ations the proposal changed and I recognize that for some who follow these things in our schools, our programs, communities, um that sometimes seems like a moving ball. I actually think that's the way the process should work. But I know at times it can be challenging and even stress inducing as
you're talking about a change in one school or program and then you conclude that that actually is not the advantageous change. If we only do that in this building hermetically sealed looking at whiteboards and don't engage the broader community, we don't get the good ideas. So that's that next step. Um
and then we br we we we we are where we are tonight which is to bring the board a proposal that is of sufficient detail for you to ask the questions uh provide the direction but not a completely developed proposal because when you do
that it is almost a take it or leave it proposition because you get to the point where so much time and expense has been set in developing the recommendations. Um, and so as Chair Nathan just shared, this is a very important point in the process, but it's not the end of our process. We will have a discussion in
July at a regular board meeting where we will present a revised version of the proposal. I think it is entirely possible that I will revise my recommendations based on further analysis that we will be describing um to you tonight and based on some of the
feedback that you may share or it may not change. Um that is an authentic uh question in the uh more than uh month about a month and a half ahead and then of course we will bring you a recommendation on uh August 4th for um action and so that is the road that um
is ahead of us and so with that let's jump in um I am going to not read to board members the um language that's on this PowerPoint and just touch on the high level um purposes as you recall from a year ago when we decided to take this question of how we use our space in
Rochester public schools on it was driven by a number of different priorities. First of all, making sure that our spaces fit our needs. As board members um know, as a former high school history teacher, I like to quote Winston Churchill a lot. Um and Churchill always said, "We shape our buildings and then
our buildings shape us." Um and so the space that our kids learn in is tremendously important to their learning. Uh we know that we also have to make efficient use of our district-owned facilities. We must be particularly concerned about deferred maintenance. Um, which school districts that take their eye off the ball, and I
have not worked in one that did that, but I've worked with them. Um, they pay a price um of catastrophically large uh upkeep uh for um facilities that they defer maintenance on. Um, and then of course we want to make sure that we find long-term homes for our programs and so
that we are um allowing those programs to take root and build their um connections. If you step back, there's three really critical drivers of the process here tonight. Number one, we have not one but two expert external projections of declining enrollment in
Rochester public schools. And that is always a cognitive challenge for people because our community is growing. However, the birth rate has declined in the United States by 20% since 2008. Younger people are having far fewer kids. And in Rochester,
potentially due to the challenges of getting single family housing, while our population is growing, the population of school-aged children moving into our school district is declining. Now, we had a very welcome increase last uh fall, as board members know well, that
was a welcome surprise. This year, year-to- date, our our projection, we are down from where we were this time last year. And so uh as you know from the budget discussion we had at our last meeting, we must base our decisions both on our financial uh planning and our
facilities planning on that projection of declining enrollment. And um once again, school districts that don't make the hard decisions end up like some school districts in our state are now with wildly underutilized buildings which saps the quality of education we
can provide our students. The second key piece is programmatic needs. We have a number of programs we're going to talk about tonight that are in facilities that don't meet the needs of the students that they serve and then financial sustainability. So there are eight key components of this proposal
and we will talk about really number two through eight because you have already voted for number one which is to sell the Fredell building the building everyone still calls Fredell as you uh uh considered and ultimately voted that is a facility which you know former
furniture store VA clinic um very limited transportation very difficult um access to the facility um It does not meet the needs of our students and it just the indoor air quality alone four
years ago would have been a $15 million upgrade to say nothing of the structural improvements. And so as you recall we looked long and hard at ways to keep Fidel. Um to do so would be to have people sitting in our seats 10 years from now saying why did they keep that albatross around the school district's
neck and so you voted um for that. The second is to move some early learning classrooms from Hoover Elementary into Gagege Elementary in order to make space for number three, which would be to combine Churchill and Hoover Elementary together as one school that serves grades kindergarten through 5. The next
would be to move our middle school alternative learning center into the facility that is now occupied as Churchill Elementary. And then after a year of colllocating with our uh rail program, which I'll come to in a moment, to build an addition uh on that site, a
modest addition um on that property. Number six, uh relocating girls gymnastics, which is currently using the gel the gym in the Fidel building to a community uh provider that's just opened called One Athletics. It's not a big deal for a lot of people, but for the 25
girls who play uh participate in gymnastics, it's a huge deal. Um uh and then finally moving our se next of next to last moving our career and technical education programming that is on the Rochester Community and Technical College campus into our three comprehensive high schools. And finally
renovating a building that is called the education service center or ESC uh for our Phoenix Academy program, our setting for program for students with disabilities. So um let's take a look at the first uh
proposal which is to unify a school Churchill that serves students in grades K through two uh with uh the the second campus uh and building that serves students in grades uh 3 through 5. The critical point here board members is
that the research is conclusive transitions are bad for educational progress and they are bad for developmental progress. This shows up from early childhood to elementary, from elementary to middle, from middle to high school. It is especially true for struggling students. Um, it's why K8
schools in many ways have the best outcomes and why we considered including moving to K8 schools in our new strategic plan as a priority. Unfortunately, we do not have the financial resources or the physical resources to do that. Um, at Churchill, we have got a situation in which our
students are just learning to read and we move them to a new building at the moment when they're reading to learn. They've spent K1 and two with a wonderful staff and wonderful teachers and then the moment before they go take the the jump to third grade and that critical third grade reading test,
they're suddenly in a new building. That has huge implications for the quality of education we provide for their students. Um it prohibits collaboration across that divide from grades uh two to three. Um it uh prohibits the ability of
teachers to collaborate vertically. Uh just as those students are becoming literate and numerate. It makes impossible the kind of strategies that we have. If you ever visit, you know, Gage Elementary and frankly at every elementary where fifth graders are working with kindergarteners, um which is not only a lot of fun but has great
research um behind it. Um it requires duplicate family nights, duplicate PTSAs, duplicate school events, which is a huge challenge um for family members. Um and I'm, you know, pleased we have our current and future principles uh at the school here tonight. It requires a principal to be in two places at one
time, which of course is impossible. And so when there is, as there always are in our schools, difficult and emergency situations, it requires shuttling between uh buildings. even if there's an assistant principal in one building at a given moment and a lead principal in another. Um board members, I would
submit that if we said to any other K through 5 school in Rochester that we're going to split them into two buildings and two campuses K through two and 3 through 5, they would revolt and they would do so justifiably. It is an educationally unound structure. Uh I
noticed it the moment I got here. Candidly, no one can tell me where it originated. My assumption is it was a space constraint and that's the only situation in which I think you would ever create a structure like this. My best research has found seven such schools in the state of Minnesota and
that is not because it is such a great idea that only seven people are um adopting it. Um we do not face those space constraints at a time of declining enrollment that we might have in another situation and so that's why that proposal is before us
now. So what would be uh using that building? Um it would be serving our uh middle school alternative learning center and our Rochester Academy for Independent Learning. Um let me start with Rail. Uh Rail uh is a student for grades uh young adults 18 through 22
with disabilities as they transition out into the world. Uh as board members know well we were just there for their graduation. It's an extraordinary life-changing um program. Um and uh this location will work for that program physically especially with the addition
that uh I am uh inclined to propose subject to the further analysis that we'll be doing over the next six weeks. Um and critically the public transit routes because those students are learning to use the bus routes as a critical life skill uh uh would work
very well for us in that location. The middle school ALC program is as board members know a program we started since I came to Rochester. We have a thriving high school ALC, but the middle school uh alternative learning center is really fundamentally different. Um these are students who are uh academically behind,
many of whom are struggling with anxiety, even depression. It's a small nurturing environment. But we know at a time of uh growing mental health concerns and academic gaps, this is a population that we need uh more space for, not less. And we want it to be
tailored for those students. Um, candidly, this is not a program for students with behavioral problems. Um, it is a student uh a program for students who need a nurturing, supportive learning environment. Um, there have been a number of questions that have been raised about, uh,
transportation in the area. Um, uh, one point I think we should make clear is that of the 190 students who attend Churchill, only 40 walk. So that is 20%. It's actually much lower than many of our elementary schools, our neighborhood elementary schools. So 40 students
currently do walk. Um but um the rest of those students are getting uh either uh dropped off or um bust or if they have disabilities driven by van. And so um while certainly the change for in walking for those students uh would be a
factor that we should consider, it is a significantly smaller portion of that school than it would be for instance at Fwell just up the street from here. Um there uh in the new configuration with middle school ALC and the al uh the rail program there would be no parent drop
offs or pickups. Those students are all transported and so the traffic impact actually would likely be uh less. And I know that in the community there's been some concern about the physical uh infrastructure of that campus. Very important. We would continue to have a
playground for young children. in fact, an upgraded one that would meet uh compliance for students with disabilities as we're doing in all of our playground upgrades. And the tennis courts and green space would continue to be um uh there and available. The next thing that has to happen to make that
possible is to move some of the early learning classrooms, 13 in particular, um from Hoover to Gage Elementary. Um there would still be early learning classrooms at Hoover. Um but we would be moving into two sites. Um, interestingly, I learned as part of this process, there was a day when all
elementary schools in Rochester had early childhood programming and then we consolidated um, we had uh, important meetings with the early childhood staff at Hoover. There is a trade-off for them. They like being together. There's a wonderful um, pos part of that um,
experience. Um, but in order to make it possible to combine the Churchill and Hoover uh, students in one campus, we would need to make a move. I think really uh a great example of how this process has resulted in new ideas as we
went along. The idea of moving those students into gauge emerged about midway through the process and for me it was like a blinding flash of the obvious. This could be fantastic. Um gauge is about half utilized as a building. Um we know at a time of uh efficient resources
we cannot sustain a building at at half uh usage uh at at at being partially filled slightly less than 50%. This would fully utilize that building and very excitingly it would further diminish those negative transitions that I was talking about a moment ago. Should families choose to keep their students
enrolled at Gagege, we would have the students that could move right from early learning into that programming um at Gagege. Um the staff at Gage has been um uh very welcoming, has asked a lot of good questions. Um and uh even started, you know, the Gage are the gators in the
elementary and one of the uh staff when we were over there started to talk about baby gators um being there in the facility. Um that will require modifications to the building, restrooms, sink heights, playroom access, the kind of thing that we just did at our Mighty Oaks early learning center. Um as well we would also
continue to work and we have uh our leader of this work Erica Schumacher who's here tonight uh to ensure commonality of high-quality early childhood programming across not just those two sites but meaning Hoover Engage but also our Mighty Oaks uh early learning center. So board members, that
is then oops, that is the next component. Moving on, um the girls gymnastics piece, but some people will recall about two years ago when a neighboring school district in Rochester had to discontinue girls gymnastics altogether, it was really cathartic for those students and their
families. I was worried that Rochester was headed in the same direction. And so I was thrilled when uh One athletics opened and when they were uh willing to host our girls gymnastics program. Um I think it will be beneficial to our programming and also will be uh beneficial to their businesses as
they're trying their business as they're trying to grow. Um uh we would continue to have competitions uh for girls gymnastics um in our buildings in our high schools. Next is a very important um shift. We've been talking now about essentially all
the changes that are related to closing Fidel and needing to find a new home for middle school ALC and rail. This next component doesn't have anything directly to do with that. Whereas all of the other things I just described were interlin. They were, you know, uh if not
dominoes, they were um cogs in the machine to make a new structure work. CEK uh is a long-standing career and technical education uh uh program that is uh consists of different courses that essentially prepare students for the world of work with a strong emphasis on
the trades. And we know the extraordinary need for uh students with those skills in our economy. We also know that these are oftenimes jobs that offer a living wage and an opportunity a pathway to opportunity especially for kids who might be growing up in low-income families or the first in
their family to go on to some kind of college. Um the logic of colllocating those programs on the RCTC campus when uh the change was made a number of years ago was that you would have um the students traveling from all the high schools to get an experience that they
couldn't get in any of their high schools. Today however those students are traveling across town to learn only with other Rochester public school students and only with Rochester public schools faculty. They are not interacting with RCTC students or faculty or using RCTC
learning spaces. We're busing them across town to use an RPS space. And as board members know, that costs more than half a million dollars a year in transportation and lease space. Um, our lease is also up this year at RCTC for CEK space. So, even if we weren't having
this conversation, we would need to be having a conversation with our colleagues at RCTC about the fact that that's their space, not ours. They have graciously agreed to extend that lease for a year pending the board's decision. My recommendation, after a lot of consideration, is to move those classes
into our high schools. Um, the vast majority, as I'm sure we'll talk about tonight, could be taught um right in our high schools in uh in a configuration that allows every one of our comprehensive high schools, John Marshall, Centry, and Mayo to offer the vast majority of CEK classes. There are
a number though because of the facilities that need to be essentially a hub where students would travel from one high school and so welding, construction trades, greenhouse plant production and criminal justice would be the four that would be in hubs. The others we would
move um into the high schools. It would require an investment in infrastructure in our facilities. The welding labs, culinary spaces, health science spaces, engineering spaces, computer labs um would need to be upgraded. um we've been working with the high school principles and Brandon McCraic um is here and can
talk about um that conversation. In the end, for me, the hope in many respects of moving CEK into the high schools is that first of all, we have a lot of students who say, "I'm interested in that content. I'm interested in welding. I'm interested in nursing, but
I don't want to leave my high school for two hours every day, travel across town. It in it influences the other classes that I can take. It takes me to another space that is not John Marshall or Mayo or Century. Um it also means that
students never stumble upon you know the welding or certified nursing assistant or agriculture or veterinary science all these wonderful courses because they actually have to choose to go there without ever literally seeing it. If it's in the high school, you'll be
literally walk what's in that classroom, what's happening there. And of course, chances for kids to get to know teachers, for instance, before they actually choose to take one of those classes. Our enrollment in CEK has really been flat for about a decade. And this is at a time when we should be growing these courses uh because, as I
said, they are they're windows of opportunity for kids and they meet a need in our economy that that is really urgent. This would save our lease and transportation costs though there would be some increase uh some cost for the hub structure depending frankly on how many kids did it. A lot of the kids once
they reach junior and senior year are driving themselves and so costing out the transportation for CEK um in this new model would be something that we would have to uh fine-tune over time but we can estimate that now. So that board members is the CEK possibility. And then
we finally come to um renovating what we call Phoenix Academy. Um every school district in the United States um either needs to have or have access to a service for students with disabilities that is what is called setting for. These are our students with the most
challenging physical, cognitive, developmental uh disabilities um and other uh urgent educational needs. We have an amazing program in Phoenix Academy. Rob Scripture, our leader of that program, is here. Um, uh, it's a fantastic staff that does amazing things
with students who have arguably, if you look on the whole, the highest needs in the district. And, um, I thought from the moment I Rob gave me a tour through Phoenix Academy in the building that we call the education service center that we have got to get these kids and the
staff into a better facility. We need one that looks aesthetically more appealing, not glamorous, not glitzy, but less like a factory or sometimes people say a prison. Um uh and more like a school. Um they have uh uh no fully
functioning cafeteria and no gym space and every other school in our system has that. Um those students absolutely need that. Um we could make some important improvements in their health offices. uh provide enhanced sensory support space for students with autism and who suffer
from other uh disabilities. Um and then there are some nuts and bolts things about indoor air quality. Um we would like to enhance uh some outdoor learning and recreation space. It's right over by the fairgrounds. There's not a large footprint as Mike will outline uh um describe for you in a minute, but we
think that we can make some of those important changes. Um, we also have, as you know, a thriving uh online school in Minskync online. And while they exist in the internet, they do need an office. Um, and they have an office manager. They need a place for kids to pick up
computers and and books. They even do use books and things like that. So, we need an office that is for Minsk. We know we want to grow that program. And so, the proposal would be to move that into um the education service center and stop calling it the education service center and call it Phoenix Academy. Um
before I ask Andy Croxstead, our um director of finance to come up, let me say one point about the money and then I'll ask Andy to give you an initial overview of our thinking along those lines before I ask Mike to come up and talk about facilities. Um it is totally understandable for people people to say
if you have a deficit, how could you consider spending money on these facilities changes? There really are four big answers to that. First of all, by state statute, there are funding streams that are available to school districts for facilities investments that are not available for teaching and
learning. The deficit that board members uh have uh uh heard about in my budget proposal and that I think we have a good plan to uh resolve that you will vote on in your next meeting involves the general fund. It involves our dollars for teaching and learning. Those cannot
be co-mingled with dollars that are dedicated for facilities purposes. So reason number one is there's a separate funding stream. I think that's the right policy for the state to have because if you don't have dedicated funding for buildings, we know uh in many cases educators, myself included, will spend
the money on teaching and learning and let the buildings start to decay because that's what's in front of me and this is a long-term thing about indoor air quality. So there are separate funding streams that we would be tapping. Um the second reason why we would be investing
even at a time of very tight resources is that the space does influence the quality of education that the students receive. Back to that Winston Churchill uh uh quote and so there is an educational dimension to these investments that is very very real
especially for a program like rail where um they're programming or or Phoenix Academy. The third is that you save the money today and you pay the price down the road. If we if we def if we stayed in the Fidell building for instance, we not only would have a a catastrophic uh
indoor air quality system failure at some point. Our engineers tell me for sure within 10 years likely five, the rest of the building is structurally unsound as well. And so um you kick the can down the road at your peril in those uh areas. And then finally in this proposal there are some efficiencies.
