UPDATED: New Info From Last Night’s Decatur School Board Special Bond Session

108 thoughts on “UPDATED: New Info From Last Night’s Decatur School Board Special Bond Session”

1. 
   

2. Thanks for aggregating all of the info here!

4. Unless this bond makes substantial protection for Senior in Decatur along with a tax digest correction I will not vote for one dime. With the average new construction in Decatur now over $750,000 the income digest is substantially and materially affected. I would even consider higher taxes if those with school age children paid a different rate than those single family and elderly households paid an adjusted amount of the burden.

   1. I am ok with some expanded relief for seniors. But not for non-seniors without school age children. People are free to live wherever they want and can afford. If you don’t have school age children and choose to live in Decatur great (I did for 15+ years before my first was born; may I apply for a retroactive credit if we change the rules?).

      But I don’t see it as practical to base property taxes on school use. How is that enforced? What about rental properties? Does the owner pay one rate if renting to no-children families, and another higher rate if renting to someone with children? That raises a lot of other issues – as a landlord can I choose not to rent to someone with children? I suppose so. Maybe there could be an excise tax on rental property based on the number of
      children living in the property.

      Now that I think about it, we could quit claim our house to my mom, take advantage of a senior property tax discount (she is here enough to say she lives here) and I think she would let us live there rent free to boot.

      1. As you point out, it’s very complex to base any kind of taxation on who’s living in the home. And, I know people are just throwing out ideas here. But, just for information’s sake, landlords cannot discriminate against families with children. Landlords can set a reasonable limit on the number of people in a home, but cannot be willing to accept 2 adults but unwilling to accept a parent and child.

         http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/free-books/renters-rights-book/chapter5-2.html

   2. ” I would even consider higher taxes if those with school age children paid a different rate than those single family and elderly households paid an adjusted amount of the burden.”

      How exactly would that work? Do I get a tax reduction after my kid graduates from Decatur High? What happens if I live in Decatur but my kid goes to private school? Less taxes for me? Since I have only one child, do I pay less than someone with 4 kids? Your argument assumes that only families with kids benefit from public schools. An educated population benefits EVERYONE Not to mention, who is going to administer this taxing nightmare you propose? I do, however, completely agree that tax digest corrections absolutely should be done.

   3. I’m fine with reductions for seniors, but we all have to share the cost of educating our nation’s children so that we don’t end up a nation of idiots. It benefits everyone to contribute to the education of the masses.

   4. Um, Terry, er, let’s see. Every adult was once a child, whose education was supported by taxpayers. Therefore, in the pay-it-forward, social-contract-way-of-looking-at-this, EVERYONE should pay taxes that support the schools. (Lower-income seniors are different, however. But seniors with plenty of money? I’ve never understood why that’s an automatic tax break. We should means-test more taxes, but that would make the conservatives nuts and would never happen.)

      So this “I don’t have a kid, so I don’t have to pay taxes” argument/mentality is just wrong.

      1. Lower-income seniors weren’t children at one time?

         1. Certainly they were. But as I see it, taxes should be progressive, not regressive. Across all fronts. But that’s a completely different conversation.

            Right now, ppl are able to pay fewer taxes on their homes when they’re older. No income/assets taken into account.

            1. If you’re referring to City of Decatur exemptions for seniors, that is not the case. Three of the five include income criteria.

               1. Smalltowngal, I stand corrected! Thank you. So at a certain senior age, everyone gets a property tax decrease, but the decrease is greater for those with lower incomes? I want to make sure I get it right! 🙂

                  1. You can look it up at decaturga[dot]com, under Residents/Taxes find “general information about homestead exemptions” or something of the kind. One kicks in at age 62, then there are tiers with both age and income criteria, and I think there’s one more with a higher age threshold (80? older?) and no income requirement.

            2. “No income/assets taken into account.”

               As STG pointed out this is incorrect information. I’m currently up for one of the opportunities, my first, where income from employment and from dividends (not pensions nor Social Security) cannot exceed $10,000. For this I receive a school tax exemption of $10,000. That’s a reduction of the 50% of appraised value used as the multiplier by mileage rate. I believe “Fix-a-Dent” could fix the dent this will make in my tax liability but hey, something is something. [Do I forego working my small part-time job that can push me over the $10k max? That’s a lot to figure out.)

