New Lancaster School project faces challenges.
The Monday night before the 7 November 2006 school bond referendum, the Lancaster ISD Board of Trustees approved a proposal to purchase land for a new elementary school. At the time, Superintendent Larry Lewis spoke of the reduction in price of the site -- from $568,000 to $222,000 -- and of his hopes that the passage of that upcoming bond would allow the new elementary school to be opened within two years -- by 2008.
The following Tuesday, voters dashed those hopes. The 215 Million dollar proposal was defeated (52% / 48% ). This was the second such defeat for LISD proposals last year. The previous May, voters similarly rejected a $93 Million referendum.
Nevertheless, district officials continued with the purchase of ten acres for a new school site. Remaining funds from the recent 2004 bond projects were used, as authorized by the Board, to secure a 10+ acre block of land in the North Lancaster "Boardwalk" development. Final agreements to transfer the property were filed in Dallas County Court records on 22 January 2007. Board President Nanette Vick signed for the district, and Steve Topletz represented the original Boardwalk developers.
A detailed review of those agreements indicates that delays, expenses, and risks will continue to thwart the district's hopes for a quick infusion of new seats for their growing population of new students.
First, neither the developer nor the district can develop the site as platted until the City of Lancaster completes three major and long delayed tasks. First, a "Stormwater Master Plan" must be approved. After that, the city must secure the necessary easements and land acquisitions of its own to channel the stormwater as planned. Finally, the city's contractors must complete construction of the culverts, aqueducts, and canals specified. The 2004 plat for Boardwalk Phase Three shows two distinct 27-inch diameter "Reinforced Concrete Pipe" (RCP) systems leading from Boardwalk. One starts from collection points in the residential neighborhood, and the other from the proposed school site. The two RCP systems then cross two different pieces of property owned by individuals completely unaffiliated with the Topletz and Andante groups. The city has been attempting to buy these residential lots an incorporate the stormwater system into a "Hike and Bike" system of nature trails. But, a pretty trail would be simply one more of the city's amenities. A system to control the floods running off newly paved School Site parking lots, to prevent another "Ten Mile Creek" disaster, that's vital. Superintendent Lewis apparently believed the city had, in fact, purchased the lots in question during his November 7th discussions with the Board of Trustees. At the time stated that an additional three acres, adjacent to the purchased site, would be donated to the LISD. But the city does not own such property to support the Dr Lewis’s expected donation. As of now the two families living in residences west of Boardwalk have NOT sold either the lots, or easements across their lots, to the city, the developer, or the district. Stormwater runoff from Boardwalk Phase 3 can not be controlled. And no construction of any sort in Phase 3 is, as of yet, permitted.
A second indication of the doubts of both the developer and the district is the inclusion of this "buy back" provision in the Use Restrictions of the agreement:
"Developer shall have the right to re-purchase the School Site for the net Purchase Price as stated in the Contract if construction of the elementary school building has not commenced on the School Site within five (5) years from the date the Contract closes and title to the School Site is conveyed to LISD."
Buy back agreements between government agencies and developers are hardly uncommon. But for the Boardwalk school agreeement, the buy back locks in the developer’s price of land at 2006 (pre-stormwater master plan) values . Should the Lancaster district fail to develop the site, they can't in turn sell it to any other buyer for any other purpose or for any other price. Or, if such a deal is proposed, Mr Topletz can simply exercise his option to repurchase the site at the 2006 price and "flip" the acreage to the new buyer, pocketing any potential gains for himself. This would be particularly advantages to a developer if the city drags out the RCP construction projects for approximately 4 years. When and if stormwater projects, or similar UNT South Dallas Campus projects, enhance the value of the Boardwalk development, the developer can enjoy the interest he's earned on the sale price, refund that price to LISD, and have his land and projects right back, unchanged.
Should the district pressure the city to provide stormwater control, and begin school construction before the Phase 3 residential construction gets underway, then a third challenging feature of this agreement comes into play. From page 3:
"In the event that LISD elects to build the school on the School Site prior to the Developer developing the adjoining property, then LISD shall be responsible for constructing the Infrastructure Work. "
Estimates attached to the agreement by the Engineering Firm Jones and Boyd indicate that the Infrastructure costs would exceed half a million dollars, over and above the purchase price.
