buzzed in.

In the first pathway, Malone Elementary School would be “reconfigured” to serve kindergarten through third grade. In addition to building safety and better parking and traffic patterns, a dedicated cafeteria space would be built, along with space for Science, Technology, Engineering and Math programming. Heating, ventilation, plumbing and electrical systems would be upgraded at all buildings but the new high school.

Under that plan, Malone Intermediate would serve grades six through eight. There would be classroom upgrades and the plan would include constructing a detached maintenance building because space in the school would be reconfigured for classrooms and choir. Asbestos would be removed, as would non-used chemistry and Family and Consumer Economics labs from when the building was the high school.

Prescott Middle School would then be updated for grades four and five.

Under pathway two, students would be consolidated into three buildings, while the current middle school would be utilized for district offices and district and community programming.

Under that plan, Malone Elementary would serve grades K-3. The Intermediate would be reconfigured for grades 4-8 with current district offices being remodeled into classrooms.

The Survey The survey to district residents is eight pages in length and is designed to inform residents about the district needs. SDS conducted a facility study to identify the potential building changes and necessary upgrades.

The board has been working with SDS on the planning for more than a year.

Surveys are expected to land in district mailboxes in about a week, and residents will have three weeks to fill it out, either on paper or online, and get it back to School Perceptions. Survey results will be examined by the board at its November meeting, and then workshops will be scheduled with the intent of getting necessary resolutions completed in January to plan for a referendum questions on the April ballot.

The survey gives background on the SDS study and invites residents to see the full study on the district web site.

“Many of the education spaces in our older schools need to be updated to meet the current educational needs of our students. Today’s classrooms require flexible space to provide large group instruction, small group collaboration, increased access to technology, and space for hands-on, project-based learning opportunities to better support the Science, Technology, Engineering and Math (STEM) curriculum. In addition, the elementary school lacks a dedicated cafeteria, requiring daily setup and take-down of tables and creating scheduling challenges for physical education classes,” the text of the survey states. ‘The elementary and intermediate schools have space that can be renovated for classrooms. The middle school is currently at capacity and remodeling or expanding it is limited by its structure and location. This is an opportunity to reconfigure the grade levels in the schools to better utilize available space as well as improve efficiency of staff and resources.”

The survey asks, “Given this information, would you support the District exploring a facilities referendum at this time?”

Costs are outlined as well. The total cost for Pathway 1 was put at $19.4 – $20.1 million.

The cost for Pathway 2 was projected at $17.9-$18.6 million.

The survey then asks which Pathway the resident would support, or it they support either or neither.

Costs of estimated property tax increases are then laid out on the survey. A property valued at $200,000 would see an estimated tax increase of $146 per year at the $18 million project level. Respondents are asked what sized referendum they would support: $22 million, $20 million, $18 million, $16 million, a “smaller” referendum or none at all.

Board members said they are eager to get information back from the community.

“I’m ready to get feedback from the community,” said Tanya Holub. “I’m really excited to get this thing out the door and in their mailboxes so they can take a look at it,” said President Mike Matzek.

The school board did hear from one citizen who expressed surprise that, prior to the annual district meeting Sept. 16, the district did not publicly divulge plans to possibly consolidated students to three buildings.

“There’s was no community involvement, no input,” said Jim Reichert. He noted he looked at school board minutes and there is no indication that plan was in play.

“Barely six years ago we moved into this building, 30-some million dollars at that time, and we were told in literature and meetings that the district is pretty much set for the next 20 years. Now it comes out there’s a need for perhaps $14.6 million worth of projects. That’s a big sum,” Reichert said.

He said the board and district need to do a better job of being “transparent.”

Current Debt Refinancing The board also unanimously approved a plan from its financial consultants, Baird, to save money by refinancing district debt with interest rates at historical lows.

The district bonds from voter-approved debt issues in 2012, 2014 and 2015 will be studied for refinancing under the plan. Savings could be up to $49,100 annually if all three bond issues are refinanced. The district pays an average of 3.5 percent interest on the bonds now, and refinancing should bring that down to 1.96 percent.

“We’ve got big savings here. It’s very exciting,” said Matzek.