I urge all citizens to vote No on the bond referendums. Look at Lake braddock high school for example. During renovations, they relocated the bathrooms and classrooms, as opposed to simply renovating the areas themselves. As someone in the construction industry, I can tell you that things will get extremely pricey once you start relocating things.

Why saddle future taxpayers with these unnecessary burdens? The money isn't even going to improve the quality of education. The money goes into local contractors pockets.

The school administration is planning to build another Taj Mahal for their administrative offices and with Superintendent Jack Dale hiring himself 17 czars at huge salaries the school system needs this money. Only a 1/4th of familities in this county have children in school, but almost half of the budget goes to the school system.

KIds are in trailers, but don't worry, every kid will be getting a Kindle because we are going to be the first county in the nation to do away with text books. Ask the school board if they've tested this idea and they have proof that it will work.

Please, please, please vote out the incumbent school board!!! And vote NO on this bond.

Shouldn't people with kids pay for most of this? I'm all for kicking in some $$ to keep the little miscreants off the street, but I'm sick of paying for this gold-plated school system.

I wouldn't vote yes to bond the FFX County School Board out of jail let alone a 250 million bond. I plan to vote against every incumbent in this election. Tired of the same old, same old song and dance from Fairfax County.

The school system and therefore jobs and property values could be at risk if the current school board's philosophy of no audits, no oversight, and ceding all spending authority to the superintendent remains in place-- even if one Democrat is replaced with another Democrat, things will not improve. Tina Hone is a strong minded Democrat who believes the school system should be for the students not an employment agency for political friends or a funnel for taxpayer money to contractor friends of Sharon Bulova. She quit after one term recognizing that the entire board and it's failed policies need to be changed. Don't get mad-vote Republican as every Republican candidate, either district or at-large-is running on accountability, fiscal discipline and responsiveness to parents, teachers and students. Put the money in the classroom, not in the front office and definitely not another granite counter-top luxury building for an expanded administration.

There is a reason that Fairfax County has one of the top rated school systems, and it’s not because we fail to improve infrastructure and technology when needed. I am concerned when people refer to our school kids as “miscreants” and think only that people with children should pay for school improvements. The education of our children is the responsibility of all of us and it leads to a stronger and more competitive America. Although it is sometimes hard to accept the large amounts of money needed in bonds, bonding has always been a successful, long-term way to make capital improvements. And at times like these, when interest rates are low, it is the best time for the County to borrow and lock in good bond rates.

Vote No on the Bond to support our students, teachers, property values and county. This bond is a white elephant. TJ and Langley HIgh School (as well as many schools throughout the world) continue to show us that the amount of money poured into a school building does not correlate with a quality education or increased student performance. Support education and vote NO.

Making a point about how teachers help students without a $250 million bond for buildings and why TJ isn't your school. Kudos to another great teacher.

http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/2011-10/tjov-tji102111.php

Thomas Jefferson High School for Science and Technology is the first post-secondary school to subscribe to JoVE, the Journal of Visualized Experiments.
Though JoVE, the first and only academic video journal indexed in PubMed and MEDLINE, has video articles showing basic experimental procedures, the majority of the content showcases cutting edge technology out of Ivy League schools -- not the level of research one would usually associate with the high school curriculum.
"We're just not your typical high school," explains Dr. Andrea Cobb, Lab Director at Jefferson, listing off some of their equipment, "we have a DNA sequencer, mammalian cell culture facilities, we just got environmental growth culture facilities. We have a lot of toys. Stuff I didn't even have when I was in grad school."
Dr. Cobb, who teaches both biotechnology and microbiology at Jefferson, requested a subscription to JoVE because she thinks it will help her students learn to use the schools advanced equipment. "This way they can see a procedure and practice it over and over again," she said....

Vote for education. Vote NO on the Bond.

The bond is a fait accompli. All they have to do is get it on the ballot. Not too shabby when you want money, eh? Who is going to vote against education, right? Pay now, worry about it later.

