Funding
Q: Please understand that in a perfect world you would
have all the money needed to build the best schools in the
country. We all love our children and want the very
best for them. However, unlike the government, we can't
run our personal finances at a deficit. The simple sad
reality is that most people that I know can't afford another
tax increase and will vote no.
Just a suggestion - I would like to see you direct you energies
toward reform at the state level. It is totally wrong
for builders and Village Presidents or Mayors to boost profits
and egos at the expense of our children's education.
Without a doubt the school board should be be the ones
to set reasonable, binding impact fees. My next
letter today will be to my State representatives and I think
we as a community, along with all the other school districts
in the area, should demand reform.
A: Yes,
we all wish this was a perfect world. In that world
every new house built would pay Impact Fees commensurate with
the cost of housing the students coming from within it.
Unfortunately, it is not. You may have read the numerous
newspaper articles describing the fight the Big Hollow School
Board and Citizens Advisory Committee have been waging.
The Daily Herald wrote an Editorial supporting our effort.
Lake County has begun a new commission based on our requests.
We have been in contact with numerous Illinois legislators
in support of better, more equitable school funding laws.
Our website has many articles covering the debates over these
issues (http://www.bighollowcac.org).
In a perfect world, you can vote down a school referendum
and punish the builders. In this world, the children
suffer. It is not a matter of having a nicer building.
Big Hollow School is nearing its maximum capacity with between
400-500 students projected coming from residential development
over the coming years.
We certainly agree with your comments that it is wrong for
builders to profit at the expense of the children and families
of the district. We trust the above information and
that on our website has proven that. In the end, a school
is a direct reflection of the values of a community.
This is a fine district we find worth fighting for.
You must understand the people of the School Board and Citizens
Advisory Committee are simply homeowners like you and everyone
else in the community. We have no more free time, no
more money, no more resources than anyone else. There
is no "YOU", no THEM, only us. We urge you
and your fellow neighbors to join us. The near term
battle is for a referendum, but the real war is about what
is right.
Q:
Am I correct in saying that federal and state education money
don't go toward the building of buildings, leaving property
tax the only revenue stream for capital improvements?
A:
You are close. While there are small amounts of federal and
state money that go to different funds, the bulk of the money
for new land and buildings in a fast growth district like
ours comes from impact fees that builders pay through the
village. As you can see in the Development area of our website,
those negotiated amounts don't fully fund the impact that
a builder brings. While we are working hard to move the amounts
to a place that does support the impact, by law the only other
way a school district can fund land and building needs is
via a referendum.
Q:
What other bond issues does the district have
still outstanding? When will they expire and how much will
the tax rate go down when that happens?
A:
To date (10/2004), Big Hollow has $6.875M in long term
debt. Series 2000 will be paid off in 2014, Series 1999 in
2019. The reduction in tax rate can only be calculated at
the time of retirement of these obligations as it is not firm
number. The 2000 tax rate was $0.42 decreasing to $0.244 in
2003. It will certainly continue to decline as more new homes
are added to the district's E.A.V.
(return
to top)
Impact
Fees
Q:
The current buildings are at capacity, and will be filled
soon due to the building of new homes in the area. So,
in simple terms, builders are putting in new homes, and that
is requiring me to pay more tax money to support the influx
of new homeowners. Why are not the builders and new homeowners
taking on this additional burden? It makes no sense to me
that the already existing population of the area should be
required to support a commercial builder making money in the
operation of their business. Are not local taxes imposed on
properties in order to support public facilities such as those
that provide for our education and public safety? Is it not
time that the people making the profit, as well as those buying
the product, are accountable for their fair share of taxation?
A:
It is unfair for existing homeowners (taxpayers) to shoulder
extra tax burden simply because developers come into an area
and construct scores of new homes thereby putting an extra
burden on the local schools. The system as it exists
today in Illinois stinks. Unfortunately, it is what
we have to deal with.
