Thursday, January 27, 2011
Boston Globe Article on Duxbury's Building Project
On Thursday, January 27, the Globe South section of the Boston Globe carried the following article about the proposed building project:
Tuesday, January 25, 2011
Building New versus Renovation
After significant and thoughtful research and discussion, the School Building Committee has put forth the co-located building proposal because they believe that it is the most cost-effective, fiscally-responsible, educationally-appropriate way to address the needs of both the middle school and high school. However, there continues to be some discussion on renovating versus rebuilding, with some believing that it is less expensive to renovate.
Renovating is actually a more expensive option for our town.
This article on the WATD website quotes Dr. Tantillo regarding renovation versus rebuilding:
While a renovation project can qualify for additional percentage points above the base, the MSBA will only approve a renovation project if it is educationally appropriate. Renovation will not achieve educational appropriateness either at DMS or at DHS. For example, the team teaching model has been in place for 10 years at DMS, but is only partially implemented because of building layout; renovation cannot move load-bearing walls and thus address that layout problem. Undersized classrooms at the high school would be made smaller by the addition of appropriate levels of insulation and would not address layout issues that impede the curriculum -- and waiting to address physical deficiencies at the high school would not put us in good stead with NEASC, the accrediting body.
The reimbursement rate from the state is not guaranteed for the future. The base reimbursement rate for school building projects has declined over the last decade. The PAC, for example, was reimbursed at 67% -- but that level of state reimbursement was unsustainable. In fact, the MSBA was formed in part to address this issue; we will not see reimbursements approaching that level again.
Duxbury is already in the MSBA pipeline for a new building project. The MSBA's assessment of Duxbury‘s school situation (a senior study conducted by architects and engineers) is consistent with the assessment of the town's Feasibility Study and the findings of the School Building Committee. To change course now means starting over with a new Statement of Interest (SOI) to the MSBA and likely investing in yet another study.
The MSBA requires districts to prioritize projects. As such Duxbury would submit a request to renovate DMS, the older building, first. It could take several years to be accepted -- if MSBA agrees that renovation is the answer -- and another several years to do the work, during which time there is nowhere to house students except trailers. Once that DMS project is complete we would then submit another SOI for the high school. Again, acceptance could take several years, then the work would take several more years, with no place to put students.
And if the MSBA doesn’t agree that renovation is the answer? Duxbury must either choose to shoulder the entire cost of a renovation without state reimbursement, or start over with another statement of interest to the MSBA with another approach.
The bottom line is that if the building project as put forth is not approved, the town is looking is 8-9 years of various construction, with likely rising construction costs and bond rates, and with students displaced in trailers for much of that time -- and the result will be buildings that still don't fully meet our childrens’ educational needs with a tax burden to Duxbury taxpayers higher than that of a new building.
(1) IF the renovation is MSBA approved, 31% base rate + community wealth factor
(2) 31% base rate + community wealth factor + model school program + green building + construction manager at risk
Additional Notes:
DuxburyCARES agrees with the School Building Committtee that the co-located school proposal is the most cost-effective, fiscally responsible, educationally appropriate long term solution for our town. We must act while favorable conditions exist.
Renovating is actually a more expensive option for our town.
This article on the WATD website quotes Dr. Tantillo regarding renovation versus rebuilding:
"It would cost $117 million over an 8 or 9 year span to renovate the buildings, with about a 30% reimbursement from the state. For a completely new building it would cost about $120 million and we will get 43% back from the state."The "30%" figure refers to the current base reimbursement rate from the MSBA for approved programs. The rate is actually 31%. For the co-located school proposal, Duxbury qualifies for additional percentage points based on various factors, including points for the model school program, green building elements, and using a construction manager at risk that bring us up to the 43% reimbursement level.
While a renovation project can qualify for additional percentage points above the base, the MSBA will only approve a renovation project if it is educationally appropriate. Renovation will not achieve educational appropriateness either at DMS or at DHS. For example, the team teaching model has been in place for 10 years at DMS, but is only partially implemented because of building layout; renovation cannot move load-bearing walls and thus address that layout problem. Undersized classrooms at the high school would be made smaller by the addition of appropriate levels of insulation and would not address layout issues that impede the curriculum -- and waiting to address physical deficiencies at the high school would not put us in good stead with NEASC, the accrediting body.
The reimbursement rate from the state is not guaranteed for the future. The base reimbursement rate for school building projects has declined over the last decade. The PAC, for example, was reimbursed at 67% -- but that level of state reimbursement was unsustainable. In fact, the MSBA was formed in part to address this issue; we will not see reimbursements approaching that level again.
