2014-05-27 PPS School Board Study Session

District	Portland Public Schools
Date	2014-05-27
Time	missing
Venue	missing
Meeting Type	study
Directors Present	missing

Documents / Media

Transcripts

Event 1: Board of Education - Study Session - May 27, 2014

00h 00m 00s
excuse me good evening uh this study session of the board of education for May 27th 2014 is called to order and I'd like to extend a warm welcome to everyone present and to our television viewers this meeting is being televised live and will be replayed throughout the next two weeks please check the Board website for replay times this meeting is also being streamed live on our PPS TV services website um director Morton is absent this evening so before we get started I'd just like to take a minute and recognize um our wonderful Chief Financial Officer Neil Sullivan Neil couldn't be with us tonight but I think it's important that we recognize his service he will be retiring this Friday um Neil uh has done a an absolutely fantastic job for the district and I'm not even sure how long he's been here is it three years four yeah um did a wonderful job stepping into this role he has a um so much experience working with school districts in the financial capacity that we were so fortunate to get him um but I I even though he's not here I think we should all give an Applause for Neil and the wonderful work he did for us and I hope he's watching us he's streaming us tonight so um to move on to our agenda for this evening uh first we'll have public comment Miss Houston I know we have people signed up for public comment you want to go ahead and call them and I'll go ahead and read the instructions our first two Greg Burl and Josh Himel great so thank you very much for taking the time to come to the board meeting tonight we deeply value public input and we look forward to hearing your thoughts Reflections and concerns and our responsibility as a board is to actively listen and reflect on the thoughts and opinions ions of others guidelines for public input emphasize respect and consideration when referring to board members staff and other presenters the board will not respond to any comments or questions at this time but the board or staff will follow up on various issues that are raised please make sure that you have left your contact information with Miss Houston pursuant to board policy 1.78 point0 one2 speakers may offer objective criticism of District Operations and programs but the board will not hear complaints concerning individual District Personnel any complaints about specific employees should be directed to the superintendent's office and will not be heard in this forum excuse me so you have a total of three minutes for the first two minutes you'll see a green light appear in front of you for the next minute uh there'll be a yellow light and when um your time is up a red light will go on and a buzzer will sound just in case you're not watching the light and we respectfully ask that you conclude your comments at that time we sincerely appreciate your input and we thank you for your cooperation and thank you again for being here tonight Mr go ahead okay so good to see you all again um now this evening I'm going to be a little careful with my remarks because it's so easy to offend people when the subject is race and racism racism is so pervasive that we can choose to see it or not to see it in every situation involved in those of different ethnicities so I came here tonight to speak as an African-American as a former mlc parent and a self-proclaimed expert on American racism see I'm thinking back to the Senate Judiciary Committee hearings on Clarence Thomas's nomination because there were no African-Americans on that panel there was no one to call into question the competence of the nominee right no one to follow up on the charges leveled by Anita Hill no one does scoff at the high-tech lynching that Justice Thomas alleged I believe that uh justice Thomas record um on the bench um calls into question his competence so today what I wanted to mention is that there are better reasons than racism behind the problems uh that uh the principle of one of our schools is having right I know I'm walking a fine line because I'm not supposed to criticize anybody by name yes you are mlc was founded on a model of collaboration between students parents and faculty and I believe that it makes no difference the per the race of the person who wants to govern the institution with unilateral dire directives from the adminis spere uh mlc
00h 05m 00s
parents I have found are generally uninterested in being told what to do um even if they're being told what to do what they would have decided to do in any event but I don't believe this is the case I am glad that representative Lou Frederick a prominent African-American has also publicly commented on this issue he is a former mlc teacher and parent and he does not think that racism is the driver of the current criticism teachers that I've talked to have told me that there's also a body of evidence to this effect um racism is however at the heart of the problems with the schools that after nine years I'm suddenly unwilling to sub at but I don't think it's the racism of the staff I think it's racism at the district level you remember the first time I spoke to you I said that education is a system of relationships between Educators and students students and in some schools in our city these relationships have been repeatedly damaged Andor destroyed by budget cuts reassignments and so on and so forth and so I guess I'll have to come back uh again in order to talk about what I'm finding um at some of these schools but I think we all have to see that this is a question of reaping what one SWS and we are not going to solve these problems by making teachers afraid to discipline or fail students thank you thank you hi everyone U and thanks for the opportunity to speak my name is Josh Emil my last name is spelled h m l and my oldest child attends luel in elementary and I'll have at least one child in PPS uh for the next 16 years so I have a a long-term interest interest in the safety of our schools I'd like to talk about the current proposal to take 25.7 million out of the summer improvements fund that's the fund that pays for seismic upgrades for a bunch of the schools and specifically I'd like to ask the board to vote no on that proposal um so as you know our region is decades overdue for a catastrophic 9.0 or greater earthquake many of these huge earthquakes have happened here in the past but none within our living memory it will happen again and it'll be nothing like the one that we all probably remember the 5.6 um spring break Quake that jiggled the area for 45 seconds back in 93 um a 9.0 will be several minutes of violent shaking that will collapse buildings and kill thousands of people according to the scientists and government agencies that study this issue it could happen at any time I think the general population isn't yet aware of the severity of that risk uh but as board members and leaders of PPS I expect you already are however you are considering using funds that are currently slated for making safety upgrades to mitigate this risk of injury and death that our students face today and using those funds to instead make three schools larger not safer I'm not against making the three high schools larger I've read the additional criteria behind the request for the funds and they strike me as reasonable education goals achieving them at the expense of the safety of thousands of other children in Old unmodified collapse prone buildings does not seem reasonable the safety of all the students must come before the educational goals of a select group this seems especially clear given that as stated in the May 24th Memo from Jim Owens the goals behind the additional criteria could be achieved through through other means such as boundary changes or reducing Community use spaces please do not build extra classrooms at the expense of safety upgrades the risk is too high thanks for listening thank you very much our next two speakers Edward wolf and Joshua Curtis good evening members of the school board and superintendent Smith my name is Edward wolf tonight I'm speaking to you in my capacities as a board member of our Portland R schools and as a co-founder of the parents initiative Oregon parents for Quake resistance schools listening online to last week's board discussion regarding the
00h 10m 00s
additional criteria for the high high school projects I heard the word heartburn so many times that I started to hope that a staff member had been dispatched to Walgreens to get a get a jar of Tums I admit I felt some heartburn myself shared by opqrs co-founder and PPS parent Amanda gers at the possibility that the fiscal implications of the criteria could put the district's commitment to seismic improvements in Jeopardy in school districts across Oregon as the previous speaker noted the commitment to seismic safety remains tenuous and our understanding of the hazard marches steadily forward the issue is one that can inflame parent and Community fears and cynicism like no other after reflecting on the district's commitment I urge you to support the adoption of the additional criteria here's why last week's discussion and some of the public comment I've seen since then presume a zero sum tradeoff between the high school projects and seismic projects but from a whole program perspective however the three high school projects bring the largest earthquake safety benefits delivered by this Bond the decision to fully modernize Roosevelt Franklin and Grant high schools three of the district's biggest masonry buildings is I believe the boldest step forward in earthquake safety taken by any Oran School District this is not to diminish the importance of the summer Improvement projects among the schools scheduled for summer improvements at least 17 have received no previous seismic safety investment these include the unreinforced masonry schools James John answorth Buckman and creative science making these and other schools many other schools safer is something to celebrate this District began its commitment to seismic improvements with the 1995 Bond using a FEMA recommended approach called incremental seismic Rehabilitation long before other org school districts began to address the risk in any systematic way and the current Bond expands on that commitment Portland's work on earthquake safety is far from complete I expect the theme to be a priority in future bonds but I want to conclude with a matter of additional criteria to modernize the structures of our high schools without also optimizing their capacity to support a robust educational program duly influenced by Community desires and by what staff learn as projects are implemented would be a failure to fulfill the ultimate purpose that Portland voters affirmed at The Ballot Box to support the teaching and the learning that Portland Students deserve so I urge you to support adoption of the criteria for the high school projects remembering that high schools are the Cornerstone and to the full extent possible within the fixed face value of the bond get these high school projects right keep this program on track thank you my name is Joshua Curtis my last name is spelled c r t i s I'm the co-chair of our Portland R schools and I'm speaking tonight in favor of the proposed changes to the criteria for High School Educational specifications opos believes that these changes are necessary to provide students with a full educational program our schools need to be built to accommodate the increasing number of students that will come as Portland's population grows our school should also be built to allow students to enroll in a course during every period of the school day meeting these needs is critical and deserves your support I would especially like to highlight the need to build schools that allow students to take more than 24 credits which is the minimum required for high school graduation many competitive four-year colleges expect students to take more than 24 high school credits if our schools assume that students will only take 24 on average that'll imply that for some students to take more than 24 credits others would have to take less forcing them to pay for summer or night school or to not graduate at all if we want to have a district where 100% of our students graduate from high school we need schools which will accommodate that I would also like to comment on the process that led to these changes being made I think it is entirely appropriate that PPS apply the knowledge it is gaining by redesigning Roosevelt and Franklin to the overall educational specifications for our high schools there's an especially great need for this learning in areas such as Career and Technical education which have suffered from a long absence in many of our high schools PPS should also use the redesign process to think about how to better serve students from groups which PPS has historically underserved how can our high school buildings better serve special education students students whose first language is not English lwi
00h 15m 00s
income and minority students I hope the design process as the design process continues PPS will focus on planning learning environments that will serve these students while we should appreciate the learning that is happening in this design process we should also encourage this learning to be transparent the process of communicating these proposed changes to the public should have been better the bond ADI Bond um advisory no it's not that account ability committee and other community groups should have been provided with a full rationale of changes before they were coming to speak with you last week also some of the changes were very predictable in October of 2011 Grant High School had 1565 students Franklin had 1480 and the district was experienced growth in lower grades which would predictably lead to increases in future for for future High School populations also Oregon has required 24 credits to graduate from high school since at least 2008 I would just like to conclude by saying that when you're more transparent in your process it will be easier to Garner support for changes and for future Bond work and I hope that with that transparency they will be more support for for these changes and that you are convinced that these changes are necessary thank thank you thank you both our last two speakers Sarah Witter and Scott Bailey hi I'm Sarah Witter my last name is wi t t r and I'd like to thank you all for letting me speak this evening um I'm here to ask that you do not approve the additional funding requested by the voter um approved Bond money to be used on the latest proposed High School improvements this money must go toward the seisman improvements specified in the bond that we voted on there were specific schools listed in that Bond and the thought that those schools will not be seismically upgraded is horrifying to us um as all of us know other people who have spoken tonight have mentioned many schools have a very very high chance of collapse in this city um our children happen to go to one of the worst and we are listed in that Bond as as a group that should be covered so I'm not here to spout the statistics that we all know I'm not here to make the argument that we need the upgrades I'm here to ask you to follow through with what the bond promised to do I think the hardest thing is as a parent is that in the event of a major earthquake we would lose our children they would die there is no question about that there is a 100% chance of collapse in many of our school buildings and that's not okay it's just my I watch my children go to school in the mornings and I don't know if they're coming back I'm trying not to be emotional it's hard it's not an exaggeration it's the truth um if you want an example take China in 2008 over 5,000 children's died in their schools in their classrooms while buildings around them survived and it was because they were in substandard buildings for earthquake environments that's what we're faced with right here in Portland and if there is an earthquake our children will die and it's not just our children it's the staff that there it's the teachers it's the administrators it's the parents it's anybody in those buildings so I'm just asking please keep your word do what we voted with this Bond please give the seismic upgrades to the schools that were listed in this Bond if the high schools want additional changes that's great I'm all for it but that should be the work of another bond that was not specified in this one and I'm just going to leave you with one thought that goes over and over in my mind which is that you can teach children in less than than optimal environments we all know that's possible but you cannot teach children that are dead thank you you're a tough act to follow thank you for what you said my name is Scott Bailey I'm here's on behalf of our Portland our schools taking the opposite point of
00h 20m 00s
view um in the last week we've been trying to chase down why the price tag on high schools has increased we know more than we did a week ago in being able to tell that story but we still don't have the full story on that in particular um we don't have the math to show what the need is for the increased classrooms there was a change in what the assumed credit credits were there's 100% uh capacity usage that's assumed we don't understand the rationale we'd like to see the math we hope that you ask to see the math going forward too to understand exactly what it would mean to shave a couple of classrooms here or a couple of classrooms there um our understanding is that whatever the those numbers were the rationale was that this is space that is needed for basic core needs going forward for our high schools and we believe that you shouldn't deviate from that until you have the math until you know what the ra rationale is until you know what you're actually cutting um it's a real tradeoff in terms of these projects but here's here's the thing we don't know exactly what the costs are going to be for this Bond work going forward we don't know what's what's the actual construction tab is going to be we know that we saved a nice chunk of money on the first Bond sale we don't know if that's going to continue going forward I suspect it is that interest rates aren't going to go up any anytime soon if we shrink the high schools now there's no going back if we if you vote now to delay some of those projects there are two alternatives to do that on uh on time actually one is that there's savings through the bond sales going forward that would give us that extra money and two is in a bond that could pass in 2016 that would pick up the work for those schools going forward but if we shrink the the high schools there's no there's no going back on that um and my time's about up so I'll stop there thank you for your attention and for your work thank you very much to both of you for your testimony okay after uh we'll go ahead and move to the next part in our agenda a quarterly update from the office of school modernization um superintendent Smith would you like to introduce this item and I would um sub Jim Owens who's our director of office of school modernization will present the quarterly report um would you received in your packet um and the narrative will actually be different than what you received in your packet be going deep on one aspect of it thank you superent Smith and good evening school board our first topic tonight is the quarterly osm update uh that as Smith mentioned is in your board packets and hopefully you've had an opportunity to peruse it it is similar to the report that osm provides on a monthly basis and what I'd like to do was just highlight a few features on the scorecard so that we can provide some context and I'd like to U complete with a a really great video uh of a student learning opportunity at Franklin High School that was done recently and I think it'll really highlight some of the wonderful things that are going on with our consultant teams and our Builder teams with with our students so in terms of our balance score card um it continues to show that the program is unplanned uh across all four of the perspectives that we have budget schedule stakeholder and Equity however a number of concerns are noted relative to budget schedule and Equity perspectives that I'd like to highlight the additional criteria for the high schools which we'll be discussing further tonight is impacting the Roosevelt and the Franklin projects osm needs a decision on this if we're to move forward into design velopment and further into the projects and stay on schedule and our revised budgets uh certainly to ensure that we complete these two important projects in time to be ready for students in the fall of 2017 budget concerns for the high schools uh relate to both the additional criteria and the work associated with value engineering that both the Franklin and Rosevelt teams have been engaged in for uh Improvement project uh or ip4
