Tornado ravaged Chapman to spend as much as $90,000 per student to rebuild schools?

[Updated 3/26] Much of Chapman, Kansas, which is about 140 miles west of Kansas City, was leveled by a tornado on June 11, 2008.  The tornado killed one woman and cut a path six blocks wide through much of the community of about 1250.

All three of Chapman’s public schools were heavily damaged by the storm.

The USD 473 School Board voted 5 to 1 at their Feb 2009 meeting for a bond issue of about $8.2 million to rebuild all three schools, but the $8.2 million was only a small part of the total expenditures.

Some say tax dollars will be wasted with the current proposed bond referendum since the full price tag is about $75 million for three schools with a total enrollment of less than 800 now.  Some claim the tornado damage is being used as an excuse to promote new school construction projects that may be among the most expensive schools in the U.S. on a per student basis.  New Chapman schools may cost taxpayers as much as $63,600 per student for the elementary school, $90,012 per student for the middle school, and $73,754 per student for the high school.

Unified School District 473 consists of the three Chapman school buildings and the Blue Ridge, Enterprise and Rural Center Elementary schools.  The 4175 voters of USD 473 will vote on the bond issue on April 7, which would increase property taxes by 6.8 mills, if approved.  The $75 million project shared over these 4175 voters would amount to $17,964 per voter.

Normally, spring elections attract few voters.  Only 1491 of the 4021 “active” voters in USD 473 have voted in previous spring elections according to voter history data from the Kansas Secretary of State. But this election may attract new spring voters, who normally might stay at home.

There is no controversy about the need to replace schools in Chapman, but some are afraid to speak in public for more transparency in the process, and for more responsible spending of tax dollars.  Some fear being labeled as someone who hates children or schools, when all that is wanted is more government transparency and accountability from USD 473.

Chart 1 and Table 1 below show the number of students for each of Chapman’s schools from the 1992-1993 school year through the current 2008-2009 school year.

---

Chart 1.  Chapman Enrollment by Building, 1992-2009
Source: Kansas State Department of Education

[Click on chart above to see enlargement]

Table 1.  Chapman Enrollment by Building, 1992-2009
Source: Kansas State Department of Education

Year	Elementary	Middle	High	TOTAL
1992-93	304	196	416	916
1993-94	334	218	416	968
1994-95	332	219	421	972
1995-96	343	240	445	1028
1996-97	304	212	461	977
1997-98	285	207	456	948
1998-99	275	214	440	929
1999-00	267	218	427	912
2000-01	211	286	416	913
2001-02	191	266	424	881
2002-03	185	252	401	838
2003-04	178	238	413	829
2004-05	181	225	385	791
2005-06	184	229	384	797
2006-07	192	206	356	754
2007-08	221	220	338	779
2008-09	240	218	325	783

---

The One “No” Vote. School Board Member, Kristine Meyer, the lone “no” vote against the current bond referendum at the Feb 2009 school board meeting, wanted to see projections of future enrollment and how that information was figured into the building plans.  In a telephone interview yesterday, Meyer indicated she thought enrollment at Chapman schools had declined in recent years.  In a recent Topeka Capital-Journal article, Meyer said

enrollment has been “trending downward” and wants to see a 20-year projection for student population so it can be compared with projections for staff, operations and maintenance expenses.

Meyer said she very much wants Chapman schools rebuilt for the students, but has concerns about the cost of the proposed project, and the lack of opportunity for the community to be involved in the process.  Meyer thought a much better approach would have been to have had formal public meetings as early as last summer, with a neutral facilitator, but that did not happen.

Government accountability and transparency were on Kristine Meyer’s mind when she voted “no” against the current bond issue, hoping a newer, better bond could be crafted.  From the Capital Journal article:

Meyer said the bond issue reminds her of the mortgage crisis: Just because you can get a loan doesn’t mean you can afford to buy a beyond-your-means house, she said. And just because the district is getting $1 worth of work for 15 cents doesn’t mean patrons can afford the 15 cents.

“It’s OK if patrons send it back to the drawing board to come up with something all patrons can be behind,” she said.

Since talking to Ms. Meyer I obtained the enrollment history numbers (in Chart 1/Table 1 above), and the cost numbers cited by the school district on their web site (see below).  I wanted to compare how Chapman’s expenditures compared with national norms for building new schools.

