Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Parents and students press board to fund new stadium scoreboards; capital plan includes replacements
Summary
Multiple parents, students and a facilities professional urged the board to prioritize replacement of failing high‑school video scoreboards and press boxes. Facilities staff presented a capital plan (first reading) that lists scoreboard replacements among proposed 2026 projects; trustees approved first reading 6–1 and asked for prioritized cost and schedule details.
Community members and student athletes pressed the board April 28 to prioritize replacement of deteriorating stadium video scoreboards, calling the aging equipment a safety and event‑management problem and an impediment to student broadcasting and community pride.
An athletic‑facilities professional and multiple parents described frequent scoreboard outages, partial blackouts and an unreliable audio system that complicate event operations and visitor experience. “It is not a matter of if it's going to go out — it's a matter of when,” one speaker said, urging district prioritization of Chapin High School’s board as an immediate need.
Facilities staff told the board the district used an outside NPS (condition assessment) and a PowerBI tracking tool to identify critical needs and to craft a proposed 2026 capital package. The presentation listed an inclusion/middle‑school fields project, Chapin transportation depot, replacement high‑school video scoreboards for three sites, and press‑box replacements as special projects in the 2026 capital plan. Administration estimated the three‑board replacement and related audio upgrades in the $1.3–$1.7 million range as part of the 2026 request and said some warranties and previously‑allocated funds have already addressed certain critical roof and mechanical items on the NPS list.
Trustees approved first reading of the spring 2026 capital projects and moved forward bond referendum resolutions for public hearings; the capital first reading passed 6–1. Board members asked for prioritized schedules, confirmation of funding sources (bond proceeds versus 8% special projects or annual capital), and whether booster or community fundraising could help accelerate specific boards.
Facilities staff said they would return with refined cost estimates, recommended phasing (including what could be addressed from annual capital vs. bond proceeds) and an explanation of ongoing replacement cycles (life cycle expectations and maintenance planning).
The board’s first reading advances the projects to the next procedural step, with public referendum actions and further vetting to follow.
