School Board Meeting Date Jan. 06 2016, Pt2

Recommended that we move this forward for consideration.

Stefan.

Can you share why it was moved forward for consideration rather than for approval?

There was actually some missing attachment that was supposed to go with this and that's the reason why it was not for approval.

They didn't include their attachment when they actually had introduced it.

Could you speak to that Mr. Best?

Richard Best, Director of Capital Projects and Planning.

We had a request from OSPI to furnish letters.

We had emails at the time we removed, took this to the operations committee with a request, at that time we knew that we had the request from OSPI, that identifying that the emails were not sufficient, they actually wanted letters.

And so we noted to the operations committee that we had sent out letters, I believe it was even that day or a day, or that we were sending out letters to get the districts to acknowledge that they had no space available.

Thank you.

Is there any questions, comments?

Okay.

We're going to go on to BEX IV award.

This is an action item so you can ask.

I'm sorry.

Ms. Fobey.

Great.

Director Burke.

Aye.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

We are now going into item 3, BEX IV award architecture and engineering service contract P1409 to Matlam Architects Incorporated for the Queen Anne Elementary classroom and gymnasium addition project.

This also came to ops and the committee recommended to move forward for consideration because not all the attachments were actually included and some of the prices were missing.

So I will read the motion now.

So go ahead.

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute an architectural and engineering services contract with Malum Architects Incorporated for the classroom and gymnasium addition project at Queen Anne Elementary School in the amount of $1,674,761 plus $25,121 in reimbursable expenses with any minor additions, deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent.

and to take any necessary actions to implement the agreement.

I second the motion.

Any questions?

Comments?

Ms. Foley.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Aye.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

This motion is passed unanimously.

Next one BEX IV Olympic Hills Elementary School approval of GC CM negotiated total contract cost with Cornerstone.

I move that the school board authorize the superintendent to execute amendment number one to the general contractor construction manager GCCM contract P5049 on the Olympic Hills elementary school project in the amount of $31,891,966 in the form of amendment number one.

attached to the board action report with any minor additions deletions and modifications deemed necessary by the superintendent and to take any necessary actions to implement the contract which fixes the total construction cost TCC previously approved by the board.

I so second.

So this item also came to ops and it was recommended by the committee to move forward with consideration because not all the attachments were actually available.

Any questions?

I do, I have a question.

Director Peters.

Okay, in public testimony Mr. Jackins said that the attachments were not there.

Is there anything missing from this presentation?

Well the attachments in the bar are all attached Director Peters.

The attachments that are referenced in the bar dated November 9 are all included.

All right well perhaps it was a different item.

Okay it was a different item.

All right.

Well then thank you.

Any more questions or comments?

Ms. Fobey.

Director Harris.

Aye.

Director Peters.

Aye.

Director Pinkham.

Aye.

Director Blanford.

Aye.

Director Burke.

Aye.

Director Geary.

Aye.

Director Patu.

Aye.

This motion has passed unanimously.

Okay we are now moving into our introduction items.

Viewlands West Playground South Hill Project.

Let me get that back over here.

The previous motion added the introduction item for ORCA as number one.

Okay.

The ORCA cards.

Thank you very much for amending the agenda so that we could come speak to you about the ORCA cards.

As you know there is a lot of excitement by the students.

No.

This is an intro.

We have to read the motion.

No.

Do you have a motion?

Somewhere.

They could do it either time.

Yeah.

Am I okay?

So what we are introducing today is the ORCA card passport program enhancement for free and reduced lunch students for the 2015-16 school year.

As you know Proposition 1 passed, it allowed us to secure some money from the city so that we could purchase ORCA cards.

That amount of money is about $1 million.

$1 million in the passport program buys us about 48, a little over $4,800, 4,800 ORCA passports.

However, we have over 6,800 students who are in the walk zone 0 to 2 miles who qualify for free and reduced lunch.

So as you can see we don't have enough money to buy ORCA cards for all of our students.

So we are looking for a way to A, see if we can increase those funds and so Director President Patu has been working with the city council and certainly so has our administration to see if we can augment that money.

But in the meantime we've been looking at a way where we can actually start to allocate that money out so that we can get reimbursement back from the state.

