Approve a resolution Approve a Resolution to Submit to Voters at the November 6, 2018 Election a $385 Million Bond Measure to Construct and Improve School Facilities, Safety, Technology, Learning Materials and Capital Assets. Mr. Torrey explained he put forward the motion to approve the resolution but intended to put forward a second one later on to table it. He wanted the board to have time to…
| Motion | Moved to approve a resolution Approve a Resolution to Submit to Voters at the November 6, 2018 Election a $385 Million Bond Measure to Construct and Improve School Facilities, Safety, Technology, Learning Materials and Capital Assets. Mr. Torrey explained he put forward the motion to approve the resolution but intended to put forward a second one later on to table it. He wanted the board to have time to discuss the suggestion first; he believed it would be in the board’s best interest to postpone the motion to the next regular board meeting which was August 1, 2018. Mr. Torrey wondered if August 1, 2018 would provide staff sufficient time to answer some of his questions. He thought everything on the proposed bond project list was worthy of supporting, but he was concerned that it was a heavy lift. He was worried about the people he wasn’t hearing from and noted if the district lost the ballot in November, it would be a number of years before the board could bring it back in any meaningful way. In addition, Mr. Torrey thought postponing approval would provide staff time to reconsider options in effort to reduce the cost of the bond. He wanted to know why choices were the best options to take. Mr. Torrey also wanted to look closely at future student demographics, and the expected timing of growth within the district. He suggested utilizing Lane Council of Governments (LCOG) to look at when growth of students might take place. In addition, Mr. Torrey wanted more specificity around CTE. He thought the board owed it to voters to do a deeper dive into the issues. He wondered if the board could have an opportunity to get more answers and move the item to the first or second meeting of August 2018. Ms. Sundgrenz appreciated Mr. Torrey’s comments, and said board members read every email received and listened carefully to community members. The board partners with the greater community. She thought he had good suggestions and wanted to ask staff if an extension was possible. Chair Nittler said the district already had a lot of data on demographics, and she was unsure if there had been changes. She thought staff would be able to pull the data quickly. Chair Nittler noted the board had discussed the bond for 18 months and had done a deeper dive; nothing proposed was done carelessly or thoughtlessly. Ms. Newman said the board had been studying the options and looking at all items on the list. When the board added up everything that really needed to be done, the bond amount was much Minutes – 4J Board of Directors June 20, 2018 Page 11 higher. They had been able to do due diligence for each item but said if analysis around growth in the North area was available it would be helpful to solidify the need for a new school. Ms. Walston wondered what the board would learn in six weeks that they didn’t already know. She was sensitive to the price point. She wondered if the board would reconvene community forums and wanted to ensure their core commitments to YG and other programs. Mr. Torrey heard the community was unsure why the district could not simply remodel North Eugene High School. Repurposing could be one way to accommodate the needs of YG and Corridor, as there weren’t facility options available. If the measure failed, there would be a tremendous overcrowding issue in the Corridor and YG facility, and the district’s options would be limited if the bond did not pass. Ms. Hays appreciated Mr. Torrey bringing his comments forward but she would hate for it to look like the board wasn’t sure about the proposal. She wanted people to understand postponing approval was simply taking a breath and wanted people to be clear about what the board and district would be doing during those 30 or 40 days. She didn’t want anyone to wonder or worry, and she thought community meetings were crucial. Ms. Hays wanted ample time on August 1, 2018 and August 15, 2018. Ms. Walston was interested in how the new federal taxes would affect property tax as it would no longer be deductible. She also wanted to ensure there was a community forum. Chair Nittler requested specific questions from the board to ask staff so they could prepare for the August 1, 2018 meeting. Mr. Torrey noted there were new apartment and housing units in the north Coburg Road area, (the Kinney Loop site), and research indicated that apartments did not generate many students. He wondered if the district needed a new school on the Kinney Loop site, or if it could be set aside for possible temporary facilities. Mr. Torrey said repurposing of North Eugene High School wouldn’t provide the type of quality facility needed but it could house YG and corridor because there was plenty of room. Alternatively, Kelly Middle School could move into North Eugene High School. Mr. Torrey summarized he wanted to know what the district would do with the existing North Eugene High School, when the district needed to deal with the Kinney Loop site, and whether the district needed the additional money for safety and security from the savings of not building a new school. Finally, Mr. Torrey wanted to know if the district was doing everything it could with safety and information technology (IT). Ms. Walston said the board discussed replacing elementary schools in the south region due to safety; if the district rebuilt Edison Elementary School but did not build the Kinney Loop site beforehand, she was unsure where students would be put as the district needed a swing school. Ms. Hays wanted to consider when board would share the changes with the community if they voted to postpone the decision. The board had brought people along in the process and she didn’t want to be done with their input. Ms. Sundgrenz wondered if the board had the ability to vote on the matter that evening, and then make amendments to the bond proposal later on. Mr. Torrey said technically they could, but he didn’t think that would be good process. Chair Nittler summarized the board’s questions for Dr. Balderas to follow up on. Minutes – 4J Board of Directors June 20, 2018 Page 12 Dr. Balderas mentioned there was a Portland State University study recently done on demographics in Oregon cities, so he would share that data. Dr. Balderas said staff would be able to answer the board’s questions during the August 1, 2018 meeting, as well as provide options for the board. Dr. Balderas asked Ms. Delf the implications of delaying adoption of the bond proposal. Ms. Delf went through the timeline and responded the draft board calendar considered later that evening had the next meeting scheduled on August 2, 2018. There was not a regular meeting scheduled on August 15, 2018 due to the board retreat and the district needed to submit the ballot title for publication of the notice by August 17, 2018. Ms. Delf said the district was on a tight timeline, especially if further discussion was needed. Other considerations included planning for a campaign. Chair Nittler said the board had been doing planning for the bond as partners with the community for months and delaying adoption felt like switching tracks to her. She couldn’t envision how they could plan a community forum and have everything turned around in time. She wondered if the district could have another round of polling in July 2018. Dr. Balderas said they could, but survey companies usually avoided polling during the month of July, as it was not an optimal time to get ahold of people. Ms. Walston didn’t think polling was considered true community involvement. She thought a special work session could happen on August 8, 2018 if necessary. Ms. Hays proposed on August 1, 2018 the board do a final reveal during a work session with an additional community input session. On August 15, 2018, the board could end their retreat at 6:30 p.m. and hold a regular meeting directly afterward at 7:00 p.m. Ms. Hays acknowledged her proposal did not provide any wiggle room |
|---|---|
| Moved by | Jim Torrey |
| Seconded by | Mary Walston |
| Member votes | Result per minutes; member votes not yet verified |
| Result | Not recorded per minutes No result recorded. |
| Agenda item / resolution | — |
| Minutes | Official minutes, page 11 |
No video was posted for this meeting. See the meeting page.