Voters have spoken again...

YES 858 37.16%

NO 1451 62.84%

This should be a clear message to the School Board... Its time to go!!!

CHECK THE FACTS:

􀀻 How has D46 managed financially since the last referendum? Since 2002, D46’s tax levies have increased 109% (a combination of increased tax rates from the 2002 referendum, increased home values, and new home construction). Since the 2002 referendum, D46 enrollment increased in total by only 5 children (less than 1%). Tax and spend needs to end!

􀀻 What will D46’s plan really cost? THERE IS NO TAX CAP ON TAXES FOR BOND AND INTEREST. Current residents will have to pay whatever is necessary to meet the payments on $25MM in bonds.

􀀻 How many children are really coming? D46’s history of projections is poor. In March, 2006, D46 projected 40 more students by September. Actual enrollment increased by 1 student. If D46 is so far off in a 6-month prediction, how can D46 project the next six years? D46 may not need a new building for 10 years.

􀀻 How much will it cost to staff and operate a new building? Unquestionably, D46 will need another referendum for a tax increase in the education fund to staff and operate the new school. School districts do not build a new building without obtaining additional money to staff, furnish, and operate the building.

􀀻 Are there other options to dealing with unknown future growth? Yes. Adding classrooms to the junior high building will accommodate 300 additional students. The junior high building was designed for such an expansion. Adding three classrooms on the elementary building could house another 72 students. Expansion does not require increasing taxes, does not risk the financial well-being of taxpayers, and does not threaten D46’s financial stability, protecting education funds that directly affect the children.

􀀻 Why should D46 wait to build a new school? It is not certain D46 needs a new school. As developments begin, D46 will have more taxpayers to share the burden of a new building if one is required.

Click here for additional FACTS

VOTE NO

The Naperville Formula: A Formula that others are questioning

Extracted from minutes of Dekalb County Regional Planning Commission—November 10, 2005

School-Age Children Population Table

Mr. Nicklas opened discussions related to the method by which the number of school age children is determined for proposed residential development, as a way of determining both school land cash contributions and impact fees. He noted that many governmental units in Northern Illinois rely on a population chart developed for the City of Naperville. This chart relates the number of children of each age group based on the number of bedrooms and type of housing. The latest version of this chart is dated 1996. Mr. Nicklas explained that not only is the data nearly 10 years old, it does not represent the population mixture that typically occurs in houses in DeKalb County.

Mr. Rasmussen agreed, noting that the Naperville formula had been developed in response to rapid growth in Naperville the 1980's, where many young families were occupying new housing. In DeKalb County, there is little new housing that is being priced to attract young families and first-time buyers. Many of the new four and five bedroom-houses are being bought by families with no school-age children due to empty-nesters moving up to larger housing.

Mr. Miller added that young families in DeKalb County are likely to buy and move into older housing stock, so that the impact to the schools may not be best estimated by evaluating the number of children in new housing.

Mr. Heiderscheidt stated that Waterman has been working with Dave Emanuelson, who indicated that a school-age children population calculator could be created that would be specific to the Village. Mr. Heiderscheidt wondered whether the other communities that make up the RPC might be interested in having Mr. Emanuelson or some other consultant create a means of estimating the impact to the schools from new growth that is more up-to-date and reflective of DeKalb County.

Following discussion, Mr. Nicklas suggested that an intern that will be working for the City of Sycamore could be asked to conduct a study of the housing that has been recently constructed and occupied in the various communities in order to generate a new school-age children multiplier. The other members agreed and requested that Mr. Nicklas explore this possibility and report back to the Commission in January of 2006.

Roundtable in Dekalb where the Naperville formula was proven to exaggerate enrollment significantly.

Extracted from Dekalb County Online. Report at a business roundtable on March 28, 2006.

The DeKalb County Economic Development Corporation hosted a Business Roundtable on March 28, 2006 at the DeKalb County Farm Bureau. Presentations were given by Dave Emanuelson of Strategic Management Alliance, Walter Magdziarz of Land Vision Inc. and Bill Nicklas, City of Sycamore. The topic was “Fiscal Impact of Residential Growth.” The event set a DCEDC record, in terms of attendance.

The panelists used local surveys and data to analyze, forecast and discuss topics such as demographics, homeowner profiles, and infrastructure needs related to new residential growth in primarily Sycamore and Cortland. It was refreshing to see actual local data being used as a source.

Magdziarz discussed trends in residential growth on a regional basis as well as an informative update on Cortland. On regional trends, according to his research on projections through 2040, there were unexpected results:
________________________________________
• 70% of new home buyers desire traditional urban density as opposed to the large single family-detached lots of suburbia.
• 57% prefer lot sizes of 7,000 sq. ft. or less. Only 15% preferred town homes.
• 54% indicated a preference of the city or older suburbs as the likely location of their next home purchase.
• 26% of home purchases are made by single females.
• 86% of the households will not have children living in them (source: Chris Nelson, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University)
________________________________________

Cortland is DeKalb County’s fastest growing community. The town has 3,502 approved residential units. More are waiting in the wings. The community is served by three different school districts (DeKalb #428, Sycamore #427 and Kaneland #302).

According to Magdziarz, Cortland will receive about $34.8 million in contributions from developers (who will then in turn pass those costs on to their customers).

Former DeKalb Park District director, Dave Emanuelson, who is now president of Strategic Management Alliance, reported on demographic studies he has performed in DeKalb County.
He cautioned governmental units, especially the education sector, against over-reliance on the “Naperville formula” for student enrollment projections. Those tables are overestimating enrollment figures and, as a result, could lead to successful challenges by developers to impact fees and contributions derived from those projections. The number of children produced by town homes is so low that Emanuelson believes they should be regarded similar to industrial development.

Bill Nicklas shared demographics from Sycamore’s recent new residential developments. Since June of 2004 the City of Sycamore has made mandatory, as a prerequisite to obtaining a final occupancy permit, a completed survey that identifies the number of school aged children living in each new home.

A total of 694 surveys (dwelling units) have been collected. Those homes have generated 427 new students (of those 134 are preschool aged). Almost 68% of the new homes built in Sycamore do not have any children living in them.

For more information:
http://www.dekalbcountyonline.com/index.php?Option=com_content&task=view&id=35&Itemid=37