And the only way that we can get reimbursement back from the state is if we distribute ORCA cards to one mile and above for our students.

So what you will see before you is a proposal to number one accept the money as much as money as we can get.

And then number two to deploy that money first so that we can get reimbursement from the state.

What that means is we're asking you to modify the transportation standards and I'd like to introduce Kathy Katterhagen who is our director of logistics to walk you through what that looks like in the transportation standards.

I'm Kathy Katterhagan and I'm the logistics director and I was tasked to work on this project which we're very pleased to work on because it provides transportation for students that otherwise wouldn't have transportation.

So what this does is for high school students that live within the one to two mile walk zone who are FRL eligible they will and don't currently receive district transportation they will receive an ORCA card and then also for the middle school students who are one to one and a half miles in the walk zone of their attendance school school, they would receive an ORCA card.

So we are still working out the details of the MOA with the city and we should have that done in a few days for you to review before we take action.

And there is some good things in the MOA that allow us to amend it in the future.

ask the city to be able to purchase additional cards so there is some flexibility here down the road.

Questions?

Director Blanford.

I'm wondering based on the testimony that we heard earlier today if there has been any analysis of the possibility of allowing for exceptions for, I don't want to call them hard cases, but situations where students are within the walk zone but for one reason or another may not want to walk.

What I'm trying to prevent is what I heard in the testimony was that they were going to reach out to all the school board directors and I imagine that what we are going to hear is make exemptions for this and this for this student and that student and that student.

So I am wondering if there is any analysis that has been done or that could be done that would allow us to be able to respond appropriately to what I believe is going to be a fair amount of making exceptions.

Does my question make sense?

Yes it does and actually we do have a process right now in place for Rainier Beach in particular.

A couple of years ago we had heard from the students that they were having problems with attendance and so we put a pilot program in place so that students who were having attendance issues and needed ORCA cards through their truancy and specialists could actually secure them.

So those are the types of hardship cases that we have primarily been looking at.

We can certainly expand that.

Now whether it would qualify for state reimbursement becomes the question.

And so what we've been doing is working with OSPI and the state to look at are there ways that we can do additional exceptions.

And I appreciate you saying that.

It seems to me that a caveat is necessary as we are fielding those questions to say you know it's not cost neutral.

Every one of those exemptions if if they are not reimbursable by the state it's not cost neutral it's going to cost us.

And whereas I remember that conversation I remember how important the board made the statement that we need to get kids to school and we need to remove the barriers that allow them to actually attend school.

But at some point it becomes a financial question as much as a question of operations and so we have to nuance that and so the more information we can have so we can respond to those concerns I think the better position will be.

And Kathy and I are also going out to Rainier Beach to speak with the students so that hopefully we can handle a lot of those questions, bring them back and give you a Friday update so you know exactly where we are with those conversations.

Thank you.

That would be optimal.

I think it would be better for those who are in the know to be able to negotiate back and forth and then report back to us as opposed to each one of us getting involved.

That's my personal preference.

Thank you for that guidance.

Director Peters.

My understanding from the testimony tonight was not for exceptions but for a broader scope in terms of what would be covered.

Meaning that all students even within a mile could qualify but the question was whether or not that financially was feasible.

So I don't know if we are talking about a bunch of exceptions necessarily.

Pegi what is your understanding?

So I think that the students have come to us asking for both.

So if in fact we can't give it to everybody is there a way for us to look at hardship cases.

So we're going to be trying to see how we can maximize this and again through getting reimbursements.

But we will have to come back to the board.

There will be budget implications if in fact we can't get to a total reimbursement or the city directly funding those metro cards.

Director Harris.

Thank you.

And if you could when you report back to us and give us their input can you do some back of the napkin or envelope calculations that talk about we have this many kids in this parameter, this many kids in this parameter times a real kiss kind of a presentation so that we understand the revenue issues on that and also so that our public understands the revenue issues in a half pager.

Okay thank you.

And I also wanted to add to that that originally when Bruce and I had a conversation over this they had actually stated that they would fully fund all kids when the kids were talking about there was no limit in terms of the the miles and also all free and reduced lunch kids were actually included in this whole proposal but what happened is when it got a little bit further things started changing and the amount of dollar amounts started changing.

