Academic Hub and BISFA
Don't miss my April 10 update at the bottom of this page!
[2/13/16]
I’ve said before in this Issues section that with any major initiative, a concept might be good but, “the devil is in the details,” and I have seen enough initiatives succeed and fail to know that details are important. My vote against the Academic Hub Resolution was not a vote against a grand concept, or a vote against Arts education, or against BISFA. It was a vote against a specific proposal. The details of that proposal included a price tag and financing plan that I could not support. The lack of details about the programs that would be supported at an academic hub and how those programs would share the facility with BISFA also concerned me.
Let me be clear. BISFA was opened without adequate classroom space and without other facilities, like a cafeteria, to be self-sufficient within its own building. I understand that that situation needs to be fixed. However, the academic hub proposal I voted against is not a solution I can support. I voted against the hub proposal, not BISFA.
Here are some details of the financing plan that trouble me:
The financing plan called for the County to borrow $6 million on behalf of the BOE. Yearly payments for that loan would have to be paid from the BOE general fund operating budget. Those loan payments would reduce the amount of funds available to support all students and school programs. The BOE is currently paying for the original BISFA building under a similar payment plan, with the payments coming from our yearly operating budget. That’s $634,000 yearly coming from the operating budget for another decade. Financing the hub with another loan payment would further reduce the amount of funding available in the operating budget each year for the foreseeable future. I do not want to use operating fund money to pay for another loan.
In addition to loaning the BOE $6 million, the Commissioners were also being asked to contribute $4 million outright to the project. What services should the Commissioners reduce to find that money in their budget? Should they raise taxes? Do they borrow money for their expected contribution and increase the county’s indebtedness even further?
The total $15.5 million Academic Hub price tag did not include a 100% finished building (at least 1 whole floor would not be immediately useable) or the necessary furnishings to make it student-ready.
Here’s what troubles me about the academic hub concept in general:
There is a lack of specificity about programs to be served by the hub and the logistics for how the facility would actually be used by those programs in conjunction with BISFA. The entire concept is too vague. It seems to be based on the “if you build it, they will come” philosophy and “we’ll figure out the details as we go.” A $15.5 million commitment is too big to make based on that.
The number of classrooms proposed seems to be enough to support the needs of a growing BISFA, and that’s great! How the facility would ever support the 600 or so students proposed to be served by the hub is not clear to me.
The hub is touted as a way to postpone the construction of a new high school while, at the same time, we are being told that enrollments are declining.
Again, let me be clear. I voted against the hub proposal, not BISFA. BISFA needs a solution but the current hub proposal and financing plan is not that solution.
As we saw with the Digital Learning Plan, the first proposal is not always the best proposal. I believe there are solutions to be found by not going it alone as a Board of Education, but by opening a meaningful dialog with all the parties impacted.
[4/10/16] UPDATE
If you read the article below, you'll see that some progress is being made and this new county vision seems to address some of my concerns. Most importantly, the BOE contribution to the project is MUCH less - down from $10 million to about $4 million. And it looks like the BOE will not be going it alone but will be one part of a county and state collaboration. I look forward to working with all the project partners.
Here's the Herald-Mail article from about 2 weeks ago outlining the county's vision for the downtown project.
I’ve said before in this Issues section that with any major initiative, a concept might be good but, “the devil is in the details,” and I have seen enough initiatives succeed and fail to know that details are important. My vote against the Academic Hub Resolution was not a vote against a grand concept, or a vote against Arts education, or against BISFA. It was a vote against a specific proposal. The details of that proposal included a price tag and financing plan that I could not support. The lack of details about the programs that would be supported at an academic hub and how those programs would share the facility with BISFA also concerned me.
Let me be clear. BISFA was opened without adequate classroom space and without other facilities, like a cafeteria, to be self-sufficient within its own building. I understand that that situation needs to be fixed. However, the academic hub proposal I voted against is not a solution I can support. I voted against the hub proposal, not BISFA.
Here are some details of the financing plan that trouble me:
The financing plan called for the County to borrow $6 million on behalf of the BOE. Yearly payments for that loan would have to be paid from the BOE general fund operating budget. Those loan payments would reduce the amount of funds available to support all students and school programs. The BOE is currently paying for the original BISFA building under a similar payment plan, with the payments coming from our yearly operating budget. That’s $634,000 yearly coming from the operating budget for another decade. Financing the hub with another loan payment would further reduce the amount of funding available in the operating budget each year for the foreseeable future. I do not want to use operating fund money to pay for another loan.
In addition to loaning the BOE $6 million, the Commissioners were also being asked to contribute $4 million outright to the project. What services should the Commissioners reduce to find that money in their budget? Should they raise taxes? Do they borrow money for their expected contribution and increase the county’s indebtedness even further?
The total $15.5 million Academic Hub price tag did not include a 100% finished building (at least 1 whole floor would not be immediately useable) or the necessary furnishings to make it student-ready.
