I am proud of our school-board members for having the courage to stand by the sound, responsible plan that they put forth for renovating the middle school, and I encourage voters to support them by passing the referendum in February. These dedicated community members, whom we elected to oversee our educational system, have done extensive, careful research, analysis and planning. They have listened to community input in regard to the location and design of the building and made adjustments accordingly.
I have followed the debate closely, attended a public hearing and spoke directly with school board members. They have articulately and fully responded to every issue raised by their vocal critics who continue to repeat the same discredited assertions.
The naysayers claim that it is fiscally irresponsible to be undertaking this project during an economic recession. School board members and economic experts have soundly refuted that assertion. Interest rates and building costs make this an opportune time for long-term investment. Sound financial planning requires a reasoned long-term perspective, not a panicked response to short-term economic conditions.
There is no doubt that the recession has harmed many people. But state and federal leaders need to address these issues through macro-economic policy and programs targeted to those in need. We are not going to save anyone from economic hardship by denying our children adequate educational facilities. On the contrary, investment in education is one of the most effective ways to build economic capacity and raise living standards.
The most absurd allegation put forth by the critics of this proposal is that we cannot afford to invest in environmentally sound building design. It is ridiculous to believe that we would save money by retaining wasteful, inefficient, unhealthy and environmentally damaging design features from the last century.
Our school-board members have done their homework and put forth a reasonable and responsible plan. I hope the voters will continue to support them by voting yes during the referendum in February.
Brian Obach
New Paltz
Saturday, January 16, 2010
Guy Kempe's Letter to the Editor 01/14/10: The Project is Scaled Right
In consideration of the proposed middle-school project, let's start with a look at the current situation. There are not enough outlets in our middle school for the computers necessary to educate kids, let alone the wiring necessary for high-speed internet. Current classroom configurations are 30% below current state minimum requirements. As Susan Zimet said when running for a seat in the state senate, "Education will open doors and pave the way for good-paying jobs and quality of life. Our children must be provided with the skills and tools necessary to compete in a global economy." "It is our responsibility and obligation to provide a learning environment that is safe, conducive to learning and available to all."
1) In 2005, a state survey of the middle school said it was "questionable that the building can continue to serve the community for an extended period of time without major renovations." Because education is central to our core values as a community, doing nothing is not an option. The "band-aid" approach (repairs only) could end up costing us more than renovating on site - the cost is estimated to be $10 million every ten years or so - without improving building function and efficiency, resolving any of the educational, justice (ADA compliance), environmental and safety issues. Over time, it would cost us more and accomplish much less.
2) Renovating the school on the current village site is projected to cost $49.8 million. This choice may sound costly - extravagant, even - but I have come to understand it is the fiscally responsible choice. More expensive renovation concepts were proposed and considered by the school board, but the board chose compromise and took a middle road renovation-build, new-combination scenario. I am convinced that this project has been scaled to meet the needs of the community. Factoring in state aid, the local share is just under $30 million.
3) Building an entirely new facility elsewhere is estimated to cost $65 million, and that is without the additional cost of acquiring the needed land. Selling the current middle-school property would need to net a minimum $15 million to come close to achieving a comparable cost offset for the new building, which is an unrealistic expectation.
I think it is a good idea to re-integrate the district office back into the middle-school site, in the center of our community rather than on the periphery of the district. The current temporary offices cost nearly $100,000 a year in rent, a cost that goes away if offices are relocated back to the middle school site.
Here is the real bottom line: in New Paltz we take pride in caring for and educating children, K-12 and beyond. Let's not make it easy for elected public officials to turn their backs on public education now that their children have grown and gone off to private college. I understand that property taxes will increase somewhat, and proportionally increase taxes on the million-dollar homes of wealthy county legislators. But being a higher-tax community with excellent schools is not as bad as some other things that might be said of us.
Guy Kempe
New Paltz
1) In 2005, a state survey of the middle school said it was "questionable that the building can continue to serve the community for an extended period of time without major renovations." Because education is central to our core values as a community, doing nothing is not an option. The "band-aid" approach (repairs only) could end up costing us more than renovating on site - the cost is estimated to be $10 million every ten years or so - without improving building function and efficiency, resolving any of the educational, justice (ADA compliance), environmental and safety issues. Over time, it would cost us more and accomplish much less.
