Three Village officials outline $120 million bond plan, estimate $268 annual household impact

Three Village Central School District officials presented a proposed bond referendum for roughly $120 million to pay for roofing, paving, HVAC, science-room and auditorium upgrades, athletic facilities, and other capital needs, and said the district would seek state building aid to cover about two-thirds of the cost.

The board heard that the district would borrow to finance the projects and repay over a 15-year schedule that matches the state’s building-aid amortization, and that the local share would amount to about $3.536 million annually once fully phased in — roughly $268 per average household — while state building aid would reimburse an estimated $6.864 million of the annual debt service.

Why it matters: District leaders said many school buildings date from the 1950s–1970s, requiring concentrated work that would be more expensive if handled piecemeal. Officials framed a bond as a way to accelerate repairs and capture long-standing state building aid that reduces the local cost.

District staff described the referendum process and timeline. A bond referendum is a public vote that (1) authorizes the projects and (2) authorizes the district to borrow money to pay for them. “A bond referendum is a vote,” the presenter said, explaining the difference between large capital work and routine maintenance. The administration said capital projects are eligible for state building aid but routine maintenance is not, and that building-aid reimbursements are typically paid back over 15 years for the types of projects under discussion.

The district’s bond advisory group unanimously recommended moving forward with a referral to voters after a year-and-a-half of review and building tours, the presenter said. The administration told the board it plans to present a final, refined project list at the next meeting; the draft list discussed included roofing, sidewalks, pavement, bathroom renovations, science-room upgrades, air conditioning of large spaces (gyms and some cafeterias), security upgrades, auditorium improvements and pool mechanical repairs at Ward Melville High School.

Officials gave a phased timeline for construction and debt service. They said some work could begin the summer after state approvals but most construction would occur across the 2027–28 and 2028–29 school years, possibly wrapping into 2029–30. The administration used a working construction-cost estimate of about $120 million and an illustrative interest rate of 3.5 percent to calculate debt service. Using those assumptions, they reported a fully phased annual principal-and-interest payment of about $10.4 million, with $6.864 million reimbursed annually by state building aid and a remaining local share of roughly $3.536 million.

The administration walked the board through a multi-year phase-in: in the first year of borrowing the net levy impact could be about $1 million because building aid lags the debt payments; by year four the district would be at the full annual debt-service profile and full building-aid reimbursement. Officials also noted that older bonds will retire in coming years (a 2007 bond and the 2014 bond) and that those retirements will reduce future debt service, offsetting some of the new borrowing’s levy impact.

Board members asked for additional detail on the household impact over time and requested a 10‑year table showing the gross increase for the bond alongside scheduled reductions from maturing debt so voters can see net changes in per-household costs over time. The administration said it would produce that table.

The board discussed ballot structure. District staff described two-proposition options: a primary proposition for core capital work and a secondary proposition limited to items such as air-conditioning and an artificial-turf field; state election rules require proposition 2 to fail if proposition 1 fails. The board also discussed a recent regulation that limits occupancy of spaces at 88 degrees, a factor the administration said reinforced the urgency for cooling in gyms and other large spaces.

Next steps and timing: The administration proposed voter dates in early December or January (examples given: Tuesday, Dec. 9, or a January Tuesday no later than Jan. 27). The board was asked to consider whether to include air-conditioning and athletic turf in the same proposition or as a separate proposition. The administration said the next regular meeting will include a recommended final scope of projects and that, if the board approves, legal and state approvals would follow prior to a public vote.

Discussion vs. decision: The board received the presentation and gave direction for additional materials; no final bond authorization or referendum date was adopted at the Sept. 17 meeting. The bond advisory committee’s unanimous recommendation to pursue a referendum was noted but is not a binding voter authorization.

Clarifying details from the meeting: - Draft scope: roofing, paving/sidewalks, bathroom renovations, science classroom upgrades, security upgrades, air conditioning in large spaces (gyms and some cafeterias), auditorium and pool mechanical work at Ward Melville High School, athletic facility upgrades (including possible artificial turf). (Not all items final.) - Working cost estimate cited by staff: about $120,000,000 (committee previously had a figure near $125 million before cuts). - Building-aid ratio cited by presenters: 66% (district’s historical “hold harmless” ratio); aid would be paid over 15 years for the type of projects under discussion. - Example annual debt service (3.5% interest, $120M): ~$10,400,000; state aid portion ~$6,864,000; local share ~$3,536,000. - Estimated average household impact (fully phased): ~$268 per household per year; staff noted the $268 figure equals $22.33 per $10,000 of bond amount per household and two ways of expressing it: $268/year ≈ $22.50/month or about $0.74/day (examples provided by board members). - Phase-in illustration: Year 1 net levy increase ~ $1,000,000 (building aid lag), Year 2 net addition ~ $1.25M, later years reach full $3.536M local share; district noted bonds from 2007 and 2014 retire in coming years producing net debt reductions in 2030–2032 that will offset some of the new levy burden. - Timeline: some work could begin summer after state approval; majority in 2027–28 and 2028–29 school years; possible wrap into 2029–30.

Speakers (selected): - Mr. Carlson, staff member (presenter of bond overview) - Jason Gresky, facilities director, Three Village Central School District - Dr. Scanlon, district administrator - Jeff, board member (asked for household-impact table) - Denise Nash, public relations specialist (noted communications planning)

Authorities referenced (from discussion): - Office of Facilities Planning, New York State Education Department (process and plan approvals) - 2012 state tax‑cap legislation (tax-cap rules described by staff) - State building-aid policies and “assumed amortization” practice (referenced historically, 2002 change described)

Actions: [ {"kind":"other","motion":"Bond advisory committee unanimously recommended proceeding with a district bond referendum and staff will return with a final scope and debt‑service phase‑in table","mover":null,"second":null,"vote_record":null,"tally":null,"outcome":"no_action","notes":"Recommendation by bond advisory committee; board requested final scope and further financial breakdown before any voter authorization."} ]

Provenance: excerpt of the presentation appears beginning at the meeting transcript block starting at 1109.815 seconds and continuing through the block ending at 3286.95 seconds (topicintro and topicfinish evidence provided in the record).