Why I do not support the Lockport High School Capital Improvement Project – A Local Issue

(Via one of my Lockport High School friends who writes at In One Ear Out the Other, original article here)

December 13, 2008 · No Comments

This discussion pertains to an upcoming vote in my hometown of Lockport, New York. Though the specifics are quite local, I am sure that the issues at hand can be applied to any number of towns across the country.

On December 16th, Lockport residents will vote on Propositions 1 and 2,  which pertain to capital improvement projects for Lockport High School. The Union Sun and Journal lists the proposed improvements as follows:

Proposition 1 includes improvements to the high school, such as a state-of-the-art performing arts center, art gallery and a fitness center for gym classes. Smaller items such as new windows and new bleachers and padding in the gymnasium are also part of the proposition. An elevator would also be added, and bathrooms would be made handicap-accessible. The technology wing would also be updated, the library would be renovated to make room for a computer lab and bathrooms would be added nearby. Other improvements include relocating the Locust Street bus loop, a parent drop-off site on Lincoln Avenue, and improvements to ventilators and mechanical systems.

The proposition also includes a six-classroom addition, which covers the classrooms lost by adding the fitness center, and a new entrance to alleviate some of the congestion in the hallway. This proposition makes up about $23.5 million of the total project.

Proposition 2 is a varsity sports complex, which includes a parking expansion, resurfacing of tennis courts and a varsity softball field. The stadium includes bleachers that seat 2,500, locker room, concession stand and an artificial turf field, which can be used by a number of school sports teams. It makes up about $6 million of the project.

First of all, I do agree that each of the listed improvements are, taken out of context, positive. However, it is precisely the context that makes these two propositions good ideas proposed at the wrong time.

No matter which way anyone spins it, the nation is facing a serious recession and that is going to result not only in job loss, bankruptcy and general belt tightening, but it will also create serious spending problems for Federal, State and Local governments. Add to this the disaster that has been the New York State budget, and you get a picture of what our circumstances are.

The issue at hand is one of want versus need. While each of the improvements listed in the propositions would indeed be beneficial to students at LHS and I am glad to say I want to see my old high school have them, there are very few elements of those lists that I would contend the school needs.

First for the needs. I am all for improving the ventilator systems, updating wheelchair accessibility and updating our tech wing and library facilities. These things are all sorely outdated and directly impact the education and health of LHS students. These are the sort of maintanance projects that any school district should engage in on a year to year basis. They are not the stuff of large, one-off spending projects.

Everything else clearly falls under the wants category, some of them truly excessive. A state-of-the-art performing arts center? An art gallery? A entirely new sports stadium? No, these requests are ridiculous considering the state of the economy, and, more importantly, the state of Lockport High School. I absolutely support the arts and the importance expanding students’ education beyond math, science and history. However, there is no need for Lockport to splurge on a new, much less state-of-the-art performing arts center so long as we have access to Artpark and the gem that is the Palace Theatre (which, in my opinion, is a much better use of funding to support the arts). Also, and please correct me if I am wrong here, I do not believe that the auditorium that LHS currently has is inadequate or falling apart. If there are improvements that could be made, they would fall under the category of things that should be done on a year to year basis.

Proposal 2 is reprehensible in its entirety. Please explain to me why we need a brand new, multi-million dollar facility to house our sports teams when we have been spending the last few years upgrading our current sports fields and have spent so much time and money creating a state-of-the-art, multi-purpose sports field behind Emmit Belknap Middle School? What in the world would be purpose of that massive structure after creating this new stadium? Certainly not to support modified and Middle School sports, as they are being cut from the budget already.

If we are interested in supporting our sports teams, let us talk about addressing the debacle that is the LHS swimming pool. The repairs to the collapsing roof have been delayed time and again while much needed improvements to the pool itself are being ignored. I have not been following this situation as closely, but it is a great example of how our district handles improvements and repairs to the building.

Expanded parking lots? Where? Instead of spending millions of dollars to tear up the limited space around the school to move the entire bus loop and expand parking opportunities, why don’t we make the rules for students driving to school more strict? I cannot point to any sources, but there are a huge number of students whole obtain parking permits when they do not even own a vehicle to park there. Further, if it is necessary to allow fewer students to drive themselves to school, then so be it. We have a school bus system for a reason. There is a late bus to accommodate those involved in extra curricular activities. I am not sympathetic to students who want to leave school early their senior year. To them I say, stop wasting my tax money and make the most out of your public education.