So that was one reason why that Peggy and I were kind of like wait a minute this is not what they promised us.

So it's almost like going back to the city and saying you know what happened to the original proposal because that's what they had originally had stated.

before I actually was the one that made the announcement and when I saw the new numbers I said wait a minute that's not what they promised me.

So I plan to go back hopefully to meet with Bruce since he's a new president for the city council and remind him this is not the original proposal that you actually had promised us.

So hopefully we can get you know go back to where we started.

Well and I would suggest that that's yet another opportunity then to build coalitions and partnerships with our new city council that is elected by district as we in some ways were as well.

So if you keep us posted and looped in we can back you up with phone calls.

That would be great and also I want to say that Councilman O'Brien has been very helpful in trying to problem solve with us also.

Director Pinkham.

First of all thank you for coming and noting that you are going to talk with the Rainier Beach high school students.

I would ask that you let us know when that's going to occur because there are going to be other high schools that would probably like to be there.

It's not just a Rainier Beach issue.

For instance Ingram high school has some issues.

My daughter if she would have to walk she would have to cross major thoroughfares to get there which can be pretty dangerous and especially with the bell times if they change that's going to change a lot of things as well for kids now if they're getting out at 4 o'clock versus 3 o'clock and how that may impact them.

So glad to hear that you are going to listen to the students as well and get their perspective.

And because we're really trying to expedite this so that we can get the cards to the students for second semester there may not be timing to get organized to have the students come down so we'll also let all the principals know and if there's other interest in us coming out to the other schools we certainly can provide that opportunity.

Okay yeah as long as whenever it works out at Rainier Beach that other schools may have the opportunity to attend as well.

Thank you.

Director Burke.

Thank you for the work on this.

In the operations committee you had provided some information that sunk partway into my head but not completely and I believe I came out of it with the notion that this is like seed money and it allows us to come back and get reimbursed and in some ways we are building capacity for the future.

Could you speak a little bit about that?

What sort of dollars are we talking about of this could be reimbursable in the future that allow us to expand the program?

So for students who live greater than a mile we can get reimbursement in the future and it has to do, takes about a year of increasing the number of students and then we get the reimbursement back.

So that's sort of the back of the napkin.

But we don't get reimbursed at this point at 100%.

It is only about 95%.

So just want you to be aware of that also.

But again that was part of the reason why we were recommending that we start with the students who live more than a mile away so that we can start to get that seed money then eventually expanded if the board is interested in supporting a program that would be funded from the state through Prop 1 at least at this point that is only for five years.

Thank you.

Director Peters.

Well it sounds like we have some details we need to work out and I just want to make sure that one thing that is not lost in this conversation is a sense of appreciation for the city of Seattle for extending this offer to us and I think it is a fabulous example of a constructive partnership between the city and the district.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We're now going into our introduction items.

Good evening I'm Gretchen Dedecker program manager for self-help projects and just a little overview for you or a definition of self-help project is any project that improves buildings or grounds that is initiated and carried out by someone other than our capital facilities or technology departments.

So a lot of self-help projects are initiated and carried out by PTAs.

I'm going to be talking about the next three items all in one group even though they are separate action items.

And then if you have questions we can talk about them individually.

Excuse me, before you do that can we actually, I would like to give the operations committee's report.

And the operations committee recommended that we move all three of these forward for full board approval.

Thank you.

And tonight with me are members from the PTAs at Broadview Thompson, Lawton, and Viewland.

Kari Nelson-Jewett is from Broadview Thompson PTA and through Anthony Spinelli is from Lawton.

PTA and Crystal Peterson is from Viewlands PTA and they have been working really hard on these projects.

So school board action, I'm sorry school board policy requires action by the school board on gifts of $250,000 and over.

And these three projects are expected to be $250,000 for playground projects and for Broadview Thompson the estimated value of their project will be $300,000.

For Viewlands it will be about $283,000.

And right now Lawton's project is expected to be under $250,000 but as they go into fundraising through the spring it may reach $250,000 and if we waited until spring school board action takes about two months and we would miss the construction window for summer of 2016 and so we are being proactive for the Lawton project.

The funding for each of the projects has come from City of Seattle Department of Neighborhoods for planning and design.

