By KATY YEISER
Staff writer
April 10, 2008
The superintendent of Clark-Pleasant schools is criticizing a state official for halting a building project he believes the community has shown support for.
While J.T. Coopman acknowledges that property taxpayers pay a hefty price to fund the schools, he said the building plans are in response to residential growth the school board doesn't have any control over.
Coopman was critical of Department of Local Government Finance Commissioner Cheryl Musgrave's decision, especially because it came from someone outside the community.
Coopman said he doesn't see a need to modify the plans to build a new middle school, convert the existing middle school into a ninth-grade center and add to and renovate the high school.
He called the commissioner's denial a travesty.
"The travesty, as far as I'm concerned, of this denial has to do with the future of this school district and the children we serve," Coopman said Wednesday. "To have this denied on the basis that it was denied is absolutely vexing to me because I don't understand why it was denied; nor do I understand the reasons that were issued in the order as to why it was denied."
The main reason for the denial, which was handed down Tuesday, was the impact on taxpayers, and Coopman acknowledged the school district's high tax rates, but he said some factors that push up the tax rate, such as new homes, are out of school officials' control.
"I'm not going to dispute the fact that we have a high tax rate, but I'm also going to point out to you that many of these factors our school district didn't have any control over. We didn't approve an 850-house housing addition for our school district," he said.
"We do have a high tax rate, but it's not because we want a high tax rate. It's because we had to provide for the needs of the students coming into the schools," Coopman said.
He said he doesn't have any plans to modify the project and doesn't regret not meeting with the remonstrance group to try to come to a resolution at Musgrave's request.
"We felt like that we did everything we possibly could this time to meet the educational needs of the students in this community. And we still feel like that we've done that," Coopman said.
He said school board members will have to make a decision on the issue during a special session next week.
School board members did not return phone messages Wednesday afternoon or had not read the commissioner's ruling and declined to comment.
Board members can choose to wait until July 1 and conduct a referendum on the project, or a Clark-Pleasant taxpayer can appeal the commissioner's decision to the state's tax court within 30 days, spokeswoman Mary Jane Michalak said.
"The longer this goes on, the more expensive it's going to be," Coopman said.
Taxpayer concerns
One reason issued in the denial was that school district did not modify any part of the project to address taxpayer concerns raised during the remonstrance process.
Coopman said he was unaware of any concerns brought up by the project.
"What are the taxpayers' concerns? I mean, I haven't heard any. We won the remonstrance by a two-to-one margin; and since that point in time, I haven't heard any disagreement with this plan moving forward except from one individual," Coopman said.
The remonstrance group was led by Tad Bohlsen.
Bohlsen said he heard plenty of concerns from community members, but he thinks none of them got to Coopman because of the schools' approach against changing the project.
"When you push and you push, you really discourage people from talking about problems and concerns with you," Bohlsen said.
Coopman also said it was wrong for someone with no ties to the community to have a final say on the school project.
"When I had a private meeting with (Musgrave), she had not even taken the opportunity to look at our materials, she didn't even know where Clark-Pleasant was located. She did not know that we were the fourth-fastest-growing school district in the state of Indiana. She did not know any of our needs whatsoever.
"So it's interesting that one individual can have that much power over a community when the community has spoken that this is the plan that they want," he said.
The public can have a final say on the project through a referendum, Michalak said.
"In meeting with school officials, (Musgrave) asks for more information about the community because she doesn't know each community first hand. And that's why she holds meetings with local officials, so she can get a better idea of what these local communities are about," Michalak said.
The commissioner takes the recommendation of the School Property Tax Control Board into consideration and listens to feedback from a representative of that board, Michalak said.
She also goes over the school's profile and looks at the school district in context of its surrounding districts.
"The information that we received on this project about the tax rate was very compelling to her," Michalak said. "She did very much try to learn about the community by looking at other districts in Johnson County and really taking into consideration the big picture, not just looking at Clark-Pleasant as a single entity, but Clark-Pleasant in Johnson County."
Handling the growth
Portable classrooms would have to be used for the intermediate, middle and high schools in order to deal with the growth the project would have handled, Coopman said.
He didn't know how many portable classrooms the school would need by 2010 but said that each building would have to use them if nothing is built.
"If we don't get this project, we will have a significant number of portable classrooms that we will have to put in place throughout the school district to handle the number of students that we expect," Coopman said.
Plans included dealing with high school growth by converting the existing middle school building into a ninth-grade center, Coopman said. The high school already uses 16 portable classrooms to deal with overcrowding, he said.
The high school currently has about 1,600 students, and Coopman said that enrollment should more than double to 3,500 students by 2015. But that estimate conflicts with the most recent demographic study, done in October by demographer Susan Brudvig.
A high forecast for enrollment at the high school in the 2015-16 school year is about 2,830 students, the study said. Low and middle forecasts range from about 2,130 to 2,400 students.
The intermediate school, which includes fifth- and sixth-graders, is currently at capacity with about 900 students, Coopman said.
Some intermediate students were going to be placed in the new middle school's empty classrooms until a 500-student building was added to the middle school for intermediate students.
School officials want to avoid putting students in portable classrooms, Coopman said.
So far, the school corporation has spent about $1 million in architectural, engineering, construction and demographic study fees since the project started in November 2005, said Steve Sonntag, Clark-Pleasant's business and finance director.
School officials planned to break ground on the new building this spring.
Effect on taxpayers
Taxpayers would have spent $4.9 million per year over the next 27 years to pay for the bond.
Musgrave cited the impact on taxpayers and slowing growth in enrollment and the housing market as reasons for the denial.
"The major concern about this project was the tax impact on the community," Michalak said.
Clark-Pleasant is one of the fastest growing school districts in the state and has one of the highest tax rates, too. The district is the only one in the county with a tax rate of more than $2 and is 29 cents higher than the Franklin school district's tax rate of $1.84, which is the second-highest in the county.
School officials calculated that the tax rate would not increase with the school project because of an increase in assessed valuation and because old debt would be replaced by new debt. They used that calculation as an argument for the project, but Musgrave said it was not persuasive.
Another reason for Musgrave's denial included a slowing growth in enrollment and the housing market.
If the 280,000-square-foot middle school for 1,600 students was built now under today's economic circumstances, then it would need to be modified. But the school is planning for the long term, and the economy won't always stay the same.
"If you wanted to look at today and tomorrow, it probably was (too big). But if you want to look at 10 years from now and saying that this school is going to need to be in place 10 years from now, then the answer is no," Coopman said.
"So are we going to sit on our hands now and say we can't do anything today because of today's economy knowing that it's going to change in three or four years?"
Sonntag said the spring season and low interest rates could be sparking a rebound in building activity.
He said the city of Greenwood had an increase in building permits last month of 40 to 50 permits.
But the city's senior planner said the city had not had an increase in permits last month or so far this year.
"We're down," said Bill Peeples, Greenwood's senior planner.
Through January, February and March, the city issued 38 building permits for homes. During the same time period last year, the city issued 74 permits, he said. Numbers were not available for April.
The city was also down in overall permits, which includes permits for homes, businesses and other projects.
In January, February and March this year, the city issued 112 permits, compared to 137 during the same time period last year, Peeples said.
Daily Journal staff writer Annie Goeller contributed to this report.