Measure 379
Frequently Asked Questions
Commonly asked questions about the school bond
Commonly asked questions about the school bond
The best time to build a new high school and remodel the elementary school was 5 or 10 years ago, when the need was evident and construction costs were lower. If we wait, construction costs will continue to rise and the facilities will continue to deteriorate.
We have been very fortunate to receive approval for a state construction grant of $6 million that the school district will receive if the voters approve the bond measure. This reduces the cost to individual taxpayers over the life of the bond. Since this particular grant — OSCIM — is awarded by lottery, it should be considered a one-time opportunity.
Yes! The Siuslaw School District has been awarded $6.1 million for a May 2026 bond measure if approved by voters. This OSCIM (Oregon School Capital Improvement Matching) grant is awarded by lottery. The Siuslaw School District is extremely fortunate to have been awarded this grant for the third time, but the district can use the funds only if the voters approve a bond measure in the next election (May 2026). The district has not been able to use it in the past because the subsequent bond measures did not pass.
Although no prediction of inflation is completely accurate due to the many uncertainties of the economy, our architect has accounted for expected increased costs as construction proceeds.
The need will not go away. In fact, it grows with each passing year as our facilities get older. At the same time, costs will continue to increase. In 2018, a replacement high school was expected to cost about $88 million. Today we are asking for $110M or $122M depending on which version the school board selects. Construction costs have been increasing historically at about 5.5%. We must continue to ask, for the sake of our children and the future of our community — but each year we will be asking for more money to accomplish the same purpose.
The Facilities Advisory Committee looked closely at the possibility of remodeling the existing high school building, but ultimately rejected the idea. If there were just a few issues, we could address each of them. But there are many issues, and addressing any one of them still leaves us with all the others along with aging buildings. Replacement parts are not always available for aging equipment. Even an extensive remodel would still leave us with an old building core and foundation. It is not cost-effective to remodel.
Furthermore, remodeling would be highly disruptive to students. Work would have to be done one wing at a time, requiring modular buildings throughout the process and meaning constant dust and noise for multiple years.
What would happen if we asked for some of the money needed for a new high school building, and the rest of the money later? It's possible the voters would turn down a second request, leaving us with a half-built facility.
We have thought about asking for only the high school now. The school board decided that it is better to ask for elementary school funds now, along with the high school funds, for two key reasons: first, the elementary school is in serious need of safety and security improvements. And second, if the voters were to reject a second bond measure in a few years, the elementary school needs would be postponed again, putting young lives at risk.
The $40M request in 2016 was hastily put together because the OSCIM (Oregon School Capital Improvement Matching) grant became available. Little time was available for planning and for explaining the need to the voters. The measure did not pass by a slim margin.
The $108M requested in 2018 was more carefully prepared but still with insufficient time to explain the need to voters. Because the measure included requests for all three schools and some athletic facilities, there were misunderstandings about what the funds were for.
This time, the Facilities Advisory Committee met regularly for about 20 months, carefully looking at the needs and developing alternatives which are being explained to the area residents. About 25 meetings have been held with community groups to get input.
A new high school building should last 75 years if it is built well. With regard to the high school, we do not anticipate returning for additional funds in the foreseeable future. Many schools have a rolling construction bond that continually adds more years to a bond payoff period. The Siuslaw School District is fortunate to be debt-free at this time.
Behind the surface, our schools face serious challenges:
We live in the Cascadia Subduction Zone, a 700-mile fault line off the Pacific Northwest coast. Scientists estimate that there is a 37% chance of an earthquake measuring 7.1 or greater in the next 50 years. Neither the high school nor the older portion of the elementary school can withstand an earthquake of anything close to that magnitude. Is that a chance we want to take with our children?
The existing high school building cannot withstand an earthquake beyond 3.5 to 4 without significant damage. That is well below the expected magnitude of a Cascadia event and well below current building codes. Replacing or upgrading the seismic safety of the high school and elementary school buildings will give our students and staff members a much better chance of surviving a major earthquake.
The school district has an excellent track record. A bond was passed in 2000 for a new middle school building on Oak Street. It was a 20-year bond, to be paid in full by 2020. In fact, it was paid off a year early. During the 20-year period, bond rates were lowered due to increased population and therefore an increased tax base. At the present time, the school district is debt-free.
When the need arose for modular buildings, the voters were not asked to pay for them. The district paid for the modulars from an existing school district account.
