$23 million
October 17th, 2007 by 
Alica
What do you think of Brandon Valley School District’s plan to spend $23 million to build new and enhance existing facilities? Voters will decide Dec. 4 on whether to go forward with a plan to:
1. put an addition on the high school
2. build a new elementary school
3. build an indoor activity center
4. make improvements to Valley Springs Elementary
5. add to the commons and kitchen at the high school
6. add more parking at the high school; and
7. buy furnishings and equipment to fill the new spaces.
Which part(s) of the plan do you like, and why? Which part(s) of the plan do you not like, and why? Do you think it’s a good idea to hold the bond election in early December, right before the Christmas holiday?
To see the recommendation of the district’s Facilities Design/Bond Promotion Committee, and more information about the proposal, click on “Brandon Valley School” under “Related Links” in the right-hand column on the main page of www.brandoninfo.com.
Posted in Uncategorized | 
October 17th, 2007 at 8:39 am
I believe that the addition of classrooms at the high school and building another elementary are probably necessary and would support those. However, the construction of an activity center with 2-3 more gyms is a luxury that we can live without. Or, in the alternative, the school board should save the money and then pay cash for the activity center, much like they did for the performing arts center and the bus facility. Or maybe the school district should pay off another project first before saddling us with another tax increase. My kids attended BV and generally I would be more supportive of everything, but county government has stuck us with so many opt-outs lately that all of these new facilities are just becoming more and more of a burden on the average taxpayer. I also wonder why the school board has told us it will cost $23 million, but they have yet to tell us what our individual tax increases will be. Remember that the Harrisburg school board thought $40 million was a slam dunk, but they got it shoved down their throats a couple of times before they got rid of the luxuries and went back to the basics.
October 17th, 2007 at 9:28 am
We definitley need the new activity center. Have you tried to go to a basketball game in the last few years? You can’t even get in the gym! I would love to take my 5 year old to games, but I’m afriad he’ll get knocked off the bleachers its so crowded. I know a lot of people that don’t go to games anymore b/c if you’re not there by 6 or 6:30 your chances of getting a seat are nil so you spend the game out in the hall trying to see over peoples heads.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:41 am
I think it’s time for the Brandon people to start improving their community. Has anyone been to the parks in Sioux Falls, quite a big difference from ours here in Brandon? Better parks / events centers only mean more activities and tournaments to bring moneys into Brandon. Sometimes you have to spend money to make money. Don’t forget”Buy Brandon”. Also with a community type center would give the kids something to do around here besides hang out at McDonalds.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:42 am
The School Board has said how much the $23 million project will cost taxpayers. Based on a $100,000 home, homeowners can expect a $114 per year increase in their property taxes. That calculates to $9.50 per month over the course of a month. I think we’re all guilty of “throwing away” $9.50 every month on a bottle of pop or water, a cup of coffee - you get the picture. I think it’s an affordable option for the BV School District and its taxpayers considering what the $23 million includes.
October 17th, 2007 at 10:44 am
In my No. 4 posting, I meant to say, “That calculates to $9.50 per month over the course of a year.”
October 17th, 2007 at 1:30 pm
I agree we need this and I also like the activity center.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:49 pm
I believe we need the school end of things. The activity center is something we do not need to borrow money for. Save for it and then build it when it can be afforded. That $9.50 a month isn’t just for year City Surveyor, it is for many years to come. And in a couple of years it will be another $9.50 a month, and next year it will be $20 a month to pay for the new ambulance. Things need to be thought over a little more in this community. I think we better start watching the checkbook a little bit closer. I agree that we need to support more facilities for our sports teams, but what we have works for now. The school district should start planning for those projects and save the money to pay for them. That plan seemed to work good for the performing arts center. We should not be reckless in our spending for the school system, and I believe one of our school board members hit the nail on the head when she said, “Do we really need 3 gyms?”.
October 17th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
To City Surveyor #4: thanks for the info on the amount of the tax increase. I agree it is nominal in the grand scheme of things.
