Indexes
February 8th, 2010
February 6th, 2010
February 5th, 2010
February 4th, 2010
February 3rd, 2010
February 2nd, 2010
February 1st, 2010
The following stories have received the most reader comments during the last 7 days.
- Will terrorists be given Miranda warnings? (75)
- Lodi Unified School District president issues warning to speakers over cuts (64)
- President Obama's first year (45)
- Many reject the politics of 'no' (45)
- Islamic symbol in mosaic — what is all the fuss? (44)
- Writer comments on Neely column (42)
- The Home Depot hopes to join Costco at Reynolds Ranch (41)
- Time to shed the convenient sham of 'Don't ask, don't tell' policy (34)
- We need to conduct respectful conversations (30)
- Tasered suspect claims he is Yosemite Sam (25)
ADVERTISEMENT
Is moving Galt High district offices a good idea?
Cost of moving computer lines, desks, equipment adds up
By Jennifer Bonnett
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
Friday, March 27, 2009 4:08 PM PDT
The Galt high school district is considering relocating its office from leased space to district-owned property to save money.
For the Galt Joint Union High School District, it isn’t as much of a problem in finding a location, it’s getting out of the one it’s in.
The district is in the first year of a new, three-year contract with Jim Spaan, owner of Spaan’s Cookies in Galt. The rent is about $6,000 a month for the 4,482-square-foot space located in downtown Galt.
Superintendent Tom Gemma said he has only begun negotiations to break that lease. The district has occupied the space since December of 1999.
“Is there district-owned space where eight people can fit?” Trustee Art Oelsner asked at a recent board meeting.
A board committee was assembled and the search began.
What about moving to the current site of the Galt Adult School? Audrey Kilpatrick, the district’s chief business official, said using any existing portables as office space would require renovations including adding restrooms and upgrading technology at a cost of roughly $385,000.
What about unused offices in the new Liberty Ranch High School? For about $2,800, the district could move its equipment there right now, Gemma said before questioning whether it is cost-effective to move to one piece of district-owned property just to be bumped in a couple of years.
When the school is built out to its full capacity — from opening to just ninthand 10-graders — will there be room for the eight administrators and their assistants?
School district offices at a glance
Galt Joint Union Elementary School District, 1018 C St., Ste. 210, Galt: 13,000-square-foot, lease-to-own office for 25 employees.Galt Joint Union High School District, 417 C St., Galt: 4,482-square-foot office space for its eight employees.
Lodi Unified School District, 1305 E. Vine St., Lodi: Own 55,000 square feet for 250 employees.
“Can we do it? Yes we can,” said Liberty Ranch principal Brian Deis who is willing to give up his larger office to make room for Gemma’s crew. “But somewhere down the road we would be asking for you to move out.”
Additionally, to move the district’s cable Internet lines from its downtown office to the new high school on the east side of the city will cost about $50,000, according to a staff report.
Still, Gemma would like to see a two-year phase-out move to the high school.
The city of Lodi, too, is moving its Finance Department from the current Pine Street location to city-owned property at the former Lodi courthouse at 230 W. Elm St. to save money
The rent for the existing location is $11,000 a month, and the total project cost, with construction and moving expenses, is $750,000, according to city spokesman Jeff Hood.
He said that while the up-front costs may appear high, the result is a financial payback in less than six years once potential rent increases and paying no rent is factored into the April 20 opening.
The city of Galt, on the other hand, owns all of its city buildings.
Lodi Unified, too, doesn’t have to worry about rental costs. Its district-financed Educational Support Center is approximately 55,000 square feet and holds about 250 employees.
Before moving into the East Vine Street location in 1991, its offices were spread out among five different locations, four of them leased, according to Art Hand, assistant superintendent of facilities.
At the time, it cost approximately $1.5 million to build, but Hand said financially the up-front costs were worth it.
