Yelm Issues: May 2006 Archives

After forwarding my blog about the Yelm High School expansion to the YHS Principal Pete Diklich, I received this response from Yelm Schools Superintendent Dr. Alan Burke which I post here unabridged for the community to read and understand. Thanks to Dr. Burke for this thorough explanation for our community.

Steve--

Pete Diklich passed your email to me with questions about YHS construction. Thanks for your inquiry. Please feel free to post this on your blog site. What follows covers more that what you requested, but I believe contextual information is important when considering issues surrounding growth and school construction.

First, the school construction formula used by the Office of the Superintendent of Public Instruction (OSPI) is based upon "unhoused" students determined by a so-called cohort survival method. Basically, this means that when a school district requests matching funds from the state, officials at OSPI look at the cohort survival number for Yelm,
determine a number for unhoused students, and then calculate how much of the square footage in the proposed building will be matched by state monies. Roughly, the state now funds one-third of projects and local taxpayers pay two-thirds. For the YHS project the total costs of construction are approximately $31,000,000 of which just over $13,000,000 is paid by the state through the match.

The big problem is that the state formula really is much more aligned to a "let's-count-who-is-here-today" concept than to a projected growth model. Consequently, growing communities like Yelm are always behind when it comes to housing students. For the YHS project, state match was determined in August of 2004, meaning that the funding formula was fixed before a shovel was turned on the construction site. Also, the state approved both Ridgeline Middle School and Yelm High School for matching monies, but only with cohort numbers for grades 7 - 9 and 10 - 12. Basically, this meant that we originally qualified for match on a 1270 student high school (the 1200 figure quoted in the newspaper was understated--my error), even though, when we open YHS this fall, the enrollment picture will be much different than it was in 2004. All of this explains why, in Washington, it is common for new schools to open with portable classrooms.

To counteract problems with inadequate state enrollment projections, and to prepare for future growth, we emphasized infrastructure and common spaces in the YHS project. The gyms, commons (lunchroom), and performing arts center are meant to accommodate up to 2000 students. We didn't want to repeat the mistakes of 30 years ago when common spaces at the current YHS were built for 700 students and quickly became overcrowded when more and more students came to the school. In this project, we planned for fewer classrooms knowing that we can use our existing stock of portables to provide classroom space. We also have built portable pads that, for now, can be used to install more portables, and, in the future, can provide space to build a new, two-story classroom unit if and when a future bond is passed by taxpayers.

Assuming that current growth rates remain constant over the next three years, we should be able to accommodate student growth K-12 with our current facilities, current portables, and perhaps the purchase of more portables. (For your information, a double classroom portable unit typically costs approximately $100,000 installed. Most of the money for portable purchases comes from mitigation fees collected from developers, now $2650 per home.)

Certainly, assuming that Yelm keeps growing, we will need to ask the voters to approve a school construction bond sometime between 2009 and 2013. That request will come at the time that the school board decides that the pace of growth, the state calculation of unhoused students (and therefore the potential amount of state match money available), and overcrowded conditions create a situation where the community can and will support new taxes for new schools.

Alan Burke

Yelm High School's 2+ year construction project is nearing an end. Quoting the Nisqually Valley News, "Currently, Yelm High School holds about 1,500 students. The new high school has capacity for 1,200, and will house about 1,100 when it opens, because the freshman class will relocate to the two middle schools in Yelm."
HMMM! Let's do a little math here:
A. Yelm High School's capacity is 1,200 students, the 9th grade is no longer located there and 1,100 students will enroll in Fall, 2006 from 10th, 11th & 12th grades. That leaves room to grow for only 100 students, if my math is correct.
B. The City of Yelm's asst. city planner Tami Merriman previously stated in the Tacoma News Tribune that 600 new homes will be built in Yelm on top of the permitted 1,200 Tahoma Terra development within 5 years from 2005. That's 1,800 new homes in the Yelm city limits only, which does not include new construction outside of the Yelm city limits or the Thurston Highlands project, if approved.

Observation: if just one-tenth of each of the 2,000+ new homes in Yelm and the surrounding area have just one high schooler, how is the Yelm High School going to handle 200+ new students by 2010?
More portables?
More property taxes?
More construction bonds?
More operational levies?
HMMM?