Duxbury is already in the MSBA pipeline for a new building project. The MSBA's assessment of Duxbury‘s school situation (a senior study conducted by architects and engineers) is consistent with the assessment of the town's Feasibility Study and the findings of the School Building Committee. To change course now means starting over with a new Statement of Interest (SOI) to the MSBA and likely investing in yet another study.
The MSBA requires districts to prioritize projects. As such Duxbury would submit a request to renovate DMS, the older building, first. It could take several years to be accepted -- if MSBA agrees that renovation is the answer -- and another several years to do the work, during which time there is nowhere to house students except trailers. Once that DMS project is complete we would then submit another SOI for the high school. Again, acceptance could take several years, then the work would take several more years, with no place to put students.
And if the MSBA doesn’t agree that renovation is the answer? Duxbury must either choose to shoulder the entire cost of a renovation without state reimbursement, or start over with another statement of interest to the MSBA with another approach.
The bottom line is that if the building project as put forth is not approved, the town is looking is 8-9 years of various construction, with likely rising construction costs and bond rates, and with students displaced in trailers for much of that time -- and the result will be buildings that still don't fully meet our childrens’ educational needs with a tax burden to Duxbury taxpayers higher than that of a new building.
| Estimated Total Cost | Estimated Reimbursement | Estimated Cost to Town | |
| Renovation | $117,000,000 | 33% (1) | $78,390,000 |
| Building New | $130,000,000 | 43% (2) | $74,100,000 |
(1) IF the renovation is MSBA approved, 31% base rate + community wealth factor
(2) 31% base rate + community wealth factor + model school program + green building + construction manager at risk
Additional Notes:
DuxburyCARES agrees with the School Building Committtee that the co-located school proposal is the most cost-effective, fiscally responsible, educationally appropriate long term solution for our town. We must act while favorable conditions exist.
- The $117m is figured in today's dollars. Construction costs will escalate over the next ten years and as a result, renovation will be more expensive over time.
- Trailer rental is not just trailer rental. There would be site work for the location of the trailers, including utility, security and parking issues, loss of some classes, even more limited science curriculum (trailers can‘t house science labs), and so on. Typically trailers are used when additions are being constructed or a district chooses partial renovation. To transfer the operations of 800-1000 students into trailers for multiple years -- and through winters possibly as we are experiencing now -- is unwieldy and complicated and educationally suspect at best. None of these costs are reimbursable.
- In ten years we may be approaching the need for major capital work at Alden School, PAC and Chandler School again.
Rescheduled Dates for Model School Building Tours
The dates for the School Building Committee sponsored Whitman-Hanson, Ashland and Hudson model school building tours have been rescheduled.
The full list of tours is as follows:
Also remember that you have another chance to tour the middle school and high school this Saturday, January 29 from 9AM to 12PM.
The full list of tours is as follows:
- Thursday, January 27, 11AM - Ipswich High School and Middle School
- Friday, January 28, 10AM - Ashland High School
- Friday, January 28, 1PM - Hudson High School
- Monday, January 31, 10:30AM - Whitman-Hanson High School
Also remember that you have another chance to tour the middle school and high school this Saturday, January 29 from 9AM to 12PM.
Friday, January 21, 2011
Interesting Information from Dr. Tantillo's Presentation
At the School Committee Meeting on Wednesday, January 19, 2011, Dr. Tantillo presented a slide show to the committee updating the committee on the proposed school building project and making recommendations. From the slides and the ensuing discussion, there were some interesting details presented. Among them:
- Duxbury is ranked 17th in wealth in the state of Massachusetts.
- Dubury ranks 277 out of 325 districts in per pupil spending.
- Duxbury's per pupil spending is $2300 below the state average.
- Not only does the model school building program save time to build, it also saves money. Norwood saved about $30MM using a model school approach.
- A year of trailers to house kids if we were to replace systems or renovate instead of build new would cost $600-700K per year.
- Dr. Tantillo says the $130MM estimate is "conservative high." The MSBA model school program limits scope creep that drives up costs.
- MSBA will not reimburse for administrative facilities. The Administration offices will need to find a new home; they can be in the new building, but Duxbury would have to cover the cost of that area of the building at 100%. The Administration offices might look at other locations in town, too.
- The MSBA will help pay for the demolition of the old DHS building and building of a new field on that site (since the project removes the old middle school field). It will not pay for things like snack shacks or other new buildings on that site.
- There will be an all new school website launching July 1. It will be far more comprehensive for the district, schools, teachers, and so on.
- An audience member made a comment about green building practices and materials reuse and such. Could we sell the old high school lockers in eBay? It's worth some talk.
