School bond proposals deserve our support

The last time Oxford Community Schools asked voters for more money this newspaper wrote, ‘We strongly recommend voters REJECT the school bond proposal, then let the district come back and ask them for what it really needs, not what it wants.? To its credit, the district did exactly what we asked.
The $33.37 million in bond proposals facing voters on the Tuesday, Nov. 3 ballot represent a 52 percent reduction from the pork-filled $70.135 million bond issue rejected by the public in late February.
A 52 percent decrease means less dollars taken out of taxpayers? wallets and purses, which is always music to our ears.
A 52 percent cut means the district actually listened to the public this time instead of just telling us what it wants.
A 52 percent reduction means this newspaper, in good conscience, can support the bond proposals.
Most of this proposal focuses on the real nuts and bolts of what it takes to keep the school district going ? roofs, mechanical and electrical infrastructure, repairs, technology, doors, energy-efficient windows, etc.
It’s much more modest and basic than the failed proposal. As taxpayers, we can certainly appreciate and applaud that.
We also like that, unlike the last time, the district and its supporters weren’t running around telling everybody and his brother that this is not a tax increase. Although the annual tax levy will remain at 7 mills to pay off the bond debt, voters are being asked to pay an extra 10 years, which is most definitely a tax increase, no matter how you slice it.
Paying longer is paying more.
Granted, there are still some things we think the district could live without in these bonds such as constructing supposedly ‘safe and secure? entrances at every single school building.
To us, these entrances are a huge waste of money ? $1.059 million to be exact ? because they merely create the illusion of safety and security. They won’t really accomplish anything in our opinion; they’ll just make some parents feel better.
If a local madman, Islamic terrorist or disgruntled individual really wanted to get inside our schools to do some damage, these supposedly ‘safe and secure? entrances would do very little, if anything, to stop them.
Should a student decide to carry out an act of violence ? the real danger in any school ? these entrances will do absolutely nothing to stop him or her because they’re already inside the building.
But we realize no proposal is perfect and whenever the words ‘safety? and ‘kids? are combined, no matter how ridiculous or unnecessary the idea is, anyone who offers an opposing view is immediately chastised for not caring about the welfare of students.
Overall, we believe the school district did a very good job scaling back their bond requests to something much more reasonable and palatable to taxpayers.
We believe both bond proposals deserve support this time and urge voters to mark ‘yes? on their ballots. ? CJC