It would also leave the school building sitting isolated by several city blocks from the nearest homes in Boardwalk (phase 2) or Meadowview. But after the power, water, sewer and storm control structures were installed by the school district, the developer would be able to pave his streets in the new development fairly quickly.
An indication of the timeline can be determined by the rate of homesales in Boardwalk phase 2. This section of the development, which contains some 180 lots, just opened this fall. At present, slower, turnover rates this provides an inventory of lots sufficient for another year and a half. Meanwhile comparable developments with stormwater and infrastructure already in place surround the Boardwalk sites along Wintergreen Road and Houston School. One of the existing homebuilders in Boardwalk, Horizon Homes, has already announced they are pulling out from the Boardwalk project. The other, K Hovnanian, is reportedly considering it. The immediate prospect of Phase 3 meeting the school district's projected timeline of 2008 seem bleak.
Meanwhile, the district has announced during Martin Luther King day celebrations, and elsewhere, that they are planning to hold a third bond referendum in May, 2007. Estimated to exceed 140 million dollars, the new referendum breaks up district proposals into three or more separate propositions, the largest portions of each will include funding for the -- politically popular -- elementary school expansions, new site acquisitions, and new construction. If the bond passes and several million becomes available to buy other land at other sites, those hoping for a new school in the Boardwalk, Meadowview, and Ames Meadow environs are likely to be extremely disappointed.
[cross-posted to Pegasus News -- www.pegnews.com/Lancaster]
Friday, March 02, 2007
OVERDUE!
Lancaster ISD accountants and auditors have failed to file required annual financial reports with the Texas Education Agency on time, or within the 30-day “grace period” after the January deadline. A senior official with TEA confirms that the state agency has not received filings. However, the district has, according to that source, last week filed a request for an extension. However, the TEA school finance office advised that their agency has no authority to issue either extentions or waivers regarding this legislative requirement. Another source in the Region Ten schools support offices confirms that failure to file these reports is a “serious problem” for the Lancaster District.
LISD’s most recent CFO, Eugene Smith, was on record as present for public meetings with the Board of Trustees as late as December 18th 2006. But early this year, trustees quietly confided to constituents that the CFO had been terminated. The confusion following the departure of the CFO contributes to the lateness of the required reports.
The annual financial reports form the basis for the TEA’s “FIRST” rankings, (the “Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas”). The state agency assigns a “Substandard” rating for any districts failing to file within a month after the January deadline.
In mid-February TEA began posting reports online from other districts that had filed on time. On Februay 16th, an Open Records Request for the Fiscal-Year 2006 was filed with LISD. It was the week following that the district requested the extension from TEA.
But November,2006, the Trustees were still voting, unanimously, to approve financial reports as submitted by CFO Smith.
And on December 18, 2006, with Eugene Smith present, the Trustees voted to approve a 4% increase in salary for the officer ultimately responsible, Superintendent Larry D. Lewis.
Lancaster ISD accountants and auditors have failed to file required annual financial reports with the Texas Education Agency on time, or within the 30-day “grace period” after the January deadline. A senior official with TEA confirms that the state agency has not received filings. However, the district has, according to that source, last week filed a request for an extension. However, the TEA school finance office advised that their agency has no authority to issue either extentions or waivers regarding this legislative requirement. Another source in the Region Ten schools support offices confirms that failure to file these reports is a “serious problem” for the Lancaster District.
LISD’s most recent CFO, Eugene Smith, was on record as present for public meetings with the Board of Trustees as late as December 18th 2006. But early this year, trustees quietly confided to constituents that the CFO had been terminated. The confusion following the departure of the CFO contributes to the lateness of the required reports.
The annual financial reports form the basis for the TEA’s “FIRST” rankings, (the “Financial Integrity Rating System of Texas”). The state agency assigns a “Substandard” rating for any districts failing to file within a month after the January deadline.
In mid-February TEA began posting reports online from other districts that had filed on time. On Februay 16th, an Open Records Request for the Fiscal-Year 2006 was filed with LISD. It was the week following that the district requested the extension from TEA.
But November,2006, the Trustees were still voting, unanimously, to approve financial reports as submitted by CFO Smith.
And on December 18, 2006, with Eugene Smith present, the Trustees voted to approve a 4% increase in salary for the officer ultimately responsible, Superintendent Larry D. Lewis.