They all had small and simple grants.

And then two of the projects, Broadview Thompson and Viewlands received large project funds from City of Seattle in the amount of $100,000 and then Broadview Thompson and Viewlands also received funding from King County and then each of the projects also did substantial fundraising through their PTAs.

So I know this is a real quick overview but I am available to answer any questions and the parents are here to answer any questions.

Any board directors have any questions or comments?

Director Harris.

I just want to say thank you to those parents who are doing the heavy lifting and heavy lifting in the context of PTSA and a self-help project means everything from a pickaxe to auction procurement to writing checks to begging and it's not right that we have to do it.

But thank you, thank you, and thank you.

Director Burke.

Thank you for your work in organizing these, putting them together.

I had a few questions which were addressed adequately, better than adequately in email But the big one that I wanted to raise with the community, all three of these projects are getting assistance, getting funding assistance from other places.

The city neighborhood matching funds, two of them look like King County youth sports facility grants.

What I love about self-help projects is that It leverages community enthusiasm, community seed money, and can bring in some of these additional grant funds.

There are very few things that I've experienced that can bring a school unity like going out and building a playground together.

It's pretty amazing.

So I'm wondering, these programs, these success stories that we've got here, what are the mechanisms within the district that we can share these out with other schools.

Are other schools aware of the opportunities that are available for funding grants and how do we help these other schools maybe that don't have as active of PTAs or that are from more disadvantaged environments, how do we help them get the same benefit?

What are the mechanisms in the district to do that right now?

So I've been working on self-help projects for the last 21 years and self-help projects have been in the district since the mid-70s.

So some of the things that we do are annually we send out a reminder to all the schools about the need to request permission for self-help projects.

Some people forget that they have to ask that.

And then we make sure that projects are done according to district standards, city standards, and just safety standards in general.

Today I sent out a notice, a Department of Neighborhood grant funding and I sent that to all the schools, to the secretaries and to all the PTAs and the Department of Neighborhood is really good too about helping facilitate leveraging funds, doing fundraising so between our office and the Department of Neighborhoods and King County we try to help schools that don't have the wherewithal to or haven't done this before.

And actually several of these people haven't done it before too.

So you know it's a learning as we go along.

I don't know if that answers your question or not.

Thanks yeah I would just like to see as much of the PR machine inside of SPS you know our ability to do translation and outreach be brought to bear to share some of this as well.

Thank you.

Director Blanford.

Director Burke got in ahead of me.

Which is fine, which is fine because he actually made the point that I was trying to make which is this has been, this program has been a wonderful addition to Seattle Public Schools and I think it's important to recognize Ms. Dedecker for the long years of work that she has been leading this program.

She and I used to work together a lot on these issues when I worked for the district.

way back in the stone ages it seems like a long time ago.

I'm not saying anything about anybody's age.

But it does seem like a long time ago and I know from that work and from being a parent and from being someone that advocates for a lot of the schools that don't have those types of programs that they do know a lot about the self-help program and the opportunities that are out there and I know that that is because in large measure because of Mr. Decker's work and so I want to appreciate you for that particularly because I think at the last board meeting that you presented at we weren't as nice to you as we probably should have been.

I don't remember that.

You don't remember that, well I do.

I do remember that and so I wanted to make sure to let you know how much we appreciate your program and the work that you do and particularly to the parents who are embarking on a huge fundraising challenge and those who have come before you it's not small work and it's very important and we do appreciate it very much.

Superintendent Nyland.

I'd also like to echo that thanks and in advance so partly in response to Director Burke's comment.

Union gospel mission has been working with churches and I think we have identified 18 partnerships that we currently have between churches and schools.

And so they are planning an August serve day.

that we haven't so far run.

I think it's August 20th, that's a Saturday.

We landed on that yesterday.

And that will, many of those are in the southeast and southwest for maybe some schools that don't have quite the access to as much parent funding.

Thank you in advance for the help to think about coordinating that.

That becomes a matter of scale to engage that number of parents and community partners.

But you are right, nothing like kind of a good barn raising community partnership that spells pride in the school and brings community and staff together in really meaningful ways.

Director Peters.

I'd also like to reiterate the appreciation for the work you've been doing.

