State Senator Louis DeLuca, R-32 nd , and State Representative Len Greene, R-105 th , announced the House of Representatives approved legislation on Wednesday, April 28 that will allow the Town of Seymour to receive a higher reimbursement rate for the Seymour High School renovation project approved by voters in October 2003. Senate Bill 530, now returns to the Senate for final legislative approval.
Voters approved a $21.9 million addition project on October 7. SB 530 guarantees it will receive a 61.5 percent reimbursement rate for eligible costs. Had the vote been held prior to June 30, 2003, it would have automatically been guaranteed that reimbursement rate. Reimbursement projects are submitted annually in December for review and possible approval in the next state budget. The rate for the current year has not been determined but it could be up to 10 percent less.
The project will add more classrooms, upgrade outdated science facilities and bring the building up to safety codes. A groundbreaking is tentatively scheduled for June 24.
"This legislation, once it passes the Senate, will allow the town of Seymour to move forward with this school construction project without putting an additional burden on the local taxpayers," said Sen. DeLuca. "The voters of Seymour voted on the referendum with the belief that they'd receive a certain reimbursement rate, so it struck me as unfair they might now be asked to pay significantly more. I am thankful the House of Representatives agreed with this position, and I look forward to passing this bill in the Senate."
"This legislation is very important to the Town of Seymour because it allows them to move forward with the high school project knowing that the reimbursement rate is the same as if they'd voted on it a year ago," said Rep. Greene. "I thank Senator DeLuca for all his hard work on this bill."
"When we passed the project, this was the reimbursement rate we were counting on," said Seymour First Selectman Robert Koskelowski. "Under our form of government, if there had been a different reimbursement rate than what was presented at the time, we might have had to take a much closer look at the project." |