the CEK change of getting rid of busing kids across town and uh needing to leave space uh does save some dollars. Um at Churchill um the vast majority of staff would move to Hoover, but you don't have um the same thing with food service,
health office, um uh cler uh clerical, custodial. So there's some modest savings there. Very importantly, um there would be not only no changes in the vast majority of staff, there would be no changes to attendance boundaries. So everybody goes to Churchill would go to the new combined uh Churchill Hoover
and everybody goes to Hoover would go to the new combined um Churchill Hoover. So with that I would like to ask Andy to come up and uh give you a overview of our current thinking on finances and then actually Mike why don't we avoid transitions and have you come up and join as well and then we'll let the rest
of uh the group um come on up over after that. So thank you. Good evening board. Uh happy to be back before you tonight to talk about um some of the funding uh options that we have identified for these particular projects.
Admittedly, we haven't gotten down too far into the weeds uh simply because we wanted to make sure that this pro these this plan as a whole had an opportunity to proceed. And and as a matter of fact, u beginning tomorrow, we'll be working with our financial adviserss to really
dig down now in into the into the weeds so that we are able to answer some fundamental questions at a very very detailed level u about these particular items here especially what would be the financial impact to our taxpayers.
That's obviously very important. And as I as I go through the different funding sources, I I I'll identify those that that could potentially have that impact and those others that that certainly would not. We continue to talk about our general fund budget and the deficits that we're
projecting out into the future. And so we know it's very important that we think about u what if any impact of the general fund these projects would have. There could be some positive impact as well that Dr. pel has mentioned but certainly not enough to offset what the
potential costs could be overall. Uh and then what would that factor be again in terms of the general fund the operating capital impact that is a component of one of the funding sources and I'll get into that in just a little bit um uh when we start talking into the the
actual um the four uh items that we've identified fund balance and reserve impact. If you recall, this board approved a $6 million committed fund balance last year after the audit, and those dollars would be identified as as
uh useful resources to help fund this work. LTFM eligibility, we have many uh projects um in this plan that would at least partially be paid for through LTFM, long-term facility maintenance dollars. Those are those restricted
funding sources that Dr. Pel spoke about earlier. That's also the dollars related to the bonds that we uh issued earlier this month and that you um accepted at our last meeting. And so that is the funding mechanism around LTFM that we have the opportunity as a a larger
district to uh issue bonds to do that work. Lease levy, lease purchase capacity, we'll talk about that in a moment. Risk and and sensitivity scenarios. We know there's obviously risk to everything that we do. And I'm not talking about safety risk, but what is the financial risk in terms of any of
the decisions that we might make? And then of course just basically summarizing all of that up and what is that impact to all of us uh as a as a community as we think about the particular projects. And I'd like to thank um Mike and and the team at facilities. They've
done a tremendous job working with all of our partners and getting some preliminary cost estimates together. And I think if there are any questions specific to a particular project and its cost, he's probably more suited to answer those questions. They've provided
me with this with the the costs that um our experts are providing to him. And then uh our our our team in the finance department then went to work to try to identify along with our support from um our financial advisor at Ellers that identify those potential funding sources. So, the first one I will talk
about is the the moving back of CEK in into the high schools. Right now, that's estimated about $4.5 million. And we would expect um a number of uh possibilities. And these are possibilities. These are not our recommendations. These are possible
funding sources for each of these line items. So when we come back for the final presentation, there will clearly be recommendations, but until we get through some of that analysis with our financial advisors, we're not making a particular funding recommendation. We're
just identifying what sources could be used because there are statutes around what sources can be used and for what projects. So that particular work could be again some of the $6 million reserves. It could be capital bonds, and I'll talk about each of these in a
moment, or some LTFM dollars. Same with the G uh Hoover and Gage renovation work at $3.5 million. The Churchill addition um would likely could likely be funded wholly um with a lease purchase
agreement. And that lease purchase agreement would allow us to um use our lease levy authority to pay for those. And so that would be one of those items that we would carefully want to consider because there could be a local tax impact or there would be a local tax
impact. How much that would be, again, we have to do the work in the study to determine what that would look like. Uh it it's important to note and Mike reaffirmed to me today that in that $16.6 $6 million. It does include uh some of the renovations that need to
take place for the um existing Churchill building that would house the middle school ALC. So, both of those projects are included in a $16.6 million. So, uh essentially that line could could or should have been named maybe Churchill work including addition the Phoenix
Academy renovation. We're expecting uh of the majority, not all, but the majority of this to be funded through LTFM dollars. And so again, we have a defined funding source uh that this board is uh has has approved and and so
about 70% of those of those costs would be funded through the LTFM program. And then we have some other work done at that uh site that is not LTFM eligible. And Mike is the expert on what is and is not LTFM LTFM eligible, but generally
it's you have to replace like for like. So we can take the carpet out and put new flooring in. We can paint the walls. If we have to do work above the ceiling, we can rip the ceiling out, but we can't necessarily add walls. We can't make more rooms. We can't split spaces. We can't do major renovation, but we can do
those uh the work renovation work that is related to like in indoor air quality if we're replacing duct work, things like that. So um there's a lot of rules around what uh projects can actually be um funded with LTFM. And so that means we have to find almost 30% of that
project costs um either through cash reserves or capital bonds are the identified sources. And then of course the Phoenix relocation there would need to be some minor work done at the existing FEL building where Phoenix would move while the work at their
current space is done. So while ESC/ Phoenix is being renovated, they would have to have a a spot to house their program for one year and that would be the current Fidel and uh there'd be some necessary um uh changes there to uh
support that program and Mike can get into more of those details. So as a whole you can see it's about a $44 million project estimated as as it is today. It does come with some potential uh annual savings um in operations both both in the CEKC decentralization we've
talked about that Dr. Mel talked about that some transportation and some other costs related to now taking CEK from a centralized location and putting it back into the schools. We also have some lease um savings and uh transportation costs. Again, we've talked about that as
well. We do know also presuming the board uh wants us to continue with the sale of the Fidel building. We expect there to be around, let's just say, $4 million of proceeds from the sale of that building
once we have a buyer and we're in a position to actually sell that building. We're we're we're done with its utilization. And so those dollars can be used specifically to fund this kind of work. There's no debt on that building. So we we we have uh these dollars that
can go specifically to operating capital type work. And so uh that would be available once that took place. And then of course we have some other um and Dr. Dr. Pel mentioned this the avoided costs for example of doing any additional major work at Fredell which is a
building that um we are planning to sell but again some of the changes perhaps um you know uh might we we don't think it would necessarily it wouldn't conflict with that but should the board decide that this is not a a useful plan then obviously we have to think about what do
we do with the programs that are there today. So, as we think about the four sources now, let me just walk through each one of them. The lease purchase, it allows us again to use our lease levy authority that allows the board to levy dollars uh on the on the taxpayers to
pay for those particular bonds annually over a life of probably 20 years. That does raise taxes potentially depending on what other projects we may or may not add into, for example, our long-term facilities maintenance plan. So without getting too far into the weeds, I just
want to make sure that you understand there's a revenue source available when we have a lease purchase option. A lease purchase option allows us to sell those bonds. We um we pay essentially lease uh
to the owner of that building. It's usually a financial institution and upon uh the the completion of our principal and interest payments, we then assume ownership. And it's it's a it's a defined statute um funding mechanism
that is uh the one option that does come with additional revenue authority or levy authority from this board. The rest of them well the rest of them essentially if we
uh wanted to make no changes um let's talk about capital bonds. Capital bonds essentially is our ability to just issue debt but with no additional revenues coming into the district. So there's no
authority for this board to issue uh additional levy. There's no additional levy authority. So ultimately what happens is we would have to use existing operating capital dollars in our general fund to pay that principle and interest.
So unlike the lease levy, so unlike the lease levy where we have new money coming in, this would be additional debt without any additional revenue to support it. And so what would that mean? That would mean we'd have to find
reductions potentially somewhere else to account for that principal and interest payment that we'd have to make each and every year. We don't yet know exactly how much that would be, but here is an estimate based on if we borrowed $10 million. Uh it
would mean that on an annual basis, it's about um 975 about a million dollars uh if we paid it back over 15 years. So uh we would essentially have to find another $975,000 in the general fund to pay for this PR
the principal and interest uh in this particular scenario. That's just one of again the four LTFM. We've talked a lot about this. The board knows a lot about LTFM. Um we called this neutral um taxpayer neutral.
And the reason it could be taxpayer neutral ultimately is you have an approved plan already for 10 years. And should you choose to maintain that level of spending, what would happen is projects would be in and out. So the
plan allows us MDE allows us to change the plans within any fiscal year without necessarily changing how much we spend. And so if the board determines that this is a a feasible plan and those projects that have been identified as long-term facility maintenance eligible, if those
projects are not yet in that plan, they could be moved into that plan and funded within the streams that you've already determined based on last year's approved plan. So in other words, we have that identified revenue, we have the identified expenditures. Those
identified expenditures could change as long as we maintained the same level of revenue or borrowing. And our revenue, remember what we do, we borrow those dollars. Those are the bonds that we issued last week. We borrow those
dollars and pay them back annually. There is another option with the LTFM plan and that would be to add some additional projects to the approved plan and if you did that it would ultimately raise the tax impact. We have authority
you have authority to do that but it would come with a a an increase in the tax impact. And so when you start talking about that and you start talking about lease purchase that's where we need our expertise to help us walk through several models and scenarios. And ultimately our goal is to try to
maintain as a level tax rate. As you recall, Jod Zespaw last week reminded the board that the goal under the current LTFM model is to maintain a relatively flat tax rate for our
homeowners. And so that could be impacted. that tax rate could be increased if so if the board so determined appropriate by adding some additional projects into what's already been approved. Finally, the cash reserves. I think this one is pretty
straightforward. There really are no strings attached to these dollars. They can be used in any way that this board uh so um deems appropriate. Again, there's $6 million that's been identified so far uh that's in committed. um there's the opportunity to
use some additional unassigned fund balance out of the general fund, but of course, if you recall, we do have some plans for using that into the future for some of our operating um deficit as well. So again, these are all four sources of uh funding. We're not
recommending any of them for any portion at this particular time. This is just to give you an idea of what we'll be doing now with our Ellers's team in the next couple of weeks so that we can fine-tune a recommendation for you and give you some options that would identify, you
know, um what the tax impact would be under this scenario or this scenario. And and we want there to make sure that there's full visibility and transparency from the perspective of what a um what a a taxpayers's um impact might be.
