Bond defeat leaves questions unanswered

It’s official — both the McCook and Cambridge school bond proposals have gone down to defeat, and by strikingly similar margins.

In McCook, the final tally came in at 1,124 “yes” votes to 1,929 “no” votes, about 37 percent in favor and 63 percent opposed. In Cambridge, the results landed in almost the same spot, with 280 in favor and 482 against. Again, a 37-to-63 split. Pierce County voters produced a similar ratio in rejecting their $25.9 million school bond, 38.8 percent for and 61.2 percent against. Different communities, different needs, and different price tags — but nearly identical verdicts.

It’s at least a curious coincidence, one that will raise eyebrows among those who mistrust electronic voting, though there’s no credible reason to doubt the results. Instead, it points to a broader sentiment running through rural Nebraska — and perhaps much of the nation — about how much voters are willing to spend on public projects and where they are willing to spend it.

Tuesday’s other special elections were telling. Nance County voters approved a city sales tax for Fullerton, 237-43. The Villages of Barneston and Lynch approved Keno and Filley Village passed a sales and use tax. Gambling? Fine. Sales taxes? No problem. School bonds? Not so much.

Why? That’s the harder question. Is it lingering economic uncertainty? A lack of confidence in how tax dollars are managed? The sting of recent property valuations? Or is it something deeper, tied to public perception of our schools? Nebraska’s most recent state assessment results show that only 59 percent of students in grades 3–8 are proficient in English language arts, 58 percent in math, and 74 percent in science. Those numbers are an improvement from post-pandemic lows, but they still leave room for doubt among voters asked to be enthusiastic about a long-term financial commitment.

None of this is to discount the work, passion, and good intentions of those who poured heart and soul into promoting the bonds. Their commitment to students is not in question–but elections are a crucible of priorities, and the majority of voters clearly decided that the benefits did not outweigh the costs.

Still, the underlying needs have not gone away. In McCook, we still have a faulty foundation causing cracks in the walls. In Cambridge, the issues with HVAC and 1926 architecture remain. In Pierce County, too, the need for facility improvements doesn’t vanish with a “no” vote. One way or another, those problems will have to be addressed — whether through scaled-back proposals, alternative funding sources, phased repairs or a different kind of partnership altogether.

The challenge now is to bridge the gap between need and willingness to pay. That will require transparency, creativity and a little humility from all sides. The vote may be over, but the conversation is not — and the cracks, both literal and figurative, will only widen if we leave them unattended.