47°
MONTROSE, N.Y. – Hendrick Hudson School District’s bond referendum was defeated by a margin of nearly 2-to-1 Wednesday night, with an unofficial vote of 1,777 “no” and 977 “yes” votes. That number does not include the absentee ballots, however, the amount of absentees submitted is not enough to change the election’s outcome. The announcement was made to an audience of disappointed school board members and district officials at 9:05 p.m.
“We thank everyone for coming out, certainly some of us are disappointed, but this is a democratic process. Our district still has needs, but we will address these,” said Superintendent of Hendrick Hudson Schools, Daniel McCann.
Board of Education President Marion Walsh said, “We need to work for the future of our students.” She added, “The negativity and the focus on the past has to stop.”
The bond proposed financing $25.1 million in capital improvements in the district and was slated to affect all five of the district’s schools. The bond would have financed a stand-alone performing arts center, new synthetic turf athletic fields and science classroom upgrades in the district’s middle and high school. Some infrastructure repairs were also included in the plan.
A controversial proposal, the district would have financed nearly half of the cost of the bond by earmarking a recent payment in lieu of taxes (PILOT) settlement with Peekskill’s Wheelabrator RESCO facility to offset costs. The PILOT agreement was for $12.5 million and the district would have earmarked $10.3 million to offset the bond’s cost. Taxpayers would have been ultimately responsible for the cost of the bond.
The district spent $16,000 preparing the bond proposal with the construction manager. The district also spent $10,000 in engineering costs, but Blue Mountain Middle School’s aging septic system would have eventually required these costs, the district said.
School district officials said the bond would have increase homeowner’s taxes by about $100 annually for Peekskill residents with an assessment of $7,700, and about $198 for Cortlandt residents with the same assessment. Those amounts represent the cost after RESCO settlements were earmarked toward the capital projects costs.
Residents of the Hendrick Hudson schools rejected the district's bond just one day after voters in the Rye School District defeated a $19.9 million bond referendum.
Comments (10)
Does anyone really believe that by voting no people chose to have "substandard" schools? Perhaps they just can't afford the ever increasing tax burden in a district that now has two under-performing schools to it's credit. That fact has a far greater effect on property values than the lack of amenities.
Just look next door at Croton Harmon schools...they don't have a turf field or a performing arts center but they do have a great school system and high property values as a result.
Marion Walsh wants us to "stop focusing on the past" but I have nostalgia for a time when BMMS was a Blue Ribbon school and the Hen Hud district was one of the most sought after school districts in northern Westchester. What happened Ms Walsh? Maybe it's time for a new Superintendent and a new School Board. Something to look forward to in May.
Agreed. In the few short years we've lived in this community, my wife and I have watched a decline in the overall state rankings of the school, and I'm certain that the aging auditorium or the grass athletic field had little to do with that decline. If the school district is serious about making this a first-in-class school district, they'll spend their energies on addressing the decline and making sure all students are truly college ready and college bound. Nobody went into that voter booth this past week with the thought of settling for substandard schools; instead, we wanted the school board to understand that they are focused on the wrong agenda. If we could see a three to five year improvement plan put in place that is well executed and demonstrates progress, I'm sure we'd happily revisit the idea of these other upgrades in a few years.
Everyone has their reasons for how they voted. What's very important now is what happens next? The bond included items which are important. The school district needs to adjust something based on yesterday's results. What that will be has yet to be determined. However something that is equally important is what those who voted against the bond do next as well. Those who voted against the bond should participate in the future of the district in a positive way. People should become more informed and participate in the decision making process. As much of this should be without animosity if possible.
This shows how foolish the residents of Cortlandt are. Do you think if their toilet was jammed or their roof was leaking, that they would fix it? They have asked for mediocrity and that’s what they shall receive. I only hope that the students can be successful in spite of the foolish decisions made by their parents and community.
Foolish? How about fiscally responsible. You miss the point.
The voters had no problem with the leaking roof and the failed septic. What they rightfully rejected was placing these needs with expensive and irresponsible "wants" that this district cannot afford.
Yes, these people would fix their tiolet and fix thier roof, but they wouldn't add on a large addition to their home as a condition for these repairs.
If you're referring to the PAC, i understand your position if that's how you interpreted the information you received. However, The PAC was a solution to a very real classroom and auditorium problem which still needs to be addressed. The PAC was not supposed to be the big fancy useless building. The auditorium is 80 yrs old, the music classrooms are located in the basement and have problems. One of the problems is the capacity of the classrooms compared to the number of students (crowded) and another is mold. There are other factors which made this particular solution the one chosen to be included into the bond. If you believe they were not being fiscally responsible, would you or others who share your beliefs, become more involved in the process of fixing what needs to be fixed?
I suspect that many who voted "no" would have, in fact, voted "yes" to "fix the broken toilet", that is, to upgrade the science classrooms, and make the necessary repairs. The issue was that many felt that other things were included in the bond that were not in the same category. I voted yes, but with quite a bit of reluctance, as I feel a responsibility to think of everyone in the district, and whether the benefits of the bond justifies the cost.
I agree dleihg... in addition: Board of Education President Marion Walsh said, “We need to work for the future of our students.” She added, “The negativity and the focus on the past has to stop.” ... I believe the proposal response proves that the voters of our community were educated regarding the details of the bond AND future focused. Why, if we NEED to improve facilities (i.e. septic systems) do we include artificial turf in the proposal adding to that expense? I believe the vote would have been YES, had the proposal NOT included unnecessary items. Everyone cannot afford this tax increase, which statistically will not decrease once the bond is paid off. Granted, the rates are lowest ever for borrowing but our recent economic decline also shows we are borrowing TOO MUCH already and our privledged offspring can survive without the extras - i.e. artificial turf. I agree that we need to work for the future of our students, but the past is behind us and hopefully WE also learn from it.
After all the misleading statements by the administration, voters did not know what to believe.
What they did believe, however, was that this bond was too expensive with too many unnecessary "wants" and too few real "needs".
Fiscal sanity won over public relations trickery.
We have chosen be a substandard school instead of an excellent school. We all had the option to increase our property values, by supporting a much needed major infrastructure upgrade to our school and community. I am disgusted that this community has no vision.