Officials trim $30M off proposalBy Dave Munday (Contact)
The Post and Courier
Saturday, August 30, 2008
Pye SUMMERVILLE — The cost of a proposed referendum to build new schools around Summerville shrank by more than $30 million this week. Dorchester District 2 officials are studying ways to make the proposal more palatable to voters hit by rising prices and declining home values. The latest proposal, hammered out at a school board workshop Wednesday, is to borrow about $165 million, down from $195 million considered about two weeks ago. A key question is what to do about Rollings Middle School of the Arts, an aging building in downtown Summerville. The referendum includes a new middle school. Rollings was built in the 1920s. One proposal is to move the district offices, which are next to Summerville High School, into the Rollings building, which would have to be renovated. Then the high school could use the district office site for vocational programs. The proposal also would include expanding Summerville Elementary School, which is next to Rollings. "This is not about the district office moving to a better facility," Superintendent Joe Pye told the school board, recalling the flak the Charleston County School District got over building new offices on Calhoun Street several years ago. "Summerville High School desperately needs the space." The board also is considering moving the elementary school into Rollings. At this point, that appears to be the less expensive proposal, but project managers are studying cost comparisons. Renovating Rollings to the standards required for a modern elementary school might turn out to be quite expensive, board members said. Project managers will consult with state education officials before proceeding. The board cut the cost of the referendum by dropping a $12.8 million community auditorium somewhere in Summerville and a $3 million public library at Fort Dorchester High School. Those projects still might be included on the ballot, but they would be a separate vote and not part of the schools referendum. The board also cut a $17 million list of renovations. The district still would borrow money to put air conditioning in middle-school gymnasiums and repair ventilation systems and roofs, but the expense would not be part of the referendum. On the other hand, the board added $3 million to the referendum to expand vocational programs for students at risk of not graduating. Training students for the work force is a strategy to reduce the dropout rate, school officials said. The board has been aiming at a March referendum but has not formally approved it. The board will spend several more weeks refining the list before presenting it to the public for feedback. "This is just a beginning point," Pye said of the present proposals. "This is a work in progress." Borrowing $165 million could raise property taxes on a $200,000 house about $185 a year, district Business Director Allyson Duke said, adding that it's hard to come up with an estimate in an uncertain economy. Reach Dave Munday at 745-5862 or dmunday@postandcourier.com. |
Article tools |
|
Notice about comments: Charleston.net is pleased to offer readers the ability to comment on stories. We expect our readers to engage in lively, yet civil discourse. Charleston.net does not edit user submitted statements and we cannot promise that readers will not occasionally find offensive or inaccurate comments posted in the comments area. Responsibility for the statements posted lies with the person submitting the comment, not charleston.net. If you find a comment that is objectionable, please click "suggest removal" and we will review it for possible removal. Please be reminded, however, that in accordance with our Terms of Use and federal law, we are under no obligation to remove any third party comments posted on our website. Full terms and conditions can be read here. |
Comments
This article has 20 comment(s)
Posted by CharlestonJim on August 30, 2008 at 1:21 a.m. (Suggest removal)
With rates going up by 2009 (the fed will do so to hedge inflation), this will cost more than you will ever know. Do kids get better educations in new buildings? Are kids in old buildings dumb for life after the school year? Let's hope not, becuase it has no chance of passing. I think a nice ballot option would be to reassess property taxes based on 2008/9 values. Government rushes to reassess when values go up, so why not do the same as they fall? I say we lower our funding to schools, because all the money we have thrown at school in the past has only led to us needing to throw more money at schools. How do private schools educate kids cheaper with higher test scores and better teachers? Take a look at the buildings also. Study the differences....
Posted by belovedbliff on August 30, 2008 at 6:13 a.m. (Suggest removal)
You can't compare private school results with public school results. Also, private schools don't have better teachers necessarily. It may seem that way because of student outcomes.
You have to remember that private schools are typically dealing with a more motivated, privileged child to begin. This child excels in spite of the quality of teacher.
Posted by carolinadude on August 30, 2008 at 7:17 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I look forward to an interesting discussion of this article through the day and will be following all posts. As a resident of Dorchester 2, this forum gives me a good feel for the pulse of the voters concerning the coming bond referendum. Fellow voters, what are your thoughts about the new high school, Ashley Ridge sitting half empty this year? What are your thoughts about the General Assembly's refusal to re-enable school impact fees for builder/developers? This was removed from state statute under Gov Jim Hodges, and the General Assembly (bought and paid for by builders and developers) refuses to re-enable them.
