Posted 2 months, 4 days ago in 
Loading ...
I continue to be surprised by statements I hear on the street, read in newspapers or ramblings in the “You Said It” section of The Daily Sentinel. Statements like “don’t vote for the school bond issue because they donated $1 million to Mesa State.” These comments baffle me and cloud the issue doing this election season.
Contrary to the vocal minority, the school district did not donate $1 million to Mesa State College. A donation is the act of giving without expectation of return. In contrast, an investment is the outlay of money for future benefit. These dollars were obviously invested for the future benefit of district students.
Our community has a long record of collaborating and maximizing resources, which is envied by every other community in Colorado. Our district has been a leader in collaborations. Examples include the Orchard Mesa pool, the Bookcliff Activity Center and Western Colorado Community College, etc. saving taxpayers’ untold dollars by eliminating duplication. The investment in the Mesa State facilities is another example of that collaboration and an outstanding use of taxpayers’ dollars.
Yes, $1 million is a lot. But don’t lose sight of the return. School District 51 now has use of state-of-the-art facilities for academics, athletics, music, etc. in a central, neutral location for a fraction of the cost that it would have cost the District to build, maintain and operate.
The investment in the Mesa State project provided yet another opportunity to leverage tax dollars for the benefit of students. This investment should be recognized as an outstanding example of the School Board’s desire to maximize resources for the betterment of the students for years to come. Don’t let the vocal minority cloud reality. Be informed and vote “YES” on 3A and 3B.
MIKE STAHL
Grand Junction
3 Responses to “School District invested in Mesa State”
Posted September 30th, 2008 at 5:12 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Obviously the word is out to bond issue supporters — flood the newspaper with LTEs becuase the PR from the $1M Gift to Mesa State is hurting us.
If this was some kind of “deal”, then post the terms. What were D51 students using previously and what was being paid? And now, post “deal”, what are D51 students using and what is beig paid? If it is a “deal” for the district, the terms should be public information.
Posted October 1st, 2008 at 11:22 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mr. Stahl maintains that the school district has ‘invested’ in Mesa State. That is an interesting statement as it is doubtful as to whether the taxpayers voted to tax themselves so that the school board could use that money to ‘invest’ in a state institution. Or, has Mesa State (a state institution) now become ‘de facto’ a local taxing authority under cover of, and with the complicity, of the local school board?
This seems to reflect much more an attitude by school board and district administrators that, once they get funds, it is to be disbursed at their sole discretion (that it is their money to spend any way they see fit); i.e. it is their personal property.
This is nothing new as I am personally aware of the same thing happening in the Delta school district, where school funds were used to ’subsidize’ a private enterprise. In any private enterprise, spending monies meant for one purpose and using it for something else would not only get the individual fired, but might even result in the individual being indicted and convicted for fraud.
Why should ‘public bodies’ be subject to any less stringent rules? It would seem, to any responsible person at least, that the ‘rules’ for public bodies should be more stringent, not less.
Posted October 1st, 2008 at 11:31 am Login to Send PM Report this comment
Mr. Laitres, like a good number of other people, remembers that the extra million dollars was referred to as “unallocated funds”, therefore not needed for the school district.
He probably also remembers that less than two weeks later the school district announced a crises with the Fruita-Monument High School in need of a roof replacement for which there were no funds available. That cost was estimated at around $700,000, substantially less than the “unallocated funds” so recently done away with.
Imagine, if in your own budget, you found an extra $10,000 that was ‘unallocated’.
Would you give it away? Or would you look to see where else it could be used to improve your finances?
That would make it YOUR money, and therefore VALUABLE to you.
Obviously YOUR MONEY is not ‘valuable’ to the school district money mangers..
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.