QUESTION #1:  WHAT DID YOU LIKE MOST ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Addressing student and staff needs

• Security improvements

• Discontinuing Central

• Classroom improvements (but need to be more specific in what is being improved. Technology, desks, aesthetics, etc….)

• Security in entrances 

• Classroom renovations 

• Ms/hs renovations 

• Discontinuing use of central

• Security _ additional support for further security 

• Classroom improvements for all schools included

QUESTION #2:  WHAT WERE YOUR GREATEST CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Athletic improvements on same question as instructional/building improvements. Improvements that benefit student body as a whole vs benefit for a small percent.

• What happens to the district’s financial responsibility to Central if it closes?

• An early childhood building does not serve the greatest amount of students 

• Not including the original committee in the forming of the question 

• Not seeming focused on education 

• Keeping the offices at CEC is still sucking too many resources (time, money, etc) 

• We don’t seem to have a long term plan 

• Cost for each piece was not clear

• Too many projects per question

• Contingency percentage too high - above standard of 10%

• What was ruled out?  Example, build a new building was given as the option…what were the other ideas?

• Impacts of open enrollment

• The early childhood center is not required by state and concerns regarding  child care vs educational facility

QUESTION #3:  FROM A FACILITY STANDPOINT, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO ADDRESS CENTRAL AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM?

• Pass a referendum for a new K-2 (usually greater support) next to BCI and shift Central programs to Bonner. Also alleviates busing issues to drop off K-5 at one location instead of opposite ends of town.

• The city NEEDS EEC! Also alleviates citywide daycare issues. Eliminating the program would place a burden on families and be extremely detrimental to a necessary educational foundation for kinders.

• Sell CEC, move out property COMPLETELY 

• Be more creative with office spaces, work remote, etc 

• Move EC to Bonner and Consider Add a wing to BCI for first and  second grade 

• Do not suggest building an EC building 

• Idea - move first and second to BCI 

• Consider having a separate high school, add on other grade Levels to BCI Tiger Time summer - go to one of the other existing schools

• Value of Central property to help pay for a new site?

• Address asbestos elimination with a grant funding to keep the existing Central location

• Consider elimination if nowhere to house the programming and Central is not an option

• What other options are on the table?

• BCI was built with ease of additions, utilize that option 

• Additional benefit of combining grades and ages - mentorship, etc.

• Utilizing other existing community building options - churches, etc.

QUESTION #4:  WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT FACILITY RELATED ISSUES FACING STEWARTVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

• Open enrollment limits (those parents can't vote in referendums and increase teacher:student ratio)

• Building security

• Central is ancient and Bonner is making ground on Central in regards to age wear and tear. Building issues need to be addressed before the issue becomes more pressing.

• BCI is reaching capacity. (Another proposal: New 2-4 elementary, ⅘ BCI, pre-k and K at Bonner)

• Ridding ourselves of CEC

• Have a good long term plan 

• Deceasing the amount of campuses over time 

• Reimagine the current spaces 

• Create a plan that benefits the greatest amount of students 

• Having spaces that community members can use

• Security

• Classroom improvements 

• Future planning strategies to account for growth in our community - how far in the future have we estimated class sizes 

• What is the plan with Central

• Empty buildings for several weeks each year - school year is built on outdated needs (assisting farmers in the field)

  • Benefits of year round school, as well

QUESTION #5:  WHAT PERCEPTIONS AND/OR FACTORS WILL HAVE THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE OUTCOME OF A FUTURE REFERENDUM?

• I want to know that the facilities serve the entire community (ex: walking, adult leisure activities, etc) 

• I want to know if you are spending my money wisely (ex: if you keep central for offices, that isn’t a good use of my money 

• Show me a long term plan

• More transparency in what is done/not done 

• Projects may need to be done in phases with a long term plan laid out

• Transparency and explanation

• Support from city leaders

• Separate athletic and educational items

• Stress the importance of a Pre-k setting and how it limits future financial obligations for programs focusing on material covered in pre-k. 

• Stress to the non-student parents the importance of supporting schools and how it benefits the community and its economy. 

• Trust - Knowing both what we are voting on and what was considered and why wasn’t it chosen as an option

• Accurate tax impact

• Current financial climate - everything costs more - this impact can be detrimental to certain populations of people 

• The feeling that our children are safe with secured entrances 

• Clear maintenance plan so that funds can be set aside over time, planned for to the school’s best ability, rather than needing a bolus of money every few years (referendums, levies)

QUESTION #1:  WHAT DID YOU LIKE MOST ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Addressing the security entry

• Build a new high school 

• Security 

• Athletic facilities

• Discounting central/knock it down now

• Security issues

• The hands on facilities tour to show the issues and the visuals

QUESTION #2:  WHAT WERE YOUR GREATEST CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Total Cost

• Not a college town - we don’t need turf

• Don’t build a building where students only spend part of their day

• Not another detached small building

• Central needs to be vacated. Keeping it would be a mistake.

• It was a band-aid

• No long term plan for growth/Stewartville not being appealing to families

• E.C.C. could be moved/utilized in other current facilities

• Improvements to a specific needs (gymnastics, early childhood). Not overall.

• Multipurpose rooms (band, gymnastics, track)

• What is the emergency plan for when systems go down before anything can be built

• How wants/needs addressed; order of presentation

QUESTION #3:  FROM A FACILITY STANDPOINT, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO ADDRESS CENTRAL AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM?

• Vacate central-sell

• Unsure how to address EC

• Realign where grade levels attend school

• Think creatively about options. For example, If a new HS was built and grades realigned, Bonner would have space for EC. Just one idea.

• Central removed/not used(demolished)

• Ecfe utilize a different existing space(ie. Bonner)

• More access to early childhood

• Presentation needs to not only focus on the same issues (e.g. aging problems with dated buildings, the negatives of the building), but discuss how to present the positives of the new.

• If these issues were topic of discussion in years past, why does this feel rushed now?  Were the same selling points used now as they were then?

• Take accountability on what is wrong

QUESTION #4:  WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT FACILITY RELATED ISSUES FACING STEWARTVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

• Secure entrances

• Class size

• HS/MS Cafeteria

• Duplicate area usages confine scheduling

• Tax Impact

• Patching long term concerns with short term solutions

• Long term operational costs

• Security/safety(up to date, healthy buildings, cameras)

• Indoor/outdoor Athletic facility (non functioning showers in locker rooms)

• Gym space 

• Weight room

• Unusable sinks & lab spaces in classrooms 

• HVAC control 

• PAC too small

• Versatile outdoor athletic space (turf, track)

• Space 

• Community & school working together to create mutual space for all to use.

• Safety is always number one, whether it be security or buildings. 

• Make a new building that can be used for more than just pre k. Make the EEC and Kindergarten go in Bonner, make a new 1-3 next to BCI and then keep 4-5 in BCI then all kids would have appropriate space for their needs.