Okay, I'll transition right into Sorry. Good evening, board members. Chair Nathan, I appreciate the time and to come and represent facilities in this important um mission that we've been on for I think Dr. Pel said over a year now
or at least 12 months. Um, and from a facility standpoint, just to kind of give you a quick background, we've had a lot of questions about this facility, what facility, what facility. We've literally taken every facility, picked it up, and made sure that we're looking into every facility on what works for
this. So, it's been a very comprehensive 12 months um to say the least. So, to go through these one by one, as Dr. Pel said, uh, laid it out in the first uh, program, the first building is Churchill. It was constructed in 1967. We did a full building update back in
2015, which included a lot of the indoor air quality upgrades that you would consider into most of our projects that seem to happen every year after year. Um, which is about 33,700 square ft. It's really hard to believe that that update was 12 years ago or soon to be 12 years ago. It seems to fly
pretty fast. But that location sits on 8 acres of property, but it also butts up to a city park. So, it does kind of make for a larger footprint from what we would look at for one of our schools and then um incorporates two playgrounds along with 46 parking stalls. The new
proposal would lay it out and look similar like this. I shaded in some areas there, but I really wanted to emphasize the city park area, kind of what is existing and what would be staying so you get a better idea of um what really doesn't exist at this point. So the area that's shaded in red would
be the impacted area for the new addition. Now the new addition wouldn't cover that whole area. That would be included with a new driveway and additional parking to um house the additional staff members with the additional size building. What that green area represents is what there's a
current playground that's aged and in need of replacement as we were moving through our plan. Um, so the timing would be perfect, but it would be updated with a dual a younger uh child playground along with the older child, so they'd be on the same footprint rather than separate the way they
currently are. It would also maintain quite a bit of green space on the side of it as well as a small area up where it says district property and then the tennis courts and and so on wouldn't be impacted by this proposal. This is kind of an artist rendering I
would say or some of the things that we've put together. It gives you an idea of how it would look. Uh and you the proposal if it would pass if the board would approve it, we would be really heavily into um the design nuts and bolts and how it would lay out and more
of the appearance and things. So this gives you a pretty good idea of close to what we're considering. Next is the building. So the Church Hill side, the existing building is on the left as you look at it. So it's a larger portion of the building and then the
addition would be a smaller addition off to the right. And again, we had to placeholders. It's kind of like if you're making a home budget, you're going to decide what you're going to buy, but then you actually go to the store and you buy the real things. We're placing these items on here so we could come up with a fairly close estimate,
especially based upon a year from now and some of those numbers and really massaging what the what what the building could look like. um at when it's all complete potential timeline for this project would be so we had the board approval
sometime end of July early August and then if that were to uh be approved this potential timeline we would start immediately on design and the big design prop the big part of the design would be the addition that's going to be the critical part of it the rest of it it' be a small amount of programming and see
what the needs are of the ALC program moving in there for the 2000 uh 27 school year. After that, it would be um really going out to bid. And then, as you can see, July, next summer of July, the addition would start. We'd break ground, do a lot of the civil work, and
have uh fencing and protection set up so we could separate construction similar to what we did at Hoover a number of years ago with the intent of completing around May and uh moving in getting ready for the 2028-29
school year with a new addition. Next, we move to Churchill Hoover. Hoover again constructed in ' 68. We put on the addition for the early childhood in 2018. The original building was 35,600 ft². The addition was almost
exactly the same, slightly larger um at 36,900 with a grand total of 72,000 square ft. Uh the building sits on 9.83 acres and again it butts up to a city park. So it does look extremely large and it really made uh an obvious choice
to add the addition back in 2018 because of the large footprint. uh 134 parking stalls, so almost double of what is uh currently at Church Hill along with two playgrounds. So, this is a snapshot kind of an idea of how things would lay out.
And there's different colors on there. They just kind of represent what the mind would take you to different grade levels, although none of that has been picked out. So, um, that really kind of explains the programming rather than just a colorful map to look at with really no information. But it did help
us dive into it working with our with all of our experts in the different programs to kind of see what would fit, what wouldn't work, and what needs to be moved. Some ideas that we added, and Dr. Pel touched on them earlier, but the restroom needs, we have to raise some
toilets, lower toilets, um, raise some sinks also. um you know classroom sync heights what what would need to happen there along with traffic flow the current setup for traffic flow is set up for early childhood parent drop off how does that look if we added um K through
five there along with lockers the lockers are weren't included in the early childhood because they weren't really needed for that type of of environment so we will need to add some lockers as well as the playground again is similar age to Church Hills and it's aging and in need of a uh replacement so
that's all considered Ed in the plan. All right. Hoover Early Learning School going to Gage. Gagege again 1964. The if you look at the if you look at the the original section of Gage Hoover and Churchill, they're almost exact the same. They're they're mirrors to each
other and they're all in that same era, probably the same designer. But that one had an addition added to added to it 1989 which essentially made their square footprint about 62,000 square feet. So slightly smaller than the Hoover gauge setup or in that same area. The uh
building lot sits on 14 and a half acres which used to butt up to Gage East for those that remember that small school that we owned and then later sold off uh as well as 148 parking stalls and again two playgrounds. this building footprint. The red area is
set up for what we would propose to put the early childhood area in, which is the older part of the building, but all of it has had an indoor air quality upgrade in the last 10 years. Um, so those items uh would be similar on both sides of the buildings, as well as the colored um areas on the K5 side. We
haven't really pinned down what grades would go where or, what rooms would be impacted according to the current schedule at Gage. One change from Gagege to Hoover is there's two playgrounds again at Gagege, but under this current proposal, the
early childhood, the smaller youth playground is actually on the other side of the building on the east side where the larger K5 children would be. So, we're also considering an update to both playgrounds to uh make that work better with the building usage. as well as gym
usage, multi-purpose area. They do have a cafeteria that they use also for gym space and we have to consider on how the uses of that flow with an early childhood program. Again, sink heights, um restrooms, traffic flow, and future growth planning as well as a declining
enrollment uh possibility and again some locker needs at both sites. A potential timeline again for these two would mirror the board approval in August. And then again, we would start right away with design and programming and really digging into the to the
actual needs right down to paint colors and other things as you as you can imagine. And then we would um be bidding around that end of January, early February. And the work would really start right after the last day of school of this coming school
year. and we would be ready for the following school year of 2829. CEK to the high schools. There's a number of maps here and I apologize if some of them are a little small but I didn't want to add to the 15 slides that were already included but CEK was
constructed in 2015 and the building is an 18,700 square foot building. the building a lot. It it really wasn't critical because it isn't owned by the districts, but it does house seven classrooms, two bathrooms, and one conference room.
The proposal, I I have it broke down between the high schools. And what it would do is it would add space to all three high schools. And and I should back up, not add space because the space already exists. What it would do, it would carve out spaces to house this program and fit the critical needs
inside the building. So, it does show an area for our nurses lab. Uh, Century, we did have kind of an aha moment when we were walking around Century. Um, with the principal and the building usage where we are now, it was offered up that the current locker areas that are kind of in the middle of the pods seemed to
be the obvious space to build out some of these needed classrooms and it really didn't impact the numbers and the and the students at Century. So that was fantastic and there really was a positive uh feeling with these programs when we were meeting with the high schools. So it does lay out a few of the
locker bays that are kind of marked in red as well as the top left one is the current science classroom. So there'll be very little changes to that classroom. This shows the culinary kitchen. We did have a few changes here at the end for a location of the culinary kitchen, but it
does work out again in the locker bay. but it is right across the hallway from the current um uh fax area um that type of uh setting. So, it's really close in proximity to how they could actually countermingle as well as um the next one is Mayo High
School. They did end up having a room right across from the cafeteria that seemed to work well and was kind of in limbo of what the uses were. So, we were able to um utilize that space as well as another space um up by the current fax
lab at uh Mayo High School for the culinary edition. So, again, they're right close uh uh in proximity to each other as well as a computer lab that was already fed up at Mayo High School. So, this would house a space for that. And then the last one would be John
Marshall. And I apologize if it feels like I'm rushing through this. I know there'll be a lot of questions at the end, but uh again a culinary um in the same area along with agriculture and sports bio. John Marshall um had had another aha moment where if you're
familiar with John Marshall, their sportsman's biolab is right next to the uh auto shop and kind of in a separate wing of the building. And it really has always kind of worked out for the program, but looking at the big picture on where we're settling, it really did kind of make sense to have it move into
the science section of the building and house in that area as well as a welding and that type of industrial type setting moving next to the auto shop. So, it was almost like a perfect scenario in the end. But these slides show that as well. These last two kind of represent the
welding area and the engineering lab. And we've had a number of conversations with current staff members and their critical needs for those programs. As Dr. Pel said, these would essentially be a hub. So they could have u quite a few more students uh initially than some of
the other classes. Again, that potential time frame is similar to the other ones. We would start um with board approval in August and then um be in design, be ready to go, bid out um as early as January, February. This is just a potential time
frame. and then all the work would take place over next summer session so we're ready for the school year of 2728. Last one, Phoenix Academy. This is one we probably spent our most time on um during the last 12 months, but the
current ESC building as we call it was a 1967 building. Really wasn't built for a school, but it was built in that same time frame. It's around 50,000 square feet sitting on one of our smaller footprints with just about the same size as Fidel. I know there's been a lot of
conversations about Fidel and the size of our property, but ESC is 2.3 acres. It has the same amount of parking stalls as Friedell, which was kind of hard to believe, and it does have one playground. No kitchen, no cafe currently, and no gym spaces, a large recreation area that was actually built
out a few years back. This would be a potential footprint or what it could look like. And we've had a number of questions come in since this study session has been posted. And really what it did, it gave us again some early programming. We had a number of critical meetings with the right
staff members from all of these programs. And then we sat down with a design team and said, "How would we make it look?" So, one of our first looks at it was would be to have a kitchen right in the center of the area that can serve uh two different programs simultaneously with separate cafeterias and then have
its own gym space as well as keeping the wood shop which is a very critical part of that programming there and trying to move things that's better centered around the current loading dock which if everybody remembers to or has been to ESC you walked right across the loading dock to go in the main entry that's
always been kind of a critical piece for me especially in the health and safety area. So, we're looking at um tackling a few of those items in uh part of this facility update. This is an artist ren rendering that we completed um last fall when we had a
diff or the initial idea of ESC and it just gave kind of what the building could look like and I know um it always has had that industrial look and it never looked like a school building and nobody understood what ESC stood for. So, this would actually put the name on the building uh and bring a little bit
of a pride of ownership back to the building potentially for that site. Again, the timeline, this one's a little different. Um, so we pending board approval in August. Again, we would jump right into the design of uh what the
needs are for the building, but the timing isn't as critical as the other projects because it will also save us money to move them out of that building. We initially sat down and said, how could we do it in a typical two or three summer project like what we're doing at Mayo High School over the next four
summers? And it really does not have the space for even a layown area, contractor parking, and then if we went into the school year, how would that look? the students would really be triggered. There were some things that really didn't work well with construction simultaneous to a school year. So, it
would allow us to move them into the Fidel building, which will be vacant after the other two move out. And we would be able to u also save some uh funage on having that program be completed over a 9-month proposed nine or 10 month build. So,
that would be ready again for the 28 29 school year. They would actually be at Fredell for the 27 28 school year. Is there a trick to it? There it goes. All right. Thank you.
We were at um our lead graduation. We we it's been a graduation season. And I wanted to end with this picture because those were moments of great joy and celebration. We earn those moments at the board and leadership level in moments like this. Um these are tough
decisions. Um I have not settled on my final recommendations to you on these points. Um and as far as this moment and the moments that we will have in July and August may seem from those moments, uh the connection as board members know
is very direct. The quality of decisions that we make now about uh issues of resources and space and educational programming will influence the uh experience our kids have in our schools and how they walk across those stages. um uh at the end of their K12
educational careers. I would like to invite the colleagues, it's kind of a cast of thousands, so we're going to need to squeeze in who are here from the various programs and schools that will be impacted to come on up um and join uh Mike and Andy at the uh tables. So, uh
everybody who's here, you're not you're not here for the um entertainment value of this presentation. I know. So, just please uh grab a we're going to need to pass some mics. And the number of chairs works. That's a good sign. um board members um these
folks uh uh many of them are our uh principles and leaders um of our schools and programs that would be impacted by these changes. Um I do not plan uh to ask any of them to return for your discussions in July and August. And so
while you certainly can um ask me and uh Mike and Andy and Jackie anything at the system level, we will be with you in July and August. And of course we are able to answer your questions at any point. And so I would suggest that this is a unique opportunity to hear from the
people who are directly working in the programs that would be impacted along of course with asking us questions. But um the discussions that we have in July and August will very much focus on our analysis and my my recommendation and those kinds of things. So I'm grateful to you all for being willing to uh come in. Maybe if we can uh start with
Principal Pearson here and you could just introduce um your name and I think we all know but especially for people who are uh here and watching online your name and which school or program or department you are with and then madam chair we will turn it over to board members for uh questions and comments.
>> Hi uh Emily Pearson and I'm at Churchill Hoover principal at Churchill Hoover soon to be Riverside on July 1. >> I'm Erin Raymond. I am currently principal at Riverside. >> Just have to pick it up. soon to be principal at Churchill Hoover.
>> Hi, I'm Travis Bane. I'm the assistant principal at Middle School ALC. >> Dustin Marorrow, director of transportation. >> I'm Brandon McCraic and I'm here on behalf of CEK. >> Jackie Peterson officer.
>> Yeah. Got to pass the thing. >> Yep. There we go. Chris. >> Chris has got his own. Chris Davidson, principal over at Gage Elementary. >> Erica Summacker, director of early learning. Melissa Stany, director of systemwide
special education services. >> Uh Rob Scripture, principal of Phoenix Academy. >> Thank you. I know that focus on the amplification can be a little awkward here, just like our our students and our high school theaters tell me. We don't have enough mics. Um we don't have
enough mics here either. It's really for people online and other people out there. So, I know it takes a little time to pass it, but if you just and it's a little awkward. You don't have to pick it up every time, but we'll do that. So, Madam Chair >> and board members, we said that we would try to do it by topic. So, the first topic we're going to cover is bring
Churchill Hoover together as one K5 school at Hoover. Who would like to kick us off with a question? Director Martin. Anytime there is a change, especially a change in buildings, it's it's disruptive and some people are
uncomfortable. And um and I'm thinking I'm guessing many of you have an answer for this, but um aren't we doing well enough now? And what would happen if we just decided not to make any changes,
especially with a Gage Churchill Hoover? Well, the the first issue would be we would need to find another location for for our current programs at Fidel should we continue to um sell that building. We're still in a situation where we have
two programs and no home. But in terms of Churchill Hoover, we do think about disruption to learners. Um the the the amazing thing about this proposal compared to the the all the others we considered is there's no boundary change
uh implication here. So we would essentially be picking up all the students at Churchill and moving them together with nearly all the staff. And we say nearly because we know we may have duplication of say uh uh nursing services or there may be some uh some
support staff that we don't need uh two of um but all the teachers of those classrooms and students would theoretically go to Hoover. So in the realm of disruption it's the least disruptive. Um and then the other piece
about this is they're joining their families. So, we're we are merging two schools but one family uh you know where there's one family involved. So, we're now putting kids together with their their siblings.
