you're ready to go. >> Um, yeah, whenever whenever you're ready. We're we're still trying to get his presentation up, but >> whenever you're ready, you let me know. >> It's up. I just pulled it up. So, we're live. >> We're live. Okay. >> So, then we'll quickly we'll call the
meeting to order. We got 610 or 510, sorry, 510 in the secondary school media center. And we'll start with the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation
under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> All right. Uh, roll call. Vincent >> here. >> Gross >> here. >> Porter here. >> Sandstead >> here. >> Sour >> here. >> Here.
>> And I am present as well. Um, while we're still waiting for those things to come up, um, Ellis, did you have anything for the board tonight? >> Okay. Um, looking at the agenda, are there any additions or corrections
to our agenda as you see it? There are no look for a motion to adopt the agenda. So move. >> Second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. I motion carries and that brings us
into in two seconds we'll have a presentation up and that'll bring us into Darren >> and we just >> got it what Scott sent you if you have that >> no we just got it up so
>> okay okay excellent >> we're ready Darren so you can go ahead and >> I'm not I'm not seeing it though Oh, so we're actually we're on two separate screens. So if that's So we've got it on a larger screen if that's okay.
>> Okay. All right. Oh, I got you. So I'll just talk through each each page. How about And they're seeing it. They're seeing it on your screen. >> They are. Yep. >> So So here's here's how this all flows. You have we came up a strategy that we felt we needed the eight page survey in order to appropriately tell your story.
And each page has kind of a a role and function. So if you look at page one, oh before I even say anymore, I want to make sure you understand when we write these, we try to keep the words to a minimum because um we find that the the higher the word count, the lower the
response rate. In fact, during CO when we were all shut down, our re research department looked back for 20 years of surveys and found that every extra 100 words hurts your response rate by 1%. So the kind of the sweet spot is right
around 1,700 words where we at peak readership and can tell your story appropriately and beyond that people's eyes start to glaze over and then they just put it away and don't take it. Well, right now you're just under 1,600 words. Okay, so the first page is basically the book we're saying, hey
dear families, community members, we need your help on solving some facility challenges. We have an aging elementary school and the the needs are beyond what we can afford with the annual budget. So here's our problem. As you may recall, West Central area voters rejected multiple
bond referendums over the past 13 years. We understand and respect these decisions. However, we we must find a long-term solution to our challenges. So then we talked about to accomplish this goal, we formed a community task force that included local business, parents, schoolboard members, and staff. This
survey then will explain the task force recommendation provides an opportunity for the west central area taxpayers to provide feedback. And then we talk about that we keep it's confidential. They're collected by us and independent research firm. And then this box is the key.
These are the three ways they can take the survey. Um the web web link, QR code, and our printer will spray a 16digit code in here that's unique to every survey taker. So it can only be taken once. no ballot stuffing or or
against, etc. And then it's signed by all of you and by Paul. So that's the hook and please take this by April 27th. We're going to have this out in the community about two and a half weeks, three weekends. We find that the weekends are when surveys surge. People
pay their bills, they they buy their groceries, catch up on life, they take their surveys. Our server floods with surveys over the weekends. And so that's what'll happen. So then and I'm going to walk you through all the pages. Then I'm going to run up to North Dakota and then I'll wait for Paul to tell me if you
want me to come back. Page two, we do some educating background information, explain what bonds are and what they're used for and how that's different from a levy, a little bit of education. Use the what we talk about in Minnesota. We like to think of it this way. Bonds are for
buildings, levies are for learning. Um and then we do a timeline of when other bonds have been asked for. and then bring it up to present time what this bond referendum is looking to do by November. And then we've got a few things that we
need to anything yellow still incomplete. We're going to thank some potentially thank some community members. I know we wanted to talk to you about that tonight. We list list the committee members kind of get them in the center of appreciation here and then we're going to talk about what their
their tasks what they were tasked with doing. Um future focus education operational sustainability one WCA community. So that's kind of the the background. Then we get into these are the challenges. Now great team, great
team on this this project between KA Charles Anderson and Witsth. Um we outline what's what's going on with North Elementary, what's going on with South Elementary, what needs take place are taking place at the secondary school. Um and and we ask our first
question. We try to actually It's more of an interactive newsletter than it is a survey of hundreds of questions. We only ask a few critical questions throughout this whole process. We say these challenges cannot be paid for within our annual budget. Therefore, the district would need uh voters to approve
a bond referendum. Would you support ask our this is what we call kind of our permission slip. Would you support the West Central area schools pursuing a revised bond referendum at this time? Now, it is very much our intention to not have dollars attached because
we want to ask them are you supported with doing anything if we get data showing that they don't even want you to even look at a revised bond referendum regardless of dollar amount when we know they just don't have the tolerance for it right now. I would tell you 90% of the time we get a yes here and then we
can move forward and show them some costing. But I have had projects that are just dead in the water at this page where people are saying doesn't matter how much it is. I'm not going to vote yes, not right now. And I've had to give some boards the report that they're just not ready for anything right now. So don't don't waste your time. But if this
if they say proceed, then we have some questions for them. If the community supports the district pursuing a bond referendum, the task force has studied options to address the needs of all of our schools. Updating all three schools would cost and we're going to get this finalized by KA and WIDS, but we're
thinking right now 46 million. The task force voted with 81% support to recommend a plan that would consolidate to one school site with an estimated cost. Again, we're they're sharper than their pencils. We're thinking it's going to be 315 all in even with the bond
borrowing fees all included. And then we had them come up with a very strong image here. We do this a fairly generic image for a reason. We don't want them to weigh in on where a door is placed or how fancy something is. We just want to show them this is where the new elementary edition would be and that
we're going to have a high school entrance here, separate entrance for the elementary kids. And we outline what this option would provide the district. We're going to save $750,000 annually by operating one facility instead of three.
build an addition onto the secondary school for elementary, all grades at a single site. We're going to create two schools under one roof with separate secure entrances for the elementary students compared to the secondary students. Create an overall more efficient footprint, do sharing staff
and services all in one building. And then we're going to remodel the existing secondary school spaces and meets the most pressing needs in that building. Replace failing siding and flooring and relocate the softball fields due to this this location right here where where the
addition needs to go. And then next page, here's where we get we're very transparent with them. We outline for them all the different property values that are present in your district. And that's yellow because we're still going to finalize this as far as what's the lowest amount and what's the highest
amount within residential property values and we're going to put exactly what 315 will cost them on an annual property tax basis. Some districts they'll ask us, can you do it monthly? I would just tell you we kind of prefer to annualize it because that's what people will do anyway. They'll multiply the
number times 12. Um, and it feels a little salesy when we say it's only this much per month. So, we tend to just annualize it for them and say, "Okay, it's going to be $112 on a $300,000 home." whatever that number is that we get back from your financial consultant.
Um, so we ask that would you support a $31.5 million bond referendum to pay for the task force recommended plan and we'll gather that data for you here. Then we do ask the question if you're undecided or would not support the bond referendum. What are the main reasons?
And we'll compile all that feedback for you. Next page two, how district doing? Um and and this data um is healthy for two reasons. A, we don't like to just ask for a tax increase. We also like to ask for
feedback on on on how the district is doing. Um and it's a good opportunity to hear how they feel about the quality of the education being provided, communication, keeping the public informed, managing funds appropriately, and building pride in the community. And
then um this closing question, on a scale of 0 to 10, how likely would you be to re recommend the district to a friend or family member? We've correlated these scores to be pretty good predictors of passage rates. The happier they are, more likely are to spend some money on you and reinvest in
the facilities. Um and then we'll ask feedback years and how things are going overall. so that regardless of the referendum, your administration and board get some feedback on just how the public is feeling about the district in general, about the programs and services you're providing. Then the final page
where we ask them to answer things, um you're you're second place behind Yellow Medicine for the number of municipalities we've ever put together for a district. And uh we've got every municipality here for a reason because if you need us to when we break this out at the end, we'll study each
municipality's response rate and their support so that Paul and you as a board know where is support is strong, where is support weak. We did a report for every township possible for Yellow Medicine so that their superintendent could go to township meetings and pitch
to them, this is what's going on. This is why we're closing the elementary schools. this is why we need to go to this one site um and and do things this way. We'll break out the data by are you an employee in the district, are you a a parent with children in the district?
And at what school do they attend? And then we're going to ask a critical question for you too to close out the survey. We say, "How do you like to receive information from us, the district?" This is not just for the survey, it's for day-to-day business. But this will tell us, regardless of
what the data tells us, we're going to know how best to communicate next steps. So, if you get enough support that you're going to go to a vote in November, this will tell you how they want to hear from you. Do they want a mailed newsletter that updates them on what exactly um your plan is? Do they
want to have a social media campaign? Do they want it on the website? Most likely it'll be a combination of things. We find it takes three or four different ways to get the word out about what your next steps are. And then we thank them for their participation. And then Paul, if you scroll to the very last page, the
last page is uh is just the mailer. Um the return address here. And then we'll spray on here their their uh property address. uh we put the due date for the survey front and center here with your with your mascot and we say if there's any questions for the that they can call
the district office at this number for any questions related to the bond referendum. So like I said you're at you're right now you're kind of at our ideal number of words where we explain what's going on what the needs are and what solution your committee came up
with. And so we're hoping for you to to maybe look through that with Paul tonight, get your reactions. We want you to be comfortable because it's got your name at the bottom. Um, we write to a fifth or sixth grade level just like you try to do with the newspaper so that everyone regardless of their level of
education really understands exactly what's at stake here and what this means for them as citizen. And then at the end um two weeks after this is I'll I'll I'll come to a board meeting either in person or via Zoom and I'll tell you exactly what your community said.
>> Okay. >> All right. Do you have time for any questions now D or you need to jump right now? >> No. Go ahead. Go ahead. Fire away. Uh just a couple just as you were talking about the questions at the end and how you could break down by precinct and
whatnot. Can you also like >> if you can tell us that this is where you got a no vote or this is where you got a yes vote. Can you also tell us can you also break that down to >> in this area where you got the no vote. They like to get information this way.
