Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District staff, architects present $23 million, no‑tax‑impact capital project ahead of December referendum
Summary
Architects and district staff outlined a proposed December referendum that would fund $23 million in building renovations and systems upgrades with no additional tax impact under a proposal that would use capital reserves; board members pressed for prioritization and asked about sports‑field options.
Eden Central School District officials and architects presented a draft capital improvement package that would, in a preliminary Prop 1, deliver roughly $23,000,000 of work with no additional tax impact, funding remaining classroom renovations, nurse's office upgrades, mechanical/electrical/plumbing work and selective air‑conditioning in larger spaces.
Ashley Jewett of Young & Wright said the pre‑referendum schedule targets a December community vote, after which design could begin. David Water summarized timing and preliminary costs, noting the board must adopt necessary resolutions in the fall to meet notice requirements: "They have shovels in the ground is about 2 years from when we originally start planning the project," he said. The architects described options for sports facilities in a second proposition ranging from a full multipurpose turf complex with lighting and bleachers to a more modest combined field to reduce footprint and cost.
Board members emphasized the importance of choosing priorities now because state maximum cost allowances reset on a rolling cycle; one member warned that delaying work can raise future costs substantially. The presenters said the district could structure alternatives (add alternates) to adjust scope based on bids and community appetite. If passed, a construction schedule discussed by the team would run design and state review into 2027 with construction in 2028–29 and closeout in December 2029.
The presentation included renderings of renovated elementary classrooms, an updated auditorium foyer and options for turf fields; architects cautioned that the Prop 2 sports‑facility concepts would increase taxpayer impact depending on the selected scope. The district said Prop 1 would use a small portion of capital reserves to remove tax impact, and that other prop options remain conceptual pending board direction and voter appetite.
Next steps: the board will receive additional presentations and, if it elects to proceed, adopt the necessary SEQRA/SEED/notice resolutions this fall to support a December referendum.