>> Director McClacklin. Um, one of the things that I was thinking about in um, Chief Peterson, this might be the question for you, is I'm trying to get my head around um, historically with this population of students, have
they been impacted by other program changes andor other boundary adjustments that I haven't really thought through some of that to know? Um, you know, some schools in our district have had boundary changes impacting them. Um, I
don't know enough about that to know if this part of the city has been impacted and to what extent. Can you help me? >> Not in the recent past. We had some discussions back when we were uh working on the attendance option redesign where there was a proposal to make a boundary
change that did not happen. So, not in the recent past. I'm thinking about my time as a principal at Riverside, which is now uh more than a dozen years ago. We did have a boundary change where some of the kids that I had at Riverside went
to Jefferson and there may have been a fraction of kids from Churchill Hoover, but I can't be sure. We'd have to go back in u but it's been more than a dozen years ago if there was a boundary change. It's been a very um a very stable environment there. And I just I
have to say if you read through that whole 40page document, you'll see in the history of the past year, some of the plans we some of the plans we proposed like moving programs, moving Sunset to Gage, for example, that's in the history would have resulted in three or four
boundary changes for that one school. And so when we landed on this idea of being able to move all of the children together, um it feels the least disruptive. and and yeah, so we we can look at the history. We would have that
history of the boundary change, but uh maybe Emily remembers. >> Yeah, we had a boundary change a few years ago just when Overland opened. We lost um like a hundred students to Overland and Elton Hills just as there was some shifting. Um but there hasn't been like a large boundary change
recently. >> Dr. I guess I'll begin with the uh 2023 boundary change uh or tenant 3 design. Um and thank you for sharing the um
effect of that change. Um the point I'd like to begin with deals with um part of that uh effort which occurred in 2023. There uh seemingly was more community engagement.
Uh uh there were uh FAQ documents which were provided to uh allow um affected uh communities
constituents to not necessarily reinvent the will every time they had a question and chose to submit it either to the board or to uh you superintendent. Uh but they could go to a central
uh source to uh see what has been asked and what was out there and what the uh responses were. Additionally, um there were identified uh survey or feedback forms made available. Uh the direction I'm going
with this deals a lot with just community engagement in general. Uh I would probably say that a full 60% of either the emails I have received or the phone calls I have received were from uh Church Hill
uh either parents and or um uh neighbors who uh felt that they were left outside the discussion. Now I am aware and I'm glad to hear that uh even beginning well not necessarily beginning tonight but uh
as uh recently as um miday uh there were community there was a community meeting held there were um uh other opportunities to inform the uh uh affected communities. Now, more
specifically, because again, uh constituent concerns directed to me have been uh well, we were told there were going to be uh community meetings. Uh there was one at least to the uh to
what I was uh what was shared with me. I don't know. Uh I guess I'm simply bringing to light that moving forward I think it is important that we ensure that uh uh our community engagement effort is such to where um uh those
being affected will actually um feel that they've been included. Uh I was intrigued to hear that we were actually joining families this effort. Uh I don't want to ask what I had to think. Well,
did families request a joining of you know in terms of you know uh Hoover Churchill? Uh I want to be honest as well. Um I have a uh
grandchild that attends uh uh Church Hill. I have attended a number of uh uh programs, activities there at Churchill and um uh it is a wonderful learning environment. I've also uh attended uh
functions at Hoover. Uh I don't believe this will be a mismatch. I think it can be a win-win. Uh I'm just always concerned that uh sometimes decisions are made and uh those which may be affected impacted are left feeling that
they weren't necessarily a part of the decision. Uh is there some assurance we can provide to um parents uh neighbors uh that uh their voices will be uh considered that they
will have opportunity to provide input and uh that there will be some mechanism to assess or evaluate what comes of the input they provide to either the board or to you superintendent male. >> Superintendent.
>> Yeah, thank you Dr. Bo. I actually um when you referenced the uh 2023 proposal uh tidy the tenants option redesign after the failure of the um referendum that was of course across the whole city a crisis moment and so there was a lot of uh discussion I would say
the feedback that we have done this time around with staff has far eclipsed that we have engaged the staff much more and respectfully director Barlo the I've read all the feedback and the vast majority is from people who live around churchel not from Churchill parents. There's been a very small number of
parents from Churchill. And while I do believe that neighbors um uh certainly are stakeholders, they pay for our schools that that community is important. Um they are not engaged in our schools in the same way that staff and parents are. And so I I would like to invite uh Principal Pearson who is at
the school now just to give a sense of what you've heard thus far and then candidly your own perspective um as someone who's been leading the school for a period of this proposal. And yes, Director Barlo, I also hear your point about the desire for, um, as we bring
you back, um, a full recommendation, some additional community engagement. And so, um, with that caveat of where we've been, I I hear you and we'll take that into consideration. But if I can ask Emily to share some thoughts. >> Yeah, I've been thinking, of course, a lot about this. Actually, for for the
five years that I've been at Churchill Hoover, I've kind of been dreaming of like, wow, what if we could have Churchill just and Hoover all together, you know, like in in my world, um I could see the benefit because as you referenced, um Churchill is an amazing
little community. I think I've walked all of you around it and it is just a a beautiful learning space and Hoover is special, too. And Hoover Early Learning is special. So whenever I'd dream of this, I would think, well, you know, kind of run up against a reason why not.
Um, but having K5 together for the continuity would be really helpful while challenging to move those kids. Um, especially those there's a few families that live right around Church Hill that walk and they love it and and they hang
out every day after school and connect with people. I know it'd be challenging for them, but I've heard a lot from families saying that they would appreciate their kids being at one school. Um, I know of two families, it's not very many, but have left Churchill Hoover to go to a neighboring school
because their kids could be at one place then. Um, and in terms of I know teachers like the small environment, you know, we have less than 200 kids at Churchill. That's a benefit um in terms of knowing all of the students and things, but the support across the
buildings is just different than you'd get if it was a larger K5. Uh for example, like our our reading specialist this year will travel between the two buildings. Um counselor, social worker, they're all halftime in each building. Um the principal and the assistant
principal, we always go back and forth. So we're at um like I'm at Church Hill two and a half days a week, you know. So just some of these these things that make it difficult. Um we always joke that there are some benefits like only three lunch periods a day at one site you know to get through. But really I
think um from from like a my perspective it would be helpful. Of course I know it's also like bittersweet for people because Church Hill and Hoover have held um special places in their hearts. And then I just have to say that it is hard for the Hoover early learning staff to
leave. I don't want to leave their voices out that um I think that they're okay with leaving, but um that has been I've heard more concern from then the Churchill Hoover staff themselves, the elementary ones like, "Oh, yeah, that makes sense." Uh for the most part, like worried about room size and things, but
the early learning people um I think have the have more feelings and wonderings about their their position in their roles. >> Director White Horton. >> Um so I I'm I'm listening. I've been paying attention. I've gotten several
emails as well. Um, I went down a little bit of a rabbit hole uh because as I've said before, I'm from a different district. Originally did my elementary school in New Jersey, which was a different structure where we did K2 K through2 for one school 3 to five. A lot of it was set up that way. And the
rabbit hole I went down with the research that's available, I was like, well, why as uh Dr. Mel pointed out today, why would they have structured schools in this way? Uh knowing even then that there were some differences in transition students that there were some
potential loss of educational value of kids moving from one building to another because not only do you have young learners moving, but you also have them learning a new building which in some cases could disrupt the learning process. So, in my little rabbit hole that I went down, what I found was
sometimes in larger districts, because again, I'm from New Jersey. Um, because they were in the schools were residential areas to not build these castle-like structures in order to house K through five for the number of kids that were around in the in the 80s. Um,
they built smaller buildings, therefore to not obstruct from the residential appearance of the of the neighborhood. That was the the best explanation I could find. There was tons of them out there. But I said, "Well, that makes a lot of sense, right? Who wants to live even with the school, but how large the
structure would have to be in order to house the number of students um it was more sensible at that time to create smaller buildings that were more aesthetically pleasing um in the neighborhoods." So, I just want to preface with that because I've always said, "Well, why not, right?" Because
that was the way I grew up. And you have, you know, nostalgic towards the way you went to school. Um with that being said, um I appreciate your comment on how that will impact the students because I guess my first thought is how is what we do what we are doing impacted
impacting the students. I've received several emails and I will have to speak with honesty that where I struggle is we are still serving RPS students. So we will still be housing students in that space. um to the other side that I
haven't heard much of and we haven't discussed is by moving this other population of students into this environment. The same love, attention, and support that these younger learners have got can also benefit this middle school ALC students and them having a
permanent home and having a building in a neighborhood that is safe and has a neighborhood environment. And I haven't heard much of that. This is just Stephanie speaking. Um, but I I struggle with that just a little bit because if we're in living within a school zone, which ironically I lived one block from
my I lived in a school zone most of my life, there are a lot of changes that impact the homeowners that are immediately in the in the area of the school zone, which is why when we moved to Rochester, my parents said they would not buy a home again in a school zone because there's impacts that affect
living very close to the school. So, I just wanted to throw in my two cents um in regards to where I'm standing currently uh with that uh with the thought of combining those schools. I I personally think that this could be a benefit to the learners uh which I think
should be the primary focus. I have not heard anything um besides our current desires for what people want, but I haven't really heard anything in regards to a negative impact on the actual students. Um the research
is there. We all are aware that there's more impact of the students remaining um in one building. Um and then that kind of segus me into this and I'm sorry uh uh chair and uh madam chair if I'm I'm going into this but with the relocation
into Hoover um and us moving those schools around. I guess with that same continuity and I'm sure we'll jump into this but I just will say it now since it flows. Um, my concern is will those students be able to continue on the track? So, I know that since we do not
have early learning education in every building, we do have students that come in that that is outside of their district boundaries. Um, will there be some kind of exception uh to the early laners that are in Gage or Hoover or
Mighty Oaks where those parents can get that continuity as well, especially if they're in the early learning that implies that there's some kind of potential um delay in their learning track so that they are able to get the full benefit of the continuity of being in a K through5.
>> Just pendant. >> Yeah. Uh, thank you, Dr. Wer. going to call on either um uh Erica or Dustin or or or Jackie or both. If I understand your question, Director Whitehorn, would a student who is in the early learning
program um uh at Hoover or at Gage be able to stay in the elementary school if the family chose to do so um with transportation and other things like that. Um could you give a thought? This is first of all, just as I said,
director Barlo, we're here to take your uh requests and feedback. So, just as I heard the request for some work on community engagement, we may need to think about this a bit, but let me just open the floor to see if uh Director Schumacher has some thoughts on that point. >> Yeah, I think um in terms of early
learning, as you stated, we are a district-wide program. So, families make a choice to come to one of our buildings. One thing that's unique about the funding we receive is we actually receive seats specific to serve Gagege students. Um so by going into Gage, we
are really serving the community that we're supposed to be serving. We already outreach we try and pull those students into the building, but this will give them some continuity from their pre-K learning center straight into their um elementary. And then in terms of the district-wide options um to be able to transport yourself and and maintain that
school setting, that would be something that would be available as it is to all students from my understanding. Does that get to your question? >> Um yeah, I guess I was just I guess my concern is just that there are busing options. So if I live southwest and I
know um just personal experience that if I have to bus my child or grandchild to Hoover, that is available. uh but then it becomes unavailable with kindergarten. And so I guess my concern is that there's a lack of um continuous service for those kids that need a
little bit more help. Um which concerns me from the the child's perspective or their learning perspective if again as we've said it is more it's better uh for the student to remain in one space K through five. So I'm concerned about the
disruption um for the kids that are not in that district. So they go from going to that building because there's a option for transportation and then even if the parent likes that environment if they don't have um a way to get that
child there that no longer becomes an option uh which is kind of unfair to the students. So, I just wonder if if as we are opening new spaces, are we considering how to offer those children that need a little bit more support early on, at least through K5?
>> Can I just offer under the current configuration, there's never an option because they go from kindergarten or from preK to third grade at Hoover. So, there's that's off the table right now completely for any student attending. And I, you know, I can think back to my
time as a principal at Bishop and then at Riverside when we had prek in our buildings, which I loved, by the way. Um, some families would either be in the neighborhood and just continue right through, which was beautiful, or they might even seek out daycare in that um
in that school or sack um so that their child could they love the school so much that they could stay. And I think by increasing our footprint, our prek footprint at Gage, it actually gives more opportunity for that to happen because kids going to prek at Gage now
have the opportunity for uh preK5 there and we have the opportunity at Hoover. Right now it it doesn't really exist at all right now um in our current confi configuration. Yeah, I would just add to one of the things that we work on
um in partnership with our sped partners is making sure and all of our elementary principles is making sure we have strong transition plans for all all of the students we serve, whether they're general education or special education. So, we're having conversations early with families as we're thinking about what that transition may look like, what
questions they may want to ask, what things they may be looking for as they're going to different buildings or if they would like to maintain the the current school they're in. Um, so that's a big piece of what we also support families with in early learning. So that way they're prepared for that transition. Um, because it wouldn't be
unlike if you were at a daycare center and then now have to go to an elementary school. So we try and build in as much as we can that's a little bit extra because they're a part of the district. >> Director Workman, >> um, I think it's important to remember a little bit of some of the history of
this. um way back when we had the prek program scattered all over the district and if you were in one school one year, you might be changing to a different school the next year. So, it was sort of like our prek kids were
constantly homeless and it made it very difficult for teachers to collaborate with each other at all. Um if there's only one or two classrooms in a building, then they're really isolated. So when we had the move to Hoover, I thought, wow, this is really really
great. They're all in one place and it it works. And I'm not going to look at it as, well, why can't we do this forever? Because we didn't do the other thing forever either. The advantages I see here is that we will have a prek at Gage, which is more northern. We'll have
prek at Hoover, which is central, and then the Pinewood option in the south. So to me it gives parents a whole lot more flexibility and choice than they have currently. >> Um we've had to make a lot of decisions at
least on my time on the board um where there have been various options that have affected a number a lot of numbers of kids. Uh Jackie Peterson mentioned um the attendance option redesign and and the boundary
changes. Um so I want to ask some questions to to kind of ground us in um uh what the what the population is that that we're affecting. Um so how many students currently attend Churchill?
