The basics:
What are voters being asked to approve?
The Rio Rancho Public Schools will place two propositions on the February 7, 2006 ballot:

• A request to approve a three-year bond issue for $39,000,000 for land acquisition and school construction. Passage of the bond issue will maintain the tax rate currently in effect, so the property tax rate would not increase as a result of the vote.
• A request to reauthorize collection of the 2-mill levy for school maintenance and technology for a six-year term. Again, passage continues the mill levy currently in effect and does not substantively increase the tax rate.

Where do I vote? View the voting district map here... (pdf)

Why is this a great deal for Rio Rancho?
Passage of the bond issue will allow Rio Rancho to build a high school for just $25.8 million bond funds from the community. The state has pledged $46.8 million towards design and construction of the school, about 65% of the estimated $72.6 million cost. However, in order to get the money, the community must contribute the remaining 35% of the cost, or about $25.8 million.

What happens if the bond issue fails? Do we lose the state money?
Yes. Under state law, local school districts are required to provide matching funds in order to receive state school construction money through the Public School Capital Outlay Council, or PSCOC. The PSCOC is the primary source of school construction money coming from the state. Since the district’s inception, the PSCOC has provided the district with about $71 million in state money for major school construction funds (this includes the high school award).

If the community fails to provide matching funds, the $46.8 million will revert to the state. The community will then be responsible for footing the entire $72.6 million cost of the high school -- a school it needs regardless of whether the bond issue passes.

What are the other consequences if the bond issue doesn't’t pass? (Back to top)

• Many Rio Rancho elementary schools, and the Mid-High and Rio Rancho High School, will become very overcrowded in a very short period of time. Enrollment in grades 9-12 already is approaching 4,000 students, and may top 5,000 in the next five years.
• Because the district will no longer be bonded to capacity, the percentage of the district’s match in order to get state funds will increase, making it even harder for the district to build new facilities.
• Emergency purchases of portables to provide space would have to be paid for from operational funds that provide teachers and educational programs, crippling those services.
• Students might have to be bused across town to less-crowded schools -- but in a very short time, there will be no schools that are not overcrowded. Student-teacher ratios would likely increase because there simply would not be enough classrooms available.
• Eventually, the district might have to consider such unpopular alternatives as extended days and year-round calendars.
• The result of all of the above will be that Rio Rancho will become a less desirable community in which to live. Dissatisfaction with overcrowded schools is one of the reasons that the Rio Rancho community chose to form its own school district. At one time, nearly three-quarters of the district’s students attended classes in portable buildings. That number has been cut drastically, but without voter support, the district will have no alternative but to house students in portables and consider changes to school schedules.

Eventually, this could impact the community’s economic development. Businesses and families considering locating in Rio Rancho might reconsider if the district’s schools are overcrowded and adequate funds are not available to build needed schools.

What the bond issue includes:
RRPS has identified eight priorities with a price tag of $46,080,000 as critical to meeting the needs of Rio Rancho students. The district’s current bonding capacity of $39 million will not meet all of these needs. However, passage will fund the following critical projects:

• Matching funds of $25,821,716 to plan, design, and construct a second high school for Rio Rancho. The state has pledged $46,878,000 towards the project. In order to secure the funds, the local community and school district must provide matching funds. This is a great opportunity for Rio Rancho, since it can get a $72+ million high school by raising just $25.8 million in bond funds.
  
  The facility will be located northwest of Paseo del Volcan and Westphalia Blvd., near the eastern end of Rio Rancho’s “new downtown.” It will be approximately 330,000 sq. ft. and will have the capacity to hold about 2,600 students. A school/district/community committee, with community input, will determine program and curriculum requirements for the school (for example, will it be organized into career academies?) and work with an architect to design the facility based on those requirements.
  
• $6,280,000 for technology and equipment -- computers, servers, phone system, office equipment, and more -- at the new high school campus.
  
• $3,000,000 for furnishings for the new high school.
  
• Matching funds of $3,300,000 for a new elementary school that would be located in the northwest portion of the district. This would be used to help match state funding of $7,150,000 the district hopes to receive for construction of the school.
  
  A second new elementary school for the northeastern portion of Rio Rancho has been identified as a critical priority and the district will seek funding from the state for the project. However, the matching funds for that school are not included in this bond issue.
  