QUESTION #5:  WHAT PERCEPTIONS AND/OR FACTORS WILL HAVE THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE OUTCOME OF A FUTURE REFERENDUM?

• Superintendent does not live in the district she asks for tax money to support.

• Put district offices where “action is” to support staff.

• Do the new facilities benefit the entire community and not just a section of the community 

• Tax Impact 

• Was very hard to get my RSVP in for this session. Called the school and no one answered. When someone did answer, they could not help me get signed up.

• Door to door connection and communication with “no” voters(ie. farmers, retired, no kids/grandkids in the district). Reminded of ag to school credit. 

• Open tours to all facilities(not just one school)

• Listening meetings/informative sessions on zoom for busy families

• Brainstorming meetings with ALL(K-12) students(recorded so community members can see the kids answers). Asking what kids like & don’t like about their current school.

• Easier, simpler ways of access/information for older people(not tech savvy).

• School board & city leaders getting along and working together to benefit the town as a whole.

• How transparent it is presented and what order it is presented 

• Listing needs first then all the wants in the second part

• Limit the fluff- try to keep it to what is truly needed.

• Make buildings and facilities usable for all not just to one group

• Accountable and transparency is a must

QUESTION #1:  WHAT DID YOU LIKE MOST ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Nothing

• Secure entry at all schools.

• Classroom Upgrades

• Building Upgrades

• Security

• Updated science space and classroom updates

• Upgrading security

• More security

• Updating bathroom facilities

QUESTION #2:  WHAT WERE YOUR GREATEST CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• I can’t afford to pay more in taxes.

• Stand alone buildings

  •  Preschool should shift to Bonner so age appropriate add ons to BCI where structure is already in place for add ons.

• No plan for Central-Sell

  • Who would pay for demolition?

• Too many “wants” vs “needs” (Ex. Turf)

• Taxes increasing

• Administrators not living in the district and not paying our taxes.

• Too costly. 

• Asking for too many things at once.

• Not convinced that we need artificial turf on the football field.

QUESTION #3:  FROM A FACILITY STANDPOINT, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO ADDRESS CENTRAL AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM?

• Keep them at Central

• Sell and rebuild elsewhere

• Can newest part be used if updated?

• Look closer at fixing the building-just because it is older doesn’t mean its time to get rid of it-get competitive rates (boiler shouldn’t cost as much as they estimated last time.

• Modernize present facilities

• No separate buildings for superintendent

• It would be nice to preserve Central if at all possible and feasible.

QUESTION #4:  WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT FACILITY RELATED ISSUES FACING STEWARTVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

• Door Safety

• Maintaining the building so that they don’t get to the point in the future.

• Increased security for facilities.

QUESTION #5:  WHAT PERCEPTIONS AND/OR FACTORS WILL HAVE THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE OUTCOME OF A FUTURE REFERENDUM?

• Everything is so expensive to live as it is now.

• Positive:

  • Take the turf out of the referendum.

  • Take away weight room expansion

  • Take out BCI upgrades.

    • It was already new and shouldn’t need too many of these yet.

• Agree with maintaining track, but not turf on the the FB Field.

• Weight room needs to be bigger-used even in Phy Ed.

• Not sure about gymnastics space?

• I need to be sure that they did due diligence to the get the best prices and that they seriously asked for only necessary things.

• If they present another referendum it shouldn’t be all or nothing. Voters should be able to have options.

• How much there will be in raised taxes

QUESTION #1:  WHAT DID YOU LIKE MOST ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Classroom renovations - should be done regardless and not even a question

• New secured entrances - that should happen regardless

• Secure Entry at Bonner and MS/HS

• Upgrades to Bonner and MS/HS

• Moving students out of Central

• It’s nice that there was a new E.E.C for a dedicated space for those students

• There were some athletic updates but could have been more

• Bonner updates were good and necessary

• Security entrances being renovated were necessary

• Updated/renovated classrooms for educating our students

• Science labs definitely need renovations and should be a priority

• The education focused updates and renovations

QUESTION #2:  WHAT WERE YOUR GREATEST CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Didn’t really hear about any of it until the April before. They had a slideshow and everything felt already done

• Staff felt they were involved too late in the process

• Not knowing who was involved in planning or anything about it and what was decided. 

• Was the facility planning team disconnected from what was actually going on in the schools?

• It all should be academically based because that is what a school is, not sports as the main focus. 

• The questions should have been rearranged differently. Security should have been done regardless and not needed voting on

• Should have been a Q3 - build a new facility should have been a whole separate question

• How it was laid out - too many items on the list

• Not realizing that we know that new items will need upkeep and face value isn’t necessarily the full cost

• Turf will be used by such a small percentage of students

• New CE facility came out of the blue. 

• Open Enrollment problem - yes we get tax dollars for each student, but at the cost of overcrowded schools and needing to build new buildings.

• Bonner looks like it hasn’t been touched in 15 years - lead water for years, etc. 

• Waste of money on things not needed (e.g. new lockers at Bonner)

• I worked at the school and didn’t even know we were doing a referendum!

• Football field - will need x amount of dollars to serve a small number of kids

• Building a new facility should have been a question in and of itself

• Too many unnecessary additions (ex: turf, gymnastics, sports related, etc.)

• Keeping Central open for Admin offices

• A new building didn’t seem necessary for E.E.C and gymnastics

• A brand new building is expensive and affected a small population of our students

• The space was customized for EC students. There was not going to be a cafeteria in the new building. 

• The timing was not ideal for our community/tax payers

• Other city improvements were recently accessed to community/taxpayers

• The financial impact on our community

• Gymnastics needs a space but could it be a space that’s more versatile, specifically targeted groups of our student population. Ex:  EC students and gymnasts

• Future needs of staff were not addressed. Ex: Additional restrooms, preferably unisex

QUESTION #3:  FROM A FACILITY STANDPOINT, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO ADDRESS CENTRAL AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM?

• Early childhood should be with K and 1st grade. 

• Central should go, but building a new facility isn’t really the answer either

  • Health hazard

• What costs more - building a new building or adding on? 

• Where will the admin go that are in central

  • If not safe for kids, staff shouldn’t be there either

• Tear it down, classes go somewhere else, build new building there where it is now and have district offices and a child care facility for staff

• Build onto bonner or BCI and put the district employees there as well

• Can some of the district employees work from home? 

• Civic Center as an option for something? 

• If staff doesn’t have direct contact with children can they work from home

• Putting preK and kindergarten in the same building would help with the transition

• Worry that Central will be sold, torn down, and a high rise apartment will go up like in other surrounding towns. We don’t want that!

