BERNE —  Nine years after voters in the Berne-Knox-Westerlo School District last approved a major capital project, they may be asked in May to approve another  multi-million-dollar bond issue for additional upgrades to the elementary and secondary buildings.

Project architects from the Schenectady firm Synthesis and an engineer from M/E Engineering who would be the project manager attended Monday’s school board meeting to present a detailed overview of their recommendations and preliminary budget figures. They had made a more broad-brush presentation at the board’s November meeting.

A combination of “must-do’s” and “wish list” elements added up to a total estimated maximum cost of between $16.035 million and $17.035 million. The presenters stressed these are “very preliminary figures.”

The ultimate size of the bond issue — possibly to be put before voters as early as May — will depend on decisions the board must now make  on what it wants the scope of the work to be.

Shopping list

The architects structured their presentation around four areas where improvements are needed or could be made: infrastructure, safety and security, educational programs, and organization.

The bulk of the work, and of the cost, is for infrastructure repair and replacement, mainly in the elementary building— including a new hot-water heating system to replace the antiquated steam-heat system. Of $7.16 million allocated for infrastructure, $6.3 would be spent on the elementary building.

Safety and security improvements would add another $2.12 million to the total. The work would involve reconfiguring spaces, in both buildings, so that access could be better monitored and controlled.

A further $4.77 million is added for reconfiguration and modernization. Creating new spaces for modern instructional needs is the aim here, and would be contingent on the infrastructure improvements being made first. This is “wish-list” territory.

Among changes recommended as organizational improvements would be moving the district’s administrative offices onto the campus; they are now located in a small building across Helderberg Trail from the main campus. This and other changes would cost an estimated $950,000.

Few of the specific recommendations were discussed at the meeting, although a suggested ramp across the front of the elementary building sparked both aesthetic and practical objections.

Near-silent board

The board members in general had little to say in response to the presentation — the little discussion that did occur centered on concerns by board President Matthew Tedeschi about the adequacy of proposed improvements in security in the elementary building, and board-member questions on the necessity of hiring a construction manager to see the projects through to completion. But at least one person in the gallery, former school board member and current Knox town supervisor, Vasilios Lefkaditis, had plenty to say.

He simultaneously attacked  the earlier $12.7 million bond issue approved by voters in December 2007, and the haste with which the district seems to be moving toward another bond issue that could be even bigger than the one in 2007.

Lefkaditis  said the earlier  capital projects for which construction began in 2010 “spent $12 million on a gym and showers for the coaches ” and did  little to improve the academic mission of the schools.

One main purpose of  that bond issue was to bring the campus into compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act — just as safety and security  concerns seem to a big factor in the new borrowing  being considered.

“Compliance could have been done, a lot more cheaply,” Lefkaditis contended.

Turning to the new proposals, he told the board, “You’re crazy if you feel you can pull this off in 30 days.”

Tight timeline

The  timeline presented by the architects envisioned about two and one-half months between  when the board approves putting the bond issue to a vote and when the referendum takes place. Backing up from a possible May vote, the board would have to vote at its March meeting to move ahead with the bond issue and the required State Environmental Quality Review

The architects expressed their hope that the board would move ahead, at or by its January meeting, to  “prioritize” those project elements it wants included in a more final proposal. But the board’s reluctance to comment on, or to question, Monday’s  preliminary proposal, as well as the intervening holidays, make that seem unlikely.

Instead, a suggestion by the engineer, Bob Abromaitis,  that the project-planners  conduct a tour of the building for board members —  so they can more easily visualize the proposed improvements — seems the more likely next step.

To this point, there has been no communication from the district to the public about the capital project nor any public reaction or comment, other than from the small number of citizens who attend board meetings regularly, like former BKW board member and teacher Helen Lounsbury. (See her letter to the editor on page 3).

Lounsbury had a suggestion: “Why not bring interested people like PTA members to schools we would like to emulate...There’s no question we need upgrading, so let people compare so this doesn’t come out of nowhere,” she told the board.      

When, and for how long, public comment would be solicited and received remain unclear at this point.

Lefkaditis said, “A project this size takes years.”

Why so fast?

One reason for fast-tracking the project seems to be a Building Condition Survey completed earlier by the project team for the district, as required by the State Education Department.

The “must-do” elements of the proposal, based on that survey, direct a large portion of the spending to the elementary building, which is decades older than the secondary building and has some serious infrastructure problems.

One of its  two boilers have failed. District Business Manager Sarah Blood discussed a stopgap  measure — renting  a portable boiler — that would  replace the failed boiler through the winter, pending a more permanent updating of the heating system financed by the bond issue.

She explained that, in order to get state aid to reimburse the expense of the rental boiler, a bidding process would be required.

Tedeschi said, “We have left a lot of things undone over the years.”

And District Superintendent Timothy Mundell said, “The Building Condition Survey found many things at the end of their expected lifespans...hidden kinds of things.

“Whatever project we do has to include these things and why not modernize classrooms along the way?”  Mundell asked.

Other business

Among other business, the board:

— Discussed district goals developed for 2016-17. Audience member Lounsbury asked why they were  being adopted so late in the year. “One half of the school year has gone by,” she noted.  

Tedeschi said the board had had  “other pressing things to attend to,”  like finding new principles for both the elementary and secondary schools. “I think the board has done a great job in keeping up moving forward.”

Board member Nathan Elble said he would have preferred to see a more detailed statement of the goals than that which  the board went on to adopt. The goals  are available for review on the school district website;

— Heard Mundell describe the possible benefits to students of a therapy-dog program and say a representative of the program will tell the board more about it as its January meeting;

— Heard Mundell discuss the importance of integration of community resources into how schools function and improve their mission; and

— Received an audit report from Joe Heroux, the district’s external auditor. He said, “The district is headed in the right direction...better than in prior years.” He affirmed the fund balance, budgetary balance, and internal controls are good.