>> Like can you bust those things apart like that? So, I mean, we know how to reach those people that are nos or yeses >> 100%. >> Okay. >> On that page, Paul, if you scroll up to scroll up to the uh what is your age, what is your township, >> any of those factors, I can sort all of
your data, all the comments, anything on this, I can sort by a factor. I can say 18 to 24 year olds, this is what they told us. >> Sure, >> I can do it by clubship. Anything that you want to know, I'll provide you so that you have scientific data supporting
anything that's on this page. You bet. >> Yes, Claire. >> Um, we're reading it off the screen, so I may have missed this, but the comment, I think it was on page one, and it talked about revised bond. Um, >> I just wondered, does that raise
eyebrows if we don't explain what we currently have? I know you want to minimize words, but like what do you mean revise bond? What will that you know does in your experience has that cause people to be confused at all or >> what do we what do we ask I think the question you're asking about is the
question maybe is it Paul I think we're looking at page page uh three where we >> first question area school pursuing a revised bond referendum >> I think that must have been it was the revised bond there
>> I would say no because on page two scroll to that one. We put together a timeline where we show, hey, you rejected one in 2013, >> 14, 2020. So, we kind of teed up the idea that, hey, you said no to some stuff. We're going to come back to you
with something revised to get your feedback on a latest proposal. And then it feeds right into the next page um and explains what that revision looks like. So, we've had really good luck using this this kind of this educate, educate,
ask for reaction, ask for their ask for their reaction to the price. Um, so no, we've had pretty good luck that way to answer your question. >> Okay, >> maybe we can talk more later. It might be a learning curve issue for me. And
then this is just uh I'm just thinking about my adult children who like text and never look at email. Um is there if you put as text as an option and then they provide the number and then we could push out um information to people
via text, you know, or is that just not doable? >> No, we we have not because um we have not had good luck that way. We've limited it to email or or mail. Um >> okay, get in the texting world and their
cell phone numbers. That's a pretty tough world for us to control. But uh your your the email list that you provided us um is about as far as we've gone and had success with. And I think Darren, just a couple other things that we had talked about, we'll discuss this as a group, but if we were
going to list all of our task force members, we kind of were cautious as what with that or do we just say representing these communities that we had these representatives, you know, from representing the five different communities or whatever it is. So, we'll have to discuss that a little bit tonight. I know we've talked a lot about
the 29.9 million that was really the project, but Ellers did point out and that's on their document that would spread out to the task force that it really does become 31.5 with the way that the interest is worked and stuff like that on that initial piece. So, it is still truly the project cost is the
29.9 for what we get for construction dollars, but it does end up being the 31.5 the way the interest was all going to be happening and things like that. And that would be an elers's piece. could have them help explain. >> And Paul, did you get that image I sent
you that we used in in that other district where we talked about the egg to school? >> I did. Yep. So, we can Yeah, we'll share that as well. >> Feel free to discuss that. And board members know this when we talk about the full cost of issuing the bonds to getting to 315. We like that transparency, but what we got what we
got criticized for this this previous spring and we don't do is we don't outline for them every dollar of interest across the 20 years. Um because we we don't know what we're going to be borrowing at. These are just estimations right now. And quite honestly, that's not how anyone talks. Um if somebody
buys one of your kids buys a house for $300,000, they don't go around and say, "Oh, you bought a house for $598,000 when you include the 30 years of interest on our mortgage." I mean, people talk about the purchase price. Uh, interest rates are variable. You have opportunities to refinance bonds.
So, we just talked about the bond issuance and the construction costs. Uh, in Midawasa, they did have a taxpayer very angry saying, "Well, you're not letting us know about all the interest." Well, that's just not the way society talks. You don't buy a car for $30,000 and say, "Well, it's going to cost me
437 when you factor in the 7% interest across 60 months." I mean, we talk about a purchase price and we're going to be consistent that way. can roll in the bond issuance fee so they know what that loan is going to cost us. But we're not going to talk about the 20 years or the life of the loan that way. That's just
not we haven't found that that's that's what most taxpayers are seeking. That was kind of an outlier we had in a while. So >> Okay. >> Well, Darren, I've got your >> look over Paul. I'll keep an eye on my
phone. Um and uh I will stand by. Okay, sir. Sounds great. Thanks, Darren. >> You bet. Take care. Bye. >> All right. So, we did move that to the front because we knew he had to leave. Do we want to do we
want to continue this conversation right now or do we want to push through some of the other business so that's out of the way and then come back? >> I did print So, >> huh, take care of the other business.
I think I think that if we move through that stuff, most of it is pretty straightforward. There isn't a lot to At least that part would be done. We won't get to the end at 7:05 and say, "Oh, yeah, we better finish the rest of this stuff." Does that make sense? Everyone okay with that?
Okay. Um, so then what we'll do is we're going to we're going to leaveformational item A for a minute and we're going to go on to um preliminary 27 budget. Yep. So, we did meet this morning as a finance committee. Um, and just looking at some
pieces here for the upcoming school year um with some assumptions that we'll have to make. We already know what our uh projections will be for the state increase right now is going to be 2.69% for the following year um with our legislative funding. And then we do have
or estimating 682 students. The biggest piece is really just the um loss from seniors that are graduating to our kindergarteners that are coming in. right there. That's a net of 14 students, a difference of 14 students um
from what we anticipate. I did ch double check with our uh elementary secretaries and they said right now those numbers would be as accurate as they have um for that piece. And so we've got a loss there. And then we've just kind of tracked um with where our numbers historical average has been this year
and we tend to drop about 10 students throughout the course of the year. So, we are conservative and um I would say Tanya is very conservative on that and how we look at our special education revenue um funding as well as our student count just because it's easier
at the end to say, you know what, we ended up having three more students that we anticipated um and instead of saying we ended up with three less students and we have less scholars to work with. So, uh that's included there as well. We already have all of our staff contracts settled for the upcoming year. So, we
know what the increase is there. Um, we're not anticipating any changes to instructional supply. Um, and we don't really have much for equipment that's going to be budgeted, but that comes out of a reserve fund of cap capital funding anyway. Um, and quite honestly, when it
comes down to that supply budgets, we've made some um decreases over the last few years, and really what that nets is usually about 10 to 15,000. So, we could do that, but then I think we're getting pretty lean um where those dollars are
for supply budgets. And then some other pieces that we're looking at would be social studies is up for a curriculum review. Um however, that number is what we've got right now listed at 85,000 is on the high side. So, that'll be a little less probably by about 20 to $25,000.
We don't see any uh vehicle purchases this year, but I know there was conversation last year of should we start designating some operating capital each year. Um so we do have that vehicle purchase come up. It's not coming out of one year's uh operating capital because
that would take a significant amount there. And if you tie that into any um activities, uniform purchase cycle or things like that, it could eliminate any dollars that are available there. And then we've also technology is covered under our capital project levy uh for the most part. And so we're we should be
sitting in good shape there. And our technology I would say is probably second to none of what we have here for our students and staff. And then any any of our buildings and grounds purchases that we would need to look at. And I know the buildings and grounds committee just sat down. The one nice piece is we
finally have LTFM. So, the long-term uh facilities maintenance funding is back available starting next school year. I mean, it was always available. We just had to take care of our LTFM bonds. It took care of the roof, the parking lot, and the the heating and cooling here at
the secondary school. Uh but that is back in play for the district there. So, right now with all those pieces in place, with the declining enrollment, where the funding is, um what we're where our assumptions are for that, we're projecting that we're going to
have to make $200,000 in reductions. Um the other thing, too, that Tanya just kind of noted was really our community um education fund or fund for is really where our preschool um classes are charged to. We do not charge anything
for preschool. Um, and with our teachers that we have there, that's about $1 135 to a $150,000 expenditure. Um, uh, so we need to just we we know what the programming is there. So the talk this morning at the finance committee was, do
we need to make an automatic transfer just realizing so we don't end up where we're now, you know, a half a million dollars um, in the deficit there. So that was the other conversation piece, but looking at approximately $200,000 in reductions. If you look at the the
document there, you're going to see as we end this year, um she does have us in a deficit uh spend. However, again, we believe that there'll be another $90,000 in special education funding that'll be coming in. Um will be some opportunity
to transfer some of those assigned and non-spendable restricted funds. So, we're hoping to be maybe a slight negative spend or possibly right at a neutral spend for the end of this year. However, the far right column is the one to look at. It does show that we're
planning $184,000 negative spending in community ed. And that's not attributed to summerrec any of our community courses. It really comes down to preschool as well as some of our daycare. So, we're watching that more closely. there will be some changes that we'll make uh to fees, but also in the
daycare as well as our um food program that we have. So, we'll be looking at that to hopefully mitigate some of those expenses, but we just have to realize if we don't charge for preschool and we have those classes, um that's going to be the expense there. So, you'll see at the end of this year, we are projecting
our unassigned fund balance to be still at 11%. The fund balance goal is 10%. um at the end of year two or the next school year um there's a projection to be down at about 5% but again remember if we get that to be a net neutral for
this year and there's some other pieces there it probably wouldn't be as extreme but Tanya always wants to give us the real opport or the real possibility of what could potentially be there on that piece so we would want to just keep an eye on that that does not include that
$200,000 in reductions and the unfortunate part is you can't find enough equipment or supplies to come up with $200,000. And so it's going to have to be looking at staffing. Um and of course we as a district are still right sizing. Um we'll have to continue to
right size, I would say, for the next several years as our student population continues to decline. Um we'll have to just make sure that we have the teacher numbers appropriate for the number of students that we have. And so that's kind of what we're looking for there is
about $200,000 in reductions. So, at our next meeting on March 18th, that's when we'll start to identify for the board positions um that we believe in programs, any programs that would need to be reduced. Um we'll bring those to the next meeting. And again, that's after the admin team looks at our
current class sizes and things like that of where those numbers are. So, preliminary budget there for you to look at. I think the other thing too that Tanya noted this morning is in her other districts as well, they're all making reductions. And I know somebody told me today a neighboring district is also
making reductions. So it's unfortunately becoming more common. You know, I think this is of course the CO money was there that's been out now for a little while, but now we're having to really look long and hard at our at our dollars. And and two, the other thing just to keep in mind, uh Tonnie mentioned this morning
that declining enrollment cost per pupil does get mitigated a little bit because the state does have a formula for declining enrollment. I believe it's 77% of your current numbers plus you take 23% of your prior year numbers to get where your numbers are based on state
aid. However, that doesn't necessarily help our operating levy. Um because our operating levy as we continue to decline our actual operating levy is also going down because they base that on a number of students is this the $1,851 per per student there. So, um, that's
another piece there that kind of has a negative effect on the on the district. >> Questions, comments on that report? So, we just passed a levy not that long ago as this question in there, but you
feel like we've planned appropriately for that when we put the dollar amount out and the only reason that this is going on is because of declining enrollment. That's it. >> I would say that's our biggest piece, Darren, is the declining enrollment. Yep. Because remember, not only the
operating levy, but we also have a capital project levy. So, that was an additional $300,000 per year. So, I would say that Yep. It's just now unfortunately with the declining enrollment we have to rightsize our our grades and things like that. I think the
comment made this morning is most of our classes are um looking I think we had one class that was 61 or 63. I didn't bring that with I'll have to grab that but I think otherwise most of them were in the in the low 50s. We have a third
grade class of 38 students. Next year's kindergarten class is >> 57. >> 47, sorry, 47. And we have 61 graduating. So right away when we take 14 off of that number and and so even looking down with our census, those
numbers don't put us back to that, we don't have any classes that show 70, you know, and so I think that's really the part of it there which unfortunately trickles that into our electives in the high school as well as you start to look at those numbers too to say, okay, how
do we become we need to have options for students, right? And and opportunities. Um and then PSCO also competes against that just a little bit where we have a large bill to PSCO um as well. So I would say we passed the right thing. We added the inflationary factor.
Unfortunately the inflationary factor doesn't that usually gets eliminated by the declining enrollment. >> But good question. Yeah it's >> are you going to provide us with all of us? Not all in the finance committee, but like
can you provide us what all of our all of our programming and programming cost non required programming? Required program. >> Yep. I can do that. So when you say like required like activities is a separate one.
