Paul Johnson, CFOWhite Pine County School District

1135 Avenue CEly, Nevada 89301

(775) 289-4851 x125(775) 289-3999 (fax)(775) 293-0569 (cell)

paujohns@whitepine.k12.nv.us

Capital Needs and Resources of Nevada’s Public Schools

Nevada Rural School Districts

Nevada Rural School FacilitiesOver 1,000 rural school district facilities

Includes multiple facilities on one campus Includes support facilities (i.e. Transportation, Admin Offices, Storage, etc.)

9.3 million SF of building space$1.7 billion estimated value

NPAIP Replacement Cost – Based on appraisals

47,751.6 weighted students NRS 387.303 report FY2013

15 counties covering 95,587 square miles http://www.indexmundi.com/facts/united-states/quick-facts/nevada/land-area#map

School ages range from 129 to 4 years

School Facility - Ages2004 1994 1984 1974 1964 1964+ 1939+ 1914+

School District 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 50+ 75+ 100+

Carson City 2 8 12 10 4 11 0 0Churchill 1 10 21 16 3 13 2 0Douglas 10 9 20 11 1 10 3 2Elko 16 59 98 11 12 17 5 1Esmerelda 3 0 11 2 11 1 0 0Eureka 1 8 10 9 5 2 0 0Humboldt 17 29 15 5 11 10 1 0Lander 12 1 3 13 2 2 0 0Lincoln 12 9 6 5 6 4 0 0Lyon 17 50 35 21 14 12 1 1Mineral 0 14 3 11 1 24 3 0Nye 53 49 27 21 4 32 1 0Pershing 3 6 4 1 1 7 0 0Storey 3 0 6 4 0 4 4 2White Pine 0 6 6 3 0 13 6 2

Total Rural 150 258 277 143 75 162 26 8% of Total 14% 24% 26% 13% 7% 15% 2% 1%

Estimated Replacement CostsYears Years Years Years Years Years Years Years2004 1994 1984 1974 1964 1964+ 1939+ 1914+

School District 0-10 11-20 21-30 31-40 41-50 50+ 75+ 100+

Carson City 804,600$ 1,258,800$ 35,659,600$ 42,023,940$ 67,324,500$ 40,851,300$ -$ -$ Churchill 65,000 19,070,400 44,872,610 16,903,240 4,084,170.00 65,057,650 26,348,270 - Douglas 1,605,500 25,737,400 37,134,300 52,967,000 62,500.00 44,653,500 4,114,600 2,417,600 Elko 38,081,900 48,027,300 94,997,000 4,793,500 33,031,400.00 78,539,700 20,267,600 1,419,800 Esmerelda 612,200 - 1,375,400 46,200 3,773,400.00 134,700 - - Eureka - 14,987,400 2,741,100 345,700 14,810,300.00 235,600 - - Humboldt 5,783,600 30,329,300 9,029,600 17,401,000 33,503,200.00 52,858,900 1,567,000 - Lander 389,000 7,799,000 6,012,200 15,875,500 5,319,400.00 10,023,300 - - Lincoln 9,945,200 25,461,600 614,600 6,793,700 1,131,600.00 11,345,700 - - Lyon 50,343,600 50,413,200 42,727,400 37,566,400 30,837,600.00 15,897,600 2,264,800 2,264,800 Mineral - 10,909,100 23,600 5,146,400 15,800.00 21,214,500 2,753,600 - Nye 67,999,800 48,865,900 51,999,200 9,299,500 8,695,000.00 26,709,300 130,600 - Pershing 1,522,100 1,942,300 15,296,300 16,600 82,900.00 30,299,700 - - Storey 1,368,200 - 9,958,600 3,184,900 - 7,982,100 7,982,100 3,176,300 White Pine - 28,444,900 4,156,200 1,917,100 - 44,269,300 32,940,800 29,054,000

Total Rural 178,520,700$ 313,246,600$ 356,597,710$ 214,280,680$ 202,671,770$ 450,072,850$ 98,369,370$ 38,332,500$ % of Total 10% 18% 21% 12% 12% 26% 6% 2%

Condition of FacilitiesRequested the District indicate conditions as good, fair,

or poor.Received responses covering approx. 74% of school

facilities

Approx. 50% of rural school facilities are in need of improvement

This assessment was not based on a common set of objective Arch/Eng criteri

Poor 139 17%

Fair 266 33%

Good 411 50%

Other Common DemandsEquipment Replacement

Heavy Equipment, tools, etc…

TransportationSchool BussesFleet vehiclesMaintenance

TechnologySchool Safety

Facility assessments and improvements as a result of school shootings.

