"Residents' input sought on high school project"

"HANOVER — If you have been wondering what’s going on with the high school building project, here’s your chance to find out.

The school building committee has scheduled a public forum for Monday, Oct. 1, at 7:30 p.m. at town hall when people can express their opinions, concerns and ask questions about the progress of the high school project. Committee members have been working behind the scenes with the state as part of its process to secure funding for the project, and wants to make sure the public is fully aware of what’s going on.

Chairman Chris Martin said the 1958 Hanover High School is not meeting the town’s current needs. Besides being overcrowded, the building does not have the propensity to be updated to the point where the school could be used to provide students with up-to-date instruction in technology, Martin said.

Committee members unanimously agreed with his idea to hold a forum to address public concerns with the construction of a new high school.

School Committee member Suzanne Brady, who attended the meeting, said they need to hear people’s comments as soon as possible so they can address them now – especially from those who are considering voting no on the possible $55 million to $60 million project.

Committee members would like to hear from people what their visions are for the future of education in Hanover, a part of the project required by the state if the town is to receive money from Massachusetts.

This summer, a team of architects and state employees from Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA) conducted three site visits to the high school, which the town has identified as its top priority should money become available. Martin said the state could pay roughly 40 percent of the estimated cost associated with the construction of a new Hanover High School, to be built on land behind the current building.

He checks the MSBA Web site everyday for process updates since the four-year moratorium on state funding for school building projects was lifted this year. Hanover has gone through several steps on the MSBA’s new checklist and the committee is waiting for the state to get back to the town.

Though as Superintendent Kristine Nash reads it, she believes the town is past the diagnostic phase and into the further review area, which requires Hanover to submit an educational facilities master plan, which could lead to more questions, visits or meetings. From there the next steps are a review of the town’s education program, a review of space planning and a review of the district budget and resources, according to the MSBA. From there, the state will prioritize projects.

Though the committee is not exactly sure what the state is going to do next, since the state visited Hanover in June and July, Martin said committee members have been doing research, planning and staying as on top of the evolving process.

 “We’re trying to do as much work as possible so that when the state comes back to us, we have everything ready,” Martin said. “So we’re doing all the legwork and all the background work” so that “what would normally take four months would take a week.”

    Committee members recently went to bond council to ask if they can use some of the $3.1 million design money that was appropriated to them at the 2005 town meeting. The money would be used to design an educational plan for the school, another state requirement, Martin said. The plan is to be designed around the educational vision of Hanover.

    The plan could include an academy-type set up, dividing the school into different houses, designing classrooms for multiple and changing uses, etc.

    Committee members are not sure how much that will cost, but are looking at two education planning service companies, DeJong and HMFH, to work on a plan that would be based on town input. According to the MSBA, the plan should include instructional programs, type of facility, the organization of administrators, security measures, list of specialized classrooms or areas of support, spatial relationships for school function, number of students, non-instructional support areas as well as an explanation of curriculum goals and instructional activities that would occur in the building.

Martin said if all goes well, they are looking at bringing the design and other costs to town meeting in May of 2008, breaking ground in the spring of 2009 and having the building ready for students and faculty by the beginning of the 2011 school year.

It’s “all predicated on what the MSBA does in the next few months,” Martin said.

The committee has also been in contact with Sen. Robert Creedon and Rep. Robert Nyman’s offices to garner their support for the project.

Right now, the committee is waiting to see what the state asks for next."