Toledo’s proposed school bond is exactly what our community needs. For a cost of just $12.9 million to the community, spread out over 21 years, the district’s three schools will have all of their most pressing needs met.
This includes new boilers for the elementary school, a new roof for the middle school, and major reconstruction on our 40-plus-year-old high school. It includes every construction item on the previous bond, plus improvements to the high school gym and a new greenhouse, at a cost to the community that’s been reduced by $1.3 million from last year’s bond.
This reduction was made possible by a combination of three factors: projects accomplished through grants that the school district was able to obtain, projects accomplished using partial funds from the levy and labor donations from the community, and cost-saving measures that members of the Facilities Advisory Committee were able to discover.
The Chronicle ran an extraordinarily misleading, counterfactual Voice of the People comment from “Cowlitzfisherman,” a member of that committee, who should know just how important that work was. We were able to obtain the reduction we did by optimizing soft costs, maximizing the state’s contribution to construction (through SCAP), and eliminating a double-counting error that was discovered in the previous bond.
The $12.9 million figure is as cheap as it gets; we can accomplish what we need with this small figure because the state is expected to contribute over $8 million through SCAP. The bond is also the best measure to run to accomplish these goals, spreading that cost out over decades and costing a homeowner only, approximately, $2 per $1,000 of assessed value.
While the earlier letter complained that inflated soft costs of 40 percent, beyond actual costs, were added to the project to “pour the gravy on thick,” nothing could be further from the truth. Soft costs are absolutely necessary to a successful project; can you imagine not paying an architect to design the new school? Or maybe you think you can get away without paying state and local taxes? Or perhaps you don’t want to buy construction insurance, as required by law? Or will you not have your project inspected, or pay your staff, or pay for the use of construction equipment?
Soft costs are estimates of what all of this will actually cost, not some magic bonus money. Through careful accounting, we estimated 38 percent soft costs should cover our needs; previous bonds in the state have run from a minimum of 32 percent up to 54 percent, so we’re being as conservative as we can.
But every additional year we delay these necessary projects, we put our kids at risk and allow costs to escalate by nearly half a million dollars. Best of all: There is no chance of anyone overcharging the community. Any funds left over after the project is completed will go to pay off the bond, potentially saving the community years of property taxes.
Everyone in the community wins, for the least expensive amount possible.
Ethan Siegel
Toledo,
in a letter to the editor
