The Salisbury Township School Board held a Feb. 1 operations committee meeting to further discuss options for heading off the impending space issue at Salisbury Elementary School and to investigate the next steps for the vacant Western Salisbury Elementary School.

Superintendent Lynn Fuini-Hetten began the discussion by addressing the space issues at Salisbury Elementary School.

The school currently has the capacity to house five additional classrooms - one for each grade level and one special education classroom but only if programs such as Pre-K Counts and Lehigh Valley Child Care are eliminated.

During the last operations committee meeting four options to alleviate the space issues were discussed and four decision-making factors were applied to each option namely health and safety, finance, academic programming and the inherent effect on the community at large.

The board concluded building an addition to Salisbury Elementary School and reconfiguring grade levels by moving eighth grade to the high school and fourth grade to the middle school were the least viable options.

The board agreed to further investigate the feasibility of utilizing four or six modular classrooms although board members Joe Kuzo and Laura McKelvey voiced the opinion their vote for modular classrooms would be contingent upon having a plan in place for the Western Salisbury Elementary School site.

In the weeks following the Jan. 11 operations committee meeting, several board members took the opportunity to visit two schools actively using modular classrooms. They were able to ask questions and see firsthand how modular classrooms may fit into the Salisbury Elementary School landscape.

Director Sarah Nemitz commented the physical space was gleaming white and bright while

Director Thomas Spinner remarked how seamlessly the modular rooms tied into the existing structure. He went on to say teachers mentioned a lack of storage space inside the classrooms posed a problem although this issue was remedied by placing cubbies outside the classrooms.

Also noted by board members was that teachers cautioned while bathrooms inside the classrooms are convenient it can present issues at times. This information caused the board to consider the option of having four modular rooms without bathrooms or six modular rooms with a common bathroom.

Bill Brackett, director of facilities for the school district, commented an extra room could be added to include closets or a larger bathroom space if necessary but it would make the modular structure longer since there is no room to add width due to property line constraints. It would slightly increase costs but it is an option.

Director Joe Gnall questioned whether there are any foreseeable problems with technology links to the existing building. Chris Smith, coordinator of technology, assured Gnall he would be able to seamlessly tap into the existing network.

Board members Kuzo and McKelvey questioned whether the district needs to engage with an engineer even if it costs money at the onset.

Kuzo cautioned, “we might be making assumptions because we don’t know what we don’t know” while McKelvey mentioned it would be good to have an engineer on site to answer questions to make good decisions.

Brackett responded by saying the quote for the modular rooms came from D’Huy Engineering and if engaging further will come at a cost.

Spinner remarked the district will engage with the township zoning board by submitting a preliminary application which should shed more light on zoning ordinances as they apply to the project.

Fuini-Hetten continued the presentation by addressing the Western Salisbury School property.

She outlined three possible plans for reopening the building to house either grades 4/5, grades 3/4 or as a fourth grade building.

Employing any of these plans would require changes to and/or prioritizing needed services such as special education services, administration, interventionists and related services such as physical therapy, psychologists, or speech. Learning support and ESL would be supported at Western but services like autistic or emotional support classes may need to be outplaced as there may not be enough students at that grade level to support a full class.

This would all depend on the needs of students within the building. No additional administrators would be hired so administrators would be called upon to share responsibilities.

Interventionists would prioritize instruction in grades kindergarten through third for math and reading and related services personnel would need to travel between three buildings at times.

After this portion of the presentation Fuini-Hetten, acknowledging that it is a lot to unpack, asked the board for comments or questions.

McKelvey commented she took issue that the community was not asked what they wanted and as a board they are accountable to the voters. She also noted she does not like the idea of having fifth graders at the middle school and parents should be asked what they think.

Fuini-Hetten responded she had spoken to students in two of the four fifth grade classes so they could voice their opinions about their time at the middle school.

Students had more positive than negative responses saying they enjoyed having more activities to participate in and more freedom although they didn’t like the early time schedule and missed having a playground.

