Lincoln Superintendent Lynn Cleary delivers final pitch for $35 million bond
Lincoln Consolidated Schools Superintendent Lynn Cleary presented her final pitch tonight for the district’s $35 million bond issue in Tuesday’s election, asserting that "our kids deserve a 21st century learning environment."
About two dozen people attended the forum in the Lincoln High School auditorium as Cleary laid out the critical needs to be addressed in the 4,700-student district.
Clearly emphasized voting to approve the measure won't increase the present levy of 7.35 mills. But a “no” vote wouldn’t cause a decrease until at least 2025, she said.
She likened the bond to a mortgage, saying, “We have superb facilities. We need to bring them up to code and bring them up to date.”
If the bond passes, some $16.8 million will be authorized for projects at the high school.
Photo courtesy of Lincoln Schools
She stressed that federal initiatives such as the Build America bonds—which are available through the end of the year—represent too good of an opportunity to miss. The program subsidizes much of the interest on capital improvement expenditures.
If voters say yes on Tuesday, some $16.8 million will be authorized for projects at the high school. The original part of the building was completed in 1960, and an addition came in 1996.
A new performing arts center is a top priority to supplement the school’s small auditorium.
“When I know the dance classes are performing at Milan High School, it breaks my heart,” Cleary said.
Replacing the cratered parking lot’s asphalt is another immediate need. If the bond is approved, work could begin soon after school lets out June 14.
A new roof is needed, and the natural-gas-fired boilers in the basement may be original in the 50-year-old structure, said consulting engineer Paul Theriault of Plante Moran in Southfield. He and Cleary walked through each of the district’s buildings to determine the most pressing problems.
Besides comprehensive infrastructure upgrades, the district is also looking to replace aging computers and add security systems at all buildings.
The proposed improvements to each school may be seen on a website the district has created.
After the bond proposal was announced in February, the Citizens for Lincoln campaign was created with former school board member Ken Goetz as chairman.
The campaign wasn’t just focused on parents of schoolchildren, Goetz said, because a strong school system benefits all property owners.
“In this economy, people are willing to spend more money, but they want to know what they’re getting,” he said.
Maria Heningburg is PTO president at Brick Elementary, where two of her three children attend. The aging building is slated for projects totaling $7 million.
“I’m hoping this bond will pass,” Heningburg said.
Ronald Ahrens is a freelance writer for AnnArbor.com. Reach the news desk at news@annarbor.com or 734-623-2530.
Comments
ypsineighbor
Sun, May 2, 2010 : 8:41 a.m.
Spyker: No one has been hiding anything about taxes. There is no conspiracy to shut down the web site ahead of the bond (both the bond site and the LCS site are up right now by the way)... I think you should take some time to consider what will happen if the bond fails. Facilities will get worse, not better. Technology will become even more obsolete, basically useless. Safety issues. Higher bus maintenance costs. Higher costs to operate the schools overall. Inability to compete with neighboring districts. Ever lower property values. You claim that this bond "does not relate to the quality or quantity of classroom instruction". Think about what will happen should the above occur. Teachers will be cut. Parapros will be cut. Class sizes will grow. Badly needed academic programs (like credit recovery, summer school programs and the like) will be eliminated. And in a world increasingly dominated by technology, we will provide our students with all the skills needed to succeed in the year 1970. If you are still planning to vote No on Tuesday, then my message to you is that I hope you're happy with what that means for the future.
glimmertwin
Sun, May 2, 2010 : 6:03 a.m.
The closing of one school and addition of classrooms in another makes perfect sense and is long over due. The additional transportation requirements for having this school off-campus has long been an issue. The building itself needs numerous, expensive repairs and updating. I was told it would not even pass current building codes if it were attempting to "open" as a new school now. And finally, it's size is maxed out, not permitting additional students that would benefit from the type of teaching and learning that they do there. So although you may have some issues with the bond, in my opinion, the closing of this school should not be one of them.
Spyker
Sat, May 1, 2010 : 3:06 p.m.
Continuation..... Since we now know voters are being asked to support a 30 year Bond proposal, a debt very much like a 30 year home mortgage (albeit one where the District makes no re-payment until approximately the 15th year) the decision regarding support or denial of this bond proposal can be based on the answer to the following simple question. Will the goods and services which will be obtained with this bond debt still be functional and usable when the debt is fully repaid in 2040? Technology based classroom instructional aids? No. Classroom computers and networking apparatus? No. School busses? No. Interior building renovations and decorating? No. Boilers and Roofs? Maybe, but these were included in previous Bond proposals and apparently never replaced. Classrooms? Yes, but the justification provided for this additional space is weak.
Spyker
Sat, May 1, 2010 : 2:59 p.m.
