Frequently asked questions about school bonds - 2004

Main | General | Prop. 5 | Prop. 6

Proposition 6 - Administrative and Training Facility

• A bond for a new administration building failed last year. Why is the district asking for it again?
• If we purchase an administration building, how will the approximately $1 million a year in saved rental cost be used ?
• Why is this year's administration building bond proposition $12 million less than last year?
• Where will the administration facility be located?
• How will the $30 million be used?

A bond for a new administration building failed last year. Why is the district asking for it again?

The district still has a need for a consolidated, more efficient administration building. We have support and administrative offices scattered across town, five of which are rented at a cost of $1.7 million per year out of our general operating budget. Owning a centralized facility will allow the district to spend approximately $1 million of that money on other general fund expenditures or be returned to local taxpayers, subject to School Board authorization. At the end of the 20-year life of the bond, the city will own the facility rather than having to continue to rent space. Lastly, the State's program which allows for 60 percent of the bond cost to be paid by the State will no longer be available after this year.

If we purchase an administration building, how will the approximately $1 million a year in saved rental cost be used?

The district recently made $26 million in cuts to instructional services and employee positions, including more than 160 teaching positions. The approximately $1 million a year saved by no longer renting office space could be used for general fund positions and services or returned to local taxpayers, subject to School Board authorization.

Why is this year's administration building bond proposition $12 million less than last year?

Following the rejection of last year's bond, many voters suggested that we acquire and renovate an existing building rather than build a new facility, and the district pursued that option for this year's proposal. The project was also scaled down to reduce overall cost. Area developers were asked to propose a variety of office spaces that would meet the modified requirements.

Where will the administration facility be located?

The proposal with the best price and overall value was for a renovation of the vacant Kmart store near the Northway Mall. The store would be renovated into 168,000 square feet of office space. This facility would replace the district's five rented offices and would also replace two offices which are currently located in schools and on school grounds (see maps at right). This project complies with the Anchorage comprehensive plan to develop a Northway Town Center. Should voters approve Proposition 6, the district will contract with the developer to begin renovating the building as soon as possible.

How will the $30 million be used?

The district received proposals for a centralized administration building from private industry developers through a competitive process, and the Kmart proposal had the lowest overall cost and lowest square foot cost. The $30 million bond covers more than just the renovation cost; it includes the purchase of 13.5 acres of land surrounding the building, purchase of the existing structure, and other associated costs. Of the $30 million total, $2.5 million is for project management, state-required One Percent for Art, moving costs and contingency costs. The land is valued at approximately $3.5 million. This leaves $24 million to both purchase the existing building and renovate its empty retail shell into a 168,000 square foot, functional office building. That works out to $142 per square foot.