Bond issue needs to be debated

Over the last two years I have researched and prepared an alternative which would only cost $11.6 million instead of $44.8 million proposed with this (Cheney High School) bond. This alternative would provide additional classrooms, safety, circulation and a new alternate high school.

I have repeatedly challenged the school district and the Yes Committee to debate. They refused prior to the first running of this bond and now have again repeated this refusal. Has it become OK with voters that there does not need to be an open discussion and vetting of bond issues? As one board member said, “We don’t have to debate.” If you vote “yes” then she is right. They don’t.

But is that what you really want? This from a district that teaches debate and has people with PhDs and masters degrees, and yet no one will debate the issues. I was willing to purchase time at the Wren Pierson Building or any place of their choosing but no takers.

It is now up to you the voters. Can they send out vague information at our expense and other promotions by the Yes Committee paid for by contractors that have worked for the district? Is enough information available in slick bright blue door hangers, signs and post cards that basically just say vote yes?

It is only acceptable if you the voters accept it. The vote goes to those who can spend the most money.

Is it logical for a lunch room that is posted for 320 to have only 124 chairs, for all bused students to be dropped off across the student parking lot instead of right at the school, to put the secretaries as the front line guardians against intruders, to build an auditorium with a cost of $20,000 per seat, to tax parents out of their homes and for the superintendent to move out of Cheney to an old missile base which costs more to maintain than the Fisher Building did?

Maybe debating issues is too old fashioned.

Bill Johns

Cheney