Ron Bohonowicz extolled the southwest view to consider for library location
The Wildwood School Building Committee met yesterday in the Middle School for the first time since the Amherst School Committee pretty much boxed them in for building designs with their controversial 4-1 vote in favor of grade reconfiguration that requires two separate schools under one roof.
Amherst School (aka Wildwood) Building Committee yesterday
After almost two hours of painstaking presentation of four options that meet the ASC requirement, Building Committee Chair Mike Morris pretty much dismissed two of the options because they require "swing space" -- a temporary location to hold classes for all the students displaced by construction.
Four options (pretty much whittled down to two)
Mr. Morris pointed out there are no spaces in Amherst large enough to handle all the Wildwood students and so the Schools would have to rent space at six or eight different locations strewn about the entire town.
Therefor due to "safety, learning and transportation considerations" he would prefer to avoid using swing space. Superintendent Maria Geryk was nodding her head in agreement as he spoke.
Since the presentations took up most of the scheduled time for the two hour meeting the group will discuss and decide at their next meeting February 2, but it's pretty safe to assume the choice will be between W10 ($60,893,000) and W12 ($67,176,167).
Maria Kopicki warns during Public Comment that public sentiment needs to be more carefully considered
Coincidentally the Amherst Finance Committee met in Town Hall just after the School Building Committee adjourned and during the "member report" Marylou Theilman brought up the school building project.
She presented a spreadsheet to the FinCom showing cost options for the Amherst short list as well as the most recent costs of school projects across the state financed by MSBA.
One member wondered what the role of the Finance Committee would be in this process? Chair Kay Moran pointed out they are advisers to Town Meeting, and it would be Town Meeting and then the voters who approve a debt exclusion Override to fund the new school construction project.
And even after it passes Town Meeting, although Ms. Moran thought it would be a "high hurdle" because it requires two-thirds support, it could still fall under their purview to educate the voters as to the financial implications of a yes vote: A $200 year tax increase for 30 years on an average home.
And maybe where Amherst currently sits for property tax rates statewide (in the top ten).
Ms. Theilman did say she was somewhat surprised when talking to one of the architects to learn that the moisture problems at Wildwood or Fort River would be solved by a simple renovation. The old foundation is dug up, removed, and a moisture barrier installed before a new foundation is poured.
Wouldn't it be cheaper to pour a new floor, put in some walls, & maybe a new boiler?
ReplyDeleteOne more teachers union toy for a college town, any sane, respectable person, would go by a re-conditioning option for the schools-sure to cost much less, be more green-environmentally responsible, but since when has the tax and spend pro-union school shill blowhard community ever been even socially responsible-taxes included ?
ReplyDeleteas there are plans to move ARMS to the HS (no idea where that process is), why wouldn't potential swing space be available in ARMS? It certainly has the capacity for all of WW. Did it come up at all?
ReplyDeleteSort of.
ReplyDeleteApparently it would take too long.
Vince is Where's Waldo in pretty much every single post. I am so sick of seeing him! GO AWAY, OLD MAN!
ReplyDeleteEspecially since the admin already rented out space in the middle school to GCC and LSSE. Hey, why reserve classrooms for our students anyway when we can build a brand new place?
ReplyDeleteTalk about unsustainable. Maybe the "Sustainability Coordinator" should be consulted about the waste of materials from new construction.
Anonymous 12:37 PM: As a member of the teachers' union, I can tell you that many of us wanted renovation to be investigated, priced, and offered as an option. No information on this option was made available to us or to the public. It's outrageous to hear how much less expensively this could have been done than the mega-school, which many of us also did not support. (And not because we don't value equity - because we think there are many other ways to define and achieve equity than those used to sell this plan.) Signed Anonymous for a reason.
ReplyDelete"Ms. Theilman did say she was somewhat surprised when talking to one of the architects to learn that the moisture problems at Wildwood or Fort River would be solved by a simple renovation. The old foundation is dug up, removed, and a moisture barrier installed before a new foundation is poured."