               “School (S-1)
               O.C.G.A. 48-5-52 Must reside at property, must be 62 or older; and the income (including salary, wages, rental income, interest, and dividends) of you and your spouse cannot exceed $10,000, excluding retirement income (such as retirement benefits, pensions, and Social Security)”

      2. I entirely agree that the tax break for seniors should be means tested.

         1. I totally disagree about taxing different populations/special groups differently. That’s a divide and conquer approach used to incrementally raise taxes overall, and over time, with multiple different special interestes feeling like they’re protected.

            Education spending in Decatur is already really high on a per-student bassis. Maybe we should be looking at how to build reasonable buildings using conventional building techniques rather than paying the premium for the latest, newest, greenest LEED Unobtanium certifications when the city is so obviously over-extended financially.

            1. Josh, society has a duty to protect its most vulnerable members. Seniors should be able to age in place. It is better for them and for our communities. Society is in a really bad place if we get to a point that we resent offering senior homeowners, the people who were once young parents who paid the property taxes that put most of us through school – and continued to pay those taxes long after they were empty-nesters- because it might cost a little more for everyone else. Actually, I’d like to know if your assertion is true. Do you have any sort of analysis that proves that senior tax breaks burden the rest of society?

               1. I completely agree that ALL groups should be able to age in place. I’ve said before, that I think it is unconscionable that we don’t set a cap on the maximum level of property tax increases year over year. Setting such a cap would bring some much needed certainty to both the elderly and non-elderly alike.

                  Similarly, for those folks moving in now at the $800/$1M price points would likewise know what to expect.

                  Such a system is infinitely more fair to all than one where certain groups are called out as special. I don’t hate old people, but I hate the idea that it’s OK move the tax burden of someone buying a $1M house, who happens to be over 65, to a young family in a $250-300K house.

                  Unless you have the magic money printing machine the federal government has, which negatively impacts poor through inflation, the burden must necessarily be pushed from those who get tax breaks to those without if you start with the overall expenditures, subtract subsidies/tax credits/special interests, and divide by the remaining taxable properties to arrive at the millage rate.

                  1. Do you think it would be appropriate for lower income seniors to get exemptions? Cause I actually agree with you that your scenario is NOT equitable and wrong.

                     1. I don’t. Do you think it would be right to lower my tax bill (and necessarily increase yours) if I lost my job, and my income were lowered?

                        Again, I’m not unsympathetic to the burden that taxation places on some people. I just feel very strongly that patchwork, special interest group “fixes” is the wrong approach to solving the problem.

                        1. Then how do we make sure our seniors stay safe in their homes? I have two neighbors who would have lost the homes in which they have lived for 40 years if they didn’t get a break. Fixed incomes, health problems, inflation, aging homes in need of repair- these things sap the income they have. Not being aggressive, just honestly probing.

            2. The city and CSD are two different animals here. CSD does not pursue LEED certification, even though they should, as it would lower operational expenses significantly as well as provide other benefits.

      3. Let’s not pretend that people who have kids in the school system aren’t getting a really sweet deal compared to childless people. This “taxpayers paid to educate you when you were a child so you should pay now” argument doesn’t wash, since those taxpayers included the parents of today’s childless people. Few people are arguing that childless residents shouldn’t pay taxes, but the people who are reaping wildly more benefit should bear more of the burden.

         1. I always crack up when people accuse parents of getting a sweet deal. There’s so many moments from projectile vomiting in infancy to teen snark to bizarrely high college costs that are nowhere near a sweet deal. I understand that parents made a choice to have children (well, actually the unplanned pregnancy rate is quite high even among married couples…) but “sweet deal” is exaggerating. Children are sometimes sweet but never a deal.

            1. No one is saying parenthood itself is a “sweet deal.” The sweet deal is getting childless people to pay for the education of your children. Of course we’ll contribute, but we shouldn’t have to pay as much as people reaping the most benefit — you, and your children.

               It doesn’t even make sense from your own perspective to tax childless residents out of your community, thereby making Decatur a financial proposition that ONLY makes sense for people with children. Get rid of the retired and the childless, and you will just be drawing more children into the school system.

               1. All that said, the merits of public education are not currently up for debate. We have a public school system. It is supported by taxes derived from the value of property. Whether or not that’s an appropriate or equitable arrangement may be something worthy of a symposium or maybe discussion over a few beers at the Thinking Man, but it’s not something currently on the table.

                  The question for us: How do we spend the money we have (or have access to) to best accommodate ourselves and our student base? Now have at it!

