Long Term School Planning / Naugatuck High School Update – 6/16/2011

Posted by Bob on June 16, 2011 under Daily Blogs | Be the First to Comment

The Long Term School Facility Planning Committee recently voted unanimously to recommend that the Five (5) Year Capital Committee review the Naugatuck High School renovate-as-new feasibility study discussed at Monday’s (6/13/2011) meeting.  The Borough recently engaged Kaestle Boos Associates to analyze the costs associated with a renovate-to-new project v. expenses associated with various repairs that are required at the high school.  The fees for this study were paid from excess bond dollars from a previously completed, under-budget school project.  The obligations of bonds usually require repayment of principal and interest in accordance with the original, fixed term.

“Renovate-as-new” is a term of art used by school construction architects to describe a reimbursable renovation of an existing facility, as described in Connecticut General Statutes Section 10-282 (18).  The premise is to allow communities to completely refurbish an existing school to meet modern educational needs, repair any structural deficiencies and ensure code compliance.  The State of Connecticut previously provided reimbursement to municipalities and/or school districts at the same rate as new constructions.  Naugatuck’s current rate of reimbursement is seventy four (74%) percent.

During the most recently concluded legislative session, the budget passed by the General Assembly reduced the state reimbursement rates for new school construction in an effort to encourage communities to renovate existing assets.  This is something that the Committee has been considering while crafting recommendations for the long term future of our school district.

Some may state that now is not the time to consider investment in the schools given the state of the economy.  Given difficult times and a very tight local budget, such a sentiment is logical.  It is also flawed.

Many of our schools, particularly Naugatuck High School (“NHS”), are in need of repair.  A 2007 study of existing conditions at NHS cited several areas in need of address.  Unfortunately many of the recommended repairs are still awaiting action.  Repairs will have to be made in coming years and most will be costly.  Some will not be eligible for the same rate of state reimbursement as new construction or renovate-as-new, and others may not be eligible at all.  Unless the argument is to allow our flagship high school, one of the most valuable assets in the Borough, to simply deteriorate, something has to be done.

One of the biggest expenses of the past year involved the removal of snow from school roofs.  While we are still actively pursing federal disaster reimbursement for applicable costs, a decision was made to protect those assets regardless.  The cost of removing snow far outweighed the value of the assets protected, given the potential for damage to our school buildings.  When you factor the safety and security of our students and staff inside the buildings, the decision to remove snow was clearly the only course of action at the time.

While the current condition of NHS does not present the same sense of urgency as the snow removal comparison, we will need to address many areas of concern in the next couple years.  Problem areas generally worsen over time and can become more costly the longer they go without repair.  Cracks in walls, inefficiencies in utility systems and athletic fields so damaged that they present safety concerns will not magically improve without action.  We eventually will have to pay to repair NHS one way or another.  From the Committee’s current analysis, the Borough may get far greater value from a renovate-as-new project than piecemeal repairs to the existing facility.

There is another flaw in using the current budget as a reason not to pursue a renovate as new project.  Annual budgets  are comprised primarily of operating expense (i.e. costs for salaries, utilities, commodities and supplies, insurance, etc.; which occur annually).  Repairs and/or renovations to schools almost always are financed in whole or in part.  While the money is certainly not free, the only recurring operating costs are the debt service.  As a result of several fiscally responsible initiatives implemented over several years by the Joint Boards of Finance and Mayor and Burgesses, the Borough’s bond rating increased last year.  That means better interest rates on bonds.  Our bonded indebtedness is actually low compared with other communities because we have not built a new school in over twenty (20) years.  This is definitely not a choice between fixing our schools and buying textbooks (on which educators rely less and less in the internet age).

The Long Term School Facility Planning Committee’s recommendation regarding the high school is only one (1) part of a more comprehensive process.  Members are still analyzing options for long term building configurations currently focused on a K-6 Campus / 7-8 / 9-12 model (referred to as the “Marenghi Plan”) and a K-4 / 5-8 Campus / 9-12 model (referred to as the “Neth Plan”).  Both options are in the preliminary stages, will require more detailed analysis and are certainly subject to change before the Committee ultimately recommends a district-wide, facilities plan for our future.  The reason an initial recommendation to the Five Year Capital Committee was made is the pressing needs of the high school and the fact that the Committee does not recommend pursuit of a new high school.  Once reviewed by the Five Year Capital Committee, a decision to refer to the Board of Mayor and Burgesses would be required.  The Board of Mayor and Burgesses has the authority to appoint a building committee should its members choose to do so.  Any bonding project the size of a complete school renovation would require approval at public referendum.

All Long Term School Facility Planning Committee meetings are open to the public.  The next meeting is scheduled for Monday, July 18, 2011, 6:30 PM, at Town Hall.  It is anticipated that a forum soliciting public comment on district-wide proposals will be held in the coming months.  We also encourage your questions and/or comments at this stage in the process.