00h 25m 00s
our six construction packages came in uh over budget so we're dipping into project level reserves to ensure that we can execute the work this summer uh we may need to be looking at other uh resources to ensure that they're properly funded depending on what we find as we get into construction we are committed to completing all 12 of the schools this summer just as we completed the six last summer in addition to scheduled concerns for Roosevelt and Franklin ip14 is uh also showing concern the yellow cells uh due to a variety of factors our construction uh season if you will this summer is reduced by about 12 days and it necessitated putting in a Six-Day work week with the firms to ensure that the work uh was properly scheduled planned and scheduled uh we also added additional Scopes this summer we have elevators in two of the schools uh we also have six construction packages versus the three that we had last summer we have Awards in place however and we're in the process of uh executing our notice of our notice to proceeds so that we can get the firms mobilized as soon as the students leave the sites and then get on with the work so we still expect to complete that but I highlighted the schedule as a concern because we've got some different Dynamics this Summer that we're working with the equity perspective continues to show concerns uh payment to minority owned women-owned and emerg emerging small business owned firms remain steady at approximately 11% uh we're also rolling out our uh Apprentice trade participation program in conjunction with the city of uh Portland who will be working with our staff in evaluating how firms are doing providing opportunities for uh state registered apprentices we have a pretty ambitious goal there of 20% and so all the firms are committed to uh striving to achieve that but this is the first time that we're actually rolling rolling that out uh we do have good news on the student engagement front which you'll recall in the equity perspective is the third uh the third leg um changing the performance measures changing the performance measures uh on the uh student engagement is something I'm going to highlight uh here in a moment to ensure that we're uh align with how the district is doing relative to the framework for career learning our contractor and Consultants are operating uh in the exploration zone for grades 9 through 12 so in terms of our performance measures uh we are looking in terms of uh changing it to align with tier one which is large group tier two which is small group and tier three which is oneon-one and I'll highlight some of the successes we've seen there so our bond funded consultants and contractors participate in career learning experence experiences in a number of ways uh we have many opportunities for them that they can pursue Jim can we go ahead and ask questions during your presentation is that a is that work for you I was planning to invite questions after completing however if you'd like to ask as we go through okay should we wait all right thank you so up on the slide are a number of the opportunities that firms have to participate and those are continuing to provide opportunities for firms and for students I think as the program picks up momentum and we bring more firms aboard the opportunities for the career counselors and the high schools is increasing and we're getting more exposure to uh to the building level in addition we're uh starting to offer some internships uh for the first time and we're also reaching into uh other opportunities for uh eighth grade students as they look at their high schools they'll be attending in terms of providing career day opportunities oops here we go this is a template that shows the uh cumulative um experience that we're having with um with student engagement and uh this isn't entirely a McDonald's type format where we're showing a number of uh customers served but we wanted to capture uh the amount of students that are impacted by the um numerous opportunities we have for large group and small groups and so as we look at the period between March of 2013 and uh April of 2014 we've actually impacted over uh 7600 students relative to different uh forums
00h 30m 00s
uh we're also trying to showcase the number of firms that are engaged actively with students down on the Lower leftand Side uh the number of presenters that have been speaking to different groups and attending different forums career learning experiences and the total number of hours that the firms are are contributing we're planning to include this information in monthly updates to you as we uh as we showcase information in the balance scorecard this is a depiction of what April looked like relative to uh the previous slide and the number of students that have been impacted our framework for career learning is shown above um we primarily operating in the exploration uh zone for grades 9 through 12 but we're also uh for uh the awareness level I mentioned we have eighth grade eighth graders coming into Franklin this summer who will be having an opportunity to engage here and then the third category the preparation phase this is the these are the active internships that several of our uh consultant and Builders are offering to us students this summer again this highlights the uh the three tiers I mentioned earlier under exploration uh we're very much coordinating closely with Jeanie yurkovich and her team to ensure that this is fully aligned with how the district is managing this overall a little more information in terms of the the groups and the types of activities that are associated with each of the T each of the tiers okay at this point I'd like to uh pause and show a short video that was taken by David mine who's our Capital Communications manager um it showcases a recent example of career learning experience at Franklin High School it's about four minutes long so after it completes um I'll answer any questions on this particular topic before I move into the next one the Portland Public Schools team and its Consultants charged with designing and building the modernized Franklin High School gave Franklin students a unique opportunity to learn about construction related careers you can use an architecture degree to become a developer or contractor the Franklin modernization team includes PPS Project Director Debbie Pearson who spoke about her role as an owner's representative and architect Karina Ruiz who described an architect's career path about an architectural education is it really kind of forms a foundation and then you can really take that however you want Tony vanderberg construction manager from herei International and Tim Bas a general contractor from scansa both described what they do and the educational Pathways that lead to their career the main thing was to kind of like hear uh the people's points of view who are already in the career um and like kind of to know how to get to that point I'm interested in engineering and like civil engineering and so I figured this would be a good opportunity to come and look at this first thing we're going to do is break you guys up into teams the event was more than lectures in a lively Hands-On competition teams of students were given an opportunity to experience what an owner architect contractor and construction manager actually does on a project one more right there they had to design then draw a building it's going to fall if I don't support it purchase Building Materials in this case uncooked spaghetti and marshmallows and then construct the building based on their designs the spaghetti is similar to like a steel bar in say like a gigantic skyscraper just the steel frame well the marshmallows represent sort of the welding of the glue that would hold it together we had a group of people that each one played a a specific role and that really helped us to see like If I Was An Architect I had to design a project then he goes to the construction manager and he decides the cost how many materials do we need so it was really really interesting and all of this comes back from the owner that he says you know I want this design this particular way come on guys just stab everything into it modernization team judged the entries based on concept how closely the visualization drawings match their owner's ideas and how well they held structur it just all pieces together like a puzzle perfectly and all calms down to the building well I just kind of liked my Design coming to life like watching it actually being built was just amazing the winning team celebrated their Victory with a bundle of swag from the Franklin project team I learned that it's um actually quite a process to design something like this and actually build it and designing the drawing and drawing it all out is actually much
00h 35m 00s
harder than I thought uh my favorite part of it was just like probably the building and the teamwork it took to actually design a building and actually see it come to life and put together after the event students were invited to apply for internships with the businesses working on the Franklin Bond project okay that was pretty uh pretty jazzed up uh presentation and we're really excited to uh to be involved with with so many kids and again I think we can look to see more of this as we as we move forward so at this time I like to take any uh any questions that you may have regarding the osm quarterly update Dr B thanks for the report and thank you to our Architects at um Franklin that was a great video and great to see students engaged and begin to really understand that process because it's so abstract um how how exciting for students to begin to realize that heard teamwork I mean it's really that new um new way of working together and how much it takes to get a project complete but back to my question sorry um so I have I I think three questions one is in I'm looking at the um at the balance scorecard there's an indicator in the overall perspective that talks about market conditions and competition on construction work are causing concerns monitoring closely can you talk a little bit about what that is and what you mean by that we're noticing some uh Trends in the market right now that's resulting in reduced competition on our work and we're seeing uh significantly higher uh bid pricing than what what we've seen previously uh comparing this uh spring to last spring has been pretty significant and so much of it um it's hard to attribute to but there's significant increase in construction here in the Portland metropolitan area and I think that's uh that's manifesting in not having as many firms who are pursuing this work uh we are trying to get a better sense of it and we're reaching out to a number of firms to ask there other factors that you're looking at relative to us um we're also um concerned about are there any are there any aspects in our uh solicitations uh in terms of how our statements of work are developed in terms of our bid packages the way we're structuring the work that's uh that's inhibiting it um as a public agency I think um it's important uh certainly it's a important fiduciary responsibility to the uh to the taxpayers to ensure that we maximize competition on work so we'll be watching this very closely as we move forward I wanted to highlight it in the overall perspective just just to bring to your attention thank you and I actually think as Beaverton just passed their bond which congratulations I just think these are the market forces that you begin to see as construction begins to increase you have more people that are able to work on other jobs and so you get less competition um another question I had is you you highlighted I'm looking at the budget perspective um there's two things one thing um I I think I understand which is the Co construction cost current estimate for Roosevelt and Franklin um and I think what we're just saying there is that the um what we're expecting to cost the current estimate is higher than we were expecting right okay which is probably related to the previous question I just asked um the second question on that same page is about the Marshall camp being budget being increased can you talk to me a little bit about that we one of the program uh categories in our bond or a swing site in transportation Improvement category and so in looking at our overall needs in terms of what spring swing sites we need to be making improvements at we primarily are looking at uh Marshall of course for Franklin and then subsequently for Grant then we're looking at another site uh for for Fabian so in looking at the needs at Marshall and looking at the site improvements looking at the tenant improvements that are needed to accommodate the group there we we saw we needed to nudge that up a bit it was previously uh running about 3.4 million so we wanted to give ourselves a little more uh flexibility there don't know that we'll end up at 4 million we also have embedded in their transportation costs and we were pleased to note that the triat uh bus passes have been renewed for another year so part of this budget incorporates Transportation costs that we may or may not have to provide okay great thank you and my last question is this is the part that I just don't understand um looking on the schedule perspective um card um under um improvements for 2014 the prime contract notice to proceed can you just explain to me what what that is and why it gets a yellow so um great questions uh the
00h 40m 00s
Prime contract notice to proceeds is the mechanism that we uh get the contractors started uh so that they can mobilize on site and begin ordering the materials they need to incorporate into the into the sites it's a it's an important Milestone on a project it U it follows the award action I mentioned earlier we have awards for all six of the contracts but the notice to proceed is is an important measure that gets gets all of them started and will allow them to to also mobilize on site just as as kids are leaving and can you help me understand why are we delayed in that or why is that delayed or yellow oh um just we we got um off to a later start uh for uh for the IP uh 14 work we ended up expanding the number of construction bid packages that we expected so we're we're running uh several weeks behind where we would have liked to have been so and it's just a comment that you know it's another another factor that goes into starting a little later than we wanted thank you other questions board members I think Greg asked all mine so yeah to say he definit thank you very much director yeah you definitely asked yes okay um you noted in your presentation that the construction timeline for this summer was reduced by 12 days so I know Labor Day is early and I think we have a couple of U snow days but 12 days seems like a lot why why is it why is it that many just in looking at the school calendar in terms of the snow days you mention and then the earlier start it actually comes out to 12 Days u in terms of the total total impact that doesn't make sense doesn't make sense no um maybe by the way the days fall through the Monday through Friday work days yeah would normally be available I don't know right the in terms of our normal uh 5day a week work schedule SCH by compressing it or accelerating the schedules to uh 6 days a week uh which many of the contractors ended up working last summer anyway but it's just a way to highlight that we have a compressed u a we have a lesser amount of days available to us this summer than we had for last summer it's just it's just a an index of concern when we look at the differences okay and there's no opportunities to get some of the work started on site wel can are still in school at all it's very difficult the type of work I mean we can get the contractors starting to mobilize on site uh that last week but as far as the work it's you know it's very uh uh it's very disruptive to teaching learning activities and we really can't get started in fact we have teacher grading uh the following uh let's say last day of school is the 13th of June and we have teacher grading the following Monday and Tuesday so we want to be careful not to disrupt that that process so it really they'll really get started in Earnest that Wednesday so I um also had a question on um I think it's listed under Equity perspective on your uh thing but Objective C is meet student participation I'm not specifically sure why that's listed under Equity perspective but um you have tier one tier two and tier three and it looks like in tier one and tier two we are relatively hitting hitting it out of the Park the tier three the one-on-one long-term activities or internships um how did we set the green yellow and red targets and is that an area where we might want to have the board weigh in because I guess I look at 25 students participating in internships as a pretty minimal number um with the amount of work that we're doing over the years um so I'm just kind of curious how I mean again I think that in terms of to what we saw here and in terms of some of the larger group activities it's great um but I guess I was looking and hoping that we would be uh seeing more internship opportunities okay great point we um again this is the first time you're seeing this uh this is a change in terms of the performance measures and the performance targets the performance targets were were developed really as an initial stab but um how many students might we expect on remember this is Project by project basis how many would we expect to have on the Franklin project for example over the duration of the project um that differs from how many students we would expect to see engaged on say ip14 which is a single project but um it's much of a much shorter duration and of course we have we actually have more contractors on ip14 than we do on on the Franklin project so it was an attempt to try to to balance uh some measures uh clearly we can do some more work on it and would
00h 45m 00s
welcome input from the board or others on how we might set different Lev levels of expectation but we do have a um a solid number of interns this Summer that uh the firms uh are sponsoring uh and we're looking to see how that's going to work follow so just to clarify that and I really appreciate the way that you've broken us out into um differentiating the activities and being specific about that and then having these metrics so that's that's fantastic um so just so I understand though the the metrics you have in there for numbers of students across each of the tiers and types of activities you're saying those numbers are for each project rather than across the entire bone program corre so this way okay and so are you then is it fair to surmise that on improvements 2013 we had 25 or more students who participated ated in internships if I'm reading these are to be filled in we don't have the we haven't actually filled those in yet we um and it's we need to go back retroactively for this one is only talking about project objectives right we've gotten to the point where we have the yeah but what we to be this is new that we would have these tiers and these and these metrics and goals so it would be from now forward right so in our in our June update I would expect we'll have those cells for uh several of the projects filled in at the different tiers what the green indicates is that uh objectives have been established uh for each of the contracts uh that exceed $100,000 uh recall that the contractual framework for contractors and Consultants participating in this program is a function of what's in their what's in their contracts and it it describes different uh opportunities that they have it describes the requirement to uh register in our system to to get access to our to our kids through the career counselors and so if I'm looking at the Roosevelt High School and I'm looking at tier three the internships um are we would I expect to see 25 internships each year of that construction project this actually measures it's O the overall duration of the contract so in the case of interns U bti architect is of course the the prime architect for that project U their contract extends over four years so over the duration of four years the expectation would be they would have they might offer six internships over that entire over that period of time correct right so I would I would s well not over four years and then we would look at the construction company also offering correct right they also have multi-year contracts in place project management firm many of these firms are also exceeding the uh requirement of the contracts uh Hui International for example is going well beyond what's required in their contract to uh sponsor interns to speak to uh just a whole variety of audiences you saw uh Tony Vandenberg who's our Deputy program manager with Hari who was uh was addressing the group uh Ken Fischer the program manager they they spend uh really significant amount of time with kids question so thank you very much I'm just G to stay here you're just gonna stay this is the uh Jim Owen show tonight okay so uh next on our agenda then thank you very much Jim is um Franklin High School schematic design I I don't think you need another introduction but superintendent Smith yes project manager and um and tonight's meeting the entire meeting is focused on different aspects of the bond and this is um a preview of the Franklin schematic design that we be back to you next week for a hopeful um decision for a decision thank you Ruth so two of two of the Stars you just saw in the video at Franklin High School are seated next to me uh peon is uh osm Project Director for the Franklin project and next to her is Karina Riz who's associate principal with the daa IBI group and both of these ladies are going to walk us through the schematic design work that um that they're completing uh would like to lead off though just briefly uh reminding the board that last December uh staff presented and you approved the master plan for the Franklin site and at the time we had a lot of conversation around the different features of the
