Bensalem board directs district to plan for new middle school after divided vote

The Bensalem Township School District Board of School Directors voted at its regular meeting to direct the district to pursue planning for new middle school construction, rather than pursue a multi-site renovation plan, after a roll-call decision that split the board.

Board members detailed three initial options — additions and renovations to the existing middle schools (estimated up to $125,000,000), a campus-style new school with multiple wings (estimated up to $165,000,000), or a single-building new middle school (maximum $155,000,000). After an initial preference roll-call produced no majority (reported on the record as 4 votes for the single-building option, 3 for renovations and 2 for the campus option), the board voted to reframe the decision as a binary choice: pursue new construction or pursue renovations. That amendment (which clarified a renovation estimate of about $125 million and a new-construction range of $155–$165 million) passed and the board then voted on the binary choice; the president announced the result as 6 votes for pursuing new construction and 3 votes for renovation.

Supporters of new construction argued the district’s aging facilities require replacement rather than piecemeal repairs. Board member Jay Patel said the existing buildings show operational problems that renovation would not fully fix: “some of these buildings…kids are getting stung by bees in there. You’ve seen little mouse running around in cafeterias,” and added that new classrooms and state-of-the-art systems would better serve students. Board member Joe Pettyjohn said on the record, “I’m obviously for new construction. I’ve listed a litany of reasons why I support that.”

Opponents and cautious members raised concerns about scale, cost and student disruption. Mrs. Fernandez said she did not want “1,600 kids in 1 building,” and another board member noted renovations could be staged, though logistical staging may extend renovation timelines. A district speaker noted that either path would be years from physical groundbreaking: one member stated construction or renovation could take 7–8 years before facilities were completed. The board president and administration emphasized that the vote provides direction for design and that the action does not commit the district to immediate construction contracts or funding draws.

What the board approved on the record is directional: the administration and architect are to pursue new-construction designs for further review. Next steps described on the record include additional design work, cost refinement, and future review by the board (including a new board that will participate in design decisions). The board also disclosed it met in executive session earlier in the evening to discuss labor negotiations.

The decision recorded on the public docket does not itself appropriate funds or authorize contracts; those steps would require future votes and budgetary actions.