I sense a lot of anger from these comments regarding the school board. Thats what we have elections for and there is a clear message that change is coming to the School Board with half the incumbents not seeking re election. DO NOT throw out the baby with the bath water and VOTE YES for the school bond for the following reason
1) With commercial construction at an all time low the prices for the work proposed is also at historically low numbers. Everything is on sale right now when it comes to commercial construction. Take advantage of that

2) Bond debt for AAA rated Fairfax county is also at an all time low. Why not borrow for 30 years at historically low interest rate. How many people are locking in their mortgages with these low rates? the county should do the same

3) This construction activity will create both jobs and infrastructure in our communities and shore up our home values with good modern facilities. Whoever said the schools are "gold plated" only needs to go look at how much Loudoun County spends per student on schools to see how hard Fairfax School Staff work to pinch a penny.

thanks for reading VOTE YES for the bonds
Len Forkas

It will pass by at least 80%. It is a done deal. All the pleas to vote yes or no are futile. Get a bond on the ballot and it passes. Nice system.

Mike is right. You could put a bond on the ballot to pay for ballet lessons for death row murderers and it would pass as long as the voters saw the word "bond" on the ballot. Has a bond vote ever failed? Not that I recall.

Thank you for this article which explains the separate relationships between the numerous school projects to a bond appearing on a ballot AND the less understood limitation of the annual spending ceiling of $155M to backloged school projects. As is pointed out, the completion of projects becomes backlogged with this annual spending cap. Another aspect that deserves mention is that after a bond is approved, but before the project reaches the top of the queue, IF new, unforeseen school additions are required, the priority for school renovations is pushed later and later.

Although I appreciate and agree that the $155M annual spending limit is set for the best long term interest of the County's AAA bond rating, I would like to see approval of a series of annual "catch up" waivers in the spending limitation. I believe this is important to approve to keep the bonding system in balance with a growing project backlog list, could be advertised and discussed with the bonding community as an infrequent action to permit the County to better maintain its overall $6.2B asset investment in our schools, is a good investment considering current lower cost of construction work and would serve the community with a local economic stimulus for these "shovel ready" projects.

When elected to the school board, this topic would lead my list for discussions between the Board of Supervisors and the School Board.

John Wittman
Candidate for School Board/ Springfield District

I'll vote yes on the school bond as soon as two things happen:

1. FCPS HONESTLY discloses how the money has been spent in the past years. I FOIADed this data over a year ago and never got an answer on all the funds.

2. FCPS reopens Clifton and admits they lied to the public about all the reasons for closing it and the fact that they would "save" money. Lies, lies and lies.

I do not trust this school system- they are habitual liars when it comes to the CIP.

Why are we paying for additions on elem schools where the Clifton kids went when they assured us they were saving money?

Why did SOCO MS get built ahead of other needed renovations especially when neighboring schools can easily handle the overflow. A waste of $35 million bucks.

Look no further than the CIP for more lies. They tell us they "saved" money on Edison HS. No they didn't. The 2005 bond referendum listed it as $63 million and it cost $78 million-that is a $15 million shortfall-not savings. So why lie and say they saved $8.6 million?

Taxpayers should not approve another penny until they disclose to the public actual expenditures going back 10 years.

Utter nonsense. The schools in MD are just as diverse, if not more so, than in VA. Plus, Maryland has Baltimore -- unlike DC which is its own separate cesspool of educational dysfunction.

Regardless, we must teach in English first -- other languages can be be paid for by someone but the taxpayer. We moved here not speaking English and we adapted to the US -- and we are all sick and tired of having to do it the other way around.

Bottom line --- the bond is not going to address any of your social issues -- the schools can barely teach let alone address the myriad of other non-education issues you use to misrepresent the issue of the bond.

VOTE NO ON THE BOND!

PS -- since the schools are majority funded by the taxpayers, the BoS should have exclusive control over them It's ironic (and pathetic) that the BoS has spent years and millions of dollars piddling with the water rates and policies of independent towns and cities, but lets this monster called the school system do what it wants?

Wake up BoS and focus on what's important! If for no other reason, do it so that we can get rid of the hideous, illegal "campaign" signs everywhere and allow informed citizens to vote for what are none other than politicians who are prohibited to affiliate with parties. What idiot came up with that rule?