Chart 2 below shows a breakdown of the revenue sources, which may be found in an online document:

---

Chart 2.  Breakdown of revenue sources to rebuild Chapman schools
Source:  Financial Information for the Bond Election, USD 473, Dickinson County, KS (Chapman).  Project Cost Breakdown (p. 20 of 27)

---

The big picture. A USD 473 web page explains the total school replacement cost will be $75,118,404, but after the insurance settlement of $20,294,714, the remaining project cost will be $54,823,690.

FEMA and the State of Kansas will pay 85% of this remaining cost with only 15% to be paid for by USD 473 through their bond election.  The two figures tagged with an asterisk in Chart 2 are 85% and 15% of the $54,823,690 figure.

The 85% figure can be divided into 75% from FEMA and 10% funds from the State of Kansas.  The $46,600,137 figure can be separated into $41,117,768 from FEMA and $5,482,369 from the State of Kansas.

Using the total cost of $75,118,404 from Chart 2, and dividing by the current enrollment of Chapman schools, 783, from Table 1 for 2008-2009, gives a rough overall cost of $95,936 per student.

Comparison to New Orleans. In New Orleans a 75 year old, private, non-profit group, Bureau of Governmental Research (BGR), researched the costs of rebuilding schools in New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina. An Oct 18, 2008 letter from BGR’s president, Janet R. Howard, cited New Orleans area school rebuilding costs ranging from $44,000 per student for grade schools to $54,000 per student for a high school.  BGR compared these numbers to regional and national norms:

For a point of reference, we looked at the national medians for projects under construction in 2008 and the regional median for 2007 and 2008 projects. In the case of the grade schools, we found a median cost per student of $19,700 at the national level and $16,900 at the regional level. In the case of high schools, the median cost per student is $29,300 at the national level and $29,900 at the regional level. The per-student cost for Landry is nearly twice the regional median. The per-pupil cost for the elementary schools is more than twice the median.

In a telephone conversation today, Ms. Howard said she did not have any updates since that letter.  She did affirm using regional and national norms from School Planning & Management magazine for any comparisons.  Their New Orleans study used the 2008 Annual School Construction Report. The 2009 report with updates was published last month.

The rough Chapman estimate of $95,936 per student is about twice the per student costs cited by BGR for New Orleans.  Chapman’s school rebuilding costs appear to be off-the-charts high.

Analysis by new school building.  A USD 473 “more facts and figures for home and land owners” page shows a breakdown for each school building: elementary school, middle school, and high school.

[Updated 3/26] The figures on this USD 473 web site seem to be dated, and are missing an explanation for about $6,789,260.  The USD 473 “more facts and figures for home and land owners” page only shows a total project cost of $68,239,144, which was allocated 82.9% to FEMA and State contribution and 17.1% to the USD 473 portion.  The USD 473 web page should be updated to have the correct figures.

[Updated 3/26] A PDF file found on the Salina Journal web site has per building figures and the correct total project cost published elsewhere, $75,118,404.

The square-foot and total estimated cost figures by building published by the Salina Journal are shown in Table 2 (below), as well as the 2008-2009 enrollment numbers from Table 1 above.

---

Table 2.  Costs to rebuild Chapman schools by building
Sources:  Enrollment data from 2008-2009 from Table 1 above.  Costs and Sq.Ft. figures by building published by the Salina Journal .

Building	Students	Sq. Ft.	Total Est. Cost
Elementary School	240	69,851	$15,267,507
Middle School	218	101,126	$19,622,571
High School	325	142,976	$23,970,094

The figures above ignore the $1.11 million for the 6310 sq. ft. Education Center.

The analysis below assumes relatively flat enrollment, which has been roughly true for the last five years.  A decline in enrollment would increase the costs discussed below.

The Topeka Capital-Journal published slightly different values for the size of the schools:  68,758 sq. ft. for the Elementary School, 88,286 sq. ft. for the Middle School, and 155,539 sq. ft. for the high school.

---

Comparison of Chapman school replacement costs with national and regional norms.

Simple computations using Table 2 values aid in comparisons to other new school buildings:

• $/Sq. Ft = Total Estimated Cost / Sq.Ft.  [part of Salina Journal report]
• $/Student = Total Estimate Cost / Students
• Sq.Ft./Student = Sq.Ft. / Students

The recently published 2009 Annual School Construction Report is a supplement to School Planning & Management Magazine.  This School Construction Report gives up-to-date normative standards for cost comparisons among schools. For comparison purposes, the School Construction Report gives median values (the “middle” value), as well as the first and third quartiles, which they call the “low quartile” and the “high quartile”.  The median value is the second quartile.

