The Francis Howell School District board on Jan. 15 adopted a facilities master plan that lays out a prioritized, data-informed roadmap for building repairs and upgrades over the next decade, with an emphasis on deferred maintenance, safety and learning-environment improvements.

Megan Barnes of Hollis & Miller Architects said the planning process combined facility assessments, stakeholder input and cost validation. "Our final recommendation...just under a $150,000,000 would address all of the red needs that have been identified," she told the board, describing a $149.8 million estimate for immediate (0–3 year) projects and a total escalated need of roughly $272 million when costs are projected into 2027 dollars.

The plan breaks immediate needs into buckets: about $55 million for ongoing maintenance, roughly $21 million for safety and security projects and roughly $74 million for learning-environment upgrades (including classroom and instructional technology). Barnes said the plan prioritizes projects by condition, safety, educational impact and risk and recommended regular reviews and phased implementation.

Board members repeatedly emphasized that adopting the plan is a policy-level step to create a framework for later decisions, not an authorization to build or a promise of funding. The administration noted that adoption does not commit the board to construction or ballot language; financing decisions and any ballot measures would come later if the board elects to pursue them.

The plan aligns with the district's long-term capital goals and the final recommendation included a Phase 1 implementation estimate focusing on the red needs. Trustees asked staff to provide two funding trajectories: one that assumes current revenue and another that models the impact of potential legislative changes on property-tax revenue. The board approved the adoption by voice vote.

What happens next: Administration will provide additional phase-specific detail and a supplemental packet with building-level spreadsheets. The board and staff signaled intent to revisit funding options — including a potential debt-levy transfer and future bond capacity — before advancing specific construction or ballot plans.