Final Report of the Community Advisory Committee

Final Report of the
COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE
September 23, 1998

Introduction

On May 20, 1998 the Oyster River School Board created the Community Advisory Committee, consisting of 30 individuals from 24 different areas of interest within the community. This advisory group was established to study the previous High School bond proposal and to review the survey results on the bond’s defeat. The Board presented the committee with the following charges:

“To provide the School Board with a sense of community support using the results of the survey, on a suggested direction and identification of specific key issues for bond proposal(s) for 1999.”
“To advise the School Board about the 1999 bond proposal(s) concerning the facilities problem at Oyster River High School. The recommendations of the Community Advisory Committee will be seriously considered but will not be binding.”

The committee began meeting in late June 1998 to develop its first two preliminary reports delivered to the Board on July 15, and July 27, 1998. After intense discussions the Advisory Committee decided to present its findings and conclusions without establishing priorities. The committee has continued to meet through September to draft and approve this final report.

In arriving at the suggestions and conclusions presented in this report, the committee chose to include those items that drew at least two thirds of those present at the committee meetings. This format was selected because the committee felt its diversity reflects that of the Oyster River community and the two thirds designation reflects the percentage needed to pass any bond proposal. Pertinent minority opinions will be addressed later in the report.

Response to the First Charge

The three areas we addressed were actions of the Board, proposed space needs solutions, and other issues.

After lengthy discussions it was evident the committee had many interpretations of how the School Board developed and presented the 1998 bonds. If in such a small group such diversity of opinion existed, it is understandable that the community at large is also unclear on many of the details leading to the development and presentation of the bonds. Therefore in terms of suggested directions for the School Board the committee presents the following suggestions.

In an effort to clarify public information and perceptions, at the earliest possible date the Board should present an initial detailed fact sheet on the high school space needs which supports a 1999 bond proposal. This fact sheet should be updated whenever alterations or modifications are made to the plan. This should include but not be limited to academic and curriculum needs and space, population (current and projected), extra curricular activities that add to or support academic programs, outside funding sources, state building supports, bonding interest rates and tax evaluations, etc. The initial fact sheet should include a web site location, phone number or other places where the public can access updates as they become available.
As the presentation of the bond progresses the Board should host as many small informational gatherings as possible in an effort to facilitate accurate dispersal of information. These presentations should be based upon the initial and updated bond fact sheets. In the past these gatherings have generated a good exchange of information and questions which allowed those attending to feel more capable of making an informed decision.
It is imperative that the School Board exhibit thoughtful leadership that exhibits credibility, cohesion and unity in all aspects of their work, especially in the development and presentation of the High School space needs solution. However, Board members must always strive to keep all members of the public well informed even when the public may not enjoy hearing all the facts.
In addition to informing the public, it is also the responsibility of the Board to demonstrate and create enthusiasm for a community wide vision of a project which will meet the needs of the students while providing value and cost effectiveness to the voters.
While we discussed the option of a new high school all except one member of the committee felt this was impractical. This issue will be addressed later in this report in the minority comments.

Specific items of the space needs solution were discussed. The following were considered essential for the next bond proposal.

The entire proposal should be presented as a whole in one bond with all the costs and benefits explained up front. If the Board feels that some aspect will have to wait for a future bond, this should be reported with its explanation from the outset. The committee feels that “one bond - one whole project” will give the public the most value for their taxes.
The primary need is meeting the accreditation requirements and NEASC Standards. We recognize that these are necessary and essential, and the Board should be creative and economical in responding to these standards.
The Long Range Planning Committee’s (LRPC) information has enabled the community to predict and prepare our schools for population growth. With the anticipated increase in housing starts and the increase in the number of families with school aged children buying existing homes, we can anticipate a faster rise in the school populations. The Board should continue to charge the LRPC to refine its projection models for high school (and all) student population growth.
The proposal should provide cost effective infrastructure renovations. Any savings provided by renovating versus building new should be carefully explained.
In designing new and renovated classroom space, the concept of multi-use should be considered. Therefore, we encourage reasonable and creative flexibility of structural design. The design should meet the needs of the students, faculty, and administration in all curricular areas (arts education, co-curricular programming, performance areas, physical education areas, and teaching spaces).
The Community Advisory Committee has been asked to continue in an advisory role to the Board after the completion of this report. While not all members will be able to continue, many will.

The following issues need to be considered while preparing the plan and the bond. These include:

Project cost
Code compliance
Ecological consideration
Investigating various lengths of bond payments
Utilitarian educational program vs. greater depth of program
Cost-efficient building design
The relationship of student achievement and the learning environment
A reasoned explanation of the selection of the architect and construction manager
The impact of the project on the operating budget
Minimize increases in operating budget in order to facilitate bond passage.