ReplyDeleteFunny, the district has repeatedly said that renovation of WW & FR is not a feasible option.
.....
& I still don't understand why the MS is not an option for swing space or ... even for use as an elementary school. Who is going to continue to pay for the upkeep of the MS once the students aren't there anymore? The region? The small fees the district plans to charge LSSE, GCC, others? isn't going to cover all the costs.
Is the district still planning to, assuming it passes Town Meeting, bring the new elementary school project to the votes for a debt exclusion override in Nov 2016? Will there be enough time for that? Will the project be far enough along?
ReplyDeleteI believe it will not be voted on by Town Meeting until the fall.
ReplyDeleteWhat happens when people simply start voting "no"?
ReplyDeleteGas heat simply wasn't feasible 40-50 years ago, it is a LOT cheaper now. Look at what WalMart does with ceiling-mounted hot air & radiant heating, you can abandon mold-infested HVAC ducts and come out ahead.
If town meeting takes a vote on the project in the fall, it seems doubtful that there will be time to get it on the presidential election ballot in early Nov. Doesn't town meeting usually not meet until Oct?
ReplyDeleteCorrect.
ReplyDeleteThank god for our active citizens, Ms. Theilman on this case here, and the Finance Committee, that will take a hard look at the school administration's proposals and number, and for Town Meeting and our voters, who will have the final say. Good work citizens! And thanks to the blog, real information is out in the community.
ReplyDeleteThe basic problem here is the echo chamber effect. The Wildwood Rebuilding Committee was stacked with district employees and operated for years with few in the elementary schools knowing what they were doing. This committee basically delivered the options that the administration wanted without asking a lot of obviuos questions like: how can the water problem be fixed? Can the middle school be used? So all the options and questions coming up since the fall did not come up early in the process. What does this administration do well?
ReplyDeleteThe problems with Wildwood and Fort River go far beyond just a problem with water. If you think that is their only problem you have definitely not been paying attention.
Delete"What does this administration do well?" F#CK it up. they are very good at that. Does anyone actually think our schools are better now than 10 years ago? The number of students fleeing is increasing; dramatically. Doesn't the SC know? Do they ask? To some extent school choice obscures the effect, but it is there. Changes in the high school are excellerating the process.
ReplyDeleteLarry is being a bit disingenuous when he says the costs of the two options on the table are, rounded, 61K and 67K. These numbers are before the MSBA reimbursement. With the reimbursement we are at 30.5K and 33.5K.
ReplyDeleteEveryone seems to keep looking at the "cheaper" renovation option. Let's really look at how much the renovation option would cost. To fully gut and renovate Wildwood the rounded cost is 34.5K. With MSBA reimbursement, our cost would be 17.25K. Of course, that means nothing is done to Fort River. We would need to fully fund the gutting and renovation of Fort River at a cost of 34.5K to us. That brings us to a total our out of pocket costs to renovate both Wildwood and Fort River of 51.75K. Of course, one would also need to add in the costs and hassle of finding a place for the kids to go to school while their school was being renovated. And, who knows when the town would be able to afford to renovate Fort River, if at all.
So, here is the bottom line: Build a building large enough to hold two co-located schools at a cost of $33.5K or renovate both Wildwood and Fort River at a cost of $51.75K. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
Actually I published Ms. Theilman's entire Finance Committee presentation which pretty clearly shows MSBA reimbursements for every option. (And it's already had over 1,1000 views.)
ReplyDeleteanon@12:54: there is another option you didn't mention: renovate/replace WW and wait until FR makes it to the top of the list (a few years perhaps). Not saying that is my preferred option but let us not be disingenuous...
ReplyDeleteanon@12:54 its "M" not "k" millions not thousands
ReplyDeleteYes Larry, you did publish Ms. Theiilman's report. BUT, you have in big headlines the cost of the two options on the table at 61K and 63K respectively. You know darn well that is misleading.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Anon 1.09. I stand corrected. The numbers in front of the letter though do not lie.
