Zacher pleads case for school building repairs

by Karen Keefe
Grand Island Dispatch, December 8, 2006

The Grand Island Town Board provided another forum Monday evening for the Grand Island School District to present its case for approval of the building renovation project that will be up for a public vote next week.

It also provided another opportunity for critics to say what they believe is unfair about the referendum.

The voting takes place Tuesday, Dec. 12, from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. in the Grand Island High School main foyer

The audience at the Town Board meeting was considerably larger than at the most recent School Board meeting the previous Monday, as interim School Superintendent Lawrence Zacher reviewed the proposed $3.9 million spending plan.

‘No Cost to Taxpayer’

He pointed out that approval of the referendum would not result in an increase in the local tax levy because it would be funded completely through state building aid of at least 71.5 percent of the cost, with the remaining 28.5 percent to be picked up by a state Excel grant. The grant, an acronym for “Expanding our Children’s Education and Learning,” is a one-time opportunity to fund education construction projects across the state. Voter approval is needed to take advantage of the grant.

The district’s “road show” brought out two frequent critics of school district spending plans, residents James Mulcahy and Donald Wilkinson. They countered that even though there would be no increase in local property taxes, state spending of this type ultimately is derived from taxpayers’ wallets. They also stated their view that the renovation projects up for a referendum should instead be a normal part of the school district’s operations and maintenance budgets.

‘Operation and Maintenance Items’

Mulcahy said Erie and Niagara counties continue to lose population because they have the highest tax burden in the nation. He said the school district’s “big enticement appears to be that it’s free money,” which he said is still part of the local tax burden.

“When you look through the list of items to be taken care of with this funding request, many, if not most, appear to be operation and maintenance items,” Mulcahy said.

“Repainting the swimming pool, repointing the brick. Why haven’t these been part of the operating budget?” he asked.

“The only true capital items are repair of this middle school roof and the science labs, and while they’re necessary, they’re real sore spots. Both were part of the 1999 capital project that we approved at $18.4 million.” Mulcahy said the district should have a five-year plan, and argued taxpayers lack assurances the district won’t come back with requests for more repairs when they run out of “free money.”

Wilkinson echoed Mulcahy’s concerns, “I can’t understand why these expenses weren’t brought to our attention last May when we got to vote the first time. I suspect that the narrow margin by which the whole thing was passed had a lot to do with that,” Wilkinson said of the approval process for the district’s 2006-07 budget.

Zacher explained that the proposed improvements would address health, safety and maintenance issues at the district’s school buildings. The district’s literature highlights such immediate concerns as roof repair, masonry restoration, emergency generators, updating the district’s entire telephone system and basic infrastructure needs.

Slides in Zacher’s PowerPoint presentation, taken in 2005, showed a graphic illustration of the deterioration of the high school/middle school complex from the leaks in the roof, which occur whenever there is significant rainfall or winter-to-spring melting.

Zacher said “the highest and largest part of the project” involves repairs at the high school/middle school complex, estimated at $2.37 million. “A significant portion of the building needs roof replacement, which was not addressed in the previous project, and that includes, essentially, the entire middle school,” he said. “There will be masonry repointing and restoration in that complex, as well, with replacements of window sills and window sealants.”

Zacher also said the swimming pool needs a considerable amount of upgrading work, including plumbing. “The science room upgrades, which, as you’ve heard were part of the previous project which were not completed, (have) very serious work that needs to be done,” he added.

Other cost estimates include:

•$423,000 at Sidway Elementary; $280,000 at Kaegebein Elementary; $370,000 at Huth Elementary; and $526,000 at the bus garage, including such items as roof replacement and parking lot paving.

If Voters Say ‘No’

Zacher said if voters do not approve the referendum, three options would remain:

•The district would have to abandon its plans to complete the renovations, which would result in continued deterioration of the facilities and higher costs in the future.

•The district could reconsider the project at a future date, but the Excel aid would be lost, resulting in a local property tax cost of more than $1 million.

•The district could complete the renovations over a number of years, resulting in the entire $3.9 million cost of the project being funded by local tax dollars.

Zacher said the state Education Department determined a number of years ago that school districts needed to complete a building condition survey. “Sadly, in many school districts around the state, when money gets tight, the way that the board of education cuts first is to cut much-needed maintenance and repair items. Boards tend to favor putting money where it directly reaches students, and so as a result, many schools around the state have neglected the need to upkeep their facilities.”

History Behind the Vote

He said Grand Island’s building survey was completed and presented to the board in 2005-06. The board’s architect reviewed and determined those capital improvement projects that were necessary, and the school board prioritized them, with input from staff. From there, a tentative action plan was developed, with priorities labeled “A,” “B” and “C.” “For the most part, this project addresses ‘Priority A’ items,” he said. One “Priority A” piece considered too big for the purposes of this project was a redo of the middle school/high school library facilities, so it was set aside for the time being, Zacher explained. If the referendum, is approved, Zacher said, and if the district has sufficient funds, it would then tackle “Priority B” items.