Response to the Second Charge

The following recommendations relate specifically to the building needs for the proposed renovation and enlargement of the Oyster River High School.

The classroom capacity must relate to our teacher/student ratio. The proposed facility should allow enough classroom space for 850 students to participate in our ongoing curriculum. The design should allow for the addition of more classrooms to eventually match the core capacity of the school.
The Board must define what the core capacity is on this site for the Oyster River High School. This committee after careful consideration feels that this site can support, at maximum, 1,000 students. This may entail expansion of playing fields on and off site.
The physical education space of the current high school is inadequate to provide for the required physical education curriculum. From the studies that have been conducted it has been shown that four teaching stations in physical education should be provided, one of which would not necessarily have to be housed within the actual gymnasium. If other classrooms or mechanical needs of the entire building are to be housed within the gymnasium wing, the cost for these should be separated out. While the core facility of the gymnasium should be able to handle 1,000 students, the bleacher capacity should provide enough space for at least 600-800 people (if this would be a cost savings over 1,000 seats). A gymnasium that supports our curricular program should also support our interscholastic program. Finally, the Board should invite that the architect to investigate the possible savings of a pre-engineered structure.
Performing arts space has been inadequate at Oyster River High School since is was first built. Through the years the performing arts have grown because of creative faculty and declined in numbers because of substandard space. Therefore, the committee feels that at least a 450-500 seat auditorium would greatly enhance the curricular aspects of the Oyster River High School performing arts curriculum. While all but one member of the committee agreed that including the 450 -500 seat auditorium was essential to the building design, the location and format must be most efficiently designed by the architect. At this time it appears that the location would be best suited within the footprint of the current cafeteria. However, if a more cost efficient location and structure is identified by the architect this choice should be pursued. It is important that the design maximizes acoustical acuity and the slope to the seating to allow good visibility. Also consideration should be given to storage, dressing area, lighting, etc. of the performing arts area.
In explaining the inclusion of the performance space it will be important for the School Board to emphasize its dual purpose. Performance education requires quality teaching space as well as quality performance space. Also, this space will be used for the many performances of the elementary and middle schools along with those of the high school. At this time there is no performance space of reasonable quality within any of the district’s schools.
The public areas (halls, intersections, cafeteria, etc.) should be made as varied and opened as possible; consider relationships between inside and outside spaces, especially the courtyards.
Address the overflow space during free periods to relieve pressure on the library. For example, let the cafeteria or hall spaces double as lounges.
Realizing that there is a tax burden associated with any school building program, the bond proposal should be developed so that the tax burden might be reduced by outside donations brought in by supporters, including but not limited to such groups as the Funding and Support Team (FAST), the Friends of Performance, and the Oyster River Booster Club.
As land use at the current site of the high school becomes tighter, the Board should explore off site options involving playing fields, parking spaces, tennis courts, etc. Also the committee felt that if the town would allow angle parking on Coe Drive this might increase the available slots for faculty, students and visitors.
It is important that the entire design minimize maintenance and operating costs. And effort should be made to eliminate unnecessary support facilities and redundancies within the entire structure.

Minority Opinions

Less than one third of the committee expressed the following opinions (with no specific order of support):

Construction of a new 1,000 student capacity high school at a new location.
A new 400 student high school to function as a second high school in the district. Those supporting this thought realized it was unrealistic to pursue after studying the survey and listening to the discussions of the committee.
A new 700-850 seat auditorium that would also serve as an income source for the school district. While several members wished this could work out, only a very few were not willing to give up the larger structure even though the survey did not show wide community support.
A portion of the committee felt that the current high school should be minimally renovated and that more time should be spent determining a more carefully thought out solution.
Some felt that the solution should not exceed $8 to $9 million.
Some felt that the cost was secondary to providing a state-of-the-art facility.

Summary

We realize that it is difficult for a survey to address the wide varieties of issues that have arisen in planning the high school expansion. There were times when the committee was frustrated in interpreting the data to everyone’s satisfaction. It is the committee’s opinion that the points raised in this report should be helpful to the Board in presenting a bond in 1999. We believe the Board must define the needs and develop a solution that can be accomplished with a single bond. The Board should be highly visible and available to the public from the initial plan announcement until voting day so that the Oyster River community can move forward with understanding and confidence.

Students and teachers spend many hours in the high school facility. They should be able to breath clean air, to wash their hands in hot water, and to be able to walk through the halls without bumping into each other. We expect 769 students in 2002. The core of the present building was created to house only 604 students. Modulars alone are not the answer. We need an expanded and renovated facility.

Thank you for allowing this committee to assist you in this difficult task.

For the Community Advisory Committee:

Co-Chairs Martha T. Gooze and Jay Flanders

Attachments: Committee members; Preliminary Report One; Preliminary Report Two

OROL Home