• $248,284 to help with the purchase of furniture and technology for new elementary schools
  
• $350,000 for land acquisition

If bond money is not available, how will the district fund the remaining projects on the “critical” list?

The district continues to work with state and local officials to identify funding sources and to open up new avenues of funding through legislative changes. For example, if the state were to provide start-up money to schools for technology and furnishings, the money earmarked for those items could be used to fund other priorities. The district may also be able to find other funding for some smaller projects. (Back to top)

I’ve heard the Governor wants to give the school district $26 million for new elementary schools. Do we still need to pass the bond issue?
Yes, absolutely. Passage of the bond issue will still be vitally important in order to complete the new high school. More than $35 million of the $39 million requested in the bond issue is earmarked for completion of the high school. The Governor’s proposal does not affect funding for the high school.

The Governor has proposed allocating additional state funds for construction of schools in high-growth areas. His proposal is subject to approval by the state legislature. It includes $26 million to construct two elementary schools in Rio Rancho. These schools are very much needed, and enactment of the proposal by the legislature would help the district keep up with Rio Rancho’s growth.

However, the money from the bond issue will still be very important towards meeting the community’s need for schools, and also towards convincing the legislature that the community is doing its part to build schools. That encourages legislators and state government leaders to help Rio Rancho meet the demand for schools. The legislature will still be in session at the time of the bond election, and passage by the voters would send a powerful message that the community supports schools and the state legislature should do the same.

If the bond issue passes and the Legislature provides the $26 million, this would free up about $3.9 million in the bond issue that had been earmarked for elementary school construction. These funds could then be reallocated by the district. They could be used for additional new schools, or to help fund some of the about $12 million in much-needed projects at our existing schools. (Back to top)

How were the bond priorities set?
The school board establishes the priorities with input from staff and the community. The board adopted the priorities for this bond issue at its October 24 meeting.

The requirement to provide matching funds in order to get state money was key to setting the bond priorities, along with the priorities identified in the Rio Rancho Public Schools Facilities Master Plan approved by the Board and the NM Public Schools Facilities Authority (PSFA). in spring and summer 2005. About three-quarters of the available $39,000,000 in bond funds will be used to meet the requirement for matching funds. The remainder is needed for land acquisition and for technology and furnishings for those schools.

How will these facilities benefit kids?
All students in Rio Rancho will benefit from construction of the second high school, which will alleviate overcrowding at Rio Rancho High School and at the Mid-High (which will become an eighth-grade academy).

Construction of two new elementary schools in northern Rio Rancho will directly relieve enrollment at Colinas del Norte, Stapleton, Enchanted Hills, and Vista Grande Elementary Schools. Through boundary changes, the district may be able to also reduce enrollment at elementary schools further south.

The bond issue includes no projects for existing schools. Why?
Because of the district’s high growth rate, all of the funds available through the bond issue are earmarked to provide matching funds and equipment for new schools to serve the growing student population. Simply put, the district’s bonding capacity is insufficient to meet all of the needs.

So, how are you going to take care of the existing schools?
The district will try to fund some projects through other sources, such as the “SB-9” two-mill levy. The proceeds from this levy pay for school maintenance (60%) and technology (40%). As the district’s tax base grows, some of this money may be available for smaller construction projects. The district may also be able to find money in other areas of its budget. (Back to top)

About Taxes:

What is the current tax rate from bonds and the mill levy?
The current tax rate from bonds is approximately 8.54 mill, which means $8.54/$1,000 of the net taxable value (1/3 of the home’s actual value). This adds up to about $35.63 per month ($428 per year) for a $150,000 home – about the price of a cup of coffee per day.

The two-mill levy, as the name suggests, has a tax rate of $2/$1,000 of net taxable value, or approximately 18 cents per day ($8.33/month, $100/year) for a $150,000 home.

Will passage make my taxes go up?
No. Passage of the bond issue permits the district to issue new bonds as old ones are retired. The tax rate remains the same. Passage of the mill levy question simply allows the district to continue the mill levy already in effect.

If your home increases in value and your property is reappraised, it’s possible your taxes could go up because your property is worth more. But the actual tax rate levied by the school district remains the same.

