We’re all for sharing information, but we can’t put up with misleading voters. Our Mythbusters, led by Ken Robertson spent some time debunking some common myths about the referendum. Here’s what we found….

The Latest Myth?  The District can Pay for Vital Upgrades with Reserve Funds….  

How do you handle an emergency situation? If your roof failed tomorrow what would you do? Dip into a savings account, borrow on a credit card, or tap into a home equity line of credit? It’s generally sound financial practice to have resources available to meet unexpected needs.

A school district’s finances are different from your household ones – but having resources available to meet unexpected needs is still sound financial practice. Our school district can’t borrow on a credit card or access a home equity loan — instead it uses reserve funds to ensure that it can manage unforeseen circumstances, cash flow issues, and other emergencies. School districts hold reserve funds as a safety net. School finance experts agree, spending down the safety net would be a risky strategy and poor financial policy. MYTH — BUSTED.

It DOESN’T ADD UP: Real Cost of Opposition Plan is $116 million or More!

The Real Cost of “A More Affordable Plan”

The opposition has put a lot of energy into trying to prove there’s a “more affordable plan.” The reality is that the opposition’s more “affordable plan” would actually cost closer to $116.1 million and deliver fewer benefits.

The bottom line? MYTHBUSTED

The community-driven, thoroughly vetted, and professionally prepared D113 plan makes sense, the opposition plan is nonsense.

Adding up the other “Plan”

Here is a breakdown of the costs cited by EdFirst compared to the actual estimates done by architects and engineers. (Source: Master Conceptual Program Budget (MCPB) built by the steering committee, Perkins + Will, and Gilbane). In millions of dollars.

A. Infrastructure & Envelope
Item	EdFirst Estimate	Architect/Engineer’s Actual Estimate	Reference (MCPB Item)
1. HPHS B building	$2.6	$5.9	2A
2. HPHS C Building & Annex	$2.3	$14.1	2D
3  HVAC at HPHS & DHS	$10	$36	1A
4. Replace pools at HPHS & DHS	$2	$9.4	3B
5. Wireless technology & electrical infrastructure	$3.6	$4	1B
6. All plumbing work in Wight plan including B & C	$2.6	$3.1	1A
7.  “Light remodeling” of Athletic Wings at both schools	$2.2	$2.2	No match
8.  All windows in Wight plan including B	$3.4	$3.5	1F
9.   Library Renovation at DHS	$2.2	$3.8	5B
10.  Total	$30.9	$82.0
B. Vocational & Physical Education
Item	EdFirst Estimate	Architect/Engineer’s Actual Estimate	Reference (MCPB Item)
1. Vocational Center @ HPHS (repurpose C & C annex)	$8.4	$3.3 add’l + $1 million (for equipment (per E1 plan)	2E
2. Replacement PE space at HPHS	$5.8	$8.7	4B
3. Inflatable Sports Dome at DHS	$4.3	$4.3	No match
4. Increase pools to 8 lanes	$12.4	$16.8 *	3A/B
Total	$30.9	$34.1
Grand Total A + B	$61.8	$116.1

All numbers in millions of dollars

Want to know more about how we compared the information, click here for a Detailed Breakdown

Financial Information

Myth: “The District has $47 million in reserves, $32 million of which has accrued in just the past two years”.

Fact:  Reserves did not increase by $32 million in 2 years.  Reserves increased by $6.9 million in 2012 and $7.1 million in 2011.  The increases in reserves in these years were not planned or forecasted – they were largely the result of higher than expected payments from the State and Federal government and lower than budgeted health care, special education and utility costs.

For more detail, see page 4 of the 2011 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report  and 2012 Comprehensive Annual Financial Report.

Myth: “The District is planning on using $5 million from its operating budget over the next 5 years to fund the referendum projects. Instead, the District could put aside $5 million/year to build up its reserves and in 7 years could accumulate $35 million.

