Elections have consequences. Voters choose, and their choices tell us who we are. Elections spotlight our priorities.

In years past, voters have rejected bonds to fix our roads. Voters rejected primary property taxes to provide steady funding for our Town. Recently, voters rejected school bond renewals for needed infrastructure. Without help, our schools are predicted to decline even more. When schools decline, so do property values. The consequences are not acceptable for some voters. A group of voters are raising private funds to prevent school facilities (and property values) from deteriorating further.

In a democracy, voters see and feel the consequences of their actions. Voters already decided how they want our schools to look, the quality of local education, the reputation of our schools, and ultimately the reputation of our town. Fountain Hills voters chose diminished schools and diminished property values.

Where are the consequences when a minority of voters “rescue” the majority from their decisions? While well intended, the school bailout turns the principles of fiscal accountability and majority rule on their heads. Voters are shielded from the consequences of their actions.

Will the school bailout encourage similar behavior by voters? Does this set the precedent for voters to reject future funding?

Alexander Hamilton observed, “People get the government they deserve.” If voters ask who is responsible for the condition of our schools and our town, just look in the mirror. While private funding “solutions” for our schools are both noble and necessary, those efforts enable Fountain Hills voters to avoid that look.