00h 50m 00s
educational spaces and the sport spaces and how they fit on the site so a lot of the adjacencies a lot of the framework for the project was was developed back in December uh since that time a lot of work has taken place to look in a more detailed fashion of uh how the site would be developed uh in terms of the the classrooms uh where they sit uh adjacent to other classrooms and basically start to lay the framework for uh connecting our budget our scope and our schedules together and again as a reminder schematic design is the place where staff connects those uh those three important metrics together and so what um we'll be presenting tonight is how that will connect and and then uh as we as we move forward with this project so with that Debbie good evening sorry first I would like to thank the board board for the honor of working for PPS on the Franklin High School modernization project it has been my privilege to guide this project over the last 10 months tonight Karina reiz associate principal of daa IBI group will present the culmination of the schematic design phase this final design represents the input from thousands of voices of the Franklin Community a community that is passionate about honoring the C and celebrating the historic facilities on our site while embracing the challenge to Incorporated design that provides opportunities for 21st C Century Learning for our students our Franklin Community stands United around this design I would also like to take this opportunity to thank skanska construction for their part in arriving at the completion of this phase as our cmgc partner skanska has been instrumental in providing estimates reconciling those estimates with an outside independent estimator and working with both PPS and daa to bring that reconciled estimate of work into alignment with our budget while not eliminating any of the program area identified in the educational specifications every project is bound by three important components Pro program budget and schedule you will see tonight a project that is in scope on budget and on schedule to be completed in September of 2017 I'd like to note that this presentation includes the additional criteria we are however ready to proceed with either the master plan criteria as presented to you in December the additional criteria as presented tonight or something in between should you decide to choose some Middle Point in that venue with that said I'd like to turn the presentation over to Karina Riz we're used to doing the dance uh thank you very much again to um Echo uh Debbie sentiments it's our pleasure to be here um we have been um actively engaged in the Franklin community and have found a really welcome home there between the staff the students the teachers and general Community it's been a pleasure to be out there um working with them every day to bring this project to fruition um and it would I would be remiss in saying and not including Debbie in that thank you she's been a great Steward for us and so um we really appreciate your your stewardship through this um so what I thought I'd do tonight is just kind of walk you through um the process that we've taken to date in terms of our community engagement from beginning to end talk about some of where we stand today relative to the area program and then provide status updates on where the plans are um specifically talking about some of the changes that you will have seen between what we presented at Master planning um and where we are now in schematic design and then start to give you some um renderings of what those uh views start to represent so um without going into a great level of detail I think when Debbie talked about that the fact that this design has been influenced by over a thousand voices I don't I don't think that's an exaggeration we have had numerous meetings both at Franklin and then in the surrounding communities to try and um build an understanding of what Portland Public Schools is trying to achieve at Franklin and what the Franklin Community wants to get um out of that process so we've met with individual focus groups looking at different departmental levels um we've taken um folks from the schools and from the design advisory groups out on tours to go and visit a variety of school sites not only um here in Portland in the metro area but also in Seattle to see the work that they've done to see what we can learn from their examples and then we've had uh again really deep and engaging conversations with students and staff um which um has been quite frankly the Highlight um of
00h 55m 00s
the work that we've done so as as Debbie talked about um the presentation that you see today does have the additional criteria um and essentially what what we Design This around is an assumption um that we'd have an average of 7.6 credits per student per year um and that we would have a reduction in the student teacher ratio and so that's the plan that you see before you today uh at 17700 students with this additional criteria um we have approximately 290,000 square feet of gross square feet at um at Franklin 20 almost 25,000 of that is in the career Pathways um enhanced electives and Career Technical Ed um Franklin as you well know has a a rich history of Career Technical education and so part of our plan is to um continue that um and build areas where that can Thrive at Franklin while introducing um other career Pathways that start to introduce students to um whether it's a biomedical field the culinary arts field the field of law or a variety of business and information Technologies so what you see in front of you is um the current master plan or the current plan for um the Franklin Community or the New Franklin High School the primary feature um for those of you that um are seeing this for the first time is that the field has rotated 180° to allow for the adjacency of a um PE Athletics and Sports Medicine building and classroom building directly to the east of that um one change that you'll see between the master plan in this plan is that the master plan had a separate Sports Medicine facility that was located here and in part of our value engineering with skanska um we identified that it would be much more cost effective to take that same area program and actually add it to this building footprint so that's why you no longer see that building there um what you see in the light gray is all of the existing um historically significant buildings that we are preserving and um rehabilitating and then addition of a student center student Commons um the CTE maker space and then a new Performing Arts venue on the corner of 52nd and um Woodward the other primary driving uh force behind the design um was a strong desire to eliminate the vehicle from the center of the campus and return that to The Pedestrian and the bike so we've moved our primary vehicular um access points to the East and the West um both of these parking lots exist now we're just um improving them and providing uh drop off rather than having that concentrated at the front of the school to again um try and appease and um ameliorate the current conflict that exists between students and um cars along Woodward so I'm going to kind of walk you through each of the levels um and what we've created uh so primarily in the existing Wings what we've done is return those to learning neighborhoods we've taken what were double loaded corridors meaning they had um classrooms on both sides and moved one of the walls um removed one of the walls to allow for us to create um single loaded classrooms that then have Extended Learning areas and small breakout rooms um directly adjacent to them to allow for some of that 21st Century Learning that we were talking about to extend beyond the walls of the classroom while still providing the transparency and adjacency that's necessary for um for supervision um so this is sorry the basement of um the westwing in what is currently the C Cafeteria on the East Wing we are um creating additional um classrooms there as as well as the central receiving and storage um facility for the school then on what is now to be the main level one of the gestures that we did if you recall when we came during master plan we had talked about the idea of creating an Atrium that enclosed um and provided sort of a student Street forward of the historic building and as we started to have um further design conversations with the community and with the state historic preservation office um it really became clear that any addition that we put there was really going to be a little bit insensitive to the historic nature of the building and um for anyone that visits Franklin you know that the minute you walk in the door this is student Street I mean they're hanging it's a tight little space but they are sitting on every possible surface that they can and so what we've done is created a student Street in the right inside the existing in main entry by um eliminating
01h 00m 00s
the the staircase that's here and turning it 90° and then opening this up to two floors to create an active student common space um sort of a a learning Commons we have another learning neighborhood that kind of matches what we have on the lower level with three science classrooms and three general education classrooms that would allow for both an academy model and a departmental learning model um we also have classrooms and um some of our partner spaces our early childhood space and our existing um Community Health Clinic our admin is still sort of right at the front door and then extends Beyond um into the East wing of the main um historic building we are adaptively reusing the existing um Auditorium and converting that to a library um and taking advantage of the volume of the space there to create a really sort of dynamic um multi-dimensional Library and adding to the front of that um a a new student Commons that's the primary um dining facility for the site as well as the the Food Service kitchen um and back of house support for that on The West Wing um and you can't unfortunately see it because it's fairly dark but this is where we have our CTE space so our maker space and our shops and classrooms that support that and then like I said on the corner of Woodward and 52nd our fine and Performing Arts building then on the on the second level um you start to see additional classrooms so in this case um another learning neighborhood we have the two and threedimensional art the other thing that you start to notice is that um here and here where the the new building is coming into direct adjacency with the existing building what we've done is we've really peeled away the floor there to allow for that existing exterior historic wall to become a significant interior wall that starts to um to to bridge that transition between old and new and really starts to um gain significance to um the historic nature of the facility so um without going into a lot of redundancy we have another learning neighborhood here a series of learning neighborhoods in the existing building creating what we're calling a brain um bar here which is kind of if you can imagine a cross between an Apple Genius bar and a project lab um a place for student engagement um outside and inside of direct instruction um similar features on in the library um more partner space and then um uh the second floor of the student Commons so the student dining Commons is actually two levels then moving on to the separate athletic building that's um directly adjacent to the um Fields you'll see that we've um introduced additional classrooms so this is um our our biomedical pathway so we have science classrooms Health classrooms and direct adjacency with the training um facilities for the site so this level um which we call level negative one is actually at the field level the field is about 20 ft lower than the basement of the existing building so that allows us to get this at the main level while still kind of um preserving the height um of the of the new building then what we've done on the main level is where we have our main gym um and concessions and support for that as well as a culinary arts um and classrooms to support that so another small learning neighborhood associated with both health and and culinary arts the auxiliary gym looks directly over the main gym and allows for extended seating um in on the the main floor and then we have another learning neighborhood that occupies half of the what would be the fourth floor as well as space for mechanical so um what I thought I'd do is walk you through a little bit um the renderings that we've created created so obviously our driving force from division was to maintain this historic Vista of the existing building by eliminating this building um that separate building it allowed us to pull that building further away which again started to accentuate um the the historic ends of the building um so here you will see that um the adjacent three and a half story four story building there this is the view from Woodward so you can start to see that um part ly by demolishing all of the um historically non-contributing buildings that were currently crowding the building on Woodward we were able to sort of peel that away and bring um the campus back into the Grandeur that it that it had when it was originally built in 1915 and then building sort of on that same um premise of symmetry ensuring that um the new common wing and the new um CTE Wing had that same level of symmetry um with the addition of the fine Performing Arts um and then really
01h 05m 00s
kind of creating um a more Collegiate campus sort of approach um from the neighborhood this is um the view from if you're standing um approaching the Performing Art Center and looking back towards the CTE so this is the main building you'll see again that they're linked by that glass link that will have both skylights and artificial light to really kind of have that be the beacon um that sort of bridges that old and new um and without getting into to um too much sort of architectural um dialogue but trying to really create a vocabulary of what we call AB CBA so if you can imagine this is a bookend that kind of matches the book end here the entry matches this entry and then the body matches the body so really trying to um take the lines the historical um datums horizontal datums and sort of that vocabulary and ensuring that what we design has um sort of that historic contextualism to it um this is the view from the the main entry Courtyard looking back towards the addition so this is the CTE the fine and Performing Arts and then the existing historic building and then finally the view of the gym building from the field so we're basically 20 ft down here um and this is the walkway that then links you back to the basement level of the existing building and I believe that is it oh I take that back our uh Beacon site so this is um the new fine and Performing Arts that's on the corner of 52nd in Woodward this becomes sort of that reach out to the community um both with sort of a a glass um entry prominade here that will allow for student work to be displayed prominently with a black box and the main um the main theater back here working your way back to the main part of Campus so as you as anyone that's driven past the corner of 52 in Woodward now and kind of knows that you really can't tell there's a school back there when you make that corner that the hope would be that now that that that um is is definitely a different experience and really reaches out and engages the community and I believe that is it like to entertain any very exciting very exciting thank you awesome itely awesome yeah questions from board members nobody director rean um I have a couple different kinds of questions first of all it looks beautiful so nice work um I'm not sure I noticed fields and how many fields we have on the property could you just go through that I know we have the main field is there a is there a separate soccer field baseball field there's an existing baseball field on site and right now Franklin uses Clinton Park for their softball facilities would that continue or we have however made sure to design this in such a way that a softball field could be can you speak into the microphone got to go to the microphone thank you we have this designed we designed this in a way that a softball field could be um installed on the northwest corner of the site opposite the baseball field so baseball would be at home or and softball away or softball at home baseball away so if you wanted to construct that facility you could great and the soccer field um the football field is actually designed as both soccer field and a football field which is fairly typical for high school okay that's what I was curious about um I wanted to ask more a timing question probably than anything else which is um I know when we were originally looking to um pass the bond um I had meetings with the police Bureau at one point talking with them about it it and I've since had some meetings with the fire Bureau at what point do we bring in some of our Public Safety experts to kind of take a look at the design and give us some feedback if they have any concerns about too many windows the height of the windows or whatever it might be that what stage do we do that because it looks beautiful I just want to make sure it's that they believe it's a safe structure for them um so we've already met with uh Portland fire for Portland Police um and we've also met with District's um security and safety officers to look at both access um uh uh observation in terms of both close circuit television and um Pathways of travel um and looked at areas that you know kind of what is that datum line that you want to be solid versus um transparent and so we've started to do that at a very schematic level I think the approach is that as um as sort of layers of the onion as you get into to Greater levels of detail you start to examine those with each of these agencies at a greater level of detail so
01h 10m 00s