Thursday, January 20, 2011
What Does Accreditation Mean?
In talking about the school building project, you may have read or heard discussion about accreditation of the high school, or reaccreditation.
Educational accreditation is like educational quality assurance. It's standards set and evaluated by a third party to verify that an educational institution meets certain basic criteria. As consumers of education, it's a way for us to be sure that our children are getting a solid educational foundation. For colleges, it's a way to help ensure that applicants to their institutions have certain basic knowledge and will be prepared for the academic rigors of higher education.
High schools in New England are accredited by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC). NEASC is the oldest of the regional accrediting bodies in the United States and serves over 2000 public and independent schools in our region.
The reaccreditation process takes place every 10 years. DHS is now in the process of reaccreditation.
During the last round of reaccreditation, NEASC found the physical qualities of the high school to be "at risk" (on the NEASC website, poor facilities is noted as "Community Resources for Learning"). This was a way to let Duxbury know that as buildings fall further in to disrepair, facilities might not meet the minimum quality standards for accreditation -- much less for our students.
Losing accreditation would be a serious problem for our schools and for our students. A diploma from a non-accredited high school might not be accepted by a college or university for admission. Accreditation status directly affects our children's future.
Last week, the town of Winchester approved funding for a school building project. Among the dialogue about the project, both for and against, we noted the following commentary from a parent in that town:
We are not the only town in Massachusetts grappling with deteriorating buildings. The town of Beverly recently completed a new high school in direct response to Beverly High school being put on probation by NEASC:
"Accreditors visit Beverly High to assess school"
Thankfully Duxbury is NOT one of the nine high schools in Massachusetts currently on probation. It would be a disservice to our kids to let it get that far -- but it might be one of NEASC's next steps if we do not address our school situation. Keep in mind also that the high school is newer than the middle school.
Finally, the parent from Winchester also wrote:
Educational accreditation is like educational quality assurance. It's standards set and evaluated by a third party to verify that an educational institution meets certain basic criteria. As consumers of education, it's a way for us to be sure that our children are getting a solid educational foundation. For colleges, it's a way to help ensure that applicants to their institutions have certain basic knowledge and will be prepared for the academic rigors of higher education.
High schools in New England are accredited by the New England Association of Schools and Colleges (NEASC). NEASC is the oldest of the regional accrediting bodies in the United States and serves over 2000 public and independent schools in our region.
The reaccreditation process takes place every 10 years. DHS is now in the process of reaccreditation.
During the last round of reaccreditation, NEASC found the physical qualities of the high school to be "at risk" (on the NEASC website, poor facilities is noted as "Community Resources for Learning"). This was a way to let Duxbury know that as buildings fall further in to disrepair, facilities might not meet the minimum quality standards for accreditation -- much less for our students.
Losing accreditation would be a serious problem for our schools and for our students. A diploma from a non-accredited high school might not be accepted by a college or university for admission. Accreditation status directly affects our children's future.
Last week, the town of Winchester approved funding for a school building project. Among the dialogue about the project, both for and against, we noted the following commentary from a parent in that town:
"I moved to Winchester because I was attracted to its outstanding schools, and its community spirit. I moved from a town that had let its high school fall into such disrepair that it lost its State Accreditation- due to structural, not educational, reasons. High School Seniors that year could not attend the colleges that had already accepted them for the upcoming year. The reason the mayor that gave for not putting money into the schools was that 'we had other priorities'. My family moved to Winchester 3 months later. "
We are not the only town in Massachusetts grappling with deteriorating buildings. The town of Beverly recently completed a new high school in direct response to Beverly High school being put on probation by NEASC:
"Accreditors visit Beverly High to assess school"
Thankfully Duxbury is NOT one of the nine high schools in Massachusetts currently on probation. It would be a disservice to our kids to let it get that far -- but it might be one of NEASC's next steps if we do not address our school situation. Keep in mind also that the high school is newer than the middle school.
Finally, the parent from Winchester also wrote:
"I am not looking forward to paying more taxes; my family sacrificed a lot to live here already. If we do not maintain a strong educational system for our town, however, and show a lack of commitment to its children, what will happen then? Will people with small children move to other towns, concerned that their children will not receive a good elementary or high school education? Sure, that will relieve the need for new or refurbished schools in the short term. But as many have pointed out, this town relies on its property tax base. If scores of people move out and the reputation of Winchester's schools dwindle.....how much more will the remaining residents suffer economically if property values lessen?"We need to ask ourselves the same questions.