2) Renovating the school on the current village site is projected to cost $49.8 million. This choice may sound costly - extravagant, even - but I have come to understand it is the fiscally responsible choice. More expensive renovation concepts were proposed and considered by the school board, but the board chose compromise and took a middle road renovation-build, new-combination scenario. I am convinced that this project has been scaled to meet the needs of the community. Factoring in state aid, the local share is just under $30 million.
3) Building an entirely new facility elsewhere is estimated to cost $65 million, and that is without the additional cost of acquiring the needed land. Selling the current middle-school property would need to net a minimum $15 million to come close to achieving a comparable cost offset for the new building, which is an unrealistic expectation.
I think it is a good idea to re-integrate the district office back into the middle-school site, in the center of our community rather than on the periphery of the district. The current temporary offices cost nearly $100,000 a year in rent, a cost that goes away if offices are relocated back to the middle school site.
Here is the real bottom line: in New Paltz we take pride in caring for and educating children, K-12 and beyond. Let's not make it easy for elected public officials to turn their backs on public education now that their children have grown and gone off to private college. I understand that property taxes will increase somewhat, and proportionally increase taxes on the million-dollar homes of wealthy county legislators. But being a higher-tax community with excellent schools is not as bad as some other things that might be said of us.
Guy Kempe
New Paltz
Alan Stout's Letter to the Editor 01/14/10: The Problem Won't Go Away
Everyone in the New Paltz school district knows that something needs to be done about the middle-school problem, but some people don't seem to understand that we're going to have to pay for it. One way or another, our taxes will have to be increased for the sake of our children.
The school board has spent almost five years studying the problem. Many board members have given countless hours of their time to work out the best solution for the students and for the community. No one who is opposing the middle school has really studied the situation in the same depth. Opposers are simply against a tax increase, any tax increase.
But the middle-school problem is not going to go away. It will just get more expensive. One thing I have in common with the middle-school opponents is that I don't like to see big tax increases either. That's why I think we should all vote yes and get this project going as soon as possible. Let's not waste ten million dollars on emergency repairs.
We should recall Benjamin Franklin's famous words that "... in this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." Any New Paltz taxpayer who expects to live for a few more years is going to have to help pay for the middle school.
A corollary to Franklin's observation is that "delay costs more money." Check with almost any economist or read the business news. Experts agree that both interest rates and construction costs are comparatively low at this time. Costs are certain to rise as the economy recovers. Right now is the right time to renovate the New Paltz Middle School.
Alan Stout
New Paltz
The school board has spent almost five years studying the problem. Many board members have given countless hours of their time to work out the best solution for the students and for the community. No one who is opposing the middle school has really studied the situation in the same depth. Opposers are simply against a tax increase, any tax increase.
But the middle-school problem is not going to go away. It will just get more expensive. One thing I have in common with the middle-school opponents is that I don't like to see big tax increases either. That's why I think we should all vote yes and get this project going as soon as possible. Let's not waste ten million dollars on emergency repairs.
We should recall Benjamin Franklin's famous words that "... in this world nothing is certain but death and taxes." Any New Paltz taxpayer who expects to live for a few more years is going to have to help pay for the middle school.
A corollary to Franklin's observation is that "delay costs more money." Check with almost any economist or read the business news. Experts agree that both interest rates and construction costs are comparatively low at this time. Costs are certain to rise as the economy recovers. Right now is the right time to renovate the New Paltz Middle School.
Alan Stout
New Paltz
Friday, January 15, 2010
Lagusta Yearwood's Letter to the Editor -01/14/10: I'M NO MONSTER
I've been closely following the debate about the middle-school renovations. There have been numerous long-winded letters back and forth about the project. But some key common sense seems to have been lost in the shuffle.
The facts:
The middle school must be renovated. After a lengthy process of public input, the school board decided to renovate rather than to build from scratch. This was a wise decision.
We all know how renovations go: the longer you wait, the more you pay. Thus, time is of the essence. The building is not safe for children or anyone else. The problems are real.
