Residents question school bond issue

Mike Morgan may not have won his school board bid in the May election, but he hasn't stopped weighing in on the Sisters School Board.

At Monday's school board meeting, Morgan questioned the board's legal authority to issue $2.1 million in bonds without taxpayer approval.

On March 12, by a vote of 3-2, board members voted in favor of "authorizing the sale of full faith and credit obligations not to exceed $2.1 million." Directors Steve Rudinsky and Jeff Smith cast the dissenting votes (See "School district issues $2.1 million in 15-year bonds," The Nugget, June 6, page 15.)

The board's action provided the district immediate access to funds for school projects without going to taxpayers to pass a bond issue.

"This board vote and bond sale violates Oregon law specific to local funding of capital projects in public school districts," Morgan said. "The board's role in any bond sale to finance new debt is to call for an election to get voter approval. The issuance of negotiable interest-bearing warrants (bonds) must be authorized by a majority vote of the electors."

Morgan cited Oregon Revised Statutes (ORS) 328.205, 328.210 and 328.213.

The school district did not rely on ORS Chapter 328 that is titled "Local Financing of Education" as its legal authority for issuing the bonds. Instead, the district used ORS Chapter 271 titled "Use and Disposition of Public Lands Generally; Easements."

"Again it's another example of the ends justifying the means," said Morgan.

Morgan asked board members why they went outside of the statute that specifically speaks to the funding of capital projects and used an "obscure" statute instead.

"What this money is being used for is no different than building a new school. It's just a little smaller number," he said.

According to Morgan the statutes are specific about raising funds for capital improvements and building new schools and facilities.

"The voters have a right to participate in that decision. The statutes say so," Morgan said.

Board member Glen Lasken was quick to respond.

"Some statues say so. Some statutes say nothing," he said.

Mark Yinger, who was defeated by incumbent Jeff Smith for a seat on the school board agrees that there should have been a vote.

"The bottom line it seems to me is that the board did not want to go to the voters for approval because very likely it would have failed, so they use 271.390 as an end-run-around. It may be legal but politically it is illegal," said Yinger.

"This is how the board ... has acted for many years. They see themselves as the sole arbiters and the moral compass for the district. In other words 'we the board will do what is best for the district even though we know the majority of voters would likely disagree with us.' A real attitude of self-righteous arrogance," said Yinger.