Here’s what troubles me about the academic hub concept in general:
There is a lack of specificity about programs to be served by the hub and the logistics for how the facility would actually be used by those programs in conjunction with BISFA. The entire concept is too vague. It seems to be based on the “if you build it, they will come” philosophy and “we’ll figure out the details as we go.” A $15.5 million commitment is too big to make based on that.
The number of classrooms proposed seems to be enough to support the needs of a growing BISFA, and that’s great! How the facility would ever support the 600 or so students proposed to be served by the hub is not clear to me.
The hub is touted as a way to postpone the construction of a new high school while, at the same time, we are being told that enrollments are declining.
Again, let me be clear. I voted against the hub proposal, not BISFA. BISFA needs a solution but the current hub proposal and financing plan is not that solution.
As we saw with the Digital Learning Plan, the first proposal is not always the best proposal. I believe there are solutions to be found by not going it alone as a Board of Education, but by opening a meaningful dialog with all the parties impacted.
[4/10/16] UPDATE
If you read the article below, you'll see that some progress is being made and this new county vision seems to address some of my concerns. Most importantly, the BOE contribution to the project is MUCH less - down from $10 million to about $4 million. And it looks like the BOE will not be going it alone but will be one part of a county and state collaboration. I look forward to working with all the project partners.
Here's the Herald-Mail article from about 2 weeks ago outlining the county's vision for the downtown project.
County administrator: Renewed support for education, theater projects in downtown Hagerstown
Government, education and entertainment officials have been discussing a potential project that could provide improved amenities to The Maryland Theatre, the University System of Maryland at Hagerstown and the Barbara Ingram School for the Arts in downtown Hagerstown.
The project — which includes expanding the theater and university and creating an academic classroom hub — is expected to result in more retail and commercial investment downtown, Washington County Administrator Greg Murray said.
Murray gave the Washington County Board of Commissioners and the county school board an overview of the potential project during a joint meeting Tuesday morning at the school system's Center for Education Services on Downsville Pike.
Murray said officials representing local governments and downtown entities have had two meetings since the Feb. 2 State of the County presentation, during which the county signaled renewed support for the redevelopment of downtown Hagerstown.
Asked about the price tag after the meeting, Murray said the theater component could cost $10 million to $11 million; the public school project $12 million; and the university project $2 million "or so."
But he said those figures are preliminary, and based on a concept and sites that are in the early stages.
That would put the minimum total cost of the project at $24 million.
Murray discussed developing a funding model for the public facilities portion of the project without "substantial tax burden for debt" and instead using cash resources for it.
The public facilities portion consists of the university expansion, an academic classroom hub and a pedestrian plaza, he later clarified in a telephone interview.
How much of the total funding is cash and how much could be funded through a "lease-back" clause between the university and a developer remains to be determined, he said.
Officials have discussed the idea with the county's legislative delegation to the Maryland General Assembly, which is working with Gov. Larry Hogan to see what state funding could be available for the project, Murray said.
If local officials hear good news about state funding by July and have a near-complete design by the end of this year, then a proposal for potential bids could be ready by late 2016 or early 2017, he said.
Murray told Washington County Board of Education officials that he expects the school system's minimum share to be $4 million in cash, but it could be more.
School board President Donna Brightman said her initial response includes some concern about a "pay-go model," and that it could be difficult for the entities involved to find enough cash.
But it's early, and officials need to see what the funding model will be, she said.
For its share, the county would have to build up cash and make sure it would be available for construction, Murray said.
Theater upgrade
The theater portion of the project involves tearing down the building that houses the box office and using the front courtyard for expansion, similar to how the theater extended to the sidewalk before a fire decades ago, Murray said.
The theater must provide space and amenities needed to attract bigger acts, Murray said.
Potential improvements include the backstage area, the stage and the concession area, whose current setup limits how many people can access concessions during intermission, he said.
If the improvements draw bigger acts and more people, the theater could grow revenue, and free up county and city funding regularly provided to the theater, mostly for physical improvements, Murray told the two boards.
He said the theater has substantial fund-raising opportunities, such as naming rights, and officials might consider alternative financing through the city.
Academic hub
One idea being discussed is for the university to use a building on West Washington Street, connecting it with an elevated walkway to a school system academic hub on South Potomac Street, Murray said.
But Murray said he didn't believe university officials had settled on a site for expansion yet.
The university has asked the state for funding for an increase in educational programming and has expressed interest in space for student housing, he said.
The design and size of the academic hub would need to be determined, but it might not need to be as large as previously proposed if the school system can use university lab space and space from connecting the hub to the theater, Murray said after the meeting.
The project also includes a plaza inside that block that would be behind the arts school, the theater and the Washington County Office Building at 35 W. Washington St., Murray said.
electMelissaWilliams.com
Committee to Elect Melissa Williams : David Williams, Treasurer
Committee to Elect Melissa Williams : David Williams, Treasurer