9/21/2011
Mt. Lebanon hopes to limit second bond issue
http://www.thealmanac.net/alm/story11/09-21-2011-ML-HS-bond-
http://www.thealmanac.net/alm/story11/09-21-2011-ML-HS-bond-
By Nick Lewandowski For The Almanac
writer@thealmanac.net
This year's property assessments will likely impact millage rates inMt. Lebanon
Millage rates are of concern to the district as it prepares to rebid its $113 million high school renovation project.
This could impact the strategy the district uses to fund its renovation project, as it, combined with the elimination of exemptions contained within the recent Act 25 legislation, limits the district's ability to raise taxes to fund debt. While all current debt is considered "pre-Act 1," any additional bonds floated to pay for the renovation will be subject to both Act 1 and Act 25 restrictions.
As it stands now, the district faces a second bond issue of $36,640,000, likely to be needed in 2014.
Klein stressed this was the maximum the district would have to borrow, however. She urged the board to consider alternative funding sources to limit the amount borrowed. These include the $8 million capital projects fund, the $600,000 food services fund and the $1.7 million asbestos abatement fund.
Any money used would still be considered part of the project budget, but would reduce debt issuance, thus leaving the district more flexibility financially.
This could prove critical in a few years as pension and healthcare obligations pressure district finances, especially given the murky legislative climate.
Asked to speculate on the impact of future legislation, Klein replied, "there are so many possible changes you're really going to have to look at it (when something is passed)."
The board also heard recommendations from an eight-member revenue review committee co-chaired by Klein and Kirsten Fudeman, which looked at possibilities for supplementing the district's current sources of income. These included advertising opportunities within the new high school building.
"We have a very attractive demographic in this community," said committee member Marc Field, who worked on that portion of the presentation. "But it would take a real commitment of resources to develop policies to determine what is and isn't appropriate."
More traditional suggestions included a planned giving program and alumni fundraising.
School superintendent Dr. Tim Steinhauer said he along with the administrative team would review the suggestions before making recommendations to the board.
Finally, on Sept. 19 the board voted 9-1 to submit revised PlanCon documents for the renovation for the high school project to the Pennsylvania State Board of Education for approval.
Vice president Dale Ostergaard was the lone dissenter, citing previous concerns regarding add and deduct alternates specified in the bid documents.
"I don't believe (the auxiliary gym, tennis courts and rifle range) should be listed there," he said. "I feel we committed to including them in the Act 34 document."
Just because an item is included on the add/deduct list does not mean it will be deleted from the project. It does, however, give the board options if project bids again come in high.
Several board members have indicated they might not support the project if any of these items had to be removed.
2 comments
writer@thealmanac.net
This year's property assessments will likely impact millage rates in
Millage rates are of concern to the district as it prepares to rebid its $113 million high school renovation project.
Act 1 of 2006 limits the potential millage increase for a given year in proportion to an inflationary index calculated from both Pennsylvania
Klein estimated that number to be 1.7 percent for the 2012-13 budget year. This could impact the strategy the district uses to fund its renovation project, as it, combined with the elimination of exemptions contained within the recent Act 25 legislation, limits the district's ability to raise taxes to fund debt. While all current debt is considered "pre-Act 1," any additional bonds floated to pay for the renovation will be subject to both Act 1 and Act 25 restrictions.
As it stands now, the district faces a second bond issue of $36,640,000, likely to be needed in 2014.
Klein stressed this was the maximum the district would have to borrow, however. She urged the board to consider alternative funding sources to limit the amount borrowed. These include the $8 million capital projects fund, the $600,000 food services fund and the $1.7 million asbestos abatement fund.
Any money used would still be considered part of the project budget, but would reduce debt issuance, thus leaving the district more flexibility financially.
This could prove critical in a few years as pension and healthcare obligations pressure district finances, especially given the murky legislative climate.
Asked to speculate on the impact of future legislation, Klein replied, "there are so many possible changes you're really going to have to look at it (when something is passed)."