Take advantage of historically-low interest rates and construction costs and vote YES for the school bond. It's fiscally irresponsible to push these capital improvements off to a more expensive point in the future when the schools are falling down around the children and failing to meet the requirements of the changing demographics. Ignore the no-government anarchists above and vote YES.

Don't be mislead by those promoting the school bond. First of all, it won't matter one bit if the bond is voted down because there is a 3-4 year backlog in borrowing anyways. Fairfax hasn't even borrowed the funds from the 2009 bond deal yet-so a no vote will have no negative impact on funding.

And this idea of accelerating construction to take advantage of low construction costs. Gee, I wonder what will happen to prices if FCPS goes out and increases spending on construction-anyone take ECON 101? Just ask the HVAC guys what happened to prices when the federal govt offered tax breaks on new HVAC-everyone replaced their units and prices went up offsetting the tax break!

What a no vote will accomplish is that it sends a clear message to FCPS that we are tired of being lied to about where the money will be spent and the distorted priorities of projects. SOCO MS should never have been built ahead of West Springfield HS renovations. We really don't need the school since Lee, Hayfield and Mt Vernon could have taken in the overflow of kids. They screwed up by overenrolling SOCO on day one. Credit Bradsher and Storck with that $35 million mistake. Even the head of facilities, Tistadt insisted on an addition to the high school rather than a new school.

What about the $50 million bus lot on the last referendum? Anyone? $50 million to park our buses when schools are waiting 45 years for renovations.

I support HONEST government-if that makes me an anarchist then so be it.

The matter is simple to me. Is this bond money to be used to make an emergency fix? No. Will an emergency likely occur if the bond is voted down? Again, no. That being the case, let FCPS save (that is, put money in a savings account) to pay for the items listed on the bond.

Vote NO to the FCPS bond.

Let's be clear on this--- FCPS gets its operational funding (about 72%) from the Board of Supervisors and about 17% of operational funding from the state. Money to maintain FCPS's facility infrastructure comes from bonding. If "Mr. Convict", nice name by the way (poster above), wants the system to use its own money then the system would have to have a means to acquire funding/revenue. Mr. Convict's statement is therefore suggesting FCPS gain taxing authority. I do not believe the greater Constituency would approve of this, and I would be in agreement with them!

As for Ms. Otersen's remark, well I guess she just overlooked those 26 trailers at South County when she was there for her daughter's Field Hockey game several weeks ago. Hard to miss them since they take up much of the parking area. The building was initially built for 1900 students Ms. Otersen, it currently has about 2800. You do the math.

Before posting one may want to know a bit about the issues and less about rhetoric.

Northern Virginia loves its bond issuances; this is sure to pass, despite my "NO" vote. If I saw any improvement in school physical plant in the years I've lived here, I'd consider it, but bond issues pass every couple of years, and all they do is make money for those who buy into the bonds -- money that's made on taxpayer backs.

Let's put into perspective how the school bord has spent their 2.2 billion dollar annual budget on their own facilities, and contrast that with the schools we have. See a little difference and disparity here? They are planning on building a second Gatehouse building, aka the Fairfax Taj Mahal. I don't know about you, but I ask myself how come the SB and it's administrative staff has such plush office space while our children are in trailers! Think good and hard before you vote November 8!

http://redapplemom.wordpress.com/2011/10/28/fcps-pictures-you-must-see-to-believe/

Laptops and video-teleconferencing functions, even on every desk, could serve for many of the meetings at a much lower cost than new buildings. Rehab of existing office space, investment in shared communications systems, and efficient databased record-keeping would go a long way toward solving the administrative issues (not really "problems") Ms. Bradsher cites. Very little in administration actually goes to "improve the delivery of education."