                  1. Fair enough, but I thought Decatur was supposed to be innovative, forward-thinking and diverse? If it fails to live up to that ideal, it will soon become an enclave for rich traditional families. Dunwoody with better restaurants.

                     1. What’s the innovation in making school taxes tied to the number of children? That’s actually a quick way to promote the death of income diversity and make sure that Decatur becomes unaffordable and unlivable for anyone without both a very high income and children.Middle and lower middle class families would have even less opportunity here.

                        1. “That’s actually a quick way to promote the death of income diversity.” This makes absolutely no sense. If you want your children educated you should be willing to pay a little extra to educate them. Again, no one is saying childless people won’t pay taxes, but you use the educational system more than, say, a childless gay couple, you should be willing to pay for the services that you and your children use — and not try to steal other people’s money for your children.

                           1. It totally makes sense. Calling legitimate taxes levied for the common good of society stealing is what makes no sense. So I get to pick and choose what taxes I pay based on what I do or don’t do? That is ridiculous. Other than a few people, the majority in this society thinks public education benefits society as a whole. The kind of system your talking about penalizes and ghettoizes poor neighborhoods with low property values even more than they are already penalized. Working and middle class people with kids couldn’t afford to buy homes and rents in areas with lots of children would skyrocket because the landlord would have to pass on the huge tax bill. Schools would wither in neighborhoods as children aged out of school and there was no one there to pay the huge taxes to keep them up.

                              Might as well send kids whose families cannot afford a big tax bill back to the fields and factories.

                              This kind of thinking is what has gotten us so far from the original intent of providing for the common good which was foundational to the origins of our system of governance.

   5. What everyone else said, plus the fact that your home in the city is only worth as much as it is *because* of the high-quality school system.

      1. +1

      2. What supports this statement? This claim is apocryphal at best. I would contend the value of the housing is more related to proximity to work and lifestyle amenities with better schools being just one part of the mix.

         1. Many neighborhoods directly bordering Decatur with lower regarded public schools have the same or better proximity to employment, and easy access to the same lifestyle amenities . . . and similar housing can be had a significant discount compared to inside the CoD limits. Literally one block can swing the value of a 3 or 4 bedroom house $100-$200k if there is a border involved. I don’t think folks are paying that premium because the fire department is more responsive. The Parkwood neighborhoods didn’t get a better location or gain amenities when they got annexed, but they almost certainly went up in price.

            1. +1. We significantly lengthened our commute to move to COD for the schools, as did nearly everyone I know who has moved to Decatur in the last 7-8 years.

            2. 3-4 bedroom houses on any contiguous streets even within COD can vary in price by $100k based upon age, construction materials and upgrades. The statement above, and ones made by others in this thread, are that my home value is soley based upon the city schools. Without some sort of reasonable support, I reject that argument. I moved here for the amenities of Decatur. I have/had no children to educate. In my opinion the statement above is being perpetuated in order to argue for higher taxes. Do I agree that the quality of the schools add to my property values; yes. But I don’t think it is 100% or even above 50%. I have paid into the school taxes for almost 30 years now. I don’t have children and I am not willing to absorb a tax increase or be forced to move at this point without some serious review of how this proposed burden will be mitigated or equitably shared.

               1. Obviously the value is not “solely” based on the schools. Pick a older construction but nicely expanded and updated 3/2 on the neighboring fringes of Kirkwood or East Lake, and you are looking at something in the $325k range today. Take that same house and move it *literally* a stone’s throw away into Oakhurst and you are looking at something well into the $400’s. Crime hasn’t changed. Commute hasn’t changed. Nearby amenities haven’t changed. Neighbors have (hardly) changed. People are not paying $100k+ premiums for similar housing stock within hundreds of feet of each other for the privilege of putting a cute little license plate on their front bumper and the ability to use city pools. They are paying it for the schools.

                  1. And your data to support this view comes from where? If it’s everyone I know agrees with me then I can point to all of my child free friends who moved here for other reasons and we are at an impasse. Well, at least we had a reasonable discussion and didn’t call each other names. Thank you.

