Dear Editor:
(In response to: ‘District under budget with school bond projects moving forward,? The Citizen, Nov. 15, page 1). After reading the article I had to read it three more times to make sure I didn’t miss something. I then reviewed the information concerning the 20-year bond for $73 millon, which with interest is actually $124 million and that doesn’t include other long-term debt of over $30 million.
My first issue: how was the planned expenses for the needed bond proposal came in $28 million under budget? That’s 38 percent of the bond. Was the $72 million inflated or was it just a mistake?
Do we have options on how the $28 million will be spent? According to Jamie Cowan, executive director of fiscal affairs for the Brandon School district, we do. We can pay down the bond debt or spend it. He has elected to spend it. He already has a wish list. This is the same attitude as our politicians who met at the White House this past weekend and served $300 a bottle of wine while they discussed how to get us out of the financial mess were in.
I am not suggesting that paying down the debt is the correct action, but seeing how fast the $28 million can be spent is irresponsible. The bond issue is specific as to how the funds can be spent, but I do not believe bond language requires that it all be spent now.
My opinion is that the funds should be used over a period of years as absolute infrastructure needs arise; not to fulfill someone’s wish list and then go after another bond proposal for future needs.
Tough times out there. But I guess not when you’re spending taxpayer dollars.
Tom Harrelson
Brandon Township