MCCSC board adopts preliminary resolutions to permit up to $221.62 million in future borrowing for facilities

The Monroe County Community School Corporation (MCCSC) board of school trustees on a voice vote adopted two resolutions preliminarily authorizing a facilities project and related financing with maximum parameters that municipal advisers said could allow up to $221,620,000 in borrowing over the next 10 years.

The resolutions open a public process required by state law and set maximum financial terms while leaving specifics of issuance, timing and project-by-project decisions to later actions by the board and its advisers.

Board President Hennessy called the meeting to order for a determination hearing; MCCSC general counsel Mr. Bonger told trustees, “This hearing this evening is being held pursuant to Indiana code 20-26-7-37.” Superintendent Dr. Winston summarized the district’s facilities planning history and needs, saying, “Approximately 8 years ago in 02/2017, the MCCSC board and administration hired CSO architects to conduct [a] facility review … in order to understand corporation wide facilities needs.”

Baker Tilly municipal adviser Mr. Broussher reviewed the proposed financing parameters. He said the district could set a maximum borrowing amount of $221,620,000 and, after estimating issuance costs, “we have about $213,820,000 available for construction projects based upon very conservative maximum parameters.” He described an assumed interest rate of “5 and a half percent” for modelling and gave an estimated total interest cost of “$232,000,000 approximately.” He also said the board is targeting “21 and a half cents on the debt service tax rate.”

Trustees then considered two resolutions required by state law: a project resolution (2025-O-7) that establishes the total project cost and estimated tax impact when a school plans to spend more than $1,000,000 on a building, and a preliminary determination resolution (2025-O-8) that contains maximum annual payment and other financial terms. Both resolutions were moved by Ross, seconded by Tianna, and adopted by voice vote; the board recorded no objections or abstentions on the record.

Discussion at the hearing emphasized the district’s decade-long facility planning process, the goal of addressing safety, classroom, STEM, performing arts, site and athletic improvements and technology, and the intent to structure multiple bond issuances so later maturities offset current payments. Dr. Winston said the proposed program “would allow us the flexibility to renovate and improve facilities throughout the school corporation, including upgrades to safety and security systems, classrooms, pathways, STEM, performing arts, site and athletic improvements, facility upgrades, and the purchase of equipment and technology enhancements.”

The municipal adviser outlined constraints and ratios required for preliminary determination hearings, reporting a debt-to-net-assessed-value preliminary ratio of 0.24 and a total direct debt and overlapping units ratio of 5.24% as the numbers that will appear in the resolution. The adviser said issuance timing, market interest rates and fees (underwriter, counsel, trustee and other issuance costs) will determine actual proceeds available and the final tax impact.

The board did not take any further binding actions on specific projects, and no public comments were offered at the hearing. The board president closed the hearing, thanking participants and saying trustees would continue to work with administration and advisers to seek efficiencies and conserve tax dollars while meeting educational needs.