October 17th, 2007 at 3:17 pm
I think we do need three gyms.Right now whenever there is a doubleheader game of any sort, some of the teams have to use bleachers for their locker rooms. Mr Marso at one of the public forums said that out of all the AA schools, Brandon is the least accomdating for visting teams. And like one person said, have you ever been to a home basketball game? Its standing room only. We need to make sure everyone that wants to come cheer on the Lynx is able to!! I think in a “perfect” world, we would be able to wait and pay for it in cash, but at the rate this town is going I don’t believe we can wait much longer!!
October 17th, 2007 at 3:46 pm
Rob, for your information, the indoor activity center was also considered at the same time the Peforming Arts Center was proposed. So, this need has been a long time coming - now it’s just on a larger scale. I do agree the bond will be paid back over a number of years - 20 to be exact. You will also soon discover this district - and school districts across the U.S. - will be forced to make such in order improvements in future years to be compliant with Title IX regulations. Our two locker rooms at the high school are no longer going to “cut it.” Athletic Director Randy Marso could certainly enlighten you on this. I think it’s more wise to address this now rather than have it forced on us in the very near future.
October 18th, 2007 at 10:08 am
Thanks for the information City Surveyor. We as a community just need to watch the spending, because not all the families can afford a tax increase every 3-5 years. Sure $119 over the course of a year is not that much, but everything adds up. Somethings can be scaled back when construction is done. Not so fancy on somethings that just need to be functional. Lets just watch what we do so the community moves forward and not backward.
October 18th, 2007 at 10:15 am
My house is worth more than $100,000, so my tax increase might be about $10 per month. I could give up three lattes a month for the school. Would I give up three lattes a month for the next 240 months (20 years) though? I’ll have to give that some thought.
I’m not saying I’m for the proposal or against it. I’m just saying I’m trying to consider all aspects.
October 18th, 2007 at 11:40 am
I agree with Rob. It isn’t that our taxes are going to just go up for this particular project. There are other things to consider; other school
expenses, not to mention city and county. Please correct me it I am wrong..
This by itself is a wonderful proposal, which I have been following. There are things that we do need for the school. I do feel that the additions to the high school and an elementary school are important, as are the updates to VE, but let’s not go overboard on the activities center. We definitely need more seating for games, etc. But, we need to watch our spending in this regard also. I like the activities center proposal, but maybe scaled down somewhat.
Don’t get me wrong, I am not anti-growth and I want the best for the kids
Just my thoughts…
October 18th, 2007 at 2:55 pm
A couple of thoughts regarding the additions proposed.
1. Yes, we need to add classrooms to the high school. It is very crowded and only is going to get worse.
2. Yes, add a new elementary school. The SW part of the BV school district is definately the correct choice.
3. Not so sure on the “community center.” It would be fabulous to have more seating for games but I question why they are trying to sell it as a “community center” versus what it reallly is - additional gyms, add’n. seating for games, locker rooms, and a couple of meeting rooms. I believe we just got done spending $$$ for additional gyms, locker rooms, etc. at the middle school. I of course realize we did not gain additional seating for the vasity sport programs. Possibly better long term planning could have been done with those $$$$ to use those $$$$ in conjunction with the “community center” project.
A true “community center” would be a multi-use facility with exercise equipment, walking track, gyms, rooms, etc. for the ENTIRE community to use. Much like Watertown and Yankton have on their high schools. The YMCA needs to be involved with this addition just as they are in Watertown & Yankton. It may be better received by ALL BV residents if everyone feels they could use the facility. Additional $$$ could be made by charging monthly useage fees (for the workout portion).
4. Regarding the cost. The quoted cost of $114 per $100,000 home valuation sounds OK - until you figure out that most homes in Brandon are valued much higher than $100,000. Also, not figured in the $114 are the operating costs of all of this. An entirely new elementary school will also mean add’n teachers, maintenance costs, etc. Are we going to need add’n teachers at the high school also? How about the operational costs of the “community center?” Does anyone have numbers for those costs??? I am guessing the additional costs may double the $114 per $100,000 home valuation. If you own a $200,000 home, probably plan on an additional $400 a year in taxes.