                     1. Check comp real estate prices. There is your data.

                        Oh yeah, then there is this school called Duke University. Here’s part of a literature survey done by the Urban Economics department on the impact of school quality on housing prices:

                        “The study then used ordinary least square estimations of a semi-log model and regressions to interpret the data collected. As will be seen in many other studies documented, Owusu-Edusei and Espey found that proximity to and quality of a school does affect the prices of housing in its respective school district. Of the houses studied in Greenville, SC, houses with elementary schools within 2640 feet (a half of a mile) of their properties have prices 18% higher than those of houses located further than 10560 feet (2 miles) from an elementary school. Similarly, houses with middle schools within 10560 feet of their properties have prices 16% higher than those of houses located further than 10560 feet from a middle school and houses with high schools within 10560 feet of their properties have prices 12% higher than those of houses located further than 10560 feet from a high school. Furthermore, if an elementary school rated Good, houses in that school district sell for 12% higher than those in districts with schools with a worse rating. If a middle school rated Average, houses sell for 31% higher than houses in a district with a school of a worse rating. Lastly, if all K-12 schools in an area rated Average and Above, the value of homes is 19% higher in that area than those in areas with Below Average schools. Thus, it can be concluded that both greater proximity to and better quality of schools does positively affect the prices of housing located in their attendance zone.

                        1. Bill Murray, Stripes:
                           It is alive.

                           1. Barely

                           2. Ah, children….

                        2. Comp real estate prices do not prove the argument. They just show there is a difference and not why there is a difference.

                           You are forcing me to turn negative because everyone in the South knows “Duke sucks” but I do appreciate the data, most of which is related to proximity rather than quality. Same could be said by the many who constantly bemoan the lack of something refered to as a “Trader Joe’s” which apparently is a much sought after commodity. Kindly send me the link to the study and I will gladly review. I am open to changing my mind but I would like to base this on data rather than conjecture.

                           1. It may go into moderation. I will try some links, though

                           2. Literature review:
                              http://sites.duke.edu/urbaneconomics/?p=712

                              If you are an insomniac who likes to study statistical modeling:
                              http://research.stlouisfed.org/publications/review/10/05/Chiodo.pdf

                              Something more accessible:

                              http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/schlhome.htm

                              Something short and in actual words:

                              http://www.biggerpockets.com/renewsblog/2011/04/06/school-districts-real-estate-prices/

                           3. I’m happy to see DM becoming an academic paper discussion group! I found “The Capitalization of School Quality into House Values: A Review” pretty helpful in understanding current (as of 2011) research on this subject, and would be interested to hear everyone’s thoughts once you’ve had a chance to read it: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1895351

                              For our next discussion, I propose we consider the shortcomings of the basic school quality statistics typically mentioned in everyday discourse (that old catch-all “test scores”), and the implications of increasing mainstream interest in value-added measures, despite the collection and many other challenges inherent in such alternatives. This is a decent starting point, if anyone one else wants to get on board this fun train before it leaves the party station:
                              http://www.dartmouth.edu/~dstaiger/Papers/kanestaigerjeparticle.pdf

                           4. http://www.ntanet.org/NTJ/50/2/ntj-v50n02p215-32-how-much-more-good.pdf

                              I would also recommend reading “Two Income Trap.” Part of the analysis done in the book relates to how families are driving up the housing prices in districts with good schools.

                              Anecdotal I know, but on my street every single house that has sold has gone to a family with small kids. No childless couples have moved in. And I don’t think it has to do with being close to Moe’s for “Kids Eat Free Saturdays”

                           5. Mr. Boh, I also believe the “anecdotal evidence” suggests that most houses are turning over to families with children. That’s the case on our street/intersection/section of our neighborhood. In the last two years, the 15 houses that sold were bought by families with young children, I can’t think of a single house in our neighborhood that was bought by a childless person/couple. I wonder if anyone tracks such a figure – I’d be willing to bet that over 90% of residences sold are bought by ppl with kids (who moved specifically for the school system). It would just be an interesting figure to know – also interesting to see if our “anecdotal evidence” actually matches up with the “real evidence.”

                     2. My data is recent real estate transactions. Oakhurst has a median sales price per square foot of over $300 in the last 90 days. In Kirkwood it’s under $200. Some of that is obviously driven by inventory available. Fact remains though: in Kirkwood 325 buy you a pretty nice place while Hundreds of feet away in oakhurst in literally buys you dirt. There’s a reason people pay that price, and the bigger tax bill, and ithese says it’s the schools.

                        1. Causation and correlation are two different things.

                           1. You win. Folks will spend a million bucks to move their family of 5 here because the oysters at Kimball House are just THAT good.