right now we're kind of focusing on the site and big gestures and then we'll eventually get into in this classroom we have glass here and we have solid here is that you know the right proportion and in the right location so so we'll specifically bring in both the fire Bureau and our Police Department to look at the designs before we go too far we have already yes we will continue to do so continue okay because I know one of the things that happened after the uh Chapman fire this um at September I think it was um I remember talking to a fire captain who said God it would be so helpful if you would put numbers on each classroom both on the inside of the building and the outside of the building so instead of somebody calling in and saying oh it's Mrs Buckley's classroom which means nothing to them they could say it's classroom 18 or whatever it might be so you know it's those kind of things that I just want to make sure we're working really closely um with both bureaus and it sounds like you are so thank you for that um um I had a question about the Early Childhood Center could you talk about that a little bit more and who that would house how it would be housed what so in the program area the educational specification that you approved it included an early childhood Learning Center of approximately 2100 square feet at Franklin High School they had an educational an early childhood development program previously um and so they're quite excited about bringing that program back we have a partner in the building the school-based health center with maltoma County Health on the east side of our facility and so we thought it was a perfect opportunity to be able to combine access to our public at the front of the um facility along Woodward we have the ability to um uh house parking in terms of 5 minute stay at the wheel or 50 minute drop off Etc so it was the perfect opportunity to be able to provide that for both um a combined CTE pathway for early childhood development as well as a daycare facility for the community which is what they had previously about 3 years ago and would our students have the opportunity to actually have their own kids there if we have any students with children is that correct part of the program correct okay I'm fine a CTE pathway correct the early childhood development is a CTE pathway so um this is fantastic it's so exciting to see this this coming to life and really appreciate all the work that's going on into each step along the way um and I think regardless of and I know we're going to have the conversation about the additional criteria later but whether we go forward with that or with the December approach um it's going to be an amazing fantastic building for our for our kids and our community so thank you so much um having said that while we have the pictures up here would this be a time to ask you to point out where those additional classrooms with the additional criteria would be or where they would not be if we decided against that let do that I uh I figured you might ask that yeah so I came prepared with uh what I'm calling sort of my before and after so um than no problem excuse me so this is um the pre- additional criteria so you can see that the gym building here becomes three stories rather than four stories that's what happens when you add the additional criteria um you can also start to see that um there's a there's a little bit of change in in this area as well but the primary um additional floor would be at the gym which would house um seven additional classrooms so wait I'm sorry were those including some General Ed as well because I thought that was more the the PE related and The Culinary no those are um the health classrooms and the general education classrooms which would be in the additional criteria are on the the lower floor and the third floor so it would be general education classrooms okay so if we reverted back it would be back to the PE plus culinary and some health some biomedical correct biomedical that's cor okay um then here this is before and after so you can again see that even though the massing has changed um what we what we actually did when we went from the pre- additional criteria to the post additional criteria is slid the Performing Art Center further to the corner of 52nd in Woodward that then allowed us to um revise the massing to get this more in keeping with sort of that that lower Mass so the idea is that in the stem CTE Wing we would house the additional five classrooms so that's how we get to the additional 12 okay so I'm sorry which is which I this is this is this is pre okay so and then you'll see the additional criteria on the ones that were designed with the additional criteria in mind um so this is what it would look like after we add the full addition additional criteria so again it's putting some general it or whatever
01h 15m 00s
the classrooms within the CTE area FL of the CTE making that area that that that chunk of the building larger correct to use the technical term yeah do do you have the floor plan differences or is it just that drawings just curious no that's okay n not I can get them on my laptop over there but I don't currently have them I I get the idea but it's the same this the square footage I mean there's been lot of discussion around the square footage of the classroom as well as the support spaces and the meeting spaces for for teachers and and so forth so the approach that that we took to the additional criteria is that though there um it's a general education classroom um but that they would come in learning neighborhoods similar to what we already have in the building so they bring with them their additional support of Extended Learning areas teacher support areas um small instructional areas um and teacher offices so all of okay but size of the classrooms well they all still remain at the 900 square feet okay thank you very much follow we were to want to go back if we if we decided not to do those classrooms now we wanted to go back especially in that first area and add them at some point is that a possibility to the top of the gymy um you certainly could add them at any time in the future the U challenge is that you spend a lot of money in Sun cost upfront to build the foundations and the structure to support that at some point in the future so the majority of the cost you're not saving the majority of the cost because you're spending it in all that infrastructure to support some future buildout so that tells me we would not be able to go back unless we were willing to syn those costs now correct you you have to upssize the structure to take that in the future correct that's what I was asking right but I but I think you're also asking if like at Roosevelt could you show that as a future addition we are doing that already with the 150 to 1500 I was curious if we had the same option here so it' be similar here but as was explained you'd have to you'd have to uh incur more cost to do the design for the structure and the foundation to support the added load so while it would be shown for future there would be considerably more cost incurred to get get us to the point where we could even show that as a future add-on so the primary difference between the Franklin um phasing if you will and and and Roosevelt is that at Frank at Roosevelt the additional uh future phases would be in a separate building whereas what we're talking about here is rather than growing horizontally we'd grow vertically which means we have to increase our foundation to allow for that support in the future and there would would there be any option on the Franklin Campus of adding a different building to accommodate more classrooms in the future similar to what we're looking at at Franklin at rooseville we land uh it's a pretty dense site um and we also have some pretty soft soils so um the locations that we could possibly put buildings on it really doesn't make sense to do that so I think our our teams approach is that know there isn't really another place on site to add those in the future okay just follow it I get I get the sunk cost for the added capacity on top but it' still be a cost savings too so can you estimate what it would be I cannot cannot no back in the envelope Jim don't really we wouldn't yeah wouldn't want to venture a guest right now we could easily come up with that share that later we'd engage our contractor we could do it quickly but I'm really hesitant to even take a step at yeah and then I guess I I have a question for um superintendent uh yeser last meeting uh Bobby asked uh you so we're clearly in uh a tight space here and um so the the mus haves versus nice to have and I'm wondering about a preschool in our high school is that a must have that was one of the things that we had in our educational specifications so for all of our campuses so it's one of the things we defined as a feature of our high schools no I I I understand that now we're in a situation where we have to look at cutting similarly so yes and you're going to end up in a in more of a trade-off coners conversation in a moment but like all of the things that are in there right now are part of what we had in our Ed Ed specs yeah yeah and so um what's the so we approved of the board but what is the rationale of a preschool in our high schools so you the what what you just heard described it's
01h 20m 00s
CTE that's the driver it's it's CTE it's a um service in the community and it's a a service to our students who have children to keep them in high school y all three and that would that space be rented out we had received Inc income from it I can tell you from the Franklin Model it wasn't rented out but it was a um money-making Venture in that from a CTE perspective what it provided for the students at Franklin High School was not not only learning about early childhood development but also business marketing business management and marketing and so they actually marketed that daycare facility and had income coming in as a result of the daycare in addition to the CTE Pathways and they had a positive cash flow every year in their daycare facility which they were quite proud of so in other words it was operated by us and not by an outside vend correct correct but it would have brought in income correct yeah it's actually the space is is is part of our wraparound services and in our edpc we had 4700 Square ft so this is a little less than half of it but it's in that category and it's in a tier that we've said is something we want to include in all of our comprehensives so the way it's currently configured both roselt and Franklin are addressing this in a similar way okay interesting great other questions uh Steve why don't we move the preschool over to Atkinson it's right there on the the same site and they already have rooms and then we could use those two rooms for classrooms and save money building other classrooms we certainly could explore other opportun that would make sense to me the way it was what we're trying to do is align with our approved Ed speec which makes this a programmatic element in this project however could we look at it uh you certainly certainly could explore other other opportunities for it what happened up along We Gots up along here right now classrooms on both sides of that right now it's a double loaded Corridor in the existing building there are classrooms on both sides of a central hallway correct on that on that side there's existing classrooms so this is the existing building here this is all new same thing here okay um this is the existing Auditorium but in the exist classroom Wing what you have is a corridor that goes down the center of the site and then narrow small classrooms on either side of that that are anywhere from 450 so about half the size of what you're currently programming to to about 600 so what now that's what they have that's about that's what they have now they use those classrooms yep they currently use those classrooms yes why didn't we just build onto those classrooms and save money um part of the concern with um adding doubling the square footage within the existing footprint is you start to create bowling alleys that aren't really conducive to um sort of the 21st Century Learning model because um if you're bound by the two walls of the corridor you can only go longer which means you'd actually end up with half the amount of classrooms um if you still went to that 900t model can't you expand those classrooms out that way we're working within the existing fac we can't expand it this way because we'd grow outside of the existing building right I don't know you're the architect no yes well I'm telling you we cannot gr we cannot go right now the historic envelope you've got classrooms there but you can't use them is that what you're saying any longer but they're using them now if in order for them to to um align with the Ed speec which is double the amount of square footage we couldn't use the the same space to do that but that was because of the Ed specs not because you couldn't use the same space we could change the Ed specs and you could use that same space as classrooms and save money and you just all you would lose is the supposed 21st century area there um I think you would lose um both the the 21st century and also the fact that they're currently overcrowded in their existing spaces the really tight spaces so how many people would can you take in that isn't the 21st century uh uh basically tied to those classrooms I'm not sure I understand your question well the whole point of the 21st century is because you can have small areas outside of those classrooms right um It's a combination of increasing the square footage offerings within the classroom to provide for more flexible learning both within the traditional classroom walls and then providing for extended um small group and individual group work individual
01h 25m 00s
work outside of the classroom in the Extended Learning spaces it's the tandem of the two that is the 21st century so if you kept those classrooms you you could actually use those for smaller classrooms right in other words you could take care of a lot more students than you can in what's designed there yeah we actually went and did a Model where we looked at um preserving the existing classroom and still trying to get the additional square footage and we weren't able to um optimize that to provide additional classrooms it still ended up being um because of the requirements of the existing building about the same if you still try to achieve the um edpc requirement for size if you say we're just going to build back what they have now um then obviously you could have more of those because they're smaller right with less expense yes and were there classrooms that are being taken out on the other side too you would no that's that's a existing I mean is there any place else that there's classrooms being demolished there's reconfiguration of space upstairs um it's still a bit of a double loaded Corridor here um and then that's those are primarily the spaces that have classrooms um the cafeteria and Auditorium in the East Wing are being repurposed for additional classroom space and and Library space what's in the back corner on on this side here uh on the other side come across right in now move your light just to the right down and to the up here what's right here um so at some point your your property ends here because your property kind of comes around like this and so there is an existing single story building that kind of is kind of a really sort of a morphous shape that does this and then there's an existing shop building that's here but really this is just drive and and your property ends about right here so if you have those two classrooms that are sitting right there which two the two that are right next to that area the top two right there these theuh down below the red ones on the left there's four of them yes those are classrooms on the second floor however those on the second yes um the shops that is your um so let me go back to your site that is your parking lot directly adjacent to the building so you'll see there's no place to build everything that's in the light gray here would be sidewalk so there's no place to build that while still providing access to the site um for parking and and uh vehicular access and Miss Pearson said we were on budget but that was prior to the 12 classroom we we actually are on budget um whether you decide to go back to the master plan whether you decide to do the full additional criteria based on the options that afforded you for um funding that or whether you decide to go to some Middle Ground we have all three options designed and um estimated along with scansa construction and the independent estimator with daa and reconcile so we're prepared to move in any direction you choose to go but you're only on Budget prior to the 12 classrooms adding the 12 classrooms based on the master plan I'm asking what I'm asking Greg I'm asking what I'm asking and I think they do itate well go ahead but I don't know I don't think I need it I think they understand what I'm saying I'm on we're on budget without 12 classrooms are we on budget with the 12 classrooms answer is no we're over budget and I'd like to know how much money that takes out of say the uh how much money that takes out of the uh go ahead thank you how much money does that take out of the uh seismic stuff those 12 classrooms take exactly how much money out of the seismic that wouldn't go into seismic they would P back I can appreciate your question and um I I just like to note that there's another agenda item at the end of this that talks about the additional criteria and we're fully prepared to talk to you about all of those options and all of the costs at that time under that agenda
01h 30m 00s
item as opposed to I can hold my question to then that's no problem sure perfect thank you thank you Bobby you go back to the picture that showed the I think you called it an Apple Genius Bar the brain bar was that in was that in the original edpc and was every school have something like that could you explain to me what that area is I'd love to explain that to you um as when the educational specification was provided there was information in terms of what was in the program to be provided at every school and there was some leeway within that program for each of the schools to be able to determine what was important to their community so in Franklin High School um the CTE career Pathways and technology related um uh uh programs were important to their community so we took square footage a little bit here a little bit there a little bit here a little bit there and combined that in a way that provided for this brain bar the brain bar is envisioned to be an adjunct if you will to the media center um where the media center has um a computer classroom in it and it provides opportunities for Project based learning the brain bar provides a multitude of technology related learning from uh individual sitting on toone with a computer to longdistance learning small learning environment with six to eight kids in a longdistance learning say with a college across um United States um to this Genius Bar type atmosphere where they would be able to have a technology uh person staff member in this brain bar who could help kids on a number of different levels whether it's talking about applications that they can get on their iPads to um different ways to um marry their curriculum with different applications so at Franklin they said this is something that's important we want to try to find a way to have this type of learning environment technology embedded in our facility how many square feet is that pardon me how many square feet it's about 1,800 two classrooms so I guess I would say that we're also hearing that what's important to the community is adding additional classroom space and and if this wasn't something that was specifically in the master plan I think it's an area that we should potentially look at as two additional classrooms um so I I mean I understand that it's important to the community but I'm also understanding that additional classroom space is important to the community so I guess I would offer that this could potentially be an area that we could or should look at I actually I actually like the idea I think it's very love the modern I totally and provides for project learning I think it's a fabulous idea and hoay for the neighbor for the community the other thing that I would like to note just for conversation is that this program that you see before you matches the edpc so while the edpe says that we should have 33 General Le classrooms in our standard facility we have 33 General Le classrooms and the Brain bar so we've done the work at Franklin to maintain the program well providing other opportunities I on to that yeah I just I really appreciate I mean that's a flexible learning space again that can be used for all types of different um learning experiences and so I mean again this this is a fabulous um plan whether or not we do the additional criteria either way it's going to be an outstanding facility it reflects the Ed specs um the input from us from the community and um at this point we need to move forward we need to say this is it and start building moving toward building because we're up against the schedule so um we could have individual tweaks we would want to continue to make for any number of aspects of this and I respect that and understand that totally but um we need to approve one way or the other um and we'll have that full discussion in a little bit and then move forward because you need this schematic design approved next week so I'm just putting that as the as the marker for what we need to what we need to accomplish here right Steve if the edpc said 33 General Ed classrooms then how many other learning spaces are there in the building on top of those 33 General Ed classrooms which would have if you took an average of even 30 kids per classroom so you got what you got a couple places in the JY there there are I mean how do we get kind of curious about sorry to interrupt you how we got in this hole that we're in where we have to go look