I read the respone and information posted by ypsineighbor last night. I have not reposted until now as I was enjoying our President's commencement speech calling for an increase in the sharing of divergent opinions, with an emphasis on civility and careful listening of opposing viewpoints. Thank you for claifying the terms of the bond debt proposal being presented to the voters on Tuesday. I assure you, I read each piece of information distributed by the school multiple times seeking this data, it simply was not in any of the "hang tags" or brochures delivered to our home. I have listened to the Superintendent's explanation regarding why we should build four more elementary classrooms when we have an entire elementary building scheduled for closure in June. I have read this same explanation in the printed material. It simply does not make sense. I have attempted to access the Lincoln Schools website to see the data which was identified as being located there. Unfortunately, the website is experiencing a planned shut-down this weekend for maintenance. The weekend before an important millage election, when it should be assumed that much of the community would require site access to educate themselves regarding the bond and its specific benefits and costs, access to this information is being withheld from the community. This is clearly not good planning. The proposal being presented to voters on Tuesday does not relate to the quality or quantity of classroom instruction, the proposal addresses needs and desires relative to physical upgrades of the facilities. Also included are technology driven instructional materials, new computers, new buses, and maybe some other miscellaneous items. Since we now know voters are being asked to support a 30 year Bond proposal, a debt very much like a 30 year home mortgage (albeit one where the District makes no re-payment until approximately the 15th year) the decision regarding support or denial of this bond proposal can be based on the answer to the following simple question. Will the goods and services which will be obtained with this bond debt still be funtional and usable when the debt is fully repaid in 2040? Technology based classromm instructional aids? No. Classroom computers and networking apparatus? No. School busses?
ypsineighbor
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 7:50 p.m.
"Yet this Bond will build Four More Elementary Classrooms. Why?" - This was addressed at the public forum (were you there?) and it's also in the FAQ section of the website (have you seen it?). "Why haven't these items been fully addressed with the previous bonds?" - You can never fully address building maintenance. Buildings always require regular attention, and new technologies make old ones obsolete (remember 30% of the money is going into classroom technology). "Why isn't that money being used for some of these items?" - Not sure where you got that information. Bond money is required by law to be used within a limited number of years. There is no regular stream of bond money except money used to pay back debt, which obviously cant be used on capital spending. "Where is Lincoln's strategic plan for facilities?" - On the LCS website. "The "No Increase in Taxes" pledge is as misleading" - The District has been very clear on the tax issue. Check out the web site, the FAQ, or just read this article above. There is no misleading pledge. "By the way, exactly when does the current Bond expire, and when will the extended Bond expire?" - Again, already answered at the 4-5 forums, FAQs, website, etc... The current debt millage begins to reduce in 2024 and fully expires in 2031. The new bond if approved will extend this millage to 2040. "All the fancy brochures delivered... fail to mention these dates." - That's flat out incorrect. In fact, the dates are listed on just about every piece of literature I have seen about the bond. "Time and time gain, Lincoln School administration has proven their inability to properly manage funds, why give then an additional $35 Million to play with?" - I don't share your view about the current LCS administration. I'm sure there's been some waste in the past, but annual audits consistently show a well-run ship at Lincoln. The AA News's own reporting has shown that Lincoln spends less on administration and more on the classroom than any other County district. But if it's any consolation, keep in mind that bond money has to be spent the way the district claims it will be spent. And they are audited on this by the State. That leaves little room for "play".
Spyker
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 4:54 p.m.
Two NO votes from our household. The District is closing the Bessie Hoffman building, idling twelve elementary classrooms because the District does not have the student count to justify their continued operation. Yet this Bond will build Four More Elementary Classrooms. Why? Every Bond that has been proposed in the many years I have lived in the District promises the same things; Athletic Facilities, Performing Arts Facilities, Computers, More Teachers (Oh wait, you can't hire Teachers with Bond money.) Facility Upgrades, New Roofs, New Boilers, etc. Why haven't these items been fully addressed with the previous bonds? Where has the money gone? Lincoln currently has over $3 Million in the Capital Improvements budget, per the latest financial audit, and a continuing stream of Bond Money arriving for the next 5(?) years from the current Bond. Why isn't that money being used for some of these items? Which items on the "Promise List" will be performed with the existing income stream and which can only be accomplished by lengthening this income stream? Where is Lincoln's strategic plan for facilities? As posted by others; if given a choice of paying $100 annually for 5 years or $100 annually for 14 years, it is obvious one of these choices will cost me more money. The "No Increase in Taxes" pledge is as misleading as the comments associated with the "Michigan's Best Schools" TV highlight. By the way, exactly when does the current Bond expire, and when will the extended Bond expire? All the fancy brochures delivered to our door, and the high pressure sales tactics used by classroom teachers instructing the students to tell their parents to vote Yes (a State violation, if you cared) fail to mention these dates. Are we being asked to approve an "in perpetuity Bond"? Time and time gain, Lincoln School administration has proven their inability to properly manage funds, why give then an additional $35 Million to play with?
preposition
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 12:41 p.m.