Fact:  If the referendum passes, the District will be able to put aside $5 million each year because it expects $3.5 million in capital repairs it ordinarily would need to make will no longer be necessary because of the repairs and improvements that these projects will make to our facilities. If the referendum doesn’t pass, the District will likely have to spend this $3.5 million just repairing our existing facilities.

Myth:  “The District could use $25 million of its $47 million in reserves to fund capital projects without harming the District’s credit rating and the District has never seriously considered doing this.

Fact:  During the 18 month review process, the Finance Study group determined, by a strong consensus, that “District 113 should maintain fund balances at or near current levels….and that the fund balance should not be used to fund capital projects.”

The fund balance ensures that the District maintains its strong (AAA) credit rating and provides funds for unforseen events and circumstances (like your family savings account).

More Myths We’re Busting….

Mythbuster Ken Robertson separates Fact from Fiction

Read Ken’s piece on Patch where he debunks the myths and offers up the facts about the anti-tax, anti-referendum flyer.

Myths BUSTED

Here are some myths being circulated in an attempt to scare or mislead voters. CLEAR sets the record straight with the FACTS about these statements.

MYTH #1:
It’s a plan for $120,400,000. $89M referendum plus $25M reserves; plus $6.4M in uncommitted contractor adjustments”  

FACTS:
The referendum requests $89 million to help fund $120.4 million in proposed projects. The $25 million referenced above incorrectly states that it comes from reserves. The $25 million will come from current budgets (5 million for 5 years) earmarked for annual capital expenditures. We will not be taxed more to cover this amount. BUSTED.

MYTH #2:
“The new multi-phase Master Plan will require millions in additional tax dollars.”  BUSTED

FACTS: This is not a multi-phase plan. The district has stated: “there are no current plans to implement other projects in the near future.”

MYTH #3:….
The combined cost of the referendum and rebuilding in reserves amounts to $553 in taxes. BUSTED

FACT: We are not paying more to rebuild reserves. Homeowners who want an accurate assessment of what the referendum will mean to an individual tax bill should click here for the District 113 referendum calculator.     

MYTH #4
The 2010 Census showed 15% fewer children age 10
and under in Highland Park and Deerfield.

FACT:
The truth is that high school enrollment is not on the decline. Enrollment is higher now than earlier models predicted and future models show enrollment maintaining current levels or increasing over the next five years. Census figures alone are not an accurate predictor of enrollment.   BUSTED

MYTH #5
The new referendum is only one of many new local taxing entities are looking to increase our real estate taxes. BUSTED  

FACT: There aren’t any “new” taxing entities in Lake County. Taxing authorities have not changed or expanded. Here are the facts about other area projects:

1. Deerfield Elementary District 109: District 109 is not considering a $168 million referendum. According to Greg Himebaugh, Assistant Superintendent for Operations and Finance at District 109, the option was dismissed as unrealistic and is not under consideration.
2. Rosewood Beach: Improvements to Highland Park’s Rosewood beach are being paid out of a combination of park district reserves, federal funds, and state grants. No new taxes.
3. Waukegan Courthouse: Updates to the Waukegan Courthouse do not require new taxes.
4. Highland Park’s Water Treatment Plant: the improvements to the water treatment plant are being funded through user fees shared by the 5 municipalities that receive water from Highland Park.
5. Highland Park Elementary District 112: District 112 is not exploring a facilities expansion, but has formed a community task force to examine facility needs. Building consolidation, not expansion, is likely to be proposed – but the district is still in the early stages of formulating a plan.

MYTH #6 There is a more affordable plan. BUSTED

FACT: Having a cheaper plan which ignores basic needs does not make it “more affordable.” After the defeat of the 2011 referendum, opponents asked for a plan developed by a community leadership team including supporters and opponents with architects, engineers and educators from our community and an independent structural engineer. Those recommendations were met and the plan that resulted is community driven with detailed professional estimating and planning with a long-term perspective.

A small group of anti-tax opponents broke off and threw together a “plan” that doesn’t meet their own recommendations, was not professionally vetted or costed. Their “plan” includes rejected ideas like an inflatable dome at DHS and band-aid fixes instead long-term solutions to infrastructure problems.