board meeting Nov 28th

OK .... Im sure many of you are looking for this one so here goes- the update from tonight’s board meeting at Leck Kill ...

*** Action items- see agenda on the web site - everything passed without much discussion and met with no conflict.

*** There was a presentation made by Jamie Doyle of CFM (financial consultant to our district) Discussion from tonight from the board on the building project.
Math is not my strong point so am not even going to try and reiterate the wonderful job she did. I would surely do an injustice to it. Basically the jest of it was there are various ways to get various things- depending on the type of bond that is taken and etc. - Once she knows more of which project we are going with and a time frame - she could more accurately provide estimates as to the financial impact. Meanwhile it was a great overview and if you are numbers person you would have loved it!
I will say these points that stuck out in my mind, for whatever they are worth are as follows:
* with one type you can actually have a lower mils (something I know we all want) but the downside is, we will pay more interest -
* 3 1/2 mils could be saved annually by building new vs renovating old -
* ACT 1 law seriously affects debt and school districts in general, all over the place - our board had the foresight to go out and incur debt before passing of that law so can get premium bonds-grandfathering them in .....
* It is legal and feasible to take on a 20 - 30 mil debt - and her job is to show various options of how to do so - explained several different strategies and will be happy to come back at a later date to go over in more detail once known which way board opts to go ....
* Plancon reimbursement is on rated pupil capacity by building ---- SO if we borrow to renovate our elementary schools now, we cannot to it again for twenty years (Well there is an exception but then you have to pay back reimbursement, so ... not appealing) ...
* we are lucky as a district to have her - the architect complimented her in that this was the best presentation he has seen (and obviously they see a lot of them at school board meetings) -

RE Building discussions ... NOW THIS IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF PARAPHRASE SO I MAY NOT GET EVERYTHING JUST PERFECT BUT IM TRYING .... Keep in mind this is how I heard it .....
well first off not all members were present so –
Laudenslager questioned how much discussion should we have- -said something like ---- seems all four of you are in favor of a middle school concept and renovations on elementary schools (meaning those present of Keim, Sample, Blasius, Roach)???---- & those that couldn’t be here tonight - passing along that well Lagerman said cant really do anything but fix the three, Buddock definitely wants a middle school concept back and to renovate the elementary schools but taxes are a concern to him which he (Troy) would like to debate * Erdman is also strongly for a middle school but would like a new elementary concept * Kauffman wants a new school - possibly K through 5 or 6 - not really sure though - may require renovations so are we at 2 & 2 or where are we ??? to which: Keim --- So are we still targeting a vote in December or is the middle school - seems done deal but elementary remains seen or --- ? Roach - something about splitting the money- let’s do middle school now and take time to design and construct that right - and decide on elementary later-
to which CFM Would not recommend doing separately
to which architects said really once board makes decision on direction, generally than it is in the administrations hands to work with them about what is needed and etc. - then they are done - so there would not be much time commitment needed from the board- their time is up until the decision point and etc. -
to which Roach questioned the # of rooms needed at the jr sr / middle - high school - and that went back and forth for awhile – until …
Laudenslager asked for time frame –
Architects advised it is a 10-12 month process at the mercy of the states schedule and really what is required of the board its all in the study – as far as rooms required --- what goes in those rooms is where the administration typically gets involved and works with the architects.
Laudenslager stated that we know something needs done at the elementary school level and to prolong 10 months after another 6 months have passed – what would be the sense in that?
Architects emphasized again you want to proceed simultaneously – design and build simultaneously due to possibly saving when putting out to bid and that as far as grade realignment goes must work together with the administration and proceed in a time frame that is wise for all involved-
? = December 12 meeting maybe vote? Maybe not …
Sample then suggested we fix the high school first then renovate the elementary schools – what was the outcome of the town meetings since not all board members were not at all of them …
Laudenslager said all three meetings one thing was clear that tax increase was desired to be kept at a minimum … & that from the property committee meetings a year ago the entire project was driven by needing space at the elementary school levels.
& He then went on to say at this point he would not be in favor of voting on a middle school concept due to the fact that operationally as a district does not know we can afford it – does anyone have any idea how we can? Asked for figures on what would be needed from a salary standpoint - Donna Politza stated
Low end (ANNUALLY) … 225,000 to 250,000
High end up to $500,000 (half a million ANNUALLY)

