OPINION: Here’s why you should vote ‘YES’ on the D91 school bond
Published at | Updated at
EDITOR’S NOTE: The following is an editorial column submitted to EastIdahoNews.com by Build Up District 91 – an advocacy group in support of the $110 million school bond proposed by Idaho Falls School District 91 school. Click here to read the editorial submitted by those opposed to the bond.
Click here to read a comprehensive report on the issue by EastIdahoNews.com.
By Build Up District 91
We want to start by simply stating that we believe it is so important for us to show our kids how much we value their education. New and updated high schools would be a huge boost for our community and our economy. Voting yes would send a message that Idaho Falls is a proud and progressive city who cares about the future. The fact that we can do so without a levy increase is a unique situation and just an added bonus.
We have a real opportunity to make a choice to invest in our community and our kids. What’s great about this decision is that it is NOT being forced on us from a state or federal level. It’s ours to make. Yours and mine. We recognize that this isn’t a small investment. $110 Million is a significant investment. But we hope that most will view it exactly as that. This is an investment, not a tax.
The Numbers
All financial decisions are based on assumptions. Piper Jaffray, the financial experts who provide bond underwriting services to school districts all over the country, have done an in depth study and used the best information available in their analysis to make their forecasts. Some data points for consideration:
o Piper Jaffray has a track record of calculating conservative, not-to-exceed, tax rate projections that have proven to be accurate for school district bond elections throughout Idaho including Twin Falls, West Ada, Boise, Nampa, Lewiston, Coeur d’Alene and Bonneville.
o Piper Jaffray considered our 20-year compound growth rate of 4.29% together with recent building permit activity in and around Idaho Falls. (It is worth noting that the historical growth rate included a period when the District’s property values declined following our nation’s worst recession since the Great Depression.)
o The growth rate necessary to avoid any levy rate increase is 1.9% (less than ½ the historical average)
o The District worked with the same professionals from Piper Jaffray on the District’s 2012 bond election and their estimate of the taxpayer impact of the 2012 bond was conservative. The projection for the 2012 Bond property tax rate was an increase of $1.19 per $1,000. The actual increase in the District’s total property tax rate was $1.04 per $1,000.
o The 5% growth projection for FY 2019 and FY 2020 is consistent with the most recent 6% actual growth rate for Tax Year 2017 which corresponds to the Districts FY 2018.
o The assumptions necessary to not have a rate increase include 8 years of zero growth – this is beyond conservative
o To be more specific, Piper Jaffray’s numbers to avoid a levy increase would result in a 3.33% compound growth rate over the next 10-years and 1.90% over the next 20-years. In short, the District believes that Piper Jaffray’s market value growth projections are reasonably conservative.
o Although not built into the projections, another factor that gives the District comfort that its tax rate projection can be achieved is the State of Idaho’s Bond Levy Equalization Program. As its name would suggest, this program is designed to “equalize” the impact of bond proposals based on a measure of the affordability of the bond in a particular community. The program provides a state-paid subsidy to reduce the local property tax levy needed to repay school bonds. Based on Piper Jaffray’s analysis of the historical data from the Department of Education, if the District’s market value grows at a lower rate than is currently projected the District would expect a corresponding increase in the levy equalization subsidy offsetting any potential increase in the property tax rate.
The opposition would have people believe in a dooms day type scenario. One of zero growth.
So which method is realistic and reasonable? You be the judge.
The great thing is that the decision is in our hands. It’s not up to politicians or a group of distantly removed officials. It’s up to us. We can either look at this from a conservative reasonable approach or from a dooms day zero-growth perspective. The choice is ours. This is one moment in time we may never have again. We hope that as a community we take advantage of the opportunity before us.
For more in depth information on the Piper Jaffray analysis or other pertinent facts, please go to www.buildupdistrict91.org.