MONROE — Though the official survey is not completely composed, the School District of Monroe further focused its scope at its meeting Dec. 9. 

Option 1, recommended by the facilities committee and currently the top contender for the consolidation plan would involve a new/remodeled high school at the existing Monroe High School location, which would also take on middle school grades seven and eight. Monroe Middle School would become an intermediate school for grades four through six. And, since Abraham Lincoln Elementary School would be razed, all PreK-3 would attend either Northside or Parkside Elementary School. 

Though Option 1 has been discussed in most detail, it is not the only possibility for a facilities update. At the previous school board meeting Nov. 25, the school board chose the next two options they were most interested in — Option 3 and Option 5. Both of those options are predicated on Abraham Lincoln Elementary staying open and Monroe High School remaining grades nine through 12. Option 3 takes a look at a completely new site for the high school, while Option 5 is a mix of remodeling and new construction at the existing site. 

At the Dec. 9 meeting, a slide show was presented primarily by Dan Chovanec, CG Schmidt vice president, highlighting some of the key points of each option. Vice President Sarah Dunn of CG Schmidt and partner Steve Kieckhafer of Plunkett Raysich Architects, were also in attendance. Both firms are based in Madison. 

The estimated budget for Option 1 is $85.9 million, compared to $84.9 million for Option 3. Option 5 might appear to be the cheapest option, at just over $78 million, but board member and treasurer Rich Deprez said it was key to also consider the possible additional costs of keeping Abraham Lincoln Elementary School open. District Administrator Rick Waski said they itemizing the costs would be necessary, including the needs of Abe for the next two to five years, which would change the totals of Options 3 and 5.  

Those who receive the survey will answer questions relevant to potential options. 

Besides the facility questions, there will also be demographic questions included in the survey, which could take in whether the respondent has children, and assessing the likelihood they’ll vote. 

The survey will also contain diagrams and graphics that educational survey company School Perceptions recommended. One would compare the tax impact of two different options on the same bar graph. 

Waski said there is information to be gained from an all-caps “NO” versus a regular “No.” 

“The goal isn’t to win a survey,” he said. “The goal is to get the feedback from the survey.” 

Due to the holidays, the board will not have a second meeting this month. Waski said survey questions need to be finalized by the first week in January.

In January and February, the survey will be distributed by postal and electronic mail to parents, staff and all district residents, as well as the school’s open enrollment families, though the latter will not be able to vote on the referendum. The board will then analyze the results in March, in preparation for a potential referendum in November.