Roach then questioned these figures – teachers could take praxis ?
This went back and forth – and it would depend on teachers taking praxis and assuming all would do that (which we are still in negotiations about all of that or would need to) – even aside from that would need I believe at least 5 more for academics ( I didn’t catch them all but special ed, music, info-skills, gifted …) – Definitely it would cost more annually – the #s apparently depend on many different things …
At this point Sodrick interjected that “ I know the value of a middle school. However … it is costly” and went on to say that we may add a middle school wing and then what – find we cant staff it ?
Jest = It doesn’t make sense to do this if we are not in a financial position to then do it right. Wiest was questioned and said something about having an 8 period day now and of that teachers are teaching 7 periods ----
Politza “This requires planning – for educational programming – you can nickel and dime this to death but …”
Sample and Roach questioned some of the statements made –
Laudenslager surmised: Ok we can pay for the buildings through the grandfathering that was done … but operationally – can anyone tell me how we can afford it?



“If we are gonna spend money on the middle school, I just want to staff it appropriately.”


So lets go to the elementary discussions …
Laudenslager opened with –
We can save $250,000 annually by doing a k – 6 … then we could staff the middle school. This would save all three areas of education:
By doing one consolidated elementary school of k through five, which I think there have been good arguments as to the benefit of – that would be good for our elementary – this would then enable us to afford us operationally so that we can revert to the 6 through 8 grade concept and we would have our 9 -12 grade school so it saves all three – feel it is win-win-win.
Roach then questioned the logic of how the money is saved, to which Troy pointed out may be a good starting point for the next discussion when all board members are present …
Sample suggested maybe the answer is to build a central elementary school in the middle part of the district and put the middle school back at Trevorton to do away with needing to add on at the high school –
Architects had a few thoughts on that which are as follows –
a) we would have 30,000 LESS square feet with one elementary building vs. 3 – (just by what we would save on not needing triple spaces) -
b) we would have to run the #s on doing that at Trevorton -
c) Note that state is pushing to consolidate – combining with schools for space putting more students in one school is just more economical than operating three – for you to operate may not be able to afford separately anymore –

So – question came back when are we talking about it again and when are we deciding - Keim – would like it to be all one night
Sample – should be at a public meeting ….

Will be decided Date books needed checked of people not there I think ---
(once I find out you know I will email) …

Then it went to public comment
~ I encouraged board members to listen to what Troy had said because no matter how you feel about the middle school –high school vs. jr/sr high and no matter what you feel about renovate elementary schools vs. construction – we absolutely need to look what we can afford as a district. & I have said all along k-6 and 7-12 would mean two schools to operate leaving money for other educational things. Also that I was at those property committee meetings and it was an entire package- with elementary schools starting it so I do not think that should be pushed out in deciding at all …**** ~ Someone else spoke to concern about State bill and how that might affect the decision if it were passed to consolidate districts and what we can afford really needs to be looked at moving forward- and this district is in a financial – crisis so need to move forward financially smart – absolutely ---
~Someone else spoke to keeping elementary schools separate because of land developers coming in –
~ Someone else made the point about going to referendum ( in some of the scenarios of securing funding it would have to go to public vote and nobody feels that people would vote for taxes to go up --- ) – it would need to be put in terms we can understand ---- we would have to do away with sports and all extra curricular activities should we decide to keep renovating the schools …
~ Someone else encouraged the board to think about looking 20 years down the road – the previous board went away from the middle school concept, now this board wants to go back to it – what if the next one wants to change it – we keep going back and forth – what is going to happen ? Don’t just think for now, think for the future …
~ Someone else pointed out that moving forward …. Taxes are going to go up and we have to spend money – education is not free- we need to look at what is best and educationally sound for all students involved and move forward in that direction –

& I Think those are the highlights. I now have a headache.
In closing I just ask you to think about what is being said, what is going on and let the school board members and administrators know what you are thinking!!!
I have said all along big decisions are about to be made in this district …
PIVOTAL decisions that will not only affect your taxes but your children and grandchildren’s future educationally, financially.
Think about it, talk about it- there are no easy answers.
None the less, something soon is going to be decided. … .

Sincerely, Lauren Hackenburg
LHIR@comcast.net

*** Ignorance of the law is no excuse, nor is it in parenting! ***
*** I have sent this to you because you requested to be on my distribution list or I feel in some way the information enclosed may affect you in that you are a parent or tax payer of our school district or may be just interested in this--- The information enclosed is as I heard it only and meant to create discussion and spread awareness of the goings on. Please feel free to forward on to any one who may be interested and let me know if you wish to be removed from future emails or know of anyone who would like to be added.
*** Have a great day!