YHS moves to hike district developer fees

Board delays loan decision

by Lacey Rees

of the Sierra Star

— Sierra Star/Lacey Rees

Debbie Sebastian, Yosemite High School math teacher, backed by her colleagues, and representing the Yosemite Teachers Association, read a statement at Wednesday’s school board meeting. Essentially, the teachers are against the district borrowing money to finish school construction.

A resolution to adopt a developer fee justification study was passed by Yosemite High School’s Board of Trustees last Wednesday.

Once the other Mountain Area school districts give their OK, developer fees will be raised, giving the high school $50,000 more each year to spend.

Among other items discussed, food sales on campus, building priorities and whether to borrow $3.5 million to complete campus construction projects were tabled for future meetings.

The meeting was lively with audience participation as nearly 80 people crowded into the school’s boardroom. About half of those were teachers, most wearing matching navy blue T-shirts sporting the YHS logo.

The school has found itself in a construction quandary since expected matching construction funds (to match an $11.7 million bond measure passed in 1998) from the state were suddenly withdrawn earlier this year when Los Angeles County schools threatened to sue the state for more money. Essentially the rest of the state money went to Los Angeles.

This has forced YHS to look for other ways to get money to finish its projects. A joint study was conducted last year by all the mountain districts to consider raising developer fees.

The study determined that “we are not charging the maximum developer fees allowed,” says Bill McCabe YHS district superintendent. By raising the fees, Yosemite could generate $290,000 a year, $50,000 more than it is currently getting, he says.

He added that the school will also be eligible for hardship funds — which can only be used for classrooms — once all the monies from the bond have been committed. There is $1.7 million of bond money left, now.

Steve Browning, YHS Spanish teacher, questioned, “Why did we build continuously when we knew the state wouldn’t give the money? We need to stop and look at the money.”

Math teacher Debbie Sebastian wondered whether raising developer fees could affect the amount of construction in the mountains.

“It used to a long time ago,” said board member Bert McSwain. “Now it is built in, and people know what they have to pay at the time of the planning.”

It is estimated that a new 2,500-square-foot home would generate $1,000 in fees. Of all developer fees generated, 40% goes to the high school and 60% goes to the elementary schools.

Mr. McCabe mentioned that the state also owed the high school $1 million in modernization funds, but no one knows when that will be paid.

While admitting that there are “no guarantees,” that the school could get hardship funds once they were applied for, the superintendent again reminded the board, “Do you want $50,000 for new projects?”

The board voted in the affirmative to adopt the developer fee justification study.

Group food sales

Nancy Teasley, special education teacher, accompanied by about 20 special education students, wants to restore the sales of food on campus by individual groups. The Special Friends class, in the past, has baked homemade cookies in class and sold them to YHS students to help fund extracurricular activities. The cookies were especially popular during mid-morning class break.

Now, she has learned, selling “home baked” cookies on campus is not allowed by the state, and neither can the class sell any food except through the cafeteria.

She wanted the board’s approval to partner with the new campus cafeteria to sell foods such as orange juice, wrapped muffins, donuts and granola bars. “The state says we only have four days a year to have fund-raisers to sell food that the cafeteria doesn’t sell,” she said.

Mr. McCabe mentioned that the cafeteria will likely run in the red this year, and suggested that snacks can ruin the desire to purchase a cafeteria lunch. He said that prior to this year, school food services fed 7% of the students. Now it feeds 18%.

Josef Lukan, student president of the Spanish Club, referred to the loss of the “illegal cookies,” and how much they were enjoyed by students. “We need to get fund-raising going,” he said, stressing that several clubs on campus earned money by selling food on campus.

“We can figure this out. There is a way to solve this problem,” said board member Tom Allcock. With the objective to create a nutrition program for the students, a motion to form a committee to do some research was passed. A special board meeting will be called when the information is ready.

Building priorities

It was difficult to separate the discussion of building priorities on campus from that of their financing.

“The No 1 reason the bond was passed was to close the campus,” said Mr. Allcock. Along with a new cafeteria and gym, the science rooms, administration and library were modernized. The problem arose when the rest of the project came into jeopardy because the “funds are not being met.”

A current building-priority list of 15 items was handed out to the audience. The first two, [remodeling building 500, auto, wood and welding education] and the energy project (that will save $40,000 a year), are done. The school is also committed to mitigating its wetlands.

