Bond financing for a community recreation center, scuttled back in the spring when one member of the three-member majority of the Board of Supervisors who favored it had to step down, is being revisited this fall.
The supervisors, on a 3-2 vote Monday, opted to move forward with scheduling a Sept. 14 public hearing on whether to use bond financing through the Virginia Public Schools Authority to pay for a community recreation center and tennis courts at Rockbridge County High School.
Back in March, the supervisors initially voted 3-2 to take part in a spring bond sale by the VPSA to finance what was then a $15.5 million project. A week later, after it was discovered that then-Walkers Creek Supervisor Jay Lewis had not taken his oath of office, the supervisors, without Lewis, voted 2-2 to participate in the spring bond sale. The tie vote meant the motion failed.
On Monday, Walkers Creek Supervisor Tori Brown joined with David McDaniel and Leslie Ayers to vote in favor of holding a public hearing Sept. 14 on whether to participate in a VPSA fall bond sale to finance what is now an $18 million project. Steve Hart and Bob Day, as they did in the spring, cast dissenting votes.
Prior to Monday’s vote, Dr. Phillip Thompson, county schools superintendent, explained why the projected costs for the rec center had increased. When the conceptual plans for the center moved to the actual design phase, the layout for the gym facilities increased by 4,624 square feet to 46,843 square feet.
“The additional square footage was necessary to address safety, functionality and flexibility concerns associated with the original gymnasium design,” said Thompson. “The original footprint provided insufficient clearance around the primary activity areas and would have placed participants too close to walls, seating areas, equipment and adjoining spaces. Those limitations would have increased the risk of collisions and injuries during athletic practices, competitions, physical education, recreational programming, and other community activities.”
During the citizens comments portion of Monday’s meeting, several people weighed in on the subject of whether to revisit the issue of bond financing for the rec center.
Bill Russell questioned why the public hadn’t been notified about the increase in costs prior to when Monday’s agenda package went online. He also questioned who was going to own the recreation center – the schools or the county? “Process keeps moving [forward] while answers lag behind,” he declared. “Enough. Before this Board moves another step forward – show the public, answer the questions.”
Charles Page said he understood that the Board had already approved the project. What’s left to do is determining the best route for funding. “I’m all for the project,” he said.
Liam Hart said he objected to the county incurring all of the debt for this and other projects. He described it as a “lien against my future. Who’s paying for this? It’s scary, looking down the barrel of $107 million [combined] debt.”
Former Kerrs Creek Supervisor Dan Lyons urged the Board to move forward with financing the project through bonds. “I’m here to ask you to honor your commitment and stand by your vote. The Board approved the rec center. The individual Board members had the chance to review debt, look at location, look at design, [then] voted for it. Hence, it became a Board decision.”
Eric Sheffield said it’s time to “move on with getting the rec center built. Both my kids went through the Rockbridge County school system and I can tell you this facility has been needed for more than 30 years. … We don’t have a lot of recreational opportunities in the area. We’re always saying, ‘What can we do to keep our young people in the area? What can we do to keep our young people out of jail?’ Having a rec center would be a step forward in both of those areas.”
“Fiscal responsibility,” said Penny Burch, “isn’t simply about avoiding debt. It is also about recognizing when an investment can be a benefit for our community and generations to come. … Instead of asking ‘what the cost is to move forward,’ ask ‘what is the cost is of doing nothing?’” The Board heard presentations Monday by Granville Grant of Spectrum Design, the architectural firm that is preparing the plans, Chad Coffey, executive director of the Rockbridge Area Recreation Organization, and Tyler Smith of Davenport and Company, the county’s financial adviser.
Steve Hart followed with his own presentation, complete with PowerPoint graphs. He suggested that the county should, instead of borrowing $18 million, take that amount out of the county’s fund balance to pay for the project, then commit to investing $1.4 million per year – what the debt payments would be – to save for future capital projects. Incurring the debt, he said, represents a “huge moral hazard here. We’re transferring money out of the county. … Continually.”
Advocating for moving forward with scheduling the public hearing on the bond financing, McDaniel said, “I feel it’s imperative that we hear from the public and hear their take on it – what they suggest to the supervisors that we do.”
Brown said she understood that the supervisors had previously decided to approve the recreation center. “We’re just deciding how we’re going to pay for it. Are we not open to looking at some form of combination of putting down a larger deposit or paying for part of it in cash versus taking a bond for all of it?”
County Administrator Spencer Suter explained how Davenport had conducted an analysis on how best to finance the project and had come up with the idea of taking $4 million out of reserves and financing the balance through a VPSA bond sale. “You could do a little more or a little less [of withdrawing from reserves].” Following Hart’s suggestion to taking the whole amount out of reserves, Suter said, “would severely deplete our reserves [which are now at $31 million].”
Brown expressed skepticism over suggestions that the county could move forward with this project and not have to raise taxes when there are various other capital projects pending. “I feel like that’s looking at this project with blinders on. I think you’re then going to sneak attack people with, ‘Oh, by the way, we’re going to have to raise taxes to cover all of these things.’ I just want to make sure we’re looking at this holistically.”
Looking at the total picture of the county’s future debt obligations would need to take into account a couple of other issues, Smith of Davenport pointed out. One is that the county’s regional partners could possibly be contributing to funding for the rec center. Another is that the state just granted localities the option of adopting a 1 percent sales tax to fund future schools capital projects. Such a tax in Rockbridge County would generate an estimated $3.6 million annually, he said. The supervisors haven’t taken action toward having a referendum this year on establishing the tax but could do so next year (in 2027).
When discussion by the supervisors concluded, chair McDaniel asked for a motion on setting the public hearing. “So moved,” said Ayers. Brown seconded the motion, which passed 3-2.