Many people will be involved in overseeing projects of this magnitude, including district personnel, a trusted architect, and an oversight committee consisting of community members. Although the facilities will be expensive, there is no luxury in what's being proposed. The buildings will be functional and will provide a healthy environment in which students can learn.
The existing high school building was not constructed well. The contract went to the lowest bidder, who cut corners by using inferior construction methods and cheap/outdated equipment. It was also built before today's seismic and other construction codes were created. This time, we are budgeting for a building that will last longer.
The numbers we have provided are the "high water mark." With projected growth in the community, a larger tax base will result in reduced monthly costs over time for all taxpayers. This is what happened with the middle school bond.
Keep in mind the benefits: attracting more professionals and businesses, providing more shared cultural and recreational space, and benefits that can attract more of our graduates to return to Florence. To keep our community strong and healthy — to keep Florence a City In Motion — we need high-quality schools!
Schools nationwide are experiencing budget shortfalls due to a variety of factors. However, operating funds and building funds are entirely different. They come from different sources and cannot be used for cross-purposes. The request for a bond measure to construct new facilities is unrelated to a shortage of operating funds. In fact, in the long run, new facilities will help to reduce operating costs such as maintenance and utilities — saving taxpayer dollars.
No, the funds will be used to construct a new public high school building and to make improvements to the elementary school facilities. The charter school will not receive any of the funds from the sale of bonds.
Yes, both academically and socially. Larger, better equipped classrooms will improve the quality of teaching and learning. More natural lighting will improve educational experiences and outcomes. A new building will improve attendance. A better design will improve flow, which in turn will improve socialization and reduce travel time between classes.
Quality schools keep Florence a City In Motion. The benefits include:
By supporting the schools, you are also supporting the future of Florence, Dunes City, and the surrounding area. Our children are our future. You are helping to attract more professionals, a more vibrant community, and a broader tax base. Some new school facilities will also be beneficial to the larger community. Keeping our schools strong keeps Florence a City In Motion.
No high school is planned for the charter school, so those students will still need a high quality high school facility. At the elementary school, the proposed improvements are not about size. They relate to safety and security, quality of classrooms, and bringing the kindergarten classes into the main building.
Yes. Many cars and buses will be diverted from Oak Street to Kingwood and 27th Streets.
A lot has happened in those years:
Historically, enrollment has been cyclical. Our community is growing with new housing, and we expect enrollment to increase. Siuslaw High School was built for 350 students but has been operating in the range of 375 to 450.
Even if size was not an issue, we still have aging electrical, plumbing, and HVAC systems along with small (sometimes windowless) classrooms and lack of an auditorium — these are serious issues that affect safety and quality of education.
After listening to public input, the committee realized there was a better placement that provides:
The FEC is useful for an occasional evening event, but it's not practical for everyday school use. The only reasonable access is by busing students, which requires about 7 buses per assembly — expensive and time-consuming. A 45-minute assembly at the FEC takes at least two extra class periods.
The gym is not practical for assemblies either. Poor acoustics and uncomfortable seating make it unsatisfactory for anything other than sporting events and pep rallies.
No building lasts forever, and older buildings are far less efficient than new ones. A new building will use environmentally friendly materials when possible and will be far more energy efficient — saving on operating costs. Materials from the old building will be saved for other uses when possible. A new facility will also make better use of natural light and green space.
LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) is a great concept, but it's expensive and time-consuming to implement. We are better off making our building as environmentally friendly as possible while being fiscally responsible. The state of Oregon requires that 1.5% of the budget must be spent on environmentally-friendly construction.
Siuslaw High School has increased graduation credits from 24 to 25 — the only high school in Oregon to require more. SHS has also taken the lead in launching essential skills proficiency requirements.
Career-technical education (CTE) has been expanded. SHS offers 8 CTE programs: Auto, Welding, Construction, Health Services, Culinary, Natural Resources, Information Technology, and Entrepreneur/Small Business. New facilities will further support these programs with proper spaces.
Twenty-first century education requires facilities that suit the times. Good teachers and good facilities go together like never before:
Yes, in several important ways:
The committee was established by the school board with the requirement that more than 50% of its membership be community members not employed by the school district. Of the 18 members, only 6 were school district employees or board members. The other 12 represented various aspects of local community life.
Yes. From the time of its inception, the committee worked closely with architect Curt Wilson of Wilson Architecture in Eugene. Curt has more than 30 years of experience and has spent more than 20 years in leadership roles in the American Institute of Architects, Oregon.
We're here to help. Reach out to the Citizens for School and Community PAC# 24826 team — it's time to invest in our future.