>> 193 at the end of last school year approximately. And if we were to make this change that would be implemented in the 202728 school year, how many students
would have attended Churchill and then have to transition to Hoover without finishing their time at Churchill? About twothirds of two two of those classes >> about 120 >> 120 if you didn't hear. >> Okay. Um
and then We also got some questions about uh and I think it was mentioned about that neighborhood um walking that that that's one of the benefits of of Church Hill is that we have people who uh who walk to school. Um I asked the question um and
um got the answer. But can somebody tell me how many students are walking to school at Church Hill this year? >> My colleague Dustin did that work and it was 40 students. >> So 40 out of 190 are currently walking and the rest or what?
>> There's 40 currently in the walk zone. It doesn't mean they actually do walk. So, I mean, they could be getting dropped off by their parents or whatever. So, we just circled up to 1.25 and there was 40 within that >> and that would be pretty stable over time because it's the number of houses
that are in the W zone. >> Correct. Um, and then we also got some questions about um anticipating increased enrollment, the need for uh us to keep some space at Churchill. Um, and
the superintendent mentioned that our overall study is showing that we're having declining enrollment. What do we know about what our projections are for enrollment in if if Churchill stay to K2 going forward? We currently and kindergarten enrollment
uh you know rolls in throughout the summer. Um and we currently Andy are we at 49 total? >> We have 49 kindergarten right now. Um presuming that everyone currently in kindergarten and first grade would roll up and stay. Those numbers we've just
rolled those numbers forward for next year. So as of right now we're at about 170 students. as a whole, kindergarten is about 14% behind pace as we mentioned earlier from where we were a year ago. So, we would anticipate 49 more. We anticipate higher
than 49, but I'm not sure that we will get to our projected number which was um >> 63 >> 61 61 was our October. >> Oh, okay. We have seats for 63 kindergarteners. >> Yep. >> For next year. So we had projected in
this budget our enrollment projection was 61 kindergarten. We're currently at 49. >> So we're not seeing any different trend with an increase of enrollment in the Churchill area that we're um not seeing in the rest of the district with a
decrease of enrollment overall. >> Uh no no and sure Nathan it's of course this is something that we think about all the time not just tied to the Churchill Hoover issue. Um the first thing that we must do is build our projections on birth rates, not um expected housing starts or expected
turnover of homes. There are ratios that have historically worked. For instance, when older um people would sell the home in which they raised their family and you could predict younger families moving in. That is not happening not just in Rochester but around the country at anything close to the historical
rates. for some pretty basic economic reasons. People are holding on to older housing stock um for much much longer. We also know that single family homes in Rochester, while there are the three biggest national builders, in addition to our long-standing Rochester builders, are now in the area, we cannot assume
that the people who will fill those um uh new apartments and homes will necessarily have school-aged children. And that's where the birth rate becomes really really absolutely critical for us to look at. Um it defies logic that at some point that will not happen. But were we to maintain um underutilized
uh physical plant in the hope of a an enrollment boom down the road. I I think we would not be serving uh the citizens of this community well by maximizing the use of our dollars. That said, I also think because of the logical long-term
likelihood of increased enrollment growth, that is why we should not close schools. Um, we need to be as efficient as possible during this period where there absolutely will be growth in enrollment in this community, but we have a puzzling five to maybe 10-year
period where that is a very slow build uh more than we'd like. And if in fact we find that last fall's increase was not an anomaly and is a new trend, we will be enthusiastically bringing you different proposals uh for the use of
our space. But at present, we're being conservative. >> Dr. Marvin, >> I was the one that started the discussion about what if we don't do anything. I think the proposal is exactly what we need to do for for three
reasons. in no particular order, our middle school kids who need that extra support, who have those emotional needs. This is exactly the right time to give it to them because when they're still just 12 years old, so much can change if
they get what they need. and the kind of structure that a middle school ALC can bring, the kind of personalization that it can bring, it can change their lives so that by the time they get ready to move out of there and into high school, they can be on a whole different
trajectory. And we owe it to those kids and to the community to be getting kids into high school who are ready for high school and ready to really buckle down and do the work. Um, secondly, it's been my experience. I've lived in Rochester for a long time. When our schools get
renovated, when the playgrounds look better, it's really good for the neighborhood. It makes the neighborhood look better, and it's a great place for families to hang out after school on weekends. Um, it's good for everybody
who lives around there. Finally, when, as it been repeated often, when kids are in the same elementary school, kindergarten through fifth grade, been my experience that when they're older and they want to go back and visit their old school, what they really want
to do is go back and visit their old not old, former teachers. And how cool that these kids will have the same teachers in that building kindergarten through fifth grade where the teachers can talk to each other and
with fourth grade teacher or the third grade teacher asked the second grade teacher who's right there. You know, Tim's having some struggles. Do you know anything that worked for him in second grade? Those conversations happen all the time. It's good for the staff. It's
good for the kids. It's good for the community. So good for you, >> director. >> Um, I kind of want to first build on what Dr. Marvin is saying that I sort of see this in some ways, this proposal as a way to kind of rightsize our
facilities to fit what we've invested in in terms of student supports. um both the early learners with the reading supports um the um extra supports that we're giving students in the tier one, tier three,
tier 2, tier three, but also the middle school students who need that emotional behavioral emotional support um given the issues that they're facing. So that they're at the right age to help them with those issues. and that that's what we're um we've invested a lot into
helping students like that um overcome those issues as younger people so that they can be successful. Um what I really raised my hand for though is um Principal Pearson, I wanted to follow up on something you said earlier because um I was processing what you were telling
us the earlier boundary changes where you talked about when Overland opened. Were Were you the principal at that time at Churchill? >> Okay. Remind me what year that was that I'm trying to remember back. >> Oh, that >> I want to say 22 or 23.
>> 22. >> Okay. And what you were describing earlier that you said that some of the Churchill students went to Overland. >> Uh Overland I mean I'm remembering Overland Gage and Elton Hills. >> Okay. So those are student some went to a new school. >> They went to a new school.
>> Okay. And that you talk about a hundred not being at Churchill anymore. Did I understand that? >> Between Churchill Hoover. Yeah. >> Okay. Oh, Churchill and Hoover. >> Between the two of them. Yeah. I think we lost like six sections across the two of them. We used to be larger, but with
that shift, it's helped for um because we were actually feeling very crowded. You know, we had like music happening in this little room in the media center and art and things were sharing with another room. So it was very helpful at the time is we had four sections of kinder, five
of first grade and four of second grade and now we're this year we're going to be three across the board. So >> okay. So what I hear you a couple things saying is number one that you were essentially over capacity prior to that and that was one of the reasons that those boundary changes were being made by the district. Do I get that right?
>> And then also I just want to make sure I understand was there an influx of students at that time from other places >> to replace those students? >> No, there wasn't. So, no one got moved to us. That'll now be moved again. >> Got it. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> So, hearing that we're starting to uh
move into the move the middle school ALC into Churchill, can we move on to that topic? >> Sorry. >> All right. No, that's fine. You you did a natural transition for that. Can I just as you're transitioning say I I'm glad you brought back the middle school
piece because when you when we said when you said what would happen if we did nothing I feel like Travis Bane is down there saying we would not be able to grow anymore than we're currently we we we're we're landlocked in that building and we have a great need to get more
kids into the program that Travis and the staff have built up in such a beautiful way. we have kids that need it and we have no more room. So, if we do nothing, our program will not grow. And I believe the same for Rio. Um that we
have students that could benefit um and even some from out of district that we could open enroll here that we will not have room for if we do nothing. >> Perfect segue to Travis. I I was just going to say ultimately I think we have three groups of of pretty marginalized
students that with this plan it starts to kind of turn that around. Um and and I think it's important to to educate the community on on what is going on in these schools. Um because these students are are great kids and and they deserve
to have everything that all the other students in the district have. >> All right. Any other questions or comments about the middle school alternative learning center? Director, >> please.
>> Okay. She's my boss. >> Okay. I'm I'm I'm going to address the elephant in the room a little bit. Um I remember when the high school ALC kids were at Golden Hill and Golden Hill is now turned down so nobody can go or torn
down so nobody can go visit it. I remember the school board had a a tour. We had the portables that were like this. There was water standing in the basement. The boiler at that time was 70 years old
and there were no parts for it. So when we were able to buy the Rochester marketplace or whatever it was called then at a really good price, it ended up being more financially feasible
for us to do that than it would have been to try and redo Golden Hill to bring it up to standards. But it was amazing to me that some in the community were reacting to the new ALC. And for people who haven't been to it,
it is a beautiful space. But the reaction from some of our community was why do those kids need a beautiful space? And I would say those kids are the ones who need that the most. And your
reference to uh Winston Churchill before, you know, the spaces do shape who we are. And so in some of the emails that we've gotten, I've had sort of that same kind of flavor of, oh, ALC middle
school students, it's those kids again. And I'm really disturbed by that that we should have those kinds of attitudes in this community towards all of our children who need the help the most who will
become contributing taxpayer paying members of our society as opposed to just letting them deteriorate somewhere. And who knows, I know director Whitehorn likes to make
the uh, you know, schools to prison reference. You know, these kids, they're all valuable. They're all humans and we owe it to them just as much as we do to any other child who comes from a more
advantaged background. And so I am completely supportive of this huge plan. Um, I'm impressed with all of the moving parts and how they're going to fit together over time. Um, I
really want to commend Mr. Stock and Mr. Mr. Andy Crockstead for for your work in such detail over the last year. Um, some of the community, they want answers to everything right now. How much is it going to cost? What is it going to do here? What is we're not at that point
yet. So, I think that the decision that the board's going to have to make in July is going to be Are our kids worth it? Are our kids worth it? And I hope that everybody on this board
will say, "Yes, our kids are worth it." The devil, of course, is in the details of, you know, some of the financials and everything else. I'm confident we'll be able to work that out. Um, but once again, to the community, it's what are some of you people thinking? Really,
these are our kids. just because they don't live in your house, they're our kids. >> Mike, >> thank you for saying that. >> Can I can I say something to your point? Um, and it really stood out to me because a lot of times we question
everything that we're doing that's life. And um I I remember all the stories that you're talking about with Golden Hill, which was not the best facility. And I just think of these two programs we're talking of, especially rail over the years, some of the
buildings that we've shoehorned them into and some of the places that they've had had to been moved place to place. But it really stood out to me when I met um Travis at Churchill late this spring and it happened to be a beautiful morning. I we lucked out, but it was a non- studentent day and I took him for a
tour and it was just you could tell he was painting the picture in his mind of what could be at this particular site for that program. So, I I just wanted to say that that it really made me feel like we're on a path here. So, >> thank you, Travis.
>> And I I'm happy to address the community. Um I I think there's there's this um misnomer about what an ALC is, and it and it stems from the 80s and the 90s. Um, I think right now if you come into
our school, I I think we're the best middle school alternative learning center in the state of Minnesota. Um, in six years I've had zero fights. Um, our students are I mean, we do a survey at the end of every year to to
ask them about their experiences. 90% of those students or more than 90% say that their middle school um opportunities prior to coming to us were pretty negative. Um after coming to us, they would recommend us um to other students.
So I our students aren't aren't violent troublemakers that I think we uh they sometimes get labeled as. um our our students are pretty awesome kids that are are just have some gaps um and some needs that maybe other students don't
have. So, if I can help put the community's mind to rest, I I'll I'll do that. and and I think the superintendent um said it or maybe Jackie did that um moving into Churchill would allow you to
go from um the number of students you have now to what you anticipate being about 120. But as the superintendent said that the need for a space for students given um some of the current challenges our students are facing, we
have a we have a need already for u what could be 120 students. >> Mo most definitely we have we have that need. Um our waiting lists are pretty long already um for this upcoming school year. I won't be able to get everyone in
um this year. Um, so I I think 120 is a low number. >> Uh, Dr. Brother, >> uh, thank you Travis for sharing that and director Workman for bringing the passion to light. Um
and yet I see a um opportunity that is before us uh not just in terms of we as a board but uh um as a district to uh better uh inform, educate, showcase, if you will, uh the various programs we
offer, why they are u so important and what makes RPS uniquely RPS and and So, um hopefully our communications director is back there listening as I'm sure she
always is. Uh and uh because we we middle school ALC is important. It's something of great value. Uh there is I think at times a tension in terms of you know when we change from what has been
to what possibly could be. Uh, and I I appreciate though the opportunity that's before us to uh own that, to acknowledge that, and to use that uh to u uh win our
community over uh and to um uh honor uh our students because uh once they hear that there are um uh not only administrators that are fighting for them. Uh but there are uh
school board directors uh uh administrative leaders, a district that uh stands with them not at the expense of, if you will, uh being dismissive of of uh community concerns, but
acknowledging that and and providing those within a within the community an opportunity. And and so Travis, I appreciate you saying, you know, you're willing to have the conversation. You're willing to invite, hey, anyone in the community who has a concern and really
wants to know about the program to to reach out to you and you'll be more than willing to do that. And and and so thank you. And and and you know, uh all of this can be a reality. And of course, we're going to get to the
funding shortly. We'll see how that works itself out. But but thank you for your input. >> Can I just >> I just want to uh barely want to briefly reiterate my commitment to uh follow through on that. So uh look forward to doing that.