Many have attempted to mislead the community about the true costs of the renovation. Even in New Paltz, there are members of the tired old right wing who are constantly incredulous that living in a community means paying into a common fund to be used for the common good. These people have been whipped up into a froth by Fox News and typo-ridden hate-mongering websites warning of the "socialist" dangers of paying taxes. We need do nothing more than ignore them. Their facts are incorrect, which should come as no surprise.
The true fact is this: If your home is valued at about $300,000, your taxes will increase about $54 per year for four years, and then will decrease each year until the debt is paid off.
I don't even like children all that much, but if I wasn't willing to pay $54 per year to ensure that they could go to school in a building that wasn't at risk of hurting them, I'd truly be a monster.
Lagusta Yearwood
New Paltz
The facts:
The middle school must be renovated. After a lengthy process of public input, the school board decided to renovate rather than to build from scratch. This was a wise decision.
We all know how renovations go: the longer you wait, the more you pay. Thus, time is of the essence. The building is not safe for children or anyone else. The problems are real.
Many have attempted to mislead the community about the true costs of the renovation. Even in New Paltz, there are members of the tired old right wing who are constantly incredulous that living in a community means paying into a common fund to be used for the common good. These people have been whipped up into a froth by Fox News and typo-ridden hate-mongering websites warning of the "socialist" dangers of paying taxes. We need do nothing more than ignore them. Their facts are incorrect, which should come as no surprise.
The true fact is this: If your home is valued at about $300,000, your taxes will increase about $54 per year for four years, and then will decrease each year until the debt is paid off.
I don't even like children all that much, but if I wasn't willing to pay $54 per year to ensure that they could go to school in a building that wasn't at risk of hurting them, I'd truly be a monster.
Lagusta Yearwood
New Paltz
Steve Casa's Letter to the Editor 01/14/10: An Opportune Investment
Being a lifelong educator and someone who has dedicated a majority of his free time to young people and their development, I felt the need to contribute to the discussion regarding the middle-school renovation in New Paltz. We all know that the middle school is in dire need of renovation. This is a fact. My fervent support for this renovation has to do with my experiences with students and educators that I've had the pleasure to work with, along with a simple formula that I learned about in college finance.
I have 20 years of experience in schools as a teacher and coach, and for the last five years I have worked for a non-profit that helps reform high schools around the country. I have been in hundreds of different school buildings, many in a similar state as the middle school. The reality is that facilities do make a difference, not only in a child's attitude toward learning but also in staff morale, attendance for both students and educators -- along with giving all stakeholders the best possible venue for teaching and learning. I have seen both sides of the spectrum, and there is a positive difference when facilities are state-of-the-art.
If we want the best for our children and community we must make sacrifices, sometimes at inopportune times. However I don't believe this is an inopportune time. My belief is that we must vote yes and here's why.
Our $49-million investment is worth just that in today's dollars; with an average inflation rate of 2.82% over the last five years, that $49 million will only purchase $44,970,401 if we were to wait three years to start the project, $42,469,833 if we start in five years, and $36,809,933 if we waited ten years. We also must add the cost of band-aid upgrades and fixes while we postpone our investment and wait for a better market.
Waiting would be prohibitive and a less prudent investment. Good investors, the most successful investors, buy into down markets, and that is why we must all make the sacrifice now for our children and educators. We've all lamented about missing opportunities for good investments, let's not miss this one.
I am a single parent, with two children in the district, who owns a home in the town of New Paltz and who like everyone else feels the pinch of the current economy. Tax increases affect me as they affect us all; nonetheless, I see the value in this investment for our children and their future. In fact, my daughter, who is in fifth grade, will be directly affected by the adjustments that will be necessary while the project is completed. However, this issue is much larger than just my daughter. This is about all children in our community for years to come. Please join me in voting yes for this savvy, long-term investment in our children.
Stephen T. Casa
New Paltz
I have 20 years of experience in schools as a teacher and coach, and for the last five years I have worked for a non-profit that helps reform high schools around the country. I have been in hundreds of different school buildings, many in a similar state as the middle school. The reality is that facilities do make a difference, not only in a child's attitude toward learning but also in staff morale, attendance for both students and educators -- along with giving all stakeholders the best possible venue for teaching and learning. I have seen both sides of the spectrum, and there is a positive difference when facilities are state-of-the-art.
