Goodrich- The Facility Planning Commission made their recommendation regarding the way money from a proposed bond extension should be spent? if it is obtained.
‘As far as planning for the future, I think we’re taking the appropriate steps,? said committee co-chairperson Trevor Alward, who gave a presentation on the committee findings at the May 21 school board meeting.
The 61-member committee was comprised of students, staff and community members, with the majority being parents of students. Five sub-committees were created, each one focusing on improvements needed in one of the following areas: Goodrich High School; Goodrich Middle School; Oaktree Elementary; Reid Elementary; and Athletics.
Recommended improvements included: a new front entry with improved security, a connecting corridor and new classrooms for the high school; a new computer lab in the middle school; a new gym at Oaktree; and varying suggestions for Reid depending on how long the district opts to keep the building.
Alward explained assessments on what improvements were desired by the committee were made based on need, not on cost. Three different scenarios were suggested to the board, labeled priority one through three.
Money from the bond issue would be primarily focused on the high school, which opened in 1964.
If the committee were to get everything recommended by all five sub-committees, on the most expensive version of their wish lists it would come at an estimated price of $31,454,747. However, the improvements would not increase the yearly taxes being paid by residents, but rather would extend the amount of time those taxes would be paid.
Linda DeCamp, business manager for Goodrich Area Schools, told The Citizen last July that options were being explored to obtain a bond extension, netting the district between $15-$17 million for the purpose of renovations and construction. DeCamp said without an extension, the current loan fund balance would be paid off in the 2012-2013 school year, with the current amount of the schools? five bonds for an approximate total of $37,186,000. With an extension, the loan fund balance would be repaid in the 2018-2019 school year, said DeCamp.
Alward said in his presentation the bond would be extended about three years for every $5 million.
Not all committee members were satisfied with the recommendations given to the board. Recently elected board member Linda Jackson, who begins her term July 1, said she served on the Reid sub-committee and was unhappy with the final recommendations. Jackson said she felt too much focus was put on the high school when Reid is the oldest building in the district and in need of attention.
‘Are we going to have to build a building, and what building are we going to build,? asked Jackson.
Committee co-chairperson Doug Tetmeyer agreed with Jackson that some focus should be directed at Reid.
‘Ideally, what I’d like to see is a new Reid Elementary,? said Tetmeyer.
Tetmeyer also stressed the list presented was a list of items in descending order of necessity, but not all items were necessary.
‘It’s a priority list, not necessarily something we have to have,? said Tetmeyer. ‘We did not take cost into account in this.?
‘A better description of a lot of these items would be ‘wants?,? added Tetmeyer, saying he’d ultimately like to see the bond at about half of the high-end figure presented.
‘Tread carefully; Stay conservative,? said Tetmeyer.
Board trustee Michael Thorp said the committee had done what was expected of them.
‘We asked this committee to dream big,? said Thorp. ‘The conversation (with the community regarding the bond issue) has really just begun in earnest tonight with this presentation.?
Several committee members expressed trepidation about the speed at which decisions had to be made in order for the bond issue to make the November ballot.
Phil Hartman, facilities consultant for construction management firm Wolgast Construction, of Saginaw, said the bond issue must be in treasury’with decisions made about what will and won’t get done? by July for the issue to be on the November ballot. Failing that, said Hartman, decisions would be needed by October for the issue to go to a vote in February 2008.
Hartman described the decision process as one that allowed community input. ‘The meetings that I attended? it was a community led process. What has been proposed has been a consensus of those involved at the meeting,? said Hartman.