I want to be clear from the outset: I voted in favor of the Battle Ground Public Schools bond that was defeated in February, and I will vote in favor again in April.
But my “yes” votes are not without reservations.
Basically I'm not happy about approving more borrowing when we are still paying on prior debt. To me it seems like faulty planning and somewhat financially irresponsible to propose new borrowing, in this case $224 million plus about $135 million in interest, when a significant debt remains on a previously-approved bond.
For clarification, a “bond” is a term used when units of government borrow money. It's the same as borrowing money from a bank except the amounts are so large that many, many investors are needed to loan the money to governments that they need to do business.
Since 1988, district voters have approved bonds three times.
Bonds approved in 1988 raised $5 million for construction projects and incurred about $4 million in interest.
But before those bonds were paid off in 2007, bonds were approved in 1993 and raised over $21 million. In 2012, district taxpayers paid off the $21 million plus about $13.3 million in interest.
But before those bonds were paid off, voters authorized the district in 2005 to borrow another $63 million. District taxpayers are still paying on that $63 million debt plus about $36 million in interest. These bonds are scheduled to be paid off in 2023.
With several years and over $35 million to go to pay off the current debt, district officials seek approval for another, much larger bond, which voters will decide in April.
There is a pattern here: the district has repeatedly borrowed more money for construction purposes before past debts have been paid off.
That's the rub for me.
I'm all in favor of keeping facilities in good condition and meeting the demands of growing enrollment with new schools. While we could all quibble over the details of how money is spent and specific projects that are or are not built, in the big picture there seems to me to be no doubt that facilities must be worked on from time to time and that new schools must be constructed. As much as we are all tired of hearing about leaking roofs, repairs, new construction must be undertaken.
But I'd much prefer to pay off debts before committing to borrowing more money. It would seem that with adequate planning and foresight, a bond could be structured to be paid off before new money is needed. Call me naive, but I don't see how officials can continually be surprised about enrollment growth, inflation, and the need for future repairs.
Even though I feel strongly about paying off each bond before a new one is put before voters, and even though several years of payments remain on the current debt, nevertheless I voted “yes” in February and will vote “yes” again in April.
I fully appreciate the theory that future district residents should pay their fair share for new facilities rather than simply getting a free ride from taxpayers in the past who shouldered the burden of new schools and repairs. But equitable responsibility for school construction can be accomplished even better by paying off old debts before new ones are incurred, assuring that all who benefit from good schools pay their share.
The bond approvals mentioned above were sandwiched among numerous bond failures. For example, between the 1993 and 2005 votes to approve more borrowing, there were five ballot box failures. And since the 2005 approval, bond proposals have failed three times. And I can understand why.
I'm not writing to encourage anyone to vote for or against the next bond. Every person will have to decide whether the bond makes sense, is needed, and represents wise planning and solid financial management. I don't think anyone should tell others how they should vote.
My reservations about the district’s financial and facilities planning and the repeated borrowing when former debts remain unpaid do not rise to the level of a “no” vote, but others could easily see it differently.
Marvin Case may be reached at marvincase@msn.com and at 360-687-4122