>> There are certain things we don't have to have, right? But we do it because it's we feel it's a program that will attract students or good for kids or whatever that is. >> I'm not making I'm not making any comment whether it's needed or not. I
just want to know what you know things that are were required to spend on it or not. >> I can do that because you're going to be weighing some of those things versus classes. I imagine some things you're going to have to weigh against how, you know, how small
class sizes does the other public want, how large class sizes, will they accept? >> Mhm. >> You know, if they don't accept certain size class sizes, then they're going to go to the other district and their decline enrollment goes again. I assume you're I mean, I have confidence that
you weigh all that information. So, but >> no, I think those are all valid points. I think, you know, we're I think we're definitely out of the opportunity of having class sizes of 12 kids. You know, we've had a couple years ago and we just know that we can't afford that anymore where with where we're at. But no, we
can lay those pieces out there to see. >> Any other questions, comments on that? >> We'll have more discussion about that, I'm sure, over the next >> Well, at the March 18th meeting, Tanya will be here. So, she'll probably say, "Here's what we've looked at for budget. Here's our, you know, that's where we'll
identify in that resolution of programs or shouldn't say programs, but staffing reductions and things like that, which is again not the not the ideal piece. Would be nice to be able to add programs, but it is our reality. And I think it's but also Darren, I think to
your point of looking at that cost where our taxpayers are at, we're also one of the larger or the higher cost operating levies as well. So I think that's why we looked at that capital project levy was to try to spread that over a different a larger tax base because we were becoming
one of the highest taxed in in the areas what other places were were showing. So I think it's trying to find that fine line of like you said providing a great quality education at WCA within parameters to that our taxpayers say is acceptable.
>> Okay. Then we'll go to the first reading of the following policies with statutory and recommended changes from MSBA. Um policy 620, credit for learning, policy 623, mandatory summer school instruction. Policy 701, establishment
and adoption of school district budget. And policy 701.1 modification of school district budget. Anything you want to touch on on those, Mr. Brown though? >> No, again just very minor changes. I think you guys as a board established this review schedule of every 3 years.
So it makes it very nice that way where we're not having to do a wide swath across all the policies. So very few changes. MSBA's made you know significant I shouldn't say significant but changes when it comes to grammar and language. So some of those you look at it's just they've changed the some of
the wording but there's no you know substantial change to the policy. And that's kind of where we're at with these four policies that you have before you today. Any questions, comments on those? And we'll jump right into the
superintendent report because you were looking to give us some more report. Right. >> That's right. Yeah. just um and I guess too probably what we'll bring because that was a little bit of the conversation this morning um at the finance committee meeting was really our
fund balance policy because that'll be a critical piece as we move forward our policy set at 10% as you look at that you know if we get down to 5% $627,000 that's really probably a payroll is what we're looking at but that also impacts our bond rating if we say our policy is
10% but the actual dollars we have in fund balance reserve reserve is only 8% that impacts your your bond rating. So, we'll want to watch that fairly close. And I think the other conversation this morning was the idea of some of those reserve funds that we have expenses that would qualify. We just need to move
those over and Tanya said there would be some pieces there that she would be able to take care of that way. So, yeah, if you look at the enrollment spreadsheet, that should be it's a link um on on your in the agenda packet there on my superintendent report, uh you're going
to see that we're down one student from from last month. Uh and but otherwise, the numbers at the elementaryaries both held consistent with South Elementary prek, our little nights through fourth grade, we have 131 students there. Um, at North Elementary we have 190
students, little ninth through fourth grade, and then 452 students at the secondary school, grades 5 through 12. And just keeping in mind again that um some of those uh students that we have at the senior high level or some of
those kids are PSO students are doing some online pieces there. But yeah, if you look at those numbers, unfortunately, you see, you know, we've got the the class of 61, otherwise and 63 in fifth grade, but those numbers are getting into the the
50s and things like that. So, we'll continue to monitor that. And I would say it's as much right sizing as it is um making those budget reductions. And then just the other part of the report there is just some updates um legislatively. So, I still need to reach
out to our legislators, but there's some MA is really pushing that uh seasonal wreck uh replacement aid. And so, what happens there is remember it was several years ago, there was some concern from folks that did not were not able to vote
on a district's operating levy because they didn't live within the district boundary. So maybe they've got um they've got seasonal wrecks. So they either live on the lake if they have a place in the cities or or they have hunting land. And so their concern was we can't even vote if we want to come up
and vote no on this. We don't have the opportunity to vote. So my understanding in talking to Fred Nolan was um the state said, "Well, we'll give you the opportunity because they agreed no taxation without representation." So actually those homeowners still or those seasonal wreck, they pay a state tax.
And so instead of that being at the local levy, that local levy, the state assesses, I don't think it's the exact same numbers, but that goes to the state. So, um, MA is recommending that there should be some type of a replacement that, yeah, they can charge that, but some of those dollars could
come back to local schools, which would then help offset some of the taxes for our local taxpayers who when all that land gets eliminated, they've got to pick up that extra cost. And so there was there's some work on that to try to get that into tax committee and see if because they the MA figures or considers
that an a levy inequity across the state and just for those districts that don't have that or have so much seasonal wreck land, it could be a negative impact there. We already talked a lot about the fiscal 27 budget, so I don't know if I need to touch any more on that. And then just
our professional learning communities. Um we'll have our second round of those. You know, we did the first group and that's really where we did a lot on the book study with anxious generation. We had a student connections group. We have several of our elementary staff in letters training. Uh we did a student
attendance piece. And so now to finish the year, what we're really looking at is another um set of professional learning communities. Some groups have said, "Hey, I've got this idea. Can we get together as a group?" So one student uh school, not student identity, school identity. Um remember um the Just piece.
So, we went out and listened to um Jeff, now his name's escaping me, but he talks about helping. He's a professor out of MSUM, but he's hired by um just so he'll help schools identify those pieces for their school identity. So,
they're going to work that group. We have two book studies, one called Just Do This. And so, really the hope there is it's about climate and culture. So, what things can we do as a school, a district, and things like that? Um, and then there's another book study, Teach
Like a Pirate. Vanessa is heading up that PLC. The student connections group felt like they had more to get through, so they wanted to do that. Our CTE group is still meeting on their some of their curriculum pieces of what they can do in their area. Um, so and then of course
the continued letters training. I would like to invite you to come to the May 8th um when we do our PLC at that point in the afternoon if you're able to make it. But we're really going to kind of talk about our collective commitments um as schools as well as a district. I know
that was one thing mentioned was it probably four years ago now that we kind of set the strategic plan and roadmap. Um some of the staff said that they weren't really included in that. So we didn't get much voice from them. And so I think this is an opportunity to sit down and go through that. in this just
do this book actually kind of lays out a plan of how you can do that to say what are what's going to be our collective commitments that we as WCA um represent not only as a student a staff member community member school and district and we'll hopefully get that laid out there
at that May 8th meeting. So if we're going to have a quorum we'll want to make sure that we have that posted. Um, but I would encourage you if you're able to make that, I think that's a great opportunity for us to set our direction and really keep moving in the same direction or in the right direction. Choir concert scheduled for tonight has
been postponed until March 23rd. We have our early out for this upcoming Friday and then our next school board meeting is actually a week from Wednesday. >> All right. Any questions, comments from Mr. Brown? and we'll move into the finance
committee. You kind of gotten I would say a lot of the nuts and bolts of what we discussed this morning um kind of came out already. Um anything you guys want to add, Nathan or Josh, on that? I don't know if
there's anything we need to add. I think we've covered just about all of it. I mean, I I guess, you know, when we talk about the 200,000 in reduction, that estimate, I kind of feel like we already knew some of these pieces were coming. We had a
couple classes that were dwindling or we're going to move from the, you know, when they moved to the secondary school, we knew they were going to be small enough to go to two sizes, you know, two sections versus three. I don't know. That's I guess my take from it is you
know nobody wants to do that but we knew already we had a too small of a class down at South that we had two teachers for already. So, you know, that's going to be right sized. And same thing with the the
group coming here next year, which is currently a three section because we're in two different locations, now really comes to be a a one se or two sections instead of three. Those are things that we we kind of already knew were going to happen. Um, a couple of
the others we had already we had had conversations about, you know, things like, >> well, I think what we're doing is reviewing anybody who's when a position has a vacancy. My practice has always been that you're supposed to review that to see if you fill it because it's a lot
easier when somebody leaves to have to say we're not going to fill that vacancy. Nobody's losing a position. But so I think we're going to have some of that those opportunities coming up here as well that will clearly look at those positions to say, okay, if there's a vacancy here, do we need to fill that
vacancy to hopefully eliminate some of those um requirements where we have to go down and tell somebody they don't have a position? But again, yeah, I think really we as we look at things, as we look at our new building plan that we've looked at, we really look at ourselves being a two-section school
with some opportunity for some flex classrooms in certain areas to adjust some of those numbers where needed for potential um behavior needs and things like that. But yeah, we're going to have to really focus long and hard and and so I would also I hate to be the doom and
gloom, but I think long term is this is probably going to be a cycle for a little while um as we go through and and so that's what Tanya mentioned. I mean, she said, you know, you she goes, I think $200,000 is appropriate, you know, because I said, do we need to look at more? And she goes, well, you can't take
everything all at one time. So, she said, let's do it staggered, but realizing that this isn't going to be a one and done. It's going to be a continued cycle for a little bit and really knowing that at the end more than likely two sections and then we're going to have to have some of that opportunity
for growth which I get it isn't easy for the district either right when you when you tell somebody they don't have a position then all a sudden next year now we have an opening that we need an extra teacher in fourth grade because we have a larger class or first grade or things like that it's going to be um challenging for the district but I think
that's also some of our inefficiencies as we look across the district of our specialists with music FID, we can only run that for so long inefficient before the budget starts to to, you know, get our attention to say, hey, these dollars
need to be watched. And we just can't try to say, well, we can cover it for the next year or two. We've really got to look at that closely to say, how do we create efficiencies as we continue to move forward because the budget is now starting to to bring more attention to those inefficiencies.
I would add the one piece that we talked about too was the HVAC system upgrades, you know, moving that into LTFM. >> You know, it'll run it into the negative >> the auditory piece. Yes. So, >> we're looking at $128,000
project in there that could be put into LTFM, which then makes LTFM negative for this year, but would come out of next year's dollars. Um, it just kind of makes the, you know, fixes the general fund a little bit, but the dollars are
still coming out. But anyway, that is an option that we could look at. >> What project is that? >> That was that water to water that we took care of, remember? So, we can put it into >> Yeah, it's already >> we already Yeah. So, it's already in
that expense for the unassigned budget. So, what we could do is spend down on the reserve side even though that's at zero. But then we know the money would be coming next year. So then instead of getting that full 300, we've already got 130,000 spent. So there'll be some opportunity there.
>> Kind of the, you know, the restricted non-spendable restricted unassigned general ledger stuff that we talked about trying to get it all to work out. So because what we want to be careful of is in some of
those restricted accounts if you don't have the right expenses expenditures we could continue to see our unassigned and say well we have money here and there's districts that I know are pushing the legislature right now to say hey our food service fund is abundant can we please just instead of having to cut
people can we move $300,000 out of our food service fund or LTFM if they've got newer facilities can we use our LTFM funding community service is another one and the state's been pretty clear right now they're not going to allow that to happen because some said, you know what, this would cost the state any money.
