Elementary School Rebuild Plan Faces First Crucial Vote This Week

Flanders Elementary School PHILIP THIBODEAU PHOTOS

An ambitious rebuilding plan that will affect four of the town’s eight elementary schools will receive the first in a series of critical votes this Thursday evening when Board of Education members gather at the Weichsel Center for their bi-monthly meeting.

If it wins the necessary support – first from the Board of Education, then from the Board of Finance, Town Council, and finally voters at a referendum – the construction plan, which is known as D-2 for short, would be rolled out in two phases.

In the first, an updated Kelley School would be built in the open field behind the existing structure; once this is ready, the old building would be demolished. At the same time, five new classrooms would be added to the existing building at South End School. This work would be completed by the start of the 2029-2030 school year. At that point Flanders would be shut down, with its students and staff redistricted to nearby schools.

In the second phase, which would get underway that same year, a new, smaller Derynoski School would be constructed in the field below the existing one, along with a dedicated building for special-needs students, the Karen Smith Academy. Once the new structure is occupied, it would be up to the town to decide what to do with the old Derynoski and Flanders buildings. 

The Board of Education already voted at its May 8 meeting last year to move ahead with phase one of the rebuild, postponing a decision on phase two. Recently, however, the Republican caucus on Town Council signaled that it was unwilling to throw its support behind any rebuild unless the Board voted to approve phases one and two together.

The reason for this move, according to Town Council Chair and Republican majority leader Paul Chaplinsky, is that his caucus wants clarity on the long-term plan. That way, he and other town leaders can initiate discussions about the future uses of Derynoski and Flanders – discussions that they hope will assuage residents’ fear that the buildings will be demolished or sold off for development.

Background for the Rebuild

The district first began weighing its options for the elementary schools in earnest in 2021. The basic issue, according to Superintendent Steve Madancy, is modernization. Since 1950, when Derynoski was built, and 1966, when Kelley and Flanders opened, not much has changed in their built structures except for such things as the installation of LED lighting. Due to their age, the buildings are not the warm, safe, and dry places they need to be. Furthermore, the operational costs associated with outdated HVAC systems are growing every year.

Another reason given for the rebuild has to do with utilization. Every school has a certain maximum number of students it can serve – roughly speaking, the number of classrooms multiplied by the largest allowable class size for the grades in question. It is more cost-effective, in terms of energy use and administrative overhead, to operate schools close to that maximum number, with 85 to 90% utilization considered optimal.

None of Southington’s elementary schools currently lies within that range. According to district figures, Thalberg has the highest figure, 83%, followed by South End (79%), Derynoski (77%), Oshana (76%), Strong (76%), Hatton (75%), and Kelley (74%), with Flanders an outlier at just 63%.

This underutilization reflects the fact that the size of the student population has been slowly declining over the past two decades. Elementary enrollments peaked at around 3,100 in 2010, and have dipped since then to about 2,660.

Going forward, Southington – unlike many communities in Connecticut – has recently seen a modest increase in both births and the number of people moving to town. For that reason elementary school enrollment is expected to climb slowly over the next few years before stabilizing around a new peak of 2,850. That increase should raise utilization rates slightly, but would still leave most schools below 85%, with Flanders, again, at just 69%.

How should the district address these two issues – and do so at the least cost, and with the least possible disruption to student learning? To provide some answers, the town brought on a trio of outside consulting firms to take a close look at the numbers and game out various solutions. Last April 1, representatives from the firms MP Planning Group, Colliers, and Studio Jaed gave a presentation at DePaolo Middle School where they sketched out a number of alternative plans labelled A, B, C, and D, with various sub-options. (A video of the presentation can be viewed here.)

The reasoning that led them to recommend plan D-2 comes down to this: once implemented, it would ensure all students in the district were going to school in comfortable, modern, energy-efficient facilities, achieve an 88 percent utilization rate, and carry the smallest price tag. And that is the plan that is on the table now.

Chart summarizing the pros and cons of various plans for upgrading the four schools. SCREENSHOT FROM SOUTHINGTON PUBLIC SCHOOLS PRESENTATION

Criticisms of the Plan

There is broad consensus within town that something needs to be done about its three oldest elementary schools. The construction of a new Kelley school has been received favorably, with some parents even calling for timeline on the project to be sped up.

