City Of American Canyon Online Community Forums

Survey shows voters wary of school district's spending habits
By CRISTINA DE LEON-MENJIVAR, Register Staff Writer
Thursday, June 29, 2006 1:14 AM PDT

It appears residents of Napa are wary of the way government leaders spend money, including those who run the Napa Valley Unified School District.

A school district poll released Tuesday shows 43 percent of those polled believe the district does not manage money efficiently, and many will not support a $250 million facilities bond in November.

During a special board meeting Tuesday night, the school district's board members got a surprising wake up call from a pollster.

"Right now you don't have the level of support you need to get this bond passed," Amy Simon, a researcher for consulting firm Goodwin and Simon, said to the board.


"I think (voter's distrust) comes from lack of information because we have very strict oversight on every dollar that is spent, and take great pains to make sure no money is wasted, any one can come and take a look at our budgets," said school board member Tom Kensok.

Simon recommended the district not move forward with a bond measure seeking money, primarily for a high school in American Canyon.

"Districts who passed bonds have higher job (approval) ratings," Simon said to the board. Whereas the Napa community has "overly-negative views about the district."

Despite low approval ratings, school board president Jackie Dickson, board members Alan Murray, Kensok and district Superintendent John Glaser said they plan to go forward with the bond.

Discussion Tuesday night suggested they will take Simon's advice and shift from a bond of as much as $250 million to one seeking $175 million to $200 million. The change means fewer projects would be funded, but the district plans to follow voters' interests. A school bond measure requires 55 percent approval from the voters in order to pass.

"We have to be thoughtful and careful to put together a measure that is reasonable and affordable, and consistent with the priorities from the community," Glaser said.

As a strategic move, the district hired Goodwin and Simon to conduct a phone survey to see how much money and what projects voters will support.

In June 440 voters were surveyed, with 400 from around the district and 40 in American Canyon.

The survey, which cost the district $19,950, found 43 percent of surveyed voters have a negative view of the district's spending practices.

During the presentation, Simon stressed the importance of public relations, stating the district needs to be more assertive in communicating their work and how they manage funds.

"If people don't have specific information (about their local school district), they fill the holes with general information," Simon said.

The board acknowledged their lack of effort in educating the public about their actions.

"I think everybody is busy doing their job, and I think sometimes that public relations piece gets lost in the day to day operations," said Dickson.

What's important

Among the issues voters think are crucial are seismic safety, building new schools to alleviate overcrowding, disabled access and constructing new classrooms. The key item for the district is the new high school in American Canyon, which would dramatically reduce the number of students bussed to Vintage High, thus reducing transportation expenses. That would relieve population pressures at Napa and Vintage high schools, which have already exceeded their capacity.

A top priority from the voters is receiving matching funds from the state. However, according to Don Evans, school district administrator of general services and facilities, obtaining these funds is not a sure bet.

"We can't count on (matching funds)," Evans said. "We need to go to the voters and ask them for funding so that we can do it ourselves, and if we have the fortune of having additional money from the state we'll use it."

By Aug. 3, the board will make its decision on what projects to fund and how much money to ask voters for.

Many voters who said they would support the school bond are labeled as "less likely voters," meaning that they have participated in one or none elections in the past two years.

Simon said that this means the district would have to create a first-rate campaign, with a focus on getting out the vote if they have any chance for success. Such a campaign could cost anywhere from $15,000 to $40,000.

"I think we should (put the bond on the November ballot), I think the cost is not outrageous," Dickson said. "We desperately need the high school in American Canyon. It doesn't just help Napa, it helps everyone."

The Napa Unified School District proposed a cost of 40 million dollars to build a new high school on AC Road and Flosden/Newell Drive.

Suddenly, about 1 year later, it is reported they think it will be 100 million.

I dont trust them either. Why should we.

Lets just say our high school is 100k sq feet of building. At $300 a foot, thats only 30 million. At $400 a foot, its 40 Million. Classrooms have little in the way of expensive specifications. as they are mostly open areas.

Sure, they will be sprinkler systems, sound systems, intercoms, fire alarms, internet, bathrooms, a dining area and so on that will be costly.

But it doesnt cost $100 Million to build a high school for a town of say 20-25K- UNLESS

You have a bloated budget to feed the rest of your school district that you want money for all over the county. And it seems to me, that is what is being promoted here.

