In protecting the fabric of the community, we see a need to speak up from time to time especially when it comes to future growth of the city and the schools.
At an emergency meeting of the Marysville School Board Monday, members didn’t vote for the new proposal from the City of Marysville that would have kept the Cook’s Pointe project moving forward. If the agreement would have been signed, the school would have given its approval to a tax increment financing (TIF) for Cook’s Pointe.
A TIF is a funding mechanism that allows infrastructure for a project to be paid upfront so the development pays for the improvements so not to come out of the city coffers. A yes from the school would have provided an avenue for needed funds to help build the road to connect routes 4 and 31, and also give a jump start for the development there.
We see this as an unforced error by the board at a time when it needs help from a public relations standpoint to stem the tide of recent decisions demonstrating questionable fiscal responsibility. We are referring to the $2.4 million parking lot project (original budget $1.2 million) the superintendent’s raise to $160,000 a year before her contract expired and the proposed $8.9 million football stadium. Board member Dick Smith has said all along that school costs are not going down in the future, and he’s certainly correct with this kind of a spending philosophy.
Keep in mind, the meeting Monday was a culmination of a six-month back and forth effort between the school and the city to try to agree on how they could both work together on the road funding.
The new proposal from the city kept the current school funding from the real estate tax intact at $4,200 per year and asked the school to let the infrastructure be paid for before collecting its tax revenue. This new plan allows the development to get started and succeed. Instead of coming back with something that helps alleviate the city’s concerns over the funding for the road, the schools balked at the offer thinking somehow this was a game of chicken and if they didn’t blink they would get the original deal they signed.
Now the project has been tabled by the city and if the road doesn’t go in, the school will only get its current $4,200 per year. The school is losing out on a potential $10 million deal that could help fund future costs that Smith alluded to.
The real kick in the pants is that the entire disagreement is over about $2.8M. Meaning, in the first proposal the schools stood to gain about $12.8M over the 30-year life of the development and with the new offer the school could be paid $10 million over the same time period. The $2.8 million difference the schools are holding onto would be at the end of the life of the development that could be 20-30 years down the road so the time value of money has to play in here at some point.
If the road doesn’t go in, the bottom line is that the school’s refusal to cooperate could delay the development’s timeline and put at risk the ability to provide a future revenue stream. We see this especially important at a time when the school announced it is going on the ballot and asking the voters for a permanent operating levy in 2018 and possible new money in 2021.
We think the school should be a problem-solver, not the cause of the problem, and take the low-hanging fruit to help this project move forward.