>> Director White, >> I just wanted to add to your comments here and I I feel the night we were at Churchill there there were a number of families there. There were some teachers there. There were some Churchill uh uh
neighbors there. And I found myself, Mike and I were there uh with Dr. PEL and um I found myself getting pretty discouraged about the way our kids were being thought of and there was a a parent there who happens to be a staff
member and she works in a district-wide program and at some point she said um some of her most joyous moments are going to Fredell and spending time with uh the middle school ALC kids who she described as largely an anxious crew of
kids that can't bring themselves to walk into one of our big elementary schools that they're very peaceful kids and after school they just want to go home. They're not running around the neighborhood. They're not looking for trouble. Um someone had also said that night that they enjoyed this joyful
sound of our younger learners when they come to school and leave school. And I don't disagree. the same staff member said um that the joy you'll hear are coming from will come from the rail kids, our kids with disabilities who um
need that programming and enjoy every bit of their day at um at school. So I I just wanted to say I I think we have people who have worked with the kids, not just the people daytoday, but who have the joyful uh experience of going
into those schools and spending time with these wonderful kids. Dr. Harorn, did you have anything more on this topic? >> So, I just want to I guess we can end with or maybe be the last one or not, but um I just want to say that there would have had to been a change made
just in listening from obvious things. The buildings are not being fully utilized. Uh we have space. So, I guess my question more opposed to the community, a thought, a point of thought is had we come with a a proposal where
we said we were going to put all the kids in Church Hill, there still would have had to been a change to that building according to what I can see, and I'm not an architect, so I don't know what all they walls and things they would have to put up, but I assume they'd have to make some changes. So my
concern is as a community member, as a board member, is it just who's going to be in the building or is it the change? Because the change was going to need to happen because of the declining rates. So as I look at this from a very um
layman's perspective, either we utilize the space or we start closing down schools. We don't we don't have kids to fill them. I mean, this is just what is before us. We don't we can't force people to have more babies there. It's just not happening. So, at some point,
we're going to have schools that are so underutilized that they'll have to close. Um, and I would say Church Hill will probably be on the chopping block because it already has what, only 190 students. You have declining birth rates. Da da da da da. The conversation
could be different. Um, so I guess my thought is that change is is going to come. It's inevitable. um the these things are kind of outside all of our controls. I mean, I think as board members, as people who like to, you know, we we love children and we love their, you know, to see them thrive. Um
we'd love to have every building full to capacity, staff and everything, right? That would just be good for us. But that's just not what we're facing. And it's not something that we're in control of. And I hope that the community will understand that as a board, we don't have the luxury of just looking at one little neighborhood. we have to look at
what's going to be best for all of our learners. Um, so I hope that people will see that this is a opportunity to keep that building up and running. Um, that there's there will have to be some changes whether it would have been um to increase size for new students, whether
it would have been to update the facility at some time, it's it's bound to happen. Um, I think that this proposal is giving us a usable option. Um, allowing the school to remain in the in the neighborhood, allowing the
playground to be upgraded. I think there are many positive outcomes that this can be viewed from. Um and again if the concern is just the age of the students um as it's was said earlier it's slightly concerning for me as a community member as that is part of
living in a school zone is that you are going to have students in and out of your your district um of of varying ages and it is oftent times that grades change, students change, environments change, demographics change. If you're in a school zone those things can
happen. So, I just would hope that our community would um take a look at that. And I'll just I'll I'm not going to get into the finance. Everybody knows numbers aren't my thing, but I do also understand there's a tax implication and those things. And I would hope as a board that we would do the best we can
um to make sure that we are not putting additional strain on our community. That's not our desire. Our desire is to make sure that the children that are in RPS are getting the best education and the best value that we can from what we have to offer without creating the least
amount of disruption. And I've looked it over. I've prayed it over and I I think that this would be a very viable option. As uh director Barlo and um Dr. Pel has said, there are more things moving. There will be more panning out of this and more discussions to be had. I think
the community involvement will be great, but um I think a change will have to be made and I hope that we can all work together as the community and embrace uh the students that are going to be in that building as we do intend to continue to use it to house our students. >> Dr. ML
>> um one thing that occurred to me when I was reading the memo and getting ready for tonight's meeting is that I feel like generally speaking we look at a lot of data in making our decisions and I felt like in some ways that was missing particularly for the ALC piece that I
know Mr. Baines has talked about it. Um, that's helpful. But I think having that in black and white for people who aren't listening tonight who need to read that about the number of students that are currently served, what the projections are when he talks about the waiting list is long and not all those kids are going to get in this year. What numbers are we
looking at and why? Um, and I think that that has impact for particularly people in our community that use data like that to make decisions. I think having that information available to us would be helpful. And also another step further
of what are those projections based on um are there kids in the pipeline coming up to middle school who would benefit from this level of service um to get them back on track. They're going to have gaps, that kind of thing. What What do we know about those kids that are in
the older elementary grades about what how many would potentially benefit from a different environment? I think that would be helpful. I think also kind of looking at data too is that I sort of looked at it like the community might not trust the
decisions that we're making inside in our bubble that can we attach some sort of document that shows the capacity at all of the schools. And I know that we've had that before in other um presentations, but if that could be linked to this discussion to show the
number of students that can fit in each school and what that capacity is. um currently so that people aren't thinking, oh, we just skipped something in a different neighborhood because we didn't want to do that. You know, I think that that kind of extra support of
our process would be helpful to people on the outside. Um the other question that related to data and I don't know if we're on number four or we're still on number three, but >> we are we are not on number four, but I would like to not move on until we okay get there. >> My next topic talks about both of them.
So, I just want to mention this um that both the middle school ALC and rail um >> us take us. Go ahead. >> That are those things that we can use those I shouldn't say it that way. are those programs that would be advantageous to RPS to market to get
students from other districts to come to RPS that the population of middle school ALC at a Byron or a Steuartville if there's kids there that need that assistance could they come to Rochester to get that assistance same thing for rail what is Byron doing with their 18
to 22 year old kids who um are developmentally um challenged and need those services where are Are they getting those services in those other districts? Can they come to Rochester to do that? Um that I was curious about that. I was as I was reading. >> Superintendent. >> Yeah. Thank you, Dr. Mclofflin. We'll be
pleased to provide the board with uh some of the details on the ALC population. And are you thinking school capacity percentages for all schools or just the schools impacted by this proposal? >> I think it's important for all schools. Okay. I think that I mean we know we have some sense of that. get presentations about that to some degree
with facilities planning. But I think it's good to provide a current snapshot when we're looking at a big decision like this that impacts part of our community but not all. It I think it helps answer the question of what other alternatives were looked at and why weren't those chosen.
>> Uh I appreciate that. In terms of your point about um students from outside um Rochester, uh rail and middle school ALC I think are different in those two regards. Um, for the middle school LLC, as Travis just mentioned, we have a weight list and we have significant need
within our district and we don't want that program to become too big because we actually defeat the entire purpose. Um, I hope that's also reassuring to the community that values a small nurturing school in that neighborhood. We also value a small nurturing program. So I
think on the whole it is unlikely that we would be able to serve significant numbers um with some you know smaller exceptions of students from outside Rochester in the middle school LC rail has had significant demand. We do serve students from outside Rochester. Our biggest constraint has been space um and
so the addition uh that would we propose um adding subject to the financial analysis that we'll be doing in the coming weeks would um somewhat help us address that. And so we do know that the programming um at rail is regionally
recognized I would say statewide as some of the best programming for uh young adults with disabilities and there's tremendous demand. We do serve students from outside Rochester there now and this might enable us to do somewhat more. We'd always give our pre our pre preference to our Rochester um students.
Um so I think that would be a difference between the two. I will just add really briefly because I know the chair is trying to move us on. When we put rail and middle school ALC into the Fidel building, um we didn't really know how it was going to go because they are different student populations, different
staffs. And I want to say um both uh Travis and Molly Murphy, who's not in town tonight, uh have done an exemplary job uh leading together. So have both staffs. Um and the students work quite well together which is why um we are proposing they remain together which if
you had told me that a number of years ago when we colllocated them in Fredell I don't know that I would have proposed that actually but it's it it works and so we're proposing to do that in a somewhat expanded facility for that reason. And to director McLaclin's
point, um, we have evidence of, uh, we had two parents, I think, at rail graduation who who said to us they moved they did research about these kinds of programs across the country and they specifically moved from out of state >> to Rochester so that their um, student
could could be in rail. And we're happily complimentary of of that. So, >> we actually just recently we recently received an email from um a parent in a city that's over an hour away and they're ready to move here as well if
they can get in. So, we're we're known for what we're doing at Rail. >> Um any other question, Director White? >> It's not on our little list up there, but I'm going to throw it in here. >> Can we Can we >> Yeah, I'll make it quick. I'll make it quick. So, what we haven't discussed
though is the impact of Fidel. Um, so I know that where we have those currently housed. Um, and just for clarity from myself, I would assume that rail could not move into the Church Hill building before there were changes because there would need to be access changes, I'm
assuming, or would they be able to would we be able to create some kind of temporary? And um my other question about Fidel, which I know we've already decided to sell, but with adding these new adjustments and having um potentially uh the other school come over these
things, how does that how does that um how does that impact all of this? Right. So like we've already agreed upon the sale of Fidel. Is this um does this what is the impact of delaying the sale? I guess like how does this how does this
impact us? Um, I guess my thought is since it's already for sale, if somebody came with a offer, how would that impact this plan? Is this does this plan take into account that we are speaking of a building that is already on the market
that could potentially not be there in July or they may not want they the person that purchases it may want to tear down. I mean, I just want to know how how this all impacts the plan as Frydale seems to be a major uh piece in making this all work. >> Superintendent.
>> Um, thank you, Director Whitehorn. We would colllocate um middle school ALC and uh rail in Churchill for one year. We could make that work for one year. We couldn't do the growth and so that is why we would be um able to do that for a period. The Fredell um uh facility is um
key to this in that it allows us to have essentially swing space for Phoenix Academy for a year that allows us to do the rehabilitation at what we now call the Education Services Center, soon to be I hope just Phoenix Academy. Um so it' be critical. We have not had um a serious offer on the Fredell building.
We have spent a lot of time both talking to our realtor and I spent a lot of time talking to city leaders. Everybody knows at some point that part of the community is going to be valuable real estate, but pretty much by consensus it's going to be a slow burn. Um and so um right now we have no reason to believe that
holding that for one more year would um uh diminish its value on the market and that we also have been told that um one-year delay in the actual movement into that facility is also likely not to discourage a buyer that really wants it.
And so that we would still be able to be in conversation actively with someone who wants it. It it it's probably going to need to be part of a larger development uh in that uh space that has multiple um landlords and a lot of
complexity. So we think that we can make that work. It will require and one reason why it is going to be imperative for this board to make a decision one way or the other on August 4th because the timelines that Mike outlined here are very very tight. We know that construction costs are increasing rapidly and so the team is actually
pretty frustrated with me that I've pushed it back this far, but um it actually was to director Barlo's point uh uh about community engagement and uh to director McGofflin's point about further analysis, but we are at a moment of truth by early August where we would need to make that decision. And just my
followup to that, so that doesn't that does not impact our proposals because all the proposals we've done thus far have been done with the assumption that this school will be sold, but it's kind of in limbo. So I I just wonder how that just affects the total plan because we are kind of adding that money in, but
we're not selling that building. So that's why I brought it on. >> Yeah, I appreciate that, Der. We have no reason to believe that a delay of one year would significantly influence the access the sale price. And before we leave the topic to bring
the rail uh move into Churchill full circle, did I remember correctly that the rail students did some mentoring of elementary students? >> Rail >> or was it Phoenix students? >> Phoenix does them, but rail does. They
go to different schools and just we had one at Phoenix Academy that came and volunteered in the classroom and works with kids. So yeah. Yep. >> So that would be a possibility being so close to Hoover that they could develop that partnership as well. >> Be great.
>> Anything else on the uh the Rochester um rail um and the addition at Churchill. >> Are we also is we also discussing the Hoover movement right now or No. Um, >> where's the
>> It was one. >> Oh, yeah. We didn't do the early learning. Yeah. Let Let's Let's go back to that one. >> Members have questions. >> Yep. Any questions on moving the early learning classrooms to Gage and any modifications at Hoover? Yes.
>> I only had one question. In the slideshow, it shows that some of the classrooms will be moved over to Mighty Oaks and I just felt like we haven't said anything about that. Is that a mistake? that are not supposed to be there. Um I think it says, what did it say? 13 classrooms potentially.
>> Yep. So the classrooms that are mentioned for both Hoover and um early learning in the move into gauge are splitting the current classroom structure that we have at Hoover Early Learning. What's happening in early childhood and especially early childhood special education is that we are seeing
some growth um in the the number of students needing to be served. And so, um, we have some classroom space as we continue to grow at Mighty Oaks in our new space. We have some space that we could relocate some offices to be able to house the additional students that we may need to serve so we don't have to
yet kind of start spawning out into other buildings. So, that's the purpose behind that. >> I have a question before I ask my question. Okay. >> Um, I have some questions more about the facility parts of that and the the what we saw on the slideshow. Are those
questions now or Okay, that's not for the Well, it's only for these people in the middle. Um, >> let me figure out what I was going to ask you. I was confused about the their slides 21 and 22 I wrote down in my
notes. They're the pictures. Um, see if I can find them here. That might not be the right numbers. Hold on. Um, it's I think it's slide 20 that has the
Churchill with rail from the exterior. Um, I didn't understand what that big gray box was next to the tennis court. that that was the additional parking lot. >> Okay, that's it wasn't labeled, so I
want that. That's what it looked like to me, but I didn't want to assume that. Um, and then what's the black thing next to that? >> That's a a current playground that has rubber crumb nugget. >> Okay, that's why it's black. >> They're two different age playgrounds on the properties. >> So, so the other one is more of that gray sandy kind of thing and then
there's the black. They just have different services that So, they look correct. >> Got it. Okay. both of which are deemed ADA accessible, but we've learned over time that they really with an update where Dr. Pel said we were headed that would be a great improvement to that
neighborhood facilities. >> Um, another followup for you that the very one of the first things you said is you talked about a compre comprehensive look at each building. Is there some sort of written report about that that could be either shared with board or
shared with public of what what that looked like. >> Um, no, director Well, often there's not a written report. We would have to retrospectively create it, but we definitely did look at that. The memo does include an extensive um discussion of the facilities alternatives that we
looked at. That was more once we were in it >> um like halfway through like you kind of narrowed down. >> Yeah, we had done that. Um uh we we certainly did look comprehensively across the district and if the board would like us to prepare something along those lines, we could it's not there's
nothing that's in existence and I am mindful of the fact that the analysis that we have to do before we come back to you in July is pretty intensive and so I I would probably focus staff time on that um analysis between now and then of these options as opposed to that. But
I can assure the board and the community that we did look uh we left no stone unturned in looking for different alternatives. >> Um and then sorry I I made a note about a Phoenix question. Is it okay if I ask that one too? >> No, we're not there yet. Okay.
>> We're not there yet. >> Okay. >> I got to keep some control. >> I lost track. Um I think that's all the questions I had. Thank you. Um, we did have some questions. Um, and it it may be um not understanding the
nature of the construction at Hoover to accommodate the Churchill students, but there was some concern that you were putting Churchill elementary students into classrooms that were sized for um early learning students. So, can anybody
speak to how we're gonna put them in the right size spaces? >> Sure. That that concern was also addressed. We talked about the size of the classroom spaces and they're they're very similar. It's just they're they have some unique characteristics within
them to house uh the early learning which would be part of the proposal to make some of those minor changes. The sizes are pretty similar. There may be a few rooms that one would say is noticeably larger, but really what it boils down to is they're right around that 900 to a,000 square foot range,
which >> and uh in terms of the early learning, we will ensure that the programs that go into the classrooms that are selected for um and stay there that those program classrooms are fitting in that space so we don't have to reduce class sizes on our end.
