Letter to the Editor: School Trustee Favors Sinking Fund Over $88.4 Million Bond Issue
John Conely said he believes a sinking fund and short term bonds are a better alternative than the current bond proposal, which will last 33 years.
I would like to explain a fiscally responsible position to this current proposed bond and offer an alternate solution to the facilities problems facing Brighton Area Schools. BAS is requesting up to a 33 year bond that leaves the public believing that all the school district’s needs will be covered for the next 33 years. The taxpayers will then spend another 27 years paying this bond back. In reality, we may need another bond at that time to cover what this bond doesn’t. This is not the only option.
I favor a sinking fund (a sinking fund is a fund set up to maintain our current facilities with strict usage requirements) and short term bonds that would place the debt on the people that create it and NOT on future generations. These debts would be voted on and paid for by the same public. We would know those who control the spending, our superintendent and the current school board, and would be able to hold them accountable for these repair projects and their spending. With a 33 year bond, nobody knows who will be in charge ten or twenty or thirty years in the future.
This vote will decide who will control the school spending. I believe that the taxpayers need to maintain control of the school system. If this bond passes as it’s written, the school system will control the taxpayers for the next 33 years. The voters should know that they are currently paying off bonds from 1992, 2003, and two bonds from 2005. We still owe $100 million on these bonds. They won’t be paid off until 2020-2021.
Brighton Area Schools has made great strides and is a high quality school system. We need to keep on track. Please vote on May 8, 2012.
Brighton Area School Board Trustee
Brighton Bulldog, Class of 1980