                           2. That’s stupid. It’s because of how cold the Jager at Trackside is.

                           3. I can’t believe I ask you for advice.

               2. In my experience as a Decatur homeowner, my property values increased the most in my first 10 years living here, not in the last 10. During those first 10 years, the school aged population was low and while the schools weren’t bad, they were not the main draw.

                  1. I have had the opposite happen. My house is now valued at an insane price- 7x what I paid for it and 6x my investment overall! Most of that has been in the last FIVE years! Likely my double lot has a lot to do with it, but still…

                     1. The lot may explain it…my lot is very small and oddly shaped and unsuitable for a large infill house…

                        1. My retirement plan is to subdivide!! (Joking, but only kinda sorta).

6. “If we don’t get it passed, then we’re either adding more portables…”

   The bond on covers building capacity for 90% of students, under a low growth scenario, making no accounts for annexing residential properties. Sounds to me like they are expecting portables to be a necessary component of accommodating everyone even if the bond measure passes and the system expands by essentially the lowest predicted amount.

   I guess that just feels like a scare tactic. Is there any evidence that kids in portables inside CSD are getting a sub-par educational experience? If they are effectively going to be a “necessary evil” even with a bond measure and higher taxes . . . why all the saber rattling about needing more of them?

   “Portables” feels like a dirty word, but they are already an integral part of the system capacity and will continue to be. The simple threat of needing more doesn’t necessarily seem like a terrible thing when weighed against dramatic tax hikes.

   1. You don’t have to look far to see a constantly growing system – Gwinnett – that does not overbuild a school because “kids are coming.” Instead the plans include trailers at existing schools while the build of the basic school is completed. Rarely does a Gwinnett school open with extra, empty classrooms. Instead there’s an addition planned for the next growth spurt and trailers added until the addition is ready. Sure the district is more than 10 times larger than CSD but they are successful academically, and the model for building construction is working over time.

      1. Interesting approach, and similar to that taken by the school systems in the fast-growing parts of Florida where I used to live. But the Gwinnett school system, like those countywide districts in Florida, must have a lot more flexibility than the city’s due to their sheer size. Gwinnett’s enrollment is about 45 times larger than the CSD.

         1. Yes, 10 times was a typo I didn’t catch when posting from my phone so thank you for the more accurate number of 45 times greater. I still say we shouldn’t build empty classrooms just because in a year or five or somewhere in between they will be needed. Trailers should fill that need.

            1. I’m not advocating building spare capacity. Just questioning if having additional portables is an inherently bad thing. I get that it’s more logistically difficult for administrators, but shuffling a household budget to accommodate a tax increase caries it’s own logistical complexities.

   2. King Joffrey, what I think matters is the percentage of a school that is in trailers. At the middle school, for example, you could have a few trailers, and it would be just fine. But I remember being at a meeting (Aug 2013) where the superintendent played a video, and it in the middle school principal explained how having half of the school in trailers (which would be the case in a few years, if there is no construction) would not be a workable option. There are so many logistical and operational factors that go into running a school that having half the students in trailers would make burdensomely difficult.

      1. Tax hikes are burdensome and difficult for residents. If the school board plans to ask residents to suck it up and deal with a little extra pain . . . they should be willing to do the same, no? It just feels like building fancy new stuff is the only viable option decision makers are willing to entertain, because the opportunity to meet these demands in more creative and financially conservative ways has come and gone.

         I get that “we are in the position we are in” and lamenting missed opportunities isn’t going to fix the present situation. But I’ve yet to see any alternative arrangement to building our way our of this mess that isn’t presented with a really negative spin. It’d be nice to see the pros/cons of various solutions on the table without them being prefaced by “well, we might be forced to XYZ if we do this, but . . .”

         1. Well, “X, Y, and Z” really are pretty bad when the options include rear-round school and split shift schedules! 🙂

            I’m fine with some portables. As many have stated before, it might lessen the demand of CSD? The number of families with kids moving into CoD the spring before their children start Kg – from APS and DeKalb County schools – is staggering. The CSD bubble is not a sustainable option. I know it’s easier to say than do, but if only ppl could make an effort to improve their own schools before moving to already overcrowded Decatur schools (and then having the nerve to complain about it!!). But before you say it, I do realize that some ppl do try to make their current schools work. But some don’t do a thing but put their house on the market.

            1. I was razed for “not recognizing satire” last time someone posted this “chameleon” plan last time, but there are obviously people who think it has merit, so I’ll say it again: The portables are already here, and people keep coming.

