Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Intermediate Schools Plan B topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board discusses 'plan B' for intermediate schools; members ask for independent review of consultant work
Summary
District administrators told the Jan. 27 board meeting that they are preparing a scaled “plan B” for the intermediate‑school projects after township feedback narrowed feasible options.
Get email alerts on the Intermediate Schools Plan B topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Administrators told the York Suburban School Board on Jan. 27 that, because of recent zoning and township feedback, the district is preparing a contingency “plan B” for the intermediate‑school projects that would prioritize MEP work and essential program elements rather than full consolidation or a larger new building.
Why it matters: the intermediate‑school work (Indian Rock and East York) is a linked part of the district’s broader capital plan. Township reviews and new definitions from local zoning officials changed what the district can include in previous consolidation concepts; administrators said that may alter scope and cost and that preparing a practical, scaled plan now will help the district respond quickly to the township’s decisions without restarting design from scratch.
Key administrative points and figures: when asked about payments to the project architect, the business office said the district had paid Crabtree approximately $1,513,636.64 for the intermediate project and $13,261.47 on the high‑school project to date. Administration said a newly engaged law firm has not yet billed the district and that no retainer has been paid. The district’s available cash position was described as holding just under $20 million available for short‑term needs while bond and borrowing schedules are adjusted.
Board members asked that the plan‑B scope focus on a priority‑based list of program elements (for example: safety and MEP upgrades, classroom capacity, and flexible learning spaces) rather than attempting full consolidation in the current budget. Administration said that a narrower program may mean losing some efficiencies that consolidation would have delivered, and that current enrollment forecasts and building constraints will drive final choices.
Several board members and public commenters pressed for a third‑party review of the project‑consultant work. “I don’t trust what the outcome’s going to be here… I don’t believe that it’s pro bono,” said a board member who objected to perceived conflicts and urged a separate firm to produce an independent feasibility assessment. Administration acknowledged that hiring another architect or firm for a second opinion would add time and cost, and said it would bring a recommendation back to the board if the board requests it.
Civil engineering and permitting: the project team said it had issued requests for proposals to civil engineers for both the high‑school and intermediate‑school work; responses were limited because many firms are busy or decline work in certain townships. Administration expects civil proposals in early February and said sketch‑plan review with the township is the gating step that will determine whether zoning variances are required; if variances are needed that process could add two to four months to the schedule.
Budget and funding context: administration reported the district’s long‑range financing plan remains based on the previously adopted funding package and that administrators have been adjusting timelines so available borrowing will match project timing; the district said it is considering pushing back some borrowing while using existing reserves to start work when prudent. The board approved an opt‑out resolution related to Act 1 index limits earlier in the meeting (see roundup), and administrators said funding timing and sequencing would be revisited depending on the board’s choices.
Quotes from the meeting
“The plan B… would be focused on renovating each building to accommodate projected enrollments and primary programs,” Superintendent Dr. Krausser said.
“I don’t trust what the outcome’s going to be here… I don’t believe that it’s pro bono,” said a board member urging independent review of the consultant proposal.
Ending: Administration will return to the board with a more detailed plan‑B scope, updated cost estimates and a recommendation on whether to engage an independent third‑party feasibility review. The board directed staff to solicit civil proposals and to be prepared to move quickly depending on the outcome of township sketch‑plan reviews.