Some building materials have gone up. But there is no doubt that we can build a quality high school for a much more reasonable number than 100 million dollars, especially when the land was DONATED!- and is flat for the most part.

I was at the city council meeting when this issue was first discussed, and I suggested we find a way to build it ourselves rather than waiting till 2011 for the School district to do it. It fell on deaf ears, with Leon complaining that we would be putting 40 M on the backs of AC residents.

Frankly, it looks now like it will be 100 M - except a good bunch of that money will be diverted to other projects or buried in teh budget to pay for other non construction items, most likely, far away from American Canyon. Council member Coffeys idea of having our own school district should be explored-and the numbers crunched.

We send a TON of money into the district in the form of taxes and we dont get back near what we put out.

She was the one who came up with LEASING the land to the School District, instead of givingit away, as they did with the high school acreage.

BUt this is all for not. The fact remains that this town has serious problems that if not handled, may end up bankrupting this city, and we will all end up back part of the county anyway.

Furthermore, I dont see upvalley folks voting to pay for a High School in American Canyon, which is where most of this latest bond money would go anyway. They just arent interested in paying for that.

Personally working on the high school design committee, I know that the money will be going to good use. Materials have gone up, plus its going to be a big high school. I think the problem is that we are ready to see results now, after all these years of suppose to be getting a high school. If this bond passes with the 55% majority needed then we look for the school to be ready for fall 10.

The NVUSD Budget is not bloated. It is one of the most efficiently run districts in NoCal and test scores and "CA Distinguished School" awards have been a result of the hard work by our educators.

In a meeting at my home with Dr. Glaser, NVUSD Board Members, City Council Vice Mayor, School Principals, NVUSD Teachers and concerned parents, held 6/22, the following was noted and discussed.

Parents of school aged children purchase homes in AC, Napa because of the NVUSD Schools. The perception of "doing nothing" is because as plans are made the county has continued to grow. One of the key challenges is to distribute information about how well the schools are run. Overcrowded, yes.

One of the other challenges is the aging population of the entire county-they refuse to vote for any tax increase. They are on fixed incomes and any slight increase in tax affects them greatly.

We will be conducting more small focus groups who are willing to inform the public with facts and try to get the 55% we need to pass the bond measure. There are benefits to the entire county.

Napa and Vintage High would be less populated. Reduced teacher student/teacher ratios = better quality for all students.
Over $890K in transportation costs would be eliminated (AC to Napa) as well as the students and parents who will no longer need to drive their children to school. American Canyon will receive a new High School but It's going to be an uphill battle-but it is achievable.

If you are interested in joining the smaller focus groups please send an email to vmr_eagle@yahoo.com

The fact remains that the 100 million dollar number from a 40 million dollar number definately needs to be disected.

East/West partners just built a brand new school that is state of the art in Truckee Ca, with Union Labor at prevailing wage- the cost was 37 Million. I believe that includes the land costs as well,

In the case of an American Canyon high school, I am using a figure of 100k sq feet, which is a very good size campus, presuming in that a cafe, a gym, offices, classrooms, field, etc. At 300 - 400 dollars a foot, which is high for this type of facility, thats a 30-40 million dollar number-and thats where is should be, or close to it.

I agree the district for the most part is run well, and Glaser does a good job. But you dont need 100 million to build a high school when the dirt was donated, and based on what I have heard at council meetings, thats the number they are trying to sell.

A number like that means that there is a whole lot more in the budget than just a high school. And I dont care how well the district is run- Vintage Grammar School was the first school in 25 plus years and it was built by a developer as part of the subdivision- not by the district.

School districts know much about education, little about construction, and a whole lot about padding budgets to get more money year after year. Ever see a government entity come in under budget? Of course not, or they would likely get their funding cut.

This figure doesnt past the straight face test, and until it is justified item per item, and there is a publicly available construction budget for American Canyon High School, it will be tough to get the votes needed to get a bond issue.

We need the high school, I support the high school, but if the district is going to spend 100 million on building it, they ought to just hand the 100 million to our city and we can keep the extra 40-50 million we wont spend to build it.

Here is a 2005 report out of the state of GA on construction costs.

Of course they are higher in CA, so double them and you still dont break 250 a square foot.

Real numbers.

http://www.doe.k12.ga.us/_documents/sch ... ncosts.pdf

Here is a comparable. American Canyon is proposing a high school of about the same size- this one is 212k sf, and Ac HS is approx 225k sf.
This facility has a similar idea of using the HS for both a HS and as a center for public use , library, gym, kitchen, pool, etc.

