Harwood not ready to decide on bond

For the second time in 12 days, the Harwood Union school board declined to endorse a plan to send all seventh- and eighth-graders to Crossett Brook Middle School.

That means the district will continue to operate a second middle school at the Harwood Union High School building.

The proposal came during a discussion of whether voters should be asked to approve a bond to finance long-overdue renovations at the high school, and what that proposal should look like.

The issue of high school renovations dates back to 2015, before Harwood merged its six school districts into one. At that time, the high school had just turned 50 years old, with the last major renovations completed in 1998.

But, with the merger into a single district, the high school bond was put on the back burner until 2018, when the question was revived.

Intertwined with the bond question is what to do with the seventh- and eighth-grade students now at the Harwood Union middle school.

In October, board members voted not to relocate the students to Crossett Brook. On Feb. 20, board members again voted not to move forward with the plan.

However, Monday night, board members were presented with a pair of bond proposals; the first would keep Harwood’s seventh- and eighth-graders at Harwood, while the second would move them to Crossett Brook.

“I’m a little confused about why we’re talking about the middle school when we just voted not to move forward at this time,” said outgoing board member Jill Ellis of Fayston, who did not seek re-election on Town Meeting Day.

“I’m frustrated that we keep on being asked to vote on the same thing without being given any new information,” said board member Melissa Phillips, who, like Ellis, did not seek re-election.

To bond, or not to bond?

Both bond proposals call for a new, 10,400-square-foot gymnasium, and both proposals come with lists of maintenance that is critical and maintenance that is not critical.

For example, lighting improvements in the 1965 portion of the school are considered critical, while similar repairs for the 1998 portion of the school are not. Numerous improvements to the science labs, which date to the original construction of the school, are considered critical. New plumbing for the 53-year-old bathrooms is not.

However, the bond proposal that keeps seventh- and eighth-graders at Harwood — referred to as option 1 — is significantly more expensive, because it involves an additional 13,886 square feet of construction at the high school.

That proposal includes 4,470 square feet for vocational education, 3,825 square feet for ninth-graders, and 1,669 square feet for studies related to science, technology, engineering and math.

The estimated cost for option 1 ranges from $31.5 million to $39.1 million, depending on the amount of deferred maintenance included.

The second proposal, which sends Harwood’s seventh- and eighth-graders to Crossett Brook, offers the same improvements, but —aside from the gymnasium — does not require new construction, and in fact would result in more than 6,000 square feet of excess space.

This proposal, known as option 2, would not require any new construction at Crossett Brook, but calls for $1.4 million in improvements to the middle school. The projected price tag for option 2 ranges from $28.1 million to $35.8 million, making it the less expensive of the two proposals.

It was also the option listed as an action item on the meeting’s agenda.

However, those cost estimates are contingent upon holding a bond vote in June.

David Epstein, an architect with TruexCullins Architecture and Interior Design, said waiting until fall to hold a bond vote would increase the project cost by 4 percent — between $1.1 million and $1.5 million.

Public comment

“How many times do you have to vote this down?” Peter Langella of Moretown asked in regard to the Crossett Brook proposal.

Langella was one of many Moretown residents who voiced opposition to moving students to Crossett Brook, and, by extension, option 2.

“I think you need to move forward with a Harwood bond, and not send students to other schools,” Langella said. “I think you are setting yourself up for failure.”

“I’m concerned that this vote is happening before all the pieces are in place and have been looked at,” said Valerie Edwards of Moretown.

Laura Schaller of Moretown noted that, with elections this week, there will be at least four new members on the school board and suggested those board members should have a voice in the plan.

Board comment

Numerous board members said the district lacks any sort of long-term plan.

“I thought, as a merged district, we were not supposed to look at one school, or one grade level,” Phillips said. “I thought were supposed to look at the big picture.”

“I feel strongly that, until we have a design for the district, we cannot sell a bond in November,” said board member Linda Hazard of Moretown.

Other board members said it would be futile to propose a bond to the public without showing the proposal would save them money.

“I’m listening to a board proposal that will fail with the electorate,” said board member Gabriel Gilman of Moretown. “We’re not going to convince people we can save money by spending $40 million.”

Board member Alexandra Thomsen of Waterbury argued that the time to act is now.

“I know that people want more time to research, collect data, do more public engagement and talk more about other options for the middle schools. We simply do not have that luxury of time,” Thomsen said. “As a board, we need to take some steps to show our communities that we understand the financial stress they are under and are willing to make hard decisions.”

In the end, the board voted to table the discussion, with the understanding there would be no bond proposal in June.