I'm a parent in the district, and I think this is a smart investment. I've heard Supt. Cleary and the Plante Moran guy talk about what improvements this includes and what it excludes, and it's clear that they had to make some difficult choices. It seems like all the things that fell into the "nice to have" category were eliminated, while they were able to keep most (but not all) of the "need to have" things in the millage. With the state giving Lincoln the lowest possible per-pupil funding, I believe this millage is the bare minimum required to give Lincoln an opportunity to maintain its academic position relative to other neighboring districts. (Just my personal opinion)
glimmertwin
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 12:14 p.m.
Yes, it is very important for schools just a few years old to be retrofitted with Auto Flush Valves on Toilets and Auto Eyes on Faucets. Looking at the list of proposed improvements, it is hard to find things that aren't important. But if anyone thinks this is the end of the district coming back to property owners for more money, you are sadly mistaken. Unfortunately, just like our government, always wanting more without correcting current excesses can only go so far. If two of these buildings are very new, yet are in need of all of these new features, do you really think extending this bond, for gosh knows how long, is going to sustain them until the end? My bet is they are back asking for more money within 7 years. They will still be debating privatizing transportation and non-teaching services like they have been for the past several years. The vacant Besse-Hoffman will still be owned by the district because they fear selling it because a better, more efficient charter school would purchase it and draw students away from the district. But there will be a new batch of people only hoping to keep things afloat long enough to get their kids through school, passing the buck to next group of over taxed taxpayers in the district. It's a never ending problem that until the unfair taxation of the state's residents is resolved, will never stop. Hopefully the state will get it together in time before the wonderful auto flush toilet valves need to be replaced.
Lincolnmom
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 11:56 a.m.
I am a proud and active Lincoln Parent. Please, please people, let's not get bogged down in anger and issues from the past. Please let's deal with this as it is. This bond is to ensure academic excellence for our children. We need them to be locally and nationally competitive. Our district is so wonderful for so many reasons. Let us celebrate that and get our children updated facilities, updated technology. It is our responsibility to be active and involved and ensure that the district adheres to its promises of facility and technology improvements. I implore everyone NOT to make our children suffer because we are worried about what MIGHT happen. I am proudly voting YES for this bond because my children deserve it!!!!
ypsineighbor
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 11:44 a.m.
Glimmer: Plante Moran identified over $50M in needed improvements, but that number was scaled down to $35M to avoid a tax rate increase. I understand your analogy about Toys R Us but that's simply untrue here. Things were removed to get to that number, not added. Ladydi: I disagree completely. I think the District has gone to great lengths to ensure people have the appropriate facts. Nearly every paper I've seen accurately explains how the tax piece works. Everyone I have spoken with knows that this is an extension of the millage rate.
Keith Schaub
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 11:35 a.m.
Looking over the article it actually states that the bond "...won't increase the present levy of 7.35 mills" not that there would be no tax increase. This would be an extension of the current bond levy and as such there is a cost to the taxpayer. It doesn't appear that they were trying to hide anything..
ladydi
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 9:36 a.m.
Glimmertwin is correct on this... it means several more years of taxes. Please present the FACTS and then let us voters decide what will work best for us. And, while we're at it, keep in mind that Cleary could also be planning her next advertising campaign, which was also misleading to the tax payers. We were all so proud of our children attending a "Best School in Michigan" and then found out it was purchased!
glimmertwin
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 8:56 a.m.
It is more taxes. Several years more. I'm not saying not to support it, but it is misleading to say it is not more taxes. It is borrowing more money and extending your payments. Therefore, it is more taxes.
ypsineighbor
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 8:36 a.m.
This is an important vote for the entire community. Voting "Yes" is a smart investment in the schools AND neighborhoods.
ironyinthesky2
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 8:06 a.m.
I hope Lincoln voters pass this. It's really NOT a lot of money but it's what we can get and not pay more taxes. They could use more...
glimmertwin
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 6:48 a.m.
Perhaps. Cleary indicated at one of the first meetings that this was the maximum amount of money they could obtain via the bond extension. So really, the improvements they are requesting money for seem to be tailored to the maximum amount they can get, not the amount that they need. You can look at that any way you like. If I gave my kid $100 dollars and sent them into Toys 'R Us, how much do you think they'd spend? How much do you think they'd spend if I sent them into Toys 'R Us and said, get what you need?
ypsineighbor
Fri, Apr 30, 2010 : 6:35 a.m.
I think this is a smart investment. Milan and Ypsilanti did similar bonds in the past few years for much more money so the amount seems reasonable, especially given the no tax rate increase. At the end of the day, for a district like Lincoln - which gets the absolute lowest possible per-pupil allowance from the state - having to do these improvements out of general funds would be disastrous.