• Moving ALL of Central facilities (students, comm. ed, staff, admin, TT)  to Bonner 

• Update Bonner to meet the needs of early childhood (bathroom, sensory, cupboard levels, etc)

• Deconstruct Central/Sell property

• We’ve exhausted the Central facility so we shouldn’t use it at all

• Do not demolish it for sentimental and cost reasons

• People should/could be concerned about students attending there 

• The gymnasium is not fit for any of our athletics to practice

• The location is ideal and maybe the community would be interested in using it for other purposes

• The space, such as the cafeteria and gym, were being utilized hen the new building would need a cafeteria and gym to accommodate the current use of the facility

• Rentals within the community, such as churches, to house the EC Education Program in the meantime

• Additions to Bear Cave Intermediate would be an option, maybe move a grade level over

• Renovate Bonner Elementary to accommodate the EC Education Program

QUESTION #4:  WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT FACILITY RELATED ISSUES FACING STEWARTVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

• Secure entrances

• Any classroom renovations that are really necessary

• Feel like BCI got built and every other building got left behind

• Science Labs

• Sidewalks in front Bonner are needing repair

• Better way for drop off and pick up for Bonner - extremely unsafe!

• BCI is unsafe as well

• New facilities are great, but if teachers/para retention is a problem and students don’t feel safe because of admin. decisions, then what’s the point.

• New cleaning service in the buildings

• Taking pride in our facilities - keep them clean and updated

• If we aren’t taking care of our current facilities, why build new ones? 

• If new entrances are done, can safer/new sidewalks be installed as well?

• New football fields are great, but if the rest of our facilities aren’t being taken care of how does that look. 

• BCI should be added onto

• Add onto Bonner or another building to accommodate moving a grade. 

• A new building for MS/HS doesn’t address what is happening inside the walls - it doesn’t matter how fancy the building is if the halls are crowded and unsafe

• Class size problems associated with open enrollment

• Space

• Security

• Meeting the needs of our special needs student

  • ADA bathrooms (students and staff)

  • Sensory/Calming areas

• Health and Safety 

  • CEC: mold, asbestos, chipping paint, pipes- can’t use certain plumbing, boiler system, entryway

  • Bonner: size of health office, entryway, chipping tiles, everyday wear and tear

  • MS/HS: entryway, pipes

• Restrooms for students and staff in the MS/HS building

• A field house 

• Bear Cave is only 5 yrs old and at its capacity already. We need to build with growth in mind for our district’s future

• Renovations/updates to classrooms

• Secure entrances at all buildings 

• More space in general Ex: classrooms, storage, staff break rooms

QUESTION #5:  WHAT PERCEPTIONS AND/OR FACTORS WILL HAVE THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE OUTCOME OF A FUTURE REFERENDUM?

• Tax repercussions

• Percentage of people with the highest burden

• Home values rising significantly before hand

• Farmer burden?

• Too many items on the questions looks like a kid in a candy store wanting anything and everything

• Giving students “fancy” facilities doesn’t necessarily make them better people, it raises entitled kids. 

• Majority of people don’t agree with a superintendent not living in the district

• Not taking care of the current facilities gives the public the perception that we won’t take care of any new buildings

• You can’t build a brand new preschool facility and add a gymnastics room - Combing older kids and little kids in the same area is unsafe

• Too many items for each question

• Inflation/building costs 

• You can't make question 2 only pass if question 1 passes

• Elderly and how much it affects their fixed income - it’s not that they don’t care about kids, but they can’t afford an increase

• Positive:

  • Security

  • Definitive plan for ending central

  • Health and Safety

  • Build for longevity and expansion - needs of a growing community (ex: build a new K-2 school by already owned property by BCI)

• Negative:

  • Through discussion with community members, there's a concern that the highest paid employees are not tax payers in this district, therefore, they are not affected by the increase of taxes

  • Strictly pushing sporting upgrades and changes without considering better solutions for these issues

  • If Central is deemed unsafe, then this should no longer be a functioning district building

• Our open enrolled student population is using our facilities but are not paying taxes benefiting our district

• The number of administrators and staff that reside outside of the district are not paying taxes benefiting our district

• The scope of the new building needs to be broader and more versatile for other events and activities

• Children are not mandated to attend Early Education Programs

• Cost and timing

• The mindset of how recent we asked for a tax increase for a new facility

QUESTION #1:  WHAT DID YOU LIKE MOST ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Security additions - added safety for ourselves and our students

• Athletic facilities - brings better morale and more revenue when hosting events

• Close central - move preschool students

• Getting rid of central.

• High School/Middle School, and Bonner Updates

• Weight room/Gymnastics is much needed to be upgraded.

• Secure Entry Renovations at Bonner and the Middle School/High School

• Bonner Classroom Renovations

• MS/HS Classroom Renovations

• Bonner Classroom Renovations 

• Secure Entries

• Bonner Sensory Calming Room

• Bonner classroom renovations

• Secure entrance at Bonner

• Discontinued central 

• Student safety

• Secure entrances are important 

• Address concerns at a majority of levels/buildings 

• The pieces that focus on the academic/educational/instructional 

• Central/EC were actually being looked at and something could be provided that is safe for those little learners  

• New CEC/Early Childhood building 

• Secure entries

• Classroom renovations

• Administrators being used in videos for secure entrances

• Sensory room 

• Updated special education spaces

• Safety issues and classroom accessibility was addressed

• We appreciate that the district is trying to address multiple issues, but it is not realistic to fix all of these issues at once. We need to prioritize.

• Classroom Improvements across schools

  • Sensory and motor skills rooms

  • Updated Science lab in the high school

  • More cabinets and storage in Bonner classrooms

• Secure entrances across schools

• New early childhood building 

• Proper and safe areas and classrooms in the early childhood building to accommodate all of the needs of the students (sensory rooms, easily accessible bathrooms)

• The design proposed for the new early childhood building made it easier to collaborate and work with other classrooms 

• It would be a safer location for the early childhood building and more handicap accessible 

• Having more secure entrances for all buildings 

• They were creating safer spaces at Bonner and the Middle School/High School

• They were creating a new preschool facility

• High school classrooms were going to be updated to current needs

• Bonner was going to get necessary renovations

• Secure Entrances

• Bonner Classroom Renovations

• Large Motor Skills Room and Sensory/Calming Room

• Playground at BCI

• MS/HS Classroom Renovations

• Preschoolers need something besides Central.  

• Science classrooms need to be updated.  

• Classrooms need updating.

• Security updates need to happen.

• High school weight room needs updating.

• Secure entry 

• Classroom renovations but we want to know what exactly would be renovated - we want what the students need instead of the pretty updates

• Need more space for preschool - have outgrown the space

• MS/HS classroom renovations

• Sensory/calming room at Bonner

• Fire alarm systems

• New weight room

• Cafeteria renovation

• open forum

• Updating classroom space, especially for classes like science, technology and "hands-on" classrooms (FACS, Ag, welding, mechanics, carpentry), etc.

• I was unable to attend, but from what I saw, I liked how the numbers were given as to what people were disagreeing with.

• equality in facilities, secure buildings, more community/athletic space.