Ms. Bradsher: the one here that sounds quite bitter and defensive is you. You sound bitter about the 40 to 50 hours of weekly work, as well S the small salary you ate paid for that work. Are you suggesting another salary increase for the SB members while teachers were frozen for 2 years? Perhaps that's where you are going with your comments. Don't forget you are, or should be, a public official serving the taxpayers that elect you and pay your salary, as meager as you might think it is. As your employer, we have every right to disagree with your chosen course of action as a Board. If you want to qualify it as bitterness, so be it. Don't forget what your place is, as voters will have a loud and clear say in less than 2 weeks what we think about the current course action and Its execution

Forgive the misspellings, as my response was typed on my iPhone, and missed a couple of words too. I'm sure I did get my point across, though.

I must respond to this quote from Ms. Bradsher:
"Are you saying that those people who work to provide instructional services, research the latest pedigogy, handle financial services, maintain and serach for human capital to operate a 175,000+ student school system do not deserve office space?"

In my opinion this is what is wrong with FCPS and its School Board. No one is saying that staff doesn't deserve office space, but I would like to remind Ms. Bradsher that the real function of FCPS is in the SCHOOLS with the students and teachers. Why do administrators and staff get plush offices when students and teachers are put into overcrowded classrooms? It is a sad case of misplaced priorities shown by our School Board.

We read a lot about "needs based" staffing. It seems to me that our School board is using mixed up formula when the greatest "need" seems to be for Staff.
I fear the problem with FCPS is that we are paying far too many people to "research the latest pedagogy" and then come up with programs to justify their existence rather than to support the teachers and students in the SCHOOLS.

And, I might remind Ms. Bradsher that she just orchestrated the closure of a school that led to students being shipped long distances to trailers and causing additional "traffic congestion" on the roads.

To Ms. Keith,
I did vote to close Clifton ES and I did so because it did not make sense to keep a school with a diminishing population open in a low density area, with a high cost of a renovation when there were schools close by for most of those students to attend. So if you want to look for answers to children in trailors then yes, look at the closing of certain schools and the decisions on capital facilities and note we are fast tracking funding to specific capacity needs due to these decisions.

Tough decisions are not a walk in the park but are at times fiscally necessary for the greater good. So what do you want? Do you want elected officials who say yes to everyone, cater to special interests and do nothing becuase of no funding or do you want elected officials who study the needs, weigh the issues and do what is prudent for the greater good with the availble funding? We have a lot of competing needs, so which ones are the most urgent? Tell me?

The function on the School Board is to govern and steer, not to manage daily operations. If you want strong schools it starts with all of us including central office staff, teachers, students, parents and residents. Finally, I have seen plush offices and sorry to disappoint but most of the staff at gatehouse work in cubicle type arrangements. Still no response on the consolidation of school offices which would provide efficiencies and save money....

Mr. Saltus,
My apologies if I sounded bitter. Rather my point was that only those who are wealthy or have disposable income will run for such an office due to the time it takes and the responsibilities that are required. It is a great opportunity and I have enjoyed working for and with constituents however with 2 children soon to be in college and grad school, it is not feasible to hold such an office for those of us who are middle class.

It has been my pleasure to serve as a School Board member. I am not suggesting a raise only pointing out that a small percentage or small pool of people can afford to run for this office. Please know I took the oath for this office very seriously.

It looks like Liz Bradsher is determined to defend bad policy decisions until the bitter end. This practice by FCPS that they never do any wrong is becoming downright annoying. Yes, of course I noticed the trailers at SOCO-I noticed them when the school first opened- as did you. Maybe you and Dan Storck should have said no to a few families and kept them at Lee and Hayfield or sent some families to Mt Vernon and then the school wouldn't be so overcrowded costing us $35 million smackers.

Let's all remember to thank The BOS for stopping the funding for Gatehouse II which the SB tried to ram thru claiming it would save millions. When pressed for details on their savings model, FCPS was unable to come up with the details, so the whole proposal was plain bunk. The taxpayers were promised a follow-up to all the oodles of savings from Gatehouse I and never got that either-I guess the numbers didn't look so hot. Clifton was a disaster-stupid decision and maybe Ms. Bradsher would like to explain why she promised repeatedly that no renovations would be needed in the receiving schools-she might want to review the 2011 bond referendum and explain that broken promise to the taxpayer. Looking forward to November 8th for better leadership.

