This plan not right for Harper College

Harper College's Trustees seek a yes vote to issue $180, million in bonds for a 10-year capital program.

In the last three weeks, I've engaged with the trustees' spokesperson to better understand the work of the college's task force and consultants.

I cannot support this referendum because I believe the trustees have not made their case to taxpayers. Here's why:

1. $117 million is for construction projects. But there are no annual cash outflow projections. If they haven't projected construction spending, how do we know what is needed and when? What if $50 million is not needed until 2025? It's not clear.

2. $63 million is to "maintain and replace infrastructure at $6.3 million annually over ten years." Maintenance is not a capital budget item paid for by bonds (that's like paying for groceries with a home-equity loan). It's not clear how much is maintenance versus replacement. But $31 million is not needed until 2025 or later.

3. The messaging is about "three priorities," but when I asked how priorities were decided, I was told "the three priorities are equal in importance." That's really an admission the projects have not been prioritized, just categorized. Lack of prioritization is not acceptable, it's a lack of consideration for taxpayers.

4. What is clear is that the projects conveniently happen to equal the amount of debt we are about to pay off. That is not prioritization but an assumption that we don't mind spending another $180 illion. That's presumptuous.

In 2016 taxpayers in Palatine District 15 voted down an ill-prepared plan to borrow $130 million. The reason "No, not this plan" was because its shortcomings were exposed. That rejection was very wise because the new District 15 board has worked hard to develop other plans at substantially lower cost.

In my view, we should again say "No, not this plan."

Len Green

Palatine