He compared it to the advantages of owning a home versus renting when payments are basically being thrown away. Further, for a public agency, a new building can be used at first as debt service offset and then as a direct benefit to the general fund after the debt service repayment, Hand added.
The Galt Joint Union Elementary District will soon be in a similar position, as it is only two years away from owning its building through a unique lease-purchase agreement it entered into 12 years ago.
Assistant Superintendent Jim Bauler calls it “lucky” that the district found the strip mall space when it started looking for a consolidated location in 1997. At the time, it even toyed with the idea of building something.
Bauler said administrators knew they would have a need for more space, and district employees at the time were scattered around campuses and in modulars.
“We found warehousing was difficult at the time. We used a school multi-purpose room for storage during the summer,” Bauler said.
“Communication was difficult; calling a meeting (was) hard and had to be held in the library. We literally were doing business from the schools.”
The district’s $10,750 a month, tax-free financing is actually partially funded by its tenant, Auto Zone, which pays $5,500 a month for its 5,000 square feet next door.
The district’s portion — 13,000 square feet — not only includes office space for about 25 employees but an adjoining warehouse that holds textbooks as well as school and office supplies.
Contact reporter Jennifer Bonnett at jenniferb@lodinews.com.
This story was updated at 4:08 p.m. March 27, 2009, to correct the sizes of and number of employees in the two Galt school district offices.
Search for Ads 
Today’s Print Ads 
RSS Feeds
Reader Feedback
Pat Maple wrote on Apr 9, 2009 5:02 PM:
Gus Prouty wrote on Apr 9, 2009 1:55 PM:
What programs do you consider discretionary and which are mandatory?
Athletics uses $210k per year, your math, your research, not mine. How can you call Ag discretionary and Athletics not? Label them as you will they are both discretionary as well as many others on campus.
Your ag is 85% of available funds is Total and complete HOGWASH. Maybe you were able to get some specific wording on the budget accounts that sets up your argument but the reality is most ALL spending is discretionary!
Your words, " A score of 800 is what all schools should be operating at and those who are not should strive for". IT is A TARGET, not an actual average, again your own words. Thanks for correcting yourself.
GHSD was well on its way and is still working to improve. The first ten pounds of fat is always the easiest to loose, its the last 10% that's always the hardest. "
Pat Maple wrote on Apr 9, 2009 12:27 PM:
Pat Maple wrote on Apr 9, 2009 12:02 PM:
Test scores...directly correlate to amount of support given to CORE subjects. The number one job of a Board member is to see that ALL students receive equal support. When the US Supreme Court ruled on Title IX they made that same statement...today women graduate from college at the same or better rate than men...THAT is a good thing and it came from EQUAL RIGHTS to an education. $460.00 = $16.00??? "
Gus Prouty wrote on Apr 9, 2009 8:39 AM:
How many of their students qualify for free and reduced lunches, have parents with English as a second language, and have a parent or more that went to college vs. Galt?
Their communities and population are VERY different than ours!
I'm not saying we can't or should not improve, but we need to be real about where we are or our methods to improve will be way off base.
So are you suggesting take the $210k from athletics you describe, (is that mandatory or discretionary money by the way?), and spend it on core programs for better test scores?
Help again will ya? Ag-discretionary,
Then everything else----- athletics non discretionary, engineering-non discretionary, health-non-discretionary, drama, band, everything else extracurricular..... non discretionary. Ag is the only program taking from the core subjects....hummmmmmmm. You just argued athletics is good for $210k per year! The only difference is the widget!
Again, I say we need them all as students needs are different. Support our winners, and foster the rising stars! "
Pat Maple wrote on Apr 9, 2009 6:52 AM:
Specialized schools like EHS? The schools I pointed out are not specialized and have the same problems GHS does. It is just WHERE they spend their money. BTW if the Ag dept only has $31K why is it that the Board is looking at cutting $110K for summer stipends? (which will NEVER happen) "
Gus Prouty wrote on Apr 8, 2009 8:18 AM:
So athletics doesn't have(teachers, stipends, periods off, field trips) also? In concept, both activities are pretty similar and are both discretionary if you look at the big picture.