Growth is always a bit painful but it can be a positive thing. We just need to remember to plan ahead, plan carefully, and work together.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:05 pm
One thing that no one has brought up is the effect of growth. The projected tax increase is based on the current value of all properties in the BV school district. As the city and surrounding area grows there will be more properties to divide the fixed amount of $23 million by. That means the most your taxes will go up is during the first year. Brandon has added 90-100 new homes each year. That will help all of us. Also, having a facility such as this will help ensure that growth.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:26 pm
Great points #15.
I also agree with the concept mentioned in some other posts above to save $$$$ and build the “community center” with cash while building the other portions of the plan now.
Is there anyway the school district plan can be broken down to individual pieces to vote on? For example:
1. New elementary school
2. Addition to HS
3. Other Improvements
4. Community Center
It would be disheartening to see the entire plan be voted down just because a portion of it seems too extravagant.
October 18th, 2007 at 3:45 pm
So Dr. Lomax, if we keep adding these additional 90-100 houses and plan with our heads we should be able to lower our taxes? Sure sounds like what you are saying makes sense to me. Build it and they will come? Sounds and looks good on paper. I am just thinking of the future for my family. And I have seen this town grow the past 25 years, believe me it is not gonna slow down. The taxes are not going down either, EVER. Once one project is done another one will be found by the leaders of the community, it is and has been the way of the community. I would just ask that everyone take note on the amount of tax dollars being spent. A lot of people in this town are average wage earners and the increase in taxes every few years are going to effect them for a long time. Using cost effective building will in the long run be good for all the residents, not just the ones with the big checkbooks.
October 18th, 2007 at 5:40 pm
Just for clarification, the school is not building a ‘Community Center’. It is building a Activities Center that will also benefit the community. The project is not being ’sold as community center’ as stated in #14 post. See Mr. Pappone’s article.
http://brandonvalleysuperintendent.blogspot.com/2007/10/indoor-activity-center-community.html
The proposed activity center is not extravagant. It will get BV a comparable facility to other AA schools.
I disagree with the suggestion that the school board save money for this activity center and ‘pay cash’. I’ve heard complaints about the PAC and Bus Barn being built without community input. Also, I don’t think the School Board should be making a $6million decision about a specific building project. That should be left to the voters.
October 18th, 2007 at 7:43 pm
The science labs are for the people that think sports are over emphasized, the activity center is for people that think we need to have better sports facilities, the Valley Spring fixes are to bring the Valley Spring residents on board and the new elementary school is needed. If you separated them into parts, none of them would pass. Compromise agreements are never perfect, but I think this is as good as we will get. I’m voting for it.
October 19th, 2007 at 8:03 am
Debate like this is healthy for the community. We have an obligation to provide good schools, yet have the right to question the reasonableness of the proposal. Tax increases affect everyone and some can afford it more than others. It’s too bad we can’t generate the same type of debate every time the county commissioners propose an opt-out whenever they get a whim to build something (like the welfare building or the courthouse addition). Those opt-outs raise our taxes too.
October 19th, 2007 at 8:41 am
i have seen the plans for the new additions and “activity center”. I use quotes becuase i think we should call it what it is a gymnasium, period. None of these plans are extravagent, they are necessary. In the interest of full disclosure, one could honestly say the gym portion is a bit more than absolutley necessary right now, but it will BE NECESSARY in the not too distant future. So the choice over that part is, spend the 6 mill for it now, or wait till its necessary (which it will be in no more than 5 years) and be faced with having to spend 10 mill, or more, to get it done. I say its a no-brainer. Brandon is seeing the growth it is in a large part becuase of the schools. That’s exactly why we chose it 4 years ago. Face it, this community and its future is tied directly to the school. Vote yes!
October 19th, 2007 at 2:14 pm
I graduated from brandon in 1997, back then we needed more space for indoor games. I don’t like the idea of my taxes going up, but sometimes you have to take the good with the bad. This is for the kids not for us. I would gladly spend an extra $10.00 a month on the future of my kids.