Local control, let our board make that decision. They can answer back to the taxpayers. But the legislature at this point, there was a big push last year for some districts up in the in the Morehead area and stuff like that that were really requesting that and came back and just said, "No, these programs were designed for these expenses and we
want to keep them in these expenses." And so that's why if you have opportunity to say, "Hey, these expenses would qualify, you know, and with LTFM you can go into the negative that that would probably be better off for the district." But realizing the expense is still there. And I think just so you know that are
the assigned that includes two pots of money. That is the bus. Um you know the buses that we had that money was in CDs still is in CDs. Um, but I think the buses were sold way back prior to even my arrival as a teacher here back in the
mid 90s I would say probably. Um, when they went to a bus company and so at that point the dollars were $550,000. We did spend a little bit of that money. That's a transfer that has to happen as well. The board made that decision to be able to buy the expedition, our school
vehicle. we use that reserve there. Um because the reality is $550,000 isn't going to buy enough buses if we have to go back into our own transportation system. And the other one is the long range capital improvements um fund that was set I think back beginning of your
tenure right Maya where there were some additional dollars >> 10 years ago probably >> some additional dollars that were set aside there just because they knew there could be some expenses upcoming and so that was 750,000 but now we're down to about 500,000 so we've had to spend that down just a little bit as well because
of the the LTFM wasn't there. Other questions, comments? Buildings and grounds committee, do you guys have uh any updates, any information for the board? We went went over a pretty good list of
items. Ne. We have uh North and South Elementary with roof repairs needed. computer room carpet. We got kitchen equipment that south that is needing some work. Oven, freezer,
milk coolers, normal things, I guess. Again, looking at some carpeting and things there, but I think the direction that the finance committee gave to Chad and myself was to put it on a spreadsheet. have kind of a prioritized list and then we'll again have to look
to see okay some of those could qualify for LTFM so we could put some of those pieces under LTFM um capital outlay if we want to use some dollars there we can um I think we probably refrain from touching the long range capital improvement but that would be some
dollars there um you know available is there but just doing some regular maintenance work I think the line usually is for if you have a flat roof you probably have a leak in the roof so we know we just have to maintain that to make sure that we um keep those structures in in good position there. Um
and then yeah, some of the carpeting in some of our areas where I know at North Elementary, Chad just noted that it's now fraying so much when the vacuum goes over top of the string gets caught in the vacuum and it pulls it. So, we just need to take care of care of some of those pieces. I think the other piece
was some um parking lot uh resurfacing in our elementarymentaries or maybe some replacement there as well just to make sure that we I think the biggest thing was probably trying to address any of those safety hazards was really our big pieces. We still have some water flow issues on the front here. So trying to
address that. So when we have the uh freeze cycle out there that sidewalk becomes awfully slippery so and which rolls into the parking lot. So is there ways to take care of that as well? some repairs in the back too of the that back drive. There's some potholes that are
significant and major. So, if you don't know they're coming, after you hit it once, you do know they're coming after that. So, making sure we take care of that. And I think that was kind of the gist there of everything that we had here at the carpeting in the auditorium potentially because I that carpeting is
original so it's lasted a long time um there. But I think and then some sound panels up at um or down at south in the cafeteria area because that seems to get a little loud there. So putting some sound panels up there and then as well
as some fencing along the one side of the playground at North Elementary just to keep that a little more separate, a little more protected. Okay. Questions, comments for the buildings and grounds committee. Then we'll move into our action items.
Uh we have the following. Approve. Um we'll start with item number one, the following resignations. Um Destiny Olrich, District Marketing and Promotions, and Madison Duffner, uh school counselor. Uh we have the
following hires. Bruce Marts, prayer professional, Erica Bordon, part-time pair professional, and a leave request for Blair Elliott. And the reason why that leave request is coming to the board because in the teacher contract, it does say if they're so if they want to take over five consecutive days, they just need
administrative approval. Um, which we've granted, but anything over two unpaid days, they need to have board approval. And you've had to do that before with other requests. So, this is a request for three um unpaid days, so one day over the two. And so, that just requires
board approval there. Um to Mr. Elliot's credit, he did try to do it over another time where there was less, but that did not work out. So, looking now here and of course, remember our spring break, there would have been he would have been just fine until we're remaking up that Monday after Easter. So, that's the one
additional day um there. Okay. Any other questions there? And I would look for a motion for our action items. >> So moved. >> And >> all in favor say I. >> I.
>> Motion carries. >> That brings us back to our discussion about the survey. And we'll just lay that right on top of the action item for it. So I'll go grab you. I'd like paper copy so you can look at that. I will go grab those quick. Do you want me to ask
Darren if he can join back in because he probably done? >> Do you want to chat a little bit first or do you want him back? Do you have I mean, do we have questions for him right away or do we want to talk a little bit before we have him come back in? >> Talk a little bit before I guess. Well, >> I'd really like paper copy. >> Yep. I'll go grab those real quick in
the timeline. >> Rest in place for a second. Holding we had a printer closer. That's right. >> Make sure you do it in black and white, right? >> That's for only Yeah, that's right.
>> We could share. I mean, if that helps >> and maybe not everybody wants. Okay, I'll go grab those real quick. Any uh upfront comments? Anything jump out? Anything way off from what you thought it was going to be?
Anything you say, "Oh, I really like that." >> I just like how straightforward it is. I mean, doesn't leave a whole lot of room for like our last survey was so >> I know we had so many you know we had four questions I think when the last one went out so there was obviously a lot
more to it so yeah the simplicity of it is >> kind of it's one question no extra gym question >> well and that's part I I think that that's still probably to be decided if there's going to be um you know I know
there was conversation I think we probably still got to get back to the have that task force come in and have some conversation about where this plan is now as you know opposed to where they you know when they left here they kind of had a shell right and now
they've revised it and and they asked in the process you know hey keep us in the loop you know I think that's important that we probably touch base back with that group and say all right here we are at this process you know we've kind of got this survey ready to go we've got this and that you know you know here's
you know a more revised refined plan is it still looking like you know where you guys were at when you, you know, you had a majority vote to say this looks good. Um, I guess that's my personal thoughts is that we should really try to tie them
back in >> before we finalize the survey. >> I think, well, I wouldn't say before we necessarily finalize the survey because I don't think it's, you know, I don't know that we're going to be ready for that part of it. you know, this is going to hopefully
one give a a yay or nay like he said right off the bat. Are you interested in, you know, moving forward or not? You know, that first question probably answers quite a bit. Um, where is that toler, you know, is that tolerance good there or not good there?
Um, I guess I don't I don't know that part of it. That's probably a Darren question more of, you know, >> so because I haven't been through this. Is it okay to do the survey and then decide later if we want to add a question about the gym or not? >> I don't think so. We think we have to
have we got to get past the concept. We got to have the price. Price has got to be right before it goes on there. Not exact. I'm not saying >> what do you mean on the survey? >> Well, you can't say it's going to cost $31 million to do this if it's really going to cost 36.
>> No. Right. But this would be the additional piece of >> talking questions on the bond. But but concept, we have to get past the concept before the survey goes out. So if you're going to put another gym, >> are we going to put another gym or not? Are we going to add a couple more classrooms?
>> Again, this base plan that they have currently they're working out details on that. It doesn't include an extra gym. It doesn't include a you know, there's pieces that may have to be >> may happen later. That's what I was trying to understand. sequence of events. So, this is the big idea
>> and there may be a discussion about having a question about an extra gym as a second question that can come later. That's what I didn't understand. >> Right. And so, that may be a better question for Darren to say if that is an option in our, you know, maybe that's a question we have to add. Would you, you
know, would you support, you know, X Y and Z items, you know, pending? >> Yeah. I don't know. And I think they can come up with a I know they've got numbers to say it cost you this much to build a gym or it cost you this much to you know do a track or a turf field or
what you know whatever that is. >> It's a sequence question, >> right? I I think that might be a a good question to ask as far as is that does that need to be finalized now or is that something that you know we're kind of getting a general feel on this piece?
I >> we're just kind of the conversation came up of if there was an additional question for the bond you know like so we have this is the base plan and here's the you know in the past we had a sports
package plan and we had a you know CTE plan you know like >> is that I mean that would be a question for Darren do we need to have those things be on this survey or are those pieces that could be worked about beyond that.
I think that's a great question for him. I know he talked about it, so I can't remember if he said that could be added or if that can't remember for sure. So, I'll text that. >> I suspect >> we got the base we got to have the base plan even the base plan finished before not maybe not well obviously not the
color of the walls and how many chairs are in there, but if >> and there >> if there needs to be a couple extra rooms like based on looking at the plan, I think you should add a couple more classrooms. just you know like two maybe three in case we're wrong like we've
been wrong before and the and it goes up I mean if you want to be a magnet school you better have someplace to put them and we don't if we're going to expand too much >> right yeah >> so like I'd like to know and that's the question for witth and those folks you
know like if we added two more rooms you know whatever like we talked before total with the hallways and everything you know like 1500 square feet, >> you know, >> about I mean the rooms are what 900 between 900 and,000 square feet somewhere in there. >> Yep.
>> And then you got if you got hallway space to it, you're adding some square footage there. So, you know, total package of adding a room is probably say 1,500 ft. Let's just >> right each estimate. >> Yep. >> So, if we add 3,000 square feet in
classroom sizes, you know, what's the operating cost of that annually? And and construction cost of that. >> And then and then the other thing is the gym is what's the board feeling on is is that a
extra or is it should it be part of the base plan? >> There is a gym in the base plan. >> No, the enough gym space not losing space like we're losing now. We're losing space in this getting rid of Kington and Elite.
>> I think there's two things that are being discussed right now. One is a sequence issue that we need some advice from Darren >> and then there's the topic that you're bringing up. And so I I don't know how
to approach that. They feel a little different to me. Um, >> and I apolog I'm trying to get his my email to pull up so I can give him a quick text to see if he can so he doesn't leave and say, "Oh, I already left the room." >> To me, you just can't have you can't
have second question part. I totally understand that. You could put a question in there. Would you want to have gym space? Whatever. But >> the concept or the base plan has got to be figured out because that's the that's in there. That's the dollar value.
That's the difference between keeping sites and not keeping sites. And the public deserves to know what that is >> before we send a survey out, >> right? And that's why it's yellow on there because they're currently finalizing those numbers on that plan.
And so, >> right on the plan that they sent us, >> that's why on the survey when you pull up your survey on the Paul pulls up their on and I don't know if you can see it on here. You can't see it on the printed out one, but that's why that's highlighted on their plan because that
are those are >> things that might be >> two numbers that they're working on currently to finalize is what is this base plan and what are those dollar amounts. So >> right >> again they're looking at this must be an old one.