QUESTION #2:  WHAT WERE YOUR GREATEST CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Central should be closed.

• A new building should be built but not for pre-k students. Pre-k and EC should move into Bonner. A new building or addition should be built onto BCI that would allow 2nd grade and possibly 1st.

• Administration should move to a building where they are more present and engaged with students and teachers.

• How lopsided the vote was.

• Preschool should not be in new building

• Rushed

• A new facility is needed but shouldn’t be for pre-k kids. Pre-K kids should move into a facility with Kindergarten.

• Biggest concern was a whole new building for CD/Preschool. If we are going to build a whole new building consider the High School (where many people visit for various reasons) or a new elementary for Bonner. 

• Concern over a new Fire Alarm System at HS/MS. What is wrong with the one used currently?

• In Question 2, concerns over athletic points (track and turf)?

• In Question 1, concern over spaces for Gymnastics space and Weight Room.

• Out of the many employees currently completing this form out, only a few of them are able to vote on the referendum

• The costs of maintaining CEC in addition to building a new CE/Preschool Facility 

• Potential overcrowding at Bonner (if preschool is added on)

• Cost 

• Raising significant taxes

• A focus on athletics versus academics

• Paying to maintain an old building (Central) verses spending money on a new facility

• That the athletics were tied into both questions

• Hard to prioritize athletics over the academics 

• How do we plan through the future and not need another referendum 

• Tax jump

• so many things that need updating that are not on the list

• Although I am a supporter of athletics, I believe our focus should be on academics and school-age children for facilities.

• My biggest concern was that so many people voted no after so the effort that was put forth to educate about the needs.

• concerned keeping staff at Central (cost to keep building going) cost of the new build.

• The emphasis on athletic space improvements–we have larger concerns in the district at the moment that directly impact the academic and safety needs of students.

• There were so many things included in the referendum that it overpowered the really important items for student and staff safety.

• Overwhelming amount of things trying to be passed in one referendum.

• Videos should have been based more on safety and academics than athletics.

• Some of the things mentioned, such as the secure entrances, should have been things that are fixed/installed regardless of a referendum. It shouldn’t be up to a community vote whether or not our students and staff are kept safe. 

• It felt rushed and secretive. 

• Much more emphasis was put on athletics than academics.

• Essential needs that were left out

  • Handicapped bathrooms and working handicapped buttons inside and outside school entrances

• Excessive Additions to the referendum

  • Turf field

  • Cafeteria renovation

  • Updated weight room

• Too many things included in the plan

  • We’ve heard comments from the community members that said “If this wasn’t included in the facility plan (for example-new football field), I would have voted yes.”  

• More time and education to have been put towards informing the community about the rationale and importance of these new facility plans.  We felt this referendum was rushed.

• Upgrades and creation of spaces that do not positively affect the majority of students or academics

• There were items included that weren’t necessities

• There were too many things in each question

• Question 1 should’ve included all of the safety and security measures

• Question 2 included safety and security measures as well as artificial turf  - that doesn’t seem to make very much sense

• Gymnastics Facility (lack of students participating in sport)

• Wrestling Locker Room

• Artificial Turf Field

• Communication problem (District employees do not know what Casework/CTE mean) 

• Flexible Learning Spaces in MS/HS

• Does the tax increase end once the improvements have been made? If not, why?

• Use of color printing for all of the flyers when it’s 7x the cost of black and white

• Central was still going to be a building used in the district.  Seems goofy to build a brand new building and keep another building.  Costs will continue to increase.

• Community does not value early childhood education.  It is looked at as a daycare.  So the community does not understand how important early education is. 

• Taxes and inflation in the current climate.

• Gymnastic room for under 10 athletes 

• Stand alone early childhood center

• Artificial turf field

• Not addressing the need for ADA compliance - student accessibility to all areas of the school (playground, rooms, bathrooms)

• Not enough bathrooms for students

• Kindergarten room size equity

QUESTION #3:  FROM A FACILITY STANDPOINT, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO ADDRESS CENTRAL AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM?

• Central should be closed.

• A new building should be built but not for pre-k students. Pre-k and EC should move into Bonner. A new building or addition should be built onto BCI that would allow 2nd grade and possibly 1st.

• Administration should move to a building where they are more present and engaged with students and teachers.

• Move them to Bonner or a different building.

• To solve the problem, an idea would be to build a new K-2 building, and in that building, you include the Early Childhood Education program. This would free up Bonner to be a space for administration. Bonner Gym could be redone to add practice spaces for sports and community education classes/Tiger Time.

• Moving second grade to BCI and preschool to Bonner

• Move preschool to Bonner with kindergarten, build a new school for grades 1-3, and move 6th grade to BCI

• Move them to Bonner and have K-2 in a new building by Bear Cave (this would cut down on transportation costs).

  • We feel strongly about this

• An idea would be using Bonner as an EC center and construction for a new K-2 building and get rid of Central 

• Combining Pre-K and Kindergarten and possibly 1st grade and utilize the ability to add on to BCI to move over 2nd grade 

• We believe a new building is necessary. If not a new building for CEC, perhaps a new building for lower elementary, with CEC moving to the current Bonner building. Alternatively, an addition to a current building.

• What other options are there beyond just building a brand new building? Could we combine Bonner & Central students and staff in one new building? We would like for the companies who do these referendums to truly present every option (adding on, remodeling CEC, building new, etc.)

• Educate the public on the issues in the building: one safe source of drinking water in the whole building (1st floor), wasps in the building (4th floor), asbestos?, sulferic scent in bathrooms, heating & cooling inconsistencies, non-handicap accessible playground, bathrooms, doorways, entryway. 

• We appreciate that people know that CEC is not a reasonable or safe building for staff and students, but what option will people accept? 

• Exterior doors do not latch and blow open.

• Central Education Center cannot just be discontinued without somewhere else for preschool to go.

• Suggestions:

  • K-2 building by Bear Cave and Bonner becomes the early childhood center. This could alleviate bussing issues for elementary. All students could access and utilize the new playground. Build one adaptive playground and all students can share

  • Bonner becomes preschool through first grade and a wing is just adding to Bear Cave for second grade

  • PreK-K and admin offices at Bonner, then 1st-3rd in new addition by Bear Cave and then Bear Cave becomes 4th-6th. Opens up space at the MS/HS.

• Newer and safer building 

• Handicap accessible building and playground  

• Air quality up to date and more energy efficient 

• Bathrooms within each classroom 

• More space to fit the needs for all of our students

• Putting money into Central isn’t worth it

• We should tear down Central and rebuild on that land

• Could Bonner be more of a pre-k building, and could we add onto Bear Cave?

• Combine with Bonner (PK-2) and make improvements/expansion to currently facility

• Ask the community what they want in regards to the Early Childhood Education Program.  Would a new elementary school be a better solution, and then early childhood and the administration could move into Bonner?  (This is heard from someone who hears the community valuing the elementary school, but not necessarily valuing early childhood).

