It seems – to most people, I’d guess – that to say ‘the bigger the project, the greater the need for substantive justifications’ is simply reasonable and practical.
In almost all public efforts, municipalities, school districts, and other public bodies should Lead Substantively, and Support Fiscally.
The best way to win big is usually a detailed, well-expounded defense of big ideas.
There’s value in thinking tactically (and it’s interesting to ponder tactics), but big efforts either fail initially (or in hindsight they look absurd) if their adoption depends on mere tactics.
(Because ‘The Future Writes the History of the Present’, projects like expanded tax incremental districts, the Innovation Center, WEDC, etc., although started, are doomed to obloquy. It’s not enough to win today; one has to secure a long-term success on a principled foundation. Everything else is just a “Nixon’s the One” Pyrrhic victory.)
Funny, though, that most local proponents concentrate on tactical wins, only to find thereafter that they’re stuck with bad deals that taint everyone connected to them. They want to win, but they’ve no idea what to do after an initial success, so they end up losing far more than they’ve gained.
It’s not the money & effort, but the money & effort based on the quality of the case for it, that matters. For the big and novel, it’s fair to ask of government, Show Your Work.
We likely have big requests ahead, including in the school district; they will require more than tactical moves and ill-defined justifications.
It’s fair that a request should begin with a detailed, thorough explanation.