>> Yep. I got to find one. >> So anyway, they are currently Carl Anderson Widsth are hashing out the final details on this is what the user groups came back and said we wanted. This is you know
what's realistic. I mean I think the was the square footage of the user groups an additional 10,000 square feet. That's a lot of square feet. Um, so I think that's part of what we're going to have to weigh out is, you know,
do we need does each room need to have its own spaces? Can we share some spaces instead of having to have, you know, an additional I mean, if we're down to I mean, the one class is going to be down to what 19 kids in a class at this
point. if we're down to that size, do we really need a an extra room for that or can they work together and share? You know, those are the questions that we're going to have to ask as we put this together. But that's what they're finalizing in
that proto, you know, >> we're the final we're the ones that are we're the final, >> right? But I'm saying they're finalizing numbers on what they have, right? >> We have to decide what they're building those numbers up if we need to add a couple more rooms or not. >> And we are building if we're building
We're building it for a long time and we've seen that over the years. You know, we had x amount of students at North and two more grades and yet we moved two grades here and they say it's full. So that means we've added other
things going on whe I don't know what those are between interventions and and computer labs and different things like that. So in the future things might change here too. We might be adding programs that or have to add different things that we don't have in today's world.
>> Well, maybe it'll go the other way. I don't know. >> The teachers have looked at this building plan. Correct. >> And like >> Yeah. The ones that were part of the the user groups. Yeah. >> How they feel they need it. >> Darren, I'm going to I'm just going to go on record and say I' I've studied
this carefully and I think there's more than adequate space. um that steam room and this I'm just going to say my observations being in lots of districts that is a full-size classroom space I've seen steam rooms
repeatedly not be used effectively during the day and so there is flex space there's steam room I think this plan is built to serve the needs of this district for many years I don't see us being deficient in space that's my
personal opinion and And I know it's different for all of us, but I'm just sharing I'm just going to be very public about that. I think this plan shows sufficient space um with some room to grow. Um you know, and I I had asked some questions about bathrooms. Um is
there a way to economize it? I think bathrooms are expensive, right? Um and so I think some of that was addressed. I asked about some of the other space, but I think, you know, I think it's a plan that will meet our needs demographically.
I hope so because if it's not then it's going to cost us money to go to where we're not going to get students. So I mean but it's I mean I appreciate that you come out and say how you feel and that I mean >> that's what because that's what we need.
We need you know people say that this what I think and you'll either be right or you'll be wrong. >> Yeah. I think we've put a lot of time into looking at where those numbers are going to be. I would say two, I would feel differently if it wasn't a statewide trend of reduction. I think
it's just going to be an ongoing trend. I don't think that's going to be something that's going to change down the road, but maybe it will. But I just think people are having fewer kids. And I mean, the demographer kind of laid that out when she presented our information. The state itself was planning on a significant number of
students not being, you know, in schools down the road. And I think too the other thing that's going to change which we none of us will know is what does that look like in 15 years? Are we going to still have the standard classroom or is it going to be a whole different model and things like that as well? But I
think with adding those additional spaces, you know, I think certain times when we look, you know, music may have to be and I'm a former music teacher, music on a cart's not ideal, but in many schools it does happen that way where you go from classroom to classroom. So,
we've got some space there to to also accommodate those pieces. So, I would say having I think what you uh what WitF looking at the numbers really calls it a two and a half section. They said we're really at two and a half sections to accommodate you know what our enrollment looks like and that's why they wanted to have the
the study the enrollment study just to see where those numbers needed to be. If if we're taking schools out of town, that's the last thing I want is for us to keep saying, "Well, it's not ideal, right?" I want it. It needs to be good.
Like maybe even >> I think I think this one's going to be great. And >> that's what I want to hear. >> Yep. I would say, >> well, we can go we can do this if we have to, but it's not ideal. >> We want it to be ideal. I would say from what we can have for efficiencies being
created by having everybody on one site. I mean, I'm just trying to think of the last example of um as we were talking, boy, if we had everybody here, it would be a different situation. You know, I know when we had our user groups, one of the pieces that they appreciated was the idea that there's going to be that
separation with our, you know, prek through fourth grade, there's a distinct separation. We can even secure the doors that way. can't block egress for the upper grades to to leave the building if they need to in an emergency. But there were some pieces there that were really taken care of. I think one of the other
pieces too was making sure that we don't forget about our identity when we come together as one site that we have some identity. I think Mr. K's done a great job. If you look out of the banners above there, how do we create that identity as we, you know, come together? But I also am fearful that the longer we
wait with those inefficiencies, it's going to put us into a real difficult decision, you know, down the road of what do we do now when we have a boiler system that fails or we have something here then? >> Yeah, I think we're past to the point the board has already decided not
unanimously, but that probably going to unless the survey comes back skewed, you're probably going to put one side on the ballot, right? >> And then they'll decide whether you or not, >> right? >> But my my question just goes back to the
survey of whatever the plan is, we need to have that done. So if the if majority of the board says that we don't need an additional two classroom, this is that this is a the base plan that we need. we
don't need another gym or we're not going to have it in the base plan and it'll only be in a second question then maybe that's something that gets changed in the survey. So if majority board says this is the
base plan this is it it's either you know they feel it's adequate I'll say then we don't have to go anymore. I just want to bring up my thought of that I think we need to probably two more classrooms to it and maybe I'm wrong and
that's just my opinion >> and if we do it should be reflected in the survey for the whatever those costs are and if we feel we need another athletic facility or the gym or we need
a bigger welding shop whatever it is not just the gym it could be anything But if we need another gym, then it should be on the base plan. It should be reflected in those numbers. And if we think it's a second question, should be reflected some way in that survey.
That's so let's dial back in for a minute here outside of page four where it talks about this is our plan, right? Because we're not it's not finalized yet. We haven't approved that
part. on the first couple of pages. Is there anything that anybody says, "This is wrong. We need to fix this piece. Um, I don't like the way this sounds. It's not accurate."
Anything that anybody would say before we get to that first, would you support West Central Area District pursuing a revised bond referendum at this time? Is there anything in that piece that anybody would say I don't like that?
>> I'm just troubled by that word revised. I don't know why that throws me. I mean, >> would it I guess that would might be so so maybe that's one of our questions is can we just say would it would you support West Central Area School District pursuing a bond referendum at
this time? Does it have to be revised? >> No. Right. Any other I mean he said that he they use this because they've showed that it's there. But I guess my question is still does it need to be there? Does it matter if it's a revised one, the same one? Do do you >> The goal is not to confuse it,
>> right? >> Do you want to remind them that voted no three times? >> We already did. We already did. >> I think we're saying like, >> right, >> it's one more one more time. I think that's why that
word is in there is >> right. >> You know what agree is maybe people look back in history and see >> would you like it to be an updated I mean would updated be a better wordi way but I mean I'm just it's a question this is why we're this is what we're here about right now
>> be bad either >> if I'm reading it and I don't know anything about how schools work and I'm worried about my checkbook you know how updated might I don't know I don't go with what I'm saying I'm just I want it to not create confusion if
people don't think that's going to create confusution that he's certainly experienced. They better go. >> I can see it either way. Maybe change the word like what you said or >> again this is why this is why we're here. This is what this meeting is all
about. So if you I mean that can be a question we can ask. So when we get back just is there a different word? >> It's not a different >> and his team might have some suggestions there as well. Can we go back? How do we want to do that with the task on page two? to the task force members. Are we just saying
>> certain number of communities and that number of members or do we want to be I think we were somewhat >> are we so at one point they did have the box identifying all the task force members I said I didn't know if that was necessary can we I mean would everybody be okay with just representing all five
communities is that >> or I would say so what's the >> if you go on page >> two names on it I >> mean I guess the question is do we need to have all their names on it? Do do we need to fill up another portion of page
or do we just does it represent that we did have people from all five communities >> and it's public somebody can call and ask you and you would certainly share that right I mean but I think just communities >> and then how many members we had
>> Ellis do you want to read all 27 names or whatever it was or do you think that it represented all five communities would be sufficient? Okay. Is that okay with everyone? >> Agree. >> So, we're just going to do all five communities and we'll leave it like that.
>> We move on to the next page. I think most of those things are pretty accurate. Obviously, the you know the back side what would be the fourth page >> my only thing with that is the update in all three schools would cost
approximately 46 million that's doing necessary updates that wasn't even like it wasn't like major facelifts or like you'd walk in and see like whoa this is really nice because I remember us discussing like that would be the HVAC and
>> it would be a little bit of that improving of the facade if that so the 46 is I think just going in and just doing um mechanical and stuff like that was going to be 30. >> This was gutting it and stuff in those places that you were going to remodel. >> I think it was more of an outside
>> redoing all the electrical, redoing the walls. >> Yeah. I'm not sure if it was I think it was most of that but not everything. But it did it did have a different look to the exterior. past remodels, unless this is different, was a complete gut job like they did on the old hospital like
like they did in the courthouse like they did, you know, it was it was making it look new with all the new electrical and all that's where every place is supposed to be and lights where everywhere it's supposed to be and new ceilings and new
floors and new desks and new chairs and >> not this 46 million. >> This wasn't I don't I if I I could be wrong, but I like the one the one plan that we discussed when we were debating on making changes to all three and then going to one site. It I mean, yes, there
was some, but not >> this was a little bit more. >> It wasn't as intrusive as some of the previous >> Yeah, I would say the floors were going to be the Tazzle was going to be the same at North and things like that. The the building facads coming in was because I think that was the talk was to have a little bit more of a pop. They
didn't want to have the same thing to say we're we're spending I can't remember what that dollar amount was 30 some million right to but that wasn't going to have any it was going to really do infrastructure and so I think this one is getting that new facade to both buildings doing a
little bit of the change on the cafeteria at south and things like that to make it a little more user friendly so there were >> list of that what that was do we have a list I can of what the plan was >> Yep. If I call on that original >> and this number if you note
this 46 was 44 previously the 29.5 is now 31.5 they have gone through some of those there has been some changes in numbers from last year to this year that weren't
anticipated or again there there is some change there. Additionally, like he talked about the whole costing of the, you know, the project versus the bonding cost has been added in there. So that 29.5 is they're
still pretty close as they finalize. They think they can still stay in that same um but that is why both of those numbers, you'll note, are $2 million additional because they did do some of those changing in the the updating of
some of those numbers. So, I think that might all be bonding costs. So, I'll double check there. But Darren, here's the >> Now, this may not so modernize and update this as projects. It did it did address part some parking
lot pieces, but I don't think the building pieces that stayed. I don't think there was a ton of change to the actual current infrastructure. Obviously, here there was an addition that's new. They were going to go in and facelift most things, but it wasn't like
the the main bulk there wasn't going to change a ton. >> Back this was Hog's plan, >> right? No, this is >> this is this is this is one this is what >> this is the task force. >> This is from the task force. >> This is the three this is the three
sites with the moderniz this is the 44 or 46 million. Yep. >> So you'll see the things that they're addressing there. >> Would it help if Darren you're looking you know we want to be precise that would have cost in excess of 44 million.
Would is that a true statement if you're you know the parking lot and whatever. Is there a way to If you're worried about that being so precise and maybe not. >> So here's what the meaning of the public thinking that it's just was going to be lipstick for 46 million and it wasn't.
So here's what the front entryway would look like then Darren on north and this was actually going to be on the back side >> you know not just the facade but in the classrooms and the the flooring and the ceiling and the electrical and the roof and the >> I mean it's getting worse.