• Close central - no students at central

• update

• Central is not conducive to education anymore. Without the ability to update, we need to start fresh.

• I don't know if this is the answer, but what if the central offices and Early Childhood moved to Bonner and a new elementary school was built? I believe that the community could get behind a new elementary or high school or middle school before an early childhood center and expensive athletic facilities/costs.

• Early childhood NEEDS/DESERVES equitable and safe space for our youngest students. 

• Preschool should be at the same site as Kindergarten

• Preschool needs a different facility but not as a stand alone building

QUESTION #4:  WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT FACILITY RELATED ISSUES FACING STEWARTVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

• In general, we need to update facilities. Our BCI facility is very nice but Central has a list of issues and our other buildings need updates. Our gymnastics room is not sufficient. The track and soccer fields also need attention. 

• Having nice facilities will also build morale.

• Age of building

• Space

• Meeting expectations of other schools around us.

• One of the biggest issues is a combined Middle School and High School. The Middle School has one hallway for passing times and it is difficult to navigate. Additionally, there is only one staff bathroom for our faculty to use. Students from both the MS and HS float to the different sides of the building and that is concerning for both staffs because of the vast maturity differences and behaviors. 

• Lack of secure entrances at multiple buildings. 

• Bonner does not have extra space for intervention programs or bathrooms that are acceptable for handicap needs.

• Secure entrances 

• Safety of our preschool age children

• Whiteboards at Bonner/replacing chalkboards 

• Staff bathroom at Bonner

• Additional gym space at Bonner

• Fitting the growing population in the existing schools we have. We need more classrooms.

• Safety of preschool age children at Central.

• Central needs to be no longer

• Secure entrances 

• Secure entries - student and staff safety is incredibly important and keeping these updated is a must. 

• Classroom renovations - students deserve good learning environments and up to date learning resources

• CEC in general

• Handicap accessibility at all buildings (across the district) on exterior doors and accessibility to outdoor facilities (playgrounds). Paths to and on the playground for wheelchairs. 

• Handicap accessibility for staff, students & visitors. 

• Staff and student safety does not seem a priority. Secure entrances.

• “If it ain't broke, don’t fix it” will only work until it doesn’t. And when it doesn’t, is when it finally gets hurt.

• Overcrowding

• Open enrollment

• Age of buildings

• Short term vs long term solutions - Bonner just got a new roof but ceiling tiles are still catching dripping water.

• Utilizing unused space - field behind Bonner

• Removing Central building but using that land

• Bonner did not get new cabinets or doors or windows this year when they were supposed to. Where is that money? Is it still allocated for those renovations?

• Videos were taken but never shown in lieu of the previous referendum

• The cost- people aren’t wanting their taxes to increase 

• Inflation- people are worried that it will actually cost more than what the district thinks it will cost 

• That people don’t have any ties to the facility plan proposed (they don’t have kids in school), so it doesn’t apply to them 

• The lack of security at Bonner and the Middle School/High School

• The deterioration of Central - it’s not a safe and welcoming environment for pre-k students

• Admin should be in a different building where they are more present in our classrooms and involved with teachers and students

• Space

• Classroom Storage

• More Bathroom Stalls at Bonner/Updates

• Entrance Security

• Early childhood at Central.  The littlest people are in the most dangerous building 

• Safety doors 

• outdated classrooms and science areas

• Current use of central

• I think Central is the most important at this point along with the security of Bonner. I feel it is hard to know what to do when we are only addressing space issues for what has been needed versus being able to plan for future growth of the other buildings.

• space and new buildings needed

• I think that three out of four buildings (Bonner, MS, HS) have serious space, utility and classroom concerns. That is where we should focus our efforts.

• cost, community value of early education program.  

• Overcrowded classrooms

• Admin should be in buildings with students and teachers

• Student safety

• ADA compliance–warm and welcoming

QUESTION #5:  WHAT PERCEPTIONS AND/OR FACTORS WILL HAVE THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE OUTCOME OF A FUTURE REFERENDUM?

• The older generations of this community have a sentimental connection to Central. The discussion of abandoning Central is difficult for that generation. Those are committed voters and are likely voting no.

• Super rushed.  Needs to be planned out longer.  

• Get backing from big business in Stewartville to promote and sponsor.

• How much will this impact the community (cost wise)?

• For our elderly community with no connection to the district, what will be the impact on them? Are they willing to due to previous experience or how it was done in the past?

• Showing how a referendum would impact the majority of student needs directly

• Positive: Bonner classroom renovations

• Positive: Secure entrances 

• Positive: Discontinuing Central

• Negative: Focusing on athletic needs over academic needs

• Positive is there is more communication and community engagement this time which is helpful and beneficial

• Knowing what the long term impact is going to be.  Less bandaids and more future planning 

• Problems are being solved for the amount of money that is being asked 

• Concerns about Bonner are still not going to be addressed

  • Need to address space at Bonner to accommodate growing number of students 

  • Becoming ADA compliant

• Need more specificity about what “classroom renovations” or other things are so we know what to expect 

• More understanding of the WHY behind each part 

  • Understanding more about the issue there is and why it is being asked to change 

• The ability to maintain what we have and improve in comparison to schools around us 

• Having the different facilities open to the community to use, for a small fee possibly.  They feel connected to the resources they are paying for through their taxes

• The community needs to be informed on how each update impacts each space. For example, the gymnastics improvements sound superfluous, but additional information highlights that there might be a greater need than what it appears on the surface based on the current space and set up. 

• Focus on EDUCATION and SAFETY

• Timing of the referendum in relation to other economic factors (e.g. previous referendums, levy, etc)

• We noticed Question 2, which included things such as classroom improvements and secure entries, REQUIRED voters to say yes to athletic improvements such as locker rooms and gymnastics space. Lump the improvements differently so that all academic are together, all safety are together, all athletic are together, etc. 

• Keep in mind “Needs VS Wants”

• Safety. 

• We need more teachers and building principals to advocate to the public for our students, our staff and our facilities on a more consistent basis. This is not a one time conversation. It is a fight until we reach a safe, secure and accessible environmental change for our students and staff. 

• Maybe we could have a community meeting with staff and community members?

• Addressing and prioritizing needs (big picture urgent issues) rather than wants

• Long term plan, done in phases, including a clear maintenance plan so funds can be set aside over time instead of asking for lump sum.

• Accessibility for all students at schools - ADA compliance

• We question the additions that were made to the previous referendum and have a fear that could happen again.

• Community concerns that the Superintendent does not live in the area that our referendum tax money supports.

• What is the sitelogic group getting paid? Is this fiscally responsible?

