Unionville-Chadds Ford School District Superintendent Dr. Sandoval recommended the board move forward with a replacement for Patton Middle School and asked the board to vote next week to authorize administration to issue a request for proposals (RFP) for design services.

The proposal is a next-step authorization, not final construction approval. "The motion before you is to give administration approval to issue a request for proposal for design services to replace the current middle school," Dr. Sandoval said during the Feb. 10 work session. He told the board a formal vote on that motion is scheduled for the regular meeting on Feb. 18.

The recommendation follows a feasibility study the district commissioned that identified 14 specific concerns at Patton Middle School, the superintendent said. The study and Dr. Sandoval's presentation listed problems including lack of ADA‑compliant circulation and bathrooms, aging and mismatched HVAC systems that make consistent classroom temperatures difficult, asbestos in original 1972 construction, leaking roofs, electrical panels at capacity, noncompliant elevator, narrow corridors and stairwell issues, outdated science labs, and campus traffic and pedestrian‑safety problems.

Why it matters: Dr. Sandoval argued only a full replacement would comprehensively address every item on the feasibility list and would minimize long‑term disruption to instruction. He presented three cost scenarios: a maintain option he said would cost about $67 million, a renovate option about $113 million, and a replace option he projected at roughly $120 million. "The replace option is the only option that addresses all 14 concerns," he said.

Finances and timeline: Finance director Mr. Dady reviewed how the district modeled tax impacts. He said the district’s recommended financing plan would increase annual debt service by roughly $426,000 on average over the next nine budgets and that, "That $426,000 budget increase, if we just isolate that number, that equates to the $42 increase for the average home." Mr. Dady said the $42 figure reflects the incremental cost above the district’s existing debt service profile and is conservative because it used higher assumed interest rates.

Dr. Sandoval and board members stressed several fiscal controls the district intends to use. The board approved a resolution last month committing the district to keep future tax increases within the state Act 1 index, the superintendent said, and the district plans to refinance existing 2016 debt in 2026 to reduce borrowing costs before taking on new debt. The administration also said bids from contractors — expected in mid‑2027 under the current timeline — will be the decisive moment at which the board can accept, reject or scale a project.

Board discussion: Board members pressed for clarity about whether next week’s vote would bind the district to full replacement. Board member Mr. Sharp asked whether the Feb. 18 vote was an irrevocable commitment; Dr. Sandoval and other board members replied the vote would authorize design work and advance the replace option but that the board would still have decisions to make later, especially after contractor bids are received.

Public comment and concerns: More than a dozen residents spoke during the meeting’s public comment period. Several community members questioned the district’s cost estimates, the $42 per‑year messaging, and the speed of the timeline. Attorney Salvatore Fea told the board that residents he represents may challenge the project in court if the board attempts to proceed, saying a proposed $120 million project "will result in the institution of a class action lawsuit against each and every board member." Other speakers pressed the district on asbestos abatement timing and costs. Parent Brian Thompson asked, "Why is there still asbestos flooring in this school? Why has that not been addressed?"

Staff and teacher perspectives: Multiple speakers who work in the district described daily operational limitations in classrooms and shared spaces. Staff member Janine McCluskey said school employees often spend decades working in the building and argued staffing and workplace conditions should factor into the decision: "The staff members who work in this building are here for much longer than the students," she said, describing outdated science labs, insufficient ventilation and frequent repurposing of the cafeteria and library for testing because of space shortages.

Counterpoints from community members with financial expertise urged the board to pause and rework the district's modeling before committing to design contracts. Mark Stuckey, who identified himself as having corporate finance experience, told the board he found the $42 figure "misleading" and urged the district to reengage public feedback and redo the financial analysis.

Other facilities and operational notes: In the work session the administration also briefed the board on discrete facilities items that will be voted on separately, including a plan to address foundation water infiltration at Union Elementary, replacement of failing epoxy floors in Hillandale Elementary restrooms, purchase of a pickup truck for transportation, and replacement of obsolete HVAC building controllers in district offices. Facilities director Mr. Weitzel also told the board that previously awarded federal and state grant funding for five electric buses is temporarily uncertain because of ongoing legal and policy developments; the district said it will need to decide by March whether to proceed with electric bus infrastructure work.

What happens next: The board is scheduled to vote Feb. 18 on a motion to authorize the administration to issue an RFP for design services to support the replace option. If the board approves the RFP, the administration said it would award a design contract in June, seek construction bids in mid‑2027 and return to the board for final approvals after bids are received.

The board and administration repeatedly told the community that the Feb. 18 vote carries no immediate tax or construction commitment and that further financial decisions — including whether to proceed with a full replacement if bids exceed projections — will come to the board later for approval.