ReplyDeleteActually the headline doesn't give any amount, simply stating it's "expensive".
ReplyDeleteAnd last I looked even a lousy $30.5 or $33.5 MILLION still qualifies as expensive.
30.5 or 33.5 million is a whole lot less than 51.75 million. Don't you think? Or is nearly 20 million pocket change?
ReplyDeleteBut the project costs are not $30. 5 million or 33.5 million, they are twice that with a 50% match (maybe 55%) in state money that comes from, among other, Amherst residents.
ReplyDeletethese costs do not include the associated costs with swing space needs and adding/renovating CF for "preK-1" learning center... and the yearly increased running for the new configuration.
ReplyDeleteWhy do we think it will cost more for the reconfigured schools? I would think the costs would be less.
ReplyDeleteOK Larry I'll keep playing your game. So, Amherst residents contribute to the 50% coming from MSBA, most likely in proportion to their population. What are we, maybe 1% at the most, of MA total population..probably less. But lets use 1%. What's 1% of 30 million - $300,000. So, for building a large building our costs are 30.5 million plus 300,000. To renovate Wildwood and Fort River we are still at 51.75 million. Still a huge difference!
ReplyDeleteWell I can pretty much guarantee you the Wildwood School Building Committee is going to chose W12 which has a total price of $67,176,167 with about half that coming from Amherst residents who pay property taxes.
ReplyDeleteSo it's not $30.5 million. It's $33.5 million.
And you know that old saying, "A million here and a million there, pretty soon you're talking real money."
Ok. 33 million compared to 52 million. 20 million here and 20 million there.
Deleteanon@2:59- lets keep the focus on the real issue: the configuration was not one that those surveyed (ES parents and teachers) wanted. I believe it is also not wanted by the majority of the remaining population, which TM will vote on (and it won't even make it to an override ballot).
ReplyDeleteThe Select Board can put a debt exclusion Override on the ballot without Town Meeting approval (strangely enough).
ReplyDeleteI believe they only did it once (after Town Meeting said no) and it failed at the ballot box. Yes, it was for a new elementary school.
ReplyDeleteThis project began as a way to renovate Wildwood, our largest elementary school and has morphed into a huge change with no comprehensive cost analysis of impacts like demo, soils, relocation of students, environmental impacts, and site impacts. The costs we see are just rough estimates to build a new building. Until we have more of a plan, I find it hard to support.
ReplyDeleteAlso, I wonder how Nick Yaffe really feels about this too? I imagine he is too much of a gentleman to really be candid.
JUST VOTE NO!
ReplyDeleteYou folks realize that a No vote means Wildwood and Fort River stay just as they are...right. I hope you all like your unhealthy and noisy elementary schools. MSBA won't be offering us any free money any time soon if we turn this money down.
ReplyDeleteThreatening people into voting for something that will cause catastrophic damage to children and families for many years to come, hardly seems like a reason to vote yes. And there is no reason the existing schools cannot be fixed--The noisy classroom environments have existed in Amherst elementary schools for years--This is not new. What a lame excuse to use for building this jailhouse complex. Amherst is an extremely wealthy town--How it can not care enough about its children to sit back and let them be educated in less than prime environments/risking their very health (toxic air quality--etc. etc.) is mind blowing! This whole mega school notion profits the contractors and builders, the administration, but sadly does not a damn thing for the child. With all the research out there proving the benefits of small school (elementary) education--how can these people think of doing anything else but keeping this proven system in tact? $$$$$ rules--end of story.
ReplyDeleteIt's not a threat. It's a fact. It's clear that Anon 844 has never had kids who went to Wildwood or Fort River.
DeleteI guess all this reconfiguration talk is going on with the assumption that regionalizing the ES schools isn't going to happen. Otherwise, it is hard to reconcile with the idea of "common curricula" bs, and all...doesn't seem compatible with regionalizing.
ReplyDeleteGreat idea, vote no and let's watch the lawsuits roll in. We have all loudly claimed the health issues in both schools- not only from students with mold, environmental allergy issues bot neither school is ADA compliant. You want to talk a hefty bill.... in lawyer fees.
