By Dan August | Published Sunday, November 8, 2009
I hope the defeat of the school bond in Decatur this week doesn't leave the impression that somehow voters don't want to do what's best for the kids in our schools. To the contrary, I think this result speaks volumes for what I know I think and I believe others do, too. I "get it" that the district can use 100 percent of the funds from the issuance of bonds toward actual projects, but my problem is what we're being asked to spend that money toward.
I always thought that bonds should be issued for large capital improvements such as building a school or even big technology upgrades, both of which have been covered (and approved) in bonds in recent years. By contrast, 70 percent of the items covered by this week's proposed bond would have paid for "projects" such as lighting, carpet, roof repairs and locks. Of the maintenance items, the only real capital improvement item I could see were the HVAC upgrades. We do pay school taxes every year, and we do have a maintenance budget every year (don't we?) and I just wish the school board had done a better job over the years to budget for these projects, rather than hitting us with the "sticker shock" to pay for them all at once.
Regarding the stadium improvements, shouldn't this be a separate decision? If our schools are in such a state of need that we are being asked to approve bond money for paint, carpet and roof repairs, does the school board really think it's a good time to improve the football stadium? Let's set our priorities first.