---

Table 3.  Comparison of Chapman school rebuilding cost/sq. ft. to national norms. Sources:  Computations from figures in Table 2.  National norms from Table 5, “Profile of New Schools Currently Underway (based on 601 elementary schools, 258 middle schools, and 335 high schools), in Feb 2009 School Planning & Management supplement.

Building	Chapman	National Norms
	$/Sq. Ft.	Low Quartile	Median	High Quartile	Top 10%
Elementary School	$218.57	$144.44	$178.77	$233.63	$299.80
Middle School	$194.04	$147.99	$178.29	$214.71	$268.07
High School	$167.65	$154.49	$187.27	$229.03	$395.00

Chapman school rebuilding costs compare favorably to other new national school construction costs on a cost per square foot basis.

• The new Chapman Elementary School’s $218.57/sq.ft is between the median and the high quartile value of $233.63.
• The new Chapman Middle Schools’ $194.04/sq.ft. is between the median $178.29 and high quartile $214.71.
• The new Chapman High School’s $167.65/sq.ft. is slightly below the national median value of $187.27, but above the low quartile value of $154.49.

Regional $/Sq.Ft. figures are given in the Feb 2009 School Planning & Management supplement for Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska construction activity.  [See Region 8, on p. CR13 in the Report.]

Regional median costs for Elementary and Middle schools are below the national medians ($184.88 and $185.90, respectively), but regional costs for high schools are slightly above the national median ($159.45).

When comparing Chapman’s costs to regional norms, Chapman’s $/Sq.Ft. costs will be slightly higher for their new Elementary and Middle School, but slightly lower for their new High School.

Conclusion:  The proposed costs for Chapman’s schools are reasonable on a square foot basis.

The figures by building published by the Salina Journal also include square foot prices adjusted to exclude site work.

---

Table 4. Comparison of Chapman school rebuilding cost/student to national norms. Sources:  See Table 3 Sources.

	Chapman	National Norms
Building	$/Student	Low Quartile	Median	High Quartile	Top 10%
Elementary School	$63,615	$16,206	$21,477	$30,000	$43,218
Middle School	$90,012	$18,820	$24,667	$31,181	$40,118
High School	$73,754	$22,727	$29,167	$38,417	$64,286

Regional median $/Student costs for Elementary and Middle schools are above the national medians ($25,167 and $26,000, respectively), but regional costs for high schools are slightly below the national median ($25,474).

Conclusion:  When comparing proposed cost per student to national norms, the proposed Chapman school costs appear to be exorbitant. Chapman’s $/Student costs will be 2.5 to 3.6 times the national median costs for their current enrollment.

Since the $/Sq.Ft. costs were reasonable in Table 3 above, the only explanation is that too few students will be in buildings much larger than necessary.

---

Table 5. Comparison of Chapman school rebuilding sq. ft. / student to national norms. Sources:  See Table 3 Sources.

	Chapman	National Norms
Building	Sq.Ft. / Student	Low Quartile	Median	High Quartile	Top 10%
Elementary School	291.0	100.0	115.4	139.2	163.6
Middle School	463.9	120.2	136.0	153.0	174.5
High School	439.9	138.3	155.0	181.7	228.9

Regional Sq.Ft./Student values are higher than national norms for all schools.  Regional Elementary schools provide 126.1 sq.ft./student, regional middle schools provide 139.8 sq.ft./student, and regional high schools provide 160.6 sq.ft./student.

Conclusion:  When comparing proposed sq.ft/student values to national norms, the space provided for students in the proposed Chapman schools is exorbitant. Chapman’s new schools will provide 2.5 to 3.7 times more space per student than the national median for their current enrollment.

---

Tax Computations.  I received a report from someone concerned with the Chapman bond issue, that the published tax increase values were not correct if the bond issue were to pass.  However, after a phone conversation yesterday with Dickinson County Appraiser’s office, Appraiser Bruce Wright confirmed the property tax calculation for the proposed school bond mill levy.

The yearly 6.8 mill tax increase means:

For a $100,000 home:  $100,000 * 11.5% assessment rate * 6.8 mills/1000 = $78.20/year

For a $100,000 business:  $100,000 * 25.0% assessment rate * 6.8 mills/1000 = $170.00/year

The current total mill levy for Chapman is 128.18, but that will increase to 134.98 if the bond issue passes.

According to Bruce Wright, the current total mill levy for nearby Abilene is 116.477.  Abilene’s tax rate is about 10% lower than Chapman before any increase by Chapman.