Your $185k number is total hogwash. You argue athletic costs with one set of glasses and ag costs with another.
You never did answer if there is a max amount we should be spending per participant???? Can you answer that outside of your regular ag is too much, don't know? Start us down the value per dollar path for students again will ya???? "
pat maple wrote on Apr 7, 2009 5:23 PM:
Gus Prouty wrote on Apr 6, 2009 12:08 PM:
So is $300 per student a max that we should be supporting as a district? Is the issue performance or relevance and to what?
Oh! And I thought ag took 85% of discretionary funding. You just argued that athletics uses $210k...........what programs do you have in your definition of discretionary? I'm confused by the math again. "
Pat Maple wrote on Apr 4, 2009 7:25 PM:
Let's compare and contrast that with the Ag program at GHS...$185,000 in additional support divided by 400 Ag students equals $460.00...or 50% more per student than athletics.
Compare and contrast the support given to the core subjects...$25,000.00 divided amongst 1600 students that comes to approximately $16.00 per student. 287.5% less per student than Ag.
And WHERE did the HS Board make the cuts???? NOT Ag. Dump the partisans and fire the Superintendent. And who was in the audience crying wolf? Jim Aschwanden the Executive Director for the Cal Ag Teachers Assoc. "
Pat Maple wrote on Apr 4, 2009 7:57 AM:
alf wrote on Apr 2, 2009 11:35 PM:
Pat Maple wrote on Apr 2, 2009 2:43 PM:
alf wrote on Mar 31, 2009 11:46 PM:
Gus Prouty wrote on Mar 31, 2009 11:48 AM:
The low hanging fruit is gone. Its like the last 10 pounds on a diet, always the hardest.
The problem we have this year is we're testing after Easter break so the union can make a stink about us not being on Lodi's schedule and better argue the Lodi calander into next year. I'm sure you heard they want a break in October also? We can't have these students going to school for more than 2 full days in a row ever, or more than a couple 4-1/2 day weeks in a row! The good news is flights are cheap in October for those teachers ...oops, I mean parents who have kids in Lodi and want to take vacation. Not sure what Galt parents with elementary students are suppose to do????? "
Gus Prouty wrote on Mar 31, 2009 9:51 AM:
1000 or even 800 is a good goal, but its not even the average for more affluent areas. "
Pat Maple wrote on Mar 30, 2009 11:30 PM:
gprouty wrote on Mar 30, 2009 8:28 PM:
I see Galt ranked at #23 of 255 with 10 schools at or above 800, and 35 in the 700's, galt included. All within 30 miles of 95632 in sac county. How are you calculating average? "
gprouty wrote on Mar 30, 2009 8:09 PM:
Pat Maple wrote on Mar 30, 2009 4:57 PM:
The agreements with the teachers is called a contract. You were there two of those contract cycles...what did you do? Would I do things different? Yes, but not your way. "
Gus Prouty wrote on Mar 30, 2009 3:47 PM:
WOW! Its really hard to make this argument using that benchmark without your assistance.
Not sure how many computer guru's and film makers I saw in the sweet sixteen????
Risk would be putting effort out before the reward, the courage to stand up and do what's right, not what's easy. The courage to put another before you, like student needs, before staff wants, (like a REALLY nice office which started this whole discussion. Really, should every teacher get COLA just because they have a pulse on Jan 1 every year?
