LRP Committee March 26, 2007

Long Range Plan Review Committee
Minutes
March 26, 2007

Members in Attendance:
Harry Amend* Susan Clayton Katie Harris Jill Neal* Lori Smith
Rosie Astorquia* Jim Ferguson Doug Jaworski Vern Newby* Tami Stroud
Hazel Bauman* Scott Fischer* Mary Larson Dave Patzer
Jeff Bengtson Lana Hamilton Erin Lenz Joel Palmer
Steve Briggs* Russ Hansen Bryan Martin* Pam Pratt*

*Ex-officio members

Welcome:
Dave Patzer called the meeting to order at 4:35 p.m. The meeting was held at the Midtown Center meeting room.

Approval of Minutes:
Due to no quorum, the February 26, 2007 minutes could not be approved at this meeting.

By-Laws Review – Doug Jaworski:
Due to no quorum, this was tabled until the next meeting.

Review of the development of the 2006 S.P.F.L. priority list – Jill Neal:
Jill reported that in the Fall of 2004 the Board asked the committee to come back to them with a list of needs for the S.P.F.L. There were 20 people on this subcommittee. In November 2004 this subcommittee took a bus trip and toured the five southern schools that were in the most need (Winton, Borah, Bryan, Sorensen and Canfield). They also toured Fernan in January so they could compare the older buildings to a newer building. The subcommittee met again for five additional meetings. In order to rank the schools by priority they used two models, one was Scott Fischer’s Buildings Educational Effectiveness worksheet and Criteria for Future Building Projects grid. The subcommittee rated the schools on air quality, site viability, classroom size, safety, security, special education, portables, playgrounds, demographics, community growth, etc. Once all this was completed, a vote was taken. This list of priorities was taken to the Board (see memo dated 6/6/05 attached to original minutes).

Update of District student demographics since 2006 – Steve Briggs:
The committee was provided with March 23, 2007 enrollment numbers. On this spreadsheet it also shows how many students were in enrollment in March of 2006. These are actual enrollment numbers not in-zone numbers, there are students attending our schools from out-of-district as well as on transfers. Transfer information will be provided at next month’s meeting. Steve pointed out that both elementary and secondary numbers have increased but that it is manageable growth. These numbers give Long Range Planning the opportunity to look at where the numbers are currently and where the needs might surface for facilities and other issues. The District’s free and reduced lunch count demographic is changing. In the last year, the District has decreased from 43% to 38%. Jobs Plus feels that the number one cause for this is the cost of housing.
Steve pointed out the demographic anomaly the District has in the elementary schools with there being room in the southern schools and overcrowding in the north. The District is challenged by this issue as well as parents wanting to have neighborhood schools. The Attendance Zone Committee has a lot to do with where students are targeted for attendance but Long Range Planning also has to have the understanding (i.e. 11th elementary, new middle school, new high school, etc.) These questions are difficult to answer because there has to be some level of stability in terms of growth which the District has not had in the last 2-3 years. Harry told the committee that one of the things the District looks for is large bubbles of students and pointed out that kindergarten is usually about 100 kids short because a lot of parents choose to start their children in public school at 1st grade. A lot of the private schools in Kootenai County are K-8 schools which bumps up our freshman numbers. The high school enrollment numbers are fairly even (students are given a choice).
Hazel stated that it seems that the Sorensen magnet school is going to be a pretty big success. They currently have 138 applicants at the end of this first window of enrollment that closed on March 12th. Of those 138, more than half are out-of-district (not currently attending any School District 271 school). Due to this success, their may be an appetite for another magnet school in the future. Steve pointed out that there needs to be some dialogue in the future about students that live outside of the District boundaries that attend our schools because they do not pay taxes to the District (levies are taxpayer supported).

Where did the $4.5 million come from? – Steve Briggs:
The committee was provided with a handout. The only project that came in under budget in 2002 S.P.F.L. was Food Service. All of the rest of the projects came in over budget due to rising construction costs. A decision was made to delay the Lakes project and $3,300,000 that was originally targeted for Lakes was used to complete the other projects. We asked the voters in March 2006 for $19,000,000 to construct a new Lakes and the levy failed. After the failure of the levy, some of the monies were used in order to install air conditioners and provide furniture and fixtures at Lakes. Steve explained that there is currently approximately $4,500,000 invested in the State Treasury pool which are being held for Lakes. Since the latest proposal we put out to the voters was to demolish the building, we need to be careful not to put any of that $4,500,000 into the existing building that could not be recovered. We need to have discussions as a Long Range Planning Committee as to where to go next.

