Rosenthal On His Vote

To the Editor:

Prior to voting on the NHS expansion, many people spoke to me in opposition, including those who support education budgets and capital projects. I had more contacts against this proposal than any other school capital project.

Additional space is needed at the high school, particularly for expansion of the cafeteria dining and serving areas. There will also be a need for classrooms for a “bubble” in enrollment when the current seventh and fifth grades pass through the school.

That said, I could not in good conscience support this $38,826,000 appropriation as currently proposed for many reasons, starting with the economic consequences:

1. The cost is too great to ask of taxpayers in this economic climate. Homes are in foreclosure or threat of foreclosure. I have heard from people having a hard time financially.

2. Debt service for this project is a big driver in the 2008-2009 budget with a proposed mill rate increase of 6.4 percent above what a flat spending plan would have caused; more than double the 2.9 percent increase that passed last year after four referenda.

3. Revaluation will place an increased tax burden on a significant number of households, particularly lower and moderately priced homes. Many of these are occupied by seniors on fixed incomes.

4. Annual operating cost estimates increased from $600,000 when the Board of Finance reviewed the plan to $2 million.

Let me review reasons related to planning for and merits of the proposal:

1. Planning was mismanaged by Dr Pitkoff and the Board of Education from the outset. The Board of Finance requests for cost estimates for the project were stonewalled for 2.5 years. A committee, appointed by the [former] superintendent worked for 18 months on a plan, only to be completely disregarded.

2. Enrollment projects have been controversial. Dr Bothwell has given, low, mid, and high projections to the Board of Education for 20 years, always targeting the midrange. In 2006, when questioned about his 2005 projections, he said, considering then current trends, to use his mid to low range. His next projections showed leveling, then decline in enrollment, but changed recommendations to target his “high,” more closely supporting the plan to build to an enrollment of 2022. The Board of Education hired Dr Peter Prowda, who had supplied projections for the State Department of Education for many years. Dr Prowda shows peak enrollment of 1,840 in 2014-2015 declining to 1,788 in 2016-2017 and a decline in the total district enrollment of 738 students less than current. Dr Prowda’s high school enrollment projections are close to Dr Bothwell’s latest “midrange” peak projection of 1,862 in 2014-2015, declining to 1,792 in 2016-2017.

3. Dr Bothwell’s projections show the peak, 149 students over current, about 16 percent over rated capacity of 1,600. Using the state’s space reimbursement formula, we will be overbuilding by approximately 28,000 to 40,000 square feet. The association price tag is $12 to $18 million.

If the Board of Education responds with a more appropriate, affordable, and defensible project, it will stand a greater chance of approval.

Sincerely

Herb Rosethal

70 Main Street, Newtown                                             March 19, 2008