Um and I think another question not just to this but this does include construction but all the costs for construction. um members of the community who haven't been following uh our board meetings, particularly our
consent agenda, um don't necessarily see all of the details that the board gets um about bids, about construction, um about the long-term um the LTFM plan that we get every year where you have this massive spreadsheet that costs out
everything. So, um, is there anything that you can say generally to reassure people? Um, because we've got questions. How do you know this is what it's going to cost and and how can we trust that that this is this is accurate?
>> I totally agree with that statement. It seems to be ever changing, especially by the minute. Um, usually in the spring we see the bulk of our bids come back and it's never a dull moment to see some of the prices, especially with the range of pricing that comes out there. We usually
can tell if one vendor doesn't want the project. You can usually tell by the their quote, but um working with um Canudson and uh CRW through this process, they have a wonderful, you know, using their means, but they also have a very big presence in the metro
area. So it's it's really wonderful to be able to use what's certain bids are coming back as it relates to Rochester compared to there as well as with the developing things that are going on with Mayo Clinic every year. There's no doubt that prices are increasing. So it's been
really minute to minute I'll say and we've had monthly meetings and it seems to change every meeting we have. which speaks to the need for us to stay on a timeline to make a decision as soon as possible because the as you said the
costs are increasing >> and that was a consideration we had when I was challenging our team to look at this time frame because really we're talking about and I'm not trying to jump to Phoenix but we're talking about that possibly be construction over a full year from now so taking those u balances
with increases into effect as Any other questions about the Hoover um early learning class? Uh moving the the classrooms from Hoover to Gage Elementary. Hearing none, we'll move on to the re
Okay. Relocate girls gymnastics to one athletics. I'm setting a timer. Any questions or comments on that? >> It's a great idea, Madam Chair. >> I just have one comment. I'll jump in. Um, we should have done this a long time ago.
>> Right. >> I I I think if I can just briefly, Madam Chair, um, I do want to acknowledge because this has been a major issue for both our girls gymnastics program and for the um staff at middle school ALC and rail during the gymnastics season. Those kids have lost their um, gym
space. It has been a a challenging circumstance for all of the years we've been coached locating that space. Um, I'm grateful to the the gymnasts and their coach for their part in making it work. I'm really grateful to the staff at Rail and Middle School ALC for making
it work. And it was not a good solution for either side. And as director, I think, is implying, this will be much uh better all around. >> And and we can we can do this uh beginning with the next gymnastic season seamlessly. >> I mean, we have a a place.
>> Yep. >> Regardless of the decision we make. >> Okay. I guess my only question regarding it would be that it's a um not as many students interested at this time, right? I think it's what 25 26 girls. Um I
guess my only thought I think it's a great idea. I'm I'm a proponent of um sports and keeping things going. Um but just in the space that we are in the climate of of finances, um I will um try to bring in my inner uh director Cook
here. Um but um just thinking of is do we have a a number and I guess you know if we drop down to nine kids enrolled like is there a magic number at which it no longer
makes sense and with that being said um how long is this um proposed lease right so is this a year-to-year thing um for the four months is this something where we are committing over the next 10 years I think that could potentially make a
difference. Um I would hope that all of the sports continue to grow and we haven't um increased enrollment. Um but in some of them where we have seen the continuous decline, I just >> don't know. Um is there a point at at where it's not feasible for the district
and of course I say this I I want girls gymnastics to continue but um is there a number where it's no longer >> Yeah. Let me ask uh Mr. Crogstead to comment on this. I will just say director, we do with all of our sports
monitor the degree to which we cover our costs for each sport and should we get to a point where we could not do that, we would have to make a very difficult decision. We actually have seen a slight uptick in the number of girls who are interested in gymnastics in the last couple years. So, I would just say that the the lease agreement is pretty flexible. We've signed a one-year lease
um and and the the academy seems to be very flexible and worked with us on the lease terms and so there's no long-term commitment. >> And gymnastics is K12 >> high school. >> There might be they might a couple play up, but it's essentially a high school
co-op across the three schools. I I will also say that um as as the board knows, we both have a commitment to equity in our offerings across genders and a legal obligation. And so we added boys volleyball, which has done really well. We're actually in a three-year pilot,
but it's going very well. I expect anticipating that we will continue it. Having girls gymnastics helps us make sure we have par in offerings. Um and so it's a it's a it's a valuable thing to make sure that we are meeting the Title N requirements. Um,
>> and again, I'm excited about it. I just want to make sure that it's feasible and if it is an uptick is, you know, something down the line that we need a more permanent space, but I what that look like. >> We were in the teens a couple years ago, so it's going up a little bit. And because I'm the chair and I know that
you're you're good at at at reflecting what other people say, but I would be remiss if I didn't let Principal Davidson talk a little bit about the feeling about having those um early learners at Gage and what it
what is what it means for the building and the transitions and all that. >> Well, thank you. I I I would say that we are all in. We we know what our capacity needs are right now. You know, we're at 48%. We know we can't continue fiscally to exist like that. Um so we know some
changes need to be made, but the opportunities that we have to partner with early childhood, but we're big believers in mentoring and incubating creative ideas and bringing things forward and the opportunities for our upper grade levels to do some mentoring or partnerships with our early childhood
as well. Plus, selfishly, you know, we're a community school and we're the first community school in Rochester. We're we just completed our 11th year. We're building a community kitchen right now, a new resource room. There's a lot of really cool things happening. But I think the opportunity for our
neighborhood itself to have more, what's the word? Opportunity and an options to come every day prek and then start kindergarten with us. So possibly have a six, seven, eight year existence with us engage I think is pretty huge. So we're
excited about it. Um, we know we've got some challenges with how we're going to configure things and we need to remap how we're going to set up all our spaces. But we made a commitment to our staff after we had our staff meeting with our teams here too that that'll all be done collaboratively together. It's not going to be done in a vacuum or a silo by ourselves, but we're excited
about the opportunity to provide more offerings for our neighborhood specifically. So, thanks for that opportunity. >> Yes. >> Um, that reminded me of a question I had um following up on something Director Schumacher said earlier. So, I think I understood what you were saying that we're using No, sorry, let me start
over. That there's funding in the early learning program that's specified for Gage students. Does that mean that they live in the gauge boundary area, but they're going to Hoover now? This would bring them back into their home area. >> That's correct. Yep. We receive um 30
seats for through VPK dollars, voluntary pre kindergarten dollars to serve Gage students specifically. Um, and so we prioritize, we um, we reach out to the neighborhood. Um, we work through the community school coordinator. Um, we spend a lot of time trying to ensure
that we serve students from the gauge um, community over at Hoover. Um, and and that way we can provide them the opportunity and access we said we would. >> Awesome. Thank you. >> All right, we can move on to look at the
right list. CEK programming into Century Mayo and John Marshall high schools with hub sites for specialized programs. >> Director Barlo. >> Yeah, I have two questions. First one being uh will moving courses into high schools improve access and
participation. >> I I think it's only fair to ask Mr. Arafic to take the first crack at that since he been here, but others can jump in. Yeah, I think the prevailing thought is that it it absolutely will increase
access. Um, you know, we know that we have a population of students who are very willing to either get in their own car or get on one of our buses and and travel across town to to CEK um located
on the RCTC campus. Um, but as Dr. Pel mentioned earlier and and as I have pointed out to my very dedicated staff at CEK um our numbers have not increased uh at at CEK um over you know I've I've
been involved with CEK since year two and we have not seen an increase in our enrollment. Um, so we also very clearly have uh an even larger number of students who are not willing to get in their own car or get on one of our buses and travel across town um to access
these courses. Um, and I I think we have students who if they were walking past uh a welding lab, a culinary lab, a nursing lab, um, and perhaps engaging in conversation with that instructor, with their their school counselor, that's a
course that they might sign up for, they might take. And, um, you know, the example that I have used with with my team and with people that know me is my my own daughter. Um she she by the way a product of an ALC um thanks to people
like Travis. Um uh and she absolutely would have taken a welding class in high school. I think she would have very much welcomed the challenge of going in there and showing the boys what it takes to be a a successful welder. She never would have left her own high school campus to
do it. Um and and so I think we have a lot of students that that would take that leap and and take, you know, um and enroll in courses that we're currently offering at CEK if they were offered on their high school campus. >> Thank you. And then just quickly, um and
there's actually three questions, but you've already answered one. Um what impact will this have on college credit opportunities? Uh I don't believe it would have any impact on college credit opportunities
other than perhaps to again increase it for some students. Um we do have some college credit bearing courses that we offer at CEK. Um and and those would now be available in our comprehensive high schools. So it could increase access to
those courses for for students who currently are not open to the idea of coming to CEK. And then finally, um, after you walked through the presentation, different programs at different high schools, uh, how was that
decided as to like for instance JM having the sports bio? Um, not singing that out, but what who decided what programs would be based at what particular high schools? >> I Yeah, I can. Uh so Mike and I went
together um and did site visits to each high school and and really looked at um did a pretty deep space analysis um going in originally with the intent of identifying spaces at each high school for each program. Uh and it became clear
pretty quickly uh which programs and which high schools would not be able to house every program. So, uh, when you walk into Century High School, it became very clear very quickly that we would not have a space for construction trades
or welding. Uh, and um the same at Mayo High School. So, that was an easy decision for us that we knew um that we were going to need to hub those options um just because of the availability of
of adequate spaces and and feasible spaces for those programs. >> Thank you, >> D. >> Um in reading through the materials and listening to the presentation, it's what I'm understanding is that CEK would
remain an RPS program. it would just be located at the different locations. Do I understand that right? >> Yeah. I think the what it looks like as we decentralize and move the programs back uh would be part of the um and I I
know um this transition is also included in the 2030 strategic plan. Um, so I think uh what that transition looks like and and um how it's uh administered um isn't fully fleshed out at this point. I know that was also a concern that was
brought up uh amongst the staff when we met with them and gathered their feedback. Um but um we have assured them that we want to maintain um not just maintain but continue to grow and place focus on the importance of of these um
CTE programs. I I think as I look at this, I would want to ensure that we don't necessarily end up with a school within a school feeling um necessarily where it's like, well, I I teach at CEK
at Century or I teach at CEK at John Marshall. um we would want to really make sure that we're integrating these programs and these staff members and these students into um those home high schools while also continuing to um maintain the the focus and the
importance of the programs. >> And kind of related to that, in terms of staff, will this model that we're looking at here, will that require um staff to split their time between building sort of like our special teachers do? Is that what the model's going to look like? is that it seems
like they're full they're at CEK 100% time now. They would have to split their time and travel like our specialist teachers do. Is that >> Yeah. So, we currently have some staff that that are not full-time at CEK. So, there we have some staff that are shared between CEK and and a comprehensive high school. I think it it really depends on
which program, which pathway we're talking about. Um, I think initially there likely would be some staff that would, you know, have the potential of needing to travel between a couple of high schools. Um, but I think the goal would be to build up the enrollment in those programs at each high school to
then move away from that model of staff needing to travel. >> That's helpful. Thank you, >> Dr. Wford. >> Um, so I guess my only question um kind of goes with what where what director Barlo was asking in regards to the difference of the programs at the
different high schools. Um, I guess my two questions around that is how will that be um conveyed to the community, right? as there may be uh students particularly very um laser focused or interested on one particular thing. I'll pick on bioscience that's already been
mentioned. Um how do we plan to deal with that? Right? Because it's not everywhere. And is there a plan at some point uh to make the options more equitable? Right? So that there's an option at each school so that we don't
end up with these potential uh bottlenecks uh where we have you know increase of students and one okay welding or you know whatever that is now where all these kids needs are trying to cycle over to this one particular um high school for that class
since we're getting rid of the central hub. I guess that would be my only concern. and I'm a fan of of uh vocational um learning. So I just want to know how do we make it so that we are not creating a new inequity by trying to create a you know create some equity if
that makes sense. >> Yeah. So I I of all of our programs uh we're only recommending the hub model for four of them. Um and for those four two of them are because of facilities uh construction trades and welding. we we
just simply don't have the the space or the right facility at all three high schools to be able to offer welding and construction trades. The other two uh are our criminal justice or peace officer and criminal justice course and then our greenhouse plant production
course and those are being recommended for the hub model because of the community partnerships that we have in those courses. um our peace officer criminal justice course is um it's taught by a a wonderful social studies teacher here in
here in Rochester. Um but then he partners with uh a great number of uh law enforcement officials from local, city, state, and federal agencies. And it's simply not feasible for those folks
to travel to three different facilities and volunteer their time um across multiple sites and multiple times. Same for our greenhouse plant production class. Those students are traveling out to Sergeants's Greenhouse out on uh 18th
Avenue North. And so we're being mindful of the partnership that we have with those community entities. Um and so that that's why those are recommended as hubs. The other thing I would point out is currently for those courses all of
our students from John Marshall Centry and Mayo have to travel to access those courses. And with this transition um we actually are reducing the number of students that would need to travel to access those courses because they would
at least be offered in directly in one high school. Um certainly if you know down the road I mean I think um my staff knows I always talk about duckies and bunnies dreams where everything is great and there's no issues and you don't none
of you have to worry about money. Um but we would love to have a welding lab and a welding facility in each high school. We would love to have a construction trades facility in in each high school. But until that's a reality, um the hub ma the hub model is is really what we
needed to look at so that we could um you know at least to a degree of equity offer those opportunities to all students. >> So I guess in in the in the spirit of the question is just making sure that it's conveyed well to the community that although a program is housed in John
Marshall that it is an option for all RPS students. I just would say that we would probably want to make sure we're very clear with that um upfront that they're not um you know housed there and and they have to belong there and you know that type of thing. So
>> yes, absolutely. and and we would be very intentional with the scheduling of those those hub courses um both in the fact that they would remain two period block courses to allow for transportation between the high schools
but also uh for instance let's take um welding and greenhouse plant production um the the courses that would be hubbed at John Marshall we would do our very best to schedule those hub courses at the same time during in the school day
to minimize transportation costs so that we could transport all of our hub students from Sentry going to John Marshall at the same time. Same from Mayo to John Marshall for those hub courses. >> What? >> So I I'm going to try and put some words
