LRP Committee September 24, 2007

Long Range Plan Review Committee
Minutes
September 24, 2007

Members in Attendance:
Harry Amend* Mike DeLong Sharon Hanson Bryan Martin* Dave Patzer
Rosie Astorquia* Jim Ferguson Katie Harris John McLeod Tamara Poelstra
Hazel Bauman* Scott Fischer* Sharalee Howard David Miller Pam Pratt*
Jeff Bengtson Lana Hamilton Doug Jaworski Jill Neal Ronnie Semko
Steve Briggs* Chris Hammons Mary Larson Vern Newby* Lori Smith
Susan Clayton Russ Hansen Kathy Liverman Joel Palmer Tami Stroud
John Swallow
*Ex-officio members

Welcome:
Dave Patzer called the meeting to order at 4:34 p.m. The meeting was held at the Midtown Center meeting room.

Introductions/Nominations:
Dave informed the committee that this is his last meeting as Chair but he will continue on for one more year as immediate Past Chair. The reigns are being passed to Doug Jaworski. If anyone is interested in the Vice-Chair position, please contact Doug. Dave asked the committee members to introduce themselves, indicate how long they have been on the committee and what school’s their children attend or if they have graduated, what school’s they attended.
Dave pointed out that the committee is a varied group and that we try to have representation from all corners of the District. He further explained that Harry, Doug and himself functioned as the Nominating Committee. The following names were brought forward by the Nominating Committee for approval by the committee as new members: Kathy Liverman, Sharon Hanson, Dianna Walde (from staff to patron), Teri Nipp, Sharalee Howard, Tamara Poelstra, Jody Azevedo, John McLeod, Jill Neal and Ronnie Semko. The committee is still in need of 4 patrons and 1 District member. Lori Smith made a motion to approve the new committee members and forward those to the Board for ratification, second by Lana Hamilton, approved unanimously.
Dave asked the committee if they knew of any at-large members that would like to serve on the committee. The following names were submitted Lisa May, Jim Pearce, Eric Murray, Kimber Gates, Roger Snyder, Michelle Williams and a representative from Concerned Businesses. The committee wanted to make sure all the schools had representation especially with the possibility of a future S.P.F.L. vote. The committee representation matrix was written on the white board and will be e-mailed to the committee. It was agreed that it would be important to have both a District representative as well as a patron representative at the targeted schools (Lakes, Borah, Bryan, Winton, Canfield and Sorensen). This will be worked on between now and the next meeting.

Approval of the April 30, 2007 Minutes:
Motion by Susan Clayton, second by Jim Ferguson to approve the April 30, 2007 minutes, approved unanimously.

Superintendent’s Report – Harry Amend:
• Supplemental Maintenance & Operations Levy Recap - Harry provided the committee with a handout titled “Some Takehomes from this Levy” for their binders. He pointed out that option 1 passed with a 72% approval rate and option 2 with 68%. There was a record turnout and there is a lot to celebrate. We need to keep the momentum going.
• Lake City Development Corporation (LCDC)/Sorensen – Over the summer the LCDC Board voted to have an appraisal done in order to determine if both the Winton and Sorensen buildings fit the criteria to qualify for urban renewal. If they do, there will be process to amend the Lake District in order to incorporate these properties into the District. Once approved by the City Council (public hearing), there will be no questioning as to their eligibility to receive funding from LCDC. LCDC should have the results of the appraisal in the next couple of weeks. It will cost approximately $410,000 in order to make Sorensen ADA compliant. Committee discussion followed.
• Enrollment – The committee was provided with the District enrollment as of September 14, 2007. In the far right hand column this year’s enrollment is compared to last year’s at this same time period. The committee was also provided with the District’s 10-year enrollment history including graphs. There was a request to know which school’s are at capacity or above capacity using the September 14th enrollment numbers. It was pointed out that at the elementary level capacity is determined by grade levels. Hazel informed the committee that the enrollment numbers include forced transfers that have occurred. The following is the breakdown of the core capacity of the schools based on their current enrollment:
Atlas – at Meadows - at Canfield – above Project - under
Borah – at Ramsey – at Lakes – under Bridge - at
Bryan – under Skyway – above Woodland – above
Dalton - under Sorensen – under CHS – above
Fernan – under Winton – at LCHS – above
Core capacity was discussed which is what the building is designed for and does not include portables. Due to attendance zone changes, the middle schools were more balanced. The high schools have been balanced since the opening of Lake City (liberal transfer policy between both schools). The committee requested the core capacity numbers for each school. The only schools that do not have portables are Dalton, Fernan, Atlas, Sorensen and Lakes. Some sort of guiding philosophy is needed regarding portables being a good use of taxpayer’s money for the short term, less of a good use in the mid-term and not a good use in the long term (not good for kids). We need to define short term, mid-term and long term. Committee discussion followed.
• Attendance Zone Committee – This committee will be beginning its work. They will be analyzing enrollment patterns for possible changes to the attendance zones for the fall of 2008.
• History of S.P.F.L. – The committee was provided with a handout of the voting history, since 1967, of District elections. This history includes bonds, supplemental levies and S.P.F.L.’s. They were also provided with a spreadsheet titled “4 Year SPFL @ $1.63 per $1,000 of Taxable Value.” Steve Briggs pointed out that the projected tax values were significantly low compared to where we actually ended up. The tax values are significantly higher so the rates are lower.

