Boards agree on consolidation plan, sort of

The Wrenshall school board wanted the full support of the Carlton school board this week when it comes to the next steps of the school district consolidation process. But some Carlton school board members are still lukewarm about the two-site plan. And that’s despite an overwhelming majority of constituents indicating via a recent survey that they want the districts to consolidate with two school locations, and that they are willing to pay for it.

On Monday, the Wrenshall board approved a resolution that the districts would move forward and lobby the state legislature for aid to help fund facility improvements at South Terrace in Carlton and the school in Wrenshall. A successful effort in St. Paul could lead to state funding that would pay 40 percent of the estimated $38 million in school improvements. The resolution also called for the planning for the two-site transition leading up to and coming after a potential levy vote in August.

But the Wrenshall board vote came with one condition: that Carlton board members and the superintendent show unanimous support for the two-site consolidation and steps toward it at their meeting on Tuesday.

Wrenshall board member Janaki Fisher-Merritt expressed relief that such a large majority of the survey respondents supported the consolidation plan.

“I think we heard a pretty clear signal on the survey,” he said, stressing how important it is that everybody is on board, for the survey results to lead to positive election results. “You can’t have people going off in different directions, so I think it’s important that all Carlton board members and the superintendent support this and say that they support it.”

That didn’t happen. Carlton voted 5-1 in favor of the resolution, with superintendent Gwen Carman also voicing her support; but discussion revealed that three board members are actually not in support of the plans. LaRae Lehto, Sue Karp and Tim Hagenah all said they still prefer a one-site consolidation, despite negotiating with Wrenshall and agreeing to the two-site option presented in the survey.

Across the districts and throughout various voting blocs, there was about 80 percent approval of consolidation and its associated costs.

Hagenah said he read through some of the more than 600 comments left by survey respondents and has concerns similar to some the comments raised. He said he remains convinced that a one-site option is the way to go and is “not in favor” of what is in the current plan. He then said, “I will go along with the board. I will do whatever it takes to move it forward,” but voted “no” on the resolution.

A review of the comments gathered from the surveys shows that a majority of them simply reiterate support for consolidation and the plan offered. Comments favoring the one-site option comprise less than half of the comments from online surveys, which made up about half of the survey responses.

Lehto said the “two-site plan is not my favorite” but that she does “support the process.”

Karp said she is convinced that the comments show there is more “diversity” among district residents when it comes to site options, despite more than half of them supporting the two-site plan.

“I prefer one site at South Terrace,” Karp said, but admitted that the “community has spoken” on the survey with support of two sites. She said she will “move forward.”

Wrenshall board members were expected to meet at 6:30 a.m. today (Friday) about perhaps rewording their resolution that asked for full support from Carlton. “Consolidation is a very hard thing for some, which is unfortunate,” said Wrenshall superintendent Kim Belcastro after the Carlton meeting, which she attended along with a few other Wrenshall supporters. “The Wrenshall board wants to make sure that there is full support to be able to secure the state funding and to successfully pass a referendum in both communities.”

Sue Peterson from School Perceptions, the company that administered the survey, said last week when the results were announced that school board members needed to speak with one voice, especially since the survey showed overwhelming community support for the current plan and its costs.

Carlton board member Jen Chmielewski asked if there was any intent by fellow board members to lobby residents against the two-site plan. Hagenah said there wasn’t.

On Friday, Wrenshall board members were also expected to discuss spending $24,000, split between the districts, to pay for a lobbyist to promote bonding at the legislature, after voting against it Monday. Carlton board members said the cost was prohibitive but likely worth it to leverage the possible 40 percent in state bonding.

Belcastro told the Carlton board members that she has been told that getting the bonding might not be as much of a “heavy lift” as first thought, since there are a limited number of education bills running through the current session. The thought is that lawmakers on the education committees will be able to sift through the consolidation needs without a preponderance of other issues.

Local representatives Rep. Mike Sundin and Sen. Jason Rarick introduced bills this week in their respective bodies calling for the consolidation bonding.

Deficit budgets

The Carlton school board on Tuesday also approved an amended budget that is $414,000 in the red. It means the district will have to dip into reserves to cover the budget. Carman said it will leave $600,000 to $750,000 in reserves after ending the last budget cycle with more than $1 million. Chipping away at the reserve is “not a good thing,” Carman said, “but there is money.” She said the issue wasn’t state funding based on declining enrollment, as the number of students in the district has leveled off. A summary of the amended budget showed red numbers for the general budget ($223,55), transportation budget ($159,012) and community budget ($56,335.) There were other negative numbers but about $200,000 in staff cuts help stave some of the budget bleeding, Carman said.

In Wrenshall Monday, board members approved the district’s 2019-20 revised budget with a deficit of $184,339. As adopted, the budget includes one fewer day per week for the Wrens Club coordinator and aid, and no Wrens Club after June 30. That could change, as the school district intends to survey parents on not offering the program over the summer, as there will be ongoing construction/renovation projects in the building so the program could move to a local church if there’s enough interest.

Construction bonds

Wrenshall school board members got good news from the company handling the upcoming sale of its facilities maintenance bonds, expected to happen in mid-March. Proceeds from the bond sales will fund air quality and fire suppression improvements at Wrenshall school over the next two summers.

Ehlers senior municipal advisor Jodie Zesbaugh said with the much lower interest rates they’re seeing, the district will likely bond for less, just under $9 million (versus the $9.3 million max) and the property tax impact on residents should also be less than anticipated after the first year.

While initial calculations predicted the owners of a $150,000 home would pay about $139 in property taxes for the district, she expects that number to go down by $30 to $35 a year “assuming we get that nice low interest rate on March 16,” she added.

Because the work is being done over two years, Zesbaugh also said the district will likely earn a little more interest on the bonds over that time to help offset costs.

***********

Mixed messages

Hagenah said he remains convinced that a one-site option is the way to go and is “not in favor” of what is in the current plan. He then said, “I will go along with the board. I will do whatever it takes to move it forward,” but voted “no” on the resolution.

Lehto said the “two-site plan is not my favorite” but that she does “support the process.”

“I prefer one site at South Terrace,” Karp said, but admitted that the “community has spoken” on the survey with support of two sites. She said she will “move forward.”