No!!! Please do not saddle our kids with more debt. That is a terrible way to finance improvements and should be reserved for only the most dire of emergencies.

Crazy - why take such a risk for just $12 million? If projects run over budget just cut out the fancy artificial turf and let our kids keep using the same play fields they've been using.

Construction costs might have gone up 8% this year, so what has the district done to mitigate that - what value engineering? Have they considered standardized design ("our kids deserve a special learning environment at each school"). How about modular construction ("you want your kid's school to be built in a factory?"). How about postponing construction until the next recession hits? We could save a lot more than $12M if we keep the cash in the bank until the economy drops. Go ahead and do all the planning; be ready to go, but why do we need to build this year?

CAB's are an irresponsible choice. Surely in the District's Planning(committee) phase and work with Master Facilities Planner along with Financial Advisory Consultants there have been discussions of 1.Project options(community input as to desirability)2.cost estimates with a reasonable cushion put in place 3. alternative funding sources?

Yet another sketchy, quasi-legal, unethical and fiscally irresponsible move by the Mountain View Whisman School District Board whose money-grubbing board members say "SPEND NOW AND PAY FOR IT AT SOME FUTURE TIME!" ... golly, sorta sounds like Wall Street before the collapse! Props to board members Mr. Nelson and Mr. Coladonato for basically calling "Bullsh*t!" and questioning the fiscal responsibility of this power grab by the rest of the ethically-challenged Mountain View Whisman School District Board members ...

Our community needs to hold Mr. Nelson and Mr. Coladonato responsible for their part in the delay in construction of these facilities. Without delays we would still have our original scope for our original budget. In this case, added transparency and community interaction has an added cost. The other board members have a reasonable solution. As to Mark above, none of the board members benefit from bond funds, so the Wall St analogy is not really appropriate.

Ixnay on the fake turf. Carcinogenic. Not worth it. Decreases percolation of winter rains down into the water table. A very bad idea.

See: Web Link

Thank god this isn't all in yet. Remove what's there.

Xnay to CABs and to Old Steve who is misstating the facts.

After thinking about this and talking to some supporters, I still believe the Board should NOT use these expensive bonds. While it is true that it is likely to be cheaper to build today than tomorrow, the limits on bond issuance exist for good reason. It is too easy to spend other people's money, especially when you can mortgage their future to do it, so limits are important. The CABs are an expensive end-run around those limits, and should not be used. The project should be scaled back to fit the amount of money available.

This situation is not unlike a homeowner asking a bank for money to remodel. The bank won't lend more than the house is worth. Would a responsible homeowner go to the loan shark to get more money, or build more modestly?

"To get around that, the district can instead use capital appreciation bonds, or CABs, which don't require repayment of the principal or the interest for decades."

This is a VERY BAD IDEA, whoever came up this this should be fired, IMMEDIATELY.

"
There is an old saying, “If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is.”

Several years ago, voters in Poway agreed to let local officials borrow $100 million to complete modernization of aging schools. It sounded like a sweet deal because they were promised this would be done without a tax increase.

As it turns out, this was the sort of deal one would usually expect to be offered by a loan shark accompanied by “associates” who favor forty-five caliber automatics.

Normally, when local governments and school districts use bonds to borrow money, the repayment with interest amounts to approximately double the face value of the bond. Borrow $100 million and expect to repay $200 million dollars over 20 to 30 years. But when Poway school officials cut a deal with a financial institution to issue what is called a Capital Appreciation Bond (CAB), payments were not scheduled to begin for 20 years with the total to be repaid in 40 years. The cost to local taxpayers? $1,000,000,000! That’s right, one billion dollars, ten times the amount borrowed.

What would possess officials to make such a deal? Stupidity? Incompetence? Or perhaps they suffer from the condition common to those in government: They delight in spending “OPM” (Other Peoples’ Money).
"

@ Old Steve of Rex Manor (assumed alias for Steve Sherman of Rex Manor?) may or may not run for Board this November. However - he never 2012-14 objected to the delay in Middle school construction that was caused, for instance, by abandoning permanent modularized construction of the new 6 classroom building at Graham (and a similar one at Crittenden). Let the public beware of 'I told-you SO' public policy experts like Mr. Sherman (that particular fellow has addressed the Board on similar topics).
The delay on Measure G projects, was caused by the Board and Administration in 2012 not having a viable strategic plan. The new administration at least has 'leaned in' to follow on Dr. Skelly's (Mr. Lee's) strategic planning efforts.
I disagree completely that anyone should be fired. I 92% totally agree with the latest bond financing plan (all the CIBs).

Man up Old Steve! Throw your hat in the ring for November!

Steven Nelson is an elected MVWSD Board member. One of five. These are just his opinions.