Bond foes question feasibility

COLUMBUS -- The cost benefits and academic advantages are being hailed by proponents as primary reasons to vote in favor of a new K-8 facility in the Lakeview Community Schools District.

But opponents of the proposal are still skeptical of such claims due to the lack of a plan or evidence to support those assertions.

According to proponents, a new double track (two classrooms for each grade) K-8 facility would resolve problems of overcrowding at Shell Creek Elementary School and relocation of the Sunrise Community Elementary School.

The district has until Sept. 1, 2009 to vacate Sunrise, according to a property sale agreement with ADM Inc.

Platte Center Elementary School is not expected to be impacted by this proposal, according to Eugene Goering, board member.

The estimated $11.8 million price tag for the project, which includes a 70,000-square-foot building and 29 acres of land located northeast of the intersection at 33rd Avenue and 83rd Street, would also include construction of a wing for science rooms at Lakeview High School.

The $9.8 million bond -- $2 million from the building fund will be used for the project -- will be financed over a 20 year period by a levy increase, which could range from as much as 8.3 cents to as little as 7 cents per $100 valuation, or $83 and $70, respectively, per $100,000 valuation, according to Marc Munford, assistant vice president of Ameritas Investment Corp.

The net increase on the district’s levy, following retirement of a 2 cent bond in September, could range from 5.5-6.5 cents per $100 valuation, or $55-$65 per $100,000 valuation.

But if the bond does not pass, the district’s board of education may use part or all of that $2 million to relocate the Sunrise students to Platte Center and Shell Creek.

Superintendent Paul Calvert provided some cost figures for portables if the district must relocate students from Sunrise to the other elementary sites.

According to Calvert, the district currently owns two portables, and up to six more may be needed to accommodate the additional students from Sunrise. Each portable would cost between $10,000-$50,000 for used portables, depending on age and condition, and if not enough used portables are available, new portables would cost in the range of $100,000-$110,000. Based on those numbers, portables could cost from $60,000-$660,000 depending on availability.

In addition to those costs, Calvert said, each would require a moving cost of $8,000-$12,000 for each portable, depending on the distance of travel, and $25,000 for installation of each portable, which would be at least an additional $198,000 if six portables are needed, based on those figures.

According to a report from Rick Thomas, maintenance director for the district, there would be additional costs to upgrade Shell Creek to accommodate the student population increase and portable attachments.

The report, dated Dec. 10, 2007, stated the district would need to upgrade the Shell Creek well to a well that would supply at least 200 gallons of potable water per minute, add to or expand the three current septic systems since sewage is at capacity and the power supply is exhausted so “if more power is needed, new power must be brought in.”

Calvert said although the exact cost of such enhancements are not known, “we know it would be substantial.”

In addition to the utility enhancements, Thomas also said the Shell Creek building is 39 years old, and he was concerned about attaching portables to it. He also stated concerns about the need for more lunch times and more physical education classes, which both utilize the gym. So there would be scheduling conflicts, unless other arrangements are made.

Thomas also had a concern about an increase in traffic. There is already congestion during drop-off and pick-up times, and more traffic would create an increased hazard for students.

Shuttle transportation is being seriously considered as an alternative to the district paying mileage to patrons whether the bond passes or fails.

Larry Mohrman, board member, said shuttles would transport 75 percent of the Sunrise student population from Country View mobile home park on U.S. Highway 30 to either the new K-8 facility or Platte Center, which would be an additional 12 miles from the proposed K-8 site in a single direction.

According to estimates provided by the district, the annual cost for shuttling those students to the K-8 building would be $25,000 annually, which includes maintenance and drivers, and an up front cost of $15,000-$85,000 for each shuttle, up to two, whereas the reimbursement cost for drivers in the Sunrise could be up to $94,000 each year.

Goering said another reason he is supportive of this project is that operating and maintaining a single facility should be more cost effective than the upkeep and costs of two buildings.

“Maintenance and cost compared to two older buildings should be a savings to our district,” he said.

Dan Pabian, an opponent of the proposal, questioned exactly how much of a savings this project would have on the district because no hard numbers have been provided.

“Overall, there are a lot of unknowns, especially for something with this major dollar amount, like what the ongoing costs are going to be, whatever savings this building will supposedly have,” Pabian said.

John Mlinar, principal of Sunrise Elementary School, said in addition to the economic advantages, by not paying for two libraries, two secretaries, two people doing lunch records, for example, there are academic advantages as well.

Teachers could spend more time instructing and less time traveling, Mlinar said, and the consolidation of students from Shell Creek and Sunrise and the additional room afforded by the larger building could accommodate additional classes, such as art or another field prioritized by the board.

It also would provide enhanced academic opportunities, he said, by offering a complete algebra course for eighth graders, better utilization of Title I and ESL (English as a second language) services and staff and utilizing teachers’ areas of concentration more effectively.

“We can have two sections, one for algebra and one for regular eighth grade math. Currently, some algebra is taught but not a complete course,” Mlinar said.

As more students from outside the district are taking geometry classes as freshmen, there is a need to offer more advanced math classes, such as trigonometry or calculus, he said.

With two sections of each grade, there could be better use of teachers with specialized education so they could teach students in those respective fields, Mlinar said. For example, a teacher with a concentration in history could teach history to both sections of a respective grade and a teacher with a math concentration at the same grade level could teach math to both sections of that respective grade.

Ryan Specht, co-chairman of the LIFE (Lakeview Improvements for Future Education) committee and a teacher at Shell Creek, agreed with Mlinar’s assessment of the potential advantage to better utilize staff and provide an expanded academic offering.

“Right now that is not feasible for the way we are set,” Specht said. “We will be able to meet the students’ needs a lot better when we have that extra class. If you are teaching the same classes, same subjects ... you can teach something a little more thoroughly, because the teacher feels more confident or is interested in a certain area.”

Also, average class sizes of 20 students are more optimal and this project would help level out those averages to the 20 student range, he said.

“I feel really strongly about building a new double track K-8 building for our school district,” Specht said. “The focus is on the kids and giving the kids better opportunities.”

Mlinar said by having space for recreational, elective and extra-curricular activities, there is an inclination for more students to participate in activities such as Math Counts, band and sports because students would not have to be transported another site to participate.

Pabian questioned the overall academic benefit since there is no plan in place to identify who will teach what areas and how staff would be utilized to take advantage of those potential educational benefits.

“Do the benefits outweigh the costs,” he said. “They can say whatever they want. I would like to see something more solid.”

Pabian said he understands the district is facing a tight timeline and the alternative options may not be the best scenarios, but he was hesitant to support a project that has been rushed through without thorough analysis.

Roger Goedeken, co-chairman of the LIFE committee, said he has been in the district for more than 50 years and he would not want the district to take the “Band-Aid” approach to resolving their problems.

“Building a new school building, looking into the future, seems to be cheaper in the long run,” Goedeken said.

He said he, his wife and all three of their kids are in or have gone through the district, and he just wants what is best for Lakeview Community Schools.

“We’re trying to get a hold of as many patrons in the district as possible, holding informational meetings, calling (patrons) on the phone and asking if they have questions and directing them to the right people to get them the right answers,” Goedeken said. “We just want everybody to try to be as informed as they can and do what is right for the district.”