In surveys given to 93 community residents, service club members and teachers asking them to list building priorities, 75% listed remodeling of buildings [building 300 is home economics and art, and 700 is performing arts] as most important, and 61% wanted to see more classrooms. Those items, along with re-roofing some buildings, are next on the school’s priority list — with nine more projects follow.

To borrow or not

The board discussed with the audience the wisdom of taking out a $3.5 million loan to complete those projects. The loan — called certificates of participation — would be paid back in 30 years using the developer fees and the $1 million in modernization money the state owes the school, whenever that comes in.

There will be a new state bond in 2002. “What I would like to see,” he says, “is a state bond in three categories: rural, urban and suburban,” so Yosemite can compete successfully in the state’s priority-point system. He added that money from the 1998 bond has to be used up within about another year.

The swimming pool, high on the priority list in the survey of local residents, has been put near the end by the school. “The reality of a swimming pool is that it must be built with district funds,” says Mr. McCabe. “The state will never contribute a dime to that kind of project.”

Teachers’ statement

Earlier in the meeting, teacher Debbie Sebastian handed out a statement to the board and audience from the Yosemite Teachers’ Association and, with the backing of her colleagues, she read it aloud.

The statement asked the “board to delay action on certificates of participation” and that more research be done before committing to a debt.

The group is concerned about the sagging economy and whether interest rates might drop further, how the school would fund maintenance costs on the proposed pool, and why the school didn’t make classrooms a priority when it realized the state would not hold up its end of the bargain.

Additionally, “the association believes that the district should be willing to invest in its staff as well as in buildings,” she read. The YHS teachers are currently at an impasse in salary negotiations. In view of the four “award-winning” teachers whom the school has lost, she wants to see a more competitive salary schedule to recruit and retain good teachers.

Economy questions

The school has 12 portable classrooms on lease from the state. “As soon as we build a replacement [10-classroom building], the lease will be up on the portables,” said Mr. McCabe, so the lease money, (paid now by developer fees) could be transferred to loan repayments.

“Whatever our decision on certificates of participation, we can’t do anything completely with the money that is left. We are stuck,” said David Hardesvelt, board member. “I have some discomfort with [borrowing.] You have to go with your gut.”

On the up side, he said that interest rates have never been lower, but it is a “guess on what the economy will do in the future.” He sees more development here.

“You need an accountant,” said Dennis Otterson, YHS teacher. His reference was to the resignation last month of Steve Carney, the district’s business manager.

Skip Bullock, a teacher at Oakhurst Elementary School, said, “I am concerned with what I see as an exit of award winning teachers. I say no to the loan,” what with the uncertain economy.

For or against

Concerning borrowing, he asked each board member to state, “Are you leaning toward it or against it, and are you willing to delay a decision?”

Steve Raupp, YHS principal, said, “I have heard the concerns about indebtedness to encroach on the general fund. Revenue from developer fees is a consistent income, and we have solid $1 million coming from the state.” He suggested using it as an insurance to pay off the loan if developer fees are too low. In any case there is no intent to dip into the general fund.

Mr. Allcock said he was not in favor of borrowing $3.5 million, but rather “spend the rest of the money and then decide what we want to do.” He would hesitate to vote until the district got a new business manager.

Neither is he in favor of a pool, although he knows those in favor will be “ticked.”

“In mind of what happened this past week, I am really conservative,” said trustee Karen Hutchins. “We still have a bit of time.”

Mr. Hartesvelt said he would like to wait one month to “hammer out priorities” and decide how much the district is willing to spend.

“I am in favor of [completing all the projects],” says board member Bert McSwain. “If you don’t take the shot, you will never know if you hit anything. I am for going ahead; $3.5 [million] can be adjusted. I am not for cutting anything. I am for starting with the list.”

Board President Dennis Adams said he was not in favor of a loan. “We have $1.7 million and the developer fees,” he said. Let’s figure out how much it will cost.”

Mr. Allcock moved that the item be tabled. “We don’t have a financial manager, but we have money we have to spend.”

It was decided to table both the building priorities and whether to take out a loan. The board will conduct a workshop and have a special meeting on the subjects on Friday, September 21. The board members said they would welcome any input, to call them at home if necessary.