You are correct that local taxes are imposed on builders in
the form of Impact Fees. Impact Fees, as they are administered
today are too low for almost all school districts. The
Big Hollow school attorney enlightened us to the fact that
typically Impact Fees contribute only 25% of the cost of the
new construction. Who shoulders the 75%? You know
the answer; it is why you sent the email; US!
We of the Big Hollow Citizens Advisory Committee are working
on many fronts to address these issues. We are parents
and homeowners like yourself, trying to make a difference.
Short term- we know we must pass the building referendum to
stay ahead of the population increase in our area so we can
continue to offer the quality education for which Big Hollow
has come to be known (thank you for your kind comments).
Long term our committee is working on numerous fronts, both
locally and with larger state groups to change the way schools
are funded.
Q:
HOW MUCH DO WE HAVE IN IMPACT FEES?
ALSO,
SINCE WE WANT $29 MILLION FOR THE SCHOOL- WHY DO WE ASK THE
TAX PAYERS FOR THE WHOLE $29 MILLION- WHY DON'T WE ASK THEM
FOR THE 29 MILLION, LESS THE IMPACT FEES??? I DON'T
QUITE UNDERSTAND THIS??
A:
As with all school funding questions there is no simple answer.
Your position that the school ask for the expected total less
the collected (or expected) Impact Fees is a logical one.
To understand how schools actually operate consider the following:
Consider
the present Building Referendum value ($29M) not as total
loan amount, but as a Maximum Line of Credit. The school
will take what it needs up to that maximum value. There is
nothing certain about Impact Fee monies. When the school
district projects how much money it will need for the new
buildings, it then asks for the total amount.
There
is good reason for this. Consider the following scenario:
The school
projects it needs $29M for construction. It expects
two, new housing developments will contribute $1M each ($2M)
of Impact Fees. It passes a referendum for the lesser
amount, $27M. One builder is behind/bankrupt/etc. and
does not build his units. The school is $1M short and
cannot meet its financial obligations For this reason, schools
typically go to Referendum for the MAXIMUM monies they will
need, then take what they ACTUALLY need once all other income
(e.g. Impact Fees) are known.
Q:
I have to say your example isn't necessarily true- doesn't
the builder have to pay the impact fees up front like we as
homeowners had to do when we built our homes, or is it different
when you build mass quantities of homes?
A:
Yes, you are correct. The builder essentially pays for
the buildings he is building based on his permit in any particular
phase of the project. Large projects can go on for years;
some phases are delayed or cancelled. Further, when
a school in Big Hollow's position is forecasting what space
may be needed it must look out into the future beyond the
known developments.
Q:
My question assumes we already have and know some of the impact
fees(Valley Lakes, Prairie Pointe etc). Also, you did not
answer the question of how much do we already have in impact
fees?????
A:
Personnel at the school are looking into how much in impact
fees has been collected since the beginning of this recent
phase of residential development (since Valley Lakes). We
hope to have an answer for you in a few days. Presently,
the school has approx. $700K of the Impact Fee monies.
It is less than might be expected since some of the monies
are paying for two existing items: * Alternative
Revenue Bonds used to buy the original 62 acres of land, *
Completion of "E" pod of the new Primary building
on Fish Lake Rd.
Q:
In one of the town hall meetings I attended, there was a discussion
about impact fees approved for Valley Lakes being only $600
and the normal fee in other communities was in the neighborhood
of $5,000-$7,000. Why hasn't the school board challenged the
village of Round Lake, who I understand issues the permits
for these homes to be built in their community, but in someone
elses school district. I plan like to vote for the upcoming
referendum because I see the need for the new buildings, but
I would also like to see some progress in addressing the issue
of inadequate impact fees. How can I participate in addressing
this problem?
A:
Many of the issues you note are the same that motivate us.
