Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Buckeye Project topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board approves $15 million financing package for Buckeye Elementary expansion after extended debate
Summary
After hours of discussion about site constraints, costs and studies, the Riverside Board of Education approved a resolution authorizing up to $15 million in lease-purchase financing (Certificates of Participation and TANS) to complete work at Buckeye Elementary and related renovations. The vote was 4–1; one amendment to cap new classrooms at eight failed.
The Riverside Board of Education on the night of the meeting voted to authorize up to $15,000,000 in installment-payment/lease‑purchase financing to support construction and renovations at Buckeye Elementary and related capital work.
The financing resolution—described in the meeting materials as a mix of Certificates of Participation (COPS) and tax anticipation notes (TANs)—was introduced for placement on the agenda and debated at length by trustees, staff and the district’s construction representatives. An amendment proposed to limit the project to “8 additional classrooms” was offered during debate but did not pass; the final resolution to increase available financing to $15 million carried on a roll call vote, 4–1.
Why it mattered: district staff and the treasurer said the extra borrowing would allow the district to consider a fuller renovation of Buckeye—potentially adding classrooms, improving mechanical systems and performing interior renovations—without delaying initial mobilization of the already-approved Guaranteed Maximum Price (GMP) work. The treasurer explained the package would be structured to combine shorter-term TANs and longer-term COPS so payments remain relatively steady, but that the district expects a portion of the PI (permanent improvement) levy to be dedicated to debt service in coming years.
What officials said: during discussion board members and construction staff repeatedly raised site limitations—possible wetlands, detention and stormwater needs, parking constraints and the irregular shape of the existing building—that will affect how many classrooms can physically fit and where additions can be placed. One board member urged acquiring additional studies (traffic, wetland delineation, green-space analysis and updated enrollment projections) before committing to a particular footprint; others argued the board should proceed to secure the financing now and rely on schematic design and phased approvals to preserve flexibility.
A typical exchange: the resolution was initially placed on the agenda by a board member who moved “to make a resolution authorizing the installment payment or lease purchase financing in the form of 1 or more series of installment payment obligations, lease purchase obligations, or certificates of participation issued as tax exempt obligations…” (motion introduced on the agenda packet). The board discussed feasibility studies, phasing and whether additional classrooms beyond the eight originally proposed could be built on the Buckeye site; construction staff estimated that with further work 10 classrooms might be feasible on the site but cautioned about the cost of expanding detention/redirecting drainage.
Vote and next steps: after debate the board approved the financing resolution (roll call recorded as 4–1). The treasurer and bond counsel said the district expects to reengage municipal advisors and insurers and proceed toward sale of the financing; officials estimated the bond sale process could take roughly three weeks to a month depending on scheduling and holiday calendars. Additional schematic and feasibility work will be requested and brought back to the board for review prior to approving any GMP or specific construction expenditure tied to additional classrooms.
Votes at a glance: • Motion to amend the agenda to add the financing resolution: passed 4–1 (to place the resolution on the agenda). • Amendment to cap additional classrooms at eight: proposed and voted on during debate; motion failed (did not pass). • Final vote to authorize financing up to $15,000,000: passed 4–1 (Mister Keeney recorded as the dissenting vote).
Where it stands next: the board instructed administration and the treasurer to compile feasibility and site studies, to coordinate with the owner’s representative and architect, and to return with more detailed schematic designs and cost estimates before committing to specific classroom counts or final GMPs. The financing authorization gives the district flexibility to pursue a more comprehensive renovation if studies and pricing allow.
