Meeting objectives of sustainability

It is important the public understands the mechanics of the vote by the Whitefish School Board Trustees Aug. 17 regarding the Center For Applied Sustainability.

Before the final vote on the motion to continue with the progress of the privately funded but publicly supported (by land and by ultimately staffing) project, there was a discussion and a defeated motion.

That motion concerned the center meeting the district design objectives of “sustainability.”

This district trustee does not seek to create a project that cannot pay for itself, utility, maintenance and staffing wise. Already staffing costs of the district comprise 88 percent of the total budget, leaving little room for new projects or new staffing. The district has already gone down the road where projects funded by private parties did not pay for operating costs.

Therefore, a motion from myself that was seconded requested the project continue only if it met the district’s sustainability objectives. If it did not, a natural stopping point or “checkpoint” would have to be met to continue. It was voted down five to two.

The generosity of private donors is appreciated, but the long-term consequences of each project must be addressed. The funding is always going to be a challenge. The land it will sit on is a scarce resource, and land in Whitefish is only becoming scarcer.

For example, the extremely valuable land being used for the downtown City Hall and a parking garage is never retrievable for retail and tax revenue.

Likewise, the 3 acres of land for the CAS site — nearly 10 percent of the land the district owns at Muldown and high school area (32 acres) — will never be usable for other educational projects or future buildings. Therefore, my hesitation over the use of this land.

I was very appreciative of the rigorous discussion by my fellow board members and believe each and every project or matter should enjoy the same public discourse over it.

— Marguerite Kaminski is a Whitefish School Board trustee