Deferred Costs - ExamplesDouglas CSD

$450,000 annual deferred maintenance$72 million construction/improvements

Other Capital Needs: Bus fleet replacement – 800,000 average miles Vehicle fleet – 34% poor or fair condition Technology Operations Equipment Food Services Equipment

Deferred Costs - ExamplesWhite Pine

$10,520,226 in deferred facility improvements Concrete, asphalt, asbestos abatement, clean and

repoint masonry, etc…1913 White Pine Middle School Replacement1908 David E. Norman Elementary

Replacement Other Capital Needs

$1.4 million bus fleet replacement: Purchased 4 new busses in 2005. Other replacements have been used vehicles from other districts as they have been rotated out of inventory.

$1.3 million Technology/Telecommunications/Internet $300,000 equipment

Funding Options for School FacilitiesPrimary source of funding is Property TaxProperty taxes for school facilities require voter

approvalCap on overlapping tax rates limits tax rate

access11 counties at or within pennies of the cap

Abatement caps limit revenue increases10 year rolling average of assessed value

growth (one of the factors in calculating the cap) could be less than 1% for many districts in a few years

Other revenue sources are imposed by county commission or legislature – not by school district

Fund to assist schools with capital improvements (NRS 387.333). No funding currently available.

Current Tax Rates and Voter Authorization

JNA Consulting Group, LLC

Debt Rate/ Voter Highest

District CPT AuthorizationOverlapping

Rate

Carson City $0.4300 Rollover (2020) $3.5600

Churchill $0.5500 Rollover (2018) $3.6400

Clark $0.5534 none $3.4030

Douglas $0.1000 Rollover (2018) $3.6600

Elko $0.7500 CPT (2022) $3.6567

Esmeralda $0.0000 none $3.0195

Eureka $0.0000 None $1.9896

Humboldt $0.1350 Rollover (2018) $3.1716

Lander $0.0000 None $3.6600

Lincoln $0.2231Traditional (2014) $3.6600

Lyon $0.5867 Rollover (2016) $3.6600

Mineral $0.3500 None $3.6600

Nye $0.5850 Rollover (2016) $3.6567

Pershing $0.4000 Rollover (2018) $3.6592

Storey $0.1447 Rollover (2022) $3.4607

Washoe $0.3885 None $3.6600

White Pine $0.2490 Rollover (2018) $3.6600

G.O. Debt & Ad Valorem (Exc. NPM)FY2015 Final Assessed Values By CountyDepartment of Taxation

5%20 Current Estimated

(Excluding NPM) P & I Tax Rate Combined CombinedCounty Total Assessed Values $20,000,000 Needed Rate Rate

Carson City 1,286,890,682 $1,604,852 0.1247 3.5600 3.6847 Churchill 683,625,992 $1,604,852 0.2348 3.6400 3.8748 Douglas 2,659,900,426 $1,604,852 0.0603 3.6600 3.7203 Elko 1,743,259,203 $1,604,852 0.0921 3.6567 3.7488 Esmerelda 60,122,367 $1,604,852 2.6693 3.0195 5.6888 Eureka 755,497,987 $1,604,852 0.2124 1.9896 2.2020 Humboldt 1,081,333,429 $1,604,852 0.1484 3.1716 3.3200 Lander 646,297,215 $1,604,852 0.2483 3.6600 3.9083 Lincoln 349,822,781 $1,604,852 0.4588 3.6600 4.1188 Lyon 1,420,138,197 $1,604,852 0.1130 3.6600 3.7730 Mineral 134,556,573 $1,604,852 1.1927 3.6600 4.8527 Nye 1,259,400,684 $1,604,852 0.1274 3.6567 3.7841 Pershing 247,536,706 $1,604,852 0.6483 3.6592 4.3075 Storey 516,362,669 $1,604,852 0.3108 3.4607 3.7715 White Pine 420,613,741 $1,604,852 0.3816 3.6600 4.0416

Total Rural 13,265,358,652

Washoe 13,281,733,500 802,426.00 0.0060 3.6600 3.6660 Clark 63,567,838,203 802,426.00 0.0013 3.4030 3.4043

