Experts tell House panel state should fund technical help for rural school building reuse

Two consultants told the House General and Housing Committee on May 9 that Vermont communities facing school closures need state-funded technical assistance and seed money to make adaptive reuse feasible.

Peter Fairweather, proprietor of Fairweather Consulting, and Greg Gossens, partner with GBA Architects and Planners, described lengthy, expensive reuse processes and said volunteers who usually lead the work often lack resources to complete market analyses, feasibility studies and renovation projects.

The experts said school closures typically follow local population loss or economic decline, leaving large buildings that are often liabilities rather than assets. "This whole process is a very emotional process. School buildings are important to people," Fairweather said. He described three upstate New York examples where two former schools attracted buyers quickly because of location near an interstate or a river, while a third remote property remained unsold and was later auctioned.

Gossens said physical constraints often rule out some reuses. He described a 33,000-square-foot former high school that "was physically not feasible" for housing and a 90,000-square-foot Park Street School that has taken about eight years to partially backfill. "To renovate it, just even to the most modicum levels, was a little over a hundred dollars a square foot," he said, noting that the size of such buildings can exceed local demand.

Why this matters: committee members and witnesses said if school closures result from statewide education policy decisions, the state should fund more than demolition or transfer. Fairweather and Gossens recommended a central resource—such as a clearinghouse or an office that tracks civic-facility reuse and provides guidance, funding information and technical help—so small towns do not shoulder complex redevelopment alone.

Details from testimony: witnesses outlined the typical components of reuse work: a market analysis to identify demand (child care, recreation, housing, small business space), a physical inventory and feasibility study, community outreach, and project management to assemble funding. Fairweather said the market/feasibility work they have done typically runs about $25,000. Gossens said renovation costs can vary widely depending on use, and gave an example in which converting a building for child care could cost about $300 per square foot—too expensive to be covered by typical nonprofit or community rents.

Witnesses and committee members identified common funding channels and partners used in successful projects: municipal planning grants (state-level), regional development corporations, Springfield Regional Development Corporation, Twin Pines Housing Trust, the Tug Hill Commission (an example from New York), historic rehabilitation tax credits, new markets tax credits, Low Income Housing Tax Credits and Vermont Housing Finance Agency (VHFA) programs. They also described projects that used many small grants to hire development consultants who in turn assembled larger funding packages.

Committee members asked practical questions about holding costs and urgency. Gossens described a Park Street School whose heating system was failing and required six-figure expenditures just to keep the building minimally heated, creating pressure to find short-term fixes while pursuing long-term reuse. Fairweather said communities can also face a "mourning process" when reuse efforts fail and urged assistance for communities to pivot to other assets.

Speakers said volunteer-led efforts are often heroic but insufficient without a predictable, state-supported pipeline of technical assistance and seed funding. Several committee members asked whether the League of Cities and Towns or regional development corporations could play the role of broker; witnesses indicated those organizations can help but are sometimes understaffed, so a centralized, statewide program or fund would improve outcomes.

Ending: Witnesses said reuse can succeed and substantially revitalize small communities when technical assistance, market analysis, realistic financing and strong local engagement align, but that such alignment is uncommon without state support.