There is no doubt about it. The community wants to upgrade our schools.
District Didn't Listen
But why did the School Board start with a $106M bond and not a smaller bond first, such as the $70M to $80M suggested by community members at the School District’s earlier outreach meetings? Why not start with a more modest bond the community could actually afford, without all the payback gimmicks? Then when our assessed valuation grows over the next 10 years, put forth a second bond to complete the work.
Backward Funding
Having the Board’s consultant resort to modifying the repayment schedule by adding 20 years of interest-only payments early in the repayment schedule shows that they are fitting the community to the bond, not the bond to our town’s resources.
Why would our locally elected officials do something so fiscally unsound?
Lack of Fiscal Restraint
Board members seem to think it was wise to put our small town into a quarter-billion dollars debt. Looking at their modified $106M bond proposal, I doubt some of them personally reflect the long-held conservative fiscal values of our community.
Their Bond, Now a Problem
Is the Board’s $106M bond proposal the best fit for our resources?
The Board’s oversized bond with its ballooning $200 million total community price tag has become a fiscal impediment to fixing our schools. The Board’s decision to propose such a bond has made it even more problematic for voters to pass it. Their proposal is another problem, not part of the solution.
The Last Say
Do we, as a community, really want to have anything to do with the Board’s ill-advised bond?
Thank goodness, the voters/taxpayers will have the final say in the matter next June.
Mr. Laase may be contacted at GMLaase@aol.com
