MONTICELLO - The Monticello school board may ask for $1.975 million over six years in a non-recurring referendum April 1.
District Administrator Karen Ballin said the board created a list of district needs for Carol Wirth of RBC Capital Markets, who then translated them into the dollar amount and number of years for the referendum.
The board hired RBC to coordinate the referendum.
The district's needs were categorized into operating costs and other projects, allowing Wirth to present two referendum options to the board Wednesday. Wirth noted that the amount "accomplishes everything on the list of needs" in either option.
The board will decide on the dollar amount and length of the referendum at its Feb. 13 meeting.
The needs include operating costs, salaries, textbook replacements and maintenance needs, including a new HVAC system, gym floor, roof repair or replacement, three new buses, a van, a garage replacement and computers as part of a technology plan.
In the first option, all funds from the referendum would go to Fund 10, which can be used by law for either operational expenses or maintenance projects. Wirth said, assuming steady enrollment, a 4 percent tax base growth and state aid offset of 25 percent, the referendum would mean an average tax rate increase of $1.35 per $1,000 of equalized property value a year for three years. For the last three years of the referendum the impact will decrease. The referendum would end after six years, impacting taxpayers a total of $1,481,250 after subtracting state aid from the initial $1,975,000.
The second option would consist of two questions on the ballot. The first question would ask for $785,000 in Fund 10 dollars over five years. The second question would ask for the authority to borrow up to $885,000 to be used exclusively for the purchase of technology, vehicles and maintenance over eight budget years. The option increases the tax rate an average $1.20 per $1,000 of equalized valuation for three years, making the same assumptions as the first option.
Wirth preferred not to make a recommendation on which option was best for the district.
"If I get a feel from the community during these initial meetings, I might be able to tell you what I sense," she said.
District Administrator Karen Ballin wasn't shy in voicing her initial opinion.
"I'm leery of a two-question option, because if one passes and the other doesn't, we still haven't taken care of what needs to be taken care of," she said.
Wirth was sure to stress to board members the importance of educating the public before the referendum.
"The whole idea of a referendum is to get people educated and give the board direction on what to do," she said. "The public needs to understand the 'yes' vote and the 'no' vote."
The first public meeting about the referendum will be held Jan. 16. A second one is Feb. 3. Both meetings are in the high school band room.
Wirth encouraged the board to advertise the meeting to increase attendance. She also asked them to be prepared to start answering questions about how the budget will be re-prioritized if the public votes "no."
District Administrator Karen Ballin said the board created a list of district needs for Carol Wirth of RBC Capital Markets, who then translated them into the dollar amount and number of years for the referendum.
The board hired RBC to coordinate the referendum.
The district's needs were categorized into operating costs and other projects, allowing Wirth to present two referendum options to the board Wednesday. Wirth noted that the amount "accomplishes everything on the list of needs" in either option.
The board will decide on the dollar amount and length of the referendum at its Feb. 13 meeting.
The needs include operating costs, salaries, textbook replacements and maintenance needs, including a new HVAC system, gym floor, roof repair or replacement, three new buses, a van, a garage replacement and computers as part of a technology plan.
In the first option, all funds from the referendum would go to Fund 10, which can be used by law for either operational expenses or maintenance projects. Wirth said, assuming steady enrollment, a 4 percent tax base growth and state aid offset of 25 percent, the referendum would mean an average tax rate increase of $1.35 per $1,000 of equalized property value a year for three years. For the last three years of the referendum the impact will decrease. The referendum would end after six years, impacting taxpayers a total of $1,481,250 after subtracting state aid from the initial $1,975,000.
The second option would consist of two questions on the ballot. The first question would ask for $785,000 in Fund 10 dollars over five years. The second question would ask for the authority to borrow up to $885,000 to be used exclusively for the purchase of technology, vehicles and maintenance over eight budget years. The option increases the tax rate an average $1.20 per $1,000 of equalized valuation for three years, making the same assumptions as the first option.
Wirth preferred not to make a recommendation on which option was best for the district.
"If I get a feel from the community during these initial meetings, I might be able to tell you what I sense," she said.
District Administrator Karen Ballin wasn't shy in voicing her initial opinion.
"I'm leery of a two-question option, because if one passes and the other doesn't, we still haven't taken care of what needs to be taken care of," she said.
Wirth was sure to stress to board members the importance of educating the public before the referendum.
"The whole idea of a referendum is to get people educated and give the board direction on what to do," she said. "The public needs to understand the 'yes' vote and the 'no' vote."
The first public meeting about the referendum will be held Jan. 16. A second one is Feb. 3. Both meetings are in the high school band room.
Wirth encouraged the board to advertise the meeting to increase attendance. She also asked them to be prepared to start answering questions about how the budget will be re-prioritized if the public votes "no."