|
Post by Wantagh Parent on Jun 20, 2008 21:30:01 GMT -5
In an effort to keep information in the same place, if anyone has the dates, components, payback period and amounts of the last several bonds, please post them in this thread.
Thank you.
|
|
|
Post by lilly on Jun 21, 2008 9:33:05 GMT -5
May 2007 Bonds
Capital Proposition #1 2,260 Yes (59.9%) 1,515 No (40.1%) $6,301,425 with $1.9m in EXCEL aid New boilers Repairs & updates to HS auditorium HS Band Room New PA and fire alarm system in MS/HS New roofs at Forest Lake and Mandalay
Capital Proposition #2 1,841 Yes (50.03%) 1,839 No (49.97%) $4,998,428 New HS gym, locker and team rooms Conversion of HS weight room back to cafeteria space
Capital Proposition #3 1,919 Yes (52.8%) 1,713 No (47.2%) $2,739,960 New HS field HS Bleachers HS Tennis courts
The track was condemned and the rickety bleachers unsafe (probably not up to some code).
I think there was new wiring and a computer lab in one of these bonds but the papers I have don't say which one.
Also, I don't know what the terms of this bond are.
|
|
|
Post by hightax on Jun 21, 2008 17:42:36 GMT -5
lilly - I just want to make a small correction. The track was not condemned. I know Dr. Bonuso loved to use that word. Another example of mis-information / scare tactic that the Administration loves to do to the people of Wantagh. If the track was condemned NO PERSON WOULD BE ALLOWED TO STEP FOOT ON THE TRACK. Since the school still uses it for gym class and track practice, I certainly hope it not condemned because the school would be putting the children in DANGER on a daily basis.
|
|
|
Post by lilly on Jun 23, 2008 9:46:01 GMT -5
Well, for whatever reason, the PAL was not using Wantagh's track as they had for many years. I believe, Wantagh school district was not hosting track meets for other schools - don't know how true that is.
Regardless, my kids ran on the track so I saw it firsthand, it was in horrendous shape and something needed to be done about it safety-wise.
|
|
|
Post by forthekids on Jun 23, 2008 20:34:09 GMT -5
Lilly - that is the same information that I heard when my son ran CYO Track for St. Francis last year, that we weren't allowed to host any events because of the condition of the track
|
|
|
Post by wantaghmember on Jun 29, 2008 11:14:19 GMT -5
Hind sight is 20-20. If proposition #2 wasn't passed we wouldn't be in the position we're in today. Going forward, a community member said that any unused monies from the bonds must be returned to pay off the debt. That's a positive. Perhaps, if the district is careful in their selection of materials, we could have a surplus to pay down the debt; not installing embellishments that are not necessary to the functionality of the upgrade.
The naysayers will be out in force next year. The district must show accoutability and responsibility for them to not vote down next year's budget. If the district produced a financial statement showing money allocated vs. money used - hopefully showing an excess of money that would be returned, the naysayers may be more inclined to pass next year's budget.
I applaud the organizers of our fundraising efforts. I am hopeful we will achieve our goal. However, we need some saavy community members (preferably with a financial background) to keep their eye on our current expenditures and formulation of next year's budget to turn this situation around.
|
|
|
Post by bconnoll on May 20, 2009 20:09:40 GMT -5
A cost saving idea the BOE could seek out - possible rate reduction (refinance) on the Bonds. Rates have come way down since the Cap. Props were issued - check the prospectus for any pre-payment fee.
RE: track - Wantagh has not hosted a home meet in 10yrs because of the poor condition of the old track - that's embarassing. Thank goodness we have a new one.
|
|
|
Post by Chris_Wendt on May 21, 2009 5:17:39 GMT -5
bconnoll suggested: "A cost saving idea the BOE could seek out - possible rate reduction (refinance) on the Bonds. Rates have come way down since the Cap. Props were issued - check the prospectus for any pre-payment fee." The capital had initially been raised using short-term instrments (BANs) until October, 2008, at which time long-term debt (bonds) was issued. I think they did a very good job of managing the interest rates on this, and went into the market at the right time. Generally, school district bonds are non 'callable', which is designed to bring them in at lower interest rates than 'callable' bonds. I am not positive about the current issue, but believe that is the case. Good suggestion, however. One year ago, Wantaghmember opined: "The naysayers will be out in force next year. The district must show accoutability and responsibility for them to not vote down next year's budget. If the district produced a financial statement showing money allocated vs. money used - hopefully showing an excess of money that would be returned, the naysayers may be more inclined to pass next year's budget.
I applaud the organizers of our fundraising efforts. I am hopeful we will achieve our goal. However, we need some saavy community members (preferably with a financial background) to keep their eye on our current expenditures and formulation of next year's budget to turn this situation around." Where were those naysayers? Who were they? We have just experienced an unprecedented margin of passing our budget in the most difficult situation I could ever have imagined! Why? How? Exactly as you suggested: 1. "The district must show accoutability and responsibility"...and they have; 2. "...we need some saavy community members (preferably with a financial background) to keep their eye on our current expenditures and formulation of next year's budget to turn this situation around"...which WE have done. I am recalling this rather prophetic post now because it really demonstrates the value of having this community forum for exchanging ideas, even in most people just stop by and read the writing on the wall. Anyhow, masterful call, Wantaghmember! I am impressed, Chris Wendt
|
|
|
Post by bnjasper on May 25, 2009 9:36:31 GMT -5
We have 1.385 million left on the 1997 issue that may be called at par since 10/1/08. The interest rates are 4.75 and 4.80. We would need to know current rates and fees to determine if there is any real savings in paying off and re-financing on short term basis. The 2008 issue is not callable at par till 2017.
|
|