The Portsmouth School Committee got its first look at the report on school buildings from consulting firm RGB, and all the options for dealing with the identified issues have pricetags in excess of $20 million. Facilities committee chair Mike Buddemeyer and consultant Steven Hughes of RGB delivered the report, more than three months in development, to the school committee at a well-attended meeting this evening at the high school.

"The school committee is receiving this report tonight for first time," said Chair Dick Carpender, introducing the agenda item. He stressed that this was not a decision-making meeting, but rather that the committee would take up the recommendations at a meeting on January 27th to consider next steps. "We will involve the public," he promised. "We are not going to do this in the dark."

The meeting had been moved to the High School auditorium because of anticipated turnout, and a large contingent of the more than 60 attendees seemed to be from the Elmhurst School, identified by RGB as having the most physical plant problems of the three elementaries.

Buddemeyer stressed the strategic nature of the analysis, which he noted was designed to comply with a new RI Department of Education (RIDE) requirement for 5-year capital plans. "The aim is to provide a long-term vision for the schools while being fiscally responsible," he said, adding that the process included a review all the school buildings, assessments of code compliance, needed maintenance and upgrades, a space needs analysis, and a prioritization of needed work into three buckets: priority "1" for life safety, "2" for action needed in 1-5 years, and "3" for issues to address in the 5-year-plus timeframe.

"Once the buildings were examined, we came up with planning options," said Buddemeyer. "Not just to fix things for today, not just for tomorrow, for the benefit of the town and our future."

Hughes, the RGB consultant, offered a challenging picture of the current buildings. Elmhurst has $1.5M in immediate needs plus $4.1M over five years, for a total of $5.6M. Hathaway $890K immediate, $2.1M 5-year, for $3M total. Melville is in the best shape, "the most efficient in the district," with $540K/$1.2M for a total of $1.6M.

The Middle school, though in relatively good shape, still requires $4.7M over 5 years, and the high school a total of 6.3M. The Administration building would require $700K over 5 years. (All these numbers, in fact, the entire report, will be posted on the School Department Web site tomorrow; I'll add a link here as soon as available.)

"The Facilities Committee," said Buddemeyer, "Was charged with coming up with a future plan for the schools that was the best educationally and fiscally responsible." To that end, he said, in consultation with RGB they had prepared 4 scenarios, in descending order of preference.

Option 1: Keep grade 5 at the elementaries and use part of the Middle School for administration. Close Elmhurst and provide renovations to Melville and Hathaway to provide two Pre-K through grade 5 elementaries. Total 5-year cost, including all school repairs: $32M.

Option 2: Close Elmhurst and Hathaway. Grade 5 returns to Middle School. Renovations and additions to Melville for early learning, and construct a new grade 2-4 elementary. Total cost: $48M.

Option 3: Grade 5 returns to Middle School. Close Elmhurst and provide renovations/additions to Melville and Hathaway to create two Pre-K through 4 neighborhood elementaries. Total cost: $25M.

Option 4 (status quo): Renovate all three elementaries as needed. Total cost: $25M. (But, as Hughes pointed out, this cost begins to rise as you project further out, since a lot of the basic physical plant issues remain; projected out to 10 years, this actually exceeds Option 3.)

There were several questions from the school committee. Recently elected member Marilyn King wanted to know if RIDE would contribute to the costs, and Hughes said that the current level was 30% reimbursement, but that nobody could guarantee how long that would stand, given the state's current fiscal woes. Committee member Jamie Heaney asked if green technologies were considered, and Hughes assured him that was actually built into the RIDE regulations.

Then the audience had their turn, and Elmhurst PTO vice president Liz Harris said that she appreciated the long-term vision, but voiced the concerns of parents about the short term. "What is the timeline for closing Elmhurst?" Buddemeyer said that had not been part of the analysis. Carpender added that this could be a question that would come up in forthcoming budget discussions, and that they would know better within a few months.

Elmhurst parent Tammy Nelson urged the committee to consider the impact on the parents of Elmhurst. She noted that many located to that part of town specifically for the Elmhurst school. Another parent asked if the proposed changes would affect class sizes (answer: no). One member of the community asked if the cost estimates included any offsets for the potential value of the land at the Elmhurst site (Buddemeyer said that the committee had deferred that analysis, since it would have required hiring an appraiser.)

Parent Dawn Cardero had both praise and advice for the committee. She was glad to hear a discussion about investing in the schools. "Usually these meetings are about cuts," she said. However, she urged the committee to keep in mind not just the facilities, but the ultimate goal of superior education. "The reason we moved here was quality of education. It wasn't that beautiful town common," she said, to laughter. "Which one of these plans has the highest quality. That's what's going to keep the families coming."

Note: Will post a link here to the RGB report as soon as it's up on the PSD Web site.

Update: Here's the link.

Full disclosure: I am a member of the Facilities Committee.