Friday, September 21, 2007

A Town meeting, a video, there was never such a project!

New Fairfield schools seek $109M
Superintendent wants taxpayers to help with building renovations

By Brian Saxton
THE NEWS-TIMES

NEW FAIRFIELD -- Old and unreliable heating and ventilating systems. Worn and dated bathroom plumbing fixtures. Cracked toilets and windowless classrooms.
A laundry list of problems at three of New Fairfield's public schools are the target of a sweeping $109 million blueprint to fix them with new building projects and renovations. District officials have labeled them "critical elements of concern."

Preliminary estimates predict that the net cost of the overall project after state reimbursements will total $78.2 million. "This is probably the most important issue facing New Fairfield," schools Superintendent Joseph Castagnola said at a public meeting Wednesday night. Current estimates and the time frame now being considered allow for financing the project through bonding over 20 years. The three schools earmarked for improvements are Meeting House Hill School, New Fairfield High School and New Fairfield Middle School.

Castagnola, who made a formal presentation of the plan at the high school, said he hoped the community could work together to develop a final format acceptable to taxpayers at a referendum. "This is about bringing forward the needs of the district and hoping people will come to understand those needs," Castagnola said. "It's important that taxpayers participate in this project."

Another public hearing is scheduled for 7 p.m. on Tuesday at the high school library on Gillotti Road. Castagnola indicated that if the project moved ahead on schedule, a town referendum to approve it could be held by June next year. Because of the magnitude of the work, Castagnola said it would take about two years to complete. After the presentation, Phil Ross, the district's director of buildings and grounds, said the project is important because of the age of the school buildings. "I think the community will be surprised by the numbers, but I think when they take the time to understand them and see what they'll get for their money they'll realize they're getting school buildings that will last for the next 20 years," Ross said. Ross described the proposals as "a first step" but added: "Construction doesn't get any cheaper."

The appointment of a five-member building committee and further studies of the plan by school and town officials are expected over the next few weeks. The district has until June 30 to file an application for state aid with the Connecticut Department of Education School Facilities Unit. The building and renovation proposals range from updating utility systems and safety codes to providing new classrooms and labs and a 1,000-seat auditorium with a new stage for the high and middle schools.

Highlights include:
Meeting House Hill School (Built 1962). Code and safety updates. New water system and energy efficient lighting. New music rooms and renovated art rooms. Replacement of windows with energy efficient units. New classroom wing replaces existing building.
Cost: $28.8 million. (After reimbursement: $19.8 million).

New Fairfield Middle School (Built 1995). New media center. Updated interior entrance vestibule. Office and meeting space for staff and visitors. Additional parking, improved site circulation and field access.
Cost: $12.9 million. (After reimbursement $9.5 million).

New Fairfield High School (Built 1974). Conversion from electric heat to hot water heat. New and renovated technical education classrooms. Replacement of undersized and outdated choral and music rooms. Renovated kitchen, offices, meeting spaces and nurse's suite.
Cost: $67.4 million. (After reimbursement $48.9 million)

The project, which was developed by district officials, school administrators, architects, construction managers and other members of the community, is expected to be a major topic of conversation in town over the coming months.

New Fairfield resident Carolee Harkins, co-president of the Parent-Teacher Organizations at Meeting House Hill School, believes the town should support the project. "They've been talking about this for as long as I've lived in New Fairfield and that's been 11 years," Harkins said. "Now it's time to take care of it." Harkins has two daughters and a son who graduated from the high school and has one son in the middle school and a daughter in fourth-grade. "Although some people may be surprised by the costs involved, a lot of them just don't know the problems inside the schools," said Harkins, who described some classrooms at the high school as "poor." "Our schools are the hub of the town," said Harkins. "I want to see some nice facilities."

Contact Brian Saxton at
bsaxton@newstimes.com
or at (203) 731-3332

this story has been read 1266 times
For more information on this: http://109million.homestead.com

Monday, September 10, 2007

High School e-Bay enrollment sweepstakes ...

Education enrollment has now been reduced to e-Bay like auction for out-of-town students. Low bid wins! Big losers are the taxpayers in the winning town.

The town of Sherman begins an e-Bay auction for their high school enrollment. Presently New Milford provides the education but current contract expires June 30, 2009.

Sherman high school, students currently have several choices for attending high school with no designated high school:

  • New Milford
  • Region 12 at Shepaug Valley High School in Washington, CT
  • Brookfield
  • Danbury
  • New Fairfield
The High School e-Bay enrollment sweepstakes ... motivation is simple saving $$$$$$$. Sherman school district no longer wants to pay a premium. That premium is a per student share of the bond indebtedness to build (or can we say "renovate as new") the school facilities. What is the New Fairfield Board of Education position on the "Sherman e-Bay enrollment sweepstakes"?