Ninety percent of the projects described by Propositions 1 and 2 would allegedly be funded by State-level grants, while the remaining ten percent would be covered by reserve funds held by the school district. First of all, as I stated before, I am of the opinion that in the current economic climate, these funds are not to be taken for granted. Second of all, just because these funds are available from the state does not mean that Lockport is automatically entitled to them. I am just as sick of hearing about pork-barrel politics as anyone else, but again, just because we want it does not mean we need it. These funds could be better spent in a district that has the tax base to accommodate these sorts of luxury improvements and can afford to reap the benefits from state-of-the-art sports and performing arts centers. Just because these facilities exist in Lockport does not mean that they will be utilized in a profitable fashion. I direct you to the renovations to the Downtown area, the plaza behind Eckerd off of Transit and the renovations done to the original Harrison Radiator building and other historical sites along the canal, just to name a few examples. I am sorry, but just because you build it does not mean they will come. And please, stop telling me that because this is state money we can achieve all of these improvements at no cost to the taxpayer. Where do you think the State of New York gets its money?

Now, on to what I think money should be spent on at LHS; education. Instead of pandering to a sports program that bends the rules to accommodate students who are failing or are convicted of sexual harassment or counterfeiting money, let us augment the primary function of a high school and update our curriculum, purchase updated text books, hire more qualified faculty and improve the classrooms themselves. I understand that the money the district claims will cover 90% of the proposed improvements can only be spent on capital improvements. We can look elsewhere for funding. We could start, for example, with the $9.4 million of tax-payer funds that the district has been hoarding for the past five years instead of allowing for significantly lower property taxes in the area. The Buffalo News reports that the New York State comptroller criticized the Lockport school district for inappropriately holding the funds in reserve.

School Superintendent Terry Ann Carbone defended the move, explaining:

“I applaud the previous board and administration that set up these reserves in 2002 and saved for a rainy day because right now it’s pouring out,” Carbone said.

“.‚.‚. We can use some of these funds to help offset an anticipated reduction in state aid next year,” she said. “We could be facing up to a 10 percent reduction. What would this district do if it didn’t have these reserves?”

Well, for one, we could hold off on building state-of-the-art sports and performing arts centers.

Many supporters of the Propositions argue that LHS does not afford its students the same opportunities as other schools in Western New York such as Williamsville or Orchard Park. They claim LHS students deserve the best we can offer. I agree. But where LHS really lags behind is in academics. If we really want our students to have the same valuable experiences as other schools in the region, let us offer more Advanced Placement courses. Let’s improve our classrooms and offer a wider variety of course material. Let’s actually prepare our students for college rather than artificially glorifying the four years they spend inside the building itself. High School is about preparing students for the future, not making sure they have all the latest, greatest stuff.

Again, none of these suggested improvements are inherently negative. It is just that they come to the wrong place at the wrong time. We have more important things to worry about right now. I do believe that we should maintain up-to-date facilities in the public education system, and that our students deserve the best that we can provide. I do not mind paying higher taxes to improve education, not in the least. But when our Federal government is spending billions of dollars to prevent our nation’s financial system from collapsing and will in all likelihood spend billions more to prop up the Big Three automakers, we at the state and local level have to be prudent with the limited resources we have. Let’s improve and repair our schools gradually and over time with money we can guarantee, and save the big magnificent projects for times of prosperity. We are, after all, part of a larger economy and a larger budget; we can’t think about only ourselves.

This issue was recently discussed in a poignant editorial released by the US&J editorial board. I will copy the article here, but I first I want to close by saying that the intent of this post was to induce you to think a little bit about what you really think about these two Propositions before you go to vote on Dec. 16. The recession is causing a lot of partisans and political ideologues to do some soul searching to see what it is they really believe in. I believe this is a good opportunity for us all to do just that. Think before you vote, and please, do vote. I encourage you to reply to this post to start a discussion on the matter. I want to hear the thoughts of others.

Now, the US&J editorial:

EDITORIAL: A revised Prop. 1 for LHS could be endorsed

Lockport Union-Sun & Journal
Over the past few weeks our Editorial Board has opposed the $29.5 million Lockport High School capital construction proposal. Our stance has been met with agreement by many and, for obvious reasons, disagreement by district officials.

Superintendent Terry Ann Carbone and members of her administrative team met with the US&J Editorial Board this week to explain the project in great detail, hoping to change our opinion.

