Since I can’t fit this in on a ‘tweet’ here’s why I’m not voting for the bond:
The school district seems to take it for granted that when they ask for money everyone just gives it to them (historically, voters have given them this perception). There seems to be a lack of really justifying the funds and second look for deeper efficiencies. Specifically, the district (all districts I’m aware of, actually) always pay an architect to design a nice new building. Why not get a set of three plans (which can be updated on a 10 – 20 year basis) where you pick plan A, B, or C for the school instead of a new design each time? Nor do the designs need to be fancy (less cute, more functional, please). Then there’s also the administrative overhead that would be better spent in classrooms which I won’t go into due to time constraints.
As a side note, I don’t know who came up with the bond being ‘for the children’ but c’mon, today’s kids are the one’s who are going to be saddled with the costs of paying of the bond. Stop using kids to guilt trip people into slapping more burdens on those very children.
So I’ll vote against the bond in hopes that it is turned down and the district has to put a bit more thought in efficiency and new adaptive ideas for dealing with growth and regular operations, in general.