Ramona school district inches toward bond bid

School board meets tonight at 7 in district office board room

By Maureen Robertson

Ramona Unified School District trustees are expected to approve a bond consultant to steer them in the direction of putting a bond measure on the November ballot.

Urban Futures Inc., the firm that worked with the district in its 2012 unsuccessful bid for a $66 million bond, is the consultant district staff and others who served on the interview panel recommend. Trustees Kim Lasley and Dawn Perfect, teachers union president Cori McDonald and Sun Valley Council PTA President Kristina Krohne were on the panel with the district superintendent, assistant superintendents and senior director of education services.

The 2012 bond bid failed by less than 4.5 percent of the required 55 percent yes vote.

With the exception of the cost of a voter survey, the consultant’s fees and expenses are contingent on voter

Trustees, from left, Bob Stoody, Rodger Dohm and Dawn Perfect consider an issue at a recent school board meeting. Sentinel file photo

approval of the bond, according to the proposed agreement between the district and Urban Futures. Money from bond sales will pay for the firm’s pre-election services, states the proposal that trustees will review at their Feb. 13 meeting, scheduled for 7 p.m. in the district office, 720 Ninth St.

Among proposal specifics are: Pre-election services will cost the district $35,000; a tracking poll, $5,000; financial advisory services, $75,000 for each series of bonds sold; disclosure services, $3,000 annually; and expenses, cost plus 5 percent, not to exceed $3,500 with written approval from the district.

Related posts:

  1. Ramona trustees may try again for a school bond
  2. Saturday workshop targets fiscal health of Ramona school district
  3. Survey shows support for a school bond
  4. Ramona school trustees schedule community workshop to discuss district’s long-term fiscal plan
  5. School board president calls for town meeting

Short URL: http://www.ramonasentinel.com/?p=31250

Posted by Maureen Robertson on Feb 13 2014. Filed under Featured Story, News, Ramona, Schools. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0. You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.

11 Comments for “Ramona school district inches toward bond bid”

  1. guest

    If this new bond initiative, after the failure of the numerous previous bond failures, is 'larded up', as prop R was – count me out. The bottom line is we as a community now own newer schools -despite the direction from the community to a previous board to not to saddle the community with with this debt. But we, as a community now own valuable long term assets – I.e. newer schools.

    The pretext for a previous board assuming this debt -in spite of the community saying no – was that developer fees would pay for these schools.

    So here's the deal, as I see it. Keep any new bond initiative strictly limited to addressing the funding of the C.O.P. debt with a pledge that all future developer funds the district receives (which a previous board intended to pay this debt) will be dedicated towards paying off this debt (I.e. make sure you're agents structure the bonds as callable). Call this bond a bridge loan from the community, if you will.

    If you (whoever the powers are that will be making the, perhaps ill-fated, decision to attempt another bond -my recommendation would be to 'keep it simple stu"#d".

  2. I oppose almost all new taxes, fees, bonds, etc, but I would probably be willing to support a bond if was lean. Let's fix the COP mess we are in once and for all, but I don't want to pay through the nose for a bunch of other projects.

    • Ramonan

      I agree. The only way I will consider voting yes is if the scope and language of the bond is limited to only paying off the COP balance. The last bond had to many "extras" in it besides just paying off the COP. I would of voted yes in 2012 if the bond would of been just for paying off the $25 million.

      Now with this illegal fire tax (Oh, I mean fee), rising electric and water rates, and the general increase in the cost of living, The majority of Ramona residents are already stretched thin in the pocket book.

      I would also suggest that the board look closely at the advice coming from a consulting company who's first and only interest is to maximize the amount of money it receives from this bond.

  3. Guest

    For months the discussions surrounding public support of a new bond measure centered around the district making some substantial progress in controlling its spending, including consolidation of services and reductions in administration. At that point support for a bond would be reasonable to finance the gap remaining after these effeciencies were put into place. Based on this article, I see the bond; I do not see anything about addressing the structural costs. Lets hope the Board and the district are not trying to pull a fast one on us and attempt to pass a bond without addressing the cost issues. Maybe I'm a cynic but I'm not convinced until I see costs addressed FIRST.

  4. M.Workman

    How 'bout we use real names and do whatever we can to increase communication and discussion on this bond topic. Hiding behind aliases reinforces distrust and misinformation. If you want to influence the discussion, or someone's thinking, trust your own real indentity to add credibility to your argument. Anything short of that is well…suspect.

  5. M.Workman

    Ramona Resident…he doesn’t and hasn’t for some time. Try to stay on top of things. In addition, my other children attend local schools and my older children did as well. I pay my taxes here just like you and my family has spent countless hours volunteering in our local schools. In addition, while he chose to attend catholic school, we pay here and we vote here, just like you. So, once again, a little accuracy and a fact or two might help your otherwise lame statement. If you have a valid point to be made, perhaps supported by a fact or two, have the cajones to use your real name. Otherwise you’re just shooting your uninformed mouth off spewing misinformation.

  6. M.Workman

    Ramona Resident know nothing. Let me introduce you to a fact or two. One, he’s been back at RHS for more than a year. Had I known you cared, I would have messaged you. Even if he was still at CCHS, I still have two here and two who graduated from RHS. I pay taxes here that support these schools. Even when I paid tuition, I paid taxes too. Plus my family has logged countless volunteer hours in our schools.
    Two, as I say, I own a home here. So I have a vested interest in my property value. The quality of our schools has direct impact on our property value. That alone should get everyone’s attention.
    So your attempt at a petty jab illustrates my point above perfectly. Lack of facts, alias used, cheap shot. No credibility. If you have something to say worthwhile, use your name to make your point.

  7. Ramona Resident

    Sounds like the CCHS thing hit a nerve. It would with me if I was in your shoes as well.

    As for uninformed, I'll stack my lifetime living in this town, including being educated in the very schools we are all discussing, against anybody who choses to send their kid to a private school rather than the school in their own community. Even though this district is financially mismanaged, the education is very good.

    You can lob out the alias insults all you want but it doesn't change the facts.

  8. M.Workman

    Again, you have no clue as to what you are talking about. But you are good at implying crapola with no factual basis.
    "maybe we only comment when our kids actually attend the district and don't go to Cathedral?"
    I say BS and they do(did). Four of five and now all.
    Be proud to be a longtime Ramonan, use your name and drop the baseless personal attack. You have roots you have history, add your name and gain credibility.
    Lastly, you seem to think the private school was some sort of judgment against local schools instead of perhaps a decision/choice made for the child. What a narrow perspective.

  9. noname

    After reading this I can only hope to win the lotto soon so I can get out of this town quickly. Interestingly enough, about 13 years ago I moved here because of the schools, now I'm leaving because of them. I wish you all the best and hope you all can work out your differences. But I do NOT get a warm fuzzy feeling in my stomach about that prospect. BTW, a bond will never pass. Deal with that fact and figure it out RUSD.

Leave a Reply