Bend voters aren’t getting what they voted for.

The Bend Park & Recreation District told voters it would use part of a $29 million bond to build a roundabout at Simpson and Columbia. Now the district may never have to build it.

In 2012, the Bend Park & Recreation District went to voters with the $29 million bond proposal. We endorsed it. Voters passed it.

It’s a great investment for the community. It included money to make the Colorado Dam safer, more money for trails and parks and money to build a covered pavilion at Simpson and Columbia that will include a seasonal ice facility.

The district also stated in the voters pamphlet that it would complete the city-required street improvements near the pavilion, including a roundabout.

The park district doesn’t want to build the Simpson/Columbia roundabout if it doesn’t have to. It would rather put its money into making nice parks than roundabouts. And according to a traffic study of the trips that will be generated by the pavilion, it’s not necessary to spend an estimated $2.5 million on the roundabout.

The city has initially agreed that the district doesn’t have to build it. Instead, the district can pay for only $206,000 in other improvements in the area and contribute to a study to plan for future traffic.

If anything else is built on the site, it’s possible that a roundabout would have to be built by the park district. It’s also possible that another new project in the area could generate enough trips to make a roundabout the best solution to the additional traffic at Simpson and Columbia. Bend City Engineer Russ Grayson told us that if that happened the city would likely work with that developer, the park district and others to find a way to divide up the cost. The developer and voters may well feel the park district did some sleight of hand.

So the question is: What should the park district do with the roundabout money?

Jim Figurski, a landscape architect for the park district, said the district would likely hold the money in reserve for now.

The temptation, though, may be for the district to use that money to enhance other bond projects or to pay for those that go over budget.

The district needs to stick to its promise. The district told voters it would build the roundabout. It shouldn’t use the money it intended for the roundabout for anything other than road improvements in the pavilion area.

Bend has a patchy history of getting out in front of growth. This council has often criticized how previous councils did not set aside money for the city’s future needs. The council had an opportunity in this case to require the park district to build for Bend’s future.

It was arguably a reasonable decision for the council to come up with a compromise with the park district. It would not be reasonable for the park district to spend the traffic improvement money on anything else.