The Peotone School District had a busy week, having held the second and third of three public hearings on the possible closure of Peotone Intermediate Center, its regular monthly board meeting, and a lengthy presentation on possibilities for the district’s school buildings by Wight and Company.
The district has indicated it is considering closing PIC for two primary concerns: student safety after road widening and financial savings.
With the fate of PIC unknown, the district contracted Wight and Company, an architectural, engineering, and construction firm. Last fall, the company evaluated the district’s facilities.
Currently, the school district serves students in the following capacity: Connor Shaw, which is the district’s early education center, serves Pre-K children ages 3-to-5; Peotone Elementary School, which serves approximately 350 children from kindergarten through third grade; Peotone Intermediate Center, serving 162 fourth- and fifth-grade students; Peotone Junior High School, serving approximately 275 students; and Peotone High School, serving 410 students, from grades nine through 12, according to the district’s website.
Following the facilities study, Wight conducted site visits to “understand existing configuration, utilization, challenges, and opportunities,” the school district’s website said.
The district recently acknowledged a $3.6 million deficit, down from $4.6 million, after reduction-in-force measures eliminated several positions earlier this month. The district also sold nearly $5 million in bonds to provide working cash.
The 127-page feasibility study surveyed the building exterior, interior, and the mechanical, plumbing, and electrical systems at each of the district’s five schools.
Stuart Brodsky of Wight and Company reviewed the findings and potential scenarios with the board on February 18.
The company identified costly repairs needed at each of the schools. The study said estimated costs for repairs or replacements to the district’s buildings over the next 10 years would total $31.5 million.
Brodsky said the estimate included soft costs, such as those required for permitting and design, but would not include what he called escalation, or rising costs of materials, labor, etc.
They offered multiple options. Two scenarios included additions and renovations. Three scenarios included new building construction. The idea behind the proposal was to provide guidance for the school district as officials work to determine a path forward amid ongoing financial challenges.
“The other way we measure the condition of a building is something called a facility condition index. The purpose of that is to compare the replacement cost of the systems in the building that need to be replaced with the replacement cost of the entire building if you were to start over and build it from the ground up,” Brodsky explained in his presentation.
“If you get to the point where you’re at more than 30 percent, you begin to question whether it makes sense to invest in that building,” he added.
The study found PIC and Connor Shaw were in the worst condition, Brodsky reported.
“The elementary school, the junior high, and the high school have more useful life left in the systems – what would be considered a fairly normal investment over time in a school building that we see,” Brodsky said.
In their recommendations, they considered each school’s square footage and enrollment, and whether there was additional space in the building to accommodate more students or whether it would need to be modified.
The various scenarios explored different splits for grades attending each building.
“What we learned in the community engagement was clarity on strategy, and I think clarity on which ones were resonating and participants really felt were responsible uses of money. So, financial stewardship was a big deal,” Brodsky said.
“Investing in the buildings you have and not completely rebuilding them, but not putting that money into buildings that are at the 30 percent or more threshold, seemed to resonate with everyone,” Brodsky added.
From the feedback they received, he added data-driven decision-making was a priority for the community.
When it came to costs, he said updating the schools, keeping Connor Shaw and eliminating PIC, would result in a $63.4 million project, which was the least expensive of the scenarios.
Another scenario would have the district close PIC and Connor Shaw but renovate the other three schools, which Brodsky said would cost an estimated $70.6 million. He said another three-building scenario would require an investment of $74.3 million.
“It’s reasonably comparable to the previous. Both are very viable. This one is likely a little bit more just because of doing work on two – more work on two sites and, you know, potentially a little more square footage,” he said.
Brodsky also explained three proposed new build scenarios. The most expensive option was $142.6 million, he said.
Board member Bob Janeliunas asked for clarification regarding costs.
“If we’re going to divest from the building — so in this case, we’re going to build a new building on that same site where the junior high is. We’re going to keep it operating while we build the new building and then tear the old building down. So, the costs for causing all that to happen are incorporated, and you don’t have to then spend money to renovate the junior high,” Brodsky responded.
Board member Tim Stoub inquired about capacity, to which Brodsky explained they looked at current and planned enrollment when developing scenarios.
Stoub also asked about time frames. Brodsky said the quickest a new building could be built, after a nine- to 12-month design and bidding process, would be 14-to-16 months.
“I think time is important to address. I think, you know, some questions have come up from folks as to why we’ve kicked this into motion as early as we have and what we’re going to do with it once we have it. I think it lends itself to know that this isn’t the time to decide everything,” Stoub said.
“This is a two- to three-year sort of process that we’ve begun,” Stoub added.
Ultimately, the board made no decisions as the final public hearing regarding the school closure had yet to be held. It was scheduled for 9 a.m. on February 21.
“This is meant to be a guide for the future. It’s flexible, and both short and long-term decisions will be made within this context,” Brodsky said in closing.
A handful of individuals spoke during the second public hearing for the closure of PIC, including Peotone’s School Council Vice President Laura Fitzpatrick. Fitzpatrick spoke on behalf of the union and ultimately requested the board table the decision after raising a number of concerns.