By REED WALLER
Staff Writer
The results are in, and a bond referendum can be recommended.
The NRHEG Facilities Task Force, an ad hoc committee of NRHEG staff and community members organized this year to study the results of last September’s Facility Assessment, met for the last time Wednesday, Oct. 10, in joint session with the NRHEG Board of Education, to hear the results of the Community Survey and prepare a recommendation for the upcoming October board meeting.
Present were consultant Sue Johnson of School Perceptions, Inc., designers of the survey; and ISG representatives Rod Schumacher and Paul Lawton; as well as Supt. Dale Carlson and the school board.
In January of this year the Board approved ISG to prepare a Facilities Plan in collaboration with School Perceptions and a committee selected by the board.
The Facilities Task Force held its first meeting April 12 with 35 present, and four more meetings more or less monthly before convening last Monday for their decision.
Results of the survey
Johnson reported that there were 427 responses to the survey.
“A 17 percent response,” she said. “That’s typical for this kind of survey.”
About 45 percent of the responses came from citizens age 35-54 and abut 17 percent from people 65 or over. 22 percent of the responses were from employees of the district. 19 percent were from New Richland residents. 28 percent of the respondents own property in the district.
How representative is 427 responses?
“We’ve found that when you get past 400 responses, regardless of how much more you get, the results stay pretty much the same,” said Johnson. “The first 400 to respond are usually a good cross section.”
How are we doing?
The results showed that 80 percent of district taxpayers were at least satisfied with the overall performance of NRHEG. They felt that NRHEG was doing well at delivering a high quality education experience and providing a good learning environment, and “fair to good” in maintaining facilities.
As to spending tax dollars wisely, NRHEG is on the bottom end of the levy scale, with a lower price tag than any other district in the area.
How much do we need?
The survey presented respondents with a list of project groups to be prioritized. School Perceptions ranked them by weight of approval on a scale of 10-0. District staff members rated some groups higher than non-staff taxpayers but most were close. (Numbers are scores for non-staff respondents)
1. Safety and Security (Secure entrance for Ellendale) (8.7), est. cost $450,000.
2. Building Infrastructure (deferred maintenance etc.) (8.6), est. cost $5.23M.
3. Disabilities accommodations (8.4), est. cost $300,000.
4. Science classroom upgrades (8.1 - staff 9.3), est. cost $997,000.
5. Career and Technical classrooms and labs (upgrade Shop, Family/Consumer Science to Pro Culinary) (7.8), est. cost $2.1M.
6. Special Education facilities (7.2), est. cost $313,000.
7. Preschool and childcare (6.4), est. cost $225,000.
8. STEAM Maker’s space (6.3), est. cost $527,000.
9. Art and Music Classrooms (6.3 – staff 8.3), est. cost $735,000.
10. Weight room and 11. Collaborative spaces scored less than 5 with the non-staff.
“Less than five means more respondents said no than yes,” Johnson explained.
The full list amounts to a little over $13 million.
How much can we ask for?
Respondents were shown data and tax impact for differing amounts between the full $13M and $7M.
About 50 percent of parents reported a willingness to go for the full $13 million, and about 25 percent of non-parents. This is short of the point where approval is good enough to ensure a referendum passing.
Where, then, is the break point where a majority can be expected to vote yes?
That break point was $9.1M, where most were comfortable. The Task Force went down the prioritized list and the break came between Item 5 and Item 6, where the number jumped to $9.4 million.
This means the recommendation the Task Force should make is for the top five to be done, and think about the rest later. Mixed priority items, like art and music rooms, could be reexamined if any of the top five come in under budget.
“We walked them down the list with costs,” said Johnson. “We let the community design the plan. They need to know this is the order we’re going to go in.”
As far as the additional project involving the New Richland gym and performing arts center, we need to just not talk about that at this point. “That’s a Big Ticket Item, and that needs a whole new P.R. game,” Johnson said.
Just go down the list
Sticking to the plan was emphasized strongly.
“We’ve seen districts pass referendums, get the approval, and then turn around and do something completely different with the money,” Johnson said.
“You can’t take the money earmarked for specific things, and then go for the big gym,” she laughed. “It doesn’t work that way.”
If the board decides on the referendum, they need to file by the end of November for a vote in February. There are only specific times when a referendum can be issued.
“I want to keep this moving,” said Supt. Dale Carlson. “If there’s too much delay, people will say, “What survey?”
“The biggest driver,” said Rod Schumacher about timing, “is ‘Go when you’re ready.’”