>> Yeah, it was updating existing classrooms. I think a lot of electrical there. Um they typically call that heavy >> going off of what updating was the last time when we went through this as a forward
back when we were going came up with the plan the last one for to do we don't know what was going to happen. We were going to put that other wing on. Of course, that was going to be new. And then how we were going to dress the other portions. And it was >> so if you see there, Darren, it says
that the update existing classrooms and corridors. Y >> heavy remodel of existing locker room. So the heavy remodel is what you're talking about. The whole full gut change everything out. That's what would have happened in the locker room part. But just an update. I don't believe that was
as intrusive as what you're talking about in a heavy remodel. Does that make sense? That's that's the difference. If it would say heavy remodel of classrooms, now you're talking about ripping all the wall coverings, you know, making getting down to bare bones
and starting again. The existing pieces in both of these facilities or all three actually in this case would be more of a light remodel update versus heavy remodel. >> We talked about that west side where
there you know the west building where green spaces now we talked about heavy remodel but that was there's the mold between the walls and what's going on in there with the heating and the cooling and the windows and
It was better off to turn it to green space and move to the east. >> Yeah, that's Yeah, that's what we had planned for, >> right? I'm just saying the heavy was just in the locker room on this particular bland that was talked about
in this process. >> Are you concerned about the term or the >> that was me figure? just a public >> I just wanted to make sure that it was accurate information. >> I just wanted to make sure that it was accurate >> accurate. >> So it's getting the public accurate.
>> And so this this page that's what they're still working on. That's why it's still yellow on there is because those numbers aren't finalized yet and we still need to make sure that that stuff is accurate going out again. This would be where the question comes in for Darren. If we were to add questions to
our ballot, does that need to be in here currently and how does that get placed? >> He's ready to jump on whenever we ready. I have one quick question before what the group thinks on this section of
um these options would I I wonder about putting in bold the saving 750 instead of three that that whole area and then separate secure entrances which I think are key points as I if I'm a parent and
a taxpayer >> and I guess that was going to be one of My questions was the 750. Where did they >> Yeah. >> Where's that number come from? Because I know >> previously it had a lot to do with
staffing and right sizing. We have actualized a lot of that. So is this actual operational cost that they're talking about or is it a little bit of both? Okay. So that that just knowing that that's an accurate number. Like I said, if we're already
I mean we're we're already down we're going to have a two section class. >> So that has not completely been figured there. So we could Yeah, we could if we get down to a two section that would be more than that. This is kind of taking those areas where we know when we get to one site. So some our secretarial staff.
>> Sure. Again, I just want to make sure it's not because I know back when the you know when the last one went around it was we have four sections now. Now, we're going to be at three sections. That's one teacher per grade. And that's how they figured out their 76 $650 to $700,000.
Well, we're already down to three and we're couple of them are closing in on two, right? Already. So, I just want to make sure that that number wasn't pulled out of something like that that we've already actualized some of those things. It's it is the other pieces, right? So, I just want to make sure that's accurate
because I don't have that, right? >> Where does that come from? the plan was, >> you know, so that again, I'm not saying they're wrong. I just want to make sure that when that question comes out, we know what that accounts for that >> were asked, we can be trans that just
like your question about that. >> Yep. Dollars. And I I think that'll be one of the pieces that we have to just make sure of. >> So that 750 is like staffing and like maintenance >> mainly staffing and then utilities. Remember that was in the task force.
They kind of took that number and put that together. So they had had that was at $100,000 and then looking at our staffing from less administration to you know then our specialists are centralized and stuff like that. Kitchen staffs would be different clerical >> square footage footprint goes down. So
that was part of that piece >> right? >> No I can actually get a spreadsheet. So a lot of those numbers are mine but I'll get a spreadsheet. I think it would be helpful until we have that. >> Yeah. Just so we can have the that's accurate. So then Darren, here's South Elementary.
So they were actually going to fill the gym basement where those locker rooms were. Yeah. Updates to existing classrooms and corridors. I just know like what the updates you go over to Alec and look at Discovery and see what their
>> remodel looks like, you know, the whole building, >> right? Yeah. No, >> absolutely. >> I'm just wondering because we have so many questions, do we need to try to schedule one more meeting with >> with Seth potentially before so we can make sure that that like you said that plan >> that part has nothing like that the
conversation of what the remodeling would look like has nothing to do with the right. I just want to be sure said my piece is that that we're accurate telling the public what it would look like if we did remodel. that has nothing to do with the survey and and I just
felt like I had to say it. Uh what the part I have only the only parts I have concerned with with the survey is is our concept now a plan so that whatever goes on there is what we're planning on now things might tweak
a little bit like they say there's but we have no and if we're going to add a gym that I think we should add if I think it should be personally I think it should be in the base plan and if it is in the base plan should be
reflected in that 31,000 or 31.5 million because it's going to add to the cost. If we think it might be a second question, then we should then that we should modify the survey somehow to say that there may be a
second question to add more gym facilities. Do you think that should be in the base plan versus a second question or something something along those lines? >> I think that should be a second question because the task force kind of led it to that. I think you get through many of those plans they kind of showed here.
>> Well, they said it was a concept because they said, if I remember right, a lot of them that was a big discussion in there that they all know that they're we're short of gym space, >> right? Yep. >> And it's our decision to decide at this point, you know, if we want to
go forward and and maybe we got to bring them in here again, but then it would be a whole, you know, the whole group and I don't know if we want to go down. >> All I'm saying is I think be direct again. I I think our core mission is to educate children. I was a college
athlete of high school athlete. I think the gym question, the second gym should be a second question to honor the finances of many people in this district. We have got to get an instructional environment that's good for kids. And so for me, it feels
appropriate to have it as a second question. I'm not against it at all, but I think we have to present a fiscally responsible plan first. >> Yeah, that's fine. Then we decide it's >> that would just be my opinion >> that in in that having that opin there's
absolutely nothing wrong and again I appreciate that opinion but as a board we got to decide is that what it's going to be or not. I personally think I want it. I think it should be there because I know we want to attract students and you know whether you like it or not that
attract students and in my opinion maybe I'm wrong but in my opinion I think it does. So having adequate facilities is would be I think that's something that would create a magnet. So should it be in the base plan or not? And if if the answer
is six of us say no, it should be a second question and one of us says it should be in the base plan, then we move forward on that. >> Let's make a decision. >> Just so for the piece going forward, Paul, when they come back, they were going to finalize
what they had from the user groups and bring that back. Is that the next meeting they were going to Was Windsth going to come to our next meeting? I think we're going to loop that back in. I mean, I know our time I was looking at the timeline here. It's because really the survey is supposed to go to the
printer. I think by the >> um the 17th, which unfortunately is next Tuesday. But that might be the question to Darren to say, >> do we need to back this up just a little bit? >> You know, if they could,
>> right? Because you know again if we back that up a week or you know so we can get our next meeting in to see that so we're you know we're appropriate with our numbers where the plan is what we want it to be um you know all those pieces
can be accurate >> is that you know that's a question for Darren as well I guess if we can >> gets pushed. So, I have one question. The uh 295 or the 315 that we're at now, does that
include everything that was originally included in the task force concept such as the track and and that kind of stuff? I >> think the track was an add-on, wasn't it? Or was that actually the base? >> It was included in the first. >> So, it does not. So, that does not include it. And the wellness center is
not there either. Um the wellness center they said there would be opportunity to add that but they've also got they do a percentage for furnishings and so we wouldn't need all the furnishings but they said the wellness center I think was going to be 1 million is what Brent
had emailed me to add on that 2400 square feet was a million dollars. He said we could reduce some of the furnishings because they plan on refernishing the entire elementary. We've got as Maya noted earlier we've got lots of classrooms now that have gotten newer furnishings. So, probably
not necessary to do all those. We'll have to have some expense that way. And I can't remember. I thought the dollar amount was well over a million dollars in furnishings for the for the elementary. So, but yeah, the one I remember for sure was wellness center. And I did email the group and just said, "Hey, this is going to be something that
was talked about it. It was the wellness center. I couldn't remember if the track and the and was a extra softball fields are included because we knew that those were going to be moved." Um, >> you're raising a good question. Do we The last want is to have some miscommunication with the task force. We
need to loop them back in even if it's quick for this >> aren't here. We want you to know that this is the why >> or otherwise I think that you know what the heck. >> So yeah, the answer you got your answer
right there provide running track. >> So yep. We got we just got to get past the concept and get the we got to get the whole plan down to where we're >> so smart numbers and they are accurate. >> We got to we got to got to get past the
concept and I said this a long time ago figure out what exactly are we going to do. And >> so then essentially what we need to ask Darren is can we bring this back or or do we need to have an I guess an additional meeting
would be the question. I don't know what the dates are, but I don't know if there's a way to do another meeting in between here and there. >> Well, to clarify what is in this versus the task force piece so that there's good communication that I don't know if that's a meeting or not
>> because our next meeting would be the 18th. >> Yep. So I guess you know there again if this was set to go to print on the 17th or I mean realistically if we have a meeting next
Wednesday and we have all these we we have all these things figured out. We could I mean potentially you're going to push a few days different. >> Right. Well, and I think you know the biggest thing is that review and comment
deadline is June 16th, >> right? >> And so there could be some I think possible you just might have to have an extra meeting between the 6th and and the 20th of May. You know, if they have survey results, maybe that gets pushed back for their presentation and still so you can
have it done by the 20th, but that still gives a month between the right survey the board considers next steps and the review and comment. And I know for a I know for a fact the last time the review and comment we were told it
probably wouldn't take as long as >> be expedited >> a normal piece. So um well >> to get Darren on the on the computer here we can ask him and maybe like you said I think it's a good idea to loop >> those user groups and probably the task force so they can see where those pieces
are at and >> go from there. So I'll ask if he can rejoin. while he's working on that. Are there as you look towards the end um you know any other issues with the I mean I think the
questions at the end seem to be pretty straightforward. Um anything anybody sees there that they don't necessarily or they want additions to? Is there any other information methods that you think should be added
on this? Is there any um any other information you're hoping to glean from this survey that you think should be asked at the end? >> I think we need to back up here. I should have mentioned this when we were discussing listing names versus the task
force representing all five communities. I don't think there's anybody >> could be accurate. I got to think about the list. I'll grab my other computer here and see >> a cross-section of district >> district communities might be saying
that >> yeah because I mean everybody that applied I mean we accepted we didn't turn anybody away >> as long as they were district resident we had >> Yep. Maybe that could get in there somehow. >> Cross-section of district residents. >> I mean, that's
>> I mean, Kent Marshall came, but he wasn't on the task force. So, >> Darren, I think they have an immediate question when it comes to timing, timeline. There's still some concern about the the project plan, true dollars, and things like that that may
have changed a little bit from the task force. Is there any opportunity to delay to give them a little more time by two weeks? What does that I know at one point we were sitting okay, but if we did a twoe delay as we look at the timeline,
what does that do? >> I I would I would tell you because you've been so proactive. I mean, think about how long we've been talking way back to January at the board convention. We we've got time. Um your biggest your biggest hurdle will be review and comment. And so I want to have you be
able to get data um by early June so that you can file your review and comment with Kra Sanderson with that state department. It's kind of the speed bump before you write the resolution in August. You've got to the state's got to bless your plan. But this is b a
singular plan. I mean there's only so much it's going to change, right? So I by all means let's let's let's pace this the right manner. or if you want to delay it. You tell me the new dead the new deadline that you prefer. And even if it means that we have to turn our our report around or record time, let's
let's go up the timeline that you need to make sure the dollars and scope are accurate. Doesn't do any good to test a question if the dollars are off, the scopes off, any of those things. >> So then, >> so if you I think I've got sharing right
now. I can go back to our our timeline if you'd like. And uh >> yeah, and they've got a copy of that as well. But yeah, if you'd like to pull that up and I'm just going to get some volume here a little louder now. We can even see you, >> which is not a treat for you. Sorry about that. But uh you know,
that's what you're stuck with. So, okay. So, I'm showing we are going to send it to print on the on the 17th, everybody. Um if you needed to delay that a couple weeks, I would push back all these all these dates accordingly. And then what I would do is I would present to your
board. You tell me the next board meeting um after May 6. If we're going to go back two weeks, you tell me the new board meeting, I'll have the data ready. >> Maybe we could schedule that now and work backwards from that. I'll redo all the tasks fall accordingly. >> Well,
>> that would be the 20th. >> The 20th is actually the meeting, right? That would be the next one after the 6 is the May 20th meeting. We have a meeting on the 20th >> of May. Yep. >> Yep. >> And I think Darren, the other piece too
is kind of working in Witsth as well to make them aware so they can get back to a task force meeting to >> get that group loop back in. >> Well, we can come back to that group. So, with this with this much warning, I I don't see how with multiple reps on their team um that we wouldn't be able
to pull this off. And quite honestly, because I serve Wisconsin accounts and Minnesota accounts, I'm going to be in Minnesota that week of the 18th. And so I could, if you needed me to to come in person, answer any of the tough taxpayer questions, we'll work that out.