Right on Janet! I think all parents and taxpayers are looking forward to next Tuesday's election. It is about time our elected public officials, in the School Board AND the Board of Supervisors, properly represent us and our interests. Enough is enough!

I don't make a habit out of attacking people-however, I do attack poor decisions that elected officials make. Let's understand the distinction. Secondly, no public official should be questioned by a member of the public on an issue while they are shopping or away from the office. Everyone deserves to spend time with family and get away from their responsibilities.

I fully support raises for SB members-$25k per year is a joke given the hours that are required to do the job effectively. Although, folks know when they run for office what the salary is, so complaining about if after the fact is pointless.

The public needs an itemized accounting of the prior bond deals-let's see what these 6-7 year delays in bond approvals and construction bids are. Let's see how much of the money is spent on what should be in the operating budget-not financed over a 20 year period. When a school is renovated they receive technology upgrades-what does this mean? If schools are buying computers with 5-7 year lives with bond money with 20 year interest costs-we need to reexamine this type of financing. The more disclosure to the public, the more trust there will be.

Ugh. All this vitriol and hatemongering. This is why we can't have nice things.

ABC---
I am not anonymous, so therefore it is easy to attack people when you hide behind a pen name---but per your email I can see you are from Clifton and once again you do injustice to those reasonable people from Clifton who are tired of your vitriolic attacks.

Your accusations are personal and you do not know me or my family so please stay out of my personal business. My responses to the issues were straight forward.
I represent both those in Clifton and West Springfield, I worked with both communities and made sure they understood the seriousness nature of the issue. Are you saying I should not have communicated to West Springfield and instead I should have left them in the dark and only worked with Clifton? The decision impacted both communities and both needed to know what could take place.

I believe the Patch has become a site for bloggers to spread rumors and erroneous facts. I think AOL thought the Patch would lead to worthwhile discussion on community issues. All I read here are for the most part are anonymous attacks on those who have truly tried to make things better for students.

If I recall the issue on this thread was about the Bond.

One can't argue with irrational and bitter people and it is unfortunate that ABC you appear to be both.

Chiming in to remind everyone of Patch's Terms of Use(http://annandale.patch.com/terms) and to please stay on task and discuss the article above. While we appreciate the passionate comments expressed here, the comments are getting off-topic and leading more toward personal attacks. Please remember to voice your opinions in a respectful manner toward each other.

I have deleted two comments above made by user ABC, janet otersen, and Mr. Stu Gibson which violate our TOS. Part of Mr. Gisbon's deleted comment included a clarification on the salary of School Board members mentioned by user janet otersen, so I will re-post that part here: our salary is $20K, NOT $25K. The Board can only raise the salary for an incoming Board, and only if it votes on the change during the first six months of an election year.

ABC and janet ostersen, you are welcome to re-submit your comments. And again, I want to remind School Board members and the public to respond to each other's opinions in a respectful way. Thank you.

Patch-

I suggest you read your own TOS.

•is defamatory, abusive, obscene, profane or offensive;
•infringes or violates another party's intellectual property rights (such as music, videos, photos or other materials for which you do not have written authority from the owner of such materials to post on the Service);
•violates any party’s right of publicity or right of privacy;
•is threatening, harassing or that promotes racism, bigotry, hatred or physical harm of any kind against any group or individual;
•promotes or encourages violence;
•is inaccurate, false or misleading in any way;
•is illegal or promotes any illegal activities;
•promotes illegal or unauthorized copying of another person's copyrighted work or links to them or providing information to circumvent security measures;
•contains “masked” profanity (e.g., F@&#)

Nice of you guys to use poetic license on what is offensive. I won't waste my time here in the future.

Thank you, Sherell. Bottom line-they haven't spent the money from the last bond issue so they don't need another now. It's a racket really. They get approval for the schools, yet the problems that need fixing never seem to be resolved, and at the same time the administration grows and so the need for accommodations in that department. Meantime, classes get bigger, buildings continue to decay, and teacher, parent, and student frustration mounts. No oversight for the the last decade is the biggest problem, along with no outside audit to assess what works, what doesn't, and to track where the $2.2 billion goes every year. Democrats have dominated both the school board and the board of supervisors for nearly 20 years, while many members have spent decades following the same dictates year after year. No new ideas, policies, procedures allowed. If you are satisfied with the direction of either or both, then by all means vote for a Democrat. But then, don't complain when nothing changes. Otherwise, vote for reform, vote Republican.