If we want the best for our children and community we must make sacrifices, sometimes at inopportune times. However I don't believe this is an inopportune time. My belief is that we must vote yes and here's why.
Our $49-million investment is worth just that in today's dollars; with an average inflation rate of 2.82% over the last five years, that $49 million will only purchase $44,970,401 if we were to wait three years to start the project, $42,469,833 if we start in five years, and $36,809,933 if we waited ten years. We also must add the cost of band-aid upgrades and fixes while we postpone our investment and wait for a better market.
Waiting would be prohibitive and a less prudent investment. Good investors, the most successful investors, buy into down markets, and that is why we must all make the sacrifice now for our children and educators. We've all lamented about missing opportunities for good investments, let's not miss this one.
I am a single parent, with two children in the district, who owns a home in the town of New Paltz and who like everyone else feels the pinch of the current economy. Tax increases affect me as they affect us all; nonetheless, I see the value in this investment for our children and their future. In fact, my daughter, who is in fifth grade, will be directly affected by the adjustments that will be necessary while the project is completed. However, this issue is much larger than just my daughter. This is about all children in our community for years to come. Please join me in voting yes for this savvy, long-term investment in our children.
Stephen T. Casa
New Paltz
Thursday, January 14, 2010
Crumbling Roof? School Board Approves Emergency Fix at Middle School: New Paltz Times 01/14/10
by Mike Townshend
With New Paltz Middle School's roof partially crumbling under the weight of rain damage and snow, the school board approved a $50,000 emergency repair last week. Water had been leaking from the ceiling in certain parts of the building, and eventually "part of the auditorium ceiling had collapsed," according to Stephen Callahan, facilities manager for the schools.
The collapsed snow guards on the old roof were the source of the problem. The middle school's roof has recessed gutters. The snow guards at the school are a strip or strips of copper - nowadays, stainless steel is the metal of choice - that hold snow back so it doesn't rush into and overtax the drains. "They're bent flat against the roof and they serve no function now," the facilities manager explained.
A number of drains along that section of the roof had also failed, leading to the collapse.
The $50,000 price tag pushed the repair onto the January 6 agenda, school board president David Dukler said.
According to Callahan, this part of the roof is just one of six parts in dire need of repair. The other five sections of roof could fail in the near future.
At first the school board wasn't convinced that it should address the problem immediately. "There is some possibility that this roof is going to be demolished," school board vice president Don Kerr said. "I don't want to spend all this money if it is just going to be demolished,"
Trustee Steven Greenfield called the roof one of the contributing elements leading up to the renovation of the middle school. "Where do we go with that roof if the public chooses not to replace the building?" he asked. Voters will decide February 9 on a bond for the proposed $50-million comprehensive renovation project.
Moisture and mold would become a big concern if the roof isn't fixed right now. The architects in charge of the renovation project, Rhinebeck Architecture & Planning, gave the school board a strong suggestion that the roof be fixed immediately.
New materials used to fix the building will likely be disassembled and reused if the renovation bond is supported by voters, Callahan said.
School board members voted to pass the measure, which allows the district to spend up to $50,000 to fix the roof. Potentially, the repair costs could be lower than that fully authorized amount.
With New Paltz Middle School's roof partially crumbling under the weight of rain damage and snow, the school board approved a $50,000 emergency repair last week. Water had been leaking from the ceiling in certain parts of the building, and eventually "part of the auditorium ceiling had collapsed," according to Stephen Callahan, facilities manager for the schools.
The collapsed snow guards on the old roof were the source of the problem. The middle school's roof has recessed gutters. The snow guards at the school are a strip or strips of copper - nowadays, stainless steel is the metal of choice - that hold snow back so it doesn't rush into and overtax the drains. "They're bent flat against the roof and they serve no function now," the facilities manager explained.
A number of drains along that section of the roof had also failed, leading to the collapse.
The $50,000 price tag pushed the repair onto the January 6 agenda, school board president David Dukler said.
According to Callahan, this part of the roof is just one of six parts in dire need of repair. The other five sections of roof could fail in the near future.
