Planning subcommittee reviews facilities slideshow, flags roughly $60 million in repairs and recommends Option 2B

The Blackstone-Millville Regional School District planning subcommittee reviewed a draft "foundation" slideshow on Jan. 6 that lays out facility needs, enrollment forecasts and a preferred building configuration the presenters labeled "Option 2B," while noting projected existing-condition repair costs in excess of $60 million.

Greg Smalley, the consultant from DRA who led the slideshow, told the committee the presentation compiles district goals, a facilities assessment and multiple reconfiguration options to help the group decide next steps and outreach targets. "We're losing students because of the educational offerings and we're losing students because of the condition of the environments that we're teaching them in," Smalley said, summarizing the stakes that underlie the proposed capital work.

The presentation included an overview of ownership and condition for each building, floor plans and a capital improvement program (CIP) forecast. Slides flagged minor asbestos remediation at the "JFK" complex and a set of pressing repairs (roofs, windows and exterior work) that, in the consultants' current estimates, put existing-condition costs above $60 million; presenters said they will adjust figures to reflect recent construction-cost escalation.

A demographic and enrollment forecast summarized by consultant Jerome McKibben highlighted an aging local population and projected enrollment declines over the next decade. The forecast also called out a 33-unit small-home development at 110 Blackstone Street, which the presenters estimated could add about 10 to 15 students to the district.

On options, Smalley told members the subcommittee’s analysis found a configuration labeled Option 2B—converting F.W. Hartnett to K–5 and reestablishing a middle/high-school model—"the most educationally appropriate and economically feasible." He recommended recording that preference in the foundation document so the subcommittee has a clear statement of position.

Committee members discussed trade-offs between short-term spending to patch existing buildings and a long-term capital project that could address ADA and Mass. Architectural Access Board (MAAB) requirements, expand career-path spaces and eliminate many recurring CIP costs. Smalley warned some ADA fixes—such as replacing an elevator or making exterior walls compliant—are unlikely without a major project.

The group also reviewed the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) process. Smalley emphasized that filing a Statement of Interest (SOI) is administrative and nonbinding: "the MSBA statement of interest involves no financial commitment," he said, and the committee would have months to test community sentiment before any local vote.

Members spent substantial time on outreach strategy. They agreed to prioritize meetings with each town’s capital outlay and finance committees, select boards and parent groups, and to collect photos of local facilities for compare-and-contrast slides. Several members urged tours of modern peer districts and recruiting parent, student and senior voices to explain why upgraded spaces matter. "These are the community schools; their voices are the most important voice," one committee member said, urging broad engagement before an SOI or local referendum.

The subcommittee also discussed timing: if an SOI were filed, MSBA shortlisting and subsequent approvals would still leave several years before construction, giving towns time to plan for surplus properties or alternative reuses. Members agreed the filing window provides months to refine messaging and gauge local readiness, and they planned to meet small groups first to build support.

Next steps recorded by the group included finalizing the slideshow and data sheets, adding local photos and a few missing data points, meeting soon with each town’s capital outlay committee, and continuing behind-the-scenes conversations with local officials and state representatives. The subcommittee scheduled a next meeting on Feb. 9 and closed its Jan. 6 meeting by voice vote on a motion to adjourn.

The committee did not take any binding votes on capital projects or MSBA enrollment filings at this meeting; members emphasized outreach and data refinement as the next immediate tasks.