I chose to live in brandon because of the school system. and I see by the growth of Brandon that I made the right decision
October 28th, 2007 at 11:15 am
Something that has not been taken into consideration is the students’ perspectives. Were there any students present at the forums? Has anyone asked them what they think about these expansions/improvements? I know they won’t have to pay for them, but they will be using them 175 days per year, unlike most of the parents. I graduated last year, and I know from personal experience that we need this new activities center, along with all the other parts.
October 29th, 2007 at 12:08 am
To #23 formerbvhs student: If you end up living in Brandon any time in the next 20 years, and if the bond passes in December, you will indeed end up helping pay for the project. Because if it passes, property tax money will go to pay for it for the next 20 years.
October 31st, 2007 at 1:32 pm
I question the whole proposition. Look at the newspapers, listen to the news. The economy, especially housing, is slowing down tremendously. Just because it hasn’t been felt in the midwest it is coming. The district gained 100 students this year, 3%. They have gained 3% for as long as I can remember. 100 students for 12 grades, divided by the grade levels. That is not 3 to 4 classrooms as the superintendent stated, that is one or 2 per classroom. I remember when kids were bussed to Valley Springs to fill up that school. That kept the cost per pupil there reasonable. With open enrollment and now virtual high school we may not grow at 3%.
November 1st, 2007 at 11:13 am
Need to really think people, we are going to get hit with tax increases from the city, the wish list would be something like new city hall, more increases for police. One thing that is coming is a fire district, full time firemen!~!!!!!!!!!!!!
November 1st, 2007 at 3:40 pm
Always Listening - Brandon is not going to be part of the fire district - they declined well over a year ago, so no new tax there. In a growing community, there are always going to be new needs - that’s just how it is. Gas, groceries, taxes, clothing, housing - the cost for all continue to rise. But we must remember, as we add an average of 100 new homes each year in Brandon, these new homeowners will also help to foot the bill for our city needs. Yes, this is America, but it’s not free to live here.
November 1st, 2007 at 5:11 pm
I remember when my kids were in school. The amount I paid in real estate taxes each year covered only a small percentage of what the school district spent to educate my two kids. My kids have been out of high school for 10 years now, and I’m not sure that I’ve even yet paid as much in taxes as the district spent on my two kids during their 13 years in school.
Residential property taxes don’t really help that much in covering school district costs, unless you factor in the years people continue to pay taxes after their kids are out of school.
Commercial and industrial property taxes are the ones that really fuel the school coffers.
November 11th, 2007 at 11:16 pm
The principal just told the whole high school about this during lunch on Friday. I think it is a great idea. Even though I wont be here when it is completed we DO need more room. Basketball is one of our greatest strengths but I stopped going to the games because I dont like to pay 3 dollars to stand on the side because I cant find a spot.
November 16th, 2007 at 12:14 pm
ALL GOOD POINTS FOR AND AGAINST; A LITTLE INFO TO PASS ON - WE HAVE BEEN VERY FORTUNATE IN THIS MARKET AREA TO HAVE CONTINUED GROWTH IN POPULATION AND HOUSING STARTS, BOTH SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY DWELLINGS.. BUT, THINGS WILL BE COMING TO A HALT WITH HOUSING STARTS DOWN SHARPLY NATIONWIDE AND OUR MARKET AREA IS NEXT..SO DON’T EXPECT GROWTH IN HOUSING HERE TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF TAX YOU HAVE TO PAY THE NEXT 20 YEARS..
ONE SIDELINE COMMENT: I KNOW THE COMMUNITY MIGHT HAVE BEEN MISLED ABOUT NO NEW TAXES FOR AN EMERGENCY CARE PROVIDER, BUT I BELIEVE NOW IS THE TIME TO SPEND A LITTLE ON GETTING THIS ISSUE RESOLVED AND PUT TO BED SO THE COMMUNITY OF BRANDON CAN HAVE QUICK EMERGENCY RESPONSE.. SOUNDS LIKE ALOT OF PEOPLE AREN’T AFFRAID OF SPENDING A FEW DOLLARS..