FAQ'S

Thank you for your interest in our schools and the children we serve.

If you have questions , please call us or send us an e-mail. Contact the USD 377 Central Office at 913-833-5050, or E-mail: wisemans@usd377.org

Will elementary students mix with middle school and/or high school students?

• The new building will be designed to section off students according to grade level. 

• The most recent design separates students according to the following:  PreK-4, Grades 5-8 and grades 9-12. 

• Bus routes will continue to assign students according to grade level, even though all grade levels will continue to ride together.

• Elementary students will eat lunch separate from middle school students

• High school students will eat lunch separately

Why not make the middle school into a high school?

The middle school is the oldest building in the district and was not designed for 21^st century teaching and learning.  The cost to refurbish it into the type of facility considered acceptable to today’s standards would be nearly as much as building a new high school. 

What is the cost to refurbish all the buildings and why is that not the best solution?

Cost - The final estimated cost to refurbish each of the main attendance centers was approximately $12 million, which in today's dollars is right at $13 million.  This would end up being close to or more than building new, when you consider the many variables involved in continuing to provide equitable services at five different centers. 

Efficiency - As long as we continue to run building that house 60 -100 students, our district will be targeted for its inefficiencies not only locally, but on a state and national level as well.  It is very hard to justify taking money from instruction to spend on operations associated with running six attendance centers.    

Equity - One underlying theme of the feasibility study was the emphasis on providing all students with equal opportunities to resources and academic programs.  Failing to provide the most equitable solution possible would not only be unfair but irresponsible as well.  Refurbishing each center does make it possible to provide equitable access to academic programs and resources.  The drawback is we would have to increase staff at every elementary and the middle school to do so.  So, while refurbishing does address the equity issue, it does not resolve our cost inefficiencies.

What is the board planning to do with the elementary schools and middle school?

Elementary Schools - Two options being considered by the board are 1) donate to a community organization or 2) sell to an interested business or company.

Middle School - The middle school will continue being used to some extent by the district.  The gymnasiums will continue to be available for practices and community use.  The community will continue to be able to use the cafeteria and kitchen for reunions, family events and other such uses.  Additionally, the district is studying the need for a drop-out recovery center and possible virtual school.  Both of which need minimal space, but could possibly increase enrollment to the district.  We will also be looking into offering adult classes through area colleges.

Will there be staff reductions or terminations?

The Board is committed to reducing staff through attrition and has no plans to reduce staff.

Listed below are changes between the bond election held last November and the upcoming election on August 5th:

• The most obvious difference is the cost increase of nearly half a million dollars from $19.43 million to $19.89 million.

• With that increase comes two less classrooms (approximately 3000 square feet less space).

• The high school would not be remodeled using bond proceeds. Any remodeling would have to be funded through the district’s capital outlay fund.

• Taken out of the project is the plan to relocate the central office to the middle school, where the lunchroom would have been converted into office space for the district copy center, shipping and receiving, and central office personnel.  The cost was the determining factor.

Will some of our schools be closed if the bond does not pass?  

The USD #377 Board of Education has not discussed nor made plans to close any schools should the August 5^th bond referendum fail. 

Why did the cost of the bond issue go from $19.89 million to $20.39 million? 

·         The State Board of Education approved the district to proceed with a bond referendum not to exceed $19.89 million. 

·         The Notice of Bond Election publication includes a projected cost table, which adds interest from bond proceeds – estimated at $500,000 – to the project. 

·         By state statute, the debt limit is set at $19.89 million.

It has been stated that nothing has been done to improve communications. 

·         One of the four goals outlined in the district’s strategic plan is to establish public trust and confidence through open, honest communications and positive relationships. 

·         Quality communications with our parents and patrons is a critical component of this goal and providing timely detailed information about not only the bond issue, but everything that we do is very important to us. 

·         To accomplish this we use a wide array of information and media outlets, such as newsletters (going out to over 4000 mailing addresses each month), the district website, bulk email groups, site councils, public forums, monthly radio interviews, etc. 

·         This past fall the district received awards of Merit at the KASB state-wide annual convention for our School Newsletter, Annual Report and for our Back to School News Release. 

What is the justification for building a new PreK-8 school rather than refurbishing all the buildings in the district? 

After two years of study by the Facilities Committee, it was determined that:

1)      the estimated cost of over $12 million (which in today’s environment is a lot closer to $13 million) to refurbish and add rooms to each of the main attendance centers was too inefficient and did not offer as complete a solution as building a new PreK-8 attendance center;  

2)      the district would still be left with older buildings;

3)      the refurbishment option, while providing equitable facilities, did not address: the loss of valuable teaching time due to teachers traveling between buildings; excess costs for teachers, counselors, administrators, maintenance workers and technology personnel to travel daily between building and towns; excess costs for duplicated services, equipment and programs – five kitchens, five libraries, five after-school programs, five buildings requiring restoration every ten years, three playgrounds and blacktop areas to maintain, five separate parking areas to upkeep, five separate physical education/music/art programs to support; excess costs to staff five separate buildings; and

4)      by consolidating attendance centers the district would be better able to address the rising costs for fuel, energy, insurance, operations, and salaries.

What is the justification for bypassing design plans and material lists? 

·         Most public school districts do not release their architects to start designing their bond improvement projects until after the bond referendum passes. 

·         They do this because they don’t want to risk paying the architect a significant portion of his full service fee to prepare bid and construction documents, should the bond referendum not pass. 

·          A typical full service architectural/engineering fee for a new school similar to ours is 6% of the construction budget. 

·         For our district, this amounts to about $1,000,000. 

·         The design team will expend ~70% of this fee ($700,000) developing bid and construction documents. 

·         Most school districts are also concerned that their voters will think it is presumptuous to proceed with the design of the proposed bond improvements without their prior approval. 

Unified School District #377, Atchison County Community Schools
506 6th Street, Effingham, KS  66023
(913) 833-5050 - USD 377