Duxbury School Building Committee

Middle School & High School

Recommendations

Superintendent Dr. Ben Tantillo

School Committee Meeting - January 19, 2011
 Agenda

• Historical Perspective • Role of Technology

• Financial Picture • Neighboring Schools
• State of Buildings • Model Design or Custom
• Rebuild or Renovate? • Cost to Taxpayers
• One Location or Two? • Why Now?
Duxbury Town PRIDE
Beach Bay Open Spaces History
Arts Athletics Education Seniors
 School Building History
• 1926 - Original DHS built, became Upper Alden and closed in 1992;
Became Library in 1997

• 1949 - 54, Alden Elementary built; addition in ‘54

• 1960 - Jr/Sr. HS built - now DMS

• 1968 - Current DHS built

• 1974 - Chandler built; additions to DMS/DHS

• 2000 - Master Facilities Plan appv’d by SC and town

• 2001-03 - Alden/Chandler additions; PAC built for schools & town at

67% reimbursement

• 2007 - Request to State for Chandler roof, DMS, DHS projects

• 2009 - Feasibility Study for DMS/DHS and Chandler roof costs

appv’d at Town Meeting
 Duxbury Support for Schools
• Duxbury ranks as the 17th wealthiest town in MA, yet 277th in school
spending out of 325 districts.
4000.0
• Enrollment has doubled since 3000.0
current DHS was built in 1968; 2000.0
so has wear and tear on both 1000.0
buildings. 0
1950 ‘60 ‘70 ‘80 ‘90 2000 ‘10

• Duxbury per pupil spending falls below MA state average; despite

increases from the Town, the gap is widening.
Comparison of Expenditure Per Student Duxbury vs. State Average
14000 2500

12500 2125
$Per Pupil Spending

$Spending Gap
11000 1750

9500 1375

8000 1000
2006 2007 2008 2009

Duxbury State Average Gap

 Current State of DMS & DHS
(per 2010 Building Feasibility Study and NEASC)

• Failing systems and aged equipment

• Boilers, heating, mechanical, HVAC, plumbing, electrical, and temperature
controls require replacement; no longer energy efficient or code compliant.

• Crumbling infrastructure beyond repair

• Weekly roof leaks impacting structure; majority of window seals and door
gaskets broken, insulation deficient, classroom lighting below state candle
requirements....can create potential health & safety issues

• Buildings hinder curriculum & instruction

• Classrooms undersized; spread-out additions inefficient; cannot deliver AP
requirements in science labs; SPED space insufficient; buildings deficient for
technology use

• 2002 NEASC cited DHS facility “at risk”

• 2011 Accreditation study underway; may be placed on warning for facilities
 The Ugly Reality at DMS & DHS:
Outdated, inefficient boiler rooms and systems;
too few outlets to support today’s technology....
A “RAIN DAY” at DMS for Rm 516: January 3, 2011
Senora Mehegan’s classroom after gushing water from
ceiling filled 2 buckets; 175 students disrupted.
A closer look at DHS & DMS windows without
seals, crumbling walls and doors wearing thin.
About that brand new $23,000 copier at DMS....
do not plug in until further notice.
 Replacement & Renovation
Cost in $mm for DMS/DHS
SYSTEM or NEED DMS DHS TOTAL COST
HVAC $7.8 $10.8 $18.6
Electrical 7.2 10.1 17.3
Roof 3.9 5.4 9.3
Windows 3.7 5.2 8.9
ADA 3.0 4.2 7.2
SPrinklers 1.2 1.6 2.8
Kitchen 0.85 0.85 1.7
Locker Rooms 0.68 0.68 3.1
Gym Floors 0.48 0.48 0.80

TOTAL SYSTEMS REPAIR $28.8 $39.4 $68.2

TOTAL EST. RENOVATION
$46.9 $70.5 $117.4
COSTS
 Rebuild or Renovate
• Biggest factors driving decision to rebuild or renovate:
• Systems replacement totaling $68mm
• State reimbursement: 43% for rebuild; significantly less
for renovation

