Resident urges Summit schools to weigh long-term costs of fields, buildings and equipment; district says oversight exists

During public comment on Sept. 11, resident Jim Bennett urged the Summit Board of Education to account for the long-term costs of district-owned tangible assets and proposed a property-manager function.

"Yes, we like tangible assets, but there is a cost of ownership," Bennett said, urging the district to consider useful life, replacement and maintenance obligations before adding athletic fields, vehicles or buildings. He referenced past local facilities that fell into disrepair and said a property manager could develop an engineering schedule "to make the stitch in time to buildings that saves millions."

In response, a district representative identified in the transcript as the director of facilities said the district already has a director who "oversees all of our facilities, our fields, our buildings, our vehicles," maintains an asset inventory and works with architects and engineers to conduct useful‑life studies. The representative said the district is required to submit a long-range facility plan to the Department of Education every five years and asserted "We do have a list of every vehicle and every asset that we have." The administration said it would follow up on specifics raised during public comment if information was not immediately available at the meeting.

No formal action was taken during public comment; the board closed the public-comment period by vote and directed staff to provide follow-up information where required.