Proposed School Bond Referendum Reviewed at LWVS Forum

The big decision on the Scarsdale Schools Bond Referendum will be made by the Scarsdale Board of Education on October 6th. In order to examine the issues, the Scarsdale League of Women Voters held an informative meeting on Monday September 29. Superintendent Thomas Hagerman, Board of Education Vice President Leila Shames Maude, Board Member Bill Natbony and Assistant Superintendent Linda Purvis were invited to answer questions and provided information on the following and more:

• Why did the board agree to reduce the amount of the bond offering from the $18 million that was agreed upon last spring to $16.7 million?
• What is the role of the Scarsdale Schools Foundation in deciding which capital projects will be on the list?
• If the board opts for the $18 million bond, what additional projects will be added?
• How much will the new debt raise local taxes?

Superintendent Hagerman provided some background, reviewing the goals of the bond offering and how the list of capital projects was selected. Hagerman divided the project list into three categories:

-The first is to deal with health and safety issues such as the roof replacement at Quaker Ridge

-The second is to provide facilities for program enhancements and optimize learning spaces including a new music room at the Middle School.

-The third is to outfit the district for 21st century learning by implementing a district-wide replacement of technology infrastructure and building a new learning commons and design lab at the high school.

Though the building-level committees and administration identified and considered over $35mm in facilities needs the Board opted for the $16.7mm plan. What was the thinking behind this decision?

Hagerman and Purvis explained that all of the district's buildings are over 50 years old, with the high school more than 100 years old. In addition, the Greenacres School will need either extensive renovations or to be totally replaced. Therefore, the administration is considering this bond referendum to be the first step in a 15 to 20 year plan to fund plant improvements. In order to keep tax increases to a minimum, Purvis anticipated that the district would raise more funds when the debt on a $17.8 million bond offering from 1998 and a $15.8 million bond from 2000 retire in 2018 and 2019.

Maude went on to explain why the board voted unanimously to adopt Dr. Hagermans's recommendation to cut $1.3 million from the initial $18 million bond referendum at their September 8th meeting.

She repeated her comments from September 22 when she told the community that in early July Dr. Hagerman and several board members and toured the facilities. At the Scarsdale Middle School they looked at the existing space and learned that a computer room, the shop-tech room and a nurses suite would be available in the future for repurposing. Therefore there was no need for additional classroom space. This information changed their view about building a room in the existing courtyard. Instead they opted to propose building one orchestra practice room and renovate existing space for instructional music.

Then they toured the high school with the principal and facilities manager and examined the space that would become a corridor from the library to the new learning commons. They determined that a second security checkpoint would be needed at the entrance to the library. After some discussion they decided that this corridor could be submitted to builders as an alternative --and if it could be worked into the budget it would be built.

They also discussed food delivery and receiving and determined that a covered area that was in the architect's plans for this purpose was not essential.

The savings from these two changes amounted to $1.3 million and at the September 8th Board of Education meeting the superintendent recommended the board adopt the plan with these revisions.

In making this decision the Board considered communications they received from the community during the summer months. Maude said we received "a tremendous amount of positive feedback," but it was not all positive. Some said "that the new learning commons was too expensive and looked like it belonged at a college." In addition, commenters were concerned that the new learning commons would require two additional custodians. Others were concerned that the district had paid off $12 mm in debt and was replacing that with an $18 mm bond.

About the recommendation Hagerman commented, "I consulted with the board and the principals. I did not want one small project to jeopardize the entire plan. We had to move forwarding a positive way. So we scaled back on a few things to make this happen." Maude commented about the role of the Board of Education and administration saying, "In the end, the administration makes the final recommendations to the board and it is the board who votes."

The conversation turned to the role of the Scarsdale Schools Education Foundation in selecting which projects to fund and in planning and designing facilities. Bill Natbony assured the group that the projects on the current list were chosen by the Board of Education, not by the foundation. He said, "Given cost constraints it became clear that we could not fund everything on the list. We asked the SSEF to wait until we decided what we could fund and then asked the foundation to help us to complete the projects. They wanted to provide funds to move the fitness center and fund the Design Lab as a discrete project to facilitate 21st century learning. These two projects lend themselves to fundraising – fitness and learning." He continued, "Without foundation funding, the overall list would need to be scaled back or eliminated completely."

Asked if the foundation will play a role in plan, design and development, Natbony said, "The answer is no. These are not the foundation's projects. These will be designed and run by the board with input from the architects and the community. The scope of the projects will be the sole province of the district and the administration."

What projects might be funded if the board decided to bring the bond referendum back up to $18 million? Linda Purvis responded, "The first place I will go is to the list of projects that we will propose next spring for funding in the 2015-216 school budget. Some of these projects are an upgrade to the fire alarms, new seats and runway lighting in the high school auditorium and courtyard drainage issues at the high school.

In the question and answer period, Dan Hochvert asked about the impact of the new bond offering on taxpayers. Purvis was not able to give an answer at the meeting but later supplied Scarsdale10583 with the following estimate: Here is what she shared:

"Budget appropriations for debt service are scheduled to go down by $1,700,000 in the 2015-16 budget. The debt service associated with the bond issuance of $17,000,000 is estimated at about $1.425,000 annually if the Board borrows the money for 15 years at 3%. If they decide to borrow that amount over 18 years, the rate is estimated at 3.25% and payments are about $'1,260,000 annually. Obviously these are all estimates, based on the assumptions we have in place now. If interest rates bump up a bit or if the board decides to go back to the $18,000,000 total, then obviously the payments will be adjusted upward a little bit. But unless something changes drastically, the new debt service should still be a little less than what is coming out of the budget."

(Update October 2) On Wednesday night October 1 the Board met with the the Building Steering Committeeto discuss a list of capital projects that could be funded in the bond referendum if the Board decides to go from $16.7 to $18 million. These projects would likely be included in the proposed school budget for 2015-16. Among the prioritized projects are the following:

- Drainage work in the high school courtyard
- Seat cushions for the chairs in the high school auditorium
- Aisle floor lighting, stage lighting and the sound system in the high school auditorium
- Ventilation and lighting in Gym B at the high school

The Board is expected to consider these projects at their October 6th meeting.