Posted by carolinadude on August 30, 2008 at 7:20 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Fellow District 2 voters, what are your thoughts about taking Rollings School and making it offices? It seems a waste to me and that issue alone, would require the building of a new elementary school, would it not?
Posted by zekemire on August 30, 2008 at 7:41 a.m. (Suggest removal)
These votes need to be legally mandated to be held at the same time as general elections in November! In fact, all voting should be done on that date! The only reason to have votes on bond issues, town and county officers and other tax proposals on dates other than the general election, when many more voters will participate, is to tilt the chances of an approval or to tilt the chances of electing certain people running for office by having less general public participation!
Posted by STREETLAW on August 30, 2008 at 7:57 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Let me see. So you house payment would go from $1200 to $1385 a month. You can handle that can't you? If not just ask your boss for a raise or cut $185 off your grocery budget. I mean do you really need to eat?
Posted by asdpe on August 30, 2008 at 8:03 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Well, I've got several dogs in this fight, so I guess I'll join in. I'm a private school teacher, but previously was in public school for 8 years. Husband is a 15 year veteran of public school teaching. And we live in DD2 as well.
The comment about Ashley Ridge sitting half empty........come on, please. If your child was a senior at Summerville or Fort D and you were zoned for the area of the new school, would you really want to tell them they had to switch schools as a senior? The new school will be full soon enough, even overcrowded, when the current 9th and 10th graders move up to 11th and 12th.
Also, beloved bliff is right about comparing private school kids and outcomes to public school. That's not even apples to oranges, that's apples to zucchini or something VERY opposite like that. And there are positive aspects to both, although some may not believe that. The thought that comes to mind is the policy that private schools have of not accepting everyone, and not guaranteeing that you can stay (if you repeatedly break rules, can't behave etc). How would this work if the much-sought-after vouchers thing happens? (which I'm not in favor of, btw) You've got your voucher for the private school, but they don't have to keep you once you're there? Then where do you go?
Bottom line, I'll be voting to approve this in November or whenever it appears. It's a necessary fact of life, although many do not believe that.
Posted by tc1 on August 30, 2008 at 8:28 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I don't live in Dorchester but this is a statewide issue. The most fair answer is the school impact fee. When developers come in and build thousands of houses in a few years that has IMMEADIATE IMPACT on everything compared to moderate steady growth.
Posted by guidedbystewart on August 30, 2008 at 8:40 a.m. (Suggest removal)
Ashley Ridge half empty? Do you realize the growth in that area of Dorchester that is coming in the near future?????? What a crazy and ignorant comment, and if it half empty is a good thing, considering that it is only two grades that are attending at the moment. Folks, there is already allot of growth that is coming in the near future to Dorchester, and not even half of the approved subdivisions are any where near completion. This means that more development is coming, and there is not much we can do about it. DSD2 has allot problems that private schools do not deal with. There is the planning and logistics that is needed when a district grows as fast as DSD2 does. Private schools can be selective who they accept for enrollment. They can control their enrollment growth how ever they see fit, a luxury the public schools do not have. The point is GROWTH TAKES MONEY !
BTW, great post asdpe!
Posted by scienceguy on August 30, 2008 at 8:42 a.m. (Suggest removal)
asdpe:
A friend of mine has a child in an AP Class at Summerville High School. There are 35 kids in the class and not enough desks. She said that had her family been given the option of attending Ashley Ridge, they would have gladly changed places with a child zoned to attend Ashley Ridge.
Had the Dorchester School District Two Board of Trustees done its job and followed State Law, all children would be at the proper school and this discussion would be over except that some people would be complaining that their children had to go to a brand new facility with some of the better teachers in the District, but with the worst football team.
Posted by scienceguy on August 30, 2008 at 8:56 a.m. (Suggest removal)
guidedbystewart:
If you will note some of Carolinadude's previous posts you will see that he is kind of an oddity on this board. While he is a true fiscal and social conseravtative he supports planned growth and opposes urban sprawl and its causes. He is not advocating building more subdivisions and schools. He merely pointed out that when Ashley River was opened the other two public high schools in the district retained 800 kids zoned for attendance at Ashley Ridge, thereby needlessly perpetuating at least some of the crowding at SHS and Ft. Dorchester.
