About this Bond

---

Those that imply that a No Vote on this bond means we don't care about the safety of children and those working within the buildings are making decisions based on emotions and not facts.  The cost to improve the safety of our existing school buildings should not cost 31.5 milion plus 33 million in interest.  

The plans are too costly!  $31.5 million plus $33 million in interest makes this a $64.5 million commitment over the next thirty years.  We still have at least 2 more years to pay on our last bond vote. 

• The last bond was for $8.77 million and to paid over 20 years,  and the state paid 20% of that bond.

The Board of Education and it's architect have done a poor job answering direct questions.  How they came up with this 31.5 million figure that requires a 5 Mill increase is a mystery.  Nothing has been shown to the public on why those extra tax dollars are necessary.  

Kansas is in a prolonged period of declining school-aged population due to low birthrates and net out-migration in many areas.  Statewide public K-12 enrollment has been dropping steadily (down~0.4% in 2024-25 alone), and most projections show this continuing.

• In this environment, building a new school would not reliably attract hundreds or thousands of net new students from outside the area.  Kansas has had relatively LOW USE OF THE NEW OPEN ENROLLMENT LAW so far (only ~1,500-2,000 out-of-district transfers statewide in its first full year), and many districts STILL have excess capacity in existing buildings.
• Growth is happening in SPECIFIC FAST-GROWING SUBURBS or EXURBAN AREAS often tied to new housing developments, population influx from other states, or economic opportunity - not primarily because of a new school building.  in those cases, the new school is usually built because enrollment is already projected to grow from housing.
  • The examples of SPT's presentation at the community meeting are in districts primarily around Wichita which is seeing 0.18% annual growth.  Augusta & Hesston both near Wichita.  Leavenworth is also an example also and it is  near Kansas City.  USD 105 Rowlins Co. was a rebuild due to a fire in one school building. 
• In stable or declining areas (common across much of rural and small-town Kansas), a new school might draw some families who prefer modern facilities, but it would mostly pull students from other schools in the same district or nearby districts - resulting in little or no net gain for the overall system and potentially accelerating closure pressures on older buildings.

Bottom line, it will not solve the broader enrollment decline over the next 15 years especially with the underlying demographic drivers are stronger than the pull of a new facility.

more to come. . .