A second community input meeting hosted by Lometa Independent School District last week for the purpose of gaining local input on a proposed bond election did not draw the numbers the first session did. With fewer than 20 local residents present, the meeting -- headed by bond committee chairman Dave Hamilton -- highlighted the latest in architect Mike Nelson’s proposed designs.

“This is not a board meeting. It is a community forum, offering a chance for the people of Lometa to speak up,” said Lometa school board president Tommy Maddox. “We would like for people to be involved and for the committee to work with the architect in planning, with no board members involved.”

The latest architectural renderings excluded conversion of the school’s athletic dressing rooms into classrooms, instead leaving that project to the school’s maintenance department. The change accounts for a drop in projected construction costs from $4.75 million to $4.18 million, and includes construction of a gym, four classrooms, science lab, lecture room and a multi-purpose concession stand.

Designs also include a circular drive behind the school for student drop-off and pick-up to alleviate traffic congestion at the front of the school.

Although some in the audience questioned the need to utilize the dressing rooms during practices in the current gymnasium, the matter would be both costly and not beneficial to the district. The architect said retrofitting the existing dressing rooms to meet Texas Accessibility Standards so they could be used in conjunction with a new gym would prove a costly endeavor.

“We need classrooms much worse than we need dressing rooms,” said Lometa ISD Superintendent David Rice. “We’re still planning to convert the dressing rooms into four classrooms, but that will fall outside of the bond project.”

Lometa resident Bruce Scarborough voiced concern that new construction would simply replace current classrooms. “You’re selling us a new gym and the same number of classrooms,” he said.

Nelson answered that with renovation and new construction, an additional four classrooms will be gained, even with demolition of the barracks. Renovating the barracks would be cost-prohibitive as bringing them up to code would be an exorbitant expense, the architect added.

Rice explained that demolishing the barracks currently being used as classrooms will allow for future expansion. The superintendent said reports in recent years listed Lampasas County as one of the fastest-growing counties in the nation. While Lometa’s average daily attendance is in the 280- student range and its numbers have remained constant with the exception of a small first-grade class and two larger-than-normal preschool classes, the prospects of growth are not beyond the imagination.

“There is nothing to say that if things open up in the north that we will grow,” Rice said.

After design strategies were discussed, the night’s conversation moved on to financial matters.

Local businessman Heath Eckermann questioned the viability of a competitive bid versus a riskmanagement choice for construction.

“Construction management is a waste of money. The Lampasas school was a disaster,” Eckermann said.

Area resident Robert Oliver agreed with Eckermann’s views on at-risk management construction, and he voiced concerns about the outsourcing of work to companies outside of Lampasas County.

“We have four construction companies that could easily complete a job of this size,” Oliver said.

School officials stated that the matter of a construction manager at risk had not been discussed, and the entity saw no problem with opening the project up to bid.

In regard to a tax increase, it was reported that taxes would go up 28 cents per $100 valuation, which would translate into a $23 per month increase or $280 per year tax increase on a home valued at $100,000. For those 65 or over, tax rates would remain frozen until the property transferred ownership by sale or inheritance.

Tax rates have been at $1.04 for three years. They dropped from $1.45 per $100 valuation when the state required school tax rates to be dropped by one-third.

A point of contention at the meeting was the tax value placed upon agricultural lands, which was stated to be an average of three percent per acre based upon market value. For example, land valued at $3,000 per acre would have a taxable value of $90. Taxable value for home and land is a combination of homestead and agricultural value.

Voicing his objections regarding agriculture values set on ranch land, Oliver said, “There is no way anyone can produce $90 per acre. There is no land in this county that can produce that much.”

Local rancher Macky Thompson also was concerned about the possibility of tax increases.

“The biggest part of ranchers here are older, and their taxes are frozen,” he said. “Who is going to pay for it [the school construction]? How many in the district are going to have to pay for it?

“We have a big area for this district. There are not a lot of people in this area to pay for it. When Lampasas built a new school, there were more people to pay for it,” Thompson said.

Rice responded that the Lampasas and Lometa figures even out. “It starts to equate itself, $4.183 million versus Lampasas’s $40 million,” he said.

Although the rancher said he remains concerned, Thompson did say his views were changing. “Before I was completely against it [the proposed bond issue]. I’m not completely against it now,” he said.

Nelson added that a portion of the cost will be paid for by the state. Thirty dollars per student will be paid by the school district, while the estimated state contribution is $5 per student, paid yearly until the bond is paid. The $4.183 million includes furniture and paving costs, Nelson said.

Another community input meeting is slated for Monday in the school cafetorium.