A reader of the blog posted these questions recently. I will do my best to answer them, but as the author points out, some of the answers are better answered by the school district, but I will my best. My comments are in italics.
QUESTION: The RASD newsletter lists the annual track loan payments that were approved in a 2004 referendum at $23,213, and states that loan will be paid off in March, 2008. Since continuing this annual payment amount would total $162,491 (the chart total is $162,591), this would seem to be the amount listed in the “District” column on the chart. If that 2004 referendum approval expires in 2008, and the income derived there from also expires, what is the source for the funding for this continuing payment?
ANSWER: Directly from the district's newsletter: Although there is no money currently available for allocation, the district does have a loan for the Ingalls Field track renovation that will be paid off in 2008. The citizens group asked the Board to earmark those funds for seven years, starting in 2009, to help with a loan to pay for installing turf. The group also received a commitment from Ripon College to pay one-third of the cost of installation. Contingent on the group raising the necessary funds with their own fundraising, the Board agreed to contribute to the turf project—beginning in 2009—the $23,213 annually that is currently allocated for the track loan. No new taxes will be raised. If the necessary funds are not raised by March 2009, then the agreement will be null and void. Deciding how the annual budget will be spent is a regular responsibility of the Board of Education. The decision to allocate funds from the existing school district budget abided by the voters’ decision and may result in a $750,000 upgrade of Ingalls Field for an expenditure of $162,491 which is 22% of the total cost of the project. After careful consideration of all the facts available, the Board decided that this would be a good deal for the district, the student-athletes, the college, the community, and the taxpayers.
QUESTION: “Superintendent Richard Zimman said the turf project would have no impact on the school levy.” If the increased levy for the track renovation loan expires, shouldn’t the tax levy go down? If not, why not?
ANSWER: I guess a better statement would be the project would not INCREASE the school levy. My error.
QUESTION: What is the annual payment of $15,476 listed under the “Loan” column, and what is the source of its funding? This amount is described in the notes on the chart as follows: “The school district commences payments in March 2009 after the current Ingalls Field loan ends ($15,476 annually)”. Is this another loan being taken out by the school district? Is this an ongoing loan already in place, and a change in where and how it is spent?
ANSWER: No new loan is being taken out. The money for the school district's contribution is the amount currently diverts to the paying off of the loan.
QUESTION: I am unclear on exactly what monies are being financed by, again from the chart notes, “the FieldTurf financing company”. Can you enlighten me? Your comments have raised other questions in my mind.
ANSWERS: From the beginning, FieldTurf has offered to finance a portion of the project through a loan from them. They offered a low-interest loan at the beginning of the year, but the deadline passed before the interest rate could be locked in.
QUESTION: “More than a decade ago, the voters said no to borrowing money for Murray Park Elementary. They did not say no to the school, as a second vote showed.” Without knowing the wording of either of these referenda, or the wording of the two referenda regarding installing artificial turf, it’s difficult to assess your comparison. Is this a question of the wording, or of the interpretation of the wishes of the voters?
ANSWER: My interpretation.
QUESTION: “First, let me say that I am a member of the committee raising funds for the turf, and have applied for and been awarded grant money for the project.” I would like to know more about this grant. To whom was it awarded? What is the amount of the grant? What is the funding source? What specifically does it cover, and what is its purpose?Another question also comes to mind.
ANSWER: I have personally written grants to two organizations, one of which has provided a donation to the project. A number of companies and groups, including the Green Bay Packers, make donations and grants for these projects. The money was awarded to the Ingalls Field Committee, which turned it over to the Oshkosh Area Foundation, which is handling the donations and grants at this point until funds need to be expended.
QUESTION: Have you, or anyone representing the City, approached Ripon College to see if there are possible solutions to the lighting problems? Perhaps something as simple as putting blinds on the stairwells to contain the light would alleviate part of the problem, and certainly would not endanger the students. Is landscaping planned that would help contain the light?
ANSWER: The college's lighting plans meet the necessary codes. City officials have not seen any reason to require the college to do more or less at this time. It is my understanding that the landscaping around the new dorm is done. I would argue that we would not want the stairwells to be covered from a personal protection standpoint. I know some people are vehemently opposed to what the college is doing, but they have broken NO laws or city ordinances, despite what some individuals have claimed. I look forward to more questions.
One final note on the turf - The winner of the raffle for the GTO will be announced at halftime of the college game this Saturday, and the ground will be broken for the new surface on Monday.