ReplyDeleteanon@11:20 Ms Geryk is the one who has made decisions for the last 10y or so. Blame her. Other choices could have been made.
ReplyDeleteAnon 8:44PM:
ReplyDelete"Amherst is an extremely wealthy town--How it can not care enough about its children to sit back and let them be educated in less than prime environments/risking their very health (toxic air quality--etc. etc.) is mind blowing!"
Seems like it's you that's encouraging us to "sit back", not the town. And using rhetoric such as "catastrophic damage" and "jailhouse complex" to refer to the proposals on the table is not only unhelpful to the dialogue, it reveals you as more than a bit over reactive and crazy headed.
Some Fort River & Wildwood families are the ones who are the most outspoken against the new school. They know the buildings could be better, but they are still concerned with losing what's good about their schools.
ReplyDeletethere is a lack of process in much of Ms Geryk's efforts. Instead of first assessing the level of interest in providing "universal" preK, it got bundled into this (now) huge reconstruction/renovation project. It now serves as the foundational rationale for the twin 2-6 schools. All this is happening before the community was asked if they wanted such a model, before given any (or very little) information needed to decide if it is warranted on the scale proposed. Folks have lost faith (with good reason) in the abilities of Ms Geryk and her approach to leading our district(s).
ReplyDeleteMs Geryk is the one who has made decisions for the last 10y or so
ReplyDeleteYour elected officials made the decision on this one.
lets keep the focus on the real issue: the configuration was not one that those surveyed (ES parents and teachers) wanted.
Correct, the SC chose another option presented fully by the admin., the reason being that the parents and teachers who do not want to reconfigure, rank equity in education as 5th in importance, while the people who want a new school and to reconfigure cite equity as 1st in coming to their decisions. Really very concerning if you think about it! (Do those teachers even live and pay taxes in our town?) The majority of Amherst teachers cite equity as FIFTH in importance in your kid's education!
Furthermore, the parents who stated (by survey) that they do not want to reconfigure, represent 8% of the parents of school children in town.
Plus, the President of the local teachers union stood up at the VOTE sc meeting, to endorse the plan which is supported by the teachers who rank equity fifth in education, and to tell the board members and administrators who rank equity first that they are wrong, then she sat back down chuckling with a friend on live camera as people made personal critiques of board members and administrators. That's the kind of attendee that supports the opposite of whatever the admin. proposes, that's the leader the teachers voted to represent them.
ReplyDeletedear anon@11:52. we have all read the bizarre questionaires put together over the years by the admin office. I would be surprised if our community didn't put EDUCATION as the #1 priority for our schools.
ReplyDeleteYou are wrong- it has been Ms Geryk who for the last ~10y hasn't done anything about conditions at WW and FR, not the SC. The ADA compliance is BS. Show me where those schools are out of compliance. If they were new building then, of course, they would be. More BS from an admin insider. I guess we'll find out if those 8% who had the opportunity to voice their opinion represents that of the TM and community, I'm betting 'yes'
Think about it:
ReplyDeleteFor 40 years elementary school thousands of students have gone to Fort River and Wildwood and they are educated and alive. There are fewer students in both schools now than ever and both schools are quieter. Residents and town meeting members whose children have gone to these schools may not view them as terrible learning environments.
The figures put forward by the adminstration/architect seem way out of line compared to other towns, even towns in expensive eastern mass. More information is needed.
Just because people ask questions or favor a different option doesn't mean they are against education, students, equity (whatever this means) and great schools.
Anon 1:04 PM, you can't rank equity in terms of importance for your choosing a different option, or be "against equity", because as you just said you don't even know what equity means. I think maybe this is where the divide exists.
ReplyDeleteImagine if we used that SIXTY SEVEN MILLION DOLLARS to actually educate students - that is, pay for the best possible teachers. A few bucks for paint and HVAC and good to go.
ReplyDeleteImagine not spending the money at all...
ReplyDelete