percent, to $12.5B. Then the School Board safely could have proposed an affordable $100M bond.
Still Waiting
School Board members need to be asked why, for the last four months, they have avoided publicly discussing the bond’s thorny, public financing. Is it because Measure CC’s financing cannot withstand public scrutiny? Is it because their Measure CC will cost our community more than it should? They have had 120 days to fully inform the community about their bond. If they are not going to be fiscally truthful with the community, then …
Just say no to Measure CC.
Mr. Laase may be contacted at GMLaase@aol.com
