MARION OFFICIALS CHANGING COURSE AFTER BOND REJECTION
The Marion School Board isn’t interested in finding out if the third time will be the charm.
At least not right now.
One week after voters rejected — for the second time in less than six months — a general obligation bond issue that would have generated $6 million in new tax revenue to help fund a major capital improvement project, school officials are regrouping and plan to prioritize the most urgent needs and pay for them on the district’s existing dime.
Indeed, any capital improvement projects in the foreseeable future will be funded using cash on hand and/or capital outlay certificates, which do not require additional tax revenue and which are not subject to a vote.
All of this is according to Marion School Board President Scott Tieszen, who said the school board discussed the matter at its regular monthly meeting Monday night, June 10.
“Nothing is set in stone, but we are going to, over the next few meetings, take our time and look at all the options moving forward,” Tieszen said. “We want to itemize everything out, look at it ala carte and determine what can we do without the bond issue. How do we streamline it to get the most bang for our buck and still do what’s best for the growth and development of our district.”
The new direction comes in response to last week’s June 4 primary election in which voters rejected the proposed bond resolution 216 to 204, falling short of even a simple majority; a 60% super majority is required for passage.
The first bond resolution, held in a special election Jan. 17, fell short of the 60% requirement by about 9%, or 34 votes.
“The mood on the board is like, ‘OK, this didn’t work, so let’s move on and do what we can with what we have,’” Tieszen said. “There’s not hostility, there aren’t bad feelings. We obviously would have liked for it to turn out different, but it’s not the end of the world.
“We viewed it as, let’s try it and let’s see what happens, and we have now found out.”
Background
Tieszen and other Marion school officials have spent more than a year discussing the needs of a cobbled together campus that includes additions built in 1914, 1939, 1958, 1975, 1983 and 1994. That process included a series of meetings with stakeholders and a working relationship with CO-OP Architecture.
The result was revealed last fall when the district announced a three-phase master plan estimated to cost $14 million. As proposed, Phases 1 and 2 would have addressed the most pressing issues and would have included a new front entrance with improved security, commons area, locker rooms, renovated classrooms, the removal of the 1914 structure still in use and, in its place, an addition featuring new administrative offices and classrooms. The original cost: $11.5 million.
Phase 3 came in at $2.5 million and would have included the demolition and replacement of the current bus shed and ag/shop, as well as the construction of a new playground.
At a special public meeting last October, the public learned that proposed funding for Phases 1 and 2 would come from cash on hand ($1 to $1.5 million), capital outlay certificates ($3.64 to $4.65 million) and a bond issue ($5.9 to $6.9).
The Marion School Board in November passed a $6.5 million bond resolution that would have raised taxes on farm ground $1.18 per thousand valuation, and a home assessed at $100,000, for example, would see an additional $118 in property taxes annually.
The January 17 bond election failed with 199 (51.15%) voting in favor of the resolution and 188 (48.83%) in opposition.
In response, the school board trimmed Phases 1 and 2 slightly, reducing the overall cost from $11.5 million to $11 million and the bond request from $6.5 million to $6, setting the second election to correspond with the June 4 primary.
And last week, the “no” votes climbed from 188 in January to 216.
“There was some disappointment, but that’s how these things work, and that’s the best part of this whole thing,” Tieszen said. “This involved raising people’s taxes, but this time they had a say on whether it gets done or not, and that’s a powerful thing and a privilege we have to be able to do that.”
Moving forward
Tieszen is optimistic that positive changes are still to come.
“This community is going to go on and this school district is going to go on,” he said. “Now we need to do what’s best for the kids and for the school.”
What that looks like remains to be seen, of course, but Tieszen said the work that was done in partnership with stakeholders and CO-OP Architecture is valuable, regardless of what the new direction looks like.
“That was not wasted time, because it has given us a lot of valuable information,” he said of all the work that has been done up to this point. “We’re still looking at all the components of Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3, but they won’t be done as they were listed out. We might pick this thing, pick that thing and pick this thing based on what we have found is priority and what can give us the most benefit.”
Tieszen said the board has not discussed what the district’s working relationship with CO-OP Architecture may look like going forward — largely because the direction is unclear — but that the board “doesn’t want to hurry up and do something.”
“This is still taxpayer money — it’s the school district’s money,” he said. “We want to make sure we make the right choices to give us the most value and the best chance at growth and development for this district.”
Tieszen added that as discussions continue in the months ahead, the board will continue to be fully transparent with the public.
“We want to keep getting the information out there,” he said, noting that he appreciates all who came out to vote in both bond elections. “That’s the only way we know how the public feels. This told us a lot. Even though it’s not the way we were hoping, it’s not the end of the world.”