Fuini-Hetten also queried counselors, administrators and teachers to gauge whether they have received an influx of parental concerns since fifth grade students began attending middle school. Overall, they did not report a significant increase in this regard.

Many board members pointed out board meetings are advertised and open to the public and parents are welcome to attend and comment.

Continuing with her presentation, Fuini-Hetten explored the costs if the district did not open Western Salisbury Elementary School.

Options available for the site include selling, leasing or demolishing the building, which would come at a price of $780,000. As it stands unused the building costs between $25-$30,000 to maintain each year, which consists mostly of utility costs. The longer it sits the more repairs will be needed.

If the district leases or sells the property there is no “right of first refusal” clause associated with the building which leaves the door open for a charter or private school to purchase or lease the building.

Fuini-Hetten then compared the total cost of using four or six modular classrooms at Salisbury Elementary School against reopening Western with one or two grade levels occupying the building. In summary, the total cost of reopening WSE would amount to $10.7 million while the cost of utilizing modular classrooms came to $1.8 to $2.8 million for a four or six classroom modular respectively.

Also included in the presentation was a $1.6 million refresh of the Salisbury Elementary building, which includes carpeting, painting, ceiling tiles and stair treads. This issue was brought up by the board at a previous meeting since the modular rooms will be new and the rest of the school could use a refresh.

Fuini-Hetten concluded the presentation with her recommendation the board come to a consensus about utilizing modular classrooms as a viable option, further investigate leasing the Western Salisbury site and submit a zoning permit application with a rough drawing as a first step to uncover any issues that have not been addressed.

Each board member was given an opportunity to openly express their thoughts at the conclusion of the presentation, which prompted a lengthy exchange of ideas.

First to comment was McKelvey saying she would rather not put modular classrooms in at all but instead reconfigure the operating space within Salisbury Elementary School by eliminating the meeting room space and have specialists float through the building to teach their subjects thereby utilizing their rooms for other purposes. She railed against the current condition of the building citing stained ceiling tiles as well as the exterior aesthetics of the building and felt that if modular classrooms are utilized then the rest of the building deserves a refresh as it is only fair to students.

Kuzo, who admittedly has not seen the building, agreed and committed his support of a maintenance budget to properly maintain the facilities.

Board member Carol Klinger commented she likes the idea of modular classrooms and sees no problem with Salisbury Elementary School. She would like to see Western go up for sale or lease and see what comes of it and based on what happens sell, lease or demolish the building.

Board member Rebecca Glenister reminded the board that last year the board cut a library position which affects programming. She went on to say she is less concerned with how things look and she would prioritize educational programming and adequate space for students over aesthetics as long as the building is safe.

Gnall echoed this sentiment and felt that the $1.6 million for the refresh of the building could be done but needs to be budgeted over time. His priority is to retain as many teachers and programs as possible.

Concerning Western Salisbury School, Gnall felt the need to find a way for it to be a stream of revenue for the district but if it is not possible then the building may need to be razed. He did caution the board about the finality of razing the building.

Nemitz emphasized being fiscally responsible but keeping the broader picture of what students are offered within the building to which Director Sam DeFrank agreed and summed up his thoughts by saying, “we need to try and do the best we can with a limited amount of funds in a systematic way.”

Board President Christopher Freas wrapped up the discussion by outlining his view of next steps based on the board’s discussion. He agreed with the need to enlist an engineering company to talk the board through the process of installing modular classrooms which seemed to be the plan most board members were leaning toward.

Engaging with the community should also be a part of the picture moving forward as well as improving the aesthetics of Salisbury Elementary School while working to bring the $1.6 million cost down and spreading the cost of improvements over time.

Continuing to explore options for the Western Salisbury site is also a priority, which is an ongoing process.

The next operations committee meeting will be held 7 p.m. March 1 at the administration building, 1140 Salisbury Road.