What if it doesn’t pass? Will my taxes go down?
If the bond issue is defeated, the tax rate for bonds would decline slowly as the district repays existing bonds. Defeat of the SB 9 mill levy would cause a decrease, beginning next tax year, of approximately $100 per year for a $150,000 house. However, the total tax rate for both bond issue and mill levy for the owner of a $150,000 house is only about $1.50/day. (Back to top)

About the Mill Levy Question:

What is the mill levy?
The mill levy was authorized by the Public School Capital Improvements Tax Act. It is often referred to by the bill’s number, SB-9. It was created to help schools fund maintenance and small construction projects, computers, and other technology needs without dipping into the operational funding needed for teachers and educational programs. Each year’s revenue from the mill levy goes directly to the school district and provides money for smaller projects.

RRPS currently receives around $2 million per year from the mill levy (the number fluctuates slightly from year to year). It spends approximately 40% of this money on computers and other technology upgrades. The remainder funds maintenance and smaller construction projects.

Why does the district need both the bond issue and the mill levy?
The mill levy is currently the only available means the district has to pay for improvements and maintenance for the district’s schools. All of the proceeds from the bond issue have to be dedicated to matching state funds to open new schools, and to equip the new schools. Our existing schools have many needs, too. Right now, the only source of funding the school district has to meet those needs is SB-9 funds and, where permissible, operational funds.

What if the two-mill levy doesn’t pass?
The district would have no source of funding for small construction projects at its schools or for routine maintenance and minor renovations. School facilities would become overcrowded and run down. It would be more likely that students would be confronted with classrooms that are too cold or too hot, leaking roofs, and other conditions that are at best uncomfortable and at worst potentially unsafe.

Furthermore, maintenance expenses do not go away; they continue to accumulate and become greater when they are postponed. It was conditions like these that led to the push by the community, in the early 1990’s, to take control of its schools and create an independent district.

The only other source of funds for emergency repairs and other classroom equipment is the district’s operational dollars. If the district were forced to dip into operational funds, it would be at the expense of present educational programs and teacher salaries. Using operational funds for these expenditures would eventually affect student achievement, and it is certainly not fair to add this burden to the teachers.
(Back to top)

Other Questions:

What about previous bond issues? Has all the money been used?
Yes, it has either already been spent or is in the process of being spent for the last remaining projects promised under the last bond issue passed in 2003.

Has RRPS kept its promises to the community and completed previous bond projects?
Absolutely. RRPS has completed dozens of projects funded totally or in part by previous voter-approved bond issues, among them:

• Colinas del Norte Elementary School
• Maggie M. Cordova Elementary School
• Vista Grande Elementary School
• New campuses for Puesta del Sol and Ernest Stapleton Elementary Schools and Mountain View Middle School
• Eagle Ridge Middle School
• Rio Rancho Mid-High School
• Major classroom additions at Rio Rancho Elementary, Colinas del Norte Elementary, Enchanted Hills Elementary, and Rio Rancho High School
• Athletic complex (football and baseball stadiums and athletic fields) at Rio Rancho High School
• Athletic fields, playgrounds, building modifications and upgrades, parking and traffic control, erosion control, and sewer hookups

Has RRPS earned community support?
Yes, for many reasons:

• The district has delivered the facilities promised in past bond issues
• Many of our facilities have received awards for design, functionality, and cost effectiveness.
• RRPS delivers for kids. Rio Rancho students consistently score above average on standardized tests. Students in all subject areas, grade levels, and all subgroups except special education meet state proficiency targets, as measured in the latest round of standardized testing.

Why don’t developers pay for schools?
In some parts of the country, that’s required. And from time to time, developers in Rio Rancho have donated land and services to support schools. However, state law does not permit schools to levy impact fees. Under current state laws and regulations and local ordinances, school districts must raise construction funds through voter-approved property tax levies, both to finance construction and to qualify for further capital funding from the state.

Wouldn’t it be better if the city just stopped growing?
No. It is preferable to be a dynamic, growing community than a community in decline.

Setting public policy as regards growth is not a school district responsibility, but the responsibility of the entire community and its elected leaders. The school district’s responsibility is to serve those students who come into the community. In order to do that, the district must have the resources to build and maintain safe and functional schools.

