Plum school board votes to finance new construction, upgrades
The Plum School Board on Tuesday night voted to approve a combination of bond refinancing and borrowing that will glean the district $15 million.
Officials intend to use the money for a variety of facility improvements over the next five years including paving driveways and parking lots, painting and installing air conditioning at Center Elementary School.
Plum School District's facility improvements total about $5.5 million, according to a list generated by the administration.
Also, $7 million is earmarked for construction of the new Holiday Park Elementary School. The total cost of the new school is estimated at $18 million.
Five million is expected to be generated from the bond refinancing, and $10 million is being borrowed, according to Joseph Muscatello, the district's bond counsel.
The vote was 7-2 with board members Tom McGough and Loretta White dissenting.
“Education is a priority for me,” White said.
Board President Andrew Drake said the work for which the money is earmarked is long overdue.
“It is an opportunity for us to meet one of our long-term objectives in getting the facilities back to where they should be,” Drake said.
Muscatello said the board's action is expected to result in the district's total debt rising from $91 million to $106 million.
Read more about the board's action in the May 9 issue of the Plum Advance Leader.
Karen Zapf is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. She can be reached at 412-856-7400, ext. 8753, or firstname.lastname@example.org.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.