Working towards the new S.P.F.L. priority list – Dave Patzer:
Dave Patzer stated that the committee needs to re-analyze and determine the priorities for the next School Plant Facilities Levy (S.P.F.L.) Is Lakes still the number one need 1-year later? If so, why is it the number one need? The committee should revalidate and revisit the needs in order to maintain credibility with the patrons. Dave asked for the committee’s input on the process that should be used as well as what other data might be needed. The following comments were made:
• Some out-of-box thinking is needed. The District is lacking ground to build on and elementary and middle schools are over capacity in the north. What if we were to build one more elementary school, change the elementary schools in the north to grades K-6 and change Canfield and Woodland to grades 7-8? This would be the least expensive route and give some relief to schools that are over capacity.
• Hate to have to re-do all the work the committee has done in the past unless something has changed and it needs to be re-done. The existing plan is a good plan we just need to decide how to deal with it. Middle schools need to be dealt with now as well as elementary schools. The above plan (bullet #1) may address both these issues.
• When talking just about the northern schools, the District is being divided once again. This causes credibility issues. We need to prioritize the middle schools and do a middle school levy. The elementary school issues could be addressed by adjusting attendance zones.
• There are a lot of facility needs in the south because the buildings are older but there is overcrowding in the north. We need to have some discussion about alternatives.
• What about one of the southern schools being a Grades 5-6 school?
• How about a kinder center, move the preschool out of Fernan, rebuild Lakes, make Fernan a math/science magnet and Lakes will serve as a math/science/arts magnet to both Fernan and Sorensen?
• What percent of districts, when looking at facilities, use S.P.F.L. vs. Bond? It is a small percentage and you have to have a favorable tax base. Are we reaching a point where it is getting too big to run an S.P.F.L.? Steve will provide an analysis on this at the next meeting. 98 school districts levy significantly more than we do. We have the 4th largest tax base in the state behind Boise, Meridian and Sun Valley.
• We need to share this information with the public. Most people understand bonds but don’t understand pay-as-you-go. People need to be educated.
• We have approximately 35 8th grade students that are being grandfathered right now.
• We need to consider A.D.A. compliance issues when looking at the schools (expensive).
• Lakes has continually wanted to be a magnet school. They are also interested in the Middle Years program (MYP). This might help adjust enrollment at the middle schools.
• Even though patron’s tax bills for the school district have gone down, the assessed valuation has gone up (tax bills may not have changed much due to this).
• What if we pair back the scope of the S.P.F.L. and rebuild some credibility?
• Do we need to look at changing the current grade alignment?
• What about having Lakes as a 6th grade center and Canfield and Woodland would have 7-8th grades? Some felt this would cause stability issues.
• The trend right now is choice.
• How about a preschool/kinder center, group grades 1-6 together and group grades 7-8 together?
• We could do a better job if we had one site for special needs students (A.D.A. issues). Need input from Tom Trotter and the principals.
• How many acres is the Borah site? It is 6 acres. Could we do more building on that site? We could build another floor. Maybe there could be a preschool center next to Borah or a kinder center. The code may have changed and it may now allow for kindergarten and 1st grades students to be on an upper floor.
• How about moving the District Office to the current library?

Dave asked Steve if he could look at the facilities (non-impact on instructional) and the costs of these options and analyze the space needs and then look at the impact on facilities (1-year, 2-years, etc.) Steve stated that some viability needs to be attached to the suggestions that have been made and then some number could be run.

Dave suggested some dialogue regarding programs as well as vocational/technical aspects. The following comments were made:
• Are programs a part of this committee’s purview? Yes, it is stated in the By-Laws.
• Vocational programs and facilities are expensive. Need to look at how much it would cost to retrofit one of the middle schools (school of choice) and one of our high schools so we could offer a viable vocational program.
• As technology has changed, there have become more needs for vocational programs.
• Businesses are wanting more professional/technical programs at the schools
• How about Project becoming a magnet school or vocational/technical school? The staff has discussed some of these ideas.
• How about getting the equipment provided by the industry?
• Programs will drive the need for facilities. We need to find out what the community wants.
• The workforce has changed and we are not meeting the needs of the workforce

Programs will be discussed more in depth at the next meeting.

Superintendent’s Report – Harry Amend:
The Levy Steering Committee is having their first meeting tomorrow from 4:30-5:30 p.m. at the Avista Utilities building in the basement. They will be meeting every Tuesday (same time, same place) for a total of six meetings. They will not be meeting over Spring Break. Harry invited the committee to attend.

Board of Trustees Report – Vern Newby:
As well as the Supplemental Maintenance & Operations Levy election, Board of Trustees elections will also be held (2 zones) on May 15th.

Next Meeting:
The next Long Range Planning meeting will be held on Monday, April 30, 2007 at 4:30 p.m. at the Midtown Center meeting room.

Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned at 6:00 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Cheri Beard
Administrative Secretary

Home