1 / 17

LAKE PEND OREILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT’S FACILITIES LEVY PROPOSAL

LAKE PEND OREILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT’S FACILITIES LEVY PROPOSAL. To provide every student an education that is academically rigorous, personally enriching and socially responsible. Needs addressed by this facilities levy.

studs
Download Presentation

LAKE PEND OREILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT’S FACILITIES LEVY PROPOSAL

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. LAKE PEND OREILLE SCHOOL DISTRICT’S FACILITIES LEVY PROPOSAL To provide every student an education that is academically rigorous, personally enriching and socially responsible.

  2. Needs addressed by this facilities levy • Relieving overcrowding by finishing construction of Kootenai Elementary, where the most growth is occurring • Reducing heating costs by installing energy efficient boilers/heating systems and controls • Improving student safety by adding buses and more vehicle maintenance • Acquiring needed technology infrastructure lacking at all schools • Upgrading food service equipment to meet unfunded federal mandates and regulations

  3. Lake Pend Oreille School Buildings Need Serious Help • No major renovations have been done since 1991 and most buildings need repair • The last successful bond election was in 1953. • All school buildings need repair. • Many facilities are out of compliance or below standards • The construction and improvements funded by a SPFL will cost far less today than if we put it off for the future.

  4. How this recommendation was developed • Facilities committee was formed early in 2005 • Technical research was used to evaluate facilities • Subcommittees addressed growth, long term maintenance plans, and logistics • Community survey conducted • Current plan evolved from Board action.

  5. Long-Range, Mid-Range, Short-Range Plan • Immediate Plan – 1-2 years –Kootenai Elementary, buses, technology, other capital improvements • Mid Range Plan – 3-6 years – SHS, SMS, LPO, buses, technology, other capital improvements • Long Range Plan – 7-12 years – Clark Fork, Farmin Stidwell, Hope, Northside, Sagle, Southside, Washington, buses, technology, other capital improvements

  6. SPFL Two –Year TOTALS $12,576,567 How the dollars will be spent. FY2007 FY2008 Total KOOTENAI SCHOOL $ 3,996,573 $ 5,075,893 $ 9,072,466 TECHNOLOGY $ 286,986 $ 263,360 $ 550,346 SCHOOL BUS TRANSPORT $ 1,018,984 $ 105,814 $1,124,798 FLEET VEHICLES $ 131,040 $ 78,520 $ 209,560 CHILD NUTRITION $ 294,000 $ 114,000 $ 408,000 BUILDING SYSTEMS $ 560,700 $ 650,696 $1,211,396

  7. Accountability • Citizens’ Oversight Committee • Responsible for monitoring the school plant facility levy in the area of: • Project sequence • Project time line • Project budgets and expenditures • Building design

  8. Financial Responsibility PROJECTED RATE FOR THIS SPFL IS .00126 OR A PROJECTED COST OF $126/PER YEAR FOR A TAXABLE PROPERTY VALUATION OF $100,000 $252/PER YEAR FOR A TAXABLE PROPERTY VALUATION OF $200,000 $378/PER YEAR FOR A TAXABLE PROPERTY VALUATION OF $300,000

  9. Construction Draw Schedule Based on a September 5, 2006 Election Date Occupy Kootenai School in September, 2008

  10. Construction Draw Schedule Based on an After September 8, 2006 Election Date and a 5.5% construction inflation projection. Occupy Kootenai School in September, 2009 A taxpayer savings of $499,000

  11. 78% of those surveyed favored finishing construction of Kootenai Elementary School

  12. PORTABLES – NOT A LONG TERM SOLUTION THERE HAS BEEN A SCHOOL ON THIS SITE SINCE 1910

  13. All heat systems need updates Most need automation

  14. Purchasing new buses is not only cost effective, it is safer for our students

  15. Some of the district’s school kitchens fall short of Federal standards and by law must be brought up to code.

  16. Adequate Yearly Progress Student Proficiency Report

More Related