Posted by Allen, a resident of another community, on Jan 14, 2008 at 1:54 pm
Uncomfortable as it is for me to be on the same side of an issue as the Libertarians, I do think this bond issue needs more study and coverage.
First, I'd like a better handle on how the $203 million from the 4 previous bond issues (approved 1996, 2001, 2004) was spent. These bonds were issued for the same purpose - facilities upgrades, modernization, etc. There's not a lot of information available online - or at least not that I've found.
Second, I'd like more information on how they intend to spend $165 million and why it's that amount. From what I've read, $165 million was arrived at by figuring out the tax base and what voters would be willing to pay, not based on what's needed. This would also seem to be the case because the measure only lists a handful of specific projects, the others being very broad categories of spending.
Perhaps the thing that chafes me most is the arrogant way in which the "For" supporters dodged the issues raised by the "Against" camp in the Voter Information Pamphlet. Instead of clarifying or rebutting facts and figures, or giving us additional data that would show that the debt our district will be assuming is sustainable and consistent with other similar districts, they instead did a character assassination of the person who wrote the argument.
I think the sponsors of the bill are being sloppy because they think voters will automatically say 'yes' to education. Let's get more information and a higher standard of accountability before we saddle ourselves with a lot of debt.