Let me itemize what you have asked:
* Impact Fees- one of our hottest issues. We have participated
in numerous meetings with village officials and builders with
the key goal of raising Impact Fees to the point at which
the project is "self-supporting". No one feels it
is fair nor equitable that existing homeowners should bear
the burden of new development. Getting fees of $712-$3,200
(Valley Lakes range across unit types) when we have shown
$20,000 per student (or $10K per unit if you use 0.5 students
per household) is necessary to be self-supporting. There are
too many issues to discuss by email but be aware that a major
issue is legal precedent in the state of Illinois. One of
the most (maybe the most) powerful lobbying organizations
in Illinois is the Homebuilders lobby. We have also opened
communication with Springfield legislators showing our support
for change.
* Village/School
boundaries- You note an issue that is a complicating factor
for our district. We are not part of a singular town or village
but "belong" to four communities- Fox Lake, Round
Lake, Volo and Lakemoor. It easily complicates what we do
by a factor of four. To answer your question, we have been
challenging ALL projects including those in Round Lake. As
I stated in my first point, Illinois law is part of our problem.
Schools have NO binding authority. Legally, negotiations are
between the village and builder. This is one part of the law
that must change.
How can
you participate? Your critical but fair attitude is a great
start. If you can join us in the CAC effort, please let us
know and we will keep you informed. If not, please spread
the word.
(return
to top)
New
Buildings
Q:
I was reviewing the numbers on the website regarding the enrollment
predictions for the district. I just don't see how the numbers
add up. The total number of new classrooms between the
two new buildings is at least 40. This number of classrooms
have the capacity to house 1000 additional students. Your
most aggressive enrollment estimates from Dr. Kasarda only
indicate an increase of ~750 students in the next decade.
This means 10 classrooms will go unused even if the "worst
case" scenario actaully does happen. If you use
the "most likely" scenario numbers provided by Dr
Kasadra (which indicate an increase of about 500 students
over 10 years), we're looking at possibly having 20 unused
classrooms if two new schools are built. This practically
means one of the new buildings will be unneeded.
Can
you tell me why you have presented a plan to the taxpayers
that is so far in excess of what is actually needed accoding
to your own numbers? It seems clear to me, after reviewing
your numbers and going with the enrollment figures that are
"most likely" to happen, that only one additional
building is needed.
I would prefer an approach that involved building only one
new school.
A:
You ask a number of good questions so let's try to answer
all of them:
Building
one building was certainly a consideration and is a good one,
particularly for the short term. Long term, however,
selling the Rt. 12 property, and all the benefits it offers,
necessitates completing all buildings on the site and vacating
all existing buildings. The benefits of this cannot
be underestimated. The $3-5M realized from the sale
is only one part of the puzzle. Having that prime, commercial
site developed will then add property tax revenue to the district
with NO increase in student population. That is a good
thing for all of us.
Big Hollow
presently has 53 classrooms among the two old school buildings
and one new Primary building on Fish Lake Rd. However,
7 classrooms are being used for other activities (Special
needs, SEDOL, etc.). The net classrooms presently available
is 46 which yields a realistic maximum of 1,150 students at
25/classroom. According to present building plans, there
should be approx. 75 classrooms at the Fish Lake campus.
1500 students (20 students/classroom)will be reached in four
years. 1875 students (25/classroom) may be reached in
approx. 10 years at which time we would need yet another building.
If we assume the same number (7, mentioned above) of classroom
used for other purposes, 1700 students (25/class for 68 classrooms)
would be reached by 2010.
The population
projections done by Dr. John Kasarda have been accurate, actually
on the low side. The numbers you see us using presently
are from a revised report he did just this past December since
his original numbers were low. His high number, unfortunately,
is the one growth trends are tracking closest to.
Q:
Do the plans (ie; $29M) include new furnishings for the new
buildings or will we be moving the old, aging things like
bookshelves, desks, tables, etc. from the Intermediate and
Middle School buildings to the new buildings?
A:
The $29m is for everything, including FF&E (Fixtures,
Furniture & Equipment). As much as possible will
be saved and moved over from the existing schools. We
are currently tossing around ideas on what to do with the
rest.