The school is lacking a clear vision of behavior on campus. Too much is let go, inconsistent, and many students walk around in FEAR. Hoods still hang out in the bathrooms and harass kids. We will wallow in mediocrity until the laggards step it up or are forced out! Quit moving problem teachers to EHS, fire them! Take a RISK and fire a few of the ones who don't get it! "
Pat Maple wrote on Mar 30, 2009 2:20 PM:
Who's lives do you want to RISK? I suppose when Jim Aschwanden and his cronie Board was there then there was LEADERSHIP? No. Leadership arises from a concern for ALL not just the few. "
Gus Prouty wrote on Mar 30, 2009 12:24 PM:
I can't remember the last time I saw a pro athlete from our school.....Why are we wasting all that money on a gym, football field, Volleyball games, bus travel, etc. when we could partition that gymnasium off and teach math in there! How many teachers could we pay for with the gas money from athletics since no one is really getting anything from it in the long run. Moreover, all the upset parents and participants. Loose the sports and we'd have a lot less issues from the community.
Not a single pro I remember in the last few years!
Neither of these are producing pro's!!!! Why keep either?
Pat help me understand will ya....... "
Gus Prouty wrote on Mar 30, 2009 10:27 AM:
Can GHSD say the same for the STUDENTS? Are they are number one, driving force behind all decisions? Do we do what's best for them in front of ALL ELSE? Not as I see it. I think the institution is protected first, then they figure out how it affects the students.
What I am talking about cannot be accomplished with $, or by committee. It requires LEADERSHIP! It also requires RISK! It may not be what has happened for the last 10 years, but it may be what needs to happen today.
The best example of this absences of clarity shows up at meetings like, "We'll survey the parents and the students and give you the kind of school you want". What the......? A professional educator needs parents to tell them what the student needs? Fix this problem and the scores will go into the 800's!!!!!!
GHSD needs a clear core value that permeates the institution! "
Pat Maple wrote on Mar 30, 2009 10:24 AM:
Gus Prouty wrote on Mar 30, 2009 10:12 AM:
There are too many people milking the system, and the system is very good at giving the appearance of concern. The administrators and union protect their own to the point it makes the institution a wasteland of meritocracy. It not that the district is malicious, is that it is MEDIOCRE! Everything outstanding is offset by laggards, and the laggards are complaining about not being GIVEN enough to be outstanding. They don't get you have to work for it. Ag stands up for its 50 years of hard work as they should. Engineering, athletics, and all the others would do the same.
The real question is how do we get the district to put student needs in front of all else....for REAL not just the old, "Your kids a great kid but" speech? Which is soon followed by the explanation of why your student is treated differently than their classmate. Its not right or wrong, its Cover Your ... "
Pat Maple wrote on Mar 29, 2009 11:47 AM:
gprouty wrote on Mar 29, 2009 10:27 AM:
Pat Maple wrote on Mar 28, 2009 10:55 AM:
Gus: You can't even identify a personal attack...you just made one. Give a lesson to TAI.
Alfie: Exaggerations galore...read the news articles before espousing such trash. The estimate from 5 contractors was less than $60M with ALL of the amenities (pool, stadium, track, BB and soccer fields) and would house 2100 students. Lathrop High was built with exactly that for $69M including paying $9M for their property and all of the soft costs. Our contract price was $56M which included a contingency of $7M.
Read Gus's comment...I was only one vote..Sue Roberts was one...Dennis Richardson, Ben Cox and Gary Silva the other three...that was a hell of a phone conversation (after 5 District meetings that you were invited to). Spotting them $30M should have been help enough but I guess it wasn't.
Gus/Alf/TAI: Vomiting is caused by several conditions...gastritis, motion and poisoning are just a few...get some medication...like the facts. "
thinkaboutit wrote on Mar 28, 2009 9:15 AM:
alf wrote on Mar 27, 2009 9:39 PM:
gprouty wrote on Mar 27, 2009 6:18 PM:
He's one person, one vote, same as you.
Your passion is compelling, your EMOTIONAL VOMIT is not!
Get a grip man, he's one guy........Can't you make a point without the personal attacks and bully tactics? "
Pat Maple wrote on Mar 27, 2009 10:04 AM:
Comments on this story are now closed.