Letters

On May 16, voters are asked to weigh in on Proposition 2, a $6 million bond and a transfer of existing reserve money of $3.425 million, totaling $9.425 million. This made me want to understand more about the $6 million and the $3.425 million.

To summarize my findings, the $6 million would be new debt, and $3.425 million is not debt.

If the board wins their Proposition 2 fight, we taxpayers take on $6 million new debt for Marsden properties. The cost of the debt includes interest plus principal payments until the debt is repaid. Think of it like getting a car loan: You get the car but also the monthly payments.

For Marsden, in 2025-26, this debt will cost taxpayers $335,000, but by 2029 through 2044, it will cost almost $500,000 annually. Without a budget increase, the only option would be cutting programs (and/or salaries) equal to the payments until the loan is paid off. You can bet that won’t happen, so taxes would have to increase.

The $3.425 million “nondebt” portion of the purchase sits in the “Facilities Capital Reserve Fund,” and taxpayers must authorize its use through a vote. The rules of this fund give taxpayers some control over the amount of debt taken on by the board. If Proposition 2 is voted down, this reserve fund of $3.425 million could be used to pay down existing bonded debt and then, subject to certain limitations, to the annual tax levy. This means that instead of using the $3.4 million to take on more debt, it can be used to pay down existing debt.

Similar to how paying off a car loan immediately frees up extra spending money, if the board would retire this fund and pay down $3.4 million of existing debt, they effectively free up funds to enrich school programs or pay teachers more. Instead, the BOE is about to spend $9.425 million to buy vacant land without clearly stating what will be done with it once it’s in board control. And that is just the down payment on more debt required to develop the land and remediate any problems.

If you didn’t already know this, Citizens of Sag won’t be able to confirm or tell you anything about what this board is or isn’t doing. Instead of trying to intimidate people who are advocating against what the board has communicated publicly for over eight months, this contentious board should spread some real information themselves regarding what taxpayers will actually be responsible for.

Vote no on Proposition 2.

Howard Mitchell

Sag Harbor