Wednesday, November 18th, 2015
Marion district seeks feedback
Schools officials list options for possible improvements
By Tom Millhouse
Submitted Photo
This graphic shows improvement projects proposed under a Marion Local Schools feasibility study. They include 1: concessions/restroom building at Booster Field; 2a: new gymnasium/locker room; 2b: new ag education-industrial arts complex; 3: auditorium; 4a: band field; 4b: band storage facility; 4c: bus garage; 5: additional practice fields; and 6: new high school building.
MARIA STEIN - Marion Local Schools District officials want residents' opinions on plans to upgrade its facilities.
Garman Miller & Associates recently prepared a master plan after assessing the school's facilities, superintendent Mike Pohlman said. The feasibility study identified six possible improvements, ranging from a concession/restroom building at the football stadium to a new high school.
"We're trying to get the pulse of the community on what they think of the master plan," Pohlman said. "We want to get a feel for the level of support and then take a look at our finances and start to prioritize the projects." He stressed board members have not decided how to proceed or if any projects will be pursued.
The possible projects include,
• Phase 1: concession/restroom building at Booster Field, $400,000.
• Phase 2a: new gymnasium with locker rooms and foyer, $7.5 million.
• Phase 2b: new ag education-industrial arts facility, $2 million.
• Phase 3: auditorium, $2.6 million.
• Phase 4a: band practice field, $630,000.
• Phase 4b: band storage building, $160,000.
• Phase 4c: bus garage, $150,000.
• Phase 5: additional practice fields, $220,000.
• Phase 6: new high school with classrooms added to the north and east sides of the proposed new gym, auditorium and ag-industrial arts facility and auditorium. Under this proposal, the current high school gym would remain but the classrooms would be removed when the new high school is built. No cost estimate was offered for Phase 6.
The phase numbers do not indicate priority, he added.
"It would not have to be done in that order," he said. "We might do all or none."
Information gathering began with publication of the master plan's outline in a district newsletter. Pohlman also included a link to www.surveymonkey.com/r/SHRV6GN, where residents can participate in an anonymous survey. Another link on the district website, www.marionlocal.org, leads residents to the survey.
The survey asks respondents whether they support each of six proposals. They may also leave comments.
"As of today, 60 people have responded," Pohlman said Monday. "We would like to get about 100."
Responses will likely be collected for another two weeks.
"They put a lot of work into this master plan," Pohlman said.
The study, including the master plan, cost $10,000.
"Even if the decision is to do nothing for the immediate future, this is still a good investment because this working document provides us a vision for many years to come," Pohlman remarked.
The projects would all be constructed without state financial assistance on land the district already owns.
"It will be 100 percent locally funded," Pohlman said. The district received state funds for high school and middle school projects in 1999 and likely would be eligible for additional state funding.
While some residents would like specific details, he said, it's too early to provide information such as design sketches.
Pohlman pointed out in the newsletter that "a very rough estimate" would be that the owner of a home valued at $100,000 would pay an additional $17.50 per year for each $1 million spent on the projects.
Officials have not determined when or if a levy would be placed on the ballot to fund the projects, he added.
The district's debt limit is about $10.5 million, but he noted in the newsletter that the limitation might be raised due to an increase in the district valuation.
School officials are listening to residents' concerns and are considering a public meeting to present information and answer questions.
The facilities evaluation began early this year with the appointment of a committee made up of school staff, administrators, board members and booster group representatives. Prior to selecting an architect, committee members visited several districts which have constructed facilities in recent years.
