Reagan

LOL!! Yeah, I just found out Ol' Buttigieg is a homosexual. The Dems can't help themselves, can they?! Of course, he'll fit in with the rest of circus!

OK -- I'll bite, where's the proof?

Fair enough. At least you answered!

Sorry, don't do Facebook. Klein gets information, like these receipts, from people who are concerned about wasting taxpayers dollars. Anyway, I think we may be talking about 2 different meetings. If we are going to talk we need to be talking about the same thing. I'm talking about the Bond CAC meetings to discuss putting the bond together. These specific meetings were held on: 9-13-18, 10-22-18, 11-5-18, 12-11-18, 1-10-19, and 2-6-19. These are the ones that the tax dollars were spent for food. I'm not talking about the later tours that were held at different schools for the public. Now, I hope that's clear. I'll ask again -- should taxpayers dollars have funded this food to the tune of over $2,700? I also understand that it didn't stop there. More on that later. BTW -- I hear the spewing of "crap," as you put it, on Facebook is mainly done by the pro-bond people!

Again, there's no history on here that would state that I think the principle was anything other than $156,000,000. Again -- the tack on more was the difference between 86 and 156. Since it's confusing some, I'll admit I could have added the words "up to". I'll concede that. But, it doesn't change the meaning! There's no indications by past comments that I believed that the bond would be more than $156,000,000.

I see you also look at Klein's website. Hey, two computers are better than nothing. There's other things that were mentioned that that money could have been used for. Now, how about addressing whether it's right to spend taxpayers dollars for food for these meetings? There's no debate that it was done because there are receipts showing the fact. My only question, was it right?

It is my understanding that the school district paid out $2,765 for food and drink at 6 different bond CAC meetings. Now, my question is, is this normal? Shouldn't this food be provided with private money. Maybe the district was reimbursed privately? But let's say the district did fund this. Seems like to me a district in such bad shape could have used this money for some technology upgrades. Maybe some supplies for teachers. Maybe the maint dept could have made some minor repairs.

LOL! Nobody thought the total was over $156,000,000! Well, the principle anyway. Now, plus interest, that's a different story. Again -- no where in the past have I stated that principle amount was anything other than the massive amount of $156,000,000. So, why would I change on one comment?

I bet you won't!

Your opinion! We shall see who is right May 4th!

Nice try again, but... The "tack on more" is the difference between the 86 Mill and the 156 Mill with the tune being $156,000,000. Always glad to help people understand!

Not to say that it wasn't, but I never saw a notice advertising these meetings. If they were, where were they advertised?

Come on, that 86 mill was part of the 156 mill. I never said otherwise. SMH!

I thought I saw the break down of cost and the total cost of the school part was 86 mill. But, I stand corrected. On the 1st page the cost was stated at $82,700,000. I was off by less that 4 Mill. I heard the total cost of the bond, with interest, would be between $230,000,000 and $240,000,000.

I had forgot how massive the 2009 bond was defeated. It was 3252-853. I’m sure the school board and the CAC, who for some reason didn’t want the membership list exposed, sat around and wondered what it would take to move any of the 3252 over to the pro-bond side. So their solution was: take the newest school and demolish it to the tune of around $86,000,000. Then, for good measure, tact on more to the tune of $156,000,000. With interest — it’ll be around $240,000,000 total! When it’s all said and done, I think the silent majority will prevail and defeat this. As of right now, I see it going down 60-40. And that may be conservative!

Nederland’s educational system will be excellent whether this massive bond passes or fails. Whether some choose to believe it or not.

No political ads are allowed on the site. Thanks

[Hidden Content]

[Hidden Content]

I'm sure, but not 100% positive, Bob Meeks told the board and the CAC to be as benign as possible with the cost verbage. This may be why we hear that repeated again and again.

Actually I did read it. I read it again. The interest rate is based on the district's bond rating. Unless someone can officially say, I can only presume that an interest rate has already been implied to the district. Is this how you see it? If that's the case, fair enough. So, on the other hand, if the interest rate is all ready in place, then the total bond cost should also be able to be implied. Correct?