What stays, goes on meager funds
High
school asks public for project priorities
About 30
Mountain Area residents shared, perhaps with more questions than requests, with
the Yosemite Joint Union High School District Board of Trustees Thursday how
they would like to see the high school’s remaining construction funds spent.
In
addition, the YHS budget for the coming fiscal year was passed by the board.
The
proposed general-fund budget shows revenues of $9,091,978 and expenditures
of $8,912,783.
A full
budget will be published in the Sierra
Star later this summer.
“These are
very tenuous times because of the uncertainty of energy costs,” says Bill
McCabe, district superintendent. “At this point in time, we have not settled contracts
with either of the employee unions, [both the teachers and classified employees],
so that is an unknown variable.”
Once the
state passes its budget, the school will have time to revise its budget.
Among a
variety of expenditures and revenues, the budget showed an increase of
average-daily-attendance funds from 36 additional students. “The increase is
due entirely to inter-district transfer students from Golden Valley and Spring
Valley school districts,” said Steve Carney, assistant district superintendent.
It should
be noted, however, that these students will be lost in about a year when
Liberty High School is built in the Golden Valley School District.
Additionally,
150 to 200 more students will be lost from YHS when Minarets High School is built
in about two years, said Mr. Carney.
Before
passing the budget, the board wanted more time to look through the half-inch
thick bundle of papers. After the members were told by Mr. Carney that it had
to be approved by July 1 or state funds would be cut off, the budget was
adopted with plans to review it at a future date.
Concerning the priority for construction
work on the high school, Earlene Ward, YHS District representative, handed out
a paper listing the projects that still need to be completed and their
estimated cost. The situation, it was explained simply, is that the school has
only $2.4 million left to finish building projects that would cost $17 million
to complete.
A detailed
discussion on why the school is short on funds to finish its construction
project appeared in the Sierra Star,
[What’s next for YHS buildings?, Friday,
June 22].
The state
still owes the school $1.2 million in modernization funds, but the fund is
dried up. Until a new state bond is passed [one for $19 billion is proposed for
November], YHS will have to wait for that money.
“Our funding sources have been
cut by one half,” said Mr. Carney. He explained when YHS construction plans
were first drawn up, the school was put in a waiting list, and when it reached
the top, it would get its matching funds from the state.
Now,
because the state changed the rules, funding is distributed according to
priority points, which favors large urban districts. The priority points ranged
from 1 to 1,000. Yosemite is about 300.
So “we
have no chance of qualifying for any matching funds from the state”, he said.
“We ended up with $14 million to work with for a $23 million project.”
The school believes it can afford to
borrow $3.1 million and repay it over 30 years with developer fees, giving the
school $5.5 million to spend.
A portion
of those developer fees are now being used to pay the lease on the school’s
portable classrooms.
“We are
not anticipating the $1.2 the state owes,” says Principal Steve Raupp. “If the
state came through with the $1.2 million it owes, it would be used to pay off
the $3.1 loan.”
At this
point, Debbie Sebastian, YHS teacher, questioned whether it was wise to saddle
the future generations with paying off such a loan.
Board
member Dave Hartesveldt later concurred with the questions, “Do people want to
borrow $3.1 million? How does the community feel about that strategy?”
Mr. Carney
also questioned whether developer fees should be used if the high school
doesn’t have enough money.
The discussion turned to what can
be done with the $2.4 that the school has in hand. The much-anticipated
performing-arts complex, which originally was to have cost $4 million, is now
estimated to cost $10 million.
“Are you
telling me that somebody is $5 million off?” asked Bruce Derry, a YHS parent.
Principal
Raupp admitted that “the difference in what things were projected [by
architects], and what they have came in at, have been about 30% to 40% off.”
“Have [the
architects] been paid off?” someone from the audience asked. “No,” answered
Mr. Raupp.
“OK. We
can’t have the steak, but can we have a chicken leg?” asked Mr. Derry. “If we
can’t have a performing-arts complex, what can we have to build and support the
music and band program?”
The
possibility of just building the amphitheater portion of the performing arts
complex was brought up.
Mr.
Hardesvelt said it would depend on what the amphitheater would serve, how big,
how it would sit. One parent pointed out that it could not be used in the
winter … or the spring where one would need “cans of bug spray.”
Mr. Raupp
said that Building 700, which now houses the drama and music departments, will
have to be remodeled to make it more feasible for drama productions, but would
not be adequate for music productions.
Someone
suggested portable tents, but they must be moved every three years, said Mr.
Carney.
“Can we
turn over any rock or place to fund a performing-arts building?” asked Joe
Smith in frustration, a parent of school children. “No funds are available,”
said Mrs. Ward.
The
subject turned to the proposed swimming pool, when Tony Misner, father of a
6-year-old, and calling himself “One-Note Tony,” said, “We need a pool. We now
have a choice of Bass Lake or a river. It is unfathomable that we do not have a
public pool in the Mountain Area.”
The
audience clapped.
The
heated, outdoor pool, scaled back from the original plans, would be 25 meters
by 25 yards. It is the minimum specification for high school interscholastic
competitions.
It would
have a one-meter board, with plans for a three-meter board factored in, which
could be added later.
Mr. Raupp
pointed out that the pool costs would surpass the revenue it would generate. He
also said the proposed cost for the pool could go up.
While new
facilities were being discussed, it was reminded that sewer facilities need
upgrading, including fire hydrants, and the 25-year-old shake roofs on all the
old buildings, which now leak, need to be replaced. The original plan was to
use modernizing money to repair the roofs.
New
classrooms to replace the portables, remodeling of older classrooms and a new
agriculture facility are needed among other improvements.
“It’s
great to be able to share this grief with the community,” said Mr. Raupp.
Don Burks,
a member of the audience, questioned why the school was in the low-funds
situation at all. “We hear a lot of fuzzy law here tonight,” he said. “How can
the state commit to fund and then take it back?”
“Should we
be suing the state?” asked Mr. Raupp. “We have asked that ourselves. Would the
board OK that?” He said that the school
did contract with the community when it was asked to pass the $11.76 million
bond in 1998.
Mr. Derry
questioned whether anyone has gone to Sacramento to plead the district’s case.
Mr.
Hardesveldt said that Superintendent Bill McCabe talked to state legislators,
“but they couldn’t do much.
“We
visited [in Sacramento] on multiple occasions,” he continued. “At some point
you do what you can do, and those folks said, ‘We can’t help you.’”
At a
suggestion that some of the board be replaced, Mr. Carney said, “You could
replace everyone up here, and you would be in the same spot.”
As the
discussion appeared to dissolve into several small conversations, the audience
was asked to put a priority on the list of projects still needing to be
completed and turn them in as they left.
Mrs. Ward
has already given the survey to the Citizens Bond Advisory Committee and will
meet with the school staff around July 9 or 10 to go through the same
exercise. She will then plot all the
surveys and give the results to the board for its decision.