Comparing Consolidation, Infrastructure Improvement, and Campus Model Scenarios

Introduction

The Southern Tioga School District is or has evaluated three significant options to address its educational infrastructure and long-term planning needs. This breakdown provides a comprehensive analysis of each scenario, outlining the structure, implications, and potential advantages and challenges associated with each choice.

Option 2: $40,000,000 Infrastructure Improvement at All Five Schools

Added to consideration. This is a modified version of the original option that seeks to address maintenance needs at all 5 schools. The original price estimate came in around $89,000,000.

This scenario involves investing $40 million to upgrade and improve all five existing schools within the district.

• Configuration: All current schools—including both high schools and all elementary schools—would remain open and operational, each receiving infrastructure improvements as needed.

Potential Advantages:

• Preserves the current school structure, maintaining community identity and minimizing disruption for students and families.
• Addresses deferred maintenance and modernization needs across the district.
• May improve safety, accessibility, and energy efficiency in all buildings.
• Allows debt service to be staggered and utilizes unassigned capital reserves to limit tax increases.

Potential Challenges:

• Does not address possible enrollment declines or operational inefficiencies associated with maintaining multiple small schools.
• No estimated operational cost savings.
• Ongoing maintenance and staffing costs remain unchanged.
• Attendance boarders between regions may continue to be squeezed to ensure at least minimum viable enrollment is achieved at Liberty campus.
• Reduces the ability of the school district to seek financing for future building upgrades and repairs and prevents the district from implementing future operational and staffing efficiencies for at least 20 years.
• A little over half of the funding required to complete all maintenance items would still be needed. Items not completed may need to be addressed prior to this debt service being satisfied.

Context

• Investment in maintenance at all 5 schools has been continuously deferred for approximately 4 years while waiting for the school board to make a final decision about all of the options that have been on the table.
• Some maintenance has been deferred for approximately 14 years while the assumption of a consolidated High School was under consideration.
• It’s cheaper to have capable maintenance personnel on staff and fund internal maintenance efforts than it is to contract out work.
• The List of required work presented by Alloy 5 doesn’t give an actual list of specific items that needs fixed, it only gives high level categories. That list would be developed and detailed in the next step of the process. (ie: Windows need upgraded, but doesn’t break down that most of the windows are in good condition. If a window breaks, we can replace it using internal resources.)
• When performing large upgrades to a building, it can be cheaper to include side work in the package. (ie: The windows are starting to break down, let’s go ahead and replace them while we are working on insulating the exterior of the building.)
• Seeing signs of potential double-speak from the STSD administration in an attempt to steer discourse, specifically promising things they can’t or that are highly dependent on the school board not changing it’s mind down the road.

Borrowing:

Presented at 11/3/2025 work session by PFM – All 5 School Improvements – perform roughly 50% to 60% of work categories noted in Alloy 5 presentations. Limited tax impact, but reduces or eliminates borrowing capacity beyond this for about 15 years while debt is serviced. 20 year rolling debt service.

Option 3: North and South Campus Model (Closure of Blossburg Elementary)

Original Consideration, reintroduced.

This option proposes dividing the district into North and South campuses, which would result in the closure of Blossburg Elementary School.

• Configuration: The district would operate distinct North and South campus schools, consolidating student populations and closing Blossburg Elementary. Students previously attending Blossburg Elementary would be reassigned to other schools within the new campus model.

Potential Advantages:

• Would lead to minimal facility operational cost savings through partial facility closure as the District offices would continue to be housed at this location.
• Estimated operational Cost Savings of approximately $1,200,000.00 per year.
• Would lead to staffing cost savings.
• Would allow for similar sized classes (Student/Teacher Ratios) across the district. BES and LES currently overstaff due to too few students for each teacher. WLM is at the appropriate ratio.
• Eliminates travel time for shared teachers (some teachers share their time between LES and BES.
• Potential to strengthen academic and extracurricular offerings by concentrating student populations.
• Eliminates need to repurpose the majority of Liberty High School to an Elementary school in the case of future high school consolidation.

Potential Challenges:

• Disruption for students and families affected by the closure of Blossburg Elementary.
• Possible overcrowding or transportation challenges depending on how students are reassigned.
• Impact on the Blossburg community due to loss of a neighborhood school.
• Student sports are currently integrated.  Decisions would still need to be made to de-integrate sports and build new sports fields, or continue with the additional enhanced bussing required of integrated sports.
• Lack of Police presence at the South campus community.

Borrowing:

Presented at 11/3/2025 Work Session – BES/LES Consolidation into new LES addition to NP-Liberty High School. 25 year debt service. Proposes eliminating BES. Est. $1.2m indirect cost savings (Operational).

