Abington board moves toward referendum after two-year facilities review, consultants recommend single new middle school

After two years of facility assessments, public outreach and scientific polling, Abington School District consultants recommended seeking voter approval for a single new middle school rather than renovating the existing building or building two separate middle schools.

The recommendation followed a December 2024 telephone survey of 500 residents (margin of error ±4.5%) and an open online survey. Todd Rapp of Rapp Strategies and Phil Solomon of ICS summarized results showing broad public interest in a referendum: “90% of your residents want a chance to make this decision,” Rapp told the Board during the Jan. 14 meeting. Poll testing of three referendum scenarios found the single-new-school option (referendum B) drew stronger support than a two-school plan once cost and monthly tax impacts were shown.

Why it matters: consultants said the district’s existing middle school has many major systems beyond useful life and estimated about $206,000,000 of deferred-maintenance needs. Consultants warned that staged renovation would be disruptive to students and could approach the cost of replacement once program needs and inflation are included. They recommended a new single middle school on the district campus as the option most likely to balance community support, educational benefit and tax impact.

Key findings and figures presented: the December scientific survey (500 adults, demographically representative) showed 63% of respondents favored replacing rather than renovating the middle school when asked without cost information. When poll respondents were shown estimated costs and tax impacts, support by option was: renovation (referendum A, $270 million, roughly $51/month on the median homestead) 54% support; single new middle school (referendum B, $285 million, roughly $54/month) 60% support; two new middle schools (referendum C, $450 million, roughly $80.86/month) 41% support. The consultants noted a community median homestead value used in the calculator of $387,402.

During discussion board members pressed for timelines, operating-cost implications and the consequences of not pursuing a referendum. Consultants estimated design and municipal approvals would take about 12–18 months, construction about 30–36 months, and an additional year for demolition and field relocation; overall occupancy for a new single middle school was therefore roughly four to five years from project start. Staff estimated a two-school solution would add ongoing operating costs (an approximate minimum of $1.5 million per year) because of duplicated services.

Board response and next steps: multiple board members said they supported the single-new-school option as the best balance of educational benefit and tax impact and thanked the consultants for the community outreach. Board President Dr. Mowery said the board was directing the superintendent to prepare a referendum question to appear on the next meeting’s agenda; Superintendent Fetcher acknowledged the direction.

Public comment and concerns: callers and attendees raised questions about bond term assumptions in the district’s tax calculator (why 40-year amortization, assumed interest rates), the consultant fees and past cost estimates. Consultants and board members responded with clarifications about the scope of earlier estimates, the differences between deferred-maintenance tallies and full renovation/replacement costs, and the purpose of a voter referendum as the mechanism that would authorize additional local funding.

The district will hold additional public-comment opportunities before the board votes to advance any ballot question.