Blog Archive

Thursday, January 19, 2017

January 18 NW Lehigh Board meeting

NORTHWESTERN LEHIGH SCHOOL BOARD VOTES TO KEEP TAX INCREASES WITHIN ACT 1 LIMITS.

POSSIBLE DILEMMA ON BUILDING PROJECT

Image result for property taxes 
 
Last nights school board meeting contained a discussion on the possible elimination of property taxes by the state. While only in the preliminary stages, there is a good possibility that a similar bill to Act 76 will pass the legislature this term. If this should happen, property taxes for school financing will be eliminated and funding will be replaced with increases in state income and sales taxes, this would spread the burden of school funding to all residents, not just property owners. If this law should be passed, school districts will be allowed to keep taxing property to retire their existing debt. Debt that is incurred after Dec. 31, 2016 will not be eligible to be paid for by property tax receipts.
 
This encouraged the administration to recommend that the school board pass a resolution to ask for a exception to the Act 1 limits on tax increases. The Act 1 limit for this year is 2.9 %, with the exceptions, taxes could be raised to near 6%. The  school board voted 8-0 to keep taxes within the Act 1 limits. This does not mean that taxes will be raised, but that they can be raised up to 2.9% this year. The reason that Act 1 came into existence was to put a restraint on school boards excessive raising of property taxes. While well  intentioned, it encouraged school districts to raise taxes by the Act 1 limit every year and bank the proceeds for future spending. It has been the unrestrained spending that brought about Act 1 and now Act 76. The property owners in Pennsylvania have been an easy touch for more funding, just produce 5 board members and in four yours you can raise taxes by near 12%, if you qualify for exceptions you can raise taxes by 25 % in 4 years. Everyone likes to keep local control of funding, but the abuse of property owners has resulted in this situation.
 
The other vote last night was to proceed with the funding options for this project, the vote resulted in a 4-4 tie. which stalls this decision until the next board meeting. Voting to proceed were, Willard Dellicker, Todd Hernandez, Joe Fatzinger and John Casciano. Voting no, Paul Fisher, Phil Toll, Darryl Schafer and Charlene Rauscher.

While this district has not raised property taxes for the past 6 years, the future does not look so bright. This school  district has shown in the past that it can live within its means, if it has the discipline to control spending. It has been able to make improvements to buildings, including a new heating system, energy savings project etc. and at the same time increase the fund balance without raising taxes. While there is a consensus that renovations and remodeling is needed to protect the citizens property and maintain the existing building, the over expansion with no educational benefit is the issue.

The district now has existing building debt of $44,139,298, the new expansion project, in a time in enrollment decline, will add at least another $11,700,000 of new debt and diminish the fund balance by $4,000,000. This will bring the building debt to $55,839,298. This does not include pension debt of $56,933,624. The income of the school district is $39,658,705. This produces a building debt to income ratio of 140%. This compares to the districts closest neighbors, Parkland at 94% and Northern Lehigh at 80%. . Even the existing building debt is 111% above income for Northwestern Lehigh .

So, the dilemma is, if the school district borrows $11.7 million in new debt it will not be able to be paid for with property taxes if Act 76 passes.  It will have to be paid for out of the fund balance. the remaining questions are what limitations may be put on fund balances in the new act.

There also is the question, if the school district is in danger of losing its ability to raise taxes, what are the considerations placed on lenders, whether through bond offerings or bank loans. There will need to be a complete re-evaluation of the credit worthiness of School Districts. Present debt levels will be an issue with lenders. The prudent thing for the board to do, would be to suspend the present project or at least limit it to $4 or $5 million dollars that would address the most pressing needs, this could be paid for out of existing revenue or fund balance. There is definitely going to be a period of uncertainty for the foreseeable future.

Former board member Joseph Reiter stated, that many legislators in other parts of the state are under pressure to eliminate the property tax, as many older and less wealthy citizens are loosing their ability to own a home.

Whether Act 76 passes this year or not, school funding through property taxes is going to come to an end. It will be necessary to keep the state competitive with other states in the future. Gov. Wolf is in a tight box, if he vetoes such a bill, he will most likely loose his re-election and the bill will be passed by the next Governor. If he passes this bill he may loose the support of his biggest support, the education industry. This should be a very interesting year in state politics.
 
 

Thursday, January 5, 2017

Northwestern Building expansion moving forward

SCHOOL BOARD VOTES TO RECIEVE BIDS FOR BUILDING PROJECT

$15 MILLION ESTIMATE

Image result for debt and taxes
 
The Northwestern Lehigh School board voted to advertise for bidding on the new High School renovation and expansion. The vote was 5-4 in favor. Voting to advertise for bids was Willard Dellicker, Todd Hernandez, John Casciano, Joseph Fatzinger, and Todd Leiser.  Voting no, Paul Fisher, Phillip Toll, Charlene Rauscher, and Darryl Schafer.
 
The building project plans to renovate, the gymnasium, auditorium, music room, locker rooms, 1 classroom and add a meeting room. It also calls for the demolition of the front of the existing building and moving it out 6 feet to provide new offices for the administration. This expansion then required that the driveway be moved out and expanded. The expected cost is $15,000,000, it will be more than that when the financing costs are added. The plan, as of now, is to borrow $11.5 million and use $4 million from the fund balance. The plan is to start the project, by demolition of the existing front of the building in April of 2017. The renovations to the existing building are expected to be completed by August of 2017. The completion of the expansion in August 2018.

The school district now has around $46,000,000 in debt from previous expansions, and also a $50,000,000 debt in unfunded pension liability. The addition of $11.5 million will amount to a total debt of  $107,500,000. The addition of this new debt will add an additional $580,000 to existing annual payments.

The opposition to this project by the dissenting members of the board has been to the scope of the project.  In a time of declining enrollment, expanding the existing building was considered by many as excessive. If compromise could have been reached, as to limiting the project to the renovations that were necessary, a consensus could possibly have been reached. The renovations would have amounted to possibly 1/2 the projected cost.  The board had the votes to approve anything they wanted and did so. The over expansion at Weisenberg, left a large debt and many empty classrooms. This expansion will add to that debt with no improvement in the education of the students. It does not qualify for any help from state funds because there is no enhancement of  education.

There are serious problems on the horizon  for the school district, the pension obligation for this year is now 32.57% of salaries for the 2017-2018 school year. Enrollment has been declining for the last 8 years and is expected to decline more in the future, the states finances are not expanding, so there may be less money for the district in the future. The income of the districts residents has been flat for the last 8 years. The only well to draw from is the property owners of the district. The present board has made its decisions based more on envy of what other districts have than on what is sustainable by the taxpayers of this district.