Option 4: 4 Building/3 Campus Model (Closure of Liberty Elementary)

Option introduced during the 11/3/2025 STSD Board Work Session

This option proposes maintaining the district’s North and South Mid/Highschool campuses, closing Liberty Elementary, and performing a minor expansion of Blossburg Elementary School..

• Configuration: The district would operate distinct North and South campus High schools, then consolidate Liberty and Blossburg Elementary student populations to Blossburg Elementary School. This would lead to the full facility closure of Liberty Elementary School. Some current students at BES may be reassigned to WLM in Mansfield.

Potential Advantages:

• Would lead to facility operational cost savings through full facility closure.
• Estimated operational Cost Savings of approximately $1,200,000.00 per year.
• Would lead to staffing cost savings
• Would allow for similar sized classes (Student/Teacher Ratios) across the district. BES and LES currently overstaff due to too few students for each teacher. WLM is at the appropriate ratio.
• Eliminates travel time for shared teachers (some teachers share their time between LES and BES.
• Potential to strengthen academic and extracurricular offerings by concentrating student populations.
• Reduced price to implement vs. Option 3 due to limited changes needed.
• Facility as a whole has enough space to support all students. If the district offices are moved to a new location or addition, the facility would reach the target ~80% capacity with limited changes.
• Local Police, Fire, and Ambulance Services readily available.
• All needed infrastructure and services already in place.

Potential Challenges:

• Disruption for students and families affected by the closure of Liberty Elementary.
• Increased transportation time for Elementary age students
• Impact on the Liberty community due to loss of a neighborhood school.
• Lack of Police presence at the South campus community.

Borrowing:

Copy of Option 3 numbers, Presented at 11/3/2025 Work Session – BES/LES Consolidation into existing BES school. 25 year debt service. Proposes eliminating LES. Est. $1.2m indirect cost savings (Operational). This is a direct copy of the Option 3 worksheet as numbers for this specific option have not been presented. It is assumed that the total amount borrowed would be the same, but distributed differently since a new structure would not be needed.

Option 1: Consolidated High School in Blossburg, PA

Removed from consideration during school board business. This leaves options 2 and 3 on the table.

11/10/2025 Board Meeting – Voted to update the Operational Cost Savings for this option for comparison to other options. It was identified during this meeting that the original PFM costing worksheet for the consolidated scenario did not include all of the Estimated Operational Cost Savings. The $1,300,000 figure cited in the material was ONLY the cost savings for the High School consolidation and did not include the cost savings from combining BES and LES schools. Updated operational cost savings would be expected to be around $2,500,000 to $3,000,000 per year.

Under this option, the district would establish a single, consolidated high school located in or around Blossburg, PA. Elementary schools would remain operational in Liberty, PA, and Mansfield, PA.  Blossburg would accept the trade off of having a central high school, but losing an elementary school.

• Configuration: All high school students across the district would attend the new facility in Blossburg. Elementary students would continue to attend their respective local schools in Liberty and Mansfield.
• Liberty High School would be converted into an Elementary School. 
• Blossburg and Liberty Elementary would be moved to the repurposed Liberty High School.
• Existing Liberty Elementary School building would be retired.

Potential Advantages:

• Centralizes high school resources, potentially offering expanded academic and extracurricular programs.
• Improves operational efficiency and reduces duplicate staffing or administrative costs.
• Estimated operational Cost Savings of approximately $2,500,000.00 per year.
• New or upgraded facilities could enhance the learning environment for high school students.
• Police, Fire, and Ambulance Emergency Services continue to be available in Mansfield and Blossburg Campus locations, and Fire/Ambulance services in Liberty.

Potential Challenges:

• Older Students from outlying areas may face longer commutes to Blossburg.
• Blossburg Elementary age students would face busing to LES or WLM
• Community concerns regarding the loss of a local high school presence in other towns.
• Potential costs associated with constructing the consolidated high school.

Context:

• The main goal is to enhance academic programs while reducing costs and rightsizing the district footprint.
• Assumes the school would be built in or around Blossburg due to public infrastructure already being available: Sewer, Water, Electric, Gas, Fiber Internet.
• Combines NP-Liberty and NP-Mansfield into a consolidated site
• Converts NP-Liberty High School building into an elementary school
• Closes Liberty Elementary School and Blossburg Elementary School, then moves students to the former NP-Liberty High School building.
• Closes NP-Mansfield
• Makes use of the existing Island Park recreational fields in Blossburg
• It would need to be determined what to do with the NP-Mansfield and LES sites after the restructuring is complete. They would be reused, sold off, mothballed, leased out, demolished, etc.
• Depending on the specific site chosen for the consolidated High School, BES may be reused, sold off, mothballed, leased out, demolished, etc.
• Achieves significant operational cost savings into the future.
• Reduces unused space
• Consolidates teaching staff into specific areas and eliminates Split & Travel requirements for some staff.
• Keeps a school in each community, although Blossburg does have the tradeoff of either an Elementary School or a Highschool, but not both. The alternatives are no school, but keep a district office.
• The price tag is between $60m and $80m. The School Board has not directed Alloy 5 to add or remove any items for the list that would affect the cost of a school build. Add a gym: $10m, remove a gym: -$10m, etc.

