NEW ELEMENTARY 1028 Hearing November 17, 2016 NEW SCHOOL - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

▶
new elementary 1028 hearing
SMART_READER_LITE
LIVE PREVIEW

NEW ELEMENTARY 1028 Hearing November 17, 2016 NEW SCHOOL - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Jan 17, 2024 205 likes •553 views

NEW ELEMENTARY 1028 Hearing November 17, 2016 NEW SCHOOL CONVERSATIONS NOVEMBER (Contd.) SEPTEMBER PGES PTO Staff: MSN MSC PTO Staff: PGES Presidents Group Staff: SGES Staff: NGES OCTOBER CG Ed.

slide-1
SLIDE 1

NEW ELEMENTARY 1028 Hearing

November 17, 2016

slide-2
SLIDE 2

SEPTEMBER

  • PGES PTO
  • MSC PTO
  • Presidents Group

OCTOBER

  • CGCSC Board Work

Session

  • NGES PTO
  • Coffee Chat

NOVEMBER

▪ CG Principals, Admins. ▪ White River Twp. Rotary

NEW SCHOOL CONVERSATIONS

NOVEMBER (Cont’d.)

  • Staff: MSN
  • Staff: PGES
  • Staff: SGES
  • Staff: NGES
  • CG Ed. Foundation
  • Transportation &

Maintenance Depts.

  • Staff: MSC
  • Staff: CGHS
  • Staff: CGES
  • Staff: MGES

2

slide-3
SLIDE 3

▪ Best for Center Grove students ▪ Elementary enrollment near capacity ▪ New school needed: 2019-2020 ▪ Finance, design, and build = approximately 30 months ▪ Until new school opens:

▪ Class sizes increase ▪ Portable classrooms needed

NEW SCHOOL OVERVIEW

3

slide-4
SLIDE 4

▪ Best for Center Grove taxpayers ▪ NO IMPACT on school district’s $1.00 tax rate ▪ Construction costs: $38-$42 million ▪ No referendum necessary, unless remonstrance petition filed ▪ A referendum would increase costs:

▪ @ $50,000 Special Election ▪ $1,600,000 - $2,000,000 increased construction costs (over 6 months) ▪ School bond cost moves above tax cap.

NEW SCHOOL OVERVIEW

4

slide-5
SLIDE 5

NEW SCHOOL = BEST FOR KIDS

5

▪ Better educational outcomes in schools below 800 ▪ Safer environment than portable classroom

slide-6
SLIDE 6

GROWTH HISTORY

2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 Change 61 171 42 67 47

  • 70
  • 11

129 36 175 165

61 171 42 67 47

  • 70
  • 11

129 36 175 165

  • 100
  • 50

50 100 150 200

Enrollment Mgmt. Enrollment Mgmt.

6

slide-7
SLIDE 7

ENROLLMENT CHANGE 2010-2015

7

slide-8
SLIDE 8

CGCSC ENROLLMENT

21 Years of Data 175 Students/Year 28 Years of Data 99 Students/Year 14 Years of Data 148 Students/Year

Only 2 Times In 65 Years

8

slide-9
SLIDE 9

2015-2016 ENROLLMENT

▪ Record Kindergarten Class (583 students) ▪ 4.0% increase in elementary enrollment ▪ Record Kindergarten Class (615 students) ▪ 3.8% increase in elementary enrollment

2016-2017 ENROLLMENT

9

slide-10
SLIDE 10

GRADE IDEAL RANGE Kindergarten 22-25 Grade 1 23-25 Grade 2 24-25 Grade 3 24-25 Grade 4 25-28 Grade 5 26-28

IDEAL RANGES FOR CLASS SIZES

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

10

slide-11
SLIDE 11

TRIGGER POINT

ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS

11

* Trigger Point for each school is 30 students less than the top of the ideal range. 2016-17 Ideal Range Trigger Point * Number of Portables Maximum w/ Portables Trigger Point* w/ Portables CGES 791 768 - 827 797 2 877 847 MGES 773 741 - 805 775 2 855 825 NGES 678 679 - 730 700 730 700 PGES 686 671 - 727 697 2 777 747 SGES 784 741 - 802 772 4 952 922 Total 3712 3600 - 3891 3741 10 4191 4041

slide-12
SLIDE 12

WHAT HAPPENED IN 2016-17

12

slide-13
SLIDE 13

CGCSC ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS

(Grade Progression Algorithm with Final ADM Enrollment)