Q:
Does the proposal to build a new school also include tearing
down the two old schools and selling that land? If the reason
the old schools will not be retained is due to them being
in poor or unusable condition, can you tell me specifically
what is wrong with the old schools that prevents them from
being useable? If a new school is built, and its open is say
three years, won't it also be filled to capacity five years
from now? The newest school on Fish Lake went up about
3 or 4 years ago, and its is already
filled to capacity. Wouldn't we expect the same to happen
with the Newly Proposed school, too, and hence 5 years from
now we'll be in the same situation of not having enough space?
A:
* New vs. Refurbished buildings- this was a fundamental part
of our early discussions. A study was done by Ruck Pate
Architects (Barrington) who developed the following general
numbers:
Rehabilitate
Build New
Elementary
Building
$10,000,000 $10,000,000
Middle
School
$17,000,000 $19,000,000
Total
$27,000,000 $29,000,000
The
difference between adding on (and bringing up to the most
recent codes) vs. building new is within $2M. Considering
the sale of the Rt. 12 property should bring $3-5M, it becomes
a simple decision. Problems with the current buildings
include; classrooms/library/etc sizes are very small and made
smaller by coat hook area in the elementary building, storage
space in classrooms and buildings is lacking, no cafeteria
in the elementary building, locker rooms in the middle school
are in bad shape, no air conditioning in either building,
inadequate parking, and no room for expansion.
* Capacity- the new school on Fish Lake Rd. is at capacity
but it was never meant to be a stand alone school. The
master plan for the ~60 acres has always considered a campus
of three schools - Primary, Elementary and Middle. This
plan would house 1600 to 1900 students depending upon number
of rooms used as classrooms (some are necessarily used for
Special Education, Art/Music, etc.) and students per classroom.
Further, these buildings are being designed in a modular fashion
to allow additional construction at a later date. With
the acreage available, the school district is in good shape
for many years to come.
* Student
population- Some of this confidence is based upon projections
by demographer Dr. Kasarda whos studies have been very accurate
over the past years. He projects our local student population
will begin to level off under 1800 around the year 2014.
Q:
The brochure says that it will cost $27 million
to renovate and expand the current Route 12 buildings. How
much would it cost to expand only? How much would it cost
to renovate only? Who made the estimates? Are the estimates
available for review?
A:
Renovation and expansion cannot be considered separately
due to code restrictions. When expanding to meet enrollment
projections the buildings must be brought up to code as well.
The plans and estimates were done by Ruck Pate Architects
of Barrington, IL. The information can be gotten from the
district office in the elementary building on Rt. 12.
Q:
If the referendum passes, and the Route 12 campus
is sold, when will the new Fish Lake Road campus be overcrowded
and in need of additional facilities and another construction
referendum? How much money is expected to be needed for this
next expansion?
A:
The Fish Lake Rd. campus is expected to house approximately
2000 students. This capacity was based on the professional
projections of demographer Dr. John Kasarda. His "high"
projections for our area show student population beginning
to level off at 1755 by the school year 2013-14. Hopefully,
this building expansion is all the district needs for many
years to come. (see link to the Kasarda report, "Demographic
Study, Dec. 2003", on CAC Home page)
Q:
I
understand the need for more classrooms to house the influx
of new students from the new subdivisions. What I don't understand
is how the additional monies collected from the addition of
several hundred homes do not bring in enough income to do
what needs to be done. Between Valley Lakes, Prairie Pointe,
and Silver Leaf Glen, there must be close to 1500 new homes.
How are the new funds from these additional homes factored
in to the existing school budgets?
A:
An 'alternate bond' was used to purchase the Fish Lake Road
campus land and is being paid with Impact Fees. It is separate
from the money used to build the Primary school building.
The payment is about $200,000 per year. They have made 5 payments
so far for a total of $950,855. There are 4 payments remaining.
