School officials, district architects and advocates for the proposed overhaul of the Martha’s Vineyard Regional High School are warning that a rejection of the project at the Islandwide vote next month could still leave taxpayers with more than $200 million of renovations in the future.
Island residents will head to the polls on June 2 to decide on the future of the high school building project, a $333.5 million endeavor that would be the largest public project in Vineyard history.
The school district has said the project, which entails razing the oldest sections of the school and adding a new, two-story wing, is needed to revamp cramped classrooms and crumbling infrastructure.
If the measure passes, the actual cost to the taxpayers will be offset by a series of grants from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA), which previously pledged to reimburse $75 million of the total and has since granted an additional $2 million specifically for the career and technical department.
But if voters turn it down, the project is essentially dead, according to a new report from Tappé Architects, which designed the high school plans. The district would also lose its grant funding.
“There is a brief opportunity to hold another vote for the same project, and the project could still pass,” the architects wrote. “However, the most common outcome of a failed vote is that the project is removed from the MSBA pipeline, their funding is gone and the project is dead.”
The MSBA, which funds school construction with a portion of the state sales tax, turned down the high school’s applications for more than a decade before finally accepting it into the sought-after building program four years ago.
“We are likely to not see that opportunity rise again for years, and maybe never,” said Richard Smith, the schools superintendent.
First opened in 1959, the high school is contaminated with asbestos and riddled with obsolete mechanical systems that are constantly failing. Something will still need to be done to improve the building if the project is rejected, a costly proposition.
“The money that we put into the school to keep it operating… is just growing year to year,” Mr. Smith said.
A no vote would immediately end all contracts under the MSBA-approved plan, said Michael Watts, a former high school committee member who now chairs a citizens ballot group that is campaigning for the measure.
With $2 million in voter-approved design and development work nearly completed, there is no money left to go back to the drawing board for a scaled-back renovation of the school, he said.
“There is no other project,” Mr. Watts said.
“If [voters] think there’s a quick pivot to a renovation, that project doesn’t exist. It is absolutely magical thinking,” he said.
The district believes that many of the issues in the building would need to be addressed in the coming years if the vote does fail. A minimal code upgrade renovation, which was looked at as an option early in the design process, would cost Island taxpayers anywhere from $201 million to $238 million, not including debt service if it were done as a single project.
The Tisbury School is a cautionary tale, said Mr. Watts, who served on the building committee for that project.
After voters narrowly defeated a $46 million bond measure for a new school in 2018, Tisbury lost a $14 million MSBA commitment that would have reduced taxpayers’ share to $32 million.
The following year, asbestos and lead paint contamination in the 1929 school forced officials to close several classrooms for months of remediation, during which several grades and their teachers commuted to the high school for classes.
To renovate its existing school without state support, Tisbury wound up spending more than $85 million, borrowed at taxpayers’ expense.
“The lesson on the Island from Tisbury is pretty strong,” Mr. Watts said.
Sally Rizzo, one of the 25 high school school building committee members who have been working with Tappé Architects and the MSBA for the past four years, said a no vote on June 2 would leave students and teachers in an aged-out, decaying building that no longer meets state building and educational codes.
“If this fails and we lose the state money, we have to go back and figure out how to do a piecemeal code upgrade, which will take years,” she said.
That code upgrade estimate did not include the cost of modular classrooms so that schooling could continue during the renovation. Tisbury spent more than $5 million on a two-year temporary school made of rented modules, school committee member Amy Houghton told the Gazette.
The current high school proposal does not call for modulars, which are not reimbursable by MSBA. Classes would continue in the original building until the addition is completed, then switch to the new wing during the renovation.
After reviewing 20 different potential designs that ranged from the basic code upgrade to an all-new school, the building committee chose the renovation and addition as its best option for a school that will last another 70 years, he said.
“I want people to understand this is a great project. It’s a project that has been four years in the planning, and it wasn’t just quickly thrown together,” Mr. Smith said.
The building committee has never lost sight of the project’s fiscal impact on towns and continues to pare costs wherever possible, while the district is seeking more grant funding to offset taxpayers’ share, he added.
“It’s a necessary building, just like fire stations [and] town halls. These are necessary buildings for a community,” Mr. Smith said.
“It’s for everybody, not just the school people and the kids. That’s what I want people to know,” he said.
