Superintendent Yaw Obeng, Director of Finance Nathan Lavery and Director of Property Services Marty Spaulding presented the details and highlighted the urgent need for the repairs. Delaying the maintenance any longer would allow the current deficiencies to snowball and could result in unplanned emergency repairs or safety issues, they said. Lavery estimated that the new bond would cost a family with a home worth $231,500 an additional $8 a month.
All told, the renovation plan would cost $39 million. The district would fund the remaining $20 million by bonding for $2 million annually over the same 10-year span. Voters in 2009 approved a change that allows the district to bond that amount each year — without putting it on the ballot.
Obeng and Lavery on Monday also presented a preliminary budget for the 2017-18 school year that estimates a $3.5 million, 5 percent increase. New spending would be directed at special education needs, preschool expansion, hiring social workers, and academic intervention for struggling students, as well as other projects, the administrators said.
The school board has yet to begin negotiating teacher and other employee contracts. After the district barely averted a strike in October by agreeing to a one-year contract with the teachers’ union, that could make for tough negotiations and a further budget increase. “It’s a balancing act,” Obeng said, between “what we add to salaries and how much we put into programs.”
Councilor Dave Hartnett praised the district’s efforts to address issues of handicap access. Because of those renovations, “I’d vote ‘yes’ if it was tonight,” he said. “I think it’s so needed.”
Others were wary of a steep increase in taxes, especially after voters in November approved millions in bonding for capital improvement projects. Councilor Sara Giannoni urged the city to better coordinate in the future with the school district before asking Burlingtonians for additional cash.
Councilor Sharon Bushor agreed. “I’m going to support this, but I’m concerned [whether taxpayers will support it].” Voters see the necessity of the repairs, Bushor added, but “it’s whether they’re able to [pay].”
Got something to say?
Send a letter to the editor and we'll publish your feedback in print!
Have Sinex build a really tall school and fill it with apartments for UVM/Champlain College, office space, a parking garage, oh, and a school.
Can’t wait to hear how slick Mayor Miro and the City Councilors supporting the mall redevelopment spin this one after we just gave Sinex $21 million in TIF money for his project in November. Kids vs. Millionaire developer….should be an interesting discussion.
It seems to me that this should have been voted on in November and the Sinex tax relief bill should have waited. What are the priorities…education or making some guy a ton of money?
I will be voting no. With how much money taxpayers generously give to fund our schools each year it is unconscionable that they have allowed basic maintenance to fall by the wayside. Is it because of the current outrageously high teacher salary and benefits? It’s ironic to have the school structure crumbling and perhaps harming the teachers whose outsized earnings are sucking struggling taxpayers dry.
There is no reason to have such large budget increases every year except for teacher salaries and benefits. For once let the teachers union deal with the problems caused by their overwhelming greed, this taxpayer has had more than enough.
I’m sorry, I love our kids but the schools have just been poorly managed. Some of us can’t just keep shelling our money to cover the mismanagement mistakes of those in charge. This has got to stop now. Some of us are part of the 99%. Priorities need to be realistic and maintainable.