Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities Planning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board votes to participate in town study to explore future uses of former Jeffrey Elementary, stops short of endorsement
Summary
The board approved a motion to join the town’s ad hoc facilities study examining possible future uses for the former Jeffrey Elementary building — including moving central office or creating a trade school — with explicit language that the vote is not an endorsement of any plan. The motion passed with eight in favor.
The Madison Board of Education voted to authorize district participation in a town-led study of future uses for the former Jeffrey Elementary facility while clarifying that the board’s vote did not endorse any particular plan.
Chairman Klaskin put forward a motion “to recommend exploring future uses of the former Jeffrey Elementary facility, including moving central office to Jeffrey, but providing no endorsement at this time.” The motion was seconded and opened to discussion.
Supporters said the motion protects the district’s ability to be at the table during the town’s ad hoc facilities planning and gives district staff the authority to provide practical input to the vendor conducting the study. One board member summarized that without participation “they’re either gonna move without us or they’re gonna move with us.” Opponents questioned jurisdiction (the town ultimately owns the building) and emphasized priorities, such as a potential auditorium at the high school, that might outrank moving central office.
The board’s discussion repeatedly emphasized the distinction between participation in a study and endorsement of spending: “it’s not an endorsement that the board is saying the town should spend money on Jeffrey from this,” a trustee said, while others argued that district input could help shape priorities if large capital investments are proposed.
Outcome: the motion to recommend exploration and allow district participation in the town’s study carried on a voice vote (chair reported the motion carried with eight in favor). The board asked administration to make clear that staff participation does not commit the district to any expenditure and to report back with results of the vendor’s assessment and any timelines tied to town referenda or budget votes.
What comes next: district staff will engage with the town’s vendor and the ad hoc facilities committee to define the district’s needs and constraints and return to the board with findings before any endorsement or budget commitment is requested.