01h 35m 00s
and say we got to add 12 more classrooms to the Ed specs how did we get there um the the additional classroom criteria was based on opportunities for kids so when we look at um what's in your board packet that talks about the additional criteria it's about op and offering not the six credits per student but something greater like 7.6 credits per unit and at the same time trying to reduce the student to teacher ratio that's what creates more staff in the building is to provide those opportunities for students so we just didn't understand that when we first started putting this building together is that is that how we did it when you passed the bond there were some parametric um estimates or or assumptions made so um part of the original edpc as you know says 30 um square feet per student and 9 00 foot classroom that means 30 students in each classroom when you start talking about opportunities for kids and reducing the student teacher ratio you start to drop that number below that and I think as we commented early on it's about those thousands of voices that have had an opportunity to speak since the bond passed I think both the board and the administrators and osm everybody understands through all of those voices that there are greater opportunities that we're trying to find for our kid kids and that's what the additional criteria is about if you went back to my original question which was 33 General EDG classrooms how many other learning spaces were there in the within the building at the time let's say you have second period where you pretty much filled up because you have some kids who don't come first but second period you have 3 you have enough room for 990 kids in your General Ed and we were building for how many kids 7 the 1700 so 1700 so we need room for 700 more kids someplace so so the original criteria Enis the 1700 criteria envisioned 333 General Ed classrooms and another uh 14 classrooms that were associated with the gymnasium there were four in the gymnasium six or three in the CTE six in the Performing Arts Center Ence and 11 in the science classroom so we have a total of 4711 58 teaching stations um total 33 of which were the general Leed classroom that's 17740 kids if it's 30 a piece correct it's Al also worth pointing out that the bond was framed based on a 1500 student capacity for Franklin and so during for master plan that you approved went up to 1,700 so that was the first scope change this additional criteria represents a connected scope change based on how they' describ thank you very much and uh so first of all this is fantastic uh sitting here as a student I can say the only thing that matches my excitement I think is my Envy so uh it's really fantastic so thank you for your work I had a couple questions and one was with the Learning Center design was that at all coordinated with the advanced Scholars Program at Franklin the early TR learning is that we talking about the Learning Center the uh general area there yeah the Genius Bar yeah there we go yes that was okay it was all right great fantastic uh and also when I was looking at the design at the outside it seemed like there were a lot of entrances and exits that's all been cleared by our safety professionals okay so one of the conversations we had actually with both um fire and the district um safety administrator or the district safety folks is while there are there's an entrance here there's an entrance here there's an entrance here and there are a couple of entrances here um those would be locked down um after school started in which case all of these doors would basically have no access to them from the exterior with the exception of the main entry okay all right great um and also I was looking at the the floor plan I was curious if there was a reasoning to not have any the wraparound Services area near the counseling uh area and student Commons was there a reason for that I think as as Debbie talked about earlier the primary um goal was to try and get that um so we wanted to kind of concentrate student services here the idea was that this building um could kind of function um for their sun and stepup programs or um alter so they there are some community service providers that are in this part of the building um but really the Community Health Clinic exists here and was fairly recently modernized so we don't actually anticipate making any changes um to that scope of work because it was done maybe three or four years ago um and is in really good shape and so so the idea was to kind of create um a similar bookend to that here and allow for that immediate access to parking here that
01h 40m 00s
would allow them to to basically not have to get into um the heart of the campus but really kind of keep uh the community in those spaces that are directly adjacent to them great thank you com okay no yes yes yes okay go ahead I've had the opportunity to get to sit on the design advisor group for this um this project and um I just want to say again congratulations um both to the community and to the professionals that are working on this um there have been hours spent on moving this from there to here and what if we do this and lots of different filters um that people bring to it um and The Architects and Debbie have been fantastic really spending hours with teachers spending hours I think of um Steve Matthews and Shay James like just hours and hours of crawling walking over checking running run schedules checking this um so one I just want to thank you all and and them for that and I really appreciate that um and we get to talk about this a little bit later about coming up with three three different options that we have ahead of us um so that we can actually begin to try to figure out which pieces um while we try to also still figure out how we find um ourselves on time on budget um and I appreciate again the the a little bit what director bule's trying to say is how could we build additional CL classrooms at least what I hear him saying how can we build additional classrooms and still be on budget what what you're saying is that if we approve a different budget um the design will meet that budget um so to his point that we wouldn't be on the original budget otherwise this would be we wouldn't be having much of a discussion um so thank you um and thank you Jim and CJ I know she's not here with us tonight um because these are very complex issues um and to be able to have an answer from everything from fire and police to why we decided to um Place The Early Childhood where it is um to why we can't push out I I was waiting for actually somebody to suggest that we um use eminent domain on a couple of houses over there to to see if we couldn't add a couple classrooms which I'm glad that we didn't have to have to suggest we had a meeting with them last Thursday so I I also appreciate that um and recognizing that there are some creative things so for example I don't remember if it's tager up there um bringing bringing folks on which will be a a a traffic flow change for the neighborhood so reaching out and being proactive with them to try to figure figure ways that we can mitigate it um it's just it's a really exciting project and everybody I see I think matches um Andrew's comments about how really exciting is I'm getting emails actually from across the country people who graduated from PPS and are really excited about this project so thank you great appreciate the comment on behalf of all of osm and our extended team others well thank you um to all of you and um thank you also to the m members of the Franklin Community who uh helped you all put all this together the members of that dag in addition to director bile so really appreciate you being here tonight lots of work so thank you Steve Matthews who has attended every meeting we have had all right okay thanks so much thank you okay we're going to move on to I thought it was bond market adjustment going to do that and actually we're kind of TF the next three things okay and then the additional High School actually ask Kar if you'll just stay stay tuned like stay nearby because we may need to pull you back up during this next conversation and Jim stay put but I'm actually going to ask Tom Peterson who's a member of um the bond accountability committee to come on up so at at May 19th meeting we we began the discussion or the board started the discussion about the additional criteria that we've have been discussed here tonight where we were looking at uh proposing to add those to the educational amending the educational specifications for all of the high schools based on this additional criteria we started that discussion we heard from the bond accountability committee they had not yet been fully briefed on the details of both the additional criteria and also um the bond market adjustment um we then met uh in briefings for several members a number of members of the bond accountability meet um committee on Friday numbers of board members got to sit in on that briefing um and got some clarity and both separating out the issues that had to do with the educational specifications and the ones that had to do with um bond market adjustments so I wanted to let Tom share some of his Reflections then um from that that briefing then we'll go through and do in detail what what's included in the bond market adjustment alignment conversation and then separately um the additional criteria consideration that we've been talking about here so three different features to really increase
01h 45m 00s
understanding of what those three things are so first Tom thank you for being here with us tonight yeah thanks um um actually um I'm here on behalf of Kevin because he's on vacation I think he's on a cruise or something so um but in any case uh I want to also thank the staff for uh taking the time to fit Us in uh and get that briefing in we kind of stirred the pot up a little bit last week um but uh we we honestly didn't really understand um how this was going to work and um now that we've had that opportunity I think we have a better understanding of of how this works um I think you may have all received a memo from Kevin so I'm not going to read all that uh to you uh we we only four of us were able to briefed we weren't able to kind of um you know deliberate on anything so so what you're hearing tonight are are my comments uh and Kevin's comments on Pardon Me I'm sorry I think there's another member of your committee back there you want to join me I didn't see he was here it's okay you didn't say you were coming where where's where's the hot SE get him in there so I'll let you add your two sets uh so qu just well thanks for coming go ahead and introduce go ahead and introduce yourself for the yes I'm Louis fonso I'm a member of the bond accountability committee thank you okay and you were briefed no I was briefed okay so we both have been briefed uh in any case I think uh from at least from Kevin and my perspective I think we understand it and I and where we had some questions and concerns relating to the costs um I think we're satisfied that the staff and the team did a is a very good effort at trying to really control the cost to do a fairly extensive ve session uh to get the numbers down uh to an acceptable level and when you adjust the uh numbers for inflation they're pretty close to the cost uh per square foot for the current scope which includes the added criteria so I don't think we have a situation where we've got a you know cost over significant cost overrun um what we have is a situation where that we have more scope and it's going to cost more and you know now we need to you need to figure out how you're going to to fund that um you know there's still adequate contingency uh we're satisfied with that I think some of the concerns about the escalation how we using the escalation were answered and and and that seems appropriate so the so um I think it's fair to say that the the difference that you've heard earlier is really going to have to come from the other IP projects um that you're going to have to decide whether or not you delete those or not um and that's certainly your call um so with that um we're satisfied at least for Franklin we're assuming that the rose ofelt um and and based on the methodology for grant that those are probably reasonable assumptions so that the budget increase at this time is pretty reasonable um for what's been added uh to the scope um I would also like to do a kind of a shout out for the staff they've done a great job um Jim and and Debbie and the team have done a great job and um just unfortunate we had had a chance to get briefed uh last week so that's all I have to add Le yes and I I concur that from a design and construction um and budgetary point of view uh I agree with uh with everything that's been said um and so it really does come down to whether the added scope is is going to be done and these are my comments and my comments Alone um I believe that adding the scope changes what was promised to the voters and it's my duty to say that we need to stay with what was promised go to bond two then add the scope for these classrooms for these for these buildings it can be done it will be expensive the design may change um but I I think that if we change the scope now and we don't do the IP program that there may not be a bond number two because there's a this is Portland we need to trust our officials our boards our city governments our our our governmental officials and if we if that's lost then when's the next time that that can be gained back and when's the next time that we will get another Bond passed it's hard enough getting this one passed so you've got a tough
01h 50m 00s
decision if I could add two more things um I forgot to mention and it's kind of gets to Lewis's Point um you really need to get a decision made quickly uh because you are jeopardizing the ability to deliver the high schools now uh schedule so you are in a tough spot so I would en encourage you to uh make the call as hard as it's going to be so the project teams continue on uh down the path so thank you questions from questions from board members none great yeah I uh Tom yeah so um was just to to engage a little bit uh so it seems like from my point of view uh the bond was designed we made a mistake and we designed these high schools for a minimum credits to graduate as opposed to allowing uh students to go beyond that and so in your view um is it is it not right to say to to fix that mistake what are all the alternatives to fix the mistake what happens if you extend the class A Day by an hour on either way can you get in more classrooms more classes that way um are there other Alternatives in just structural Alternatives building you know is there different programming models that can be used so that we can get in all the number of classes that need to be done and so I right so making sure that we look at all those can you change the boundaries M so you have pure children pure students in the school MH okay Bobby I just want to express how grateful I am that you raised the questions that you raised last week and that's why we have a b Bond accountability committee and you all are experts and uh I really appreciate that you helped us pause um and to really have a much more intentional discussion about the scope so um I'm very grateful to you welcome you great thank you both you Tom Lewis really appreciate your help and to Kevin also wherever he may be cruising appreciate he's on his way to Alaska okay thank you thank you okay so part of what um the conversation on Friday during the brief both last at the last board meeting and the conversation during the briefing um the board then requested m multiple scen potential scenarios of how we could could um either not address the additional criteria address the additional criteria fully um what the trade-offs are in each of those so what are other non Capital kinds of solutions um and we and the request was to find two midpoint solutions that would allow us to potentially do some of the additional criteria um and fulfill the number of schools in particular the maximum number of schools in the uh summer project work prioritizing seismic which is the place that we've really heard significant concern so um what Jim will walk you through first actually will be um looking at the bond market adjustment alignment and then secondly we'll walk through what your potential scenarios are for considering um the additional criteria and the relationship to the IP work so Jim great so continuing on to the next two topics that are in sequence as the superintendent mentioned um this one is a is a short uh update that relates to the comments from Tom Peterson and Lis funno relative to the bond accountability committee and I also would like to applaud their effort and understanding this fairly complex issue and working with us to have a sense of the puts and takes if you will that are resulting from from this discussion so very much appreciate their uh their comments uh tonight so in your board packets um you have a a short one-page memo uh it's an informational report that describes how staff interprets use of a bond funding component uh that uh was entitled escalation and escalation you may recall is really a Consortium of Market factors that are occurring uh inflation factors impacts from uh labor wage changes bully changes just a whole series series of items that we anticipated over the duration of 8-year program that we would need to tap into so when the project budgets were
01h 55m 00s
developed the escalation and it began as a $45 million line item uh when the voters approved the bond so staff has been allocating escalation based on uh inflation factors that we know about um what the memo uh attempts to convey is what we and I believe the bond accountability committee are in agreement on is the use of uh the escalation dollars to apply to the high schools for the uh we're calling it The schematic design um Market adjustment for the work that the project teams did in implementing the approved master plan so with your approval at schematic of use of uh Bond program Reserve or board Reserve if you will that was the scope change the market adjustment represents use of the escalation category to support the project so when we characterize Franklin and Roosevelt and the other projects it's important to recognize that from the onset we expected that escalation would be applied to the projects over the duration of their of their life cycles um we did uh establish a protocol that once we determined what the construction schedule was we projected to Mid midpoint of construction and then we allocated accordingly um this is an opportunity for Franklin based on the work that the team has done there to uh to look at what the allocation uh should be um so the memo um really summarizes that and it describes not only how we would view this for Franklin but also how it's been used to support the Improvement projects the uh we applied it for 2013 2014 the 2015 IP uh also for the fabbian project L we not forget that escalation is also being used on that so before we go into the next topic on the additional criteria we' like to invite any questions on use of escalation that you may have are you still looking at 18 million was that across all the three high schools for use of escalation um it's actually um it's a little higher than that but my notes for each one 36 Al together and 18 was so uh right about 20 million pardon right about 20 million for escalation for all three other questions for all three correct and it's a good point uh that Grant is being captured in this uh protocol as well because Grant's several years out but we wanted to ensure that the resources uh are being allocated correctly to Grant as well as the other projects and again just to clarify escalation refers to the increase in the cost of the materials and it's not it's separate from the issue of whether we would increase our scope corre and so forth it's what it costs in order to build the buildings the the scope changes and as we go into the additional criteria I'll characterize that differently as relating to scope just as I did when we went from the 1500 student capacity to the 1700 that and there's additional money in terms of the contingency I mean it was just really helpful to hear the the experts on the bond accountability committee kind of quiz you about all the different pieces that they're so familiar with and you are as professionals that there's all these different um um contingencies built in and they all have separate technical names but there's different just the the checks and balances and the the conservative way that you've approached this regardless of whether we do the December approach or the additional criteria so really appreciate that great thank you Tom thank you uh so I just had a quick clarification because that the the four things that you talked about seem redundant to me and but they're probably not so um one is labor market uh bowly changes um and then cost per square foot of construction increases right uh and then increased cost of construction materials so isn't that built in the cost of of the square foot um and then alignment cost of work with PPS construction design guidelines I don't know what that stands for so it could you just explain how these are distinct okay and what they are great great question direct kler and I would say that there is a certain amount of overlap across these but our wage scale as a public agency is we pay prevailing wage rate and that changes as we move forward in time and we call them the Bly rates and so we have to take Bly rates
