Earlier this month, a "collective of volunteer advocates dedicated to advancing and enriching Beaverton Rural Schools and our community" launched a web site called "Beaverton One," meant to provide information for people about the Beaverton Rural Schools Bond Extension Proposal.
They also have a Facebook Page, and a Twitter. But just a few posts in - Radio Silence.
Perhaps it's because those of us who do not think a 15-year, 9-month extension of a bond that is set to expire after 20 years is a good idea took a few opportunities to express our views; because we hope that the committee and the taxpayers will take a moment or two and consider other alternatives, like a Sinking Fund.
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sinking_fund)
We can only surmise, since our comments were deleted in the beginning, and the pages have basically gone inactive, that a discussion is not what the committee wants.
Perhaps all they want is to offer a static web site with their own propaganda, and a link to that site from their social media accounts.
We don't think that's fair. We think discussion - no matter whether you are for or against the issue - is not only healthy but necessary.
We're not here because we want to see the school continue to deteriorate (see the photos in the gallery at beavertonone.com). On the contrary, we want to see the much-needed repairs be made, despite the unspoken yet obvious implication on the web site that if you don't want to B1, you must fall into some category in opposition to "an ever-expanding list of people and organizations in the community who are on board with BeavertonOne and its mission to advance and enrich Beaverton Rural Schools and our community."
In our case, nothing could be further from the truth. We want to foster a successful community and school system, and part of that what leads us to that success is careful examination of our options.
We see the bond extension as an unnecessary and lengthy burden. We see the sinking fund as a better option for our community.
Normally, most school construction and improvements are paid for with bonds, which is really borrowing money. We have to pay that money back with interest and fees, and have a special tax dedicated to paying off each bond. Because it's complicated, schools usually only use bonds for major projects every 10 to 20 years. That makes sense for new structures and additions, but not so much for things like roof replacement or heating system upgrades.
The sinking fund allows our schools to pay for these kind of smaller renovations as we go, without having to borrow money or pay interest. It also means that we're not letting our schools deteriorate for ten or fifteen years while we wait for a new bond project.
But we're not looking for your blind acceptance and "stakeholder buy-in" here. We don't want to put your name on a list (like this: http://www.beavertonone.com/whos-with-us/). (Although we're a bit miffed on why Beaverton Rural Schools are being contacted by folks who ended up on the list without their knowledge.)
All we want to do is share information. We want to foster discussion. We invite you to come to Beaverton Free and share your own information, ask questions, or just read if you want... We will not shut down discussions that are productive and relevant. This process affects all of us, and DESERVES healthy community dialogue.
So come read with us, learn with us, discuss with us. Click on our page below.
Like our page: https://www.facebook.com/Beavertonfree.
No comments:
Post a Comment