BISD bond initiative already in peril
The Beaumont school district's efforts to fix a bleak facilities picture already has shown troubling signs of a cracking foundation.
The bond proposal - almost a half decade overdue - has created disturbing divisions in the planning committee. The committee recently voted 18-5 to hold the bond election in May, but co-chairman Dr. David Teuscher, a dissenter, said he felt "steamrolled" by the group's shift from consensus to majority-rule.
At a meeting last week, committee members bickered over various aspects of the bond issue, such as whether a vote should be held in May or November. Committee members are divided along racial lines.
Meanwhile, the bond's humongous size - about $450 million - is going to take some serious marketing and explaining to be palatable for taxpayers. As it stands, the bond proposal has a feeling of being rushed, reckless and controversial.
Beaumont school trustees must decide by March 12 whether to put the bond issue on the May ballot.
As it stands, the bond effort is rife with conflict when it should be a community rallying point. This community needs better facilities, no question.
The school district's failed 2002 bond issue - which was only $150 million - went down due to being poorly marketed and overambitious. It should have been broken into two parts: Bond A with the essential needs and Bond B with the essential needs plus bells and whistles such as athletic upgrades. Bond B approval negates Bond A.
Now, athletic upgrades and a 1,000-seat Ozen auditorium are being proposed for the new bond issue, thereby making it critical for the district to divide the bond issue into at least two parts and give voters a choice.
Otherwise, this bond issue most likely will be doomed to failure, perhaps costing the district even more millions upon millions in inflation-related constructions expenses if and when a sensible, well-planned bond issue makes it onto the ballot and gains voter approval.
The bond proposal - almost a half decade overdue - has created disturbing divisions in the planning committee. The committee recently voted 18-5 to hold the bond election in May, but co-chairman Dr. David Teuscher, a dissenter, said he felt "steamrolled" by the group's shift from consensus to majority-rule.
At a meeting last week, committee members bickered over various aspects of the bond issue, such as whether a vote should be held in May or November. Committee members are divided along racial lines.
Meanwhile, the bond's humongous size - about $450 million - is going to take some serious marketing and explaining to be palatable for taxpayers. As it stands, the bond proposal has a feeling of being rushed, reckless and controversial.
Beaumont school trustees must decide by March 12 whether to put the bond issue on the May ballot.
As it stands, the bond effort is rife with conflict when it should be a community rallying point. This community needs better facilities, no question.
The school district's failed 2002 bond issue - which was only $150 million - went down due to being poorly marketed and overambitious. It should have been broken into two parts: Bond A with the essential needs and Bond B with the essential needs plus bells and whistles such as athletic upgrades. Bond B approval negates Bond A.
Now, athletic upgrades and a 1,000-seat Ozen auditorium are being proposed for the new bond issue, thereby making it critical for the district to divide the bond issue into at least two parts and give voters a choice.
Otherwise, this bond issue most likely will be doomed to failure, perhaps costing the district even more millions upon millions in inflation-related constructions expenses if and when a sensible, well-planned bond issue makes it onto the ballot and gains voter approval.
posted by Brian Pearson at 10:31 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home