Disrupted Class Days and Damaged Equipment
On Monday, January 3, 2011, the Duxbury Middle School greeted the new school year with an unwelcome guest: water.
Over the holiday break, the DMS roof was breached. For students in Senora Mehegan's Spanish class, that meant gushing water from the ceiling, maintenence in the classroom trying to get things under control, and a totally lost day of instruction.
Water also poured into the print room. A $20K printer is unusable until special maintenance and repair can be performed.
The following photos are from the unexpected DMS "Rain Day." There are also more photos of the eletrical/wiring problem at the middle school (similar issues at the high school): with only two outlets per classroom and no techology infrastructure, dealing with a mass of wires is a common experience for our students.
UPDATE: We now have these photos from just yesterday, January 19, at the middle school.
Over the holiday break, the DMS roof was breached. For students in Senora Mehegan's Spanish class, that meant gushing water from the ceiling, maintenence in the classroom trying to get things under control, and a totally lost day of instruction.
Water also poured into the print room. A $20K printer is unusable until special maintenance and repair can be performed.
The following photos are from the unexpected DMS "Rain Day." There are also more photos of the eletrical/wiring problem at the middle school (similar issues at the high school): with only two outlets per classroom and no techology infrastructure, dealing with a mass of wires is a common experience for our students.
UPDATE: We now have these photos from just yesterday, January 19, at the middle school.
Wednesday, January 19, 2011
Press Release: “DuxburyCARES” Supports School Re-Build
The following press release has been distributed to local news outlets.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With Town Meeting less than two months away, a Duxbury citizens’ committee has organized to encourage residents to vote “YES” on the upcoming school building article. “DuxburyCARES” will inform residents on the state of DMS and DHS and communicate why re-building is the most fiscally responsible and educationally sound option.
The school building article seeks approximately $3.5MM in funding for architectural and schematic drawings, based on an existing state model school design program. At the 2009 Town Meeting, voters approved a $200,000 feasibility study to review the state of Duxbury Middle School and Duxbury High School. The results of that study were outlined last spring by the School Building Committee (SBC) which reconvened in 2008 to assess the options for these schools.
As a reminder, residents must be registered to vote to raise a hand in the upcoming March 12th Town Meeting and vote again in the March 26th Town Election. The last day to register to vote is February 18th at Town Hall; mail-in forms are also available at the Post Office and Library. “Vote Twice if YOU Care” will be the rallying cry for DuxburyCARES because the school building article must pass at Town Meeting and again at Town Election.
Elizabeth Lewis, a Duxbury resident, engineer, and chair of the SBC commented on the committee’s work over the past two years. “We’ve assessed every brick and corner of these buildings,” said Ms Lewis. “The systems are shot: roofs, walls, windows, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing. Neither building comes close to current codes for energy compliance, ADA, seismic or wind resistance. We unanimously recommend rebuilding DHS and DMS in one location, giving us 43% reimbursement from the state. This is the most cost effective, responsible option over the long haul.”
In Spring 2010, the SBC outlined six options considered in the feasibility study, ranging from renovating to rebuilding both buildings at two different locations. The cost of these options, outlined in the building feasibility study which can be found on the school website at http://www.duxbury.k12.ma.us/, ranged from $68MM to $148MM. The SBC recommends building a co-located DMS and DHS at an estimated cost of $125MM. The buildings would operate independently and maintain unique identities but share infrastructure in systems, media-technology and kitchen areas. Classrooms, offices, hallways and cafeterias would be separate for the two schools.
Dr. Ben Tantillo, Superintendent of Duxbury Schools, is scheduled to present an overview of the schools and the SBC recommendations at the School Committee meeting, Wednesday, January 19th at 7:00pm in room 104 at Alden School. “We’re at a crossroad,” said Dr. Tantillo. “Both DMS & DHS were built in the 1960’s, a decade when the quality of construction didn’t come close to 1926 when our original high school was built (now the Town Library). Even the 2002 accreditation for DHS cited the facility ‘at risk’. The time has come.”
The next meeting for DuxburyCARES will be held on Thursday, January 20th at 10:00am upstairs at One, located on Depot Street next to D’orazio’s. Anyone is welcome to come and get involved. Karen Wong, Chairwoman of the group encourages individuals of all ages to attend this meeting. "We have parents with children from pre-school through college age as well as empty nesters and business professionals concerned about property values and the quality of our schools." said Karen. “We hope to see more new faces on Thursday."