               If the test scores continue to rank near the tops in the state, (most) people are not going to care if the classroom has a hitch on one end of it. Many people moving into Decatur might be coming from districts where trailers are already a way of life. It’s not like they are going to turn tail at the sight of corrugated sheet metal . . . it’s become almost a “constant” in the educational landscape over the last couple decades, and people have gotten used to it. They are not the scarlet letter they used to be.

               1. I know, I know. I just keep hoping *something” will slow down the school growth. The “CSD bubble” is not a sustainable solution for the long term. Everyone can’t keep moving to CSD from APS and DeKalb Schools… or can they??

                  1. DM needs to add a like button. I keep trying to like this series of posts from you 🙂
                     But there is no button 🙁

8. With all the apartments going in and other rental property, it does seem kinda unfair to throw all the taxes onto the home owners. Why not an additional $.02 sales tax for city of Decatur only?

   1. The apartment projects are commercial enterprises so they’re taxed as commercial. Someone chime in here to clarify, but I thought the property tax rate on commercial was higher than it is on residential. If so, doesn’t that mean the new batch of apartment dwellers will be carrying more of the load per household?

      1. I suppose it depends how much of the tax burden the landlord “passes on” to the renters via the rent?

         1. 100%

            1. What he said.

               As an owner of rental property – of course it is passed on. Or at least built into the economic decision (besides market demand) on how much to charge, and even whether or not to rent. Taxes on rental property are an expense, and treated as such by the IRS.

   2. Sales tax used for capital improvements and school construction? I think that requires a SPLOST. Who’s got the details?

      1. Scott

10. Sup’t. Edwards’ statement to the effect of “It’s either building more, or your kids are gonna get put into trailers!” has clinched it for me. I’m voting “NO” on any bond referendum, especially when (as others have so eloquently pointed out) our tax digest is still nowhere near accurate. We need to put ourselves on a school funding diet until we get our other financial ducks in a row, and then revisit it. Parents just need to understand & accept that more portables aren’t going to turn us into an educational ghetto by any stretch. Building newer, bigger schools won’t do anything to stem the influx of PWKs into the City, it’s going to encourage them further–thus hastening Decatur’s descent into an intown Alpharetta.

    1. I have posted a few times regarding the tax digest, but as DawFan and others have pointed out, the County is responsible for appraising homes, not the city. I would like to know what efforts the city is making in conjunction with the county to get the digest up to date. Any information on that would be appreciated.

       1. Under the heading of “If I were dictator of Decatur”

          It is in interesting exercise to imagine how an office in Decatur would handle assessments. There’s quite a bit of data on most neighborhoods using recent sales, lots, and prior assessments (although perhaps the information from that would be minimal. It seems that one could model likely home sale price without too much difficulty. Very nice methods in spatial statistics here…

          The problem is that in most statistics, you want to get your aggregate error down to a reasonable level, but for property value, there are individual households interested almost only in a single data point’s error. If you are responsive to appeals, then you mess up your overall model or you aren’t and you catch **** from residents.

          Hence, after daydreaming about this, I fully realize why this whole mess gets farmed out to the county…

12. Interesting that CSD is now using the term “portables” instead of the formerly used term “learning cottages”.

    I’m fine with the use of portables/trailers/learning cottages because I don’t think they negatively impact students or teachers if handled properly. But, from what has been stated over the last few years, I believe that we can’t rely on portables alone–there’s only so much space to put them and they increase operating costs to the point that other operational items like number of teachers/staff, programs, books/supplies are impacted. Portables come out of an operational budget which I guess is hard to expand. Buildings come out of another bucket–SPLOST/bonds/loans, things that I don’t understand but have been expandable up until this point. Now that the debt limit is being reached, I guess we are running out of buckets.

    1. Interesting that CSD is now using the term “portables” instead of the formerly used term “learning cottages”.

       Ha. That’s because, before, it served CSD’s agenda for us to like the trailers. Now it serves their agenda for us to dislike them.

       1. Discovery lodge
          Understanding bungalow
          Memorization cabin
          Reviewing shanty

          (clearly i’m just procrastinating now…)

14. Does anybody know what the $82M is supposed to cover? I’m assuming the additions to the HS and MS plus trailers as needed everywhere, but are other construction projects included?