They've also paid $480,896 for the completion of the e-pod
(final area of the Primary building, being used this year).
In addition, they've paid $238,808 in Capital Outlay for Renovation.
Additional Impact Fees will be used for this purpose as needed
for upkeep of the existing buildings.
(return
to top)
Property Taxes
Q:
Residents in Gurnee or Schaumburg always talk about their
property taxes being lower because local sales tax help fund
their schools. Is this true or are they all wrong to believe
this?
A:
The direct answer to your question is that Sales Tax does
not make it's way into public school funding monies.
Community members are often unaware of the intricacies of
public school funding and believe that sales tax, rather than
corporate/industrial taxes help school districts in well developed
areas such as Gurnee or Schaumburg.
Although
not a ‘light read’, this document on the Illinois
State Board of Education’s website explains in great
detail those intricacies.
http://www.isbe.state.il.us/sfms/pdf/slf01.pdf
In approximate
percentages, 90% of our funding comes from real estate property
tax, 9% comes from state and federal sources, and 1% comes
from the Corporate Personal Property Replacement tax (CPPRT)
– essentially a corporate/industrial tax.
(return
to top)
Referendum
Q:
I'd like to know what the Board's intentions are concerning
the education fund referendum. My recollection is that
last year, the education fund increase was considered
to be of paramount importance. Has this been shelved?
For how long? Why? Your only comment in the FAQs is
that the two don't relate.
A:
You are correct on both points. The Education Fund increase
was presented as of paramount importance but it cannot be
confused with the needs of the Building Fund. Illinois
state law dictates these remain separate. Why presently
this is of less importance is as follows:
To understand
school funding in Illinois you have to understand the art
of projections. Yearly, every administration must project
their annual Costs (number of students, teachers, etc., etc.)
and compare it to the annual Income (almost no Federal money,
slightly more from the State, most from Local property taxes).
This exercise can be difficult in any school district but
here in Big Hollow it has been exacerbated by the rapid residential
development occurring in the community. This complicates
projecting Costs ("How many students will we have by
the end of the year?") and Income ("What will be
the Equalized Assessed Valuation the income is calculated
from?").
As you
are surely aware, the number of students is rising rapidly.
Present enrollment is at 1095; up 20 students in just the
past 30 days. However, the Income side has been affected
as well. The EAV of our area is also increasing at a
rapid rate due to the extra residential units. Herein
lay the answer to your question (sorry for taking so long
to get there). The EAV projections utilized by the school
administration the past few years have been low. The actual EAV,
and therefore the monies the school can derive from it, has
been higher than projected; hence the need for increasing
the Ed Fund rate has been temporarily ameliorated.
If you
know something about School Funding you may ask "Doesn't
the Tax Cap limit the amount of increase a school can receive
to 5% or a Cost of Living increase (based on CPI)?"
Yes, it does, but only to the EXISTING property values.
Any NEW construction is taxed at the full rate which can then
be accessed by the schools.
This
very subject has been one of great discussion within our Citizens
Advisory Committee. The understanding of School funding
is not something a person is born with and the realities have
been an eye-opener for all of us as we learn it together.
We hope this has been of some help.
Q:
The line of credit is a good way to explain it, although I
do think people always feel if you authorize them to spend
that much ($29 million) then they will since the people have
authorized that.
A:
It is difficult to question your skepticism. The same
attitude has been displayed in many of our Citizens Advisory
Committee meetings. However, if you review Big Hollow's
fiscal reputation for the past years (decades, actually) you
will find it has been very efficient with its money.
The same cannot be said for many other areas of our government
bureaucracy.
Q:
Was the recent brochure mailer (Spring 2004) just sent to
parents of school children or all school district residents
(ie; those without children currently enrolled)?
A:
The brochure was sent to registered voters.
Q:
Why were the recent brochure mailer just sent just to the
registered voters and not to all the tax paying residents
of the district? This information should be available
to all the school district residents irrespective of them
being registered voters or not, have children or not for the
simple reason that part of their tax money is going to the
school.
