CLEARFIELD – During the public comment session at Monday night’s combined committee and board meeting, a familiar face – resident Gail Ralston – challenged the Clearfield school board about its decisions related to the high school expansion and renovation and the costs involved.
In June 2011, the board approved renovating and expanding the high school campus into grades seven through twelve by a 5-2 vote. The board is currently seeking competitive bids for the $34 million high school renovation and expansion project and intends to open sealed proposals on Friday, June 15.
Ralston said at the last board meeting, Superintendent Dr. Thomas B. Otto clarified costs for the high school expansion and renovation. She said he estimated $9,881,659 for the kitchen, gymnasium, library, family and consumer sciences, technology and school and administrative offices.
She added art rooms, which were shown on the proposed second floor plans, as well as maintenance on the first floor. She said the list isn’t itemized as to the cost of each, and information she’d requested about some of these items hasn’t yet been provided to her.
When she’d initially proposed Centre Elementary to house the district administrative offices, the board advised it was worth studying. It was explored by three district employees who completed a walk-through of the building before calling HHSDR Architects/Engineers, according to Ralston.
“Personally, I don’t make decisions about our home without several qualified contractors coming and looking at what we want and need,” she said.
She said HHSDR evaluated Centre when the option of reimbursable funding was being considered for student, not administrative use. Using $1.39 million from Option 2 for administrative construction costs and a worst-case scenario of 50 percent for renovations to Centre, she said the district realizes a savings of $695,000. However, she believed the figure was vastly overstated for this project.
With the aforementioned savings, Ralston said the high school could have air conditioning for one-third of the academic year, making it more educationally productive and improving the air quality of the school.
“Or, you simply (do) not spend this money at all,” she said. “That is called savings.”
In addition, she said if Centre was utilized for administrative offices, it’d have another benefit for the district, as the auxiliary gymnasium at the high school would remain available for student use. She said Centre’s gymnasium/cafeteria would still be available as well.
“I’ve learned that gymnasium space is highly valued,” said Ralston. “Real estate people say buildings are worth what people are willing to pay. There are many vacant buildings available in Clearfield. The real value of Centre is in its use for the district, not in its sale.
“The case for Centre is one of better and best. It is a much better facility for our administrative team with its space and central location. Of equal importance, it is best for our district’s financial bottom line – now and into the cloudy future.”
She also questioned the potential savings of $1,372,720 annually with the reduction of expenses for personnel, maintenance and utilities. She asked if the district’s debt for this construction project is more than $1 million, how it would be saving money.
She said that reducing costs while increasing debt is not saving money. She likened it to going shopping and “saving money” by purchasing sale items while maxing out a credit card.
According to her, the next several years are going to be filled with land mines of cyber-school, retirement increases and health care costs. She told the board she has an extensive collection of newspaper articles about how school districts in the region and state are balancing their budgets.
She said some, which still have the financial resources, are using reserve funds to cover the difference between their revenues and expenditures. She said others are forced to cut programs by attrition or personnel reduction, and these cuts are usually art, music and physical education.
“All of these cost-cutting strategies affect students. Our debt load and tax revenue have limits. If we misjudge now, our children will be the ones to pay the price with the cuts to their educational program. If we don’t insure our financial visibility, we too will be in the situation of so many other districts. Let’s not make that a part of Clearfield’s future,” said Ralston.
During her presentation, she expressed interest in information about prior building projects, especially the position of clerk of the works. She said this line item is estimated at $200,000 for the high school expansion and renovation project. She said its function is to ensure that the architect’s design and material specifications are followed.
She said this position of oversight is to protect the quality of the project. In light of what’s been revealed about the construction of the Girard-Goshen Elementary School, she believed this information should also be of great interest to the board. She said Clearfield can’t afford another building project to have the same result as Girard-Goshen.
Ralston said that Otto was gathering information for her regarding the size of the high school additions as well as the clerk of works. She told the board he’d likely share this information with them to help guide their decision-making process.
She concluded with three questions, which she hoped wouldn’t be rhetorical. She asked how large the proposed gymnasium will be at the high school; are the elementary students going to allotted more age-appropriate time use of the gymnasiums; and is the addition located by the technology department on the high school plans the maintenance department.
“I’m sure I’ll have to make an appointment to get these answers. Dr. Otto, I hope you’ll see me,” said Ralston.