Norwich — The Board of Education rejected a proposed $144.5 million school restructuring plan Tuesday in a 4-4 tie vote, with opponents expressing concern over the price tag, lack of support from city officials and whether the existing state reimbursement formula that would reduce the local taxpayers' cost to $57.6 million still will be in place next year.

The vote could kill the project that has been in the works for the past year, but Board of Education Chairman Aaron “Al” Daniels, who voted in favor, said he likely will call for a second vote at a future meeting. Daniels said there is still time to endorse the project and have it placed on the November 2017 ballot for a referendum.

The project, endorsed by the School Facilities Review Committee in November, calls for closing three schools and restructuring elementary schools by grade level rather than geography. Two schools with kindergarten through second grade, two schools with grades three to six and the recently renovated Kelly Middle School for grades seven and eight would remain.

“With what's happening now with the budget, who knows if it's going to be the same,” board Vice Chairman Dennis Slopak, chairman of the School Facilities Review Committee, said of the state reimbursement rate.

Slopak at first seemed to be urging fellow board members to support the project — although throughout the process he supported an alternate plan for a single school campus — but ultimately voted against it. Slopak initially tried to abstain, but Daniels implored him to cast a vote.

Republican Daniels joined Democrats Joyce Werden, Kevin Saythany and Yvette Jacaruso in voting for the project. Republicans Slopak, Margaret Becotte, Angelo Yeitz and Democrat Robert Aldi voted against the plan. The ninth board member, Republican Susan Thomas, was absent. Thomas has told board leaders she plans to resign, but has not submitted a resignation letter.

Slopak did say Norwich children deserve upgraded buildings, and the city would see economies of scale by reducing the number of school buildings. Slopak said the school system could save 75 percent on maintenance and utilities costs with fewer and completely renovated buildings.

But Yeitz, who served until recently on the School Facilities Review Committee, voted against the project. Yeitz expressed doubt that the project would win voter approval. He said the committee never received the support he anticipated from city leaders for a complete restructuring that would reduce the number of schools, cut operational costs and promote economic development and reuse of the vacated buildings.

Slopak said school teachers also did not support the project.

Slopak is scheduled to give the City Council an update on the project at the Feb. 6 City Council meeting.

School board member Robert Aldi questioned whether the state reimbursement would be there in the future, given the state's budget crisis.

Daniels said the project would be implemented as a “slow progression,” as buildings are renovated over time. He said the city should see a “slowing” of the rise of education costs as efficiencies are implemented.

The plan, written by a consulting team of JCJ Architecture, LEARN and O&G Industries, recommended “renovating as new” the Thomas Mahan, John M. Moriarty, Teachers Memorial and John B. Stanton schools and expanding each school building to house additional students and possibly additional common facilities, such as the gymnasium and cafeteria.

Mahan School, however, is often considered as a potential site for economic development; the school is located directly off Interstate 395 off Exit 11. An alternative plan would use the nearby Uncas School as the fourth elementary school, turning Mahan over to the city.

Superintendent Abby Dolliver attempted to rally support for the project, urging the board to approve the project and advocate for it before the City Council. She called Tuesday's vote a “placeholder” to present the project to the state Department of Education that this project is under consideration.

Dolliver said it also would send the message that the city cannot continue to afford a school system with a dozen or more aging buildings.

“We know the budgets are awful,” Dolliver said. "We know we're losing programs, we're losing staff ... and now we won't have a plan for the future, either.”

The cost of doing nothing, Dolliver said, also would mean the entire city would be doing nothing to advance both education and economic development.

“The city has to work with us on this,” she said. “That's not just on your shoulders. We have to work together on this.”

c.bessette@theday.com