July 23, 2014 at 2:10 p.m.
Debate over projects encouraging (02/27/2009)
Editorial
Most of the time, local government is about problem-solving.
Only rarely does debate turn philosophical.
But that's where the Jay School Board found itself Monday evening, during a lengthy discussion of how best to pay for on-going improvements to school buildings.
The discussion, which was both civil and thoughtful, went on for about an hour; and because two board members were absent, the matter was tabled. So the discussion will continue, and that's a good thing.
At issue is whether it makes more sense to take on building improvement projects one at a time over a period of years or to borrow funds to make improvements at a number of schools at the same time.
Either way, funds to pay for the work will come from the school corporation's capital projects fund.
None of the projects are frivolous. They'll mostly involve things like replacing old boilers and improving heating and cooling systems.
So the focus of the debate wasn't on whether to maintain our schools properly, it was all about what Superintendent Tim Long described as "the approach."
On the one hand, use of a funding method known as Senate Bill 516, could allow the school corporation to borrow money for, say, 10 years, paying the loan off with money from the capital projects fund. Long estimates that when all buildings in the corporation are looked at the cost of needed improvements may be in the neighborhood of $3 million.
Borrowing the money and doing all the projects within a short timeframe has the advantage of locking in today's prices and solving a number of problems at once.
On the other hand, board members are uneasy about the idea of taking on additional indebtedness. Spreading the projects over a period of years seems more fiscally conservative.
It's the sort of issue where people of good sense and good will can come to completely different conclusions.
And it's encouraging to know that the debate is going on. - J.R.
[[In-content Ad]]
Only rarely does debate turn philosophical.
But that's where the Jay School Board found itself Monday evening, during a lengthy discussion of how best to pay for on-going improvements to school buildings.
The discussion, which was both civil and thoughtful, went on for about an hour; and because two board members were absent, the matter was tabled. So the discussion will continue, and that's a good thing.
At issue is whether it makes more sense to take on building improvement projects one at a time over a period of years or to borrow funds to make improvements at a number of schools at the same time.
Either way, funds to pay for the work will come from the school corporation's capital projects fund.
None of the projects are frivolous. They'll mostly involve things like replacing old boilers and improving heating and cooling systems.
So the focus of the debate wasn't on whether to maintain our schools properly, it was all about what Superintendent Tim Long described as "the approach."
On the one hand, use of a funding method known as Senate Bill 516, could allow the school corporation to borrow money for, say, 10 years, paying the loan off with money from the capital projects fund. Long estimates that when all buildings in the corporation are looked at the cost of needed improvements may be in the neighborhood of $3 million.
Borrowing the money and doing all the projects within a short timeframe has the advantage of locking in today's prices and solving a number of problems at once.
On the other hand, board members are uneasy about the idea of taking on additional indebtedness. Spreading the projects over a period of years seems more fiscally conservative.
It's the sort of issue where people of good sense and good will can come to completely different conclusions.
And it's encouraging to know that the debate is going on. - J.R.
[[In-content Ad]]
Top Stories
9/11 NEVER FORGET Mobile Exhibit
Chartwells marketing
September 17, 2024 7:36 a.m.
Events
250 X 250 AD