This is NOT about the Need for a New High School
Let’s be clear. The need for a new High School, or at a minimum, more HS capacity is real, understood, and supported. Elementary School capacity will be needed – although there are some legitimate questions about whether rezoning could delay the development of one or both of the Elementary schools.
The argument being taken is not anti-school capacity. It is not anti-student. It is about the lack of financial due diligence, transparency and accountability currently shown by the Administration, the Long-Range Facilities Planning Committee and the Board of Trustees (should they pass the $703M bond proposal on Wednesday night).
This is not 2018. There are more eyes on government spending and government policy than ever before. We are going to review the details, ask hard questions, revolt against the censorship that Committee members are using on the FB 2022 LTISD Bond “Information” page, and work toward making sure our tax dollars are truly being used prudently and responsibly on must-haves that impact core education and academic enriching needs.
That is what this dialog is about.
The argument being taken is not anti-school capacity. It is not anti-student. It is about the lack of financial due diligence, transparency and accountability currently shown by the Administration, the Long-Range Facilities Planning Committee and the Board of Trustees (should they pass the $703M bond proposal on Wednesday night).
This is not 2018. There are more eyes on government spending and government policy than ever before. We are going to review the details, ask hard questions, revolt against the censorship that Committee members are using on the FB 2022 LTISD Bond “Information” page, and work toward making sure our tax dollars are truly being used prudently and responsibly on must-haves that impact core education and academic enriching needs.
That is what this dialog is about.