Caldwell-West School District to ask voters to approve $8.5 million athletic center on Nov. 4

The Caldwell‑West School District on Tuesday presented a revised plan for a new athletic center and told the public the proposal will appear as a single yes/no question on the regular board election ballot on Nov. 4.

The district's outside architect said the revised plan replaces an older one that had included a second floor; the new building would be one story, about 7,080 square feet, and is budgeted at $8,500,000. “So the budget is $8,500,000. It is 55% less than the previous proposal,” the Pritzamgen Architects representative said during the board meeting.

The project is designed to modernize the existing 3,000‑square‑foot field house, provide separate men’s and women’s locker rooms, add multi‑fixture public restrooms and meet barrier‑free/code compliance requirements that the current facility lacks. The architect described the interior program as two larger and two smaller locker rooms (the primary locker room is estimated at between about 60 and 80 lockers; a second smaller room roughly 32 lockers, mirrored on the women's side), a trainer's room, storage, custodial space and family/unisex restroom access.

Why it matters: District officials said the existing field house is old and noncompliant with current accessibility and plumbing standards, and that replacing it will address student needs across sports, physical education classes and general events. The architect estimated the tax impact at roughly $83–$84 annually on an average assessed home, and said the district would borrow long term (20–30 years was discussed) to finance the bond if voters approve the measure.

Public questions at the meeting centered on operating costs, contingencies and whether the building would be built from the ground up. A resident asked whether the old structure would be fully demolished; the Pritzamgen representative answered, “Yes.” Another attendee cited an HVAC and plumbing line‑item totaling about $2,500,000 in the estimate and asked what the ongoing utility or maintenance impact would be; the architect said the district already carries costs for the existing facility and that usage and efficiencies (for example, motion sensor lighting) would determine any net change. The architect also said a market‑escalation contingency was included in the budget because drawings and bidding will occur many months after the estimate is prepared.

On contingency and budget volatility, the architect explained that the Department of Education requires a contingency be carried, and that the district has capital funds that could be used; alternatively, the board may need to reduce scope or finishes if bids exceed available funding. “If for some reason we encounter an issue during the bidding phase, there are two options,” the architect said, noting the district could allocate capital funds or pare back project components while maintaining parity between men's and women's facilities.

The architect also addressed common community questions: the field house is intended for multiple sports and physical education use, not solely football; it would not include the multi‑purpose public gathering spaces contemplated in the earlier two‑story plan; and solar panels are not part of this project because, as presented, the expected return‑on‑investment without subsidies or a different financing structure was not favorable.

Design and timeline: The revised single‑story footprint was shown in renderings during the meeting and described as intended to match existing campus architecture. The team said drawings will be further developed and bidding will take place after the holidays; work is expected to become visible in the new year if bids and permitting proceed on schedule.

What remains unresolved: The architect did not provide a precise operating cost estimate for utilities and maintenance; the meeting record shows board members and residents asked for that data but were told usage patterns and final equipment choices will determine first‑year impacts and that staff will budget accordingly after the building opens.

The Nov. 4 ballot will contain a single yes/no question asking voters to approve the district borrowing to construct the athletic center. If the question passes, the district will proceed to finalize plans, bid the work and manage contingencies as needed.