At first the school board wasn't convinced that it should address the problem immediately. "There is some possibility that this roof is going to be demolished," school board vice president Don Kerr said. "I don't want to spend all this money if it is just going to be demolished,"
Trustee Steven Greenfield called the roof one of the contributing elements leading up to the renovation of the middle school. "Where do we go with that roof if the public chooses not to replace the building?" he asked. Voters will decide February 9 on a bond for the proposed $50-million comprehensive renovation project.
Moisture and mold would become a big concern if the roof isn't fixed right now. The architects in charge of the renovation project, Rhinebeck Architecture & Planning, gave the school board a strong suggestion that the roof be fixed immediately.
New materials used to fix the building will likely be disassembled and reused if the renovation bond is supported by voters, Callahan said.
School board members voted to pass the measure, which allows the district to spend up to $50,000 to fix the roof. Potentially, the repair costs could be lower than that fully authorized amount.
Wednesday, January 13, 2010
Schedule for Upcoming Middle School Project Presentations Released
The New Paltz Central School District has announced the dates for a series of presentations regarding the upcoming Middle School Capital Project Vote that will be held in a variety of locations. Dates, times and locations.
January 27 7:00 PM Lenape Elementary School
February 3 7:00 PM Board of Education Meeting at the High School
February 4 6:30 PM Tours of the Middle School
February 4 7:00 PM New Paltz Middle School Gym
From the announcement: "These presentations come after years of discussion and planning about how to address the aged Middle School facility, which was built in 1930. After reviewing and revising numerous options, the Board has agreed on a plan that uses a combination of renovation and new construction to address the failing infrastructure and educational space deficiencies, as well as meets specific District spatial goals.
While the Board is acutely aware of the current economic conditions facing our nation, plans to address the Middle School issues have been under discussion for many years. Waiting for a better time to present the culmination of their work would likely result in substantially higher costs. According to the District’s professional consultants from Rhinebeck Architecture & Planning, the conditions offered by the present economy are expected to provide the District with the opportunity to secure project bids for less cost than what has been available in recent years. Securing bids soon will also help safeguard the District from cost escalations that will occur when the market shows greater improvement in the next few years, as is predicted. Aside from the effort to save as much money as possible for the community in the long run, the health/safety and educational needs of the students are such that the Board of Education and Superintendent Maria Rice feel that it would be irresponsible for them to delay this decision any further."
January 27 7:00 PM Lenape Elementary School
February 3 7:00 PM Board of Education Meeting at the High School
February 4 6:30 PM Tours of the Middle School
February 4 7:00 PM New Paltz Middle School Gym
From the announcement: "These presentations come after years of discussion and planning about how to address the aged Middle School facility, which was built in 1930. After reviewing and revising numerous options, the Board has agreed on a plan that uses a combination of renovation and new construction to address the failing infrastructure and educational space deficiencies, as well as meets specific District spatial goals.
While the Board is acutely aware of the current economic conditions facing our nation, plans to address the Middle School issues have been under discussion for many years. Waiting for a better time to present the culmination of their work would likely result in substantially higher costs. According to the District’s professional consultants from Rhinebeck Architecture & Planning, the conditions offered by the present economy are expected to provide the District with the opportunity to secure project bids for less cost than what has been available in recent years. Securing bids soon will also help safeguard the District from cost escalations that will occur when the market shows greater improvement in the next few years, as is predicted. Aside from the effort to save as much money as possible for the community in the long run, the health/safety and educational needs of the students are such that the Board of Education and Superintendent Maria Rice feel that it would be irresponsible for them to delay this decision any further."
Tuesday, January 12, 2010
Presentation on the Project at Duzine this Wednesday, 7pm
Reminder: there will be a Presentation on the Project at Duzine this Wednesday, 7pm
Friday, January 8, 2010
NPCSD Posts Details About Cost and High Performance Components
New information has been posted to the District's Middle School Project blogsite:
Click here to download a copy of the Detailed Project Scope Summary.
Click here to download a copy of the High Performance Opportunities Cost Matrix.
Click here to download a copy of the Detailed Project Scope Summary.
Click here to download a copy of the High Performance Opportunities Cost Matrix.
