Published: July 01, 2008 09:45 am            

Bond issue may require more thought

We think the mayor’s proposed extension of the bond paying for the recreation center to fund $10 million worth of building projects needs some more thought.

Pryor’s mayor is proposing the public extend the 1/2 cent sales tax used to build the recreation center to 2025. The 1/2 cent is scheduled to expire in 2018.

If the tax is extended, a graduating senior will be 35-years-old when the proposed bond is paid off.

If tax collections stay at their current level, the bond to build the recreation center will be paid off in June 2011. But with the price of everything rising, how much longer will it be before residents begin to cut their spending, decreasing the amount of tax money available to pay off our obligations?

One major problem we have with the proposal to construct more buildings is evident in the recreation center itself.

Since construction was completed, we’ve heard of an air conditioning unit not equipped to handle the humidity from the indoor pool, cracked concrete in the pool area, a leaking roof which ruined the fitness room floor and that’s not to mention making the building compliant with the Americans with Disabilities Act.

Who’s to say if the public gives our city leaders permission to build these buildings that they won’t be plagued with problems before the bill is paid?

The recreation center isn’t paid for, folks. And parts of it are falling apart just a short two years after the massive structure was completed.

Who’s to blame? Was it the architects (Selzer-Schaefer Architectural), the construction company (Jim Butler) or those we trust to handle our tax money in a responsible manner?

Another issue we are concerned with is whether the $10 million worth of projects will actually cost $10 million. What will happen if, when the projects are finally ready for construction, costs have doubled? Where would the money come from to make up the difference? And which project goes first? Who gets an expansion first — the library, police, fire, city hall? And how do we determine which facility gets priority?

Before the tax payers of this city are asked to extend a tax to 2025, city leaders should heed the city attorney’s counsel. A project manager should be consulted, a committee formed representing each entity involved and more information presented to the public once a solid plan is in place.

We should give the matter strong consideration before approving a tax that will see many of us into retirement, placing the debt on the shoulders of the next generation who are not yet old enough to vote against it.

        

• Click to discuss this story with other readers on our forums.