The school building project election takes place in each town from 11 a.m. to 7 p.m. June 2. Polling locations and the sample ballot are posted on town web sites and complete information on the building project, including design illustrations, is posted at mvrhsbuildingproject.info.
This article appears in May 22, 2026.
There are always options and this article sure makes it sound like we have a gun to our head and if we don’t say yes, they’re going to pull the trigger on us. I do not ever recall the building being open up for a walking tour to the general public to see for themselves the condition of the building. I have been through the building and as with any building, there are always improvements that could be made, but this building is not falling into the ground. Take the performing arts center where we have seen so many world class productions could it be improved probably but does it work as it is now absolutely.
The High School has been offered multiple guided tours for the public over the last couple of weeks and the Times and Gazette have both shared information about the time and dates for these tours. I hope you will take the opportunity to attend a tour and see for yourself the poor condition of our high school and how inadequate it is for 21st century learning.
I am voting NO! This is outrageous cost.. we put the burden on taxpayers with no accountability..
Please define accountability. Do you believe this has all been done in backrooms?
As a taxpayer, you have had endless opportunities, over 4 years to speak up and provide your input to the committee, etc. The current model, with the MSBA reimbursement ($75 mil) and the CTE grant ($2mil), will cost very close to the same for a better and more thorough build. A renovation will be extremely disruptive to the learning environment, probably end up costing more, etc., etc.
Build the whole new school with modular pods it will last just as long as this Taj Mahal thing they want to build. Maybe they won’t be able to brag at the tea and crumpet socials, but it will be a place kids can learn,and it will probably cost 1/2 as much and be done in half the time
““If [voters] think there’s a quick pivot to a renovation, that project doesn’t exist. It is absolutely magical thinking,” he said.”
Why isn’t there a plan b waiting in the wings? This is just horrible planning by a group we entrust to be solution oriented…horrible situation they’ve put everyone, mostly the kids, in.
I said those words because they are the truth. The current project is culminating in this vote. If the vote is yes then this project, the only one before island voters, moves forward with the agreement in place with the MSBA. This is the project that the committee sent to the MSBA. Not another project. The very large committee with reps from each town evaluated the Reno/code upgrade, this project and a build new as is required by the MSBA process. That committee chose this option of the 20+ iterations they evaluated. All done in public meetings over 2+ years. All accessible to every voter. Once the committee chose this option further work stops on Reno and new. Why pay for that work as it is not deemed the best option to put to voters. There can always be a plan B. Vote yes, no Plan B needed. Vote No and you will need a committee to put together that project. You will need to spend money on that design work. You will delay the start and inflation grows the bottom line. You will pay for trailers which become disposable taxpayer money. You will need to buy the track that is included in the current project because that is where construction staging will happen for the project in front voters. And the plan B will have to go back to voters to approve someday in the future. We all have a choice. I hope the majority vote “YES”
This is a great article, thank you. For all of those who are leaning towards voting no, please understand that your no vote does not make the issue disappear. You will still be on the hook for emergency renovations with no help from the MSBA.
VOTE NO. Renovations and portable trailer units are sufficient and used by many school systems nationwide. Claiming Remo will cost $200 M is ridiculous, irresponsible and nothing but a scare tactic to get individuals to vote yes. Let’s be fiscally prudent and demand a rigorous bidding process for “adequate” renovations and leasable portable units!
Ask any Tisbury resident how much money they saved by voting NO to a new school and opting for the modulars and renovation.
Let’s see if we can unpack this. What you are insinuating is a professional architecture firm and the owners project manager that both build schools for a living have no idea how to do cost analysis. Assume when you say adequate you mean slapping on a coat of paint and a bunch of mini splits. Maybe tearing up the floors with asbestos underneath and maybe doing a little mold eradication in those rooms that have had leaks. No need for more electrical for all those chromebooks in use in every classroom. No need to bring the building up to current code standards. It’s all good. Just do the minimum because I will be dead before the next major problem comes around and I won’t have to pay for it.
The proposed budget for this proposed project is outrageous and will leave island taxpayers holding the bag. Local governments need to do more with less, eliminate the waste and take preventative measures that don’t leave taxpayers in absurd situations like this. Vote NO and protect island taxpayers payers!
