January 3rd meeting (Work Session on Facilities Master Plan)
John Laing, Sarah Yaworsky and I covered the January 3rd meeting.  At this meeting the School Board members questioned, expressed their opinions and instructed the Superintendent and his administration on Facilities Master Plan issues.   We were there just as observers but this was a very interesting meeting.  Take-aways for me from this meeting include:

• Schools 16, 33 and 44 are now considered for rebuilding.
• The administration is doubtful the state will go along with tearing down 16 and 44 to rebuild as separate schools which is why they are are pushing for one large school.
• The district recognizes the 19th Ward has the students to fill our neighborhood schools.
• The strong voices being raised for neighborhood schools is being heard but it conflicts with parents choosing busing for their children.
• The State is recommending full day pre-K,  but will funding follow?
• School 10 has the smallest % of its students coming from the School 1 feeder pattern and the largest % coming from the School 10 and 16 neighborhoods.  The administration cited that as a reason for moving the school 10 Expeditionary Learning program to School 1.  Some Board members agreed and some disagreed.
• A strong argument was made by Malik Evans for keeping 10 where it is to have the Expeditionary Learning program benefit from its proximity to the U of R.
• I'm sure John and Sarah will have more information to review.  They were taking better notes.

January 4th School 16 Walk-Through
John Laing had received an invitation from Superintendent Vargas at an earlier meeting to join him on a School 16 Walk-Through to review firsthand some of the issues being disputed.  We ended up having John Laing, DeWain Feller, Bill Nichthauser and myself participating from the neighborhood residents.  About half the Board participated and there were many administration representatives.  It was a great opportunity to ask questions.  I still have to finish transcribing notes from video clips I shot but major take-aways were:

• The district has been putting a lot of maintenance into School 16 in the past 25 years.   A comparison of 16 to other schools shows average expenses over this time period:  
  • School16 - $87/sq-ft,
  • School 7 - $50/sq-ft,
  • School 23 - $77/sq-ft,
  • School 28 - $ 37/sq-ft
  • Schools 43, 44 - $67/sq-ft
• School 16 sits on 2.66 acres, New schools with waiver for less than recommended land have 6.5 acres
• Repair Options
  • Minimum to keep building going - $2 million (would fix over heating problem) ~ 2yrs
  • A more thorough modernization - $6 to $8 million ~ 4+yrs
  • Complete modernization of existing facility - $16 million
• Repair vs. Build New
  • Top notch refurbishing - $200/sq-ft (but it can escalate)
  • New construction - $300/sq-ft
• Maintenance cost will be higher for refurbished vs new building.
• State expects 30 year life for new construction but it can be much longer depending on maintenance.
• Ventilation rate with current system is 1/3 of new system.
• The urine smell in the boys rooms issue: It's not the building plumbing, its boys' poor or creative aim!  It is  problem in other schools which is solved by higher air exhaust rates and floor tile and wall treatments to make cleaning easier.
• Boilers are about 10 years old - in very good shape
• Would need to build out to add kitchen to lunch room.
• Building has Wi-Fi
• Since  the original school was built, there have been six additions which led to differences in floor levels.
• The building is ADA compliant
• The district overall has not been spending enough on repairs
• Superintendent Vargas stated that the major issue that precipitated the decision to close the school last summer was the urine smell in the boys' bathrooms.