A:
We acquire the list for the mailings through the county and
can only obtain those who have registered to vote. Those
who are not on the rolls are not available. Unless registering
at the last minute, they will likely be ineligible to vote.
Student/family information is not something the school can
distribute freely.
While
possible to send bulk mail to all residents in the area, that
would triple our cost. We work with a limited budget,
strictly drawn from contributions. Because of this,
we evaluate the cost/benefit of our spending carefully.
Brochures will be given out by committee members at the Parent/Teacher
conferences, Open Houses, and other events prior to the referendum.
Q:
As a new resident with a child entering Big Hollow soon, I
certainly support the referendum as well as the concerns raised
in your Q&A section of the website. The first questions
is, will these funds be locked into the construction of new
buildings and their associated FF&E's, or is it possible
that the money could be reallocated down the road to different
priorities as they arise?
A:
The $29 million for the new school buildings construction
and their related items can only be spent specifically for
that purpose. The $29 million cannot be allocated to
any other fund such as Education, Transportation, etc.
Q:
It is my firm belief that all new developers and new homeowners
be charged for the new schools. I will not or forever
agree for referendum for the new school. The tax payers
of Ingleside should not and will not pay for the new school
system.
A: It is not
fair that an existing resident of the community has to pay
increased taxes due simply to a large residential development
being built in the area. Members of the CAC have attended
numerous meetings, written many editorials, and, in general,
spent an inordinate amount of our time fighting for fair and
equitable Impact Fees. We believe, as you do, that builders
should pay their fair share. You may have recently seen the
editorial "battle" in the Daily Herald that we waged
against a representative of the Illinois Homebuilders Association.
Unfortunately, law does
not force this issue. Rather, it allows builders to pay for
land value only. This leaves thousand, if not millions, of
dollars for local residents to absorb in building new school
buildings. No, it is not fair.
Having
said this, taking a stand to "never" pay for a referendum
ultimately penalizes the children of our community for the
actions of developers and weaknesses in our state laws. It
ends up being short sighted and does nothing to address the
real issue. We encourage you to write or email your/our state
legislators expressing your disapproval and invite you to
join us in the battle. You can find specific events
and meetings around our efforts in the calendar area of the
BigHollowCAC.org website.
Q:
After talking with people in the school district, two of the
same questions keep coming up. What is going to be done with
the 5 million dollars from the sale of the property that the
current schools are on and why haven't you tried for one school
now and another at a later date? Five hundred dollars on a
350000.00 house is a lot of money to some people when the
economy isn't so great and a lot of people that have lived
out here for a long time don't have children in the school
district. All of the people in the new subdivisions want the
schools, but the old timers don't. If the referendum fails
again this time, I think you're going to have to reevaluate
your plan.
A:
To clarify, $5 million is not a confirmed number, rather one
estimate from a potentially interested party as of a point
in time. When the time comes to sell the property/buildings,
that number will likely be different. The plan that
the school district developed when purchasing the Fish Lake
Rd. land has been to first build two new buildings.
Then, if the Fish Lake Rd. campus is able to accommodate the
district’s students for the foreseeable future, sell
the Rt. 12/134 land/buildings. It is likely that commercial
property will be built there, which provides increased property
tax money without adding children to the district.
$1 is
more than most of us would like to pay in increased property
taxes, much less several hundred. Keep in mind that
because the EAV of the district continues to go up with new
houses being built, the bond money is continually being spread
over these new houses, bringing each of our >share down.
Take a look at the Big Hollow portion of your property taxes
(or the historical numbers on our website) over time to see
this.
At any
time in any school district, only 25-35% of homes contribute
children to the schools. Other residents were supporting
the schools when today’s older residents had their kids
in school. It takes an entire community to support the
schools with today’s public school funding methodology.
The quality of the schools is a direct reflection of the values
of a community.