The bidding starts when a school district sets a tuition rate for out-of-town students. What is New Fairfield present rate? New Milford has set the rate for the 2007-08 school year at $10,414.30, up from $9,909.38 in 2006-07. New Fairfield is expected to come in considerable lower. If you're interested query any member of the Board of Education as to our bid number?

Thursday, March 1, 2007

Two Public Hearings Requesting Public Input - Game Over?!

Dr. Castagnola stated at 2/7 Public Hearing, "I said in the video this is probably one of the most important issue facing the Town. I probably should change that and say that this is THE MOST IMPORTANT ISSUE that will face the Town of New Fairfield.", and he further stated, "Our intention this evening is to gather input concerning the building project. We want to use this meeting to hear reactions to the video concerning the needs which exist and also listen to your ideas and concerns from members of this community."

On 3/1/2007 BoE, the Board clearly was not interested in hearing ideas and/or concerns from members of this community. In fact, two elected officials were summarily cut off during their public comment. The BoE cited, process, procedure, policy in cutting off public comment.

What are your comments?

Sunday, February 25, 2007

DIVISION OF FINANCE AND INTERNAL OPERATIONS

Banner for the Division of Grants Management

CLICK ON THE ABOVE IMAGE AND BE DIRECTED TO THE DIVISION OF FINANCE
AND INTERNAL OPERATIONS FOR THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION

SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION GUIDELINES FOR SCHOOL DISTRICTS DESIGN PROFESSIONALS
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION GRANT PROCESS
BUREAU OF SCHOOL FACILITIES MAIN PAGE
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION PROCEDURES
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION REPORTS SUB MENU
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION RESOURCE INFORMATION
SCHOOL CONSTRUCTION FORMS, INSTRUCTIONS AND WORKSHEET SUB MENU

CHAPTER 173 OF THE CONNECTICUT GENERAL STATUTES (REVISED TO JANUARY 1, 2005)



Friday, February 23, 2007

BL Companies awarded design and renovation of three schools in New Fairfield

Dear Dr. Castagnola,

I shall publish your reply on the web site (http://109million.homestead.com). Thank you for your prompt attention concerning the misrepresentation by BL Companies about New Fairfield School building projects. Unfortunately this misrepresentation created an unwanted perception leading to many questions and second guessing as to whether or not the prescribed process and procedure, so carefully illustrated in C.G.S. Statutes Chapter 173 regarding School building projects, was being followed. At the end of the day, we must depend upon process and procedure as proscribed in the Connecticut General Statutes, along with the elected citizens exercising the "public trust' within their communities.

Of course, their action (BL Companies) is understandable considering their short history and desire to compete in their market segment; however such misrepresentation is inexcusable. One can only wonder how many other references on BL Companies web site reflect similar marketing exuberance and what effect such misrepresentation had on our BoE members in their deliberations and selection process by which BL Companies was subsequently choosen by the BoE.

I believe the BoE as a matter of policy should review the BL Companies references, in light of this misrepresentation with particular emphasis to the segment related to education projects, to ensure other misrepresentations did not impact or sway judgement of the BoE in their vetting and selection process. The gravity and impact of this biggest building project to come before the voters of New Fairfield demands such a review.

Regards,
Roger C. Wise
(203) 470-7473

Sunday, February 18, 2007

Questions every citizen should ask ...

  • HAS THE BOARD EVER MADE AN ASSESSMENT OF NEEDS DEFINED IN THE SCOPE OF THE CONCEPTUAL DESIGN ESTIMATE FROM WHICH THE EDUCATION SPECIFICATION IS CREATED?
  • DOES THE PROJECT AS PRESENTED REFLECT THE RESULTS OF RESULTS OF AN INDEPENDENT CONSULTANT AND THE BOE?
    • IF NOT, WHY NOT?
  • WHOSE WISHES DO THE ARCHITECTUAL DRAWINGS REFLECT?
  • UPON WHOSE AUTHORITY WAS THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT DEFINED AND SENT TO THE ARCHITECT?
  • WHY DID THE ARCHITECTS BEGIN DRAWING BEFORE THE BOARD OF EDUCATION REVIEWED AND DEFINED THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT?
  • WHY IS THE PROJECT BEING INTRODUCTED TO THE TOWN BEFORE EVEN THE MOST RUDIMENTARY BOARD OF EDUCATION OVERSIGHT HAS OCCURRED?
  • DOES THE PROJECT ACCURATELY REFLECT THE BOE'S ASSESSMENT OF WHAT OUR SCHOOLS NEED, NOW AND IN THE FUTURE?