02h 00m 00s
as they change into account as we look at what the uh what the costs are the project team specifically the work that U that the daa and scansa and their independent estimator they take that into account um it does manifest into the cost per square foot however as you mentioned so uh the cost for increased labor is part of the increase to the uh I think $236 a square foot for our building hard cost um material costs are also ined of that but um often times um there's a certain expectation of of the cost of Steel and concrete and Fuel and how that changes so again the project team takes that into account as they uh as they move forward uh the last item you mentioned are the district's construction design guidelines and that's that's the uh the criteria that the district trick uses with design professionals to describe what it is that's important to us in terms of different Building Systems like U heating ventilating air conditioning systems there's a separate division in our guid specs that relates to what type of system we have it connects to our lead criteria that we established it connects to the Quality requirements that that we try to establish and then the design team takes that into account um often times um as a result just as they take take into account our edpc our design guidelines also will reflect a cost impact that is part of this Market adjustment as well and so we believe that that's consistent with the use of escalation and so this Market adjustment that you're that you're making is is the out I mean you're estimating it out until the end of the program till all these high schools are built is that correct actually we estimate um to the midpoint of construction so the construction period for Franklin is approximately 26 months I think and so with construction starting in June of 2015 uh basically June of 2016 is what we projected to be the midpoint and so the allocation or the uh the escalation the escalated amount the market adjustment was calculated by the project team through that period uh and so then how do you do that with Grant that won't even be in uh in construction by then grant grant was a was a little more difficult but we identified an amount you know based on what we uh are expecting to see at this point in time for what uh what factors will occur um I would say uh uh very candidly uh because grants out two years they're likely will be more unknowns for Grant I think it's important to recognize that one of the program continues categories the program Reserve board Reserve if you will uh we still are not recommending taking more than the half that's already been allocated the 10 million so that 10 million I guess in my experience would be something we would need to to keep uh in place to to support any changes in in Grant that went above and beyond what we were assuming now okay thank you can I ask a follow up since you brought up the $10 million that we already apped um I had meant to ask you this earlier this is under your staff recommendation for Franklin High School full modernization under budget and resource implications you talked about that $10 million and then so you said the board approved resolution number 4840 which allocated approximately $10 million from Bond program Reserve to support all three high school projects and then you say staff is requesting that approximately 5 million or half of that be allocated specifically to the Franklin project so I was surprised that we would have half of it that obviously doesn't leave equivalent amounts for Grant and Roosevelt can you just walk me through that real quick I know this is a little bit off subject but okay the um the resolution that identified the the 10 million was correctly as you stated to be applied to all three of the comprehensive high schools in the bond uh the reason it's a it's a different amount for the three is it has have to go back to the the way the bond was structured uh Franklin in the bond started out as at a certain size we used in our parametric or our conceptual estimates we we used the larger of um a student Factor times capacity to come up with the size Franklin started out as a 240,000 squ foot uh full modernization project that's actually larger than the existing size of Franklin right now uh the one at the other end was uh Grant High School which went with a larger amount of of square footage so the need
02h 05m 00s
to uh adjust with the program Reserve to bring Grant down to the same size as Franklin resulted in it having a negative allocation so between Franklin and and Roosevelt we saw a a net ad in terms of that but we saw in that deduct or a deduct for Grant High School okay I had noticed that also I was going to ask about that so that's helpful okay it's it's an attempt to uh to to level you we we talk in terms of facility parody but connecting the three high schools to our edpc program is what that was an effort to accomplish and we actually walked through that with the bond accountability committee sometime back so explain on that any other questions Steve did you you say that Franklin is smaller now Frankl under the ad specs it smaller than is now where where it began in the bond when it was a 1500 student capacity when it went to the 1700 size it it increased and with the additional criteria it increased again so currently with the full additional criteria it's about 20% larger than what than what it was originally just understood what you said thank you okay thank you so you ready to yep so now we'll move on to talk about the additional criteria and the various options and what they mean in terms of tradeoffs so Jim okay so this is our uh I think this is our last topic tonight and it pertains to the uh item that we've been discussing at several points tonight on the uh additional High School criteria uh this actually uh began back in on June or May 12th when uh CJ Sylvester uh made a presentation on it we subsequently discussed it last Monday uh the 19th and uh the way it was described and again you have a memo in your packets that uh summarize the additional criteria in an informational uh report format um the criteria and I don't know how deep a dive need to take into it but how we establish the additional criteria is is really driven based on U uh student driven values wanting to provide students uh greater opportunity for more credits uh really to go to the 30.4 uh credits for graduation standard and we're on a trajectory uh to get to that um we also are supplementing uh through this additional criteria the use of our classrooms our gened classrooms uh which is 100% and being able to configure in such a way that we could make that more palatable to the teachers um we're also trying to uh reduce the student to teacher ratios which again is another student driven value aspect so with those um with those those particular characteristics of the additional uh criteria we applied that to uh to Franklin and we've also applied it to Roosevelt which will be talking about as well and we identified several different options that um we might look at what this slide projects is uh starting to bring into the discussion the uh the use of the U Improvement projects which uh in the bond measure talked about up to 63 schools and what's important to recognize here is uh the way the bond was structured we were looking at um Roofing uh seismic uh Ada which included elevators uh middle-grade science classroom improvements doing that over the 8-year time frame and it was a staff construct to bundle those into consecutive summer program s hence the IP program so part of the exchange in terms of funding the additional criteria has to include a conversation around the IP work so in terms of options that we wanted to review U with you tonight we've identified three and the first option uh that you have here uh we would refer to as the no Change option and by no change no change from the the master plan that was approved for both Franklin and Roosevelt back in December of 2013 and some of the characteristics um of that if you will or pros and cons which is actually how the memo is formatted that you have uh I'll try to simplify it here perhaps but um identifying that um with the additional criteria around the 30.4 credits and the number of classrooms uh if you take the master plan and you apply that it basically results in a significant reduction in student capacity um it actually brings it down below where we began the bond
02h 10m 00s
with which was 1,500 brings it down to to 1250 um this particular option uh requires uh boundary changes um the Improvement projects uh under this option remain intact meaning that all 63 of the schools we would be able to um we would be able to address um the edpc are revised for schools and need to be revised in later bonds to accommodate the larger student populations excuse me Jim is this in our memo I don't I don't see this in our memo option one am I missing a page you have in your memo our option one is different than what that is okay um in in your memo I think it describes I don't have it handy but it would one the number one is uh approve the additional criteria and retain 1,700 student capacity that's option three on this on his slides number one is number three number one is number three on the slides I think okay so so this would be option option one on on the on the screen is action option three but it's still option three still says retain 1700 students there you go there's option okay okay go back they all have 1700 students in them well actually option one with the with the additional criteria logic would actually drop drop us to 1250 under option two would actually uh bring us to 1500 which was the original language in the bond and then option three which adds all of the additional criteria would bring us to 1,700 students and actually you know what so they've got an option in here I'll tell you why the what the difference is go back to option one Jim if you flip back up to option one so the other one is on the other variation on this one is700 students taking six classes this one is 1,50 students taking the 7.6 classes so you are either varying the number of students served in the building or you're varying the number of courses available to it's two variations on this option this is a totally different way of looking at that we've been talking about before so it's a little confusing it it is and it's but it's two different variations on a theme that either you're varying the number of students served in the building or you're varying the amount of program available to them um but and the no change refers to no change to the building plan is there an option that has the 1700 students just stopping where we have been what we've been doing prior to the time we started to add additional criteria do we have that option that's that's option one but would be with a lesser option one would be yeah but the 1700 without the additional crer that that jumps it up to 1700 students thank you 1700 students taking six classes yeah and then of course the uh one of the other aspects of this option is the uh students would be limited number of classes basically the six periods and then no additional teachers um if you think of capacity um in terms of space um it doesn't directly connect with teachers but when you think in terms of number of teach teachers in the school there needs to be a connection so uh with this particular option uh the ability to put more teachers in the in the school would be compromised to a certain extent um the next option is um sort of a in between the full criteria and the and the no change and the uh half the additional criteria in the case of Franklin means five additional classrooms and Associated space from what was approved in the master plan and with the additional criteria there that bring us to 1500 students uh unlike option one they're likely would be boundary changes but uh perhaps not to the same extent and then in this instance of the 63 schools in the IP projects uh all but one would be completed and the one is is a big one it's the re Roofing of Cleveland High School so can I ask in that option to um does that assume that all summer IP work at 62 or does that assume just focusing on seismic and not doing the Ada elevator great great question um relative to the Scopes of course with the 63 schools there's various combinations of work Scopes that are included in each one of them so this uh this focuses on the the roof and the seismic uh components so uh in most instances the schools that haven't already uh I ip13 ip14 ip5 would not get the uh would not get the Ada or the uh
02h 15m 00s
or the elevator work uh or some of the smaller seism work that's not related structurally um however it would include all of the middle-grade science classrooms which currently are planned to complete by the end of summer 2016 question the um so is option two uh um 1500 students at what credits so that would be at the 30.4 okay level in fact the same applies to option three the 1700 would be for the 30.4 credits okay for the program and then option three uh would be the master plan plus the full additional that's approximately for the case of Franklin and for Grant and and we're using Grant to replicate what we're doing at Franklin because of the similarity around capacity but would represents about a 20% increase in size um so would not require boundary changes but would only get about 85% of the schools uh 54 of the of the 63 so this is the one that uh you we had talked about with the bond accountability committee on Friday and uh we had I think the summary that you have seen actually describes uh the schools that you know that that wouldn't be wouldn't be addressed and that that's the $25 million figure from your um table one of the potentialist of delayed summer Improvement projects right and it is a little confusing because there's the sites and then there's the projects which varies from so it's it's it's sometimes it's s apples to oranges when you do the the arithmetic but that's what that the 25 million is okay and the last slide before we get into Q&A I appreciate the questions and continue certainly um this summarizes the uh some of the contingency categories if you will as as I'm currently defining them uh when the bond was put in place we had the uh the program or the board Reserve in the amount of 20 million currently that's that's at 10 million um assuming that the scope increases for the three high schools goes forward as schematic design so uh that would be the 10 so 10 remains Bond premium is a amount I mentioned last week that we don't know if we're going to have access to it's a little under 14 million through the first Bond issuance we'll know about this time next year um if we have access uh to that I don't know at this point how much we would or wouldn't have again depends on availability but I characterize it as a contingency of sorts uh we have um Bond issuance uh that may be available as well we initially planned for 3 million we spent about 600,000 in the first Bond issuance so that could be something and then we have the uh what we call the COO Chief Operating Officer contingency which is the place holder where we move funds into as projects complete and and uh different changes occur what's not shown here of course is the is the escalation category the $45 million that I explained earlier actually fully allocates uh to these schools to these projects so um any additional requirements we would have would would have to come from one of these sources over the you know over the course of the program so that like to uh see if you have any additional questions comments great thank you thank you very much J questions just Tom yeah just um on the on the bond premium uh essentially we assumed a cost of that based upon a certain interest rate and interest rates areow lower than what we had assumed is that could you explain that to everybody it's a function of um the face value of the bond which is 482 million and for the U the the rate the doll10 per th000 uh assessed value which we're trying to keep constant and so when the second issuance uh is is done next spring we likely would get uh feedback in terms of what impact that would have on the bond premium if we keep that tax rate constant and I'm over my skis very quickly here in terms of what right behind you if you want him to come up and do more David David uh Deputy Chief Financial Officer may want to add additional comments on that that me it's been a long David Deputy CFO so when we um when we went out to market the first time and issued the first bonds the way the way those were priced um was a market based decision and it resulted in that premium we won't until we're further
02h 20m 00s
