Old Colony presents possible steps forward after rejected building project

ROCHESTER — After residents voted against constructing a new  Old Colony Regional Vocational Technical High School building, the school held a meeting with member towns to discuss next steps. 

Superintendent Aaron Polansky and representatives of Old Colony involved with the building project presented five solutions at the Thursday, Dec. 18 meeting at the school. 

Polansky said the goal of the meeting was to present solutions, gather community feedback and find other possible solutions. 

The Old Colony School Board plans to hold a meeting Jan. 7 and hold a final vote Jan. 21 to determine how they will proceed. 

While the $288 million project failed in November, the school will still need to address aging infrastructure and safety concerns. Two of the proposed solutions focus on updating and repairing the building, while the other three call for new construction.

One update-only solution was to make significant repairs once every three years. This would cost about $5 million for the first year, and would begin with priority repairs.

The group also suggested a $134 million project to bring the existing building up to code, without increasing the footprint of the building or enrollment.

The next three solutions they posed involved either expanding or replacing the current building. 

One solution was a $50 million project to build an additional structure near the school to introduce new vocational programs and increase enrollment. 

Another was to submit a new building project plan, restarting the 6-10 year process. The final solution was to bring the same project proposal back for a second vote. 

Superintendent Aaron Polansky said he was disappointed with the outcome of the previous vote, but looked to pursue a new solution that would satisfy residents and Old Colony students. 

“I was overwhelmed with the significant level of guilt because I don't want to put good money into a bad structure,” Polansky said. 

Polansky said he preferred either slowly repairing the building or pursuing a total reconstruction,  but whatever choice they make is a huge financial undertaking. 

“I feel like I'm putting a tarp on a roof or I feel like I'm putting a new engine in an old car,” he said. 

After the presentation, several parents and residents shared their concerns about the school’s structure. 

Many were worried about the lack of fire suppression and back up water systems in case of emergencies, wondering how the building got into such serious disrepair. 

David Arancio, a Rochester Capital Planning Committee, said he is concerned as a parent of two children who attend the school, especially about the lack of a back-up water source. 

Arancio was also concerned by the $134 million cost to bring the building up to code.

Rochester Select Board member Adam Murphy, said he wished there had been more information and details provided before the vote happened. 

“These things that you're bringing to us today are problems of today that aren't going to go away in a year or two,” Murphy said. 

Old Colony School Committee member Nancy Sousa brought the scope back to the students. 

She said voters need to prioritize students’ needs and consider how moving them during the school year will impact their learning. 

She said with any of these options, their education will be interrupted at some level.  

“I don't know exactly what the answer is for the right project, but from where I'm sitting, I'm thinking about the students,” Sousa said. 

Old Colony representatives said they have been requesting state funds and trying to get more support for vocational education for the past 6 years. 

Polansky said he wants a choice that will give the highest return on investment. He added spending money on a solution, regardless of how the school moves forward, is inevitable and should happen sooner rather than later. 

“Days after a failed vote our students were in Rochester serving the town of Rochester for a Thanksgiving lunch at the Council on Aging and I'm proud of that,” Polansky said. “That's who we are and that's what we stand for.”