---

Campaign Contributions.  Weak Kansas law provides little disclosure by the groups formed to support or oppose any local issue, such as a bond issue, or local contests, such as school district contests.

In a phone conversation yesterday, Carol Williams, Executive Director of the Kansas Governmental Ethics Commission, said her office has no jurisdiction in local matters such as the Chapman school bond referendum vote.  Groups that form to support or oppose the measure could register as a local committee with the Dickinson County Clerk’s office, but such registration was not required before the election.

Such groups should file reports detailing contributions and expenditures, but that report is not due until the end of the year, long after many will have forgotten about the bond issue.

The Dickinson County Attorney has the authority to investigate and prosecute those who fail to file, but knowing who the groups are can be a problem.

Pepsi banners without attribution statements have been seen on public property in Chapman and Enterprise, but according to Exec. Dir. Carol Williams such banners are not required to have attribution statements.  [Update:  The Pepsi banner at the tennis court in central Chapman has been removed.]

However, any newspaper ad or campaign flier should have a “Paid for by” statement along with the name of the treasurer, but with such weak and end-of-year reporting requirements, determining compliance is not easy.

The full-page color ads in newspapers in support of the bond issue reportedly have proper attribution statements.  But, a “Paid for by” statement reportedly is missing from recent black and white newspaper ads.  At present it’s unknown how much money, if any, USD 473 has spent on this bond issue.

[Updated 3/26:  A quarter-page black and white ad appeared in today's Abilene Reflector-Chronicle and was apparently paid for by USD 473.]

Attribution statements must be present on campaign materials for or against any local candidates, like school board candidates, but there are similar weak reporting requirements.

Please send pictures of any ads without attribution statements to the Meadowlark for further investigation.

---

Patriot Kristine Meyer. School Board member Kristine Meyer received a bit of grief for wanting more transparency and more accountability in the process of re-building Chapman schools.  Kristine Meyer, a Democrat, should be commended for looking after tax dollars regardless of whether they are local, state or federal dollars.

Board members from USD 473 in Chapman were concerned with the 15% paid by local taxpayers, but seemed far less concerned with the other 85% that would be paid for by additional debt by taxpayers in Kansas and the rest of the country.  Many USD 473 Board members do not seem to understand they will be inviting scrutiny by the state and federal taxpayers for the other 85% of their school.  Does USD 473 want national press attention for their irresponsible spending paid for by citizens outside of Chapman?

For being a responsible steward of tax dollars and for voting “no” to the current bond proposal to seek a more responsible and transparent bond, Meyer drew several challengers in her re-election bid to the school board in a March 3 primary contest.  While she survived the primary contest, those supporting the current bond proposal have targeted Meyer for defeat in the April 7 general election.

As if one cannot care about kids if one is not a parent of children in school, the recent Topeka Capital-Journal article mentioned:

Meyer, who doesn’t have children attending the schools, said the board hasn’t shown how patrons can afford the bond issue and didn’t make an “honest attempt to solicit patrons’ input.”

The article should have mentioned all the work Kristine Meyer does for children as president of the Community Foundation of Dickinson County.  That group makes a number of grants each year (according to their IRS 990) to help the community, to help a number of youth groups, to provide scholarships and other support for education.

Kristen Meyer’s support for Chapman and Dickinson county, both on the USD 473 School Board and through her other activities, is commendable. The children in USD 473 should appreciate what Meyer is doing to help their future, and should emulate her leadership.

---

Related:

• USD 473 web site:  Proposed Chapman Schools Bond Issue Ballot
• USD 473 web site:  Bond issue cost figures
• USD 473 Financial Information for the Bond Election (by PiperJaffray)
• USD 473 Board Members
• Dickinson County, KS Property Tax Calculation
• Kansas State Department of Education:  K-12 School Reports
• Chapman schools have bond, Topeka Capital-Journal, March 8, 2009.
• Minutes of Feb 9, 2009 USD 473 School Board meeting when bond issue was approved.
• 2009 Annual School Construction Report, School Planning & Management, Feb 2009.
• Rebuilding Chapman schools could cost $75 million, Salina Journal, Jan 7, 2009.
• Letter from Bureau of Governmental Research making public comments about cost of schools being rebuilt in Louisiana after Hurricane Katrina ranging from $44,000 to $54,000 per student, Oct 17, 2008.
• 2008 Annual School Construction Report, School Planning & Management, Feb 2008.

---

---

Also published on the Salina Journal blog

Tags: Chapman Kansas, schools, Tornado, USD 473