Hits: 0
WPCNR SCHOOL DAYS. October 17, 2006: Registered voters are called upon to decide whether they will choose to authorize spending $69.6 Million (White Plains biggest lump sum school district expenditure in history) to build a new Post Road School on the Little League Fields between Sterling and Soundview Avenues over the next two years (for $38.7 Million), expand the library, add windows to the cafeteria, and put a three-story addition on Mamaroneck Avenue School for $4.6 Million; execute $17 Million of “infrastructure” repairs on the balance of district buildings, and install two synthetic turf athletic stadiums at Loucks Field and Parker Stadium for a cost of $9.4 Million.
School Referendum Polling Stations are located in the Battle Hill Fire Station # 5 (District 1), Church Street School (District 2), Rochambeau School (District 3), Highlands School (District 4), Mamaroneck Avenue School (district 5), and Ridgeway School (District 6). Photo, WPCNR News
The rationale promoted by the District for the expenditures is to prepare the district for an expected increased enrollment of 280 students by 2010 and keep White Plains school buildings up to standards and preserve them. Meanwhile, the strategic planning consultant, it was reported last night at the Board of Education meeting will begin talking with leaders of the community about long-term priorities for the district’s long-term planning beginning October 24.
The Post Road School, on the other hand, which has been in service since 1914, has been determined by the architectural firm of Kaeyer, Garment & Davidson to be obsolete and too expensive to renovate and expand, and has been recommended to be replaced with a new school on the same site. This is a procedure that KG & D recommended to the Pleasantville School District in replacing the Bedford Road School.
However, citizens attending the tour of Post Road School Saturday morning learned from the Administrator of Buildings and Facilities for the district, that the conditions of flooding, ostensibly one of the key reasons Post Road School is deemed unsalvageable has existed for more than 15 years, and is blamed on overflowing city storm drains. (No comment yet from White Plains Commissioner of Public Works Joseph Nicoletti on the storm drain situation on those streets.)
At a cost of $29 Million to renovate Post Road School, it was decided by a citywide committee and recommended to the Board of Education that a new school be built on the site at a cost of $38.7 Million. The option not explored was building a new library, auditorium and classroom wing on the site for less money while expanding classrooms in the old building.
Since flooding problems can be eliminated by drainage systems below ground level, this option should have been explored years ago, but was not. The question arises, if this flooding has existed for years, why did not the school district make a concentrated effort to eliminate it years ago, why is it a sudden problem now? Why have Post Road parents chosen Post Road – if it is so overcrowded and too small and such a slum?
In the matter of the infrastructure expenditure of approximately $17 Million, no second opinion on these infrastructure matters was sought. It is the architect’s recommendation that the school district is going on. However, the infrastructure improvements are not mandated by the state to be executed — it is a school district option. The infrastructure improvements could be executed without bonding on a once a year basis over the next five years at even with inflation $3.5 Million a year (an approximate 3-4% increase in property taxes a year) instead of bonded for with the added cost of debt service.
Mamaroneck Avenue School
The Mamaroneck Avenue School addition program of a three story wing to provide a new library, provide music and small group instruction rooms and place kindergarten all on one level, while improving the cafeteria (providing windows) and auditorium is being executed as an improvement to that school.
The Stadiums
On the matter of the athletic stadiums, the $9.4 Million consists of a lot more than just synthetic turf. It includes demolition of the Parker Stadium bowl, and replacement of the the old concrete bowl with metal bleachers and press box and seeding the hill, installing a walking track and synthetic turf.
The district rationale for this started out as a money-saving measure over maintenance of grass fields at Parker and Loucks Stadiums. There is also, they said, the added benefit of providing heavier use of fields for expansion of the school athletic programs and community recreation programs, with the prestige perk of attracting national events to Parker Stadium by expanding seating capacity with new metal bleachers, press box 10-lane track and lights are added.
