I read with growing dismay the article in Hays Post of April 22 regarding the meeting about the upcoming bond issue and the arguments against passing. I am retired and my grandchildren are old enough they will see very little of the gains from the major factors of the passage of the bond issues, but that is beside the point. The point being is that Hays desperately needs to build and revamp the secondary schools in the district. To not do so is short-sighted to say the least. Second-rate facilities means it is hard to hire and keep quality teachers and administration and provide a solid foundation for the future.
Additionally, HaysMed strives to be a paragon of excellence in health care for rural communities not only in Kansas, but as a model across the nation. We cannot attract and keep top-notch personnel if the school system is second rate. FHSU is also a pre-eminent institution. Likewise, the ability to attract not only faculty, but to retain them and to attract and retain students once they graduate is hampered when the district has second-rate facilities.
Arguments against passage of the bond issue cited high interest rates and inflation, but to delay only means the cost of eventually remedying the situation will be much higher. It is cheaper now than it will be in the future — it always is. How many times have you seen costs drop?
In the same issue of Hays Post, Jacob Proffit had an op-ed that was dead-on. It is more expensive to maintain older, outdated facilities than it is to build new ones and repurpose some of the newer of the current buildings.
Although USD 489 is the main beneficiary of the passage of the bond issue, the entire city, county and the region also benefit as Hays grows and more businesses and services come to town. The “pull factor” that Hays has now only increases with top-notch K-12 facilities. We cannot afford to not pass the bond issue.
Mike Giess
Hays