Midland really doesn't vote down bonds
In my previous Hospital thread there are several comments that I think make wrong assumptions about the willingness of the Citizens of Midland to pass certain bond issues. Going back to the MRT's article which outlines several of the recent bond issues since 1980, one might get the impression that Midland has a real aginner mentality when it comes to our civic facilities, especially our schools, since the community voted three bonds down.
In my opinion, Midland is more than willing to approve bonds for our various local taxing entities, but they are not willing to fund certain projects or give out blank checks for undeterminiate projects.
The failed MISD bond issues in 1996 ($110M), 2000 ($72.2M) and 2002 ($91-167M) suffered from an unpopular and ill defined project (a new Midland High) or a majority of the issue didn't include specific projects, but a range of projects that may be undertaken if necessary.
If you look at the remainder of the list, they all passed, even the recent jail bond. I would argue the jail bonds that failed in the past were because Midlanders didn't want us to become a "Prison City" like Colorado City or Pecos. However, when it came down to providing facilities to serve the detention and inmate needs of our own community, that passed.
In the case of the Hospital, the plan is pretty well defined and using the strategies of the Airport and Successful School bonds, they have shown the 50 year old boilers and totally blocked plumbing.
As for costs, at $175M for 350,000 S.F. of new construction and 100,000 S.F. of rennovations, that meets LEED certification, the costs aren't out of line. This would be the 2nd or 3rd LEED Certified Hospital in Texas and one of only a handful of LEED Certified Hospitals in the United States. As a point of reference, the Dell Children's Medical Center of Central Texas was the first LEED Certified Hospital in Texas and the 500,000 S.F. facility (pediatrics only mind you) cost $200M. I'm sure the emergency department and other full service hospital accommodations makes up the difference in $/SF ratios between MMH and Dell Children's.
(as an aside: To say that having a facility that is on par with Dell Children's and is one of a handful of hospitals to have LEED and GGHC certifications in addition to meeting all the current regulatory and design standards of hospitals isn't going to attract some staff is like saying fielding a fast new car at the track isn't going to attract drivers.)
So, if history holds, for this bond to go down, there has to be something community wide that is unpopular about the hospital's project....and I don't see it, feel it or hear it.
What I do see is a bunch negativity about the hospital administration....and yet a jail bond passed with about the same level of negativity towards Sheriff Painter and the Commissioner's Court.
This is why I think the Hospital Bond is going to pass.
0 TrackBacks
Listed below are links to blogs that reference this entry: Midland really doesn't vote down bonds.
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.jessicaswell.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/2551
4 Comments
Of course it is all idle speculation. This is a blog and that is my assessment of the political landscape, take it or leave it.
Besides, the only thing I have to gain is a nicer place for my wife to work.
As for losing because the "NO" votes, don't show up. I think you are counting too many no voters...they are don't care voters, and that's a big difference.
If the Bond proponents wanted a truly fair vote, they wouldn't schedule it for May 9th, rather they would have gotten it ready in time for the presidential vote last November. But then it would have failed miserably. They hope that most voters will be too busy or apathetic to go out and vote, then if they have a small hardcore bunch of supporters it will pass. Just think, probably less than 10,000 people will decide the tax liability for 100,000.
Nostadamus, you must forget that a bond was approved (overwhelmingly) last November, for the expansion of the county jail.
Typically, you don't see two bonds on the same ballot because they end up competing with each other, which really isn't fair, since they should be decided each on their own merits. But some folks look at it at either this one or that one, when they really has anything to do with each other. So you will almost never ever see two bonds on the same ballot.
As for a non presidential vote not being fair, hogwash. If people care, they vote. If they don't care they give their tacit approval to whatever those who do care decide to do.
As long as you fully understand that your assumptions is just that and nothing more. If the bonds pass it will be because those that oppose them did not vote, and once again they will pass by the most votes cast not the majority of those registered.