in your mouth. Correct me if they're wrong. It's what I hear you're saying is this is what we have to do now because of our limitations. But what we are doing now does not preclude expanding those opportunities of welding and the other programs that you
mentioned. Should the space be available, we get, you know, resources change. I mean, I've I've been on this board a lot a long time and I've seen tremendous changes in the district and I think the vast majority of them have always been positive. And what I really
like about the discussion that we've had it is it's it's all still very open-ended, which sometimes people struggle with. They want to have a boundary like this is going to be the way it's going to be for the next 50 years, but I mean, you know, we don't know what's going to happen next week, so much less 50 years from now. So, I I
really appreciate the the efforts that you're making to make the courses available to as many possible kids as possible within the current resources and restraints that we have. I I can't I don't say I guarantee anything,
but this one I'm going to guarantee. The move to being able to have a single period for some of these CEK courses is going to change student access dramatically. I I know students personally
for whom that was the barrier. And I mean, we've talked I I think it was I I I kid the superintendent that when he came here, I came with a list. That is one of the things on the list um that I'm I'm glad to see that we're able
to do. The other question I have though about the CEKC lease at the building, it's possible that RCTC could someday say, "I'm sorry, you need to find another place for CEK because we need that space." Uh yeah, Madam Chair, we have a great
relationship with RCTC, but RCTC, like this district, has its own agenda and priorities. It's uh it is more desirable space for them than some other alternatives they have. I meet monthly with President uh Boyd and um uh he's
he's passionate about supporting the district and um so if I said we got to keep them there, I think the bar would be very hard high for them to kick us out. But we all have to make really tough decisions and they do face uh uh some
very important program expansion needs. Actually very analogous to what we're talking about here. Just as the interest in K12 in this type of coursework is growing, the interest at community technical colleges is exploding. Um and so um I think that um it's it's well
timed for their purposes and our purposes actually. And I I also think it's well timed with the work that is being proposed for the 2030 strategic plan for our career pathways. Um I I I think we we started developing career
pathways in with this focus on CEKC and I think the CEK is setting a great foundation for where we're going to go in that direction. Um, I think it also has taught us as a district the um the the struggles and the strategies and the
barriers um especially for really highly specialized career path pathways. Um but I I think we've taken those lessons well and this is a good next step in the evolution. Anything else on CEK? All right, we will move on to renovate
the educational services center for Phoenix Academy. They want to start with that one. >> I might if I can just I just to get going. I I would ask Rob just to share with the board and um what has the the
absence of a cafeteria and equivalent of gym space uh meant for the students? We we've talked about it periodically and it's it it's it's a key point that I know board members have mentioned to me as well. I I want to say first of all, food service has worked their tail off
to make it work without a kitchen. But what ends up happening is the food comes in a cooler and I always you can whatever your favorite restaurant is if you put it in the cooler. Our secondary kids eat an hour after it gets in the building and it's been in a cooler the majority of that time. So you can
imagine the taste and the crispiness maybe isn't as good as it as it uh would be if it was made there and and given to him. the gym. It's a big issue. I mean, we got a lot of kids that want to move. Um, we got kids that part of their sensory stuff is moving stuff, so
they're riding bikes and they're in the hallway and then you've got a kid struggling with the behavior or mental health and you got a ASD kid riding behind a bike. We're in this, at least in the current model, that's what we go with. There's three separate spaces during the day that when we're not eating, we could use those cafeteria
spaces. Um, it's it's been tough. The kids make it work, but it's um they're doing fiat on a cement floor around tables and pool tables and fools ball stuff and they're they're getting creative and doing it, but uh it it's been it's a struggle and it's also like
when you give a tour of the building for a prospective family, we get some families can't wait to get to us and they want to be there and and then there's others that have a lot of reservations or flat out just don't want to come. And when you look go through that, I love the building. I love the people. I love the kids. But when you
look I gave one about a month ago and I knew it was they didn't want to be there and I I was looking through their lens and it it does you walk in there and you go this is our gym and it's our cafeteria and it's our lunch. It's a tough tough cell you know that that
that's what we have. So but I want to highlight food service because they've really made adjustments to to try to make it work in a not so great situation. >> Dr. Marvin, >> you say there's no such thing as a dumb question. And this is probably one on
the uh graphic it looks like there are two different entrances to the new and improved Phoenix and on one side it's there are sun labs and sun classrooms. What is sun? >> I mean I know what the sun is but
>> so it it's all Phoenix but at Phoenix we have I always say we have like four programs. We've got elementary, which is K through five. Secondary, which is sixth grade through 12th grade, at least what we call. Then we've got sons, students with unique needs. It could be kindergarten all the way up to 22 years
old. Developmental, cognitive, some kids can fluctuate between the secondary and the um and sun. And then we've got what we call our success lab, which is typically 11th and 12th graders. Yeah. And the sun program has really grown. When I first got there, it was just
called the room number. It was 105. I've been there 13 years. There were three kids >> and I think we're at 23 right now. So, it's really a population that's increased. Elementary, same thing. Three kids when I first got there. Before CO,
we were at 24. And you can have six kids in a class. So, we had four sections. COVID came and it's it's hard to get sent to Phoenix when you're not in school. So, we decreased. And now that program is coming back up where we're at 17 going into the school year. So
>> yeah, >> the Sun program that's increasing is the program that requires our most intensive staff as well. So it's our our highest ratios that we have. So the students might have the most behavioral needs as well as um cognitive needs on top of it.
So that's where uh the programming and the facilities require really specific facilities. So they might have a classroom and then a cubby um behind the classroom. So anything to add on a very brief point? >> No, I think if you come out there's a
there's a room that we're kind of modeling the the new design off and I could show it to you and it's it's like three breakout spaces. So and they're kind of all a little unique the breakout spaces like one's padded because we got some kids their sensory need is to to
headbang. So, we've created different rooms for them to go into, and it it really explained that whole sun. If you just come out and look at that, you could see what those rooms look like. >> Um, thank you, Chair Nathan. Um, as board members know, I've invited board
members to identify issues of interest to you for the 2026 2027 school year board agenda. And one of the items that one of you has identified is a comprehensive update on our special education services. And so I'll be working with um Melissa and with Mona
and the team. Uh it'll probably be a multi-session uh update because we haven't done that with the board uh actually in depth since I've been here and so I appreciate you asking. I had to ask too the first time I heard son. >> Thank you. >> Um and so we we we and we have a lot of
change going on in our special services for students with disabilities as well. So that will be I'll be presenting you uh and the executive committee first with a proposal for next year's board calendar um in the coming months and this will definitely be on it. Um
we um are we pretty much guaranteed to be seeing an increase in students in level four going forward? I mean is it is it what is it is the trend graph look like this or is it
>> well what we can say is years ago we were seeing it more with our upper grades and now we are seeing more of an increase with our younger grades. So that's the trajectory right now that that we're showing in our district >> and this is a program that we are required to offer. >> We are required to offer continuum of
services. Correct. >> Any other questions or comments? I I I think this is long overdue. >> Um all right. Well, that is the last of the topics unless anybody has any other
general questions. Should set a timer for this section. Director White, >> I feel like you say timer right before I'm about >> I didn't look your direction. >> I I felt it though. It's just I just want to throw that out there. So I feel a type of way.
>> Okay. >> I just want to make a a a general statement as I appreciate how the board has organized this. Um and I this is just a suggestion. Again, this is the Stephanie speaking. You know, it has come come to my attention that we
discuss a lot of topics um that could potentially need a little bit more time or you know in depth from the community standpoint and we kind of group them all together. Right? So, we're talking about selling a building, um, outsourcing a sport team, remodeling, u moving a
program, moving classrooms, moving schools. And I and I understand why it works under one topic for us as from a professional lens, but I think sometimes from the community lens, it could be a little bit overwhelming uh because there are different types of changes. So,
we're talking about several different types of changes which all fall under the same umbrella. Um, but I can I can see why that could lead to the feeling of a lack of transparency uh because we've discussed so many different um topics tonight. Um, all
related to, you know, the moving of facilities. Um, but all with different impacts and different levels of change, if if I'm making any sense there. Um, because from selling a building to moving a program to moving a school, they're not they don't all have the same
impact. And I would is just to Stephanie's suggestion that as we roll this information out into the community that maybe we could be mindful of how I I appreciate one document for me because it it's just one document. Um
but I could see how from the community standpoint it could be overwhelming and very important information can get overlooked because there's so much information presented at one time. Um, and I know even for us as board members,
it's a lot of information that we also take in when we're reading through the documents. Um, and personally sometimes we leave and feel like we may have missed things because we're talking about so many different topics. So, it's just a personal suggestion that as we make these big changes which will impact
our students and impact our communities that um we maybe consider condensing uh the topics and and I'm not asking for more meetings. So, let me just be very clear on that. But just in maybe how it's it's rolled out t topic-wise if if
this makes any sense there. Um so that the community members can maybe focus in on what they are most concerned with and and kind of placing that information in one uh one space. >> Um thank you for that point Director
Whitehorn. I'll keep that in mind. um just to explain the logic of this um tonight. Uh on that list that's on the screen, options one through six are all interlin. They they're intimately linked together. Options seven and eight are distinct in terms of the facilities of
locations, but they're linked on the financing. And so that was the logic of bringing together. But I do take your point about um the ability on the part of various people to pull these two. I just want to understand want to explain what the logic of linking this together was. Well, and I I guess I see that, but
the community may not see how they're intertwined. So maybe when we are even if we're going to keep it as a topic, maybe explaining that two through six are all impacting one another. So the community can look at it from that perspective. Um but looking at it as one document, the assumption would be that
everything is intertwined when they're not necessarily, but they are. So maybe that would just um just because that was brought up earlier tonight as well with community engagement. Um, I think we share a lot of very valuable information. Um, but I know that as
community members, they may not um they may miss valuable pieces because of the way we are presenting it to the community. It's just just a thought. >> Thank you, >> Director Workman. >> Um, I'd really like to thank all of you
who are assembled here and those of all the other people who contributed to um all of this hard work. Um it's been extremely helpful and superintendent for your leadership in in managing this this whole thing. Um I I think what's
people people need to remember that as school board members we are tasked with the 30,000 foot view >> for all of our students. Whereas when people come to us with specific concerns, it's in their own little
bubble, which is absolutely normal and understandable. But I think the the public also needs to understand that this information is available. We're not hiding it. It's available on s um simply. I know that um Chair Nathan when she responds to emails directs people to
all of these sources. So, um, you know, it it's out there, but you know, you can lead a horse to water, but you can't always make them drink. Um, and there's a lot of water to be considered and a lot of I was going to say a lot of drinking going on, but that might be
misinterpreted the wrong way. So, um, thank you. Yeah. And I think it's also important to let the community know that all of the emails that were received by um either myself as chair or as all of us as the board were shared with all
board members and the superintendent. Um so the superintendent in developing this recommendation received the community feedback as it was as it was coming in and um I you know looking at a
summary of what that feedback and questions we got from the community I think I can conf confidently say that most of the an most of the questions and concerns people had there's an there's an answer may not be an answer they're comfortable with but there are answers
in in this in this material and also to say if anybody's watching that the materials will be available in assembly for the July 21st meeting on the Friday before the meeting and and I think to
what uh director Workman said um none of this work happened before we got to this none of none of this conversation as a board happened before we came to the table the superintendent and the team and the other people were involved were responsible for putting together the
recommendations and collecting the information um that the board needed to have this conversation. So, if anybody says the decision has been made, you did not hear a vote here tonight of us making a decision. We're we're giving further direction to the superintendent.
Um and it is something that you asked for tonight which was um some consensus on giving a direction to the superintendent to take the next step and develop um the financing and I have not heard any board members say no to that.
So I I believe that that requested next step is is going to move forward. Um but there was no decision made tonight to approve any of these items. We are coming back on June 21st with a full recommendation along with the financing pieces. >> June 21st or July.
>> Did I say July 21st? >> I'm confused. >> July 21. >> Not I won't be >> July 21st. Um so for the community who is interested in this topic, watch for that information. Thank you for everything you've contributed so far and what I know you will continue to tri
contribute to the development of the recommendation. Anything to wrap it up? >> No. And I mean yes. Thank you for all of this, but um more than that, thanks for the really strong school year that just finished. Um and not just those of you who are leading in our buildings, but for the central office team as well.
It's quite a way to finish a year to come and do this. Um which I was mindful of when we scheduled it, but as we've said often tonight, we do need to make this decision this summer. And so there is um uh an imperative um whatever decision that the board ultimately makes. And we look forward to providing uh board members with some of the things
that you've asked for plus uh other things that I know may come up in the coming weeks. and that we will hear from you about. >> All right. >> Thank you all. >> Thank you. >> So the next item on our agenda is our other business. The current version of the ABCD is available in this agenda
item and are um we have Oh, we need the clicker. Oh, >> we are waiting for our graphic. >> Sorry, there's no when you don't have the computer because I can do it like this.
>> We're getting a fast slideshow memory lane. >> Don't run out of battery. >> Remember that slidy one. >> Oh, that's a good one, too. >> Yeah. >> Oh, wait. >> We're on a loop. We don't know what's happening here.
>> Almost there. >> I'm pretty sure we're good. >> Yeah. >> Any any moment now. It's happening. >> And there we go. One more. >> One more. Yes. All right. All right. So, at the June 16th meeting, we have a prep
for action on our social studies curriculum adoption, an action on our uh 2027-28 school calendar proposal, and our 202627 budget proposal. And then on July 7th, we have a focus topic which is our long range technology
plan, prep for action on our review of our long-term facilities maintenance plan and two policy committee uh recommendation agenda items for upcoming meetings and action on the social studies curriculum adoption. And we have our board meeting dates. As
you saw, we have one on the 16th of June, July 7th, and July 21st at 5:30 p.m. and on August 4th. We're currently scheduled to meet from 4 to 6:00 p.m., but stay tuned on that time. Uh, those are all regular meetings. And hearing no
other business, this meeting is adjourned at 8:24 p.m. >> Did you have another pair of glasses just like that on Saturday at graduation? items at my house. >> I took them by accident. Thought they
were Cathy's because they were on the shelf >> next to her stuff.