Ossining school board advances library’s $30 million bond vote after technical briefing

The Ossining Board of Education voted July 9 to place a $30 million bond proposal from the Ossining Public Library on a special district ballot, advancing the library’s plan to repair a failing retaining wall, update heating and cooling systems, make accessibility improvements and undertake interior renovations. The board moved resolution 6.1 to call a special district meeting and authorize the levy of taxes to support the spending; the vote on the resolution was approved by the board during the meeting.

The action followed a presentation by Karen LaRocca Fells, director of the Ossining Public Library, who described key elements of the project and the proposed schedule. “The key pieces of our proposal include repairs to our retaining wall and drainage…accessibility improvements in the parking lot…a new heating and cooling system…roof repairs…and service‑related upgrades,” LaRocca Fells said. She said the bond would be for 15 years and the library estimates an average taxpayer increase of $184 per year, using district full market values to calculate an average impact. The library is targeting a public vote on September 16, 2025.

LaRocca Fells described a phased approach: exterior work, including the retaining wall, stormwater drainage and parking reconfiguration, would start in spring 2026; interior work, including HVAC replacement, was planned for 2027–28, though the library said it might fast‑track some interior HVAC work after a recent equipment failure. “We have lost a critical piece of equipment just recently, and we’re looking to see if we can push ahead with some of that work sooner rather than later,” she said.

Board members pressed library officials on cost, oversight and contingency planning. Trustee Phil Rice, a licensed engineer and chair of the library’s buildings and grounds and finance committees, said the library had retained engineers, architects and a construction project manager (Calgee Construction) and that the retained firms were experienced. “I’m helping the board and Karen and Molly to watch what our consultants are doing very closely,” Rice said. He said engineers monitoring the retaining wall were experienced and that routine monthly monitoring had been established.

Superintendent Mary Fox Alter and Assistant Superintendent for Business Alita McCoy described procedural options for board oversight. McCoy explained that the resolution before the board authorized the special district meeting and the bond ballot; she said the district currently is not the “lead agency” for any SEQRA/environmental review (the transcript used the term “seeker” during the exchange) and that making the district the lead would require rescinding portions of the draft resolution and would likely delay the library timeline.

Several trustees, including Trustee Melissa Banta and Trustee Frank (surname not specified in the record), said they supported putting the bond before voters but asked for stronger oversight assurances and clearer documentation for the community. Trustee Roger Bhattacharya, attending remotely, urged library officials to prepare public communications showing how cost estimates were developed. LaRocca Fells said professional estimators prepared the cost estimates and that the library would put work out to competitive bid for construction, which could lower final prices.

Library representatives said they had included contingency amounts in the bond estimate and planned public information sessions for technical questions, including sessions with engineers and architects on July 22, July 29 (Spanish language) and August 17. LaRocca Fells also said the library had identified possible additional state grants and fundraising to reduce pressure on the bond portion.

Board discussion also addressed liability and the relationship between the library’s independent board and the school district. Legal counsel and bond counsel had advised the Board of Education that the district should not assume lead‑agency responsibility for the library project or accept direct project management responsibility because of potential added liability, cost and staffing needs, McCoy said. Board members debated whether a memorandum of agreement (MOA) or memorandum of understanding (MOU) could provide middle‑ground oversight; staff said an MOA would need to be negotiated and included in the resolution and would delay the town’s timeline.

The board adopted resolution 6.1 to call a special district meeting and authorize the levy of a tax for the Ossining Public Library’s bond. Board members and library officials said they expect to continue coordination; LaRocca Fells and her trustees invited questions and scheduled public outreach to explain technical details and project phasing to voters.

A vote on the bond itself will occur only if the district voters approve the September 16 special district ballot item; library staff said they will manage bidding and construction only after funding is secured. Library and board officials repeatedly emphasized the project would be staged to address the most critical exterior safety concerns first — notably the retaining wall and stormwater — and that unresolved critical failures could force continued partial closures or space restrictions if funding is not approved.