We welcome your, and your neighbor’s, thoughts on what
the next best plan besides the short-term referendum request
would be and invite you to attend the next Citizens Advisory
Committee meeting, which is published on our website.
Q:
How can we assured that the money raised by the referendum
will indeed go to the responsible bidding and construction
of a school building and not be used in another capacity?
A:
By law, building referendum money can only be spent on land
and buildings. A school district has very clear rules on which
fund money can go into and come out of. The district's budget
is audited by an independant auditor and is available for
public review. As far as the bidding and construction being
'responsible', you can see some of the architectural designs
on our website. The district has reused designs, the architectural
firm, and construction resources from the building of the
Primary building to make the best use of the money available.
When comparing the plans for the new buildings to other area
school district's recent construction, our plans are very
reasonable for space, capacity, and cost.
Q:
How can we be sure that this referendum won't be a recurring
theme in future elections?
A:
This referendum is specific to the *building fund* ONLY for
two new buildings on the district's existing land. It has
taken into account an independant demographer's study of the
area's growth and student capacity needs. This should prevent
the need for a building referendum for the forseeable future.
While
there are efforts (that we are also involved in) to change
the way public school funding works in Illinois, it is difficult
to predict the future for the *education fund*. This fund
provides for teacher and administration staff salaries, etc.
The Big Hollow district has done a good job at limiting costs
and keeping the budget balanced to date, but it is difficult
to predict when/if there will be a need in this area.
(return
to top)
Rt. 12/134 Land and
Buildings
Q:
I voted for the last tax increase in the late 90's.
The plan then was to sell the property at Route 12 and 134
and use that money for the additional buildings. No
mention is made in this current campaign of what happened
to that plan. I'm sure you can borrow against the land
to construct the new buildings and pay off the loan when the
property is sold. If you can't sell that land then you
are going to have to use it and sell some of the property
on Fish Lake Road to help with the remodeling expenses. While
I agree that it is not the most perfect location, many of
us have attended school in older buildings in less than
perfect locations and received a very good education.
A:
We appreciate your support of the referendum in the late 90's
and want to address your questions so we can count on you
again. Essentially, the plan is still the same. With
the purchase of the 62 acres on Fish Lake Rd., a plan was
developed to build three buildings then move the entire student
population to this site. This has two, key financial
advantages:
1.) Receive a substantial amount of money from the proceeds
of the sale of the property
2.) As this has become a valuable piece of commercial real
estate, it is highly probable this will become a valuable
source of property tax monies- without providing any new students.
This is a win/win for this, or any, district.
One bit of caution- the school district has no control over
what happens to the scores of undeveloped acres left in the
area. The present plan was developed in the mid-90s
with an eye on a maximum student population of approx. 2000
students. The Fish Lake campus will accommodate this
number. If, for reasons presently unknown to all of
us, the projected student population increases to a higher
number, the buildings on Rt. 12 may still be needed.
Let us all hope this is not needed.
Q:
The plan for the use or sale of the property on Route
12 is still not clear. There is a rumor that this property was
donated and could only be sold to another educational institution.
If that is true I don't see any choice but to expand
and remodel the two buildings on that property.
A:
Any suggestion that the property was donated and could only
be sold to another education institution is untrue.
The property and buildings belong to the school district and
are fully within their control.
Q:
Your original promise in the 90’s was to build the campus
at Fish Lake Rd. and sell the Rt. 12 property to help pay
for the land and buildings.
A:
Members of the school district, school board, and Citizens
Advisory Committee have searched through archives of the local
press, school district newsletters, and other sources and
can find no promise that the Rt. 12/134 land would be sold
to help pay for the land and buildings. The district’s
position today is that when they have adequately housed the
students in the district on the Fish Lake Rd. campus, they
will then make the decisions on vacating the Rt. 12/134 campus
and disposition of the land and buildings.
Q:
I heard that the property the two schools are sitting on that
they own. After the new schools are built and they sell that
property, Where does that money go?