• The buy-in from influential community members (the mayor, life-long community members, past school board members) 

• Having more information about how much each component of the plan will cost

• “This isn’t the right time” kind of mindset

• Rearranging the priorities on the questions

• It doesn’t seem logical right now to be concerned about artificial turf when we have students at Bonner and the Middle School/High School don’t have secure entrances

• The community should be able to take tours of our facilities in order to truly see all of the needs that we have

• The focus should be on the safety and academics of our students first and the things that aren’t necessities should come second

• Putting money into Early Childhood when it is not required and not all students attend

• Athletics

• The current economic state.

• Community needs to buy in.

• If it is perceived as "extravagant" then I don't believe it will pass.

• I feel that a lot of the community and staff were told that BCI was able to be added on to. Not understanding why past plans aren't being followed through with is a concern that I have heard from the community. If that isn't the best option, maybe being transparent as to why past plans aren't what is best for our district would be good to explain.

• let the numbers speak for themselves-  show the facts for the costs of rebuild/up keep of central and cost of new building. felt that there were numbers but nothing that backed up the numbers.

• The public’s perception is that early childhood is optional and Bonner is mandatory for kids. Although the public recognizes Central is old and probably not the safest place for kids.

• Administration not living in the district and paying increased property tax for new building angers community members 

• Detailed information on how specifically the money will be spent in renovations i.e. “classroom renovations” is not specific enough

• The district needs to advocate on behalf of our youngest learners and  the importance of work done at the earliest grades to the general public!

QUESTION #1:  WHAT DID YOU LIKE MOST ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Receive athletic improvements. 

• Some classroom improvements.

• Included classroom improvements.

• Secure entrance is timely and necessary.

• Outdated middle school high school equipment.

• We liked the much needed updates to the middle school and high school.  

• We liked the secure entries, but if we have open campus and have people coming and going all day, it sort of defeats the purpose.  

• We liked the turf field and improvements to the track.  However, we think our presentation of this was off.

• Updated science classrooms

• Increased building security 

• MS/HS classroom renovations

• Fire alarm system upgrade

• Liked track and football field improvements

• Classroom improvements

• We liked that it didn’t pass as it was put forward

• Potential for making a CT Shop.

• HS and MS improvements across the board

• All Security Updates

• Wrestling Locker Room

• Update to meet handicap requirements

• Get rid of Central

• Replacing central 

• Safety and security 

• Updated classrooms 

• Getting up to code (fire) and legal requirements (accessibility) 

• We appreciate the color fact sheets and newspapers however staff don’t actually have this privilege

• Upgrade athletic facilities - other schools have much more

• Closing educational access to CEC; no educational instruction to take place at CEC

• “A place” for early childhood education; “a place” developed for early childhood learning

• Secure entryways at MS/HS and Bonner site

• MS/HS renovations, to include MS/HS lunchroom

• Consistent “home” for gymnastics space; equitable area/access to appropriate space needs

• Secure entrances

• Update/fixing classrooms (but what exactly does that mean?)

• Building Security Updates

• Addressing concerns of elementary and MS/HS classrooms

• Motor/Sensory/Calm room Bonner

• MS/HS classroom improvements 

• Improvement to high school science labs

• Track needs improvements (Maybe should just do it all?)

QUESTION #2:  WHAT WERE YOUR GREATEST CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Not enough classroom/PE Middle School updates.

• Building onto the wrong building. BCI does not need the additions, MS/HS needs it.

• Office, gymnastics, PE, etc. need the updates.

• Field House is better than a turf field.

• Opinions from the community (prominent people) were saying this was not necessary for the time. Timing was rough because of COVID. Assessments on homes went up, which increased taxes.

• Need new bathrooms at MS and HS.

• Grouping facilities with classroom and outdoor spaces.

• Early childhood is desired by a small number of users.

• More questions.

• We felt the football field and athletics facility was poorly advertised and narrowly thought of.  We feel that a better approach to this facility is to think BIGGER.  Austin and RCTC make bundles of money on their field (with dome/bubble) for softball and soccer leagues/tournaments.   To sell it to our community as simply a football field and track is ridiculously poorly done.  We need to think of the athletics facility as a way to make money and help our community make money…..lessening the actual cost of all these needed fixes. 

• We feel the bigger need is to fix the high school and middle school.  To build a Early Childhood center is only helping a small fraction of students improve their environment.  More of the money from community members need to be going to more students.  

• Again, thinking bigger might be a more successful plan of attack.  We are essentially looking to “catch up” to other schools in our conference or area.  By the time our updates ever pass, we will already be behind again.

• Why not put safety and academics as question #1, and all athletics in question #2?!

• The lack of transparency / information to expand upon ideas that are mentioned!

• Lack of input from staff and community members on what is needed!

• Focus on athletics over academics (student first, athlete second)

• If we don’t spend our money wisely, why are we trying to spend more?

• Safety concerns could only be ‘yes’ if we said ‘yes’ for sports related pieces

• A new EEC might become a Community Ed palace

• Security aspects of referendum would not adequately address security concerns 

• Turf on the football/soccer field is a luxury item many pro and college teams are moving away from

• Gymnastics improvements may be for naught if a team isn’t sustainable

• Overcrowding isn’t addressed in this referendum

• Creating a Pre-K building that is tuition based and not used by everyone. Private use using public money.

• Too many athletic updates

• Admin doesn’t need to be placed in a new building

• It’s a bandaid - it doesn’t solve long term space issues 

• The new building meets the needs of a small group of our student population 

• Members of the focus group didn’t feel that the end plan was aligned with their recommendations 

• Timing - came right after an operating levy - did this come at the right time for the general public? Does the public understand the difference between the two? 

• Not collaborating with the local government (city/county etc) 

• Trust. Does our community trust the school leaders?

• Is an artificial turf “needed;” viewed as “want,” an expensive want at that

• Building early childhood site at BCI

• High number of open-enrollment; these families do not pay “our” taxes

• Lack of information

• Lacks specifics and details of what the future of Central would be if a new building was built

• Goals didn’t represent the mass population of students

• We need more classrooms in the high school. There are not enough classrooms for all the teachers. Sharing classrooms is not a long term solution. 

• We need more lab space for the growing number of students enrolled in science courses. The current labs are outdated and in disrepair. 

• It doesn’t address the middle school/high school space. We need to separate the 2. Students have freedom to wander the whole building, it would allow for more classrooms and needed space. 

• No funding for the arts/theater programs.

• There is a feeling in the community that lacks support due to leadership.

• It didn’t address bigger needs at the MS/HS of growing out of the building

• It didn’t address a plan for Central

• The amount of focus on sporting facilities

• No need for a turf field.

• Early Childhood never made sense to me.

  • What is the cost of keeping another building open? How much of the population does it affect the student body?

• The community would rather see a new building for some other set of students and relocate early childhood.

QUESTION #3:  FROM A FACILITY STANDPOINT, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO ADDRESS CENTRAL AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM?

• Expand on secondary education facilities, then slide grades up. Make space at Bonner, add 5th grade to MS.

• Sell Central.

• Early childhood, K, and 1 to Bonner.