16. Post above is updated with info from Decaturish’s extensive report from the meeting. Check it all out.

18. I’m not sure if ultimately this would be cheaper or even doable, but I wonder if it’s possible to build some kind of hub system for these portables where they can be driven in and directly attached to an offshoot of a school building instead of having a separate island of portables away from the main campus connected by covered walkways, like at Inman. That might address some of the security and logistical concerns and costs. Kids would be able to access the school bathrooms and could quickly move from class to class during period changes. As such, CSD could lease smaller and maybe cheaper portables. Personally, I’d love to see some kind of Deep Space Nine design since it would fit with the high school’s spaceship, but I suppose one could construct a truck warehouse system with bays to accommodate enough portables to handle the ebb and flow in the student population.

    1. Like a Habitrail?

       1. If each classroom had a running wheel there would be no issue about where to hold PE on rainy days.

20. Don’t care so much about portables…. do care about programs getting cut and teachers and staff being overworked and under paid. Someone reminded me today that the most important factor in school success is quality teachers. I still need to read more to understand what the 82MM is for…..

    I’m also going to say again that if all these decisions are being made based on population scenarios I’d like to see a second opinion. It’s a lot of money, a lot of churn and I’d be concerned to have the same consultants that have been advising us for several years be the only basis for all these numbers.

    I’m also pretty sure that if the only factor in picking where to live was schools, then Decatur wouldn’t be it. Decatur has very good schools but there are other systems right? If you wanted the “best” possible public schools on test scores and resources where would you be? Gwinnet? I am not certain. But my guess is that folks want good schools in an intown neighborhood. Geoff has probably stopped reading these threads because every time someone says the ONLY reason that property values are going up and the downtown is thriving is because of the schools he tries to explain otherwise. Understanding this doesn’t necessarily solve our problem… but perhaps it reframes the notion that everyone should be totally grateful to pay unlimited taxes for good schools because that’s the only reason for Decatur to exist.

    1. Agree re second opinion. It worries me to see statements in the Decaturish report like “…those projections were based on incorrect information” (from one CSD adviser) and “…said that assessment was due to an error on his part.” (about another adviser). I know that mistakes can be made and that’s alright as long as folks admit to them and correct them. And population projections will never be perfect because human behavior is hard to predict. But these are even higher stakes than back in 2004 so it is worth it to get enough opinions or double checks or both that the data are as sound as possible.

22. I guess I will be living in a portable if my taxes go up again.

24. Why don’t they turn the new school administrative building into a new high school annex. Lease cheaper office space in Dekalb County, or put their offices in trailers until we figure it out.

    1. Will. Never. Happen.

26. On a happier note , DHS Lady a Bulldogs play for a trip to the Final Four tonight at 6 at DHS. Go girls !!!!

28. Shifting numbers – Is the new data accurate? The old data was not. What is the source of the new data?

    “Dianne McNabb, with CSD adviser Public Financial Management, said those projections were based on incorrect information.

    “We got the new data on the value of a mill,” McNabb said. “That amount was higher than the one we were working with.”

30. And tomorrow’s a new day to argue about this while parents try to amuse their children on the first snow day of the year. Yup, that’s right…no school tomorrow.

32. 1000 bucks a year is not a lot when you consider how much your property will appreciate.

    1. I can’t pay the bills with an appraisal.

       1. And I don’t think my property appreciates me enough as it is.

34. Why don’t we save a few million dollars by cutting out these ‘advisors’

    1. Is that what they earn? Wow. I am pretty sure that that Superintendent’s Enrollment Committee, all volunteer, did a fine job with projections a few years ago Unfortunately, there’s probably legal reasons that you have to hire consultants rather than use the local volunteer talent. Some of the smartest minds in Georgia in terms of business and/or quantitative analysis live right here in Decatur.

36. Sounds like the school board doesn’t really know how much money it needs and they’re asking for as much as they think they can get. Come on. If I refinance my house to do some renovations and take out as much equity as I possibly can instead of the actual estimate I got from my contractors, I’m sure I’d find a way to use it all.

    From the Decaturish post on Feb 11:
    “School Board members debated a long while about whether it was worth asking for the whole $82 million. They considered two other options: asking for a $75 million bond referendum for a $60 million referendum.

    Superintendent Phyllis Edwards suggested there was some wisdom in asking for less. She said the question becomes, “What can we actually get passed?”

    Board Member Annie Caiola convinced the board that they needed to start out with a high number. She reasoned that commissioners would inevitably chip away at any number the School Board initially gave them.

