Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Jm Hill topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board signals little appetite to close JM Hill as renovation, new-build costs discussed
Summary
District leaders presented renovation and new-build cost estimates for JM Hill (renovation: $22–24M; new: about $35M). Several board members and many public commenters urged keeping JM Hill open and exploring phased renovation or grant funding rather than closure.
The superintendent presented preliminary cost ranges for JM Hill: RLPS estimated a renovation in the $22 million to $24 million range (the superintendent used a $25 million round figure in presentation) and an entirely new building at about $35 million. She said renovation would require planning, staging and likely temporary relocations for students.
Several board members and public commenters pushed back on the idea of closing JM Hill. "We have 0 appetite to consider closing JM Hill," the superintendent summarized as the boardpreferred direction after members spoke; multiple trustees and community members echoed that sentiment during discussion and public comment. Board members described alternatives including staged renovations and targeted upgrades (roofs, mechanicals, basement remediation) rather than wholesale closure and relocation.
Public commenters and local officials urged caution about the $25 million figure and suggested pursuing federal and state construction grants. Representative Probst (who spoke during public input) told the district it has received additional funding and offered assistance seeking grants for construction projects. Several residents suggested phased renovation or repurposing options (for example, a career-technical focus) to reduce costs and preserve community access.
Board discussion identified several specific facility needs across the district (boiler and domestic hot-water replacements, partial roof projects and stadium roof work) and stressed that available capital funds (~$13 million) should not be assumed as available for a full JM Hill renovation because those funds are earmarked for other near-term projects.
No action or vote was taken; the board asked staff to develop options that prioritize stability for the JM Hill community and to return with staged renovation scenarios and more precise costings.
