The Great Bend USD 428 Board of Education on Monday received copies of a 320-page book outlining recommendations for a facilities master plan for the next 15-20 years. Terry Wiggers from SJCF Architects made a presentation as several members from the community steering committee watched in the audience.

It will be up to the board of education to adopt a final master plan, but Wiggers noted the recommendation from the steering committee is the result of about 11 months of work and some 50 meetings, many of which included the 50-member community group. The steering committee represented “a good cross section of the community,” Wiggers said.

The total cost for everything being recommended is $88.7 million but research showed voters are most likely to approve something closer to $50 million. One option would be to adopt a two-phase plan. Phase 1 would cost about $52,126,934 and Phase 2 would cost $36,666,716, before inflation, in a future bond issue in 10-15 years.

Superintendent Khris Thexton said the board will have some time to study the suggestions because a bond issue proposal for facilities can’t be sent to the Kansas State Board of Education before July 1, due to a cap on such projects, enacted by the Legislature in 2016.

Highlights of the report include:

Cost

A 20-year bond issue for $52.13 million would result in an estimated mill levy increase of 16.25 mills. That would cost the owner of a $50,000 home an additional $93.44 a year and the owner of a $100,000 home an additional $186.87 a year.

The projected property tax increase for a $100,000 commercial property would be $406.25. Estimates are also available for agricultural land.

A mill levy comparison of districts in the Western Athletic Conference league shows Great Bend’s mill levy is now 41.226, and one mill generates $163,203. The mill levy for Hays is 42.799; Garden City, 48.848; Liberal, 50.0; and Dodge City, 57.176.

Phase 1

In Phase 1 as recommended, every school would see additions and renovation, with the largest amount — $13.4 million — spent at Great Bend Middle School. The additions would allow all schools to have controlled entries near the office, and storm shelters. GBMS would also get a new wing for sixth graders and a new band, choir and orchestra addition. Infrastructure improvements at the buildings are also included.

The steering committee also recommends a new transportation, maintenance and grounds building with storm shelter on the site of the District Education Center at 201 South Patton Road. Eliminating the transportation building from Phase 1 would reduce the cost by almost $4.5 million, bringing it to $47,646,957.

Community feedback

At 17 community feedback meetings with approximately 300 participants, the top facility goals identified for USD 428 were staff safety/security (34 percent); adequate facilities/future growth (28 percent); and building/technology infrastructure (20 percent). Sixty percent said the greatest need in the district was to upgrade infrastructure and aging facilities, and 75 percent would prefer to add on and renovate current buildings vs. building new facilities.

The master plan options being considered include moving sixth grade to a new separate wing at the middle school to allow early childhood education to be located at elementary schools. Fifty-six percent “strongly agreed” and 28 percent “somewhat agreed” with that option.

Asked if there were any recommendations in the proposed plans that they felt should not be included in the long-range master plan, 61 percent said no and 16 percent said yes, remove a new high school auditorium (in Phase 2).

Forty percent said they would be “likely” to vote for a bond issue for Phase 1 and 47 percent said they would be “extremely likely” to vote for it. But when asked “what amount would you support if there were a master plan bond issue?” 36 said $50 million; 29 percent said $75 million and 22 percent said $100 million.

Community feedback priorities

1 Student and staff safety and security (access and shelters)

2 Address capacity at early childhood and elementary schools

3 Address orchestra and art spaces at elementary schools

4 Address aging Washington facility (part of it was built in 1919)

5 Improve transportation/maintenance/grounds facility needs

6 Improve outdoor elementary playgrounds

7 Plan for future educational needs

8 Address aging facilities and infrastructure