the school board of seminole county - Seminole County Schools

THE SCHOOL BOARD OF SEMINOLE COUNTYACTION ITEM: WORK SESSION SUMMARY – APRIL 20, 2010 IV.B.Item Number1. Superintendent’s Recommendation:That the School Board of Seminole County accept as part of its permanent record this report of theApril 20, 2010 Work Session to discuss the district’s proposed project list for a potential sales taxinitiative.2. Background/Analysis:Chairman Sandra Robinson called the meeting to order at 2:00 p.m. Superintendent Bill Vogelwelcomed the guests and shared that the refreshment was provided by Suzette Swallow as astatement of appreciation for the district’s support of teachers. Deputy Superintendent of OperationsGeorge Kosmac introduced Dana Chester, Director of Facilities Planning and Construction.Mr. Kosmac explained that the intent of the Work Session was for the School Board to discuss itsproject priority list. Mr. Kosmac provided a review of the 5 Year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). Insummary, total capital funding has decreased from $112 million in 2006/2007 to $47 million in2009/2010. The State portion for capital funding has declined from $29 million to $1 million. Capitalfunding received from the State in 2006/2007 represented 26% of the total yearly budget and, in2009/2010, the State’s contribution to the capital budget was only 2% of the budget. The burden offunding capital needs for school districts has been shifted from the State to the local level. Mr.Kosmac noted additional pressures on CIP funding including legislative mandated reduction from 2 milto 1.5 mil or a 35% reduction in yearly funds, a reduction in local property tax assessments andrevenues and a falloff in interest earnings. New expenses for the capital budget include the costs ofpurchasing property insurance and acquiring computer hardware for the upcoming end-of-coursetests. Mr. Kosmac discussed the need for the district to explore additional capital revenue optionsincluding extending the current infrastructure sales tax (of which the school board receives ¼ penny)or seeking approval of a local capital outlay surtax of ½ penny.Mr. Chester discussed the process used to evaluate the capital needs of the district. In 2006, thearchitectural firm of Rhodes + Brito was hired to evaluate each of the district’s facilities and develop aneeds list. The needs list was updated in 2010. Rhodes + Brito has determined that, over the next 10years, SCPS has a total of $583.9 million in capital needs across the district. These needs includereplacing buildings in disrepair constructed prior to 1976, remodeling buildings constructed between1976 and 1989, security and technology upgrades to SCPS standards, and replacement of majorsystems that have outlived their serviceable lives including HVAC, roofs, and pavement. Notably, thecurrent 10 year CIP funding projections will not cover the needs. Currently 47 cents out of every dollarpays for debt service and, it is anticipated, that the amount may increase to 55 cents due to furthercuts in funding of the capital budget. The district is concerned that its strong bond rating may beaffected. Per statute, the district may not incur a debt to income ratio of 75% or more. Also, stateprovided PECO construction revenue, which previously generate millions of annual funding, is zerothis year.Page 14