$33,365,000 High School Capital Facilities Project ????

We, as the voting public of the Rondout Valley School District, are about to make a huge decision:

• Should we give the Board of Education approval to spend $33,365,000 on a High School Capital Facilities Project ?
  

Ultimately, this decision is about three things;

1. Will this High School Renovation/Improvement Project help our children be successful?

Many of the proposed renovations will simply bring the building up to code and will expand and modernize classrooms that currently lack adequate space and equipment to do such things as chemistry and biology labs. There can be no doubt that a clean new environment, without crumbling concrete stairs, old corroded windows and broken bathrooms will benefit students because cleanliness is better for their health, and safety is an absolute requirement.

Ultimately, the success or failure of students relies more on the support they receive at home, than how pretty their classroom is. But, the question remains, does a nicer school result in better grades?

One of the more well known studies was done in between 1999 and 2003 the HESCHONG MAHONE GROUP, Inc. of Fair Oaks, CA studied the effects of lighting and other physical comforts, such as ventilation, on productivity. They specifically studied students in classrooms with respect to their standardized test scores and attendance. The results were remarkable, after the data was retested and reanalyzed for accuracy, it was apparent that students exposed to the most sunlight had a 21% increase in productivity over the students with the least. Since, in corporate settings and schools, similar increases in productivity are no longer a mysterious consequence of increased sunlight but rather an anticipated result.

Perhaps the answer is simpler than a study can tell us.

If given a choice, where would you rather work? In an old office, at an dilapidated desk designed for a different job? OR In a modern office with a new work table and plenty of ventilation and sunlight? Would you be more productive in the newer office?

Should we be giving our students every opportunity we can afford in order to help them succeed?

2. Assuming everything about this project is what we want - Can we actually afford it?

This is in certain ways a personal decision. The school district has a bunch of charts and graphs on their website showing all sorts of combinations of how much this will likely cost each taxpayer. The bottom line is this: Most folks in Rochester have an average assessment of around $186,000. At that level, with Basic STAR, if both propositions pass, you will have a tax increase of about $68.00/yr. If you have No STAR, it will be about $80.00/yr. and with Senior STAR- $60.00/yr.

Is this affordable? Can your family afford an additional $5-7.00 per month to pay for this? Although none of us like taxes, most folks believe that public education is a good use for tax money.

Perhaps, the affordability question should really be - Is this a good deal, in terms of NYS coming up with their part of the deal? After reviewing the reimbursement proposal, for the standalone minimal Project # 1, NYS is scheduled to reimburse the district at a rate of 73% or $15,404,787 and for the more expansive combined Project #2, they will reimburse at a rate of 61% for a total of $20,215,595! The members of the Citizens Task Force along with the other planners have done a tremendous job in carefully using the state reimbursement schedules to get us the best deal possible. From this point of view this is a good deal!

3. Do we have faith in the Board of Education to manage the project?

• Has the Board of Education developed a plan that is cost effective both in terms of building it AND maintaining it, in the future?
• Does the plan adequately cover what is needed in order to avoid wasteful cost overruns in the form of change orders'?
• Is the Board of Education prepared to play hardball, if necessary, with the commercial building professionals from Turner and others in order to manage the spending?

These are the real tough questions. We can not even begin to discuss the school project plan with acknowledging the Enrollment Projection Study. We have a problem here! Based on a bunch of factors this well grounded, properly done study tells us that we are about to have less and less children in the high school. Unless something dramatic happens, for instance a major industry moves to our area (if only!) this downward shift in school population is almost certain. Has the proposal taken this into consideration? Does this mean we do not need this project? Let's talk about the current condition of the school and future maintenance.

This is where I get to say - It's my blog and I'll say what I want to.... In the past the district has done a horrible job of taking care of the facility. Some of the blame goes to the state for setting up the system that gives incentives only for huge renovation projects and no money towards slow steady upgrade projects done on a systematic, perhaps annual, basis. Part of the blame rests on the administration for not having aggressive building maintenance in terms of small repairs and other issues that should have been addressed from a janitorial/facility management point of view. The balance of the blame needs to be split between past school boards for a lack of foresight and leadership, poor management of the facilities and even poorer planning for not doing basic maintenance and for not anticipating and preparing for changes in building uses and academic needs.

Ultimately, it is us, the public, who are to blame for voting for school board members who have allowed this facility to become run down, unsafe, and shamefully decrepit. Have you seen the district's propaganda slide show, the school looks like buildings in places like Newark, NJ (no offense to Newarkites!). The worst part is if you go to the high school and take a tour to check it out, you'll see that it really is THAT bad!

So, can we trust them to keep up a new school?? NO Way - the only reason they ever do anything is because people complain. If this project passes, WE, THE PEOPLE, need to never allow a school board, administration and anyone in building maintenance, to let our investment decay to this condition again. We must force our board to spend their war chest of fund balance money on things like keeping our schools clean and safe, for students to learn in. It is never a savings to forgo facility maintenance, it always costs much more to fix later.

The answer to the second question is Yes, the original plan did not address the desire of the community to have a Green Building in terms of a commitment to the environment per se as well as the projected savings on utility costs based on a more efficient use of resources. As plans go, this is a pretty good design that works for us.

Ahhhhhh, my favorite part of this topic - Let me be as plain and simple as I can be about this: Commercial building professionals are evil sharks who's livelihood depends on squeezing every last nickel out of school districts like ours. Do I think the good folks from the EYP, Turner, the PR firm and others have been consciously taking advantage of us? Not really, but it is the nature of the process of doing projects, especially renovation projects, that unanticipated things always happen and they always cost more than originally planned. To blindly think that this isn't going to happen on our project is naive and silly.

CAN YOU SAY ULSTER COUNTY JAIL!!!!

What is equally silly is to imagine that our school board (unpaid volunteers who have normal day jobs, families and other commitments) and our school administrators (professionally trained educators with mission critical responsibilities running the schools) can manage a project of this size. We cannot, this is why we hired Turner Construction to manage the project. For a long time my big question has been - WHO IS LOOKING OUT FOR US? Who will manage the management company? If we had considered this back in 2001 perhaps the jail would have come in on time and on budget?

The truth is that we need a building professional to act as our ombudsman or clerk of the works. I envision that lunch meetings, opera tickets and golf weekends would be prohibited. I envision a person who would keep ridiculously detailed notes of everything that happened every day. Keep track of contractors coming and going. Keep logs of material delivered and used. AND, and, and... be a diplomatic but nevertheless PITA to keep things organized, going and honest. We are in the high tech world so this person would need a portable communications device to be in synch with everyone involved with the project including the computer which his/hers assistant would enter everything into project management software. What would this cost? Is this what we need to insure that we get what we pay for? If we vote for this project we need to insist that our investment is protected from the beginning... What do you think?

Please take a moment to add your opinion on the poll question on the right.

Is the High School Capital Project good for us as a community?

Please use the comment button to post your thoughts anonymously.