G.O. Debt & Ad Valorem (Inc. NPM)FY2015 Final Assessed Values By CountyDepartment of Taxation

5%20 Current Estimated

(Excluding NPM) P & I Tax Rate Combined CombinedCounty Total Assessed Values Net Proceeds $20,000,000 Needed Rate Rate

Carson City 1,286,890,682 - $1,604,852 0.1247 3.5600 3.6847 Churchill 683,625,992 24,217,467 1,604,852 0.2267 3.6400 3.8667 Douglas 2,659,900,426 - 1,604,852 0.0603 3.6600 3.7203 Elko 1,743,259,203 179,399,883 1,604,852 0.0835 3.6567 3.7402 Esmerelda 60,122,367 25,089,453 1,604,852 1.8834 3.0195 4.9029 Eureka 755,497,987 884,566,984 1,604,852 0.0979 1.9896 2.0875 Humboldt 1,081,333,429 488,843,326 1,604,852 0.1022 3.1716 3.2738 Lander 646,297,215 1,483,808,094 1,604,852 0.0753 3.6600 3.7353 Lincoln 349,822,781 256,290 1,604,852 0.4584 3.6600 4.1184 Lyon 1,420,138,197 3,764,932 1,604,852 0.1127 3.6600 3.7727 Mineral 134,556,573 4,945,738 1,604,852 1.1504 3.6600 4.8104 Nye 1,259,400,684 163,959,748 1,604,852 0.1128 3.6567 3.7695 Pershing 247,536,706 57,004,381 1,604,852 0.5270 3.6592 4.1862 Storey 516,362,669 1,322,718 1,604,852 0.3100 3.4607 3.7707 White Pine 420,613,741 58,855,667 1,604,852 0.3347 3.6600 3.9947

Total Rural 13,265,358,652 3,376,034,681

Washoe 13,281,733,500 3,472,463 $1,604,852 0.0121 3.6600 3.6721 Clark 63,567,838,203 - $1,604,852 0.0025 3.4030 3.4055

Other Sources.125% Sales Tax (NRS 374A)

Only available to districts utilizing the Fund to Assist School Districts (NRS 387.3335)

.25% Sales Tax (NRS 377B) Imposed by county commissionAllocation of funding determined by county commissionFew districts have seen any money in the seven

counties levying the tax Residential Construction Tax (NRS 387)

Imposed by county commissionMust be reviewed every 4 years by Tax Commission

Room Tax (NRS 244)/Real Property Transfer Tax (NRS 375)Approved by Legislature in 1997 for Clark County

JNA Consulting Group, LLC

G.O. Debt & Sales TaxLSST Worksheet - Fiscal Year 2014-2015Department of Taxation - 3/15/2014

5%Estimated Impact of 20

2.60% Gross 0.25% P & I Surplus/County LSST Sales LSST $20,000,000 (Deficit)

Carson City 18,060,612 694,638,923 1,736,597 $1,604,852 $131,745.56Churchill 6,106,829 234,878,038 587,195 $1,604,852 ($1,017,656.65)Douglas 14,407,963 554,152,423 1,385,381 $1,604,852 ($219,470.69)Elko 42,907,680 1,650,295,385 4,125,738 $1,604,852 $2,520,886.72Esmerelda 129,231 4,970,423 12,426 $1,604,852 ($1,592,425.69)Eureka 2,199,071 84,579,654 211,449 $1,604,852 ($1,393,402.61)Humboldt 12,544,884 482,495,538 1,206,239 $1,604,852 ($398,612.90)Lander 1,981,763 76,221,654 190,554 $1,604,852 ($1,414,297.61)Lincoln 337,460 12,979,231 32,448 $1,604,852 ($1,572,403.67)Lyon 8,142,967 313,191,038 782,978 $1,604,852 ($821,874.15)Mineral 494,220 19,008,462 47,521 $1,604,852 ($1,557,330.59)Nye 8,790,041 338,078,500 845,196 $1,604,852 ($759,655.49)Pershing 600,942 23,113,154 57,783 $1,604,852 ($1,547,068.86)Storey 1,008,760 38,798,462 96,996 $1,604,852 ($1,507,855.59)White Pine 3,164,909 121,727,269 304,318 $1,604,852 ($1,300,533.57)