13

4041 2200 2800 K-12 Elem Middle High Year KG 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Total Total Total Total ADM 2014 533 600 591 533 598 585 608 645 603 633 626 591 603 7749 3440 1856 2453 7483 2015 583 574 612 627 561 619 592 615 665 635 638 616 587 7924 3576 1872 2476 7633 2016 615 606 625 640 640 586 653 606 619 660 606 622 605 8083 3712 1878 2493 7776 2017 620 661 632 648 664 658 605 669 611 625 649 597 616 8255 3883 1885 2487 7945 2018 626 666 689 655 673 683 679 620 675 617 614 639 591 8428 3992 1974 2462 8115 2019 632 673 694 714 680 692 705 695 625 682 607 605 633 8638 4085 2025 2527 8321 2020 639 679 701 719 741 699 714 722 702 632 670 598 599 8816 4179 2137 2499 8496 2021 645 686 708 727 747 762 721 731 728 709 621 660 592 9038 4275 2181 2582 8716 2022 652 693 715 734 754 768 787 739 738 736 697 612 654 9278 4316 2264 2698 8952

slide-14
SLIDE 14

CGCSC ELEMENTARY ENROLLMENT TRANSFER STUDENTS

14

1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17

18 29 23 9 16 22

Total Enrollment New Transfers (Non-employee)

slide-15
SLIDE 15

CGCSC ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS

(Grade Progression Algorithm with Final ADM Enrollment)

2,500 3,000 3,500 4,000 4,500

3,332 3,349 3,373 3,440 3,576 3,712 3,883 3,992

4,085

4,179 4,275

4,041 15 * * Trigger Point enrollment for new school

slide-16
SLIDE 16

NEW NEIGHBORHOODS

742 HOMES

16

slide-17
SLIDE 17

WHY CENTER GROVE?

17

INDIANA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

Rating

slide-18
SLIDE 18

4000 South Morgantown Road Bargersville

NEW ELEMENTARY SITE

18

slide-19
SLIDE 19

WHY NOT WEST GROVE?

Location

  • Northern half of district
  • I-69 ramp will be just feet

from entrance drive Maintenance

  • No city sewer
  • No sprinkler system

Size/Expansion

  • Flood plain
  • 62,500 square feet
  • Sugar Grove - 95,899
  • Maple Grove - 109,500

19

slide-20
SLIDE 20

POTENTIAL SCHOOL SITES 20

WHY NOT MAPLE GROVE SITE?

  • Main consideration: Current road structure can’t handle traffic
  • Cost savings: Land, utilities (not significant)
  • Future use: 3rd Middle School, 7th Elementary
slide-21
SLIDE 21

NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL PROJECTED CONSTRUCTION COST

Category Low Median High

Sitework 5,000,000 5,500,000 6,000,000 General Construction 14,000,000 14,500,000 15,000,000 Mechanical Construction 5,000,000 5,500,000 6,000,000 Electrical/Technology Construction 4,300,000 4,800,000 5,300,000 Construction Management 1,800,000 1,800,000 1,800,000 Architecture/Engineering 1,800,000 1,800,000 1,800,000 Financing/Consultants/Interest 1,800,000 1,800,000 1,800,000 Loose Equipment 1,500,000 1,500,000 1,500,000 Contingency 2,800,000 2,800,000 2,800,000

Total Project Cost 38,000,000 40,000,000 42,000,000

21

slide-22
SLIDE 22

TAX RATE IMPACT*

22

School district rate can remain flat at $1.00.