A:
The district does own the property and buildings at Rt. 12/134.
The district's position today is that when they have adequately
housed all students that they are responsible for on the Fish
Lake Rd. campus, they will then make the decisions on vacating
the Rt. 12/134 campus and disposition of the land and buildings.
Barring any big unpredicted growth or new federal/state mandates
that change the student population which the district is responsible
for, one available option is to sell the land and buildings
on that campus. If Rt. 12 corridor growth is an accurate indicator,
it is becoming more and more attractive as commercial property.
Q:
It seems that if the Route 12 campus is abandoned,
how much is reasonably expected to be realized from its sale?
A:
There is no way of having an exact number until a valid
appraisal is completed but unofficial estimates place the
value between $3M and $5M.
Q:
How will the proceeds of Route 12 campus be
used? To reduce debt? If not, why not? It seems that any sales
proceeds of major school property should be used to reduce
debt.
A:
The easy answer to this question is the proceeds will
be used to pay down the debt. The correct, and more complicated,
answer is there can be no firm position taken as only the
school board can make the decision. There are seven school
board members with all seven seats up in the April 05 election.
The sitting board at the time of the sale of the Rt. 12 property
will decide the use of the proceeds.
(return
to top)
Salaries
Q:
Our teachers salaries are also approximately $10,000
below the overall state average and $6,000 below comparable
type districts. With the growing student population and increased
demands, it makes sense that the teachers would request a
raise in salary commensurate with their responsibilities.
That, I would suppose, would result in another tax increase
unless the building funds could be diverted. We certainly
would not like to see a teachers strike.
A: Your
observation on salaries is accurate. However, once again,
I must point out that the $29 million for building bonds can
only be applied to buildings. It might be insightful
to note the comparison of the Big Hollow Tax Rate (2.305),
with the other 28 Lake County Elementary Districts: 21 (75%)
are higher and 7 (25%) are lower.
(return
to top)
Students
Q:
How many students are currently (10/2004) housed at
the Route 12 campus?
A: The
Big Hollow student population changes on almost a daily basis
but general numbers are;
Primary Building 540
Elementary Building 380
Middle School 260
This yields a present district total of 1180 students.
(return
to top)
Test Scores
Q:
While the need for new buildings is self-evident, I
also foresee in the near future the need for additional, and
highly qualified teachers, salary increases for teachers (but
not so much the administration), and other support to raise
our district state report card. As the attached spreadsheet
for ISAT/PSAE results from the State show, the district overall
ranks approximately 22 out of 35 in Lake County for combined
writing, math and reading, with Taveirne consistently being
ranked lowest. What is the plan to improve the scores?
A: Last
year's ISAT scores were a deviation from previous years.
It is an issue which has many components - too many to delineate
in an email correspondence. Mr. Pazanin, the Superintendent
of BHS, would be happy to discuss the past history of
BH test scores with you in more detail. Please contact
him at Big Hollow School if you would like to discuss.
(return
to top)
Voting
Q:
Can you please send us more information regarding voter registration?
Outside of the driver's license bureau, where and when can
we register to make sure we can vote on this issue?
A:
There are two options that we are aware of. There is
voter registration at the Primary School building this Friday,
2/13 from 2:30-4:00. Please contact the Primary School
office at (847) 740-5320 to double-check the time so that
you do not waste time if this is incorrect. Also, you
can register at the Grant Township offices on Molidor Rd.
You may also want to contact the office at (847) 546-8880
to verify availability of a registrar being on-site at a particular
time.
A
reminder that voter registration for the upcoming referendum
can only be done on or before 2/15/04.
Q:
What hours on March 16th will the polling places
be open? I’m trying to decide whether I should
plan to vote before work or after or whether I need to do
it at lunch or something.
A:
The polls in Grant Township are open 6a.m. to 7p.m.
See the Lake County website for further polling place information.
(return
to top)
|