Price: 58 Million dollars.

212,000 sq feet/ 58,000,000 = 273.59 a sq foot, which again, is a high number. The facility is state of the art, in Natomas Park, and a big campus on a large acreage like AC HS is proposed to be.

so based on this comparable high school just built last year

225,000 sq ft x 273.59 is 61,558,000.

Add 15% for material cost increases, inflation, etc

and your still only at 71,000,000.

So where is the other approximately 29,000,000 million dollars going?

The other question can we afford such an elaborate facility?

Take a look at this joint venture with a private builder:


http://sacramento.bizjournals.com/sacra ... ocus4.html

I didnt add a up all of the numbers like you but in there I didnt see the cost of adding all of the furniture and things like that. Also its important that the city is involved in funding so that we as a city can use the school. During some of the meetings we were discussing what would be used by both the school distrtict and what would be used by both the district and the community.

It seems like alot of money now but hopefully after the school bond passes and the school is finished in a few years, you will see that it was worth it.

Voters and tax payers get ripped off all the time by government wasting money on bloated contracts and overruns on costs. No high school should be built with american can tax dollars until there is a full independent audit of the costs.

Mr. Maguire makes valid points here. Why should this high school cost 100 million when Sacramento just built one that is similar for under 60 million. It does not cost 40 million dollars less to build 45 minutes up highway 80 nor will it cost 40 million more to build one here.

American can needs a new high school. It does not need to pay almost two times what it should cost to do it.

Justify the numbers. Whats wrong with some fiscal responsibility?

Because of our location in the town center, we wanted to conserve land, so we could have these partnerships," Tooker said. Inderkum High, which will eventually serve 2,000 students in grades 9 through 12, is being built on 50 acres at one end of a 96-acre regional park planned in the town center.
With 212,000 square feet under one roof, the two-story building is part of a 200-acre master-planned town center

Why not in American Canyon?? We don't have the 50 or 200 master-planned area that is described here.

Private builder? Who builds in the area and "stays" after the homes are built?

Can it be done? Possbily, if citizens with enough inititative are willing to get off their duffs and actively participate in making the city realize its full potential..

Todays 183 Million Dollar Bond Issue that the Napa Unified School District agreed to put on the ballot, now has the cost of a new American Canyon High School at :

120 Million!!!

Unbelievable- 40 million, to 100 Million, to 120 Million!

And the big claim today is that the President of the School Board is "going to oversee spending to protect the public interest".

Now that is evidence you cannot believe everything in you read in the paper.

How about having an independant audit of the construction budget and the furnishings/ improvement budget by a 3rd party independant auditor, without any affiliation from the state.

We are NOW at the ASTRONOMICAL number of $533 per sf including interior improvements and furnishings.

Ridiculous!

I agree with you Paul that the figures just seem to continue to climb.
I beleive that the entire AC High School has to be revisited.
But not because of the cost!
I have heard for 20 yrs that a high school was coming to town. My kids went to Vintage (on the bus) and guess what they had a wonderful experience meeting new lifelong friends, participating in programs that have been in place for years and played sports for teams that were established in the high school arena for many years.
Is this what will be offered to the future students of AC High?

I have a couple of questions that always bother me regarding the new AC High.

In order to fill seats will we be taking in the students from Vallejo? God knows how screwed up that district is!

With our own high school are we not keeping our kids in a socalled "bubble" where they do not mix with other kids from different economic, ethic and social backrounds?

To be successful in life I would think that the more experiences you have with individuals "outside our box" could only help not hurt.

I look forward to others response.

i dn't care what it takes american canyon needs a school and if we have to pay a arm and a leg for it here's my arm and leg american canyon needs a high school no ifs ands or buts i went to vintage high for 3/4 of a year and got to my stomach of how many kids there were its pitifull i saw go for it if it costs 100mill and i hope its big ost more people will be moving here with there kids so it better be big althought I will never atend the school because i will be in college by then my littel sister and my two ittel cousins will for sure be atending it so it better cost that much because american canyon students deserv the best and nothing else.

I support bringing a high school here, that is within the affordability of the taxpayers, and that provides a quality education to the students here in American Canyon.

