The Millis Finance Committee on Oct. 8 heard detailed briefings from project staff and the school building committee on the proposed middle-high school renovation and addition, including the two-step approval process and estimated tax effect on homeowners.

Craig Schultz, a project representative, said the town must first approve an appropriation at town meeting on Nov. 10 and then voters must approve a debt-exclusion ballot question on Dec. 8 to raise taxes to pay for the work. "We need to pass town meeting, and then we need to pass at the ballot on December 8," Schultz said.

The project team presented a financing summary that shows the town would need to provide about $56,100,000 and the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) is expected to reimburse roughly $67,600,000 under the current draft contract; the MSBA maximum reimbursement listed in the draft warrant language is $68,250,000. "The state's going to give us $67,600,000 and we have to spend $56,100,000," Schultz said. He added the MSBA reimbursement percentage in this case is unusually high—about 54 percent of eligible costs.

The timetable presented calls for enabling work and design to begin after the Dec. 8 vote, construction to start in the first quarter of 2027 and substantial completion in the second quarter of 2029. Bonding is expected in fiscal 2030; officials said the tax increase would likely take effect with the FY30 tax year beginning July 1, 2030. In the interim the town would use bond‑anticipation notes. "It'll be borrowing, bond anticipation notes," Schultz said, noting interest-only costs on those notes could cause small interim tax changes.

Project staff described how the building would be constructed in phases to use newly built space as "swing space" while other sections are renovated. Emily Saracen, senior project manager at Vertex Engineering, said contingencies and investigative work would be used to manage risk from unknown conditions, such as hazardous materials discovered during demolition. "Hazmat is one of the biggest unforeseen conditions. ... exploratory work, making roof cuts, checking inside the walls, above the ceilings before you start in a certain area," Saracen said.

Committee members pushed on taxpayer impacts. Using current town valuation figures presented at the meeting (a town valuation estimate of about $2.2 billion and an average assessed single‑family home assessed at about $605,000), the project team estimated the annual tax increase for the average single‑family property at roughly $9.13 (rounded to $9.14). "We're estimating that an average assessed value single family house ... would cost $9.13 ... $9.14 per household," Schultz said. He also said the town’s assessed base has grown, which would spread the debt-exclusion cost across more households over time.

Officials emphasized the difference between an operational override and a debt exclusion: both are Proposition 2½ votes, but a debt exclusion is temporary for the length of the bonding period. "It is an override of Proposition 2½. There's two types of overrides, a debt exclusion, which only lasts for the period that the project is being paid for, in this case, 28 years, and an operational override, which goes on in perpetuity," Schultz said.

Committee members asked about enrollment, alternatives and renovation-only costs. The town’s current combined middle‑high population is roughly 572 students (about 286 in middle school, 286 in high school); the proposed design assumes capacity near 645 students. The project team said renovation-only options were estimated at about $50,000,000 for building work plus roughly $5,000,000 for modular classrooms (a total that staff said could push the public‑only renovation approach toward about $75,000,000 once project management, escalation and other costs are included). The team also noted a multi‑phase, incremental renovation plan—spread over a decade—would require repeated town funding votes and still would not deliver the educational program in the proposed design.

Officials described other financial details that will be finalized if voters approve the project: final MSBA contract terms (expected within days of the meeting), the ultimate interest rate used for the bond, and whether any small adjustments to the MSBA figure are needed. "They have not voted, but there were pre meetings on that, and that's the number they're going to give us possibly by the end of this week," Schultz said of the MSBA reimbursement figure. The project team said MSBA funding comes from a dedicated state sales‑tax reserve and, once the MSBA executes a contract, that reimbursement amount is fixed.

The committee was told the MSBA will review design documents at intermediate completion stages and the agency typically participates in construction meetings and reimburses eligible costs after review. Project managers described using construction management at‑risk and prevailing‑wage labor, and said the MSBA does not fund site work such as new athletic fields.

Why this matters: Millis faces a choice between a single, state‑backed renovation/addition with an above‑average state reimbursement, or a longer, town‑funded incremental repair plan that staff said would cost more over time, require repeated overrides and would not deliver the proposed educational spaces and safety upgrades.

What’s next: The first formal town meeting appropriation vote is scheduled for Nov. 10; if passed, the debt‑exclusion question will appear on the Dec. 8 ballot. The project team will continue design-development and cost‑model work, refine contingency and escalation allowances, and bring back final contract language for legal review and a select‑board vote on the warrant and ballot question.