• Rebuilding addresses both the physical system needs

and academic needs; renovation doesn’t

• Rebuilding is more cost efficient and causes far less

disruption to school environment
• Renovation would require portable trailers for 5-7 yrs.
 Options: 2 Locations, 2 Buildings or
1 Location, 2 Buildings Co-located

• Six options presented to SBC in Spring 2010: renovate

both buildings, replace both bldgs in different locations,
renovate plus addition, rebuild both schools at 1 location
(range from $47 -$146MM)

• Unanimous SBC recommendation for a co-located

building with separate identities, shared
infrastructure at estimated cost of $125MM

• Significant economic, academic and logistical

considerations support this decision
 Advantages of 1 Location,
Co-located Buildings
• Economic Benefits: Single shared mechanical plant for
HVAC, heating, electrical, plumbing, technology support, etc,
provides significant savings in initial building costs and ongoing
maintenance; more efficient footprint with shared kitchen, media
center, loading dock, saves $ on both ends.

• Academic Benefits: Separate buildings but alignment in

curriculum & instruction for grades 6-12, enhanced technology with
shared software & labs; peer tutoring; easier transition to HS.

• Logistical Benefits: Disruption issues minimized, no

trailers needed with students remaining in existing buildings in
transition; shorter construction time with buildings connected in
one location; may reduce grid lock problem on St. George St.
 Role of Technology in our
Evolving Education System
• A tool, but a critical one going forward; need
flexible space & wireless capability
• Nearly 90% of DHS graduates go on to college -
they need to be fluent in technology

• 21st century skills needed in the work place

require students to learn and think globally;
technology integral to making this happen
• All current equipment & components -
purchased or leased - can and will be transitioned
Recently built high schools: Silver Lake, Whitman
Hanson, Norwood, Ashland, Pembroke & Natick
 Benefits of Using a
Model School Design
• Following SBC approval of a co-joined building and submission for
reimbursement, the state invited Duxbury to consider a Model
School design.
• A State Model Design decreases design time by up to 6 months and
can reduce construction costs by 5-10%
• State reimbursement increases by 5% using a Model School design
(savings of approx. $6.5MM)
• Towns using this approach have saved up to $30mm (Norwood);
other towns include Natick, N. Plymouth and E. Bridgewater.
• Option to choose from 4 designs, then customize to fit local needs
and space requirements.
Preliminary Cost to Taxpayer
 Preliminary Tax Impact
Size of Borrowing $130,000,000 - 25 Years
Estimated Interest Rate - 4.75%
State Reimbursement - 43.75%
Net Borrowing - $73,125,000
First Year of Debt Service - 2014
Median House Assessment - $481,100

Level Principal' ' ' ' Level Debt Service (Mortgage)

Max $918' ' ' ' ' $727
Avg. $679' ' ' ' ' $725

*Based on current market conditions

 Why Now?
• Infrastructure and major systems at DMS and DHS are failing
or close to it; we’re at a crossroad.
• State of buildings erodes long standing PRIDE in Duxbury
education among students, teachers and community
• Duxbury is eligible for State reimbursement for a project at
43.45% after many submissions; many school proposals aren’t
accepted
• Most cost effective, educationally appropriate solution is to
build a co-located DHS/DMS building with reimbursement,
when construction costs are low and borrowing favorable
• NEASC accreditation for DHS at risk; status review in Aug
2011
 Timeline/Next Steps
• Citizens of Duxbury will decide schools’ fate

• Town Article for $3.5-4.0MM for Model School Design schematic (customized
for DMS/DHS) launches project

• SC approval of recommendation/article - Feb

• Presentation of Article at Town Meeting - March 12

• Ballot of Article at Town Election -March 26

• With voter approval, design begins; construction $ approved fall 2011 at

Special Town Meeting.

• Construction begins Spring 2012; Current 3rd, 4th and 5th graders enter
new Middle School in 2014; current 6th, 7th and 8th graders enter new
High School in 2015.
 Duxbury takes great PRIDE in its bay, open spaces and
historical buildings. Where we educate our children and
support our teachers deserves that PRIDE too.