1 / 16

Act 1 Discussion: Debt Act Referendum - Upper Dublin’s Experience

Act 1 Discussion: Debt Act Referendum - Upper Dublin’s Experience. Act 1 Discussion: Debt Act Referendum. On March 20 The Upper Dublin Community approved a $119.2 Million of Debt to fund a new High School with a vote of 4,275 yes and 2,562 no. Our Background.

idana
Download Presentation

Act 1 Discussion: Debt Act Referendum - Upper Dublin’s Experience

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Act 1 Discussion: Debt Act Referendum - Upper Dublin’s Experience

  2. Act 1 Discussion: Debt Act Referendum • On March 20 The Upper Dublin Community approved a $119.2 Million of Debt to fund a new High School with a vote of 4,275 yes and 2,562 no.

  3. Our Background • A 25 member community “Task Force” reviewed all District Facilities for a period of over a year led by Vitetta Architects • The Product was a District – Wide Feasibility Study, a recommendation that the HS was the first priority, and very detailed HS Educational Model

  4. Our Background – cont. • Our HS building is 2, 50 + year old buildings which were later connected. The result was a large footprint – and not particularly attractive or well master planned building. • The architects cost estimate for major renovation and addition was ~ $95 million and new construction ~ $105 million • We had a $70 mill parameters resolution

  5. Background and Process • Based on the small cost diff, for credibility purposes we hired two additional arch firms to review our situation and create 1) a $70 mill renovation 2) a renovation and addition project and 3) a new construction option – “Design Competition” • Hire a CM to review Arch costs to insure fair and reasonable Arch estimates

  6. Process to Referendum • New architect selected • Cost differential of new and renovation still small ~ $10 mill – 10% • Based on costs and the limit of the parameters resolution, Board supported the Referendum Decision

  7. Rules of a Debt Act Referendum • Adopt a resolution 45 days before the referendum. • Referendum Date selected is guided by specific criteria. Either general, municipal, primary, or special election or more than 90 days away from other election dates • Get Solicitor (Wisler Pearlstine), Bond Counsel (Saul Ewing), and Financial Advisor (PFM) Involved • Public Relations or other Advisory Involved ?????

  8. Referendum • Based on the perceived confusion of the May Primary – Act 1 EIT/PIT vote and construction cost delay of waiting, Board decided to hold a separate referendum • Contact your County Election Board – (they will likely not be to happy) • Referendum Question: 53 Pa CS Section 8042(5) for wording. You can only ask 1 question – no either or

  9. Referendum • Our Superintendent and Board got the word out. Lots of Tours of HS. Involve Pro-Ed groups, Athletic, Arts, and Music Orgs • Lots of Community Meetings • Lots of Milestone Meetings • Lots of Information Meetings • Helpful to Have Pro Organizations prior to Referendum being Scheduled

  10. Referendum • The District pays the cost of the referendum – for us 14 voting locations cost $25K • Talk to your solicitor about what “position” you can take • If a no vote on the referendum you have to wait 155 days

  11. Roll Of Bus. Mgr. • Talk Real Numbers • Keep Others Grounded • Keep Process Honest • Time Talking To Citizens

  12. Bus. Mgr. Strategy • Do not shy away from the numbers • Have History Under Control

  13. Things to Consider – • The vote was based on a schematic design. Plus = you don’t spend lots of $ on arch fees that if there is a “no” vote, is wasted. Minus = the design is very likely to change - you will be accused of misleading and costs can change a lot. Implication = build in a large contingency (we used 12.5%) • Commit to decisions early – Arch Fees – CM or not – to some extent quality of construction • District-wide Building such as HS easier

  14. This Is Great…But Our Community Will Never Vote For a Tax Increase • Discussion…

  15. Electoral Debt Positives • Does not count against Borrowing Base Calculations • Certain ACT 34 rules appear to go away including 1) capacity – (you can design the building the way you want as opposed to avoiding “Taj Mahal”) 2) No Hearing

  16. After All This • Call with questions – Wade Coleman and Mike Paston –Pres. of Board - 215 643 8811

More Related