Hesitant on the Public Buildings renovations bond

I’m having a hard time voting a straight ticket on the Greensboro bonds. There are other issues with other bonds, but this bond particularly bugs me. It really bugs me.
This bond was the one that was in the N&R? a while ago, but I can’t seem to find the article/post anymore. It basically talked about how the icicles from the communications tower would hit the roof and pierce it. Then maintenance would patch the roof and this kept happening every year until current, where they need a new roof.
My question is: How is a new roof supposed to prevent the above from happening again?

As a taxpayer, I have no issues with paying for a new roof for a city building. It’s my city. But I do have an issue when there are no plans in place to change the way the buildings are maintained. You would figure that after the first year where the buildings were being pierced by icicles, there would have been some sort of discussion brought up.
The discussions I’ve had in preventive maintenance included running hot water pipes to the tower, line the tower with something that doesn’t allow icicles to form, or one of the easiest that a friend said would probably cost somewhere around a grand or two by getting some steel sheets and placing them around the areas where the icicles would hit. None of these solutions have ever been brought to the public so there is the assumption it was never discussed. I’d be fairly surprised if they were actually.
So as a taxpayer, it’s tough for me to say: “Hey, let’s vote for this bond.” I do know how difficult it is to get money from funding you probably don’t have. But in the engineering world, we call this “bootstrapping”. You find what you can and make it happen. Otherwise, how can we justify paying for something that will get demolished the same year it’s installed? Again? Really now.