But there have been plenty of criticisms as well. For starters, plan D-2 would not come cheap: last April the total budget for both phases was given as $173.7 million, of which the town’s share would be $97.2 million, paid for by issuing bonds. While the town has a top-notch credit rating, something that would keep the interest share of its debt service under control, it would need to budget an additional few million dollars each year to cover the cost of the project in the decades to come. Updated estimates for the project’s total cost will be presented at this Thursday’s Board of Education meeting.

A key sticking point for many residents is the proposed closure of Flanders. Some of those who went to school there or sent their children to Flanders have lamented the loss of a building that holds treasured memories. On the Facebook page Southington Talks, Sherrie Shover touched off a discussion that elicited more than 260 comments by writing, “I am not in support of this [closure], being a Flanders alumni myself and having a kids currently in and about to enter Flanders. I understand it's coming down to funding, and consolidation is needed for the other school projects to happen, but we don't need fewer schools here in town, especially a lovely neighborhood school. Isn't that why we live in Southington, for neighborhood schools like Flanders? It's one reason I wanted to stay in this town and live in the Flanders district.”

Like Shover, Board members Joe Baczewski and Terri Carmody noted after last April’s presentation that closing Flanders would fly in the face of the educational ideal called ‘neighborhood schools.’ This is the idea that students benefit from proximity to their schools because it allows them to have neighbors as classmates and shortens commute times; since schools also serve as hubs of community activity, proximity often means stronger community connection.

Another common criticism of the plan has to do with open space. Some commenters, especially on social media, have foreseen an endgame where the closing of Flanders gives the town the chance to sell the land to a developer and so eliminate one of the last tracts of unbuilt land in that area of town. In recent years, local resistance to new development has grown increasingly stiff, and the Flanders project has now become another flashpoint for this issue.

 

Weighing the Pros and Cons

The response to the first two criticisms has generally been to note that none of the alternatives are any better – they either allow conditions at the old schools to deteriorate further, are more disruptive to students’ educational experience, or cost more than the town can afford.

The consultants started by gaming out a scenario in which the town brought the facilities at the existing Kelley, Flanders, and Derynoski buildings up to modern standards. These upgrades would cost over $120 million – and leave the district with the same low utilization rate of about 80%.

The advantages of replacing Derynoski with a new school about one-third smaller than the original quickly became clear. Building a new school on a smaller footprint was actually projected to cost much less than upgrading the old one. So the question then became whether to close Kelley or Flanders.

One reason Flanders was chosen is that it has the lowest current utilization. Another is that it is in the close proximity to schools, Hatton and Thalberg, where students could be reassigned without added travel time; closing Kelley, by contrast, would put a commuting strain on families to its west.

Finally, the consultants determined that Flanders is not favorably situated for a rebuild. The current structure is on the best part of the site in terms of accessibility, and putting a building in any other location would create access difficulties. For Kelley, this is much less of a problem.

Urbin T. Kelley Elementary School

What to Do with the Old Buildings?

As for what will happen to the former Derynoski and Flanders buildings, no concrete proposals have been spelled out yet. That said, at a recent Districtwide Facilities Committee meeting, Chaplinsky floated some possibilities which share a common assumption – that the old Derynoski building and the Flanders school and field would remain in town hands.

One idea brought up at the meeting is to turn Derynoski into a multi-use building, with the classrooms converted into low-income units run by the town’s Housing Authority, the gym becoming a recreational venue, and the auditorium a space for community theater. Speaking of Flanders, Chaplinsky said it might make sense to consolidate various town operations there that are currently housed in smaller buildings all over Southington.

These ideas are very tentative, and could well hit unforeseen roadblocks; final decisions on the buildings’ use may have to wait for years. That said, town leaders have expressed a desire to preserve the structures, and in public meetings no one has advocated for turning them over to developers.

The Board of Education will vote on plan D-2 this Thursday, February 19. If it passes, it will then go to the Board of Finance and the Town Council. Should it also be approved there, phase one of the plan will go to a town-wide referendum, with a vote tentatively scheduled for June 2.

Walter A. Derynoski Elementary School

Downtown Parking Plan Among Ideas Previewed for Council

Former Bank of America parking lot from overhead. BING SATELLITE IMAGE

Much of the Southington Town Council’s February 9 meeting was devoted to previews, as members were briefed on plans that will require decisions at upcoming meetings. Several of the plans had to do with infrastructure.

New Parking Lot Improvements

The town’s Parking Authority laid out ideas for utilizing the newly-acquired Bank of America parking area. Authority Chair Michael Riccio presented a plan that he said had a “ton of input from members and Town staff.”