Posted by rollnwflo on August 30, 2008 at 9:43 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I believe that the tax increase would $185 annual not per month. My question for everyone who is opposed to the referendum is, what is your solution? Doing nothing is an option that only our elected officials have, those of us who live here face the hard choices of spending our money wisely. That means making the tough choices between what is necessary and what is not. All I ask is that we don't make the same mistake twice. When the last referendum was defeated, thank Dorchester Taxpayers Association, they won and what followed was a building boom that strained all of our school resources. Lets try to plan ahead and protect ourselves, no one else will be coming to our aid. Our elected officals, at all levels, appear to be bought and paid for. We have to think beyond ourselves, and try to plan for a community that we all can be proud of.
Posted by ginj on August 30, 2008 at 12:32 p.m. (Suggest removal)
rollnwflo - Increasing the taxes we already pay would not solve the problem. You only need to check your property tax statements over the past several years to see that no matter how much it is increased, they keep coming back for more.
How to solve the problem? All you need to do is to convince those in Columbia and Washington to work for the people, not their own re-election by using the money they spend on earmarks to lower their constituents taxes. Either they help us or we need to help them find other employment.
Property taxes are paid by property owners not transients who are only hear for the short term and go elsewhere (ie. most developers and construction workers) leaving those of us who make Summerville our home pay for their profit. Lets make sure they pay for what we have to live with.
Posted by tc1 on August 30, 2008 at 12:37 p.m. (Suggest removal)
"a building boom that strained all of our school resources"
Don't forget the roads and sewer and...
The developers walk off with a nice profit which is good and the American way. But a profit is a lot easier to make if the surrounding area has to suddenly come up with the expenses for infrastructure caused by the sudden IMPACT of the developer exercising his right to do what he wants with his property. Large Developers profit comes from everyone else picking up the major expenses caused by it.
Posted by mkris on August 30, 2008 at 1:15 p.m. (Suggest removal)
All those that have written that Taxes need not go up are delusional. The development that has already occured has made sure that taxes WILL go up to pay for the infrastructure necessary to service the developmnets and residents already here. Developers crap in the community backyard and then let the community clean thier mess. Impact fees are necessary and they have to be HIGH. $35,000 to 55,000 per home. That should cover the additional roads, schools, municipal services for a couple years. But development NEVER pays for itself.
Posted by STREETLAW on August 30, 2008 at 2:50 p.m. (Suggest removal)
rollnwflo you got me. I often slide these in to see if anyone is paying attention. Other times I get taxpayers rage and assume the worst. In this case I just plain goofed.
Only $185 a year is correct.
Posted by STREETLAW on August 30, 2008 at 8:31 p.m. (Suggest removal)
Gov, for the most part, is a sickness. But they do live within their means. They means to get every dollar we have.
Posted by just1reader on August 30, 2008 at 9:49 p.m. (Suggest removal)
why would Rollings have to be renovated to be office space? Just put in some cubicle dividers....well, ok I guess that is renovation. Sorry. And who is the dumbazz that things we need another auditorium (in addition to the ones at Rollings, SHS, and FDHS) and library (its on Trolley by Applebees, folks, just go there!) THINK, you idiots in DD2! Use what you've got!
Posted by CharlestonJim on August 31, 2008 at 1:15 a.m. (Suggest removal)
No one tied to any public school wants to compare private vs public, because public loses every time. No one addressed the building issues by the way... private schools as usually "eyesores". To just say "you can't compare private vs public" is because public doesn't try as hard, they just hide behind excuses and ask for more money, which has yet to solve the problem. Ironically, the public crowd says it is because they have never had enough money. So remember everyone, when the kids are out selling doughnuts coupons, books, wrapping paper, candy bars, etc buy as much as you can so the school gets their 3% cut to fund more middle management and travel/training for them.
Good luck in November!!!
Posted by Slick50 on August 31, 2008 at 7:34 a.m. (Suggest removal)
I think the point we should be focusing on is the issue of raising property taxes to pay for building more schools. Couple this with the plan to raise sales tax another penny to pay for the roadwork which the half-cent sales tax didn't cover. ginj is correct, they will keep coming back for more. Our elected officials need to do a better job with the assets they have and not keep relying on taxpayers to cover their misuse of funds.