2006 Priority List:
The committee was provided with a handout titled “2006 Priority List.” Harry stated that the heart and soul of this committee is to evaluate where facilities are needed the most. The Needs Assessment Subcommittee put together the priority list after touring Lakes, Borah, Bryan, Winton, Canfield and Sorensen. They used a detailed matrix to evaluate each of the facilities. This subcommittee also had a follow-up meeting at Fernan in order to compare a newer facility with the older facilities. They proceeded to have a couple of more meetings in order to determine which projects were most important and timely. The order they came up with was Lakes, Winton, a new elementary school, Borah and technology needs. Bryan, Canfield and Sorensen were not included on this ballot. There were some other projects that were discussed as well.
Harry stated that the committee’s goal is to start this conversation tonight (the timing and the list), to continue in October and, as soon as the committee is ready, present a recommendation to the Board. In the Robinson Research survey results, the community felt there were too many projects and that we were asking for too much money. Harry informed the committee that there is approximately $4,500,000 in the bank that was part of the original $19,200,000 the voters approved for Lakes. This could be added on to whatever is placed on the ballot. Dave Patzer also referred to the survey and what he took out of it is to keep it simple, be project specific and be very cognizant of the fact that there is opposition and try to address those particular needs. Hazel reminded everyone that the Supplemental Maintenance & Operations Levy is run every other year. It has been said that running a Supplemental and S.P.F.L. the same year would be hard to pass. We will not be running a Supplemental in 2008. Hazel pointed out that if the committee decides this is a good time to run another S.P.F.L., there is a timeline. She suggested December, no later than January, if the committee would like to recommend an S.P.F.L. for the spring of 2008. The committee members made the following comments/suggestions:
• The last S.P.F.L. was run in March. We need to consider the climate and tax arena. When is a good time to run it? Need to get input from the community.
• People received increased valuations on their property taxes at the same time as we were running the last S.P.F.L. The Assessor’s Office is not going to be receiving sales data from the multiple listing service anymore so they may be off on their evaluations because they don’t have accurate sales information.
• People are more supportive of new construction; remodels are more difficult to sell.
• If there any new information that would have us consider a bond instead of an S.P.F.L.? Steve stated that all the alternatives need to be analyzed.
• Should we have a project in the north and the south? What has significantly changed in order for us to change the priority list? If we receive money from LCDC, it could affect our decision. Also what we learned from the Robinson Research survey, the last S.P.F.L. was too ambitious. Lakes should have been completed in the prior S.P.F.L. We need to have a limited scope this time in order to rebuild our credibility.
• If we go to having 1 or 2 projects every 4 years, we will get further behind.
• The nebulous elementary school angered people. We can do more than one project but we need to be more exacting. We need to watch the City Council races and the primaries.
• We hit the perfect storm last time (construction prices increased, anti-tax sentiment and the nebulous elementary school).
• We also had just come on the backside of spiked 4% enrollment growth (unexpected) which was why the new elementary school came up. The mass mailing full of mis-information that was sent out right before the election also did not help.
• If we go to an extended S.P.F.L. of 2, 3 or 4 years and if the construction prices go beyond our projections and there are multiple projects, do we take money from one project to pay for another or scale back a project? A philosophy needs to be very clearly delineated.
• The projects need to be finished. We need to continue to do credible work.
• The longer the term of the S.P.F.L. the more likely we are to run out of money.
• We need to educate the voters. The difference between a bond vs. an S.P.F.L. needs to be explained. Enrollment and core capacity numbers need to be explained. The middle schools are suffering.
• We need to find a happy medium between 1-5 projects.
• Maybe we should have an election with choices.
• Need to be careful with our timing, attendance zone changes could have an impact.
• We should run the election in May.
• We need to look at what new buildings are needed for growth and what needs to be remodeled.
• Is the plan still to build a new Lakes rather than remodel it? This is still to be decided. Bryan checked with 3 contractors on the Lakes project (remodel vs. new) and it would cost more to remodel that building due to asbestos, plumbing, wiring, etc.
• Need to be consistent with terminology (remodel, rebuild, refurbish, etc.)
• Air quality systems will eventually have to be added to older schools
• Portables are a huge issue including air quality
• At some point we need to address Hayden Lake
• We should have a public forum
• We need to get everyone on board (community, staff, etc.) Need to get input from everybody.
• A lot of variables affect the mood of the public. A national election is going to have a big impact on how people feel about our economy.
• Don’t run the election the same day as a general election.

At the next meeting, the committee will be provided with a breakdown of what the tax rate will be for the number of dollars for the projects on the list.

Board of Trustees Report – Vern Newby:
Vern reported that Edie Brooks is the Board Chair this year. The Coeur d’Alene School District is part of the Lighthouse training. The Board meetings have been rearranged this year. There will be one Board meeting a month and one study session a month (8-9 per year). This will be for 5 years. The Idaho School Board’s Association is meeting in town in November so the travel expenses will be very low. We are going to send a strong contingency to the National School Board Association conference in April.

Other:
Dave Patzer thanked the outgoing members for all their time and hard work.

Next Meeting:
The next Long Range Planning meeting will be held on Monday, October 22, 2007 at 4:30 p.m. at the Midtown Center meeting room. Binders will be provided to new committee members at this meeting.

Adjournment:
The meeting was adjourned at 7:05 p.m.

Respectfully submitted,

Cheri Beard
Administrative Secretary

Home