The Main Stream Media (MSM) has long abandoned honesty and integrity in reporting, shifting from investigative journalism to becoming propaganda tools for both the Far Left and the Far Right. When an organization like Pennsbury sends out a press release, news outlets like Patch.com often re-write it, presenting it as original content. This results in a polished but misleading narrative. Locally in Pennsbury, we primarily rely on LevittownNow.com, but they can’t cover every story. Fortunately, Broad & Liberty and Delaware Valley Journal have stepped in to fill the void left by the Bucks County Courier Times, which has lost 85% of its subscription base since Gannett’s mismanagement. Now, it’s up to the public to disseminate information, a role that PSD411.net is fulfilling.

Why Does The Price Point Keep Changing?

For those who have been following along, the initial cost estimates for a new PHS building were presented in the Fall of 2021 by D’Huy Engineering (now known as CHA) and KCBA Architects, who were selected to work on the Charles Boehm renovation project. During this period, these organizations provided cost projections, estimating the renovation of PHS West at $100 million. Simultaneously, they estimated the cost of the football stadium at $6 million and the Charles Boehm renovation project at $34 million. Cost overruns on those projects currently stand at 140% and 20% respectively and still climbing. The following is a screenshot of the presentation slide that was entered into public record with the original cost estimates for the PHS Building Project as they considered the Boehm and Stadium projects:

For those who haven’t been following, the change orders for the Stadium and Charles Boehm projects have spiraled out of control. Linda Palsky, Chip Taylor, and newly appointed, unelected Board Member Donna Petrecco have been unable to rein in their reckless spending. At the April 2024 facilities meeting, Taylor suggested putting a canopy at the bus drop-off area out to bid to ensure not a single raindrop falls on our children’s heads. At the most recent January 2025 meeting, the cost for a new centrally located server bank skyrocketed from $680,000 to over $1 million. This decision was made despite the district’s awareness that Charles Boehm’s flat roofs are prone to leaks and were not included in the renovation plans to add peaks, leading to previous flooding issues due to drainage problems. While placing the server bank in the brand-new facility would seem to make sense, it appears that this decision could have triggered the referendum they are trying to avoid. More shocking was the new forecast for the PHS building project that D’Huy bolstered to between $180M to $240M, with no supporting backup on why those cost estimates more than doubled in just 30 months, far exceeding inflationary rates.

So What Is Behind The Constant Reforecasting?

Under PA School Code, our legislators did place into effect legalese protections for PA citizens from the duly-elected, and in the case of Pennsylvania, hand-picked cronies of State Senator Steve Santarsiero whom runs the Democratic Party with an iron first despite deeming Pennsbury unsuitable to send his own children. In the PA School Code there is a math formula that limits how much debt can be accumulate to avoid a School District from heading into outright bankruptcy. The following is the formula:

Three Year Average of Recent Total Revenues * 225% = Total Debt Capacity

The Local Government Unit Debt Act (Act 52 of 1978, reenacting and amending Act 185 of 1972) sets debt limits for all local government units in Pennsylvania. Administered by the Pennsylvania Department of Community Affairs, this Act excludes amounts received as reimbursement from the state for a portion of the district’s debt service, extra state grants (account 7500), and revenue from other financing sources. Act 50 of 1998 amended the limits on indebtedness that a school district may incur without voter consent. Under the current Act, no school district may incur any non-electoral or lease rental debt if the total net principal amount of this new debt, combined with other outstanding net non-electoral and lease rental debt, would cause the net non-electoral debt plus net lease rental debt to exceed 225% of the Borrowing Base.

Additionally, there is Act 34, known as the “Taj Mahal Act,” which aims to curb misconduct by school districts that treat taxpayer dollars as Monopoly money. This will be discussed in detail in a future post, which will also address multiple laws that Pennsbury allegedly violated and the open investigation currently underway at the PA Department of Education.

So here are what the current numbers looks like based on the most current public filings by Pennsbury:

As Pennsbury began the process, they hired a firm called PFM, their go-to vendor for estimating lending needs and initiating bonds. PFM recommended the continued use of “wrapped around bonds,” a financial instrument that allows Pennsbury to structure a payment plan that only pays down interest initially while delaying principal payments. This effectively causes the true cost of any building project to soar because the principal is never being paid down. If you’ve ever heard of a “balloon payment” at the end of a loan cycle, that’s what a “wrapped around bond” is. This leads the lender to constantly refinance the loans because funds don’t exist to make the “balloon payment.” With each refinancing, PFM makes millions.

In the above chart, nearly $34M was financed this year. This was primarily the result of the 30-year bonds taken out for Afton Elementary and William Penn Middle School, on which little to no principal has been paid down. Next up is the Pennsbury West High School renovation, led by Linda Palsky, which cost around $45M. She is spearheading this despite the fact that not a single nickel of that $45M principal has been paid back.

This following is the original forecast for lending presented by PFM in the process:

According to the PFM forecast, Pennsbury was advised to construct a brand new building, which would require an additional $367M in lending, far exceeding the current state limits on debt capacity. Subsequent forecasts from PFM attempted to lower this amount without providing any clear backup on how the revised metrics were determined, as illustrated below:

Miraculously, after months of citizen complaints and reminders of state law, the financing required for the exact same building plummeted by nearly $120M, just ahead of the anticipated Federal Reserve interest rate cuts. Many attribute these changes to the leadership strategy commonly referred to as “Mushroom Management” by our School Administration and the School Board. For those unfamiliar with this term, it humorously means “Keep them in the dark and feed them bull.”

What’s most concerning is if PFM’s original forecast holds true, our School District might only end up building three-quarters of a structure. Similar-sized projects at North Penn and Perth Amboy suggest this estimate is accurate. Without additional financing, our Moody’s Rating could descend to Junk Bond status by 2029. This would likely lead to a referendum, asking taxpayers for more money and potentially imposing double-digit tax hikes, all to avoid leaving the building incomplete.