Please leave a comment if you have the answer.

I just returned from the Yelm City Council Public Hearing for the Local Improvement District (LID) Proposal.
The LID (Local Improvement District) is to provide funding for access roads and road imrpovements to the Tahoma Terra & Thurston Highland complexes. While the developers would fund what is stated as 60-65% of the project, the balance would be raised through a tax assessment of properties contiguous to the roads under the premise their property values would increase, as well. Many property owners at tonight's meeting were upset because they thought the developers had agreed to build access roads and Yelm Ave. West improvements themselves when the Thurston Highlands development was proposed to the City. Many expressed that they felt betrayed that the city would consider passing on 35-40% of the funding through an LID to local property owners, when they had understood the developers had already agreed to pay for road improvements as part of the development's application.

This meeting filled Council Chambers.
Comments were opened by the Mayor at 7:37pm, closed at 8:54pm

The public comments fell into two camps:

Corporate interests vs. individual property owners

Giving testimony on the corporate interests' side were representatives that were asked by Mayor Harding to testify first and in order as follows Thurston Highlands, Yelm Community Schools (Superintendent Al Burke), Thurston County Economic Development President Mike Edwards (see below) who reminded the audience that his ancestors settled Yelm over 150 years ago, and the Twin County Credit Union's rep., all who stated these improvements will help Yelm with managed growth by packaging all of the improvements together.

Vs.

local property owners, all strongly opposed to the LID, stating that this project shifts too much of the expense for road upgrades to the local property owners. Many property owners said they wish no improvements to their frontage lots, but would have no choice if passed. One noted property owner voicing an eloquent statement opposed to the LID was Darlene Baker, sister-in-law to Yelm Councilman Joe Baker and co-owner with her husband Virgil of Sunrise Homes. Another citizen, one of our sweet seniors Gail Cane addressed the Council with information that in her research via the interent, learned an L. I. D. is nothing more than a wholesale transfer of funding local road projects from developers and towns to local citizens via a tax assessment. Council person Bob Isom interrupted Ms. Cane requesting the link and she replied that her limited time before Council would not be taken up addressing their questions - "no," he could not interrupt her. That drew applause. This writer contacted Ms. Cane for the link and she told me LIDs are the same thing as Tax Increment Financing
Please read Ms. Cane's discovery on the link highlighted above.

Mayor Harding stated, “It makes much more sense to do this as one project than several.”
The city’s rep. Jim Gibson stated this LID would cost $19 million if done in separate sections, yet will cost $8.8 million done collectively.

Alan Burke said it would save the schools $500,000 [yeah, yet puts 35-40% of the burden onto the local neighbors; upgrades which around the Yelm High School had been previously agreed to be made by Yelm Schools as part of the Yelm High School expansion and had nothing to do with Tahoma Terra & Thurston Highlands developers' plans. So, Mr. Gibson is saying take all of the proposed upgrades to Yelm Ave. West and do them as one project and save money. That's fine, just not via an LID which would transfer the burden of funding onto road-contiguous owners ].

Legal counsel for the City stated that interested parties have 30 days to write letters to the City Council on this subject. She continued that although public comments are recorded, a written letter to City Hall will make a difference. The city's Legal Counsel said property owners can defer payment of the assessment, however there would be interest incurred which would have to be paid upon the sale of any property. One man stood and said he was on a limited income and the assessment plus interest would force him to lose his home.

