The superintendent and architect presented a summary of the proposal. A number of comments were made, pro and con. Most of the negative comments revolved around the relationship between the capital proposals and their effect on educational goals. Many of the commenters seemed to think that much of the money was being spent in ways that would not directly impact the student body's education. Particular reference was made to the amount budgeted for air conditioning, driveway/parking lot, and other items not directly related to basic education.
There were also comments regarding the effect on taxation, and that if the full capital proposal were to pass, taxes would increase by 15% (although the proposal handout seemed to indicate 15.56 if I'm interpreting it correctly) per year (not compounded - i.e., a set fixed increase every year until the required bond issue is retired). This is in addition to the normal operating budget increase which was estimated by the financial consultant (sorry, didn't get his name) as 5% per year (compounded), although this is less than the district saw last year.
In addition, a commenter presented to the Board a well-thought out critique. While a number of points were made, the key point I took away was that the presentation and architectural analysis was given by entities "solely concerned with the presentation's monetary acceptance." There was no second opinion, no second cost estimates, no second pair of eyes. The architect that did the study was the architect for the Taconic Hills project. Not surprising that our costs of $47MM (million) was in line with theirs.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
11 comments:
I do not feel as though any of the important questions were answered.
I agree that there are too many unanswered questions. Hopefully the superintendent and board will provide further details.
I was not at the meeting but have heard that this budget is up to 47 million! Who arrived at that? Were there bids on this? I don't remember hearing anything. Doesn't the school baord have an obligation to keep the taxpayer informed. I have never seen anything written in the papers.
The last poster is correct. The current budget is $47,975,000. The Superintendent and the Board are trying to determine which of the many included projects are really necessary and which can be deferred or eliminated. They have sought community input regarding the above, as well as the impact on taxes.
There has been little written communication although the projects have been discussed at the Board meetings.
My understanding is that there have actually been no bids sought at this point; the amount is the architect's estimate.
Please call the board members to express your feelings. They are listed at http://www.chathamcentralschools.com/boe/boe.html (cut and paste if not clickable).
Please pass this on!!!
What exactly is this $47 million project include? Does it include better education for our children? Does it include getting rid of some of the deadbeat teachers that are out there? (School Administrators know who these teachers are) Does it include better food for school lunches? The price of the lunches keep going up but the quality and the quantity stay the same. Does it include a safety plan for the freight trains that go by all 3 schools in case of an emergency - such as a chemical spill? (You know that the High School and Elementary school have only one way out) Also, the same architect that build Taconic Hills (beautiful school I must say) - built it on a swamp land - which the school is now sinking, the roof is also leaking and some of the floors had to be redone. This architect is also recommending that the same contractor used to build Taconic Hills - to be used in this $47 million project for Chatham. Now who is lining who's pockets? (Architect? Contractor? School Board Members?) I do not think that this $47 million project is what the taxpayers want or need- other things need to be done first than the stuff that they are trying to do here. Also, the taxpayers of Chatham School District will be footing this bill because we will be the ones paying for it. I also know that the population of students are declining probably due to the fact of the high tax rates and that new families can not afford to buy in the Chatham School District. So we need to ask ourselves - is this $47 million project necessary? Is getting a 20% school tax increase necessary? I think not.
Signed ,
Concerned Parent & Taxpayer of Chatham Central Schools
I have submitted questions to the superintendent and the board president, some of which you share in this blog. I did receive a response from both saying that the questions will be addressed in the board meeting on Tuesday. They are hoping for a large turnout. The meeting will not be one in which people in the audience will be able to ask questions,as was the case in the last one. They will discuss questions among themselves and we will be able to see how they address questions on the project. A short time may be provided for questions from the audience.
I have given them this blog site and John Wapner is checking out the questions being asked here. So if something is on your mind, put it here so it can be part of the agenda Tuesday. This is a great way to communicate.
John Kilcer, teacher CMS
Correction to the September 18, 2007 8:57 PM comment. The current budget is $46,975,000, not $47.975,000. Sorry for the error.
I really hope that the 46 million dollar proposal is a wish list for the school district. In reading over it - is sure sounds like one. Do the students actually need all this done to the school? I think that the school board members need to really look over this proposal very carefully because a lot of it is not needed. Also, Doesn't the school board have to ask for bids on this type of project from different contractors and architects? Do we have to use the same architect and contractor as Taconic Hills? Why? Because we know that they can build a beautiful school. I think that we should look at the problems that Taconic Hills is facing and decide against using the same people.
I have spoken to many people in the last few days and here are some of the opinions shared.
No one wants to pay higher taxes. realestate prices may fluctuate over the years - but taxes never go down. Since when did the board receive the power to dictate our community health and demographic? When taxes increase again, no young people will be able to live here, week-enders move in, student population goes down further.
The cost. Where did it come from. People want to know how our administration could be fooled in to thinking that when a $13,000,000 budget was not accurate, a $47,000,000 one will be. Where are the bids. People have a right to know exactly what they are expected to pay for.
An attendee of one of the meetings cited that it seemed as though the architect's "hook" is by pairing projects in order to get state aid. So, spend millions on an unnecessary item,add two classrooms we don't need and get 50% state aid. result - the taxpayer pays for items not needed BUT PAID LESS! What a deal!
The architect has come up in all conversations. It is felt that his fee is based on project size and that he is leading the board by the nose by using the state aid issue as the lure. How many of our board members are qualified to make decisions on a project this size? What are their business backgrounds on something as critical as this? They are good people and no one doubts their intentions - but really?
It seems to me that prudent administrators - in all years past to present - would have been budgeting money for the things they forsaw as future issues (roof, heat,ets) in order to avoid asking taxpayers to pay so much for things that will not directly affect our kids' education. Like a $1,700,000 district office rehab for 8 people - lots of comments on this one.
I guess it is a simple outlook, but why didn't we ask the people that maintain our buildings what they saw as necessary projects. why did we ask for a wishlist to begin with? And why (several asked this one) don't we build a new school.
If the board has spent two years on this, shame on them for not getting public opinion early on and shame on them for not getting it in the papers.
More will come, i am sure
With a proposed building plan such as this one - Why is it not published in the local papers? Do they not want the public to see their crazy ideas?
It HAS been advertized in the local papers several times. There were newspaper reports about the recommendations of the two community committees that the board commissioned to study the district's buildings. There have also been letters in the papers from the superintendent and board president. Right now, the board is trying to decide what size project the community can afford that also meets the recommendations of those committees. I say we have to give them a chance to work it out and publish what they want the community to vote on. Come to the meetings and find out what's being discussed.
Post a Comment