FEC: Right Initials, Wrong Name
Does this group have the best interests of students?

February 22, 2011


Hunter Mill District School Board Representative Stuart Gibson FCPS

What would you call a group made up of vocal critics of Fairfax County Public Schools, driven by issues unrelated to student achievement, and led by people running for the school board?

They call themselves the Fairfax Education Coalition, or FEC. Despite their name, FEC has ignored or sidestepped every serious discussion about student achievement.

More importantly, FEC has been AWOL while Fairfax County has lost tens of millions of dollars in state and local school funding, as enrollment increased by thousands. Instead of focusing on the educational issues that matter most, FEC has become a magnet attracting every person and group with an ax to grind.

I forgot----you have to have your own column----like Gobson has----in order to use personal attacks. I guess I'll have to wait until I get my column.

Nice double standard, Patch.

Actively reading and providing a timely response to blog posts is just 1 way I help provide transparent, accountable government as an Independent candidate for Chairman of the Fairfax County Board of Supervisors.

I am glad to see other candidates for other offices beginning to participate. We are all equal, we just have different responsibilities. Participating in this community open forum demonstrates our equality and strengthens access to a local government that listens. We all have to adhere to the same rules. Thank you, Sherrell and everyone.

Remember, whether you are blue, red, green, purple or polka-dotted: Vote November 8.

A. Will Radle, Jr.
Independent Candidate for Chairman,
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors
FairfaxAdvocates@gmail.com
http://YouTube.com/WillRadle1

Sherell, I identify the content as a letter from Mr. Gibson that was published in Connection Newspapers. I recognize it because I read all of our community newspapers and specifically responded to his appalling letter.

He actually told private citizens to step aside. It grossly failed to meet the standards of an accountable public servant.

I hope this helps.

A. Will Radle, Jr.
Independent Candidate for Chairman,
Fairfax County Board of Supervisors
FairfaxAdvocates@gmail.com
http://YouTube.com/WillRadle1

I recall Mr. Gibson's column in the Reston Patch. I found his column quite offensive, but did not comment at that time. A lot of people did comment and Mr. Gibson responded to their comments in kind. I felt that Ms. Goff could have been more impartial in her responses. That is my opinion.

I know that the Patch editors are individuals with different points of view about what is acceptable. I did not see ABC's comments on here earlier, but I did see Mr. Gibson's comments. I thought they were inappropriate--but in line with the column he wrote in Reston Patch.

Completely insppropriate for an elected official, calling a parent a perennial "attacker"

Mr. Gibson also has an article in Reston Patch which recommends who to vote for He also discusses why opponents are poor choices. So much for a non-partisan School Board.

Are we going to discuss bonding?

If so I have a comment which might assist with understanding bonding. In order to keep the county's triple A bond rating FCPS can only spend $155 million a year, this includes money from the BOS for capital projects. Money is kept in an account due to the delays of construction which include, weather, permitting, plan development and public feedback required for school renovations. TJ's funding has been kept in an account because that community kept changing plans or probably better said could not agree on the plan submitted, so it took awhile to reach a community consensus regarding renvation plans.

I have been working on the CIP for over 11 years. Bonding finances renovations, new schools, additions, etc. Without it as a tool for funding resources our county's schools would be in serious decay and decline.

Liz,

Thanks for being respectful and getting us back on topic. Three questions for you, please:

1. Why did you claim...even in an editorial, that the schools receiving Clifton kids wouldn't need any additions or renovations?

2. Why were we told repeatedly that Soco HS was built with public-private funds at no cost when in fact an EDA bond was issued-debt to Fairfax taxpayers?

3. What is the bond borrowing backlog? In other words if this bond fails and one passes in 2013 will there be any impact on funding the schools waiting for funds for the next 2 years?

