Will Revisiting the Middle School Decision Cause Unacceptable Delays?

One frequently asked question I get is: won’t rescinding the middle school vote and rebuilding at Rundlett cause an unacceptable delay in the project? Many who ask this acknowledge that the original decision to relocate the middle school may have been flawed, yet argue that at this point, going back to the drawing board will only lead to unnecessary delays. Given the poor condition of the middle school, they say, time is something we don’t have. It’s a fair question, and one I want to address in detail.

Like almost everyone, I want a functional middle school as soon as possible. However, I believe that the long-term implications of the site’s location are just as important as speed. Yes, the current conditions at Rundlett are bad, but I think the decision needs to balance both short-term needs and long-term consequences.

According to the original site comparison document from October 2023, rebuilding at the current Rundlett site would take the same amount of time as building at Broken Ground. Both plans projected a 2026 start and an August 2028 move-in. However, the school district recently introduced new information on its website stating that rebuilding at Rundlett will now take three years, not the two previously stated. The district also claims that redoing the construction documents will take an additional year, pushing the start to 2027. So, based on this new information, the total delay would be two years, with a move-in date of August 2030 instead of August 2028.

As far as I can tell, this new information isn’t cited back to any documents prepared by architects or other experts, and the author isn’t identified, making it difficult to fact-check. It’s worth asking why this extended timeline is being presented now, on the eve of an important election centered on this very issue.

This new, pessimistic timeline should be compared with the optimistic one presented for the Broken Ground site, which still envisions a two-year project and a move-in date of August 2028. However, there hasn't been enough detail provided about the construction process for the public to assess how realistic this timeline is. For instance, there are several unresolved infrastructure issues—clearing the land, building a street and sidewalks, negotiating costs for a water pump with the city, and more. Most of these challenges will either be nonexistent or much more predictable at the Rundlett site, which already accommodates a structure.

A complete and accurate comparison of the timelines and costs of the two projects is essentially impossible because only one of them will be built. If government construction history is any guide, whichever site is chosen, there’s always a chance of delays and cost overruns. We’ll never know the timeline and costs of the alternative project.

If elected, I would push for a faster schedule, though I can’t promise anything until I have a clearer understanding. I would also aim to reduce costs, but again, can't make guarantees—there’s simply not enough detail to know what can realistically be reduced from the budget, if anything.

So yes, if we take the new timeline at face value, there would be a two-year delay compared to the current plan. If speed is your only priority, I understand that I won’t have your support. But I believe we need to weigh that against the risk of making a potential 50- to 75-year mistake in site selection. I won’t rehash all the concerns here—environmental impact, increased busing, fewer walkable routes, disruption to neighborhoods that don’t want this school, etc.—but these issues matter in such a long-term decision.

I also don’t think it’s fair to blame delays on those who support rebuilding at Rundlett. As far back as 2017, the district had a detailed feasibility study with estimates for rebuilding at the Rundlett site. At that time, Broken Ground wasn’t even considered. In 2022, the district switched to the CenterPoint site but kept Rundlett as a backup. In fact, the state building aid application lists only these two options, with no mention of Broken Ground. Superintendent Kathleen Murphy and Business Manager Jack Dunn even pointed out in May 2022 why the Broken Ground site “had been set aside,” describing all the drawbacks of this site. It wasn’t until 2023 that Broken Ground suddenly became an option, and with incomplete information, the Board made the decision—a decision that has proven enormously unpopular. This process has been going on for years, and it was the relatively last-minute switch to Broken Ground, not reconsideration of Rundlett, that is the primary cause of the delays.

We should also remind ourselves why Rundlett is in such poor condition. Contrary to the perception that the building is “falling apart,” engineers in 2017 found “no evidence of structural distress.” The issues that raise justifiable complaints from parents, students, and staff seem to stem entirely from deferred maintenance. The claim that renovating Rundlett would cost as much as building new is based on a misreading of the site evaluation report, and unfortunately, the true cost of renovation has never been properly calculated. I believe the Board should have had that information before deciding to build new, but at this point, deferred maintenance may have worsened the situation beyond repair.

Finally, it’s important to note that no one is promising a new middle school at any site yet. Even Board President Pam Walsh, a supporter of the current plan, was quoted in the Concord Monitor earlier this year saying, “There has not been a vote to build a new middle school; there’s been a vote to design... Next year, the school board could say, ‘Nope, we can’t afford it.’” So it’s worth considering that the timeline could shift no matter which site is chosen.

In the end, this is a complicated decision, but I believe we need to carefully consider both the immediate and long-term impacts of the site location. I appreciate concerns about the current conditions, and I will work to ensure we don’t delay progress unnecessarily—but not at the cost of making a rushed, regrettable decision.