Trending
SALEM -- Voters will once again be presented with the question of a 3.48 mill, 37-year property tax levy to fund the construction of a new K-8 school building.
The levy seeks to raise Salem's 34% share of the $57 million total cost of the new school building which would be built at the 67-acre property that used to be Whinnery farm, in the city's southeast corner. The 66% majority of the expense would be funded through an award from the Ohio Facilities Construction Commission. However, that 34% figure is deceptive, as it includes 16.5% which will be funded through a $10 million donation from the Salem Community Foundation, and 6.2% to be funded from community/industry public utilities; meaning the actual amount to be covered by taxpayers is only about 10%.
If approved the actual property tax increase per $100,000 in property home valuation would be $96.25 annually or $8.02 monthly, and those that qualify for the homestead exemption would pay $72.19 annually or $6.02 monthly, for the first 10 years. After 10 years those figures would decrease to $77 annually or $6.42 monthly, and $57.75 annually or $4.81 monthly for those that qualify for the homestead exemption.
The district says that it is necessary to build a new building, as the existing buildings had outlived their life expectancies and were experiencing many mechanical and maintenance issues, such as plumbing, wiring and heating, as well as safety issues in the parking lots, and that it was not sustainable to keep repairing them. Superintendent Sean Kirkland has also explained that the state recommends building new if the cost to bring a building up to standards reaches 77% of the cost to build new. The facilities commission's feasibility study found the costs to renovate all three buildings reached, or exceeded that threshold, with Southeast estimated at 77%, Reilly at 81% and Buckeye at 78%.
In addition to funding the construction of the new building, should the levy pass that favorable offer from the construction commission would be retained in perpetuity, meaning that if the district decided to build a new high school in 30 years, the district would receive the same rate. However, such a project is merely theoretical, as there are no plans to stop using or replace the high school any time soon -- a matter that has been stressed by Kirkland and the board of education at length.
In regard to the current elementary buildings, which would be replaced by the K-8 building, the state of Ohio offers the district three options -- to sell the building to their competition, demolish the building or to repurpose it. Kirkland has repeatedly said that selling the buildings to a competitor such as a charter school is not a tenable option, meaning that the only other options are to demolish or repurpose the buildings.
The district believes that Southeast Elementary, the youngest of the district's three elementary buildings at 56 years old, can still be repurposed for future use, and that the district wants to keep the building in place.
"It is the desire to keep Southeast around. It's the youngest building out of the three we're talking about. We believe there's a way to repurpose it and make it financially sound for the district," said Kirkland.
The same is not true of Reilly, the oldest of the three buildings, and Buckeye, which the district plans to tear down. With its location near Sebo Stadium the demolition of Reilly would provide the district with the opportunity to build a second entrance and additional parking for the stadium. Kirkland said that should a developer come forward with a plan and funding to make use of Reilly or Buckeye, the board would consider it, but that he felt it was unlikely.
"Salem High School is not being knocked down due to this bond issue, Southeast School is being repurposed, the Buckeye School, and Reilly will both be abated unless some steps forward with a very appealing offer to the board to consider," said Kirkland.
The district previously attempted unsuccessfully to get the levy passed in the May 2 special election. At that time the levy failed with a vote of 907 (44.07%) for and 1,151 (55.93%) against. The board elected to present the question to the voters again in the general election in its June meeting with Kirkland explaining that himself, Treasurer Mike Douglas and the board felt that the narrow margin of defeat and overall low voter turnout for the special election had "not expressed the whole community's viewpoint" on the issue.
Should the district be unable to pass the levy for a second time, it would lose both the offered $10 million gift from the community foundation, and the offer of 67% of the building expenses, becoming a lapse district and moving to the back of the line for future OFCC funding, with no guarantees that when the time comes again to receive a funding offer it will be as favorable.
mahart@mojonews.com