For the most part, they did not.

As it stands today, the project is split into two separate spending propositions, both to be voted on Dec. 16 either in person or through absentee ballot. The absentee ballot option was news to us, so be sure to spread the word on that portion of it to your snowbird friends.

Administrators have said the project will have no impact on local school tax rates because most of it will be paid for by state aid and the portion that’s not is to be covered by existing district savings.

Our opinion remains that there are no guarantees from the state and, considering the financial crisis afflicting both the nation and the state, there’s no better time than now for the school district to protect its reserve funds.

Proposition 2, which would pour $6 million into a Lockport Lions athletic complex including a varsity stadium with artificial turf, should be thrown out the window. It’s the perfect symbol of increasingly widespread public sentiment about this project generally: great idea, bad timing.

Proposition 1, tabbed at $23.5 million, should be rejected as well.

Elements within it are worth preserving, however. What we would recommend, after a double “no” vote, is that the Lockport School Board come back with a revised Proposition 1.

Projects within that warrant support are:

n All renovations except the cafeteria/kitchen re-do. Bringing the technology education wing up to date, adding handicap-accessible bathrooms and an elevator in the classroom wing and cleaning up the crowded entry corridor are projects that meet legitimate student needs. Rearranging the cafeteria into multiple dining stations, so Suzy can go for Chinese while Sam visits the Mexican stand, is not.

n All building condition survey work, including window replacement and mechanical upgrades, to increase energy efficiency.

n Addition of a computer lab and special education/life skills classroom. Carbone made a convincing case for both enhancing students’ day-to-day education.

n Site improvements: Increased parking, relocation of the Locust Street bus loop and creation of a parent drop-off and visitor area on Lincoln Avenue.

Other parts of Proposition 1 — addition of four “general” classrooms, a new chorus room, a new fitness room, an art gallery (?!) and band room expansion — are luxury items and should be scrapped.

We urge residents to listen carefully to district officials’ choices of words to defend Props 1 and 2. You’re being told that the state aid and district reserves can only be spent on capital improvements, not books, staff or other resources that affect children more directly. OK, that’s fine; a slimmed-down Prop 1 still fits the bill.

You might also be told, by Carbone, that your children “deserve” the best facilities, as good as any found in a district like Williamsville or Orchard Park, and these propositions are all about helping your children aim higher.

Listen: We all want the best for Lockport’s students, but this is not Williamsville, where the tax base is thriving and population is growing.

Lockport is a small-city school district, with big city struggles, which Carbone knew when she took the job. As superintendent of such a district, she ought to realize the difference between needs and wants.

Once again, this proposal seems like a great academic case study in fiscal responsibility and priority setting. We all deserve great things; that doesn’t mean we’ll get them all.

You might also be warned, “if we don’t use it (state aid) someone else will.”

We say “Let them.”

Let someone else risk Albany changing the aid game mid-stream. Let someone else spend down the reserves on luxuries. Let someone else gamble on the long-term outlook turning rosy again.

Deborah Coder, Carbone’s assistant superintendent for finance and management, asserts project critics are confused when they think the stock market’s troubles mean borrowing to cover costs upfront is bad; the municipal bond market is doing well, she said, and by the time the district actually takes out a loan, in 2010, conditions likely will be even better.

Less than 24 hours after Coder insisted that’s so, we received an alert about municipal borrowing from the office of state Comptroller Thomas P. DiNapoli. It read, in part: “The credit crunch is squeezing local governments. The disruption in the markets could have serious implications for school districts and local governments, which need access to short-term credit to manage cash flow and finance infrastructure projects. Higher borrowing costs are making an already volatile fiscal situation more challenging for school districts and local governments.”

Boiled down, DiNapoli said, municipal capital projects that invoke borrowing may have to be postponed until the market situation improves; and since one cost of delay is price hikes, municipal planners will have to rethink their priorities even when the markets do improve.

And there we have it: Do we “need” Props 1 and 2 or do we simply “want” them?

Whether the public approves or rejects one or both propositions on Dec. 16, Lockport City School District needs to adopt a long-term capital improvement plan, one that spans 10 to 15 years, so taxpayers aren’t hit with one giant, catch-all spending proposal every decade or so.

Chipping away at the needs is what any good homeowner does with an aging house. The district ought to treat the high school, and the rest of its aging buildings, the same. Better planning is necessary.

-Mike