Thanks.

Janet,
Part 1 of my response:
Schools receiviing Clifton kids will not need renovations or additions for Clifton students. Oak View and Fairview can handle the load with minor alterations inside of both schools, not sure if Oak View needed any but I do believe some classrooms at Fairview that were used for other programs are now classrooms. As for Union Mill the addition of the Clifton students did not warrant an addition. I was there last week and met with the principal to check on all this. Every classroom at Union Mill is being used and space is being used efficiently ---but no addition. OK---now follow me here, Clifton will get an addition for the transfer of Centreville students to the school in 2013. These students live in the townhouse community which is part of Little Rocky Run. I believed and still do that this community belonged at Union Mill with the rest of the Little Rocky Run community. There removal from Centreville ES assisted with capacity there and I believe another shift for a community closer to Centreville although I need to check my notes on that to be sure.

Part 2:
South County was built with the use of a private public partnership. The partners were Clark Construction, Pulte, the Park Authority and of course FCPS. This was a complex arrangement and what made it work was the land, the land was used as a leverage, so to speak. If you look at the SC area it is surrounded by land that 10 years ago was farm fields. This land was worth a pretty penny and there was a land swap that took place with the federal government and FCPS, Pulte was invovled with this. I can go into detail in person as it is very detailed. The payoff of the school is best responded to by FCPS, I do know construction bonds sought by Clark made this deal worthwhile because the interest was less than what FCPS had anticipated and could get. The facility was to be paid in a matter of an arranged time, but my understanding was that financial conditions were very good and FCPS was able to negotiate a favorable agreement which indicated over $18 million dollars was saved (when looking at the projected expense of the facility if built through convential means) via the Private Public Partnership -- this savings was due to the innovative financing. Important to note that not one project on the CIP was ever bumped due to this new construction need. New construction trumps a renovation, South County was built without any impact to the queue, the community worked on this and it was paramount to the success of the arrangement.

Part 3:
You can review the bond backlog by looking at the queue in the Capital Improvement Program and then comparing it to what is on this year's bond. If the bond is not passed theses projects will not get funded and all projects currently unfunded and in the queue will get bumped back. There is a good report and I believe it is on line which demonstrates a 10 year capital projection and schools waiting for funding. Therefore if a school is waiting for planning funding and is on this bond for planning funds to be allocated near the end of this cycle, which is about 2013, then this school would not see planning funds till 2015 or 2016 if this bond failed and the next bond passed. That would mean they would see renovation funding, should the 2015 bond pass at 2017/2018. I high school renovation takes about 18 months to 2 years and then there is some residual work after that so the school might not be completed till 2020 or 2021---had the 2011 Bond passed, per your question the school would have been renovated by 2017 or perhaps sooner due to efficiencies in planning, renovation, etc.
Note: There is quite a list of ES renovations and of course severely needed HS renovations to include Oakton, Langley, WSHS, Falls Church and Herndon.

I get that SOCO HS was not a typical bond deal..it was an EDA bond which is still owed by taxpayers and interest is paid each year out of operating expenses as well as principal repayments. I think it is misleading to say this debt does not impact the queue. As you stated, in order for Fairfax County to maintain our AAA bond rating, we are limited on what we can borrow each year--correct? Given that the EDA bonds are lumped in with the school and county bonds, it does impact what we can borrow.

The land swap really was just that. We gave up land A, the builder swapped us land B. That does not necessarily translate into savings. Most companies I know don't give land away unless they get something of value in return.

The land swap was indeed a savings and the swap was between the Laurel Hill Site and Mason Neck, in addition, the federal government settled on the land on which SCSS was built for a nominal fee, also something the community worked on to begin the buidling. The South County took the growth in population while a portion of Mason Neck was handed over to the Bureau of Land Management.
The debt does not impact the queue because you need to remember SC was at one time on that queue, it was taken off and projects were bumped up---look at the old CIPs.

Don't be so quick to find fault, because there really is none in this. There were over 4000 kids at Hayfield, over 30 trailers, and more were coming. The school was needed and the parternship provided a timely resolved that saved money. Bottom line it saved money---

That is if for me Janet. If you want to discuss further we can meet. Just a reminder this blog is about bonding.