along in the bond program we won't know whether or not we can capture that1 14 million as additional proceeds or not because we in addition to being governed by the $482 million which is the face value of bonds that we're limited to by the the vote also working to stay at a tax rate of A110 per thousand or less we're not legally obligated to do that but we have a commitment to the community to try and stay within that and so until we have more uh more years experience of where we go with tax assessed value growth we don't know whether we can capture that $14 million as additional proceeds or not because the in the first instance the premium was just a factor of of of how you price the bonds and so at this point to stay within a1ar 10,000 we have to hold the bond premium to one side if in um over the next couple of years tax assessed value grows faster High you know at a higher rate than we assumed um and then depending on what happens with the second bond issue we may be able to capture some of that $14 million and still stay within A110 but at this point we've just had one year of tax assessed value growth and not quite one full year of collection so it's it's premature to know how much of that is available but it's entirely possible that a significant portion of that over the course of this 8year program would actually be available to us but at this point it's too soon to make that call and and are there not models out there that we can run that that anticipate or I mean just to get a little more clarity on that issue because it's significant amount of money yeah we can we can run models yeah but it is it's a model well and our country runs on models but what the models will say if tax assessed value grows at these certain rates relative to what we assumed when we put the bond program together then yeah maybe we'll be able to capture some of that but but until we know what actually happens in relation to that um we won't know and it and there's more than one variable the other variable as I said is what our collection rate is going to be we we are we're working with our financial financial advisor to start developing those models but they're not they're not going to give us any great certainty about how soon yet well every year that goes by will will help us because as you know we'll have another year of actual experience to know what those changes are relative to what we assumed when we put the bonds in place in the first place okay believe me if we could if if we could give you access to that $14 million now we would do that in a heartbeat but it's it's too soon it's definitely there as a possibility but it's it's too early because this is this is an 8-year program it's too soon after one year to be able to say with certainty where we are with that unless you want to go above A110 as a tax rate if you want if you're willing to go above A110 then we can give you access to that money but I don't think that's somewhere you want to go at this point thank you thanks sir others thank you Devin did you have a question Steve I'm of the opinion similar to Kevin I believe was his name that we should stay pretty darn close to what we said we should which means to me the basic idea is that we do not in any way cut back on the seismic stuff so if we don't cut cut back in the seismic what does that mean if we said okay we're going to do that for sure what does that how does that affect how would that affect Franklin High School so the way it would impact Franklin and de you may want to how many how many million would we be short of 12 classrooms spread the wealth here and answering some of these Ste you want to take that well there's there's two different answers to that if you're just talking the additional criteria we were talking approxim ately 7 million 8.2 when you add in soft cost for Franklin if you do not do any of the additional criteria I think what what what was important to your question is when we talk about option two and this Middle Ground um you're you're trying to wrap what can we do in the IP projects versus trying to get to a greater capacity at Franklin High School and this option to the Midway point of provides you with the opportunity to complete roof and seismic projects in total science classrooms in in total and hit 62 out of 63 schools in total while providing additional capacity at Franklin so that's option
02h 25m 00s
two that's option two so that wouldn't so let me clarify for my own understanding again that would so if we kept all the seismic then we could go with option two which would add how much to Franklin what would it do that here yeah cuz they got me all over to options I don't have your options option two is up here 1500 so be 1500 plan would remove all would it remove all Ada and elevators or we remove some no it was reduced the scope to just doing the roof and seismic work at those facilities at the 62 out of 63 so you would hit all of the seismic at the um IP projects but it would my question is what does it do in terms of elev the impact on the IPS and one of the reasons to go through the slide on the on the funding options is the delay if you will of those Scopes would be dependent upon getting access to to this money so delaying the uh if we prioritize the roof seismic uh then it would delay doing the Ada work the elevators uh primarily and some of the non-structural seismic work would it get done though all of the Ada elevator work would be delayed or a few of them not all of it the work that we've accomplished through uh IP 15 but it would be beyond that that would be delayed and part part of the Paradox we find ourselves in here is the the planning for ip6 doesn't occur for another another year or so so if we find ourselves um a year from now in a place where we have a sense of what is available here then then we have that conversation separately but what we've planned thus far is through IP 15 so 16 17 18 or even 19 could still be put back in so we're we're using the term delay or postpone uh and instead what we're showing in option two was trying to ensure that we we are hitting all but one of the schools in the IP program and that we're we're getting the size making the roofing so what I'm what I'm trying to understand do we have any documentation that would show what schools would be at risk in terms of the Ada did we receive any of that the memo that I think you're holding is so which one I think option two is a some portion of table one that list okay I I actually have a more complete list that um shows B based on our revised analysis what what the impact would be and and really it it depends on which which of these options um is is identified because the number of schools that we would get to under option three the option three is more in line with the memo that um I think you have from myself to superintendent Smith um that's what that describes table one is the schools that wouldn't that would have that work delayed and it would result in 54 of the 63 schools having some improvement at them then the next one option too you you don't you don't have right now but I I have that data so it was an attempt to try to find a middle ground and give us a middle option so if I'm understanding correctly option three um would be in your in your Memo from the 21st everything on table one would be delayed correct under option two what we would have from table one would be the roof seismic and the seismic with the exception of Cleveland's roof correct but none of the remaining things on table one no Ada or elevator what's what's difficult is you know we talk in terms of projects and we have one per summer but projects are made up of schools which are made up of work Scopes so it's about how do you balance the work Scopes that go into the school that go into the project which is part of the calculus but again just so that I'm clear under option two when you say 62 63 IP schools remain attct you mean in terms of the roof and seismic not the Ada or elevator that is being that would not be included that would be postponed until you just until we have or not done or not done potentially not done and I'll just I'll just say that's a huge huge concern for me I totally appreciate what you've done here and trying to provide multiple options for us to try to land this because we need to land it totally appreciate that and that you heard I mean obviously seismic is a huge priority but I would say even that ADA um an elevator and access is also a huge issue we may not hear as much about it um but it's part of our responsibility and part of the promise of what we um need to do for the schools that are
02h 30m 00s
waiting in the meantime so um I totally appreciate what you came forward with that it was responsive to what we were trying to as we were trying to land this um but that that um we need to go beyond the rof and siiz we need to do the the Ada and the elevator part of the promise to the voters in our community as well that's what I is my take on it and the roof of Cleveland and the roof of Cleveland but again not a you know not a criticism what you've done here because you've worked hard to try to be responsive to our to our concerns and issues I appreciate that I think it's a little ironic that in our Bond videos we had in our Bond videos it was Cleveland that we highlighted with the buckets in the hallway uh with the rain coming in so I mean just I think about that Steve if we did everything in the bond right now are we off at all if we just did what we originally said we would do how much money are we short are we short any money to do that or are we on We Are We There we we're there we are there okay so how much money are we short in order to do the 12 classrooms 12 classrooms 12 classrooms we'll say 12 123 What's the total amount of money we short in in the total program you mean no in the just over okay suppose I was a multi-millionaire Bill Gates and I said I'm going to give you a certain amount of money you already have everything in the bond how much more would you need to do the three additional schools with the additional add-ons yes if you want that's where the 25 million is coming out of right um I just just quickly and it's late then I'm um I don't want to throw numbers around I said earlier I if we get a I mean question it's going to be about 25 million yeah about 25 million but I yeah I so if we found 25 million someplace now is and there's I think places no I think we could take 7 million a year in the next four years out of our general fund but the uh I could find it let's just cut from 14 million to 7 million our Consulting uh contracts that's 7 million that's 28 million in the next four years and the uh the so does would that do it 28 million if we handed you 28 million out of that the next four years that do it and then my other question is do you the other question is that sounds like it would do it but the the other question is if you build later what is it is there a chance that some of those add additional things would come up at that we would have money within our bond to build in the extra classrooms well just just like I mean you had the 14 million you had the 10 million we going to get down to the end theoretically we had the 10 million but but prices are going up again right I mean prices are going to go up three years from now they're going to be more than they are do we have that figured in an inflationary thing or is that part of your escalation is that but the escalation we've already used Park well we we've applied the escalation to the to the known projects currently so fabian's in that the three high schools are in that the IPS are in that through ip5 right now what we would need to evaluate is um what what other risks are out there and it's it's hard you really don't know it's hard to say and I but 28 million in the next four years from the general fund might do that whole thing it's possible thank you very much in terms of multiple I me yeah I mean okay dollars that are needed for the investment in these Pro and and we would then be able to go to the community and say hey hey we uh we did what we said we were going to do so now give us another bond which is going to be awful hard I agree it's be real hard if we don't do what we said we were going to do to turn around and get an under Bond could we borrow the money could we borrow the money for the 28 million and then pay it off from the general fund and do the and do the uh who would answer that uh we would need to evaluate that terms nobody tonight could we borrow that money and and could we borrow 28 million and then pay it off for 7 million or something like that ask the superintendent is that possible for us to go borrow another 28 million I mean could we borrow money and then pay it off like that theoretically any of these Solutions are ones you can consider I mean it's a possibility is what I'm saying I mean it's not there's nothing against the law to say we can't borrow money and I and part of what we're trying to make visible to you is you have multiple scenarios that are possible and you're adding to those scenarios what I was trying to do disc I hear you yeah thank you very much thank you
02h 35m 00s
others just a a clarification I noticed that um on table one um arita is on here for Ada and elevator that would be put off um but I believe we're doing some roof work at arita this summer was that planed to be split or would we pull or is there work already expected to happen in Earl this Summer that would be pulled out are we going back to Earl twice there there are a number of schools um in the IP program that were were impacting multiple times over multiple Summers that's one of them and it gets back to the methodology we use that we presented to you about how we selected the IP 13 schools the 14 Schools and the 15 schools Ruth so I'll just um say I mean again I really appreciate um the work the staff has done the integrity and the professionalism with which you have done it and the responsiveness both to our various comments and inputs over these many months as well as obviously a huge amount of community input so um it's just been outstanding work and we're really lucky to have you and and also appreciation to the bond accountability committee for being that that those experts um with the from the outside so I'm I after much consideration and this is a change from what I had where I had been indicating I was previously I'm with sticking with the the master plan in December and I'm working with what we have the the status quo if you will um because that already did reflect an increased size and scope and budget from um the original and um to me it will be fully seismically upgraded and it will be an outstanding program and design as as we've seen um and to me you know the change there's going to be changes is guaranteed we've already heard tonight about labor costs um escalation in in materials um per student funding God knows is not constant in this state so that's going to change um workload agreements contracts you know all sorts of pieces potentially the length of the day boundaries so all those things are there are so many moving parts that are going to change and that we can also affect but what we can't change and we mustn't change is what we had promised to the voters and um I totally get and um appreciate the risk of not having as much um program flexibility with those additional classrooms as we would now like to have and then it's going to require some tough trade-offs on the ground in making it work in the schools and for students and um the risk that we could potentially if everything goes our way in all scenarios and then we end up we could potentially end up with some extra funding at the end of this and have you know with the smaller size um smaller compared to that it's still larger than we originally said I just want to keep saying that and it's still going to be awesome but then not as large um of initial high schools so I I'd get that that that's a risk and a concern and an issue but to me the largest um piece here is that we need to be to be true to that original um that original program in the original scope so again I truly appreciate what staff has done in tracking this every step of the way and being responsive to us but now we need to make that call so that's that's the call I've made and you to hear where others are but we do need to make that decision next week approve a schematic design and move forward and I'm thrilled to be moving forward it is going to be an awesome all three schools are going to be all four schools that are fully modernized and the improvements it's going to be great other um Tom or Steve do either one of you want to chime in here and uh help with the staff as they're trying to prepare resolutions for us next year next week it would be helpful to hear what you're thinking sure which one of the options or what whatever else you want to add to that um I I guess I'm still um sifting through it all I mean I what I don't want to do is build a high school where kids were limited to um six classes uh and so if um so you know that that's that's number one um but I also respect the um you know I think it's it is very important that we that we stick to uh what we said we were going to do um and the public trust and the bond accountability committee made that clear and Ruth your your comments I think are right on in that respect um so then um so then there's there's then we I think we have to look and I'd like to have some more information on tonight um but in in terms of um what does it mean to build
02h 40m 00s
these high schools um with our existing budget and um in terms of what we can do with different schedules um with boundary changes um so understanding I think I need to understand personally that piece a little bit more um um so that's that's essentially where where my head is at the moment do you have yeah you personally I think right now I'm leaning towards option two um I am worried about presenting to the voters the next Bond if we haven't met what we agreed we were going to do but I'm also worried about uh not following through with our other you know ask of the community when we approve this bond which was we are going to give these high schools 21st century buildings and I feel like if we don't give them what we know now is exactly what they need then we're not only doing a disservice to those schools and those communities but I think we're also setting I think a bad precedent for ourselves in the future when we look at these projects so okay did you something else sure yeah add which is the other thing in the bond that we pass in in the contact essentially with the voters um it it said up to 63 well that is ambiguous and so the the other thing I would like to do is uh is to take the ambiguity out of that and you know maybe the number is 60 uh maybe it's 61 maybe it's 62 but I mean there is flexibility here um and I think that we that we need to to to land on on a number um and I'm not convinced 63 is the the right number I I you know 60 could be the could be the number suree yeah I think Andrew I totally respect what you said I think though that we will get a 21st century building and and an outstanding building either way and a lot of the additional criteria are based on sort of the current assumptions and our current state and reality of many different pieces and you know the last all the things that have changed related to high school schedule over the last couple years it's just kind of mindboggling actually all the different pieces so I hear what you're saying but I also feel like to assume that that is going to remain the reality going into the future is not necessarily Again State funding could change any number of pieces could change so I get that it will be more difficult to do what we want to do we might be able to serve fewer students in that building and that would be that would be a huge downside but that might be what we just have to do given the the scope and the money that that we've been provided in this bond that we have so that's but it's it's it is a huge trade-off to to weby um I think my highest priority is to be true to our voters if we expect them to or hope that they will consider um contributing again um we've always talked about this being a 30-year plan um and the only way you're going to get there is if you do what you say you're going to do um so I do think there's some things that have changed since um we passed the bond and that includes passing our teacher contract trying to reduce our student teacher ratio um adding more credits for students to take so I am still wanting information on for example if we uh looked at at a stagger teacher schedule um so that we could actually offer another credit each day already we do that as with a waiver process where we have a zero period in some classes how many more uh opportunities would that give us in terms of uh credits for our students um the reason I was asking about the Genius Bar um is it sounds so utterly cool and wonderful but it also sounds like a nice to have and not a have to have and that's the reason I was asking about that I I view certain things as has to have um but when I was on the Roosevelt design team I don't recall seeing any kind of a Genius Bar um so to me that we have some other options that I think we still need to look at and I don't want to be delaying the plan um but at the same time I think we need to do a little bit more homework still before um next week I have huge concern about pushing $25 million of uh summer projects we keep using this term IP which means nothing to the public IP is
02h 45m 00s