The plan in question eliminates lanes and guardrails that are no longer needed in order to create close to a dozen new parking spaces in the area and improve the overall flow and look. “With the guardrails gone, it creates better flow and better access” for nearby businesses, he said.

His group sought to create a more “parklike atmosphere” for the Town Green on Apple Alley and reduce the need for pedestrians to cross the street or cut between parked cars, especially at popular events like the Farmer’s Market. Riccio said he did not foresee any issue with work being done during the Apple Harvest Festival, but would work with that Committee to ensure smooth operations.

He also addressed the need for new safety lighting that “doesn’t break the bank and is tastefully done,” stressing that, in a “tight” budget year, not all of the work had to be done at once. It was his hope to match existing light poles on adjacent streets and possibly replace the “ugly” overhead wires with below-ground wiring.

“We think it will be great for the merchants,” Riccio added, “and great for using the Green.” He estimated that the money the town spent in the past to improve the look of the area, some $5 million in today’s dollars by his calculations, has paid for itself 10 to 20 times over in terms of tax revenues.

Riccio further speculated that restaurant owners, including group taking over the former Bank of America building on Center Street, might someday need to utilize a valet service on busy nights to ferry people from the lot up on Riccio Way. He pointed out that having a shortage of parking is better than having empty lots and empty tables.

Sewer Billing Schedule Change

Sewers were a source of controversy last month when billing issues became a point of public discussion. Chairman Tony Morrison informed the Council that a major change to the billing cycle may require action next month.

The Sewer Committee discussed at its most recent meeting the possibility of changing the billing cycle from four times a year to twice a year. A possible drawback to this change is that users would receive a bigger bill. However, according to Morrison, changing the billing cycle could provide more efficiency in the collections process and fewer past-due accounts. Such a change, he added, would have to be done in March for “timing reasons.” It will be discussed at the next Committee meeting before the Council takes any decision.

Local Ordinance Issues

 

Morrison also reported on three topics that were discussed at the February 6 meeting of the Ordinance Committee.

An ordinance to address the use of electric bikes on Town properties is “on hold” as the Town awaits more guidance, Morrison said. The state classifies e-bikes into four categories based on power wattage, ranging from the pedal-assisted style all the way up to motorcycles, each with its own regulations, which are spelled out in this chart provided by the Southington Police Department:

Two issues that remain open, Morrison said, are how to treat motorized scooters that have become popular among middle-schoolers, and whether to require helmet use. A recent change to Connecticut statutes raised the ages at which helmets were required for some forms of motorized transport but apply differently to different classes of vehicle.

Police enforcement of existing laws is difficult, Morrison noted, especially on the Farmington Canal Trail, since officers prefer not to initiate chases that could result in damage or injuries.

The issue of chalk graffiti on town property was also discussed. As Morrison framed it, the question is not one of free speech but of vandalism. He noted that political speech on town property is not currently permitted. While chalk is generally a temporary problem that doesn’t require intervention, some chalked messages are longer lasting. The committee asked the Town Attorney to look the matter further and has yet to come to any decisions on it.

Finally, the committee also took up the issue of payments for emergency calls by the Fire Department. According to the minutes of the Ordinance Committee, the Department responds to between 400 and 500 motor vehicle accidents annually on roads in town. A California-based company, Fire Recovery USA, presented a possible service solution, billing the at-fault drivers for the cost of the response. Insurance companies pay these bills in about 70% of cases. The firm takes 22% of the recovered money and sends the rest to the town. This matter too awaits further discussion.

Bridges and Mailboxes

Council member Michael DelSanto reported from the Public Works Committee. He flagged an upcoming presentation from the state Department of Transportation that will discuss the replacement of the three bridges in town that cross I-84. That presentation will be coming on March 4.

DelSanto also noted that there were some 70 complaints of damaged mailboxes following the recent heavy snow. He noted that damage has to be from town plows, not snow itself or private operators, in order for the town to assume responsibility.

Self Insurance

Town Council Chair Paul Chaplinsky provided an update on the Self-Insurance Committee, which was disbanded earlier this term and its duties folded into the Board of Finance. Under the new arrangement, the Board of Finance will address the topic of self-insurance at every other meeting. A third-party contractor will provide an update for the Board, the public, and the finance directors for the town and the schools.

Public Feedback Channel

Chaplinsky also highlighted the Town’s feedback form for suggestions and complaints, which can be found under the Quick Links section of the Town website.

