GLTech School Renovation Project
By Shawn on Oct 4, 2012 in Schools
GLTech School Renovation Project
The Greater Lowell Regional Tech School administration presented their school renovation project to a joint meeting of the selectmen, finance committee, permanent building, and public last evening.
Dracut’s part would be about $3.4 million dollars over 20 years, which would have to be in the form of new taxes.
Town Manager Dennis Piendak was fully supportive of the project, but “there is a real fiscal impact to the town here.”
“40% of our annual tax levy increase every year goes to the voke already,” he said. “This would push that up to over 50%”
The board noted that 20% of enrollments to the school are from Dracut, yet we are being asked to pick up over 30% of the cost. Because of state funding formulas, Lowell benefits at the sacrifice of the other communities (all the while trying to capture more votes on the regional school board by challenging its makeup).
When asked how much debt the regional school carries, they said “none.”
Dracut educates students at about $9-10,000 per pupil per year, while the tech does so at $16,000. Every students that does there, costs the Dracut schools considerable revenue.
Chairman of the GLTech School Cmte Victor Olson will be on the 980 AM Saturday Morning Live program this week to discuss the project.
Loading ...
Brian Flaherty | Oct 4, 2012 | Reply
DOA
george boag | Oct 4, 2012 | Reply
Former voke school committee member said the project could be done without an override if they switched to GIC health insurance. The committee refused. Several of the committee members also receive insurance from the school.
Rich Cowan | Oct 4, 2012 | Reply
“Former voke school committee member said the project could be done without an override if they switched to GIC health insurance”
The point was made several times last night that if the school were able to save bucks on utilities (gas/oil/electric) as a result of the renovation ($200,000 was quoted), then it would not affect the assessment at all because the state basically says to all of the vokes, “your operating budget must be x”, based on a formula.
My understanding is that this voke committee member and his cheerleaders have never acknowledged that to be able to take a savings in the operating budget and “bank” it as a credit (that could later be used on the next MSBA capital project), would require an act by the legislature. Because chapter 70 requires that its funds, as well as the town contribution to meet net school spending, be used for operating expenses.
An example of someone who took money out of capital and put it into operating and got in trouble for it was just posted on this blog a couple of days ago. Remember who that was?
Shawn | Oct 4, 2012 | Reply
Steve O’Niell I believe explained it this way…
The school could make $1.5 million in cuts (by converting to GIC insurance).
The towns in the district could bond out the project, and the school would reimburse them each year for the debt service (as they have for transportation a number of times over the years) or reduce their assessment by the amount.. thus it would not be chapter 70.
McLaughlin got in trouble for hiding what he was doing, and using government money for personal benefit. This is all up front and transparent.
Rich Cowan | Oct 4, 2012 | Reply
I still assume that the O’Neill concept would require changes to law. The entity buying the school, that gets the 80% reimbursement, has to be one entity, not four. Otherwise there is no way to hold one organizational responsible for completing the project, and fulfilling the requirement.
And the reimbursements for debt service would not count as operating expense… if the purpose is to pay for construction debt it is still a capital expense, no?
george boag | Oct 5, 2012 | Reply
One of my sons graduated from the voke. It is a good school. Vocational schools are an under appreciated resource. When your pipes back up you don’t call the guy with a Harvard MBA. But I want to see the cuts in overhead and administration before I consider an override.
Shawn | Oct 5, 2012 | Reply
Rich, if you start your discussion with an assumption, the rest is of no logical value.
I defer to the expert. He had years on the board and knows the system in detail. You should forward those questions to Mr O’Neill or the GLTECH board.
The key for us will be to reduce the number of students going to the gltech as much as possible in the future, which we should be able to do once the school renovation project is done via marketing. For every student we keep, our assessment should go down (as well as our proportion of students at the gltech, thus reducing impact on us by this proposed project).
Kids needing a technical education by all means should try to go there, its a great school for that. Those targeting college should be encouraged to go to DHS, a charter or a private school. That school was not meant to be just a more expensive way for kids to get a college track high school education.
Karen | Oct 7, 2012 | Reply
What I’d like to know is if it’s the right and the responsibility of the GL Tech board to take a portion of the Chapter 70 funds and put it into some sort of enterprise account for future repairs and capital projects.
Rich Cowan | Oct 9, 2012 | Reply
I posted something 4 days ago to the effect that the Chapter 70 regulations would not allow this, but the moderator has not approved my post.
admin | Oct 9, 2012 | Reply
you’re right