basically summer of projects um we keep talking about you know potentially pushing $25 million in summer projects off into the next Bond well that has an impact on what we do in the next Bond in the next Bond Our Hope was to go out and build our next three high schools and all of a sudden you carve 25 million dollars off the top to do your Ada work or your seismic work that has that has ramifications it's not just pushing it off it's it at some point you got to come up with those dollars like pay for R Parks H like paying for R par well we did that yeah so um I I'm at this point wanting to I I I need more information in terms of what we really could do in terms of credits and I and I think it's reasonable to be asking staff uh if we were to look at a stagger teacher schedule what how that would help us or not if there are some areas um in any of our designs at this point that really are nice to have rather than must haves and I guess I'm specifically looking at so far the Roosevelt and Franklin designs and if there's things that one school has the other one totally doesn't have um let's look at it and see if if there is some room there to add a couple of classrooms I don't know um I mean my my main thing is I want to be true to what we've told voters and if we're not um we deserve to have them say sorry we're not going we're not doing this again with you so we we have to figure it out um and we have lots of new Criterion information that we're trying to put in the mix so I I need more information before I can tell you where I'm going to land but I think I'm projecting a little bit yeah my feeling is we should be able to find at least a few more classrooms and then if we get down at the end of the bond and we have money left over we could add more classrooms and I think one of the in each school we can find two classrooms by moving the preschool maybe over to the over to a elementary school I mean they're right there on the site practically I mean they're within walking distance particularly uh at Grant and at at uh uh Franklin and I think we should go and look at some of that space that we're talking about as 21st century where you get kids out into this open area I don't think the open area space is any more 21st century or 22nd century or 20th century one way or the other personally maybe I'm wrong it's very possible I am but I don't I think we could capture a little space there maybe we had three maybe four classrooms I think we could get some money out of the budget we found 7 million this this year in the middle of it I think that some of that money is going to come up and we can Air Market think we can find some money that's in our regular budget to add a little more we can maybe get six classrooms in there uh out of what we have by doing those things and then you could add on another uh six if you have the money at the end of the bond so you've taken some of the pressure off uh and and I don't have a problem with staggered schedules I don't think most teachers or kids do tell you the truth uh and I think we could think about that and that would cuz I think that teachers are right when they complain they don't have those classroom space and they're going to have to have those problems and we need to work on that but we're correcting an error that we made and you don't get to correct your errors perfectly in this world but that would kind of take the steps to it and then we say okay we get down towards the end we're going to have more money okay we got more money let's add on so I just think those are all distinct possibil ilities and I'd like to see us come back with something that looked like that even if you did 3 million out of the general budget you know that would do quite a that would add you maybe get six classrooms out of it that's quite a few to add on right now on top of what we had said I don't think we have to if we did that I don't necessarily would guess we maybe wouldn't have to do boundary changes I think boundary changes scare the heck out of people but you may have to but that's what I think which is what you asked thank you Pam for asking BR do you have something sure okay I think that's it right one I just want to say um thank you again to the design teams and staff um because as you can see we have a million different options um and staff has been working tirelessly to get us the options that we have to make sure that the numbers match sometimes I worry when we sit up here and say oh I'll just grab 3 million from here and 7 million from there it becomes a little bit magical like we're all sitting in money because I hear us say we want to invest in um Librarians we want to invest in a variety of things but all of a sudden when we need 7 million for this we can somehow find it
02h 50m 00s
so I just want to say thank you to to staff to to get us the um the presentations I think from what I heard from the bond accountability committee is um it's time to make some choices that you can't you you can't have everything that you want within this within this one package and as we've gone we've learned additional things and by want I don't mean to to make it sound like it's extraneous um students taking 30.7 30.8 credits is not extraneous some of those are makeup recovery classes some of those are additional classes um so it is not that we're trying to build something everybody what I heard from our community loud and clear right is we want lower class sizes that that's not an extra that is sound educational practice I hear people often say where's the education side of the house and there's the educational side of the house as we want better student teacher ratios um at the same time um as clear in testimony tonight and as my email box is showing um we were speaking to different constituents with different parts of this Bond Community we designed the bond from Community input and people wanted seismic safety for their schools they wanted additional classrooms for the k8s that we didn't we didn't convert when we got there some people wanted the high schools they knew they were our flagship they recognized the partnership with fabbi and K8 um and they wanted to see us capitalize on it um to to begin to pull money from one one of those to support another um begins to feel I I again I think the Bond accountability committee that the scope changes well within the the intent of the bond and the language of the bond but I do think that um I do think that our community is is is expecting something slightly different than us changing the scope on this and I also oo am reminded that when I um helped a a Kindergarten Roundup or kindergarten connect event at my daughter's school one year and there was a gentleman that came in um in a wheelchair um and he rolled you know he came around and visited the first floor but he couldn't make it to the second floor and I thought what a shame that any member of our community cannot access our student our school or their student school um and so that became a real priority for me the Ada accessible and we have lots of families for whom that's the issue that it's really important for them to be able to have full access to their school um so at this point I um I am Landing I think probably more similar to where Ruth is is that um without the additional criteria um to to look at um that initial scope size of 1700 and I um we don't know what the schedules in the future will hold and um to director bule's Point um boundary changes um worry people um at the same time we're also trying to get this um to be where boundary changes happen more frequently our neighboring districts do it much more frequently and that's not to say that we take it casually or lightly or that they people don't make decisions based on where that is at the same time our long range facility plan makes clear that building your way out of overcrowding is the most expensive option and they didn't recommend that so the work again I think of thousands of voices there have been thousands of voices that informed are going out to the voters as well as the long range facility plan and beyond that um so I guess that's where I'm landing and again I I thank you for for all your efforts and um and options that you presented okay um so just my thoughts and where I'm heading um first of all thank you to staff excellent presentations everybody um appreciate that espe and also the bond accountability committee and and stepping up I think that's great looking forward to working with them more in in depth in the future um I guess what I would say is that uh the only thing uh that's constant is change and if we could just be constant not have change we wouldn't have these issues um but we can't be and just while uh similar to what's happening right now is we've seen some changes we're going to continue to see changes um but one of the things that hasn't changed and won't change is what we promise the voters and so um the things that I think about and have been mentioned by other board members is three high schools fabbian in partnership with Concordia new roofs so we don't see those buckets in the middle of the hallways or in classrooms seismic to keep our children safe access so that all of the members of our community can be in our schools and let's not forget about the science labs uh so that we can teach our uh kids stem so those are the things that I think we promised to the voters and that are the most concern to me um on the other hand if we did some of these changes um the things that concern me are the uncertainty of the
02h 55m 00s
funds so we have schedule scope and budget right so budget is how could we still do all of those things well we know we can't so um and and some of the things we're relying on like Bond sales contingencies cost of construction are they going to go up down my guess is they're going to go up and they're going to keep going up from what we're seeing um and the compet because of the competitiveness right now and getting people to do that work so um I guess uh the other part of it is uh to go back to the change piece again uh we have a lot of change and in addition to what's mentioned in our long range facility plans we have a lot of other levers that we can use in this District somebody somebody mentioned boundary changes already which is one of the top top things that is suggested in the long range facilities plan that we use and that we're actually studying at this very moment so boundary changes is one uh the size of the schools are any of these schools going to be at 1,700 students when we open the doors I don't know probably not close some of them will be close but not if we change the boundaries so other other levers Community spaces um and eventually additional schools will be able to open um the value engineering Jim's talked about so many times how do we how do we use that and then we have um our discussions with our teachers around schedule changes so maybe we won't have six of eight classes maybe someday it'll be five of seven again and then it'll be seven classes and not eight classes so the number the the amount of change that's ongoing in this district and it's not a bad thing I mean change helps us it's a good thing but we have to to realize that it's the only thing that's constant and so for me the only other thing that's constant is my word to the voters and so I'm going to be somebody who's Landing back on doing in doing the work without the additional criteria so others yeah I mean I'll just yeah I guess I put a shade shading on there which is um is I think it's possible to uh keep the word with the voters and look at some of the additional criteria so and you actually said mentioned it yourself which was okay um what what are we going to do with each school so for me it's I I think we ought to have an ability to have 30 plus credits for high schoolers to take um we can do that in the high school with the existing budget uh and so when so I I I guess that's the only thing I want I want to say is is that that additional criteria is an important one um and there there's ways to make that happen within budget and that's where I want to be that would be part of what we would figure out as we go as we work this and as we see where we land in terms of our our funding and and all other pieces when we get to having these schools be operational is that what you're I mean what you're saying is that this is the additional criteria is not necessarily the only way that we can get to that goal yeah right so so in terms of us preparing a resolution for you what I'm hearing is people being pretty firmly on here's what we want to do with the building um which is where we were with the master plan with with 7 1700 right period and honor the the summer work that we had committed to in total and the high schools as it stood back in December knowing the director Morton isn't here and no director Morton isn't here but that's that's the resolution I hear us doing in terms of here's what we're doing with our buildings I think a number of the other things I'm hearing are not things that are going to change your decision there then okay here are the other things like as here's the commitment we're making and here's the decision we're making um next week and voting on which is that commitment full summer work as committed high schools as defined in the bond the things we've learned since then and I think Pam's point that it's going to continue to change what the one of the biggest values we've said is flexibility over time and that these are going to be used really differently you know and we'll figure out how to use the space like whatever space we have we'll figure out creatively how to use it a number of the other things are the other levers of how do we offer program it will be boundaries so yes we will start talking boundaries fairly swiftly um in terms of what does that mean it it may be schedule changes there's a bunch of other things but they are not going to impact the decision you make next week nor will they be figured out by next
03h 00m 00s
week those are other things that will then be okay now what are the other other levers that can be pulled in terms of how we maximize programs to kids but for next week purposes I hear the resolution we're preparing is building as they were originally master plan that that's what I'm hear and I would also and I'm looking more for like what I don't want to do is leave here and have different people to giving direction about what other scenarios you want I don't think anything I heard was something you needed in order to have the resolution next week the things I heard were much more after that than how do we use the space that we've committed to build and I'm more looking for is that accurate and I would also um say to my colleagues that at least in the materials that we had today we had Franklin 46 days behind and Roosevelt 110 days behind that's right um so um there there cannot be any more delay oh and actually Amanda just texted me saying we don't need a resolution to not change so like we can just do schematic design next week so we're not changing there you go thank you yeah I mean truly I mean that is you were looking at a resolution to amend the Ed specs um to add the additional criteria you're electing not to do which is then we just do the Franklin design next week that um the schematic design and again you were saying before that you have you have the alternative of the original ready to go and planned out and that applies to Rosevelt as well so if I interpret the what you've said tonight then we would apply this to both Franklin and Roseville which course approximate and then Grant two years to maintain our facility parody across the three and then what we will need to look at is if we will have to go back to the Ed specs at some point because we will now need to look at what we need to do elsewhere to accommodate our number of students but yeah right and we had wanted oh sorry go ahead Bobby I just say before at least for me uh I feel like I would finalize this is I do need to understand a little bit better how we're going to accommodate the credit situation because at least in this memo it indicated that if we don't add 12 classes at Franklin we could only accommodate 1250 students I personally don't believe that but I would like to have you do some work with us and maybe folks in the community to help us understand what the actual real options are and again that's why I'm asking about staggered schedule I'm asking about the possibility of converting a space or two at Franklin perhaps back into General classroom space which to me makes perfect sense um so I would like to see a few other options so we know we're not really limiting ourselves to 1250 students that doesn't make any sense but but again I think I'm sorry go ahead Bru so again I think but what I hear Carol saying when it what makes sense to me is that we go with a schematic design that's been worked out and and um approve that and then figure out within that as we go forward and within all the parameters that we have and the levers and all the different possibilities how we make it work and again there's flexibility built into this plan that we can whether it's this issue or other issues we can accommodate and flex and change and be creative I just want to know that we can make it work because if you change the boundaries that doesn't make it work I mean you're still talking 1250 students so that doesn't make it work by changing the B so I I I guess I 1700 is what we were talking about well we're talking 1700 but it's in terms of trying to do credits for 7.6 credits per student they said we can only accommodate 1,250 students so changing boundaries doesn't change that so I I guess I want I want to understand how we're going to get closer to the number of credits that we want our kids to take I mean we just passed a teacher contract we just got sued by the parent group we have other obligations personally I want to do what the voters told us to do I want to understand that we can do that and have enough options at our disposal that we can live up to some of these other commandments so great okay so go do that um who yeah go forward but without tweaking this pleas make it work without have making us having to make choices I know yeah I mean again I think we I think we can make it work well and with this current schematic design though again I mean I feel like for us at this point to say well let's take a wall out here or change this room there we need to go with what the design is that's you know through the this long process with multiple voices that that it's been landed on um so to me yes we can there'll be an ongoing conversation and figuring out how to make all this work with all the the pluses and minuses but we need to work with the schematic design that's been landed on but that will come back to you next week yes yes and approve it yes for approval so we
03h 05m 00s
can move forward any other and I will say we can give you some sense of what do you get from doing a staggered schedule within our contract I mean we can give you a sense of a number of these other things and just getting that you're getting these as like theoretical things in terms of how a build gets used and you've got kids schedules that vary all I mean you've got a whole lot of other variables in here and we've given you a lot of the scenarios and a lot of the tradeoffs and I know what we all want is make it all work and don't make it cost more money and you're getting the tradeoffs I don't know how to cut it any other way for you I mean truly so next week what will come back to you is the as a Franklin schematic design that you've seen essentially um and we will work on giving you more sense of like how do we actually use the building in creative ways that make it work the very maximize I mean we'll always work to maximize the space to make it work for kids so will tell us that based on today and two years three years from now when the building it'll keep Chang we'll keep working on it and we'll keep working on it and our funding will keep changing and what number of teachers we have will keep changing I mean truly our schedule will keep changing students will keep changing how much we're co- programming with other entities will'll keep changing for credit access PCC Hybrid models kids out of the school doing a lot of stuff online there's all kinds of things that are going to happen in the next right so many years and it sounds like I appreciate that landed I think we're done yeah okay okay any anything else no okay thank go remember that this is unbelievably exciting yes and the schools are going to be wonderful uh they may not be everything we all dreamed of but they're going to be absolutely incredible so thank you they're going to be fantastic and thanks to the voters I think we can all thank the voters yay voters so that's great okay and thank you to all of you who presented to us T I appreciate that and with that I think it's true we're adjourning the next meeting of the board will be held on Monday June 2nd and this meeting is

Sources

PPS Board of Education, Archive 2013-2014, https://www.pps.net/Page/2224 (accessed: 2022-03-24T00:57:54.073648Z)
PPS Communications, "Board of Education" (YouTube playlist), https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL8CC942A46270A16E (accessed: 2023-10-10T04:10:04.879786Z)

2014-05-27 PPS School Board Study Session

Documents / Media

Notices/Agendas

Materials

Minutes

Transcripts

Event 1: Board of Education - Study Session - May 27, 2014

Sources