Rye City School District Superintendent Dr. Edward Shine will present a draft proposal for a less expensive School Bond January 17 at a special meeting of the Board of Education. It will likely feature greater use of reserve funds and a streamlined facilities plan focused on ameliorating classroom crowding at the Rye Middle/High School campus.

 

By Sarah Varney

Rye City School District Superintendent Dr. Edward Shine will present a draft proposal for a less expensive School Bond January 17 at a special meeting of the Board of Education. It will likely feature greater use of reserve funds and a streamlined facilities plan focused on ameliorating classroom crowding at the Rye Middle/High School campus.

“It’s clear that we need to present a smaller, less costly project,” said Dr. Shine. “However, if you don’t respond to this enrollment situation, it’s pretty certain that class sizes will increase.”

 

The original $20 million proposal was defeated December 11 by a vote of 1,777 to 1,471.

 

Discussion at the meeting centered on the number of additional students now moving through the schools and the accuracy of the District’s enrollment projections compared to actual enrollment. In a report called “The Enrollment Imperative”, Dr. Shine emphasized that the middle and high schools are currently 104% over functional capacity and will not be able to accommodate the current enrollment increase of 242 students by 2012.

 

Fiscal watchdog Bertrand de Frondeville reiterated his support for a smaller, less expensive proposal stretched over a longer timeframe. Mr. de Frondeville disputes the effect of increased enrollment and believes growth will be smaller than expected.

 

Several members of the community expressed dismay and disappointment as they stepped forward to offer their reaction to the defeat. Many also reiterated issues that must be addressed if the revised bill is to pass.

 

Megan Keough, co-president of the RHS Parents Organization, presented an informal report of reasons she’d heard from community members opposed to the bond. She attributed the defeat to several factors, including opinions that “$20 million was too much for 12 classrooms”, and confusion over why the District was balking at using reserve funds to decrease the cost of the project.

 

“I also think that the confluence of the tax cap with the need for the bond was extremely unfortunate,” said Ms. Keough. She added that making the influence of the cap clearer to the community will be vital to passing a revised bond.

 

Rye resident Jamie Jensen delivered an impassioned plea for more detailed communication from the Board about the implications of the defeat on day-to-day school scheduling. She stressed the need to address these possibilities in order to pass its next proposal. “For example, what would it look like if our kids had to go to school in the summertime, or the effect on working parents who might have to take their kids to school at 10 a.m.?”

 

Bob Zahm suggested the Board consider fostering the formation of an informal group with both supporters and opponents of the bond working together to reach a consensus.

 

“We have to retrench,” said Board Vice President Ray Schmitt. “What we heard here tonight is that we need to present a smaller project, increase the use of the reserves, slow the growth of the budget, and still deal with the enrollment issue.”