• BCI is a 2-5 grade with additions.

• Move 6 to BCI and more space at MS/HS for classes and admin.

• Admin needs to be located at MS and HS.

• Central should probably just be demolished (partially or fully depending on experts opinions) and try to team with the city to use that lot as a new community center.

• Rebuild Central (or do whatever is cheaper) - new would bring greater opportunities and last longer!

• Is Bonner full? If not, could ECE move there? Or shifting of grades?

• Sell or demolish Central

• Add EEC to existing building (Bonner or BCI)

  •   EEC to Grade 1 at Bonner

  •   Grades 2-6 at BCI

    • Alleviate overcrowding at MS/HS

• Option 1: Restructuring grade levels

  • Move CEC to Bonner - Bonner becomes a Pre-K through kindergarten

  •    Move 1st and 2nd to BCI, expand BCI

  •     Move 5th, 6th-8th to a new middle school

• Option 2: Build a new high school and move the grades as posted above

• Bonner is already built for littles and would help alleviate the drop off issues

• Knock it over - Central 

• Expansion on BCI (1-4th grade) , Build a 5-8 building N Of BCI, Bonner PreK-K and Tiger Tots, High School would then expand into MS area. District Offices could be in one of the MS houses or in Bonner.

• CEC needs to be disposed of

• Move 2nd Grade to BCI, Early Childhood to Bonner

• Move 6th Grade to BCI, MS/HS becomes 7-12, block off designated space MS/HS for Early Childhood

• Move Early Childhood to MS, build a new MS at Central’s present location

• New HS; MS becomes 5th and 6th; HS becomes 7th and 8th; BCI becomes 2nd through 4th; Early Childhood through 1st Grade at Bonner

• Add to BCI to allow for additional students. Then create a plan to communicate to the community what will happen to Central after it is closed. Or shift Bonner to BCI and put Central kids in Bonner. 

• OR rebuild in the same location

• An analysis of the Central building if it can be used and if not, then not used.

• Possibly look into adding to BCI and adding Bonner students.

• Possibly Bonner for Early Childhood

• Relocate to a different building and build a new MS/HS

• Or add on to BCI for Early Childhood for 2-5 and put Early childhood at Bonner.

• New HS → Old HS becomes 7-8 → Old MS becomes 5-6 → BCI becomes 2-4 → Bonner becomes EC-1

• Tear down Central and improve bonner

• Build a new high school, old HS becomes 7-8, old MS becomes 5-6, BCI becomes 2-4, Bonner becomes EC-1

QUESTION #4:  WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT FACILITY RELATED ISSUES FACING STEWARTVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

• Classroom quality. MS PE Space.

• Need additional bathrooms.

• The MS/HS building is not equipped to accommodate 1000 students.

• Leaks

• Infrastructure.

• Science rooms need to be updated.

• Fix and Fob door 6.

• Turf in the dome field.

• Another middle school gym.

• Facs room with kitchens and sewing and woodshop.

• New softball field.

• Middle School and High School space is a huge concern. 

• Science rooms are ill equipped to run labs. 

• We lack locker room and equipment storage.  

• Gymnastics room is too small to actually perform their events

• Weight room is too small 

• Basically SPACE is a huge deal in terms classrooms, storage, and.

• We emphasize sports over athletics (and the maintenance of the materials needed)

• We do not have space. . . NOT enough classrooms! Teachers traveling from room to room → if we don’t have classrooms, we can’t hire more teachers to teach the growing number of students

• Classroom sizes are HUGE

• Build a new high school?

• Need to separate the middle school and the high school - safety concerns 

• Missing ceiling tiles and leaking from ceiling after it was just fixed?

• Temperatures are drastically different between rooms

• Not enough maintenance staff / cleaning crew

• Windows that could open - for safety and climate control 

• Better wifi / internet access 

• Better computers

• Classroom space at MS/HS level

• Security (make it really secure vs. ineffectual systems that don’t work as intended)

• Balance new HVAC systems so they actually work, don’t cause floods, aren’t so loud that teachers have to yell in class to be heard, etc.

• Address bathroom options for trans students

• Space for ever-increasing student population

• Age of buildings is concerning.

• Temperature variations throughout the hs/ms

• Handicap accessibility

• MEET SAFETY LAWS AND REGULATIONS 

• Having sufficient space for expected growth

• Updates to CTE spaces & science 

• Ensuring special education has the facilities needed to provide quality programing

• Physical space

• Special Education classrooms being assigned to “folded wall” classrooms, past staff lounges, etc.

• Athletic spaces (ie. Gymnastics, locker rooms, weight room/endurance training/Iron Tiger

• Classroom space at the HS/MS

• Outdated Science classrooms and need additional space

• Outdated Art classrooms

• Not enough space in the PAC to host programs

• No available space for DAPE program

• Updating the availability of outlets in classrooms to meet the growing need of charging ports for all of the electronic devices

• Bonner entrance

• Drop-off space for Bonner and Central

• Space for students as we are growing

• Security, efficiency of access to buildings

• Updating older buildings (walls, drinking fountains, paint) to make safe for younger students

• Space for classrooms

• HS/MS shared cafeteria space - impacts scheduling for both buildings.

• Not enough gym space. Designated area for DAPE

• CEC needs to be taken down.

• Not enough bathrooms (all are outdated).

• “It was good enough for us,” but they haven’t seen the building in ten years.

QUESTION #5:  WHAT PERCEPTIONS AND/OR FACTORS WILL HAVE THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE OUTCOME OF A FUTURE REFERENDUM?

• Prominent community members opinions.

• Financial obligations.

• Perceived needs.

• Current economic conditions.

• Football

• Specific details.

• Perception of the leader.

• Timing and high tax rates.

• In all honesty, our leaders are major factors.

• Again, to reiterate above comments….there is a perception that athletic facility improvements would only benefit football.  That is small thinking.  An athletic facility can improve our entire community if it is utilized properly.  Put a bubble on the thing and turn it into a community money generator.

• Lack of transparency 

• Taxpayers won’t pay for what they don’t want / think is necessary

• Lack of influence from staff members 

• If people believe the system is broken or the schools are not truly teaching students, why would taxpayers want to support it?

• Where does the money go? paper trails are important for the people in the community know what is going on 

• Administrators got a raise to compare to other districts near us - but no improvements in terms of education / curriculum / or duties.

• Advertising / wording of what was presented 

• What are we communicating to the community around us?

• Mistrust of leadership

• Lack of equity in benefit

• Felt manipulative

• Security at Bonner locked to a new building for EEC/Comm.Ed. in question 1

• Security at MS/HS (question 2) was only available if the new building question passedLong-term solutions and not short-term patches

• Superintendent

• Should go towards students and not administrators

• All students and not simply those who can pay (Preschool parents and athletics)

• Serving the majority of students and not a select few

• Leadership - Superintendent, Mayors, Current & Former Board Members 

• Cost 

  • Let’s solve more than one issue with the cost 

  • Prioritize the issues 

• Get community support from businesses - matching programs etc 

• Community needs to feel that there is complete transparency in the process

• Public perception/public buy-in

• Perceptions of “pros” vs. “cons” with open enrollment

• Identify $ amount with various options, details, itemized summary, potential taxes, etc.