All of the indicators forecast that growth will continue. City and private demographers project the growth rate at 6% annually through the year 2015. Based on this rate of growth, Rio Rancho Public Schools will enroll more than 24,000 students ten years from now. If the growth rate were to remain at its current annual rate 8.5%, enrollment in 2015-16 would exceed 30,000. (Back to top)

What about all those kids who go to RRPS but don’t live in the district? Can’t we throw them out to make space for our own kids?
The state’s Open Enrollment Law requires school districts to accept any student who wishes to enroll – regardless of where he or she lives – on a space-available basis. Space available refers either to physical space in the building or space in individual classes subject to state-mandated class size limits. It is important to note that schools are required to first accept any student living in that school’s attendance area (with rare discipline-related exceptions allowed by state law). So those students always have priority over out-of-district students.

Students are accepted under open enrollment on a year-to-year basis, so if a school has an influx of students living in that school’s attendance area, out-of-district students can be turned away.

By the way, open enrollment works both ways. Other districts accept Rio Rancho students and some Rio Rancho families, for a variety of reasons, enroll their children in APS’s and other district’s schools.

I don’t like the school board’s policies. So why should I vote for the bond issue?
Voting against the bond issue because you don’t like a position the school board has taken or a policy it has passed doesn’t penalize the board -- it penalizes the kids. If the bond issue doesn’t pass, all students will suffer from being in overcrowded classrooms in overcrowded schools.

Some policies established by the school board are strongly disliked by some in the electorate, and citizens can and should make their views known to the members of the school board. However, it is unfair to students to deny them a functional learning environment because you don’t agree with a decision made by the adults that has nothing to do with the adequacy of school facilities. There are many other more appropriate ways for voters to express their opinions about school board decisions than by turning down the bond issue.

I don’t have kids – why should I pay for schools?
Good schools are at the foundation of any strong community. Housing values are enhanced because buyers want to live in neighborhoods that have quality schools in quality facilities. A strong school system also offers a powerful incentive for companies looking for a community in which to do business. The whole community benefits when new business “grows the pie” of resources available to fund services. (Back to top)

Potential employees demand good schools for their children, and employers benefit because graduates are more likely to have the skills needed to succeed in the workplace and in higher education. Those students, as adults, then can contribute to their communities both financially and as productive citizens living in the community. Previous generations of adults provided schools for us, and it is our responsibility to make sure future generations have the opportunities we enjoyed.

Finally, the community benefits because students studying in safe, functional buildings that provide the right environment for learning are more likely to stay in school and become good citizens. Young people who are involved in school and in school activities are less likely to commit crimes or to contribute to an unhealthy community environment.

The price tag for these schools seems high. Why have costs gone up so much?
Construction costs have increased dramatically in the past couple of years because materials costs -- especially for steel and concrete -- have gone through the roof. This is being aggravated by rising energy costs (gasoline is more expensive for contractors, too) and labor costs (employees have to be adequately paid so they can afford gas to commute to the job!). Estimates for the high school are that the construction cost will be about $173/sq.ft.

I’d rather have the money go to boost teacher salaries. Can’t we do that?
Afraid not. Bond issue funds can’t be used to pay salaries or to fund the district’s operational expenses.

Why don’t you just ask the legislature for money for schools?
It is not currently to Rio Rancho’s advantage to do that. Under state law, there are consequences for school districts that get money from direct legislative appropriations. A percentage of any funds that are directly appropriated by the legislature is subtracted from any award the district might get from the PSCOC.

In order to get maximum value from PSCOC awards, the district must discourage direct legislative appropriations. The funding for the high school demonstrates why. The original state award for the new high school was $47.7 million. However, the state subtracted more than $800,000 from that award because of money the district received through the legislature in the 2005 session. That’s $800,000 that the district must now include in the bond issue in order to pay for the high school.

The district encourages legislators to fund projects -- like roads, sidewalks, and utilities in areas where schools will be built -- that will directly benefit schools and students as well as the community. This helps Rio Rancho maximize its legislative awards without penalty to the school district.

Why is the question on the ballot so broadly worded? Doesn’t it give the school district too much latitude to change things and go back on its promises?
The wording of the bond question adheres to the language specified under the state constitution, as it must for legal reasons. Yes, the question is broadly worded to afford the school district some flexibility if changes are necessary; for example, if a bond-funded project is subsequently funded by the state, or if for some reason a project costs more than estimated.

The district has an excellent record of delivering on the projects it has promised voters in the past and fully intends to complete the projects it has listed as priorities in this bond issue. The school district has an elected board that voters can hold accountable for keeping its promises.