Just say NO
It seems like one issue that doesn’t seem to get any attention is the fact that islanders will pay a relatively small fraction of this cost. The majority of our tax revenue is from second home owners who won’t be sending any kids to this school. We should be thankful to them. And as mentioned voting no does nothing but kick the can down the road for it to be an even more costly endeavor.
With every push there’s a pull. The biggest issue is that we have not systematically invested in a year in a year out on the buildings. This is in essence demolition by neglect, ask the MVC how that works for applicants yet here we are holding the bag. As much as I’d like to support this, I’ll be unable to support it. I would much rather see 10 million in a year put into the building for the next 30 years. Because 30 years from now, this new building will be falling apart because once again it won’t be maintained.
Bulldoze it down and bring all of the schools k through 12 back to their hometowns. The dissenters in 1958 were correct.
We hear this comment repeatedly. Can you tell us which elementary can handle the addition of their 9-12 students? Edgartown does not have room for their share of the 700+ kids at the high school. Let alone staffing all those schools individually with appropriate teachers for high school kids. That is just going backwards.
That’s easy. Take the money that you would have spent on rebuilding the high school, and I might add more money than people want to spend, and put it into each individual school. Do some renovations, add grades 9, 10, 11 and 12, add some teachers. Everything will be much more reasonable, guaranteed, controlled locally, and we will restore the sense of home town identity that we once enjoyed. Some of the forefathers who battled against the new regional high School district back in the 1950s predicted this mess and that’s why they voted against it. A local k through 12 school will also likely alleviate some of the traffic problems on the island.
With all this housing going in the island population will grow to 50k and we will probably need this school. Without the housing we can stay small and let the seasonal people pay for stuff.
I have read a lot of letters against building the school project. What I haven’t heard is their expertise in construction costs that would sway my opinion against the project.
Just stating I don’t want to spend money doesn’t solve the problems this project has been designed to correct.
Vote for the project and our children
As someone who normally would not be in favor in increasing taxes, I think the school really needs this. The future is in the future generations. While we may not directly benefit today, the greater good will. Furthermore, it will create so many construction jobs which will boost the island economy. I am tight on money right now and would not want my taxes to increase but I will still be voting yes!
Is there a study on the projected enrollment for MVRHS over the next however many years? Perhaps over the lifespan of the new build? Has the lifespan of this project been laid out? How about upkeep costs? I see the WT Library HVAC system issues as a small scale look into the longevity of municipal investments. I genuinely do not know the trajectory of our population demographics. I keep hearing we will only be second homes and retired people soon. Meanwhile I see articles noting state and country wide school enrollment is diminishing, with some places at record lows.
The schools get this data every year. Nobody pays attention to it. Just ask for it. And please pay attention to all the projects in the works. Housing = children. Unless you assume it will all be summer homes. That is not how the recent 40B projects and MVC requirements for affordable housing are playing out.
Vote NO!!
These architects and builders stand to
make more money the more these costs. They have no incentive to provide us with alternative options that are more affordable. It’s costing us each likely $1,000+ per year for the next 40 years according to that calculator. What does the average citizen without kids actually get for that? Nothing!! They actually lock the school down and don’t allow regular tax payers to use the facilities for meetings etc. what about a community outreach program?
Why did we not get to vote on a repair option??? Voting yes or no is short sided by this committee. They should have provided 3 options or at least 2 for us to vote on. Now we have not option but to vote this down and get that committee back to work.
Confused by logic that you don’t get anything because you don’t have kids. Do you want live in a society without educated people who are given opportunity?Going to high school and the benefits it provides to our youth is essential for a functioning society….your rationale makes no sense
I need more information before I decide how to vote. “ no longer meets state building and educational codes.” That statement draws me to ask what educational codes? I am not asking for a debate. I am asking for pure facts to help me make an educated vote. The part about bldg codes doesn’t phase me in the least. I do agree with fixing the hazards for health and safety. But most of us live in houses that would not meet the code for 2026. If we felt that uneasy of our own homes not being up to today’s code most of us would be homeless. Simpson tie downs come to mind. For those that don’t know what it is. It’s a flat piece of metal 3” wide and about 3’ long fastened to the frame of the house and imbedded in the poured concrete foundation. The purpose is to keep your house from blowing away. Codes evolve as technology advances. But they don’t necessarily mean old technology is obsolete or hazardous. Again asbestos is a major concern. I really want more information on education codes. Please provide them with out debate or drama