Thank you.

A question did come up in public testimony about the agreements that each one of these projects is connected to, the grant agreement.

And the agreements are not included with the bar.

Is that something that could be done between now and next meeting?

I had heard that but I wasn't quite following the testimony.

The agreements for Department of Neighborhoods are between The PTA and the city of Seattle so that I mean I can bring a copy of that, that's no problem.

And then the agreement for King County is between the city and the school district.

So I can bring those contracts.

I think it would be helpful to have those for our reference.

Great thank you.

Director Harris.

at the risk of throwing a less than positive piece into this discussion, do we have some feedback about what our labor partners think about some of these projects and or whether there's an opportunity to work with them on the so-called barn raising and that?

I know it's a sensitive issue, but it's one I want to be respectful of as well.

I work real closely with my fellow colleagues and sometimes we partner with them in doing they do some of the work and then the volunteers do some of the work.

One example of routine partnership is when we have grounds cleanups and we probably have I stated that in my email but now I can't remember.

Probably about close to 100 a year grounds cleanup so that doesn't count the service projects.

And for each of those our ground staff is offered the opportunity to work alongside and help with the volunteer projects.

But I don't know if that really answered your question.

I guess part of my question is, is there on your checklist and on your operating model reaching out to our labor partners to band together with them as part of your analysis and what resources and advice?

I don't have a good answer for that right now.

I can think about it and get back to you on that.

I sure appreciate it.

Thank you.

Any more comments?

Director Pinkham.

I guess for me it would be kind of the comment that was brought up again by one of our speakers in regards to like Loyal Heights and as these self-help projects are done by communities getting involved and then because of capacity issues we need to expand schools on occasion.

How do we help mitigate that?

self-help project gets done and then oh we've got to take some of that space back and put a portable or expand the school.

It's been very tricky.

I don't know if you want to speak to that at all but we've been looking carefully at when a project is proposed and we try to anticipate what the growth is going to be so that we don't run into a project that was just completed and then has to be disbanded.

Yes, as Ms. DeDecker was commenting, we do try and if there is a self-help project that is on its way, we do try and coordinate with the capital department so that Gretchen's office is aware of kind of which buildings and programs are being expanded and what we are looking at.

It's not perfect every time but we do try and mitigate that as much as possible.

In some cases growth could happen in a very short amount of time.

In other cases it might be that the self-help project was done 15 years ago and it could depend on what the project is but we do try and mitigate that as much as possible.

We understand that community and people have put a lot of effort and time and money into raising that and really trying to make the school better.

And obviously the expansion that we have is not something that we take lightly and obviously is again trying to meet the instructional needs of what we have there.

But we try and have the two coexist as peacefully as possible.

Any more comments?

Okay moving along.

Thank you.

Number four, capacity management 2016-2017 school year.

This actually came to ops committee and it was recommended by the committee to move it forward for full board, not full board approval but for consideration.

And the reason why it is considered is because most of the attachments was not on there.

Richard Best, Director of Capital Projects and Planning.

Before you, you have a request for us really to begin our capacity planning and class size reduction efforts for school year 2016-2017.

And to give you a you know size of the problem that we are looking at we are looking at adding 65 classrooms in almost 50 schools.

The approach that we are implementing is varied depending on the schools that we are looking at.

We have some schools with vacant space and were able to utilize those classrooms with very few facility modifications.

We have some schools that we are going to be evicting the PCP the planning conference room use of that space and putting a classroom in there.

And then we have other schools where we have childcare programs that we are going to be needing to evict that are not kindergarten through 12th grade The previous board was very clear on their directions to us that was the mission of the institution.

And then we have some schools in which we have no options but to place a portable.

And so we have worked with our capacity planning project team and the enrollment planning group utilizing their December 1st forecasts to bring this bar in front of you tonight.

What this bar does is we have a preliminary December 1st forecast is begin the design efforts at these schools.

We know that after the open enrollment period is complete we will have a final projection Most of the information that you see before you in the 65 classrooms that we are adding, we do not anticipate will be revised significantly.

We do anticipate there will be some minor modifications.

But in order to be prepared for school to open in the fall of 2016, we need to begin the design efforts today.

And so that's why we