Wednesday, December 30, 2009
Terence Ward's Letter to the Editor 12/30/09: Biting the Bullet for the Sake of Our Kids
Richard Cohen believes that the Planning Board, and not the School Board, should be deciding what's best for the New Paltz Middle School property. He seems to suffer from a common, and understandable, misconception: that Planning Boards actually have anything to do with planning.
I've served on both the town and village Planning Boards and I can say with confidence that nothing could be further from the truth. What a Planning Board does is decide if the developer's project will go through or not. They don't decide on the zoning, they don't get to choose among several alternatives and they don't tell developers, "What the community wants is..." The very name "Planning Board" is a misnomer; laws governing Planning Boards make them reactive bodies, not at all involved in any real planning.
Mr. Cohen is also under the impression that the Board of Education made the decision to keep the middle school at its present location in a vacuum, completely understandable for anyone just waking up to an issue that has been actively discussed for years, not the few months some naysayers seem to believe. I was at the meetings and debates about whether it was better to keep it where it is or move it, and it was the community that gave the Board of Education its marching orders. Or, I should say, it was those of us who decided to show up. I imagine that the debate would be differently framed if those in opposition had helped the board make its initial decision, rather than pitching a fit now, after they did a tremendous amount of work to figure out what's best for the students and taxpayers.
For the record, as a taxpayer I'm not looking forward to what this project has in store for me. We can probably find ways to make it less expensive, but two things are clear: we have dragged our feet on this issue for too long and cannot delay, and it will cost us much less money to renovate it on the same site. That's what came out of the forums over two years ago, along with a desire to see our kids educated in a school they can walk to, and a desire to avoid the problems of what to do with the athletic field if the school isn't there anymore. (For those just joining the debate now, the New Paltz Lumber Company deeded the athletic field to the district under the condition that it be used for that purpose only, and the land will return to whoever its successors in interest are should that change. This means additional busing to cart kids into town to use the field.)
The real problem here is that property taxes are regressive and medieval. Once we stop trying to tie wealth to land and tax people intelligently, maybe we can have a rational debate about how to educate our children without having to punish those on fixed incomes for the sin of being successful at some point in their lives. I'm not holding my breath about that happening in my lifetime, but I am getting ready to bite the bullet for the sake of our kids -- even though I don't have any in school right now.
Terence Ward
New Paltz
I've served on both the town and village Planning Boards and I can say with confidence that nothing could be further from the truth. What a Planning Board does is decide if the developer's project will go through or not. They don't decide on the zoning, they don't get to choose among several alternatives and they don't tell developers, "What the community wants is..." The very name "Planning Board" is a misnomer; laws governing Planning Boards make them reactive bodies, not at all involved in any real planning.
Mr. Cohen is also under the impression that the Board of Education made the decision to keep the middle school at its present location in a vacuum, completely understandable for anyone just waking up to an issue that has been actively discussed for years, not the few months some naysayers seem to believe. I was at the meetings and debates about whether it was better to keep it where it is or move it, and it was the community that gave the Board of Education its marching orders. Or, I should say, it was those of us who decided to show up. I imagine that the debate would be differently framed if those in opposition had helped the board make its initial decision, rather than pitching a fit now, after they did a tremendous amount of work to figure out what's best for the students and taxpayers.
For the record, as a taxpayer I'm not looking forward to what this project has in store for me. We can probably find ways to make it less expensive, but two things are clear: we have dragged our feet on this issue for too long and cannot delay, and it will cost us much less money to renovate it on the same site. That's what came out of the forums over two years ago, along with a desire to see our kids educated in a school they can walk to, and a desire to avoid the problems of what to do with the athletic field if the school isn't there anymore. (For those just joining the debate now, the New Paltz Lumber Company deeded the athletic field to the district under the condition that it be used for that purpose only, and the land will return to whoever its successors in interest are should that change. This means additional busing to cart kids into town to use the field.)
The real problem here is that property taxes are regressive and medieval. Once we stop trying to tie wealth to land and tax people intelligently, maybe we can have a rational debate about how to educate our children without having to punish those on fixed incomes for the sin of being successful at some point in their lives. I'm not holding my breath about that happening in my lifetime, but I am getting ready to bite the bullet for the sake of our kids -- even though I don't have any in school right now.
Terence Ward
New Paltz
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