American Canyon families are burdened with the transportation to Napa, and the traffic has gotten worse over the years, so the time involved in getting to and from Vintage is just too long now.

Demand is there for a High School. I believe we will fit right into the sports programs and will be invited to do so.

But regardless of that, right now in American Canyon, we do not have the money to finish the Veterans Park, approved years ago, fix an ailiing infrastructure that we have known about for years, and take care of a number of other issues that we need now.

To suggest that the taxpayers of this county should pay twice the cost of comparable school sites built in recent years for a new high school in AC just does not pass the straight face test.

Why should we further burden ourselves with almost twice the debt load of bonds to build a 120 million dollar facility? The proposed facility is about 225,000 sq feet. Thats a cost of 533.34 per building sq foot including furnishings, interior improvements, and so on.

New standard homes are costing about 90-150 a sq foot, commercial construction is at 120-$200 a sf, but this high school is pushing over $400 a sq foot.(and thats a very generous $100 a sf for furnishings and interior improvments) Some of the most expensive homes around are not even that much with granite, travertine, custom everything- its ridiculous!

That is so out of line with recent builds as noted on this thread, the ability to get it passed is hurt when the school district raised the cost estimate from 40 Million to 100 Million in 12 months, then again 4 months later or so, another 20 million, to 120 million.

I support a high school, one that we can afford, one that is provides great facilities for students, and the versitility to be used for communitie programs too.

But at the end of the day, we cannot afford to be spending 1.5-2 times what other districts have to build a high school.

I predict this bond will be tough to pass, regardless of how much money the district throws at it promoting it, unless the district gets some REASONABLE and Market numbers for costs that are somewhere close to what other districts nearby have paid. And thats too bad, because AC could use the facility badly, and it is supported by the community.

yeah i see where your coming from and by all means not to sound insulting you are such a downer i geuss your right there really is not enough recorces to build a high school in the inevitable future but we must keep hoping but first we need to take care of american canyon's crumbaling infrastructure

American Canyon high school would have a broad impact
By JOE SCHUNK
Sunday, July 30, 2006 1:15 AM PDT

I'd like to respond to Ms. Watter's opinion piece ("For bond to pass, Napa High must benefit," July 16) on the upcoming local bond measure in November. I believe a number of the propositions put forth are myopic and counter to recent district history.

It has been argued in these pages that Proposition H in the recent election was so larded with "something for everyone" that the public perceived it as a boondoggle. Well, the district is responding by focusing the proposed bond on the areas of greatest need -- not all needs. Schools all over the district have benefited, more or less equitably, through a veritable alphabet soup of Measures A, Y and M over the last couple of years. The facility's budget was more constrained than typically for the last couple of years due to the economy and budget machinations emanating from Sacramento. The district, with effort, managed to avoid significant program curtailments, but just barely.

The District has spent the last year studying their facilities and capacities, the results of which are available on their Web site: www2.nvusd.k12.ca.us/Projects/43/Facilities%20Task%20Force/FacilitiesMasterPlan_Presentation.pdf. The gist of it was that absent of the growth in American Canyon, there would have been a net reduction of 1,000 students in the district due to the demographics of the city of Napa and surrounding environs. That level of census drop would have necessitated "adjustments" in instructional staffing overall.

I believe it is generally understood, if not well communicated, that an American Canyon high school would necessitate a redrawing of the boundaries of both comprehensive high schools in the city of Napa to redistribute the load. Because when American Canyon pulls out, by the time we do this in five years or more, Vintage loses more than half its population. Redrawing boundaries, if recent history is any guide, is a process that is not without it own controversies. There was vigorous discussion about changes to the tradition-bound boundaries of Donaldson Way and Napa Junction when Canyon Oaks came online a little over a year ago.


Many campuses are land-locked, have sub-optimal traffic patterns and share facilities with other schools or cities. After portables, there is no place to go but up. American Canyon Middle School was first to go two story; Napa High and Vintage High are next -- others will follow to the extent needed. The public gets good value for their buildings; many are fully utilized beyond the traditional school day by adult school, community college and community programs.

It sounds as if Ms. Watter believes the growth in American Canyon has been unplanned and out of control. That is not quite the case. A high school in American Canyon has been the first or second desire of residents since incorporation 14 years ago. The district did not ignore us; they did what had to be done first -- acquire land. Without that, the discussion of what to build on it is moot. The nascent city spent several years developing a master plan, in a quite open and public process. It was only after that, that house building began in earnest.