    “I don’t want to bid against ourselves, if there’s a negotiation with the city,” she said.”

    1. Exactly. This is why I asked what the $82M is for. I’m not convinced anybody knows. Maybe the uncertainty surrounding annexation plays into this, but we don’t have the luxury to wait indefinitely. Annexation or not, our HS and MS overcrowding needs to be addressed. I think we should borrow enough to meet less than 100% of our projected enrollment and do it on a no-frills budget – not crappy cheap, but not super shiny either. For PK-5 we need to put everything on the table including getting back to PK-5 neighborhood schools (converting College Heights and 5th Ave into PK-5) and leasing buildings outside the city.

       1. Does anyone have any data on what it would look like if the schools were converted back to K-5s? I also question the viability of the 0-3 program at CHECLC in the long run. Pre-K does not have enough slots to accommodate our 4 year olds and I wonder if it is just not the choice for the majority of the city now (full disclosure: I am going on 8 years at College Heights and 2 kids in the program from 0-preK, so I am not a casual observer or a bitter lottery loser!). The 0-3 serves so few families that I am really concerned about the amount of space we are devoting to a very few, especially if we are in a situation where we have no more classrooms.

          1. I don’t thik the Supt is interested in collecting that data, but the BOE should demand it. College Heights worked great when we had excess capacity. Now that we don’t, I agree it should get a hard look.

38. There were probably less than 20 people in attendance at this meeting and I suspect I was one of the few, if only, non-parents. This is a big issue, so I did not want to wait until it showed up for me to vote to understand it better. My takeaways from the meeting are:

    1. CSD is doing a very poor job educating everyone on their efforts and analysis. They reviewed lots of great details about the options, what’s included (i.e. annexation areas), what is missed, but I cannot find those documents anywhere. Maybe I don’t know where to look, but it should not matter because most people are going to come to DM for information anyway.

    2. There was a comment made that our taxes would go up by 1.0 mil by 2020 regardless of the GO Bond passing or not. Dr. Edwards pointed out the Board needed to be upfront about that when presenting to the Commission. I appreciate the transparency in asking for tax increases.

    3. Assuming the school growth will stay consistent, there is a point at which trailers become too costly to make sense. In other words, if CSD does not spend capital to build schools, there is a break point where our taxes go up because the operational side of the budget must increase to support trailers.

    4. Decatur collects $1.3 billion in taxes. Dang.

    1. Re documents to review: did you check eBoard?

       1. After trying again, I was able to find some of the documents. It did not seem intuitive to me, and regardless most people are not going to try and look. And even so, there was a lot of conversation and questions answered that will not show up. For example, some estimates included the Fuqua and adjacent to Patel Plaza developments.

          Point still remains that CSD is doing a terrible job explaining this issue to the community. Personally I learned more at that meeting than I have in any of the DM or Decaturish posts thus far.

          1. Wasn’t the whole point of the meeting to disseminate information?

             I wasn’t able to attend, but I appreciate the fact that the School Board thought to have this meeting 9 months before the bond would appear on the ballot.

40. Decatur does not collect $1.3 billion in taxes.

    The $1.3 billion you cite is the tax assessed value (digest) of all properties in the City of Decatur. The city and schools collect property taxes based on millage rates. The school millage rate is 20.5. A mill is a thousandth. So the local property tax revenue for the schools is around $1.3 billion x 0.0205 = $26,650,000

    The materials which were presented at the meeting are attached to the work session and special session agendas on the eBoard website where the school district posts such things:

    Annexation and Enrollment Growth Plan:
    https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/Attachment.aspx?S=4052&AID=594582&MID=42941

    CSD Space Low Growth Analysis Presentation:
    https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/Attachment.aspx?S=4052&AID=594583&MID=42941

    Property Tax Analysis:
    https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/Attachment.aspx?S=4052&AID=594591&MID=42989

    Debt Capacity Analysis:
    https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/Attachment.aspx?S=4052&AID=594592&MID=42989

    Decatur and Adjoining Areas:
    https://eboard.eboardsolutions.com/Meetings/Attachment.aspx?S=4052&AID=594622&MID=42989

42. Hey, thanks for the correction on collection versus digestion.

    Already found the documents thanks to AHID, but nice of you to repost for others.

    Still wish more people went to the meeting or CSD did a better job communicating.

Comments are closed.