Okay, >> Darren, if we were to decide, you know, like one thing we're we're kind of up in the air right now about is what is the actual hard numbers with the one plan that we have going forward? Um, if we
were to decide we needed to add or separate some things, additional questions, how difficult does that get to be for you? If say there was a I don't know, in in the past we had a a sports plan or a
CTE plan like separating out separate pieces, would that be difficult on your end? >> What's your name, sir? >> This is Maya. Jeremiah. >> Maya is your board chair. Yep. Uh, easy. We do that all the time. Um, actually,
it's more rare for us to have a singular plan like yours and only test one. Um, right now because dollars are so tight, most of our projects have a base, what we call a base plan, right? And then there's additional scope items that that to give the kind of empower the
taxpayers to say, how far are you willing to go with right now? Um, yours I I keep referencing Yellow Medicine, but that's kind of a similar community, right? I mean, conservative area and and they went all in because they didn't have any other options. They're just an all- in K12 solution.
But um if you want to test out some things that people have been in your ear about but aren't deal breakers, that's really healthy because you can really see uh what people want to spend their their bucks on and what they don't. >> Sure. >> Okay. >> We just have to just have to come back
to the science folks and what we'll do is we have to create another tax grid and say, "Okay, sure. for this much more, you're going to get this renovated CTE wing. And I got to tell you, right now, CTE is carrying carrying the day. People are realizing that the skilled
labor gap is real. And they're investing in their high school kids having state-of-the-art CTE weighing way over anything else. Way over performing art centers, way over athletics. >> Mhm. Oh, we saw that in our last that was the
closest thing to passing was our CTE renovations on the last bond. So, okay. Is there any other questions? I wrote down a couple of things. Maya, the other comment I make, if
there's something that people are in your ear about that the board is like, we don't think pass, you're we always say you're going to survey. You're not going to represent. use our survey tool to flesh that stuff out. So, if these people won't quiet down about turf for the football field
or whatever, it just put on the survey. Let us >> be the bad news people and and just let's just roll with the survey and see what your public says. >> Sure. >> Okay. Um yeah. Any other questions on those
pieces then? If that I mean realistically then if that works we're probably going to have a meeting that 18th of March would be the next right if we're if we're backing up here. >> Yeah. So our next meeting would be the
18th. So we had to figure out time for the task force to reconvene >> right >> the boards are to meet and discuss it and probably our user groups to get looped in as well. So really sometime between
the 17th and the 6th, we'd probably need to get a >> Is that a fair estimate? >> Get a what? Get an extra meeting. >> Get an extra meeting in to try to get the if we were going to get the task force looped in. Is that accurate?
>> I think we got a loop in the especially if there's some pieces >> right because of that. Yep. >> There's the track piece, the gym piece, the So, do we have them in here, bring them to our meeting? >> Is that what you're saying?
>> Yeah. Well, either that or or in order to, you know, I guess I feel like that conversation is probably going to be a meeting in it in itself if we're going to do that. So to say that we're going to show up on the you know pick a date
the 6th and or whatever our I don't remember what the date is but you know to say that we're going to come in and do all of our regular business and have that conversation I I just I guess I would question if that's going to be feasible or not. We might need more time. So that might be a meeting in
itself. And I guess that's why I, you know, it doesn't necessarily have to be there, but you know, somewhere in that April, early late March, early April, I would think we need to try to get a work a task force meeting in to talk
about some of those. >> I would know that know that as far as our timeline goes, we need three weeks for it to be at the printer to get to all the mailboxes and then we have the survey out for three weeks. So, um, you know, just everything gets pushed back
by the amount of time we send it to print being pushed back. So, um, >> and I guess that's where if we can get it in between the March 17th and the March April 6th, then we're only pushing back two weeks, right? I mean, is that make sense? >> Yep.
>> So, >> and I could honor I could honor May 20th then easily. Yes. So, so you know those would be the pieces that we would want to try to get figured out in that time frame so that we can still give them the proper time to get to print and you know
so I I guess that's a question to the board is does that make sense to everyone that we would add an additional meeting and obviously we're going to have to get with Woods and Carl Anderson to get some finalized. They're going to have to come to us with this is what
we've got for you and this is our projections on dollars and these are the pieces that fit in those dollars and these are the pieces that don't fit in that. You know, as we look at >> here's what you were handed from the task force as a you know, this is what we think we're going to get. Well, this
is what you really can get, you know, and then what do those additional pieces look like? >> Paul, is my document showing up? >> It is. Yep. And they've got a copy in front of them as well. >> Yes. So I'm redoing this as we speak with all the new dates based on us
pushing back two weeks. Okay. >> Okay. >> So So then we would be talking about getting it to the printer on March March 31st. Now instead of the 17th,
you' give it final approval on the the 30th and whatever that date would be. um when you can review us as a board in in blush. And I'll just refresh this um and call this the uh the May 20th edition. That's
when we're going to get data to you by is May 20. I suppose that would be a little easier right now too for a folks because they're probably getting geared up but not quite out in the fields and stuff, >> right? >> Okay. >> So, I can get a communication out to the
task force as well as our user groups, I'll reach out to Brent and Lindsay right away in the morning and then we may if if that's our, you know, just listening to those numbers, you know, we may have to have that meeting and an additional board meeting in there. Does that make sense to
everyone? If we're gonna if we're going to make a March 30th, we're probably looking at two meetings there. We're probably looking at a task force meeting one day and a school board meeting a different day to have those conversations to make that to be ready for print.
>> Yep. And you said March 31st is the deadline for print, right? >> Yeah. In order to get the printer uh the amount of time they need to insert all those codes for you, you bet. Yep. So, we already have a meeting on the 18th.
>> I wonder if the task force could get together before that. I guess we'd have to check on that. or if we were to go if at some point we could get the 18th and the 25th to work that would give us
time to finish. >> Let me ask a question. We're meeting with the task force to communicate some of the things that we might not we might not have been able to include. Correct. >> So we want them as many people as
possible. We could offer two alternative times because we're really explaining it's I mean right we're not discussing at this point that sounds harsh but so maybe we offer two meeting times to honor them or a Google meet or something
>> um because we're we want them to understand the why behind it right >> right >> okay I just want to make sure I understood that it's not a discussion >> I want I guess I want to understand what their intention was their intention wants to have the track and field the
track in there then we want to know that >> there's a lot of discussion about extra >> if it's our decision to to whether it ends up in there or not. >> Mhm. >> But if you're going to talk about 81% of
the people passed it and their intention was to have something in and we took it out then we just have to be clear about that we took it out and there'll be a why whatever >> right? But we got to find out what their intention was. >> Well, and I think at that point now you
have to look at what that scope was that the task force had and we have to get they have to come with dollars for those things. I know they talked about the, you know, >> additional gym space could cost an extra $4 million. You know, if it's $4
million, did you really, you know, >> do we, you know, I know that was one conversation at one meeting was the additional gym space. Let's go with the BA, you know, let's stay with the base plan. We know that we like, you know, we know that we like
additional gym space, but >> let's get this first part to go and we and we can look at this piece, you know, and I don't know that necessarily at that time there was a $4 million tag to the gym space, but >> I know, you know, we know they kind of
left that out as part of the concept, right? Right. >> Was a track something they left out or was that in it >> with their >> It was in It was in the plan. Yep. >> And there again, I I don't know that
the dollars that were talked about then are the same as now. Now it doesn't matter which side of it you're on. There's still different dollars. So, we have to figure that piece out. So, >> and you know maybe maybe some dialogue
could be you know we're discussing whether we add a question >> then with that question as task force make sense to be >> you know the wellness track together or separate and maybe get some feedback from them on that >> right
>> one thing we do normalize that is we will talk about that we'll talk about that base plan >> yes >> kind of transition and say Hey, while crews are on site, it is it is um it is efficient to to do other additional work, too. So, we want to gauge your
interest in that just to kind of normalize it and say, "Hey, this is an this would be the most efficient time to do other projects you've been wanting us to do. Give us your feedback and we'll ask them to prioritize on a high, medium, low scale." And we'll have data to based on what they prioritize on the
high and the low end of the the continuum. >> Sure. That makes sense. I was just going to look and see to that question of the gym on their spreadsheet.
This is a fabric steel 4.8 million >> and that's a single place. >> I think it's a little bit bigger than that. They have that on a potential question two is what Krauss Anderson. So I think those will be the pieces that we'll have to finalize for this and that
obviously adjusts the you know this is question one this is question two this is question three you know what are your how do you support that like you said are are you interested in what do or or do you do I guess Darren would you do more of a you know if we do you do more
of a this is what question one would be this is our base plan and how do you support that but then do you say this is what question two would be or do you say we've got these other items that we're looking that and then we find out what question two maybe should be off of the support for those items or how does that
work in your survey? >> So, so what we do is we get an initial reaction to the costing and the base plan in and of itself. Then we use the next page to transition. We'll say hey these we're also wondering would you want to expand the scope beyond the base plan and we'd let's say there's three
items say which of these rate them please high do now immediately medium do sometimes but not right now and low not pressing in the next 10 to 15 years and then we'll come back with rating scales compiled and averaged out based on all
three of those and we have to attach the costing so they're so they're voting with their pocketbook too and then we'll do us a second tax impact tax chart and show them what the the new tax levels would be with all those additional projects added in. So, you kind of isolate it, the base, the
non-negotiables. We just got to have that one building site. And then, oh, oh, by the way, these are some things we could do. Um, and we'd like to get your feedback on these, too. And much to our surprise, like I had this happen in in um Ed Ederton, M Minnesota, they
actually went a couple thresholds up. They actually went a little conservative. They probably left a little money on the table because they were surprised. People wanted to go a bit further than their base plan. >> Sure. Okay. Well, is there any other questions for
Darren at this time? Anybody have any questions for him? We'll respect your time and No, you're I'm here to serve you. All I can tell you is when you talk to your committee and if people say if people say, "Oh, I know that people don't want that." Please don't listen to
that. The survey is your tool to know what people really feel. Um, I learned that the hard way with my board. My board thought that my community would never build a performing arts center. And I said, "Can I at least ask the question on the survey, please?" Well, guess what? They built it. It was time.