• Present/address an “inflation tracker”; when BCI was built, it cost ____; in 5 years, it is expected to cost _____ to build a new location; in 10 years, it is expected to cost _____ to build a new location

• Community perception - the # of students this referendum benefits needs to benefit students across multiple settings

• Community trust in school leadership

• Clear, specific, communication to everyone

• Clear wording/language with descriptions

• The delivering of the message needs to be clear, concise, and from multiple speakers

• How many people have been in the school that filled out the referendum? 

• The biggest investments should be on facilities that serve more students.

• Build ahead of growth, look at a facility with more programming space for more than two hundred kids per grade.

QUESTION #1:  WHAT DID YOU LIKE MOST ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• That it was voted down

• Secure entrance - to a point. Why was this not a priority under question one? The most important part of this should be securing the schools.

• Classroom renovation items that promote learning

• Safety items at Central and Bonner

• Good communication / site visits were helpful to explain issues

• Necessary improvements to Central made apparent

• Classroom improvements were clear

• Clear articulation of whee funds would be spent

• Balanced investment in all facilities  and across academics and athletics

• Secure entrances

QUESTION #2:  WHAT WERE YOUR GREATEST CONCERNS ABOUT THE FACILITY PLAN PRESENTED IN THE REFERENDUM?

• Why do we think we can up-keep the turf and track with operating levies but we cannot use that to update the science rooms? Or the other updates.

• Other schools are moving away from turf why would we add it?

• Nowhere do they address the concerns with the lack of space. There are teachers at the high school that do not have their own classrooms. Their classroom is a former office, closet, lounge, etc.

• Classroom renovations are vague. What does that entail? Most of these items are vague. Staff members were unaware of the updates that were supposed to be done in their own classrooms.

• What are the updates needed for the fire alarm system?

• What does renovating the wrestling room look like? Why aren’t the boosters paying for that? Only the wrestlers use them?

• Why are we paying for new cabinetry when the students are the ones who damaged these items? Why not have the shop classes create some of these items as a project?

• We are worried about building shiny new things, and hyper focused on athletics while academics are struggling. Why would we spend money on updating facilities when the kids are allowed to run rampant in the schools and are getting no education? 

• Gymnastics is a small group; why are we putting so much money into a facility for them? Can they partner with another community like we do for hockey?

• Why do we need a calming room? Again, why are we spending money on a small percentage of students?

• What does the activity space look like in the MS? Do we need this? How and when would it be used?

• What are the renovations needed for the cafeteria?

• MS/HS flexible learning space is not needed. 

• Didn’t like the way it was presented.  Too many projects. Safety items were split between both questions.

• Attended a tour but the tour was negative

• Did not hear much about the referendum before the vote.

• Gymnastic facility is too limiting to one sport only.

• Facilities were too limited in scope (focusing on a subset of students it the masses)

• Funds did not equally support all district students 

• Facilities plans were a bandaid, not a cure, for the current needs not the future needs

QUESTION #3:  FROM A FACILITY STANDPOINT, WHAT SHOULD BE DONE TO ADDRESS CENTRAL AND THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION PROGRAM?

• What repairs are needed to continue using Central? Can we make repairs for now?

• If central needs a new boiler, pay for a new boiler, not put turf on the football field.

• When BCI was built, we were told that it could be added onto.

• Add onto BCI and move 2nd grade over to BCI, then move early childhood into Bonner with K-1.

• Sell Central at a very low or no price so the district doesn’t have it on their hands any longer.

• Split up admin offices and move them where appropriate and where space allows.

• We need to vacate central,  it’s not a suitable space.  It’s a health hazard for children and staff alike. But site should have a sunset plan to garner community support (ie senior living apartments)

• Build a middle school 5~8,  move 2nd grade to BCI,  move Early childhood to Bonner.

QUESTION #4:  WHAT DO YOU BELIEVE ARE THE MOST IMPORTANT FACILITY RELATED ISSUES FACING STEWARTVILLE PUBLIC SCHOOLS?

• Securing our schools. All schools should have secure entries.

• We are running out of space, and more thought needs to be put into the planning. BCI was a blunder. We did not look far enough down the road when we pushed the building of BCI through.

• Safety (security to prohibit access to the building from outsiders)

• Safety among the students within the middle school

• Vacating Central

• Enhancing the learning environment

• Space limitations

• Community buy in / community offset of costs by dual use of school facilities for community use ( ie intramural sports, community use of weight room)

• Health concerns at central

QUESTION #5:  WHAT PERCEPTIONS AND/OR FACTORS WILL HAVE THE GREATEST INFLUENCE ON A POSITIVE OR NEGATIVE OUTCOME OF A FUTURE REFERENDUM?

• Emails went out to every student’s parent to contribute to this survey/information. This would include non-taxpayers (open enrollment students)

• Members of the community were “cherry-picked” to be a part of this referendum committee.

• How do community members get involved with the initial proposal? How will they be contacted?

• The lack of transparency on all of these items. These do not seems like items we need but items we wants. Everything is vague, what exactly do these “updates” mean.

• The curriculum at the MS/HS is lacking. Students are not learning. When students are failing exams but earning A’s in their classes there is a disconnect in our educational system. Why should the taxpayers continue to give money to a failing system?

• Students are not being held accountable. They are walking the halls and avoiding their classes.

• Administration is not doing their job. Kids are running the schools. There are no checks and balances for our administrators. 

• Superintendent is not a part of the community. She is not visible.

• Staff members are not happy working here. They are leaving the district; turnover is high. Morale is low.

• The focus should be on curriculum. We do not have the same opportunities as the surrounding districts.

• Open enrollment need to be ended to help with facility needs

• All open enrollment student should be charged if they ride a school bus

• Need to build a sense of community and get the community involved.

• Need strong spokespeople who are publicly supporting and sharing info

• Find the platform where people are (Facebook, etc.)

• Tax dollars supporting students who live in the community.

• Need to build trust of where the ideas are coming from.

• Poor relationship between school district & city developers

• Other communities are moving forward with school facilities (ie Bryon, Kasson)

• We now have videos out there highlighting the issues and concerns,  how is this going to attract anyone to our area if there is no plan to move forward?  

• We are perceived to have a community of taxpayers that do not want our community to grow and that do not support our schools. Big negative.  

• Hopefully a positive influence will be the continued data gathered to show the immense need.  

• Speak to community members and bridge a gap with the city to reach people who don’t have kids in the district to see that this is a positive change. 

• We need to stay proactive in growth,  stay on top of improvements faster to avoid asking for 32 mil