The board also heard recommendations from an eight-member revenue review committee co-chaired by Klein and Kirsten Fudeman, which looked at possibilities for supplementing the district's current sources of income. These included advertising opportunities within the new high school building.
"We have a very attractive demographic in this community," said committee member Marc Field, who worked on that portion of the presentation. "But it would take a real commitment of resources to develop policies to determine what is and isn't appropriate."
More traditional suggestions included a planned giving program and alumni fundraising.
School superintendent Dr. Tim Steinhauer said he along with the administrative team would review the suggestions before making recommendations to the board.
Finally, on Sept. 19 the board voted 9-1 to submit revised PlanCon documents for the renovation for the high school project to the Pennsylvania State Board of Education for approval.
Vice president Dale Ostergaard was the lone dissenter, citing previous concerns regarding add and deduct alternates specified in the bid documents.
"I don't believe (the auxiliary gym, tennis courts and rifle range) should be listed there," he said. "I feel we committed to including them in the Act 34 document."
Just because an item is included on the add/deduct list does not mean it will be deleted from the project. It does, however, give the board options if project bids again come in high.
Several board members have indicated they might not support the project if any of these items had to be removed.
2 comments
Love that last sentence : 9/22/2011
"Several board members have indicated they might not support the project if..." Now there is a commitment to a plan if I ever heard one. Might not?! Might?! Might not?! Might?! I love decisive leadership.
Fed Up
What???? : 9/23/2011
Board members... "MIGHT NOT SUPPORT THE PROJECT IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS HAD TO BE REMOVED." Woul someone please analyze that sentence and tell taxpayers exactly what it says! Could one sentence sum up exactly what is wrong with the Mt. Lebanon School Board and the high school project. If they "might not" support the project, then they are also saying subtly "we might support the project too!" Love it when elected officials show decisive action... don't you?
Thinking about being disagreeable!
"Several board members have indicated they might not support the project if..." Now there is a commitment to a plan if I ever heard one. Might not?! Might?! Might not?! Might?! I love decisive leadership.
Fed Up
What???? : 9/23/2011
Board members... "MIGHT NOT SUPPORT THE PROJECT IF ANY OF THESE ITEMS HAD TO BE REMOVED." Woul someone please analyze that sentence and tell taxpayers exactly what it says! Could one sentence sum up exactly what is wrong with the Mt. Lebanon School Board and the high school project. If they "might not" support the project, then they are also saying subtly "we might support the project too!" Love it when elected officials show decisive action... don't you?
Thinking about being disagreeable!
The problem seems not even to be the money, but rather the nature of the project. If we now propose to eliminate facilities we enjoy in the "old" - but negligently maintained - school, exactly what are we gaining? Maybe tennis is not a sport in the 21st Century?--I suppose we shall see. It should occur to someone that a comprehensive plan for what is needed should be the starting point, not the last item, in this process. So, maybe it really is the money because we will buy whatever $113 million buys, regardless of whether it is better or worse than the current facility. And there is still no discussion of maintenance, deferred or otherwise. If the school board takes no better care of the "new high school" than it has the current one, we need to prepare for yet another in 20 years (but that will be a separate bond). Does it occur to anyone that there is very little good management or judgment being exercised here? Doesn't this board and its staff feel just the tiniest bit foolish over all this?
ReplyDeleteOne last thought. If the "desirable demographic" for advertising is our 70% too-old-to-have-kids-in-school population, perhaps elder care and products will find a market on the walls of the new high school.
I applaud Mr. Ostergaard's stance, that if the items were promised to the community in the renovation they should damn well be in the renovation.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand why the board would put Celli and bidders through an exercise of bidding a project that the board might not agree with. Why not insist in the gym, tennis courts and rifle range etc. in the first place?
Dick Saunders
Mr. Saunders,
ReplyDeleteI believe the project is being driven by a goal to spend to satisfy certain special interest groups.
How many gyms does USC HS have compared to our proposed three?
How many gyms do we have in the District compared to USC? Don't forget to count the elementary and middle school gyms that were not used when they were open on Sunday.
John Ewing