A Bond Debate in the middle of Summer? Oh, Prudence, we need you!

Just a few days ago, a slick piece from the Superintendent with pictures of what seem like decaying school facilities came in the mail. I quickly interrupted my summer and opened those emails from the parent yahoo group I had neglected. Much to my surprise, there was a healthy debate going about whether our District was prepared to put a bond measure on the ballot to pay for facilities improvements.

I decided it was time to read up on the issue. There had been, I learned, one community meeting and a survey of likely voters. Despite this, three of five Board members had voted not to put the measure on the ballot, even though they supported the need for investing in facilities, perhaps even, by putting a bond measure on the ballot.  But they felt that there were many questions were left unanswered. (read Karlo Silbiger's speech)

What seems to be at issue is the speed at which this process is moving.  Some feel that in the past, putting a measure on the ballot has been done more carefully, that the community has been engaged more thoughtfully.  Others argue that the current process is long enough, that we are ready.  

When the  process was challenged, even the Superintendent who previously supported it, understood that the Board is not objecting to the measure and is willing to slow down and do it right, to make sure that everyone is invested and willing to support it. In this article on Frontline, La Rose states "To do something this significant, this important, we want people to speak with great confidence, not only about the need but the manner in which we are going to address it."

As a parent with kids in both CCMS and CCHS, a homeowner, a senior-to-be, and an active voter, I applaud the Board members that are taking this matter seriously and being prudent.   When you are talking about a measure that we will pay for over 29 years, you better believe I expect them to.  I especially appreciate that they are concerned about the impact the bond will have on seniors.  If you think about it, over the life of the bond, many of us will fall in that category.

But I also think the three Board members are showing foresight in taking this matter seriously. The additional time will allow more people to learn about what is at stake. We can never be in a hurry when it comes to making long term decisions.

What most helped me in understanding why time is important is the article that appeared in the Los Angeles Times (see link below). It made me reflect on whether we may become part of a trend of cities that are at risk of making costly decisions, causing legislators to call for bond reform.

I'm looking forward to learning more about what all is at stake when we are all back from summer! 

School bond reforms sought: Critics say districts' use of underwriters to campaign is unfair to opponents and, ultimately, taxpayers.
http://articles.latimes.com/2013/jun/03/local/la-me-bond-donations-20130603