Let's be clear. American Canyon/South County/Napa Junction, however it was known, has participated in every bond benefiting the Napa Valley Unified School District and its predecessors for decades. Now we need a little help from the rest of the community, and the benefits to others will be less direct but no less meaningful.

I do wish the district leadership would start acting on a communication strategy replacing misinformation with specifics, both regarding the upcoming bond measure and what was accomplished in previous bonds. The public would also benefit from a clear idea of to what degree district staff can participate in the coming debate -- so that silence is not misinterpreted. Ms. Watter and I agree on the point that the public needs a clear view of the alternatives in November. The passing or not passing of a bond measure in November will impact many people beyond the boundaries of American Canyon -- whichever way it goes.

(Schunk lives in American Canyon.)

The funds over and above the high school are good policy, and good politics. It does make sense to have money in the bond issue for the entire district, as that is fair, and the entire district will be voting on it, making passage more probable.

The entire county will be paying for it as well and some facilities need some financial help to be maintained or improved.

The district needs to get competative bids and get a cost statement out early. It is going to take time to sell this and the district needs to get this cost number down.

Personally, I think the facility will add to property values and desirability here in AC. THe biggest obstacle is the cost number for AC High, and that needs to be addressed.

THere will be some sympathy vote upvalley ( I wouldnt want my kid ona bus an hour a day either), but it would seem would we get alot more traction on this deal in passing this bond issue with a good explanation of the costs, where costs where saved, what the district is doing to get it built affordably, and why the cost of construction may be higher than similar facilities. Get the numbers out, get some support, get some major contracting firms bids made public, so the voter can see where their money in going.

I certainly dont intend to sound negative at all, and do support a new facility. But I also support bringing the budget to a number that will be supported, and right now, that does not look promising. I could be wrong, I hope I am, however money is tight in many households and voters are not just approving every request for funds these days.

Well see.

In this weeks Napa Sentinal, Harry Martin article discussed the problems the Napa County Grand Jury has found and continues to find with the Napa Unified School District:

" The 2005-6 Grand Jury was disappointed with the Napa Unified School Districts ( NUSD) response to the 2004-05 Grand Jury Report on Student Health and Safety in Middle and High Schools." The prior grand jury "...identified serious concerns and issues with student health and safety, the school districts administration operations and leadership."

"the districts performance remains inadequate" quotes the article.

From the Grand Jury Report " The District continues to be ineffective in its oversight, communications, and management of both persons and processes, with minimal supervision and accountability for job responsibilities."

A number of findings from the GJ report are included.

" Finance Department's Accounts receivable continues to amass uncollected monies owed the district"

Per the article, the Grand Jury was concerned over " significant mismanagment" of its accounts receivable resulting in over $700,000.00 in uncollected funds. " the district must have financial control....to support the schools many needs"

THis is the district, with a recent report like this, that wants to oversee a 183 million dollars of our money? What, are you kidding me? Per the grand jury report, they are mismanaged, poorly supervised, and ineffective in their oversight.

How then are they going to be effective in oversight of building a new high school, the first one they have built in decades, when they are doing so poorly now?

Track records are important.

As I said before, this bond issue must include PRIVATE, THIRD PARTY, OVERSIGHT, from competent and experienced persons in the area of construction managment and finance. The districts own finance department was held out as having "significant mismanagement".

The district was said to have made little in the way of progress from the first GJ report-

In my view, this and this alone says that NO MONEY should be managed at all by this school district for the construction of any new high school in American Canyon. Based on this report and the NUSD's track record, the school with be OVER THE BUDGET, DELAYED FOR MONTHS OR YEARS from Targets set, and have a number of problems associated with poor communication, mismanagment, and poor supervision.

Clearly the NUSD is the absolute WRONG ENTITY to oversee 120 Million dollar project, and clearly the GJ has pointed this out, not once, but twice now over two years.

Perhaps this is why the project has gone from 40 million, to 100 million to 120 Million. Perhaps it is the lack of management at the NUSD as pointed out by the GJ that has lead us down the path of runaway costs.

This report is striking, and very critical of the NUSD's abilities, so much so, that very serious concerns are raised. Funding or giving NUSD 183 Million with this type of track record and problems is irresponsible.

Other options must be explored to build this new high school other than have the NUSD in its current condition, in charge of it.