Round 3 for Winton Woods bond issue
Voters in the Winton Woods school district will have a third opportunity to vote on a bond issue that would build two new schools for all students.
The Board of Education voted 4-1 to place the issue on the November ballot, though board members were not in agreement on the timing of the decision to place the issue before voters.
The $61 million bond reflects a contribution from the state of Ohio for $49,000, which is nearly half of the $110 million total project cost. That compares to the estimated $67 million cost to repair and replace current infrastructure and building systems, according to Steve Denny, executive director of business affairs for the school district. If passed, the owner of a house valued at $100,000 would pay $241.08 annually.
Two earlier attempts to pass the bond issue, in November 2014 and May 2015, failed.
The district had hoped to build two new campuses – a pre-K through sixth-grade elementary school on the current Winton Woods Middle School campus in Greenhills, and a new seventh-through 12th-grade secondary school on the current Winton Woods High School campus in Forest Park.
The May 2015 ballot called for an 8.79-mill bond issue. That reflected an approximately 33-percent input from the state. Since then, the state has increased its input to nearly 50 percent. That savings in such a short period of time is unheard of, Superintendent Anthony Smith said, and though no one can foresee what would be offered in the future if this issue is not passed in November, a one-year increase of that magnitude hasn’t happened in the past.
Katrina Rugless, who cast the sole no vote, said she didn’t feel that the board had engaged the community to find out why the previous votes failed.
“To place it back on the ballot without sufficiently garnering input from the community may work against our attempts to secure future funding,” Rugless said during the July 25 board meeting.
Communication with the community is important, Rugless said, and the absence of that contact could give voters the wrong impression of the board’s interest in their opinions and concerns.
“Without properly engaging our community for over a year on this very important issue, we may erroneously give the appearance that our board leadership has no interest in hearing the community’s concerns,” she said.
Rugless said she would support the bond issue when the board has “sufficiently engaged stakeholders to hear their concerns and develop a comprehensive plan for addressing those issues.”
All members of the board agreed that community engagement is important.
“An inclusive approach will help build a buy-in for the leadership and teachers as they work to put new process in place to improve the academic performances of our students,” she said. Rugless, who was elected to the board last November, added that since she’s been a member, “expectations have risen and administrator accountability has increased.”
Board President Jessica Miranda took exception to Rugless’ comments.
“Regarding calling out the board leadership, I find that personally offensive,” Miranda said to Rugless. She added that “the board’s door is always open.”
Board members Paula Kuhn and Jeff Berte pointed out that the condition of the buildings continues to deteriorate, and something has to be done.
“I graduated from this building 38 years ago,” Berte said of the high school building. “It’s a very old building, and we’re going to pay for it.”
“Our children are growing and our buildings are getting older,” Kuhn said. “It’s going to take four years before any construction can be start. That’s four measurable years of students losing the opportunity to be in a school building that provides their needs.”
While the deteriorating condition of the buildings has not been disputed, the cost to the taxpayers to build new schools has caused concern.
Board Member Viola Johnson addressed the cost, pointing out that whether new structures are built or existing ones are repaired, the buildings’ deterioration will require action.
“We’re going to have to pay for something,” Johnson said. “Do you want to throw good money after bad? Do you want to pay for repairs or for new buildings?
“We cannot expect to do new things in old circumstances,” she said. “We’re going to pay one way or another.”
During the meeting, former board member Tim Cleary addressed the board. He vacated his seat in late September, when he moved out of the district, and spoke during the public input portion of the July meeting. Cleary is a member of the Great Oaks board of trustees, listed as a representative of Winton Woods City School District.
Cleary was the sole no vote when he served on the Winton Woods Board of Education, but has since changed his mind, he said. It was feedback from voters after the election, both positive and negative, that made him think about his role as a board member. Though he did not personally support the bond issue, Cleary said he should have voted in favor of putting the issue on the ballot, where the public has the opportunity to decide.