They ch, you know, the community had changed enough that they they felt the need was there. So, this is use our tool to ask any question you've ever wondered about and put some of these things to rest once and for all. Okay.
>> People travel in like circles and listen to friends who have like opinions, but this survey is going to everybody. >> Right. Okay. All right. Any any other questions? >> Well, thank you, Darren. We'll definitely get back to you and we'll uh
hash through a few more things and probably come with another laundry list for you. >> All right. We're excited to do some revisions. We'll wait to hear from you, Paul. Okay, bud. >> Sounds great. Thanks, Taran. >> Take care. Good night, everybody. See you. >> I got a question on a previous
project list here where it shows the prices. >> Yep. >> So, the one for exterior siding and exterior doors, phase two, new future LTFM, can you explain that project? So,
initially I don't think they recognized that we had 30 I think it's about 32,000 square feet of sighting in the back. So, they would do >> we're talking the green steel, >> right? >> That's what he's talking about. >> They would redo this in the front steel. >> Yeah. But then it goes all the way back to the, you know, the egg room and
everything. So, that's >> this part would be the part nobody sees the the >> phase two would be on the back side. We'd eventually get it done through and then it's also the doors all on the backside there as well. also was replacing all those doors. I know they were saying then the steel sighting too
they could repaint. There was some concern is there anything that's happening behind that sighting as well. They've uh excuse me Krauss Anderson said they've never seen that happen to steel before where it has all the paint peeling. They said that's not something that they're they're not sure
why that even happened. So, but yeah, that would be getting the front all taken care of. It would just be then over a planned cycle around the back just because yeah when they said they started adding it all up it's 32,000 square ft of sighting and the
rest repurposing was that something that was never in the task force plan or our base plan a future goal or hope that we're expanding the wrestling room we are doing that plan
even >> so this is >> a little bit of the push from me and I would say is I really kind of said we told our folks it was 299 you know so maybe it's going to be a conversation with the task force and the board to say well now it's got to be 30
31 million or something like that I just said I think we really need because this was after the scope creep came in after we met with our user groups that project really exploded so I think that was more than what the task force had so I think it's now coming back to the board to say
okay where is the threshold the dollars the dollars and doing it right and all those pieces there so I think >> that's yeah that's the that's the number you have when we don't when we start with just general concept and they'll create a plan is that like this
the expansion of your user groups coming in and saying this is what we need you know I don't think >> well I guess they weren't extravagant they were just saying this This is what we have. >> Some some pieces might have been. >> Yeah, some pieces might have been. I think not realizing because I don't I
think that was the one thing that witsth after said we probably should have had some basic pieces laid out too. And I think it's looking at what MDE recommends, you know, what is the right size classroom? And I think there was, you know, we have spaces that have lots of reading nooks and things like that,
which are but, you know, what is the the standard and things like that. So, I think they they said if they were to do it again, they would probably re-evaluate say, "Here are some of our guiding principles going in." And that didn't happen to start with. It was more or less kind of an open format.
I also think it's worth noting that if you look at the history with North and South, they both had additions over the years and many many school buildings throughout the state of Minnesota 20 30 years in, there's an addition or something. So, I think we are right to
be prudent about what we're doing right now and what the taxpayers will support. Um, and that may not check every box and that's stinks, but we have to create a plan that that will allow us to have an
instructional sites for our kids. So that I mean that's just where I'm at is that it's you want to do your best projection, but certainly the data is out there that many many school buildings are remodeled added on to at some point in the 40 50 year history of
a building. I guess that we haven't talked about that in in this particular plan, but I know in previous plans that was part of the conversation, especially when we had the growing enrollment, which we don't currently have, but when our enrollment was growing,
they had this is what the plan is on this end right here. It's set up to just dig outside of this, knock a hole in the wall, and we've just added on another, you know, how many other classroom Right. So that was how the building was
built was so it could be added on to I would anticipate that's what we would do with something like this to say all right we need two classrooms here two you know just like if we went straight to the north from here you would anticipate that you probably could add
two classrooms on pretty simply just outside the back door you're just adding them on extending your hallway similar here. I would think you have to build it that way. So in that in the case that for some reason everything turns around and all of a sudden our classes are going from
40, you know, changing from instead of being from 40 to they're going to 70 instead of, you know, but right now that doesn't appear to be the case. And I I just think I know the one plan had like three classrooms and a flex room for
every grade. And we're just not at that point right now where I mean again majority of our numbers say we could do two classrooms and we probably we may or may not use a flex, you know. So to say that we should build a flex room and an
additional steam room and an additional breakout space room and an, you know, all those pieces and we probably can do all that in one room and not necessarily need every one of those extra spaces at this point. And if we do need extra spaces, great. We're going to probably
have to go out and build some more. But that's a down the road question and it doesn't look like it's on this current map. So on this current plan, we're not expanding the wrestling room or the fitness or the weight room. Where are we? >> The fitness center is not added there.
Open up for the 29 stay the same size and the rest room stay the same size. >> Correct. Yep. All right. Any other questions on the current survey? Obviously, we've got some work to do on that page four and
and likely some other numbers in the the tax implication part and I don't know how they do that if if they give you a step system. I know in the past, you know, it was 30 million is this and 50 million is
this and you know 70 million is this or I don't know how that >> Yep. So they do that. So Ellers will put that together and just for clarity that bond so the 299 which was the one site plan came to 31450 because their note at
the very bottom says bond amounts for each option has been sized to include the first interest payment that would be due in fiscal year 2627. So that's why that went from the 299 to the 31450.
That's also why the 44 44475 went to the 46480 because that's also including so it wasn't anything with interest scope creep it's that first bond payment that would have to be paid so >> right yep so and they did this is part
of their presentation that they sure gave there um that way but yeah so that's where that piece is there >> in that task force meeting and maybe I'm birdwalking here too much would there be a does the board see it is appropriate to
propose a question too that they might want to respond to that might have to do with the extra gym or wellness space. I mean when I look at that wrestling room I think wellness space how that could be merged along you know I don't know is
that something we want to talk to them about or not >> I would I think you have that base question and then question two right and what things would be priorities to include and maybe does it even become question three is it question one two and three >> you know so I think so I think I'd need
to get back to Mike Bars with KA and say okay what is your furnishings budget if we can how much then what is that accurate cost on that piece and but to have that conversation with the task force, right? Yep. >> So, we honor some of those pieces that they talked about, >> right?
>> Yep. And I think the other thing too, the reason why Krauss Anderson got brought in as one to help us with the project, but they're also the ones that get more of the they know what those expenses are and costs are going to be, which is better to do that now as we go out with that survey than it is after
it's all said and done. The community passes it and then they say, "Oh, and we're short dollars here." So, >> can you get a perfectly good count of what um the number of student desks, whatever we have that are that would be
um in good enough condition to move to a new building site. So, we know like we have six complete classrooms we don't need to address. >> That's what Mike needs there too. He said he said if you said then we can just get a percentage to say here's >> the cafeteria tables. I'm sure they've bought cafeteria tables over the years.
You know, >> I'd have to see that might be one area that they maybe haven't purchased a whole lot recently. Yep. So, I would have to check that to see. >> But just there are other things, right? >> Yep. Nope. Absolutely. >> So, then if we look forward, our currently our next meeting is next
Wednesday, a week from Wednesday. Is there a date would we look at? Obviously, we're going to have to reach out to the task force and see when they're available. Um, is there a time or a space in there
where everybody says, "Ah, I can't do this." Or, you know, that week of the 23rd to the 27th, is there room in there for a 23rd or a 25th, you know, type of a meeting where we have a couple of options for flexibility in there? Um,
obviously by the next meeting, we'll probably have to lock that down and get it posted if we're going to add an additional meeting, but I would say look at your calendars and see what we can get in on in that week of the 23rd to the 27th as we reach out to a task force and say, do you have availability there?
Maybe their availability is next week versus that. I don't I don't know what that looks like, but if anybody has any pressing things that you say this isn't going to work. I do know now the 23rd there is a choir concert at 7:00 p.m. So, if we do it
that night, we should start at 5. Um, and maybe that's a night where, you know, maybe a bunch of task force members have choir pe, you know, choir kids and they'd want to sneak in here and talk about it. I just I think in the interest of you know I think you have a
meeting but I think we offer a second option to get some information if it's a Google lead >> with just you or your board member or just something so that every passport member feels like they have a shot at >> being part of that >> right
>> you know I just think it's pretty important >> I would agree I just emailed Lindsay and Brent and Mike Bars to see what their availability was the 23rd through 27 too. So, >> so I guess keep those, you know, look at
your calendars, see what those dates look like. Um, the 23rd that Monday might be the best time because it's still Lent for folks, right? That'll be Yep. still Lent for >> people there. So, it might be
that Monday might be the >> Sure. So best time >> again if there's a date you know that I can't do that one you know let's x some of those off because I think you know I hope everybody wants to be there I get it maybe we
can't get everybody there but I say we pick a day I'm pretty open see what the schedule looks like Paul will get back to us >> okay I will do that >> okay so we'll We'll plan for our 18th meeting to make
sure we can set some dates there. Um, is there anything else in the interim that we need to obviously we need to get some numbers from Carl Sanderson before then? So, I don't know that, you know, anything else this week benefits us because they're
probably not quite done with all that stuff yet. >> And revisit that 750,000. >> Yep. I'll get that cleaned up and then yeah talking. So I'll talk to the to them about the furnishings as well and see there. I just got an email back from Brent. I've got to give him a call
because it says he's out till the end of April which I'm not sure. That seems to me it might be a typo, but I'll double check there. Lindsay could still come in though, but I'll double check there. So I suppose we'll have to motion. again. I think as long as uh Yeah. I mean,
obviously we won't or it would just >> Buddy, I didn't mean to cut you off. >> No, no, you're right. Yeah. I mean, I I I was just going to say I think as long as we could get Kander, you know, somebody here to talk
some numbers with us as far as what some of these costs are going to be and where everything fits so that we have good numbers for that task force to understand this is why, you know, these things were removed and this is where we're at and does this make sense or, you know, does that make sense? And,
>> you know, again, get a little feel there. But um yes, you're absolutely right. At this point, we would need to just table this uh action item 6B
on the consider the survey. We're not ready for this. >> I don't a motion. >> Yes, I'll make a motion. >> Is there a second? >> Second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. P the same sign. Motion carries.
Um any other discussion item? Any other piece of this that anybody feels needs to be pertinent today or any question? >> Need more information? If you need anything else, let me know. I can reach out to that >> team and find out. I'll get a date and
get that out to everybody. >> Okay. And then I would look for a motion to adjurnn. I'll make that motion. Second. >> All in favor say I. >> I. Motion carries.