By Patrick Tepoorten

The North Branch school board spent last Thursdayís work session looking forward to the next year as well as to the next decade. Dominating the looking glass was the possibility of an operating referendum this fall and needed facilities improvements farther down the road.

Dr. Don Lifto, of Springsted Inc., attended the session and laid out a plan for determining if a fall operating levy referendum would be viable. Lifto, a long-time school superintendent himself, recently took a position with Springsted to lead the companyís efforts to assist districts with referendum pursuits, and has also written a book and numerous articles on the subject.

Liftoís plan for answering the districtís questions on a levy, begins with identifying the district demographics. ìWho are your registered voters? You need to take a careful look at that,î he advised, including categories such as age, gender, etc.

Those demographic subcategories would be used to determine their ìnature of participation over timeî regarding voting habits and level of support for district ballot questions. Finally, the results would be used to tailor a very specific telephone survey that would attempt to paint a picture of each demographicís support level for a future referendum. A random sampling of 400 district voters could be conducted and, according to Lifto, a computer model can be used to insure that those surveyed represent an accurate picture of the districtís population.

An accurate representation of the district would insure a clear picture of community support levels for referendum. Lifto noted that districts donít always have accurate information when facing the decision to seek additional local funds. ìOne mistake districts have made in the past is over-sampling parents,î said Lifto, who warned that doing so can create an overly optimistic view of community support.

Results from such a survey would give the district a snapshot of the support they could expect to receive from men, women, retired persons, parents of students, and new and long-time residents, among others.

That information could be valuable to the district in trying to determine the chances for success in a fall referendum.

Lifto warned that, were a survey to be completed, it is possible that Springsted could recommend against pursuing a referendum based on low levels of support in the community. ìOnly one thing is for sure. For districts who choose a data driven approach the research clearly indicates they are more likely to be successful,î he concluded.

Responding to queries from the board, Lifto stated that the process could be complete by mid- to late April, putting the board in a position to make a decision as early as May.

Springstedís estimate, which would include the survey as well as a ìcount bookî
containing specific demographics of the district and be theirs to keep, is an amount not to exceed $8,400. Were the district to decide to retain Springstedís services in pursuit of a referendum, the cost would be above and beyond that figure.

Rather than having to pay a blanket figure though, district superintendent Rodney Reisnouer pointed out on Friday that Springsted offers a ìmenuî of services complete with costs. The district could use that menu to tailor services or stay within a pre-determined budget.

Facilities

Also on the agenda was an update from Dan Moll of ATS&R, the districtís architectural firm. Moll apprised the board of the latest analysis of school usage within the district.

At the top of district priorities, facility wise, is the high school. As Moll pointed out, that facility is already beyond its ideal capacity of 1,100 students. Currently there are about 1,150 students enrolled.

ìThings are starting to get a little tight,î said Moll, and suggested that the next step in accommodating growing enrollment would be to pursue a second floor addition over a portion of the school. Such an addition would increase the square footage of the building from roughly 235,400 square feet to 281,000, and accommodate an additional 300 students.

Moll reminded the board that the high school was built with the addition of a second floor some time in the future. He suggested the district may want to pursue the addition in the next five to 10 years. He thought the project would require two years for construction as it would have to be completed while students were on summer break.

Constructing the addition would essentially ìmax outî the high schoolís capacity, according to Moll, who pointed out that there is little available land near the school that could be used for expansion.

The roughly 45,600 square-foot second-floor addition, at an estimated cost of $175 per square foot, would cost the district roughly $8 million to complete at todayís costs.

Moll summarized the districtís situation with the Main Street School as well. Most importantly, he warned that any construction beyond basic repairs to the existing structure would trigger a state mandated 20 percent of overall spending for accessibility upgrades. Therefore, unless the district plans to make those upgrades, any substantial remodeling of the building is out of the question.

Moll encouraged board members to consider how much money they would like to spend on the Main Street school in the future and how the building fits into their overall plans. It was further pointed out that the structure is already in need of some major repairs, like the addition of insulation to the walls and substantial roof repairs.

If there was good news on the facility front it was the middle school. Enrollment at the middle school continues to be below the maximum, and that is not expected to change in the next decade, barring major growth.

Moll encouraged the board to keep all of the potential problems raised in mind when considering the long-range facilities plan for the district. He also suggested a possible fix, which he warned the board may find shocking. It would involve moving the middle school to the high school building, elementary to the middle school, and constructing a new high school at a different location.

If growth in the area does not level off in the next decade, the board may be forced to consider such a possibility.