* Chart shows Debt Service Fund rate

0.20 0.30 0.40 0.50 0.60

2009 2014 2019 2024 2029 2034 Current Debt Service Payments With “GO” Bonds in 2016, 2018, 2019, 2020

New Elementary School

Funding Capacity

slide-23
SLIDE 23

CENTER GROVE SCHOOLS TAX RATE

2009-2016 and Projected 2017

23 1.040 1.020 0.990 0.960 0.990 0.946 0.995 0.990 1.008

0.250 0.500 0.750 1.000 1.250 1.500 1.750 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017

slide-24
SLIDE 24

JOHNSON COUNTY 2016 TAX RATE

Comparison

24

$0.0000 $0.5000 $1.0000 $1.5000 $2.0000 Nineveh-Hensley-Jackson Greenwood Center Grove Edinburgh Franklin Clark Pleasant

$0.7776 $0.8548 $0.9902 $1.0706 $1.5735 $1.8911

slide-25
SLIDE 25

LEGALLY REQUIRED INFO FOR 1028 HEARING New Elementary School

  • Estimated maximum par amount of bonds: $42,000,000
  • Maximum term of lease: 21 years
  • Maximum term of bonds: 20 years
  • Maximum annual lease payment: $5,100,000
  • Maximum total of all lease payments: $73,500,000
  • Total interest cost: $32,701,600
  • 2015 pay 2016 school Debt Service Fund levy and rate: $12,618,718 and rate
  • f $0.5527
  • 2016 pay 2017 school Debt Service Fund levy and rate: $13,755,000 and rate
  • f $0.5797
  • Maximum Debt Service rate for this project only (based on $5,100,000 maximum

annual lease rental and pay 2017 assessed value): $0.2150

  • Direct and Overlapping Debt as a percent of 2017 assessed value: 4.71%

Overall tax rate for the School Corporation will not increase due to the repayment of the bonds for this project.

25

slide-26
SLIDE 26

ELEMENTARY SCHOOL OPERATING COSTS

GENERAL FUND STAFFING $881,000 (Principal, Specials Teachers, Office Staff, Custodian, etc.) GENERAL FUND UTILITIES $204,744 (Gas, Electricity, etc.) GENERAL FUND MISCELLANEOUS (Professional Development, Library Books, etc.) $16,360

GENERAL FUND TOTAL COSTS $1,102,104

26

Increased enrollment will add revenue to the General Fund.

slide-27
SLIDE 27

FUNDING PROCESS

27

$2 Million to $10 Million: Remonstrance

  • Opposition must collect required number of signatures.
  • If enough signatures are collected:
  • Project goes to a remonstrance. (Each side has

30 days to collect the most signatures.)

Above $10 Million: Referendum

  • Opposition must collect required number of signatures.
  • If enough signatures are collected:
  • Project is placed on a ballot as a referendum. (The

project passes if more people vote in favor of it.)

  • Center Grove pays county election cost (approx.

$50,000).

slide-28
SLIDE 28

28

NEW SCHOOL IMPACT

WITHOUT A REFERENDUM

  • School tax rate remains FLAT ($1.00)
  • Portable classrooms needed for only 2 YEARS.
  • New school could open for 2019-20 School Year
slide-29
SLIDE 29

29

NEW SCHOOL IMPACT

WITH A REFERENDUM

  • New school repayment moves ABOVE tax cap.
  • School pays county $50,000 for special election.
  • Construction costs INCREASE $1.6 - $2 million
  • Portable classrooms needed for at least 3 YEARS.
  • If passes, new school opens as early as 2020-21.
  • If fails, must wait 1 year (May 2018 Election)
  • New school opens*: 2021-22**

* If remonstrance is filed and referendum passes.

  • ** 85 students above our max capacity with portables
slide-30
SLIDE 30 THRU JUN 2019 THRU MAR 2020

NEW ELEMENTARY TIMELINE

(With Referendum and Without Referendum)

30

slide-31
SLIDE 31

▪ Best for Center Grove students ▪ Elementary enrollment near capacity ▪ New school needed: 2019-2020 ▪ Finance, design, and build = @30 months ▪ Until new school opens:

▪ Class sizes increase ▪ Portable classrooms needed

NEW SCHOOL RECAP

31

slide-32
SLIDE 32

▪ Best for Center Grove taxpayers ▪ NO IMPACT on school district’s $1.00 tax rate ▪ Construction costs: $38-$42 million ▪ No referendum required unless remonstrance filed ▪ A referendum would increase costs:

▪ @ $50,000 Special Election ▪ $1,600,000 - $2,000,000 increase construction costs (over 6 months) ▪ School bond cost moves above tax cap.

NEW SCHOOL RECAP

32

slide-33
SLIDE 33

PUBLIC COMMENT

CENTERGROVE.K12.IN.US/NEWSCHOOL