As a historic preservationist, chairman of the William Street historic district commission/Tisbury historical commission and a builder with an emphasis on renovations, I attended the July 17, 2017 meeting of the Tisbury School Building Committee to oppose the demolition of the present Tisbury School. Within days I found myself a member of the committee. My first thought at the invitation to join was the old phrase “keep your friends close and your enemies even closer.” Fine with me, I thought.

With many years of committee and board member experience, I thought I had the experience to move the committee toward a renovation/addition rather than demolition and a new build.

To oppose any endeavor effectively one must understand the opposition. I began to examine the factors that drove the committee to the new build choice. Through the fall of 2017 I grew to respect the members of the school building committee. I learned the committee hired an excellent and experienced owner’s project manager, Richard Marks of Daedalus Projects Inc., and a creative and responsive architectural team, Peter and Libby Turowski of t2Architecture. Both have proved to be professional firms with extensive experience in school construction. This did not help my cause to preserve the old brick school. When I was a member of the West Tisbury school council considering the middle school addition project, I learned it was imperative to understand the education plan of the school including class size, enrollment projections, Islandwide shared services, state standards, community use, safety, evacuation plans, emergency service access and many other factors that drive space needs and design. While educating myself to the needs of the Tisbury School, attending site visits to schools under construction, and critically scrutinizing the proposed new-build school plans, the decision to build a new school gained credibility both functionally and financially. Over the months my learning curve became less steep and the facts began to take precedent over my objective: the old school should be saved. It became clear a new-build makes both short and long-term sense for the town Tisbury.

The preservationist in me wants to renovate and add to the existing school, but the facts do not support this nostalgic and idealistic notion. The school building committee has been holding public meetings, workshops and working groups for over two years. Opponents and proponents have been welcomed to all meetings in my nine months of membership.

Some claim a renovation/addition could be completed for $25 million. This was an interesting prospect to consider; however, those of this opinion have not produced credible and verifiable budgets to support this assertion. Our owner project manager, using comparative statistics of recent school renovations, projects the cost of a renovation/addition to be $3 million more than the new-build project.

A list of Massachusetts schools scheduled for renovation/addition in 2019 have projected costs ranging from $453 per square foot up to $693 per square foot. If we average these costs at $575 per square foot and renovate the existing school, something from a space needs reality we cannot do, the equation would be: existing school 56,410 square feet renovated at $575 per square foot equals $32.4 million. This exceeds the town’s cost to build a new 75,390-square-foot state-of-the-art building. And understand this would be a “go it alone” path without any state funding.

In all renovation/addition options for the school the town would incur the cost of temporary classrooms, a required temporary gym, and, because of our location in a wind zone, the cost of a foundation for the gym would add another $2.5 to $3.5 million to the $3 million of additional cost related to renovating the existing school. This amounts to $5.5 to $6.5 million, significant taxpayer dollars for temporary structures lacking any long-term benefits for the town.

Though immeasurable ahead of time, there will be change orders and cost overruns for unforeseen conditions associated with any major renovation. If you accept the unsubstantiated claim that we can complete a renovation/addition for $25 million, add in the cost of temporary structures, and allocate just 10 per cent for unforeseen expenses, the town will have spent between $30 and $31 million to renovate the existing school. In the end, the town would still own a building that is 100 years old and would likely inherit a compromised finished product that presents ongoing maintenance costs which will prove very costly for future taxpayers.

One well-reasoned renovation/addition proposal projected a cost of $43 million. While it preserves the existing building, this design falls 15,000 square feet short of the state-mandated requirements to receive state funding of $15 million. If you add the cost of the required square footage, this proposal validates the facts submitted by our project manager that a renovation/addition will cost at least $3 million more than a new-build, before adding the cost of the temporary classrooms and a gym with a temporary foundation.

While we would all like a path of self determination with our town projects, organizations like the Massachusetts School Building Authority exist because most if not all cities and towns in the commonwealth are incapable of effectively and efficiently handling a project of this scope. Yes, we may be able to handle the bricks and mortar but can we meet all the regulatory and programing requirements of the state and federal governments that are necessary to receive both building and annual funding?

Doing nothing is not a viable alternative. The school suffers from deferred maintenance, has inadequate classroom, storage, cafeteria and meeting space. Windows have failed, and brick and concrete facades are crumbling. The school has been cited for not meeting education standards and safety is becoming a concern. These problems will not go away and the cost to manage them will escalate over time. There is no way to cap expenses as some have proposed without inviting serious costs down the road.

The tax impact on a home valued at $515,000 will be $558 at the completion of construction and will reduce annually until paid in 2042. The school building committee in coordination with the town treasurer will provide tax impact information in increments of $100,000 of value for your consideration.

Where does that leaves as a community? How do we fulfill the social contract most effectively for this and future generations?

We can roll the dice on a hypothetical and unsubstantiated claim we can renovate and add on to the existing school for $30 to $31 million, accepting the expense of maintaining the 90-year-old building.

We can dream of relinquishing annual state and federal funding and renovate without adding to the existing school. Creating, while newly renovated, a substandard noncompliant building for $32.4 million.

We can renovate and add on to the existing building in full compliance inclusive of MSBA reimbursement and spend $ 37.5 to $ 38 million and waste $5.5 million to $6.5 million more of the taxpayers’ money.

Or we can leave the children in the existing school, avoid the waste and cost of temporary gym and classrooms while building a state-of-the art school for $31.9 million, inclusive of a 5 per cent construction portion contingency.

Dear friends and neighbors: before you vote at town meeting and in the voting booth, I ask you to separate the facts from fiction and cast your vote based on fact not wishful thinking.