Rushford-Peterson School Board held a special meeting July 7 at 7:30 a.m. in order to take action on the review and comment document regarding a possible referendum to be held in the fall. The Wednesday prior to the board’s last regular meeting a question arose whether a daycare addition would qualify for the disaster relief funding from the state.
Before taking any further action, the board wisely sought clarification on this question. After discussion with state officials, Superintendent Ben Bernard shared information with the board July 7. He had learned that if the board decided to go with two separate questions on the balllot with one question about building a gym and classrooms and another about building a daycare, the question about building a daycare addition would “more than likely not qualify” to fall under the disaster relief funding.
However, if the board opted to choose to use just one question which would include an additional gymnasium, additional classrooms and a daycare addition, it would “more than likely” be approved by the state. A daycare had been high on the priority list in recent citizen survey. However, if the board opted to choose to use one question which would include an additional gymnasium, additional classrooms and a daycare addition, it would “more than likely” be approved by the state.
Until the review and comment has actually been submitted and read by the state officials, that was as definitive an answer as could be expected. Since only two districts in the state, R-P and Moose Lake, have received such disaster funding, there are no past precedents to follow. Legislation states that the funding was intended for a “primarily K-12 building” which is what the R-P school is.
Bernard presented two schedules with the tax expense for a house valued at $250,000, the mean value of homes throughout the Rushford-Peterson district. If one question passed, the increase in tax would be $171 per year. If two questions with the $3,000 daycare not eligible for the disaster relief funding passed, the tax on a $250,000 house would increase by $195 a year.
Non-homestead agricultural land valued at $8,000 an acre would see a tax increase of $1.95 an acre with one question and $2.07 an acre with two questions,
The board has been working with a limited window of time. If they chose to wait a year, the rising construction costs would increase the costs and they would lose a year’s worth of the disaster relief funding, The end time for the disaster relief funding is 2036. If the project were to be delayed and done later with no relief funding, tax increase would be $342 annually for a $250,000 for the construction of a $23.1 million project.
Board member Nancy Snyder commented that she felt having one question would be cleaner.
Ken Sawle asked what would happen if the state decided they would not go along with the daycare. Bernard answered that the board would then need to decide if they wanted to modify the question. According to Sarah Fox of ATS&R who attended the meeting virtually, an addendum would then need to be made to the paperwork, which would affect the timeline.
Aaron Bushberger from Ehler’s, Inc. who also attended virtually, shared some draft ballot language for both one question and two questions with Dr. Bernard.
Sarah Fox assured the board they would have another chance to approve the final ballot question on August 12. By that time the state should be finished reviewing the document and given their approval or disapproval of the project.
Board member Carl Schollmeier shared his concern that many residents already have a tight budget.
Chris Grindland commented that he was having a hard time balancing the need for the project and the financial cost. “I want to ask the public for money when it’s really necessary. What if we need an operating referendum later?” Matt Helgemoe and Ken Sawle said they felt the same.
Ultimately, the board decided they needed to present the opportunity to use the disaster relief funding to the public and unanimously approved submitting the documents for review and comment. They chose to include one question to be asked in an election. Submitting the documents for review and comment does not commit the board to an election. They will make that decision after the review and comment has been sent back from the state. The next step would be to call for an election on or before August 12 if they choose to do so.
If an election is called, there will be multiple public meetings scheduled. No meetings have been yet because they want to share accurate, concrete information with the public rather than estimates.
Board member Ken Sawle summed up the feelings of the board, “We need to represent what’s best for the school and then let the public decide. We can have our doubts but we need to make the best decision for the school.”