Posted 1 year, 0 months ago in 
Loading ...
I am writing to urge a “No” vote on the requests from the School District and the city of Grand Junction to plunge us into $300 million of debt. In recent weeks, we have seen our economy show signs of coming apart. The root problem seems to be that those with the power have developed a cavalier attitude toward borrowing and lending money. Those in power locally seem to have adopted the same attitude.
While the size of the debt is in itself a concern, the bigger concern is the fact that taxpayers are not being given all of the facts.
Since June, I have been requesting and receiving information from the School District regarding the specifics of the debt that resulted from projects approved by voters in 2004. I have reason to believe that the same process will be repeated in 2008.
In 2004, voters approved $109 million of debt. Soon after the election, the School District sold bonds and, without public disclosure, raised $116 million. This neat trick was accomplished by paying interest rates that were higher than market rates. This extra $7 million is not free. We taxpayers are going to get to pay it all back; we will just call it interest instead of principal.
The city’s proposals show the same disrespect for the taxpayer that is shown at the School District. If you read the ballot questions carefully, you can see that approval gives the city tremendous power to put us all in debt. But they don’t say how much debt, how much interest will be paid, what might happen in an economic down turn, etc, etc.
It is unfortunate that this information, and much more, has not already been disclosed to the public by our local media. Both local newspapers have declined the opportunity to disclose the facts. The lack of transparency in government debt issuance will continue until the press forces behavior changes or we have a financial calamity.
DENNIS J. SIMPSON
Grand Junction
One Response to “Vote ‘No’ on public-safety issue and school-district bond request”
Posted October 23rd, 2008 at 2:03 pm Login to Send PM Report this comment
Letter writer Dennis J. Simpson accuses District 51 Board members of a “cavalier attitude toward borrowing and lending money”. He then accuses the city council of “disrespect for the taxpayer”. In both cases he is way off the mark. In both cases dedicated elected public servants have seen necessities and have devised a way to deal with them. Mr.Simpson may disagree with the necessity for the ballot issues but calling the elected people charged with doing the public’s business, in effect, incompetent, insensitive and dishonest is uncalled for.
I can’t speak to the financial affairs of District 51 other than to say I believe the board and urge a Yes vote on both measures.
I do know something about the city’s Questions 2A & 2B. The language of 2A states that taxes will be increased by a precise $5,129,091 in 2009 and every year thereafter plus whatever sales tax revenue results from a 1/4 percent increase in sales tax. What is so imprecise about that? Where is the smokescreen? It has been publicized widely that the city is seeking to bond an amount of $98 million. The city may or may not be able to secure such a bond in the current atmosphere and getting a reasonable interest rate is up in the air. Nobody gives a guarantee on interest rates and terms in advance of a ballot issue because too much time elapses between seeking a bond and getting an approval to move ahead after a vote. I have confidence that the city fathers will not move ahead in the event of the issue’s approval unless the financial circumstances make sense. Whatever the amount of the bond and interest rate, the amount of taxes is fixed by the measure people will vote on. Can anybody answer Mr.Simpson’s question as to what happens in an economic turndown? Does he expect that, somehow, the debt will be forgiven, the terms changed or the interest reduced?
If Mr.Simpson’s motivation is to just discourage more taxes–any taxes–that’s his prerogative but he is way out of line to derogate honest elected neighbors donating their time to do the business of all of us.
Regardless what happens economically in the next few years the needs of District 51 and the city will remain and cost much more in the future. When voting you will undoubtedly take uncertainty into consideration but the need is there now and the people who decided to put the public’s needs on the ballot are honest, intelligent citizens doing a thankless job. Implying that they are anything other than that is nonsense and way out of line.
Vote Yes on Questions 2A & 2B, 3A &3B
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.