Once again, I will urge all voters to tell their friends and family to vote NO on the bond referendums this year.

It's unfair to saddle future residents with this enormous debt amount.

If you live in the 41st district please visit www.kanefordelegate.com for more information about my campaign.

Mike,
How do you propose then to pay for the renovations of such schools as West Springfield, Oakton, Herndon, Falls Church and Langley. These schools were built in the mid 60s, some are over crowded and need not only renovations but more rooms. What is your answer and don't say cut central office staff, that is not the panacea for capital funding.

Take a step back and look at the data being presented in this blog. When did it become reasonable to RENOVATE a school to the tune of $84 million? Has anyone driven by Edison, Woodson or Fairfax high schools in the last 5 years? These buildings are amazing architectural products. Too amazing. The FCPS process for renovating schools is over the top. These are schools, not class A office spaces. Put the necessary technology in the building, make it safe and comfortable. Make sure it won't burn to the ground or flood from a leaky roof. The standards for renovation need to be revisited. 3 years to renovate a school? And yes, there will be students graduating from Edison High School that will have spent only 1 semester out of 8 in a building that didn't look like a war zone. FCPS facilities and finance teams along side of the superintendent should be justifying the scale and scope of these projects, not Board members. Board members should be validating that an eye for fiscal prudence has been applied to projects. A request to revisit the educational specifications for facilities as adopted by the current School Board would be a great place to start. Once that happens and REASONABLE renovation scopes are put forward, perhaps then I'll vote for another bond. But not until then.

As I suspected Mr. ABC.

I did look at the scope of renovations for schools and originially suggested the scope be diminshed in some way. This issue was discussed at length among Board members and the communitys that would be impacted . It was agreed and I agreed as well that there was a fairness issue with such a subject matter.

Wodson's renovation went to bids at one of the highest and expensive times in the market. Also Woodson's renovation was scaled down due to costs--and decisions were made during the renovation to scale down certain projects. This is not the case at this time, however cost continue to remain closely reviewed. Also, FCPS is incorporating environmental innitiatives into renovation projects.

Edison was due a renwal as are the rest of the schools built in the mid 60s, to leave them and their communities with something less and not bring their classrooms up to current ed specs along with core facility needs would be short sighted and lacks a sense of equity for a community awaiting a renovation.

To Ms. Vittori,
There is no need to clarify my statement --I believe it is understood. The issue is about bonding not Clifton. I responded to Ms. Otersen in an attempt to clear up misinformation about certain matters.

I have to respectfully disagree with Ms. Bradsher that Clifton has nothing to do with the bond. Watch the Patch people block me. We were told closing Clifton would save money and that no renovations would be needed. This is incorrect. Portable classrooms and other mods were made to accommodate the transfer of 400 kids-as one would expect in such a huge shift of kids.
I am just tired of being lied to. Pimmitt Hills is another example. we were told that we would close the school and save the money (6 million) which was on the CIP and yet, last year, facilities spent $7 million renovating this closed school. Same thing with Graham Road-we shifted the renovation funds to Devonshire-which is fine-same school/community and now we are talking about turning Graham Road into a charter school. If so, won't we need to spend money on renovations?

This School Board needs to do a much better job of accounting for this money. We are talking about $150 million per year-no small amount of chump change.

I said in earlier comments the Clifton decision and others had an impact on capital funding. However I have no intention of getting into Clifton community issues. This is about bonding. Yes, the Clifton decision impacted funding for other projects as the school needed a renovation and capital funding would have needed to be allocated for this school. The renovation was unfunded.

I have no problem with school bonds - if they stay with structural and not cosmetic, i.e., a wall of windows on the stairs and other fancy work. Those items have nothing to do with the integrity of the school building at all! Assistance to move students about the building, particularly those not able to climb stairs, etc. Elevators would be very helpful. Sound enhancement for the deaf, etc.
The school buildings of old of solid brick with useful windows and addition of proper heating and cooling is enough, now.

I was wrong. It passed by only 70%!