Total Rural 120,877,332 4,649,128,154 11,622,820

Clark County 792,016,088 30,462,157,231 76,155,393 $1,604,852 $74,550,541.33Washoe County 143,443,675 5,517,064,423 13,792,661 $1,604,852 $12,187,809.31

Availability of Other Revenue Sources

JNA Consulting Group, LLC

.125% Sales Tax

.25% Sales Tax RCT Room Tax RPTT

NRS 374A NRS 377B NRS 387 NRS 244 NRS 375

Carson City     No No No

Churchill   Levied – No   No No

Clark   No No Yes Yes

Douglas       No No

Elko       No No

Esmeralda       No No

Eureka       No No

Humboldt       No No

Lander   Levied – No   No No

Lincoln   Levied – No   No No

Lyon   Levied – No   No No

Mineral       No No

Nye       No No

Pershing   Levied - ?   No No

Storey   Levied – No   No No

Washoe    No No No No

White Pine Yes Levied – No   No No

Available

Prohibited

Revenue ChallengesPer Capita Taxes do not generate sufficient

revenue for demandProperty Tax Base is insufficient to support

capital demands of multiple local government entities with competing interests and “allowable” rates.

Construction ChallengesConstruction companies have to relocate and pay

per diem costs to their workers.Logistics can increase mobility costsThe long distance can increase costs for even

simple jobs. The freight costs for everything shipped also adds

to high repair costs. Experience difficulty getting competitive bidsBig jobs can exceed local contractor’s bonding

capacityLocal vendors can not provide supplies to

construction projects so materials must be shipped

Voter Approval

Nevada Studies1954 – Peabody Report1971 – Governor O’Callaghan Study1994 – Legislative Commission’s

Subcommittee to Study Public Elementary and Secondary Education (S.C.R. 52 Committee)

1996 – Legislative Commission’s Subcommittee to Study the Realignment of School Districts (S.C.R. 30 Committee)

1998 - Nevada School Needs Assessment (ISES Corporation Study)

Nevada InitiativesState School Construction Relief Fund

(1955-1979) No continual funding source was established and the fund was

eliminated.

Account for State Assistance for School Construction (1979-1983) No continual funding source was established and the fund was

eliminated.

Fund to Assist Schools With Capital Improvements (1999 – Present) No continual funding source established

All of the programs contained specific criteria to qualify for funding and limit state liability

Other legislation has been confined to specific appropriations

Learning EnvironmentsResearch has confirmed that there is a

consistent relationship between the condition of a school facility and student performance. The cognitive requirements for learning and teaching are

affected by the physical surroundings where they take place (Do School Facilities Affect Academic Outcomes ?; National Clearinghouse for Educational

Facilities; Mark Schneider, November 2002)

The amount of natural light, the indoor air quality and temperature impact student learning (Prioritization of 31 Criteria for School Building Adequacy; Glen I. Earthman, Professor

Emeritus, Virginia Polytechnic Institute & State University, January 2004)

Poor building conditions greatly increase employee absenteeism and turnover that directly affect the quality of education Growth and Disparity: A Decade of U.S. Public School Construction, October 2006

Impact of Quality Schools School quality has a direct and positive impact on property values or

tax base (Kane et al. 2003); School quality affects the quality of life and ability to attract

businesses and workers (Salveson and Renski 2002); Investments in the construction and maintenance of school facilities

bring money into local economies through job creation and supply purchases (Economics Center for Education Research 2003);

Investments in a community have a multiplier affect that indirectly affects local merchants, local tax revenue, and the labor force.

New or well-maintained school facilities can help revitalize distressed neighborhoods (Local Government Commission 2002)

Environments that are in a well ordered condition may stop vandalism as well as crime (http://www.manhattan-institute.org/pdf/_atlantic_monthly-broken_windows.pdf).

Growth and Disparity: A Decade of U.S. Public School Construction, October 2006

Discussion PointsEach school district has there own unique capital demand

and financial hurdlesExisting sources of revenue are insufficient to meet

demandDeferred construction, improvements and maintenance will

continue that may adversely affect economic development, property values and student performance

As capital demand continues to outpace funding, more and more capital projects will be deferred making it increasingly difficult to maintain facilities

All school districts regardless of size are financially stressed to meet operating and capital demands

Smaller school districts may never be able to replace or construct school facilities