Op-Ed: A Letter To The Central Middle School Community

By Dan Ozizmir, Greenwich Board of Estimate and Taxation Chair

As Chair of the of the Board of Estimate and Taxation (BET), I have received numerous emails from concerned parents of Central Middle School (CMS) students. Parents have asked what my position is on CMS and what I anticipate the BET is going to do to address the issues.

We are all disappointed and concerned to hear of the closure of CMS last Friday. The safety of our students is our first priority. I expect that both parties on the BET will support the Superintendent and the BOE to address the issues at Central Middle School (CMS) and get our students safely back in school as quickly as possible. If the BOE requires additional funding, the BET will meet expeditiously to act on the proposal.

However, the issues around CMS did not start with the closure last week, nor will they end when the immediate problems are addressed. Parents have demanded that the rebuild of CMS be a priority. I couldn’t agree more. In fact, at the BET debate last fall, I called for CMS to be made the highest priority. The BOE’s $500,000 master plan study from 2018 funded by the BET found that CMS was the only school that should be replaced. I and others were concerned that the superintendent and former BOE had deferred CMS so far into the future. They scheduled the rebuild of CMS in FY33 in their Nov 2019 master plan prioritization and in FY34 in their FY22 capital plan. A review of the BOE master plan chart (see below) shows that seven school renovations and the BOE Administrative building are prioritized ahead of CMS.

The former BOE may have had good reasons for placing CMS last, but I didn’t agree then and I don’t agree now. While it is the role of the BOE, not the BET, to prioritize school projects, I am pleased to see that the superintendent and the new BOE have moved CMS forward 8 years from FY34 to FY26 in their FY23 capital plan.

So where do we go from here? Currently the BOE is planning for a $250,000 feasibility study in FY23, $0 in FY24, $2,500,000 for Design in FY25 and a $67,500,000 place holder for construction in FY26. Why wait a year between feasibility and design? The BOE should consider moving up their timeline by moving directly to design after the feasibility study is completed, which would pull forward CMS by at least a year. I encourage the BOE to meet as soon as possible to consider their Educational Specifications as well as a plan that will accelerate the rebuild of CMS. Once the BOE articulates their plan, the BET can work in collaboration with them as the project progresses. As Chair of the BET, I will work to make this happen.

Respectfully,

Dan Ozizmir
Chair, Board of Estimate and Taxation