He said he hoped to drive traffic to that site to provide a “repository” of comments in the interest of transparency and ease of follow-up. In addition, the email addresses for communicating with individual Council members are migrating to the new .gov domain and can be found on the website.

Upcoming Special Budget Meeting

In consultation with Board of Finance Chair John Leary, Chaplinsky also announced a special Town Council meeting for Monday, April 6, on the Monday prior to the regularly-scheduled session. The only agenda item will be discussion of the budget. Members of the public are encouraged to attend the session and make their voices heard.

“The hope here is if we have questions for the Manager, the Superintendent, the Finance Director, then we will have an opportunity to ask those questions and give them a week for the questions to be answered,” explained Chaplinsky. He added that he hoped to keep the public hearing open following the meeting and continue it to the next Town Council meeting, at which time a budget could potentially be adopted.

After Debate, BOE Approves School Budget with 6.7% Increase

Cover image from Steve Madancy's proposed 2026/2027 budget.

For much of the evening last Thursday, the main sticking point for the Board of Education as it considered whether to approve the proposed school budget was this: should the district hire an additional social worker to help manage the increasing number of students with acute needs?

In the end, the four Republicans on the Board, who objected to the proposal on various grounds, did not succeed in convincing the Democratic majority to strike that line item from the budget.

Their arguments were similar to ones advanced during the BOE workshops on January 13 and 15. Their starting point was that an 6.8% increase was a very large one and the Board had an obligation to trim it in any way that was feasible. From there, Sean Carson and Joe Baczewski questioned whether the school system really has either the ability or the duty to tackle issues that often stem from the way parents raise their kids. Baczewski pointed to the lost opportunity for other students who do not have these issues, arguing that the $83,000 for salary and benefits might better be spent on, say, professional development relating to the subject.

The replies from Democratic members of the Board varied but all came to the same conclusion. Bob Brown reiterated that schools are seeing an increase in social-emotional issues, and that once students enter the building, there needs to be staff in place to help them, something that social workers are best equipped to do, given their training.

Terri Carmody argued that the problems are sometimes beyond the ability of even parents to handle, and that the position was “one of the most important parts of the budget.” She later added, “It’s not going to take care of all of the problems, but it’s a start.”

Zaya Oshana sought to put things in context by noting that the students with acute issues must be handled by someone in the community – if not the schools, then the police or community services – and that the school system is in some ways best placed to do it. Adding a social worker line, he observed, would reduce the student-to-social worker ratio from 486:1 to 453:1. While the move that would not solve the problem, Oshana said, it would benefit both the students in question and their classroom peers.

Adjusting NEXUS Funding

Once it became clear that the Democrats would not budge on the social worker position, Joe Baczewski signaled that would vote for the budget if another change was made, one that would reduce the hike from 6.8% to 6.7%.

The change had to do with funding for teachers in the NEXUS program. This is a school choice program that allows students in Hartford who have won a placement lottery to attend school in Southington. The town sends the capitol city a bill for the educational services these students receive. The proposed budget would prefund four teachers.

The number of students coming from Hartford varies from year to year and won’t be know until the fall. Asked about trends, Director of Business and Finance Jennifer Mellitt indicated that the number has been decreasing recently, and was in the low 60’s last year.

Madancy’s proposed budget called for four teachers to cover students in NEXUS. At the start of the meeting Lisa Cammuso moved to reduce this number to two; Baczewski’s proposal took it down to zero.

With this change made, the Board voted. The modified budget passed 7 to 2, with Cammuso and Cecil Whitehead voting no.

Elephants in the Room

Throughout the discussion, there was palpable frustration on the part of board members that the major drivers of the budget increase – which was larger than last year’s 5.1% increase – were beyond their control. According to figures included in the Superintendent’s original document, the most important new costs were contractual pay increases ($4.0 million more than last year), health insurance increases ($1.7 million more), increased costs for out-of-town special education tuition ($660k more), transportation ($355k more), retirement fund contributions ($335k more), new personnel ($326k more), and new hardware and software (200k more).

At the same time, state and federal support has essentially flatlined, which means that local taxpayers must foot an increasingly large portion of the total bill. Colleen Clark described the district’s predicament as one of being “squeezed” between rising costs and shrinking outside aid.

Clark and Carson also pointed out that the budget increase is just first of multiple asks of taxpayers, given the likelihood that upcoming referendums will seek voter approval for new parking at the high school and an expensive set of rebuilds of local elementary schools.

The budget will now go to the Board of Finance and the Town Council for further consideration.