Borrowing:

25 Year Borrowing: Consolidated High School Build + Liberty HS Conversion to an Elementary School + LES Mothball + Mansfield HS Mothball. Numbers prepared 3/6/2024. Only includes indirect cost savings for the Consolidated High School and does not include indirect cost savings from LES/BES combining.

Total Borrowed assumes 100% of all tasks needed and completed. Does not include the calculation of compounded indirect savings or future savings from inflation avoidance.

NP-Blossburg / Blossburg Elementary Site Option Info:

Alternative Site Option Info:

NP-Liberty High School Converted into a new Elementary School (No additions). Likely applies with either Onsite or Alternate site HS plans

Supporting Documents

Conclusion

Each option presents unique benefits and challenges. The consolidated high school model prioritizes centralization and potential program enhancement but may increase travel times for some students. Infrastructure improvement maintains the status quo and upgrades all facilities but comes with a significant financial commitment and does not address existing inefficiencies, reduce operating costs, and limits the ability of the district to address declining enrollment for 20 years. The North and South campus approach aims for operational efficiency but involves closing a local school, impacting the Blossburg community. The district will need to weigh these factors carefully to select the best path forward for students, families, and taxpayers.

Writers Comments

11/11/2025 – Now with pictures and supporting documents! Yay! Board voted to update the PFM numbers for the Consolidated High School plan for current year. They did not vote on moving forward with either option and it looks like they will wait until the new board members are seated. The STSD Administration noted at this time that the original $1,300,000 indirect cost savings noted in the 3/8/2024 PFM presentation for consolidation (and other variations of this presentation for 30 year, 25 year, etc.) did not include the cost savings from combining LES and BES that goes along with it. This was a major oversight. It did not seem like any of the board members knew this key piece of information. This would mean that the consolidated HS option is more like $2,500,000.00 to $3,000,000.00 indirect cost savings per year.

11/7/2025 – As any good learner and researcher, I would be remiss if I didn’t take into account new information as it comes in or context and background as it applies to the question. For this analysis and comments, I have ordered the options so that Infrastructure is at top, moved consolidated to the bottom as it is not in consideration, and left option 4 as to be determined if it will be voted on to be added to the discussion. For Writer’s Comments, these are in reverse chronological order (read from oldest comment up to the latest).

I had a discussion at lunch today by chance (ok – I saw your truck and stopped in on purpose) with a good friend whom I’ve known for a long time and of course this, being one of the hundred different topics affecting us today, came up. In my analysis, I, for the most part, only take into consideration financial and impacts to the towns, but lack clear context and background. As most of the discussion is only about the immediate impact, this is true. But again, I’m just trying to be the loudest voice in the room like a handful of others. The thing about board meetings, work sessions, and even one-off social media posts is that you’re only getting small snippets of the actual question and reasoning. You get bite sized captions that are used to make a stupidly complex topic seem simple. That’s not really how things are. For every “We Must Do It This Way Because of X”, you have a “That’s stupid! We Must Do It This Way Because of Y”. Those statements hide the complexities of the topics under discussion in favor of pandering to the lowest common denominator to spark action and fervor. They speak to untruths and make us no better by repeating them.

The fact is, yes, some school board members will always vote to close a school for financial reasons. Some will even vote to close a school out of spite (ex: I have the power, therefore this is my will). Other school board members will look at the numbers and say that we have a good amount of time before this decision needs to be made, let’s put this to bed so we can improve our current schools and work toward that future decision – It’s not that time yet. This is true of our school board and most school boards in the rest of the country (don’t count yourselves as special).

If we assume that a 5 building school system can continue to exist with only marginal impact on tax increases, what might this look like. The proposed options make judicious use of tiered borrowing and the capital reserves. I’m not against this, it’s exactly how I would approach a project. In fact all projects proposed are suggesting this. The question is how much at each tollgate and how does it affect the near term tax rate. The financial planners have that all laid out. In this scenario, implementing the plan has limited impact on current taxes. That being said, taxes will still go up over time – nothing in any option will suddenly make inflation go away. Taxes go up, it’s as certain as death. By the school district existing and operating, taxes will still go up. Whoa – ok. So I’m damned if I do, damned if I don’t. My taxes are going to go up. Yes. that is correct. Our taxes will go up. The question is how fast. Staffing costs will continue to go up (pay, healthcare, pension, etc.) The increase in those costs will be what causes the tax increases, along with some maintenance needs, energy costs, and everything else that makes your monthly household bills go up.