There is an open house public tour scheduled for DMS & DHS on Saturday, Jan 22nd, from 9am -12pm. For more information about DuxburyCARES or to help fund their efforts, please visit duxburycares.org or call Karen at 781-934-6682. DuxburyCARES can also be followed on Facebook and Twitter.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With Town Meeting less than two months away, a Duxbury citizens’ committee has organized to encourage residents to vote “YES” on the upcoming school building article. “DuxburyCARES” will inform residents on the state of DMS and DHS and communicate why re-building is the most fiscally responsible and educationally sound option.
The school building article seeks approximately $3.5MM in funding for architectural and schematic drawings, based on an existing state model school design program. At the 2009 Town Meeting, voters approved a $200,000 feasibility study to review the state of Duxbury Middle School and Duxbury High School. The results of that study were outlined last spring by the School Building Committee (SBC) which reconvened in 2008 to assess the options for these schools.
As a reminder, residents must be registered to vote to raise a hand in the upcoming March 12th Town Meeting and vote again in the March 26th Town Election. The last day to register to vote is February 18th at Town Hall; mail-in forms are also available at the Post Office and Library. “Vote Twice if YOU Care” will be the rallying cry for DuxburyCARES because the school building article must pass at Town Meeting and again at Town Election.
Elizabeth Lewis, a Duxbury resident, engineer, and chair of the SBC commented on the committee’s work over the past two years. “We’ve assessed every brick and corner of these buildings,” said Ms Lewis. “The systems are shot: roofs, walls, windows, mechanical, electrical, and plumbing. Neither building comes close to current codes for energy compliance, ADA, seismic or wind resistance. We unanimously recommend rebuilding DHS and DMS in one location, giving us 43% reimbursement from the state. This is the most cost effective, responsible option over the long haul.”
In Spring 2010, the SBC outlined six options considered in the feasibility study, ranging from renovating to rebuilding both buildings at two different locations. The cost of these options, outlined in the building feasibility study which can be found on the school website at http://www.duxbury.k12.ma.us/, ranged from $68MM to $148MM. The SBC recommends building a co-located DMS and DHS at an estimated cost of $125MM. The buildings would operate independently and maintain unique identities but share infrastructure in systems, media-technology and kitchen areas. Classrooms, offices, hallways and cafeterias would be separate for the two schools.
Dr. Ben Tantillo, Superintendent of Duxbury Schools, is scheduled to present an overview of the schools and the SBC recommendations at the School Committee meeting, Wednesday, January 19th at 7:00pm in room 104 at Alden School. “We’re at a crossroad,” said Dr. Tantillo. “Both DMS & DHS were built in the 1960’s, a decade when the quality of construction didn’t come close to 1926 when our original high school was built (now the Town Library). Even the 2002 accreditation for DHS cited the facility ‘at risk’. The time has come.”
The next meeting for DuxburyCARES will be held on Thursday, January 20th at 10:00am upstairs at One, located on Depot Street next to D’orazio’s. Anyone is welcome to come and get involved. Karen Wong, Chairwoman of the group encourages individuals of all ages to attend this meeting. "We have parents with children from pre-school through college age as well as empty nesters and business professionals concerned about property values and the quality of our schools." said Karen. “We hope to see more new faces on Thursday."
There is an open house public tour scheduled for DMS & DHS on Saturday, Jan 22nd, from 9am -12pm. For more information about DuxburyCARES or to help fund their efforts, please visit duxburycares.org or call Karen at 781-934-6682. DuxburyCARES can also be followed on Facebook and Twitter.
Sunday, January 16, 2011
Welcome to DuxburyCARES!
Welcome to the DuxburyCARES website. Here you will find information for the community about the proposed Duxbury school building project and what you can do to help get it passed.
We are citizens organizing in support of the proposed Duxbury school building project. We are taxpayers, parents, small business owners, empty-nesters, educators, medical professionals, realtors and volunteers who believe that the best, most cost-effective, educationally-appropriate, long-term approach to our school building crisis is to support the co-located building plan as put forth by the School Building Committee.
We are committed to educating and motivating the community to vote FOR the school building project at Town Meeting on March 12 AND at the town election on March 26.
Our next meeting will be Thursday, January 20 at 10AM at One in Hall's Corner. Please join us!
We are citizens organizing in support of the proposed Duxbury school building project. We are taxpayers, parents, small business owners, empty-nesters, educators, medical professionals, realtors and volunteers who believe that the best, most cost-effective, educationally-appropriate, long-term approach to our school building crisis is to support the co-located building plan as put forth by the School Building Committee.
We are committed to educating and motivating the community to vote FOR the school building project at Town Meeting on March 12 AND at the town election on March 26.
Our next meeting will be Thursday, January 20 at 10AM at One in Hall's Corner. Please join us!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)