This latter enhancement of turning Loucks Field into a showplace has long been quietly pushed by athletic booster groups who have not been able to generate more than $200,000 in community donations towards it in 7 years of fund-raising efforts. The community and corporate White Plains have not shown support for it. It is something that the school district feels would be “nice” to have.
WPCNR has heard excellent reviews on the state-of-the-art turf planned to be installed at Parker and Loucks Stadiums. It is soft, allows players to make true cuts on an even surface and is yielding as opposed to the hard-as-a-rock surface of first generation synthetic turf fields. The drawback according to Brad Fresenburg, a Missouri University extension specialist is that synthetic turf generates temperatures twice as high as grass. In The Columbia (Missouri) Daily Tribune reports Fresenburg as saying on a 98 degree day, surface temperatures on an in-filled field “top 170 degrees, compared to 105 degrees for natural grass.” Fresenburg found that a firmly planted cleat in “in-filled” turf was harder to “twist free” of the surface, that he thought could lead to sprains. But, he found, “partially planted” cleats the resistance was similar to grass.
In the same Columbia Daily Tribune article, by Megan Means, Michael Meyers of the Human Performance Research Center at West Texas A & M University, having conducted a long-term study on “in-filled” turf finds in-filled turf produced “more muscle injuries, injuries on hot days and noncontact injuries on artificial surfaces, while grass fields had more knee and ligament injuries, head trauma and injuries that cost playing time.”
The in-filled fields have to be disinfected from time-to-time because in-filled turf does not absorb and decompose bodily fluids, writes reporter Means.
The main question voters need to consider is how many more games and practices will the new fields accommodate. There are only 3 to 4 home football games a year for the varsity football team. There are of course other games played by the Junior Varsity and “feeder football” programs, lacrosse and field hockey as well as varsity boys and women’s soccer and community soccer.
Breaks Even on principle only after 18 years, Discounting Debt Service.
At a $9.4 Million expenditure next year with a field life of 12 years before the synthetic turfs have to be replaced, you have a cost of approximately $800,000 a year ($9.4 Million) With the cost of maintaining two grass fields placed at over $500,000 for 12 years, it will take the district 18 years to get their money back on the principle alone, not to mention the debt service. If you have to replace the fields in 8 years, you will be out, say $2 Million more after 8 eight years pushing the cost of break-even out to 22 years (2028).
Another way of looking at it is at $800,000 a year for the cost of the two stadiums, if you have 500 practices and games on the two synthetic fields over a year it is costing the district $1,600 a game or practice for that synthetic turf field. But, of course you are expanding your athletic venue usage. No figures have been given as to how much more usage is expected per synthetic field. No revenue projections from rentals have been projected.
( In contrast, Michael Lynch, Administrator of Buildings and Facilities for the district estimated the cost of maintaining Parker and Loucks Stadiums as grass fields to be $11,480 a year each. Double that and you get a cost of $22,960 a year to maintain those grass fields. Multiply that $22, 960 by 12 years, and you get $275,520 to keep the Parker and Loucks Stadiums grass, but of course you lose the multiple usage the artificial turf gives you.
Mr. Lynch also said he would recrown and resod the grass fields once in the next 12 years for a cost of $44,000 for both grass field crowns, bringing the total estimated expenditure for maintaining two grass fields at Parker and Loucks as $320,000. Add say 60% inflation over 12 years and the cost comes to approximately $512,000 over 12 years as opposed to a $9.4 Million expenditure to build new stadia with artificial turf at Loucks and Parker, to increase usage of fields. If inflation is less, then maybe the stadium projects earn your money back in 16 years not 18.)
But if the voters feel these state-of-art facilities are prestigious and useful to the district and the city, now is the day to bring them to White Plains.
Mr. and Mrs. White Plains Deep Pockets.
The cost per year in new taxes for the $66 Million bond issue (over 25 years) in addition to the ongoing automatic school budget increase of 8% is $66 next year, $64 in 2008-2009 and $71 in 2009-2010, with the cost of principle and debt service promised by the district to decline beyond 2010. How much it will decline has not been made public.