Steve Klein (this writer) pointed out that within 5 years the city would have to come back and rip out all of the improvements in this LID as the city will have to 5 lane Yelm Ave. West, that this already happened with 5 Corners when that intersection had to be widened 18 months after it was upgraded. Mr. Klein pointed out to the audience that the FORS were all corporate interests and the AGAINSTS were "Yelm's Little People", the local home owners and asked everyone to notice that fact. Jim Gibson replied that with the Loop built, Yelm Ave. West should handle the traffic just fine with three lanes. Klein reminded him that Rep. Tom Campbell sat in that very same chair a few weeks earlier stating the Loop funding was such that construction would not begin prior to 2011 with opening in 2016 and asked about Yelm Ave. West traffic until then. Mayor Harding jumped in and said the city has to start somewhere and how do we handle the traffic passing through town. Mr Klein stated that a center turn lane in the afternoons from the west into town or east out of town will not help the flow, that there is no increase in actual road capacity and school traffic is gone by 3pm, and most of the traffic is between 7-8am & 3-6pm. Mr. Klein suggested the council ride in traffic from the Red Wind Casino to Yelm about 5pm on Thursday or Friday. Klein noted that a center turn lane, lights and improvements on Yelm Ave. East has done little to ease the traffic congestion as traffic backs up for blocks at 5 Corners every afternoon now. Then, Mr. Harding bristled and said he has lived here all of his life, he knows about the traffic. Mr. Klein was about to offer some suggestions (like one-way streets mentioned by him in January and by a local resident tonight), when Councilwoman Fetterly cut him off and said she wanted to hear no arguments.

Mike Edwards then spoke again reminding everyone that the Federal funding for the Loop would not be present if local municipalities do not handle their local traffic properly themselves and this LID assists Yelm in that venture.

Then Mr. Harding stated that although he does not vote, he strongly supports the LID and encourages the council to take action now and vote for approval. [Ed. Note: This is the same man that stood so firmly behind the flag of Washington’s Appearance of Fairness Doctrine last year during the Wal-Mart debate as Mayor Pro-Tem. His definite stand for this LID against his own constituents and attempt at swaying the City Council was noted in stark contrast to his behavior when a corporate entity like Wal-Mart was before the Council here last year and he so vigorously upheld Wal-Mart’s rights for fair and unbiased treatment].

Mr. Isom interrupted Mr. Harding and immediately motioned to table the action on the LID until the next City Council Meeting and asked the City Staff for some more numbers to be presented to Council. Mr. Baker seconded the motion. It carried.

The public left this meeting shaking their heads in disgust.

As an aside,
Mike Edwards is President & Chief Executive Officer of Thurston First Bank of Olympia
and served as the supervisor of banking for the State of Washington and as an advisor to Chairman Alan Greenspan and the Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System in Washington D.C. He also served as Chairman of the Conference of State Bank Supervisors (a national organization of state banking supervisors) in Washington D.C. Mike has served as president of three community banks in Washington State: Prairie Security Bank in Yelm, which he started, Hood Canal State Bank and First Community Bank. Mike is president of the Economic Development Council of Thurston County and has served on the board for the last 15 years. [Ed. Note: Prairie Security Bank was acquired by the former First Community Bank now known as Venture Bank.]

City of Yelm Mayor Pro-tem Bob Isom shared with the collective at Rep. Tom Campbell's Open House on Saturday, April 29, 2006 in Yelm that Amtech Corp. was leaving Yelm because of plant consolidation and not because of the encroachment of residential homes, as reported in the Nisqually Valley News. In this writer's listening, I heard Mr. Isom to say the environmentalists are thrilled about the impending plant closure, yet are not concerned with the loss to Yelm of those 50 jobs [Ed. Note: Mr. Isom, you and your fellow city council members touted the 400 jobs created with a proposed Yelm Wal-Mart last year. With their permit now paid, Wal-Mart will be placing local ads for new hires by year-end and the non-relocated Amtech employees can apply there for jobs. Wal-Mart will not match the pay or benefits of Amtech, yet there will be an option according to the city]. Yes, the loss of jobs is serious, yet the constant pollution of the air has been far worse and could have greater lasting impact for generations on the health of our fellow citizens who live downwind.
Additionally, with the closure of Amtech, the City of Yelm is left with an empty industrial area as defined in the Yelm Vision Plan, except for an unmaintained rail spur the city purchased to entice light industry here. With gas at $3 a gallon, Yelm is too distant a freeway or rail connection to be of interest to any manufacturing concern requiring rail or truck service. Access to the city is even more challenging to any prospective company because of continued growth by city officials with no road capacity increase within the Yelm urban core on already-clogged highways 510 or 507, main arteries to I-5, IMHO.