Oakfield-Alabama school board members were advised to break the next phase of capital improvement projects into two propositions on Tuesday at the regular Board of Education meeting.
The Capital Project Planning Committee has been meeting regularly for nearly a year to bring recommendations to the board.
SEI Design Group and Municipal Solutions representatives presented the plans and costs to renovate high school and middle school areas, including Tech/Ag, science rooms, athletic field support spaces, STEAM and F.A.C.S./Health classrooms, the stadium, and parking lots. Richard Little of SEI said these “test fit” designs are preliminary and that full designs would include collaboration with teachers and other users of the specific areas.
In addition, many updates in the “Priority #1” Building Condition Survey (BCS) list will be completed as part of the proposed inside improvement projects. Little reported that they estimate an additional $3.8 million would complete BCS projects needed at this time. These include items like HVAC work, carpeting, pool work, and bleacher replacement.
The committee, which also included parents, teachers and school staff, recommended separating the projects into two propositions. Proposition 1 would contain what is called inside construction, and as Maggie Augugliaro of Municipal Solutions explained, are within a higher “aided amount” from the state of New York. Proposition 1 includes renovations or updates to Tech, Ag and Art, F.A.C.S. and STEAM, MS/HS classrooms, MS/HS Science, MS/HS Pool, Concessions, Lockers, and Toilets, and BCS Priority #1.
Proposition 2 is the renovation and relocation of the stadium area, new lighting, track replacement and an expansion of the parking. “What this does allow for is a nice proximity of the stadium to the building, and also it opens up some space…for the ag program, for future expansion. That was one of the goals, working through this Prop 2 scope here, that we were trying to achieve,” Little said.
The outside sites and “incidental” or “soft” costs included in Proposition 2 are not aided at the same rate by the state, said Augugliaro, which is why the committee developed the two-proposition idea. However, the BOE will decide if that is how they want to proceed.
The $15 million cost of Proposition 1 would mostly be covered by state aid, with a Capital Reserve contribution of approximately $1.8 million, which would completely cover the remainder, Augugliaro told the board. No tax increase would be needed.
However, after aid and what was left in the Capital Reserve, Proposition 2 would still require about $5.7 million in funds. Augugliaro estimated the tax impact at $380,000 per year for 15 years.
The BOE will discuss and vote on whether to approve the scope and schedule of the proposal as the next step in the process. If approved, and environmental impact studies were complete, the proposal would then go to public discussion and vote.
Little made a point of thanking the many members of the Capital Project Planning Committee for their months of work, study and discussion. “Again, to thank the committee,” he said. “They are representatives of the board requesting a committee to come together and talk about our needs. (This is) what they thought would be a good project…that would meet our needs, be fiscally reasonable, and that’s what we’re presenting here today.”
