Brockton Public Schools present MSBA-backed plan for new Brockton High; project team outlines timeline and tax estimates

Kevin Sullivan, the project director from Left Field working on the Brockton High School project, outlined a preferred plan at a Brockton Public Schools community forum and said the city is advancing through the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) process toward a local debt-exclusion vote early next year.

Sullivan told residents that the MSBA recently approved Brockton’s preferred schematic and that the district intends to submit a schematic design report to the MSBA in October with the hope of MSBA board approval in December. After that approval, the team said the district will have roughly 120 days to seek local authorization; they are targeting a district-wide debt-exclusion ballot question in January or February.

Why it matters: Brockton High School, the presenters said, is approaching 60 years old and has multiple failing systems — original HVAC, worn finishes, limited science and special-education space and potential asbestos in some materials — and the MSBA program offers partial reimbursement for construction and renovation that would otherwise fall fully to local taxpayers. That reimbursement is limited to eligible costs and subject to MSBA caps, so the presenters emphasized the difference between the MSBA’s listed “base” rate and the project’s expected “effective” reimbursement.

Funding and tax impact: Project staff walked through the city’s debt profile and an illustrative tax-impact table. Using their early estimates, they presented a timeline of annual incremental tax impacts for a single-family house within a 10-year debt-exclusion window: roughly $8.24 in 2027–28, rising in later years (about $28 in year 3, $86 year 4, $170 year 5, $276 year 6, roughly $322 in years 7–9 and about $335 at the peak). Averaged across that 10-year period, the presenters said the debt-exclusion portion would equal roughly $180–$188 per year for a single-family house. The team cautioned these are preliminary figures and said they expect changes as design and budgeting continue.

MSBA reimbursement: The team answered repeated questions about MSBA participation. They said Brockton’s MSBA base reimbursement rate is roughly 80% of eligible costs but cautioned listeners that the MSBA excludes certain scope items and applies caps — for example, the MSBA typically limits participation in construction costs (the presentation cited a “$65” construction-cost cap in the materials shown) and does not fund some athletic facilities (presenters noted the MSBA will not fund swimming pools or some field-house items). After accounting for caps and ineligible items, the project team estimated a conservative effective reimbursement rate in the range of about 50–60% (they cited ~54% as a working conservative figure).

Project vision and features: Principal Kevin McCascal said the project aims to create a modern, flexible learning environment that better reflects Brockton’s diversity and community needs. The architectural concept presented by KBA Architects would phase construction to limit disruption — for example, building a new district kitchen early, maintaining access to athletic facilities during construction, then completing additions and demolitions in later phases — and would add space for career and technical education (CTE), a multi-part media center, interoperable academic houses, and public-facing components such as a culinary program where students could operate a restaurant open to the community. Craig Olsson, lead architect, described plans for giving back green space, maintaining stadium parking, and creating multiple access points to separate construction traffic from daily student flows.

Schedule and next steps: The team described a multi-year phasing plan: schematic design through late 2026, design development and early construction activities in 2027–2028 (including the district kitchen and preparatory work), construction of academic houses in later years, and final demolition/site work toward the end of the multi-year schedule. They said they expect to hire a construction manager this summer to refine phasing and sequencing.

Community response and concerns: Dozens of residents took questions and spoke during public comment. Supporters emphasized the need for modern facilities and the potential job and training benefits of robust CTE programs: “I will be a proud advocate to fight for it,” said Stephen, identified as business manager for Local 223, offering union partnership for training and construction. Several speakers praised the administration’s outreach and urged a yes vote; Jeff Thompson, identified as a city councilor, said, “When this comes to a vote, vote yes.”

Other commenters asked for more financial detail and raised concerns about policy risks and equity. One attendee raised a policy claim about proposed federal voucher programs and warned of possible revenue impacts if students leave the district; another noted a lawsuit filed in the Southern Superior Court alleging that community-based school organization has contributed to racial segregation. The project team did not take a position on those external policy items but said they would continue to provide outreach and more detailed financial tables.

What the presenters promised: staff said they will provide updated financial summaries and tables, continue community office hours (monthly beginning in July), and be available after the forum for individual questions. The next formal steps are the October schematic submission to the MSBA, MSBA board consideration in December, and the anticipated local debt-exclusion vote in January or February.

Limitations and data: Presenters repeatedly described the cost and tax figures as preliminary. They said the MSBA’s base rate applies only to eligible costs and that caps and ineligible items reduce the actual state contribution. The project team also noted that the debt-exclusion numbers assume certain future repayments (including a pension obligation scheduled to be paid down by 2036) that create capacity in the city’s long-term debt plan.

What’s next: The project team encouraged residents to visit the project website for materials and video, attend monthly office hours beginning in July and future community forums, and review forthcoming schematic-design materials and updated finance tables before the expected local vote in January or February.