How can we control those costs? There’s lot’s of options. Some are more realistic than others. Truth be told, class sizes are below what a school system would consider a minimum at some our schools. There aren’t enough students, but at the same time, there’s too many students to reduce staff due to layout. This option does not address that. That is what will ultimately cause the tax increase rate to run faster down the road. It will need to be addressed at some point in the future. For this option, they’re saying that we’re not there yet and the tax base can handle the run rate for a while longer.

A lever that needs to be pulled (spend money to save money) – hire additional qualified Maintenance staff and give them the tools (or budget to rent) to complete maintenance projects. Have the highly qualified engineers already on staff build an actual list of items that need to be address based on the Alloy 5 assessments and determine the true costs. Rank the items. Fund the items. Start addressing the items. Report on progress at each board meeting.

How do we handle the classroom sizes – right now, you don’t. Look for opportunities to optimize, but at the moment, this will stay as status quo. Rely on attrition (people retiring or finding jobs elsewhere) to keep the staffing costs in check – you continue to hire and backfill, it is just that the new teachers typically earn less than a retiring teacher.

I’m sure there’s more context and background that could be put out there for these options, but ideally, the school board members themselves should be publishing it, sharing it, or making it known in general. They should understand they can’t convey such complexities of whole ideas and concepts to the general public in a short 3 hour board meeting or work session that most people skip 90% of. Or rely on the condensed reporting of published newspapers and local journalism websites.

As usual, my ears are open. If you have something to say, people are listening (even if we’re bitching). Say your peace, but for the love of god, do not try to dumb it down. Be expressive and detailed. Electronic ink is cheap and plentiful. Use it.

There was something else important that I was going to write here, but the thought was fleeting.

I’ve been writing for a while. I’m going to take a break now.

11/4/2025 – As expected, the School Board raised the idea of an Option 3/Alternate – now becoming Option 4 – Close LES and merge into BES. This is an interesting option as it can be done in a few different ways. BES could be fully used with only the priority items being addressed rather than a full new facility. The “old” portion of BES could be torn down and rebuilt at a lower cost to Option 3. They could also lay the plan for a future fully consolidated Elementary school at the same site. They get all of the savings with minimal effort if they so desire. While I’m not for Option 3 or 4, option 4 would be the obvious choice if it is on the table without a consolidated Highschool.

10/14/2025 – While reviewing all information that has been presented over the last 20 or so years, it is my belief that the school district needs to consolidate the high schools into one location while providing viable Elementary schools at the Mansfield and Liberty locations.  This belief has also been echoed by multiple previous school boards, only to be swept aside the following year after a decision has been made because new members have been elected with the express purpose to maintain status quo or to eliminate Blossburg schools. It’s the only option on the table that truly reduces the operational and administrative costs for the long haul and is the biggest lever the school district can pull.

Option 2 is a red-herring, only meant to appease a select few and tie the hands of the district so nothing further can be done for 20 to 30 years. The borrowing capacity of the school district would be knee-capped by already having existing debt service. It is questionable whether the school district would actually be able to survive for 30 years or would become insolvent and need to merge with another school district if this option goes forward.

Option 3 is an alternative to option 1. The reason why it was previously removed as an option is because it severely deviates from the spirit of the school district by entirely eliminating any schools in Blossburg Borough without setting a plan for a centralized high school. It puts into place some of the additional work of centralizing schools, but without actually committing. If the voting regions were properly realigned, that would likely mean an entire region without a school, much like region 2 already is. This was added back as an option for the explicit purpose of showing how asinine option 2 is and because the district needs to cut costs somehow and that option does not even fix all of the items that need addressed.

If they can’t get option 1 across the finish line, then option 3 becomes the next obvious choice. Option 3 doesn’t get the district to where it needs to be from an administrative cost savings, but it does help with the operational costs. Even with Option 3, Option 1 continues to be on the table, although the timeline for the next discussion of the topic is again pushed out 10 to 20 years, much like option 2. Administrative costs will need to be addressed and can only be addressed with a consolidated high school. By that time, we will likely be talking about a new single campus for consolidated Elementary and High Schools.

I would myself present a 4th option – Closure of Liberty Elementary School, moving students to BES, and add a small addition to Blossburg Elementary school to achieve 80% utilization. The prices would likely be lower due to reduced need for renovations and only building a few extra rooms on to meet the needed space requirements. The land is already available and ready to be developed. All needed services are already onsite. This would also be low impact as it only adds an additional 12 minutes of travel time beyond the original bussing routes to LES. This also provides enhanced emergency services coverage which the schools in Liberty lack.

Either way the school district goes – they should just go ahead and buy a big plot of land for a centralized campus. Put the “Where” to bed. From there, they can plan out the “How”. They know they are going to need it at some point, they know they will have to overpay, so might as well go ahead and authorize a purchase.