Fairfield School Bond Vote: The cost of doing nothing is not nothing

To the editor:

I favor the Middle School General Obligation Bond proposal and will vote for it on September 14, and here’s why.

I had doubts about this myself, so I went to one of the informational meetings the district held, and reviewed the documents provided after the presentation (there’s a ton of information available online, just google Fairfield Bond Issue to see it). Sometimes it makes sense to repair. Sometimes in makes more sense to invest and replace. A group of faculty and community members met for several months to determine if it was a better use of money to repair or to replace.

Design flaws when the middle school was built in 1967 are causing maintenance problems that are increasingly difficult to manage. When the group crunched the numbers several different ways a bond for a new building made the most sense. They also created a 10-20-30 year plan for the district’s building and maintenance needs, based on population trends, etc. I am now confident that they made a good decision. I especially appreciate that there is now a long-range plan for all the buildings of the district. To me, that is the kind of responsible stewardship we want from local leaders.

Not passing the bond means our district will spend a lot of money to patch and maintain the existing middle school. It is a flawed and inefficient building. According to the study group, it meets our needs poorly today and will meet them even more poorly in the future.

Let’s not throw good money after bad. Vote “yes” on the General Obligation Bond on September 14 and let’s use our tax dollars wisely to build a better future.

Margaret Dwyer

Fairfield