Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Facilities Survey Answers to Questions

There have been some great questions asked under the comments tab on the facilities survey and we would like to answer as many as possible. See below:


1. How many years on the bond?

The standard issuance length on school bonds is 30 years. Depending upon when the bonds are issued the term could be shorter. The Board would work with a Financial Advisor, Bond Counsel and Underwriters to insure the best rate and terms for district taxpayers.


2.  The current facilities have, in my opinion, reached the end of their intended lifespan. I would be fully behind a bond issue to build a completely new facility, even if it meant that I had to pay more in taxes. Let's build a facility that our community can be proud of, not waste $$ putting lipstick on a pig.

The short answer is the district does not have the bonding capacity to build all new facilities. The committee looked at many different options. You can see the options: Facilities Committee Report One was building totally new MS/HS facilities and demolishing the current MS/HS facilities. The estimated cost was between 25-30 million. I do not speak for the committee but I believe they did not think that was wise use of taxpayer money and the district could not bond a project that large with the current tax base.
Once renovated and with the additions the current facilities will have an extended life span (25-35 years) and fit into a long range plan. If the district continues to grow the renovated facilities could be used solely by the Middle School and a new HS could be constructed. Extremely long range but a viable plan.
There is an immediate need for new science labs, to get students out of portable buildings, expand CATE facilities, upgrade technology and infrastructure and for another gymnasium.


3. Several survey respondents commented about the need for upgrading the track and asked why it was not included on the bond?

I do not speak for the facilities committee but I think they would agree with you wholeheartedly that the track needs upgrading. As a group the need for another gym outweighed upgrading the track. However, upgrading the track is the #1 priority on the long range plan submitted to the Board by the Facilities Committee. See at   Facilities Committee Report and I believe it was the committees hope that it would be addressed if there was money left over after the other facility upgrades.


4. I would back a bond proposal only if it is to do with educational needs as the last bond issue was wasted and was not done to take care of the future, like the gym that was built I do know that more space is needed but not to the education of our children.

I do not know all of the specifics but the last bond built the new elementary school. It appears to be well done and is benefiting over 400 students daily and will do so for years to come. The cafeteria in the elementary serves all students as well.