By Joe Stewart

When Town Meeting convenes this June, voters will likely be asked to approve funding for the new Charles E. Roderick Elementary School — a project seven years in the making that represents one of the largest capital investments in the town’s history.

Total project costs were originally estimated at $122 million, but through cost cutting and with reimbursement from the Massachusetts School Building Authority (MSBA), the net cost to Wrentham is now estimated at $66 million, not to exceed that amount — a figure that will require Town Meeting debt exclusion approval.

School Building Committee Chair Phil Jordan, in an interview following a February 3 Select Board presentation, laid out the committee’s central argument: the cost of not building is itself substantial.  Current estimates to replace the Roderick’s failing HVAC systems, roof, windows, and exterior doors, while also addressing code compliance, total nearly $70 million — and that work would not resolve fundamental educational deficiencies in the building.

Site, Cost, and Configuration Settled

The path to Town Meeting has been deliberate. The district applied to the MSBA in 2022 and was accepted into the state’s grant program, which reimburses a portion of eligible school construction costs.

Since then, the School Building Committee has evaluated 11 distinct options — ranging from a simple code upgrade to new construction at five different locations — before unanimously selecting a new building at the Gilpatrick softball field in August 2025. The School Building Committee and School Committee each endorsed the selection unanimously.

The proposed two-story, 102,734 square-foot building would serve 595 students in grades 3 through 6, shifting third grade from the overcrowded Delaney Elementary School. According to the district’s Educational Program document, classrooms would be organized into “grade-level neighborhoods” with seven general education classrooms, a special education resource room, four small-group breakout rooms, and a shared extended learning area per grade.

The design features separate spaces for a gymnasium, stage, cafeteria, music, and band — addressing a long-standing problem at the current school where the gym and cafeteria share a single space, creating noise disruptions and forcing physical education classes to be held at Delaney.  These spaces have also been designed to serve as emergency shelter space for the community.

Superintendent Allan Cameron, speaking at the February 3 Select Board meeting, described three key areas of concern at the Roderick driving the project: educational limitations including undersized classrooms, operational deficiencies with aging HVAC and fire suppression systems, and security vulnerabilities from numerous exterior doors and single-pane windows.

$10M in Cuts, Higher Reimbursement

Jordan described the committee’s approach to discretionary spending as guided by three questions: What have other communities done? Is it cost-justified in terms of durability and maintenance? And is it reimbursable by the state?

Using that framework, the committee reduced the project’s estimated total construction cost by 14 percent while simultaneously increasing the expected MSBA reimbursement rate from 29.8 percent to as high as 41 percent, according to cost tables presented to the Select Board.

“We’re trying to maximize value for Wrentham taxpayers,” Jordan said at the meeting.

Jeff D’Amico of Vertex Companies, the project’s owner’s project manager, told the Select Board that their construction estimates have proven conservative, with recent winning bids in other districts coming in substantially below estimates.

D’Amico also clarified that the total project cost does not include anticipated rebates: approximately $925,000 from MassSave and $4 million from the federal Inflation Reduction Act, both tied to the proposed geothermal heating and cooling system.

Two Unresolved Questions: Ballfields and Traffic

Two significant questions remain unresolved as the project heads toward Town Meeting: the fate of displaced athletic fields, and whether to address the chronically congested intersection of South Street (Route 1A) and Randall Road.

The proposed Gilpatrick site permanently displaces one baseball field. During construction, the town would also lose use of the Heckler field, which would serve as a laydown area and geothermal well field, though it would be restored to athletic use after project completion.

The district had sought to use project funds to construct replacement ballfields at the Rice Complex. However, the MSBA made clear in its August 2025 review comments that such costs are not eligible for reimbursement and must be a separate funding vote at Town Meeting.

“The district sees the displacement of the ballfields as a necessary enabling phase,” the district responded in its report, while requesting a meeting with the MSBA about potentially including the work. As of February 2026, the MSBA has not changed its position, Jordan confirmed in the interview.

The intersection of South Street and Randall Road presents a more complex picture. Jordan said that the building committee has voted to include the intersection improvement as an “add alternate” in the project bid package. This approach would allow the work to be a part of the project if the committee votes to include it, but does not commit the town to the expense.

Town Administrator Michael King told the Select Board that a 2008 traffic study rated the intersection “F” — the worst possible grade — and that the town never addressed it nor did the state provide funding. Select Board member James Anderson recalled that when the public safety building was constructed, the town was similarly unable to secure funding for the intersection.

Since the Select Board meeting, Wrentham public safety officials have weighed in. According to Jordan, police and fire departments provided written feedback describing improvements to the intersection as important.

At the February 3 meeting, D’Amico explained that the intersection work could be broken out as its own bid package. James Saylor of architecture and planning firm TSKP Studio told the board that if the work is part of the building project, the design team would handle the engineering, substantially reducing the timeline. Permitting through MassDOT would still take approximately two years.

Select Board Chair Chris Gallo inquired about the need to take land for additional turn lanes. D’Amico responded that the current expectation is to add a left-turn lane from Route 1A onto Randall Road, and that sufficient space likely exists without a land taking. Gallo further asked whether a traffic study had been performed to assess the need for turning lanes from Randall Road; according to the discussion, that work has not been done.

Saylor shared results of traffic simulations showing the current delay on Randall Road at 223 seconds. With the addition of third grade, the projected delay would increase to 358 seconds.

Superintendent Cameron noted that most pickups are for kindergarten, first, and second grade — students who will remain at Delaney Elementary School on Taunton Street. Jordan pointed out that more than 50 percent of current dropoff and pickup traffic occurs at Delaney, suggesting that shifting third grade to Roderick could reduce traffic on Taunton while increasing it on Randall.

Select Board Divided on Aesthetics, Supportive on Need

The February 3 Select Board meeting revealed broad support for the school project itself, though not without reservations.

Board member Bill Harrington acknowledged “an obvious need for it” while expressing concern about the flat roof design, noting that King Philip Regional High School’s flat roof required a multi-million dollar replacement. In a separate interview, Superintendent RIch Drollet confirmed that the estimated cost to replace the High School roof is nearly $12M and the Middle School roof is nearly $9M.

Board members Anderson and Roy Lamothe both stated the project needs to be done. Board member Michelle Rouse, who is also a member of the School Building Committee, noted that cuts have already been made and that the committee will continue looking for additional savings.

But Gallo described hearing from constituents with sharply divided views on the building’s appearance.

“I have some constituents who are in full support of the project, they think it looks incredible, the kids deserve it, the teachers deserve it, the town deserves it,” Gallo said.  Conversely, some constituents say “it doesn’t look like a school, it looks like a hotel. …. It doesn’t fit with the other buildings we have nor the other projects that we have.”

Following the meeting, Jordan acknowledged the aesthetic concerns while emphasizing the committee’s focus on long-term value.

“We’re trying to maximize value for Wrentham taxpayers,” he said. “The only cheaper time to build was yesterday.”

What Happens Next

If voters approve the project at Town Meeting in June and approve the subsequent debt exclusion by ballot vote, the design team would complete schematic design and development over the summer and fall of 2026. Construction documents would be prepared through most of 2027, with the goal of selecting a contractor by September of that year.

Construction of the new building would then take approximately 23 months. Under the current schedule, the school would open to students in August 2029. Demolition of the existing Roderick building would follow, likely finishing by the end of that year.

Throughout the construction period, students would remain in the existing building, relocating only upon completion — a far less disruptive approach than the 32-month, four-phase renovation plan required to keep students in the current building during a major renovation, according to project documents.

For more information, including project plans and educational program documents, visit the Roderick School Building Project website at https://www.wrentham.k12.ma.us/subsites/Roderick-School-Building-Project/. Town Meeting is planned for June 1, with a ballot vote to follow later.