Dan and others who want detail support of the $25 million bond alternative to the proposed $44 million proposal go to

http://www.scribd.com/doc/36260417/SCHOOL-SQ-FT-R8-17-10

I have posted an excel file that has some of my detailed calculations that support a $25 million bond.  The $25 million bond actually presents a $30 million project cost.  The reason only $25 million needs to be borrowed is because the school already raised over $2 million in last year’s $5 million bond that was to be spent on the high school.  In addition to this $2 million, the school has over $4 million in surplus from it’s over budgeted costs for the past several years.  I am proposing that $3 million of this $4 million be used to fund the renovation.  By state standards, the school should not have more than $1.2 million in surplus on hand.

My cost of $30 million vs. the school’s estimate of $47 million differs solely based on eliminating the 90,000 excess square feet of space in the project.  The school plan is actually not really a renovation plan it is a 50% expansion of the high school from about 205,000 square feet to 307,000 square feet.  The proposed plan equates to over 300 square feet per student based on the highest projected school enrollment of 1022 in 2018.  This 300 compares to less than 200 square feet per student average for the high schools built over the past ten years.  In addition, the enrollment after 2018 begins to decline.  The most reliable studies are uncertain after 2019, but the enrollment is much more likely to go down after 2019 then it is to go up.

The proposed plan is to build 170,000 new square feet of space and to remove 65,000 square feet of space.  It will also renovate about 115,000 square feet of space. This is not a “renovation” it is a major expansion.  The issued that has not be answered is why would we need to expand a facility by 50%, when that facility has a capacity of 1200 students and currently has no projections where the enrollment goes over 1022?  While this project will not go through a state review (because the state is not funding it) my discussion with Scott Brown (lead official who approves school construction projects) at the Maine Department of Education clearly suggests that it would not be approved by the state because of the excessive square feet of space and the lack of high enough utilization of the space.

Finally, no one likes it when I compare South Portland to Scarborough, but the SP property tax rate at $15.70 is already 24% higher than Scarborough’s tax rate of $12.64 and the projected rate increase to pay for this $44 million bond will increase the rate to $16.87 or 33% more than Scarborough.  Good luck trying to get any new businesses to locate in SP vs. Scarborough.