To the Editor:

I am writing about Bethlehem Central School District’s proposed lease-purchase agreement between the District and the Albany County Sheriff Department for our Clarksville Elementary School...You can find the proposed agreement and the District administration's presentations here:  http://www.bethlehemschools.org/recap-march-8-community-conversation/

I believe that selling the Clarksville Elementary School is short-sighted and a waste of taxpayer dollars, especially given the visible growth within our district, the inaccurate nature of enrollment projections, the debt incurred renovating the school in 2008-09 and the district’s recent multi-million budget surpluses.  I would prefer the district extend the Albany County Sheriff’s lease and sell/give the sheriff two of the 12.4 acres upon which the school sits for him to build his facility (e.g., at the end of Olive Street). That way, all parties benefit and the sheriff can remain in this strategic area.

I hope that district residents don’t allow this board to constrain future school boards’ ability to manage growth in our elementary schools — after all, quality early childhood education is critical for academic success which is what we all want for our children.

Here are my concerns:

— Enrollment: This district is using a "declining enrollment" narrative to justify the sale of Clarksville Elementary School even though it knows that the enrollment projections are inaccurate and ignore external factors such as current/proposed residential growth. The Capital District Regional Planning Commission pointed this out in its December 2016 report, along with an expected more than 700 anticipated residential units planned for the district (http://www.bethlehemschools.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/12/2016-17-Bethlehem-Projections-Final.pdf ).

The basic tenet of the Webster 1970 enrollment projection model is that future enrollment must look like past enrollment. Therefore, the model yields inaccurate results when enrollment isn't stable. Also, the authors of the model warn that it shouldn't be used to project more than five years out into the future

I'm disappointed by the district's willingness to rely on the same poor enrollment projection model that they used to justify building Eagle Elementary School — then, a projected enrollment increase despite a Bethlehem residential development moratorium.  At the June 7 board meeting, a former State Education Department employee who used these same models to project enrollment trends for the department indicated that the results were no better than "guesses."  These models shouldn't be used for big costly decisions like selling a school building;

— Money: We still owe almost $2 million in debt service on the Clarksville school building from a $4 million capital improvement project at Clarksville Elementary School. The proposed agreement extends the lease for three years, allowing the sheriff to build a garage and modify the interior space, then transfers the deed for $325,000 via lease payments and the costs of "in-kind" patrols of the high school just after graduation.

According to the State Education Department, the "sale" of the building will decrease future state building aid an undetermined amount. It seems to me that we spent a lot of money improving and expanding Clarksville just to sell it at a loss; and

— Limited flexibility will cost us: This agreement doesn't give our district any option for review of our enrollment situation after the lease ends in three years, before the school property transfers to the sheriff.  As a result, the district will have limited options when elementary school boundaries are redrawn, which is soon because Slingerlands and Elsmere Elementary Schools are at/near capacity now and "flex zones" in these areas may be implemented

There are only six classrooms left in the entire district and most of our elementary schools have little physical room for expansion.  This may be an unsustainable situation. But, at the March 8 community forum, the school superintendent indicated that, in the case of future growth beyond our capacities, the district would prefer to build elsewhere instead of using the eleven classrooms at Clarksville Elementary School. (I find this disrespectful to all of the taxpayers, especially those in the New Scotland and in the hamlet of Clarksville.).

The district also says the school building needs work to re-open and would cost $800,000 per year to operate as a fully-staffed elementary school.  According to the district's own maintenance department, it does most of most work "in-house" and I have learned that this district anticipates $2 million leftover in this year's school budget (we had $5-million extra for the previous two budget cycles — they put this money into the "capital reserve" fund so they aren't in violation of SED law, as BCSD was in 2010, for having too much money in an "unrestricted" reserve fund).

Therefore, the district has the resources to include Clarksville among the elementary schools in the near future and there is no reason we can't use all our school buildings creatively to create language/math labs, art rooms, learning spaces for children with anxiety, pre-schools, etc.

BCSD residents should know that the district didn't simply close Clarksville Elementary School in 2010 because of declining enrollment. The school was closed because we built a school we didn't need (Eagle) based on inaccurate enrollment projection models and to fill a self-created budget gap (a first-ever predetermined tax levy of 2 percent set in August of that year!) for which we didn't use the (illegal) excess money in our "unrestricted reserve fund" to close.

Currently, most of the suburban school districts are expanding elementary capacity due to suburban growth; growth is happening in our towns too — look around you. BCSD is a high-performing school district that attracts families. We should make sure we have capacity without wasting taxpayer dollars.

I certainly agree that no one wants an empty school building in the hamlet of Clarksville but there are children in the hamlet and its surrounding rural area. The district hasn't conducted a census in years and ZIP codes, as a surrogate, do not match school zones (e.g., there are four ZIP codes in the former Clarksville zone).

Clarksville Elementary sits on 12.4 acres and is listed on the National Registry of Historic Sites as the first public school building designed for handicap accessibility and environmental considerations — the novel building design inspired future school buildings everywhere. The murals and art inside the building are unique and not found within our other elementary schools. We should be demonstrating pride for the Clarksville Elementary School.

Please get involved, BCSD taxpayers, and don't let the district waste your tax dollars.  

Judy Abbott

New Scotland

Corrected on June 26, 2017: This letter originally located Judy Abbott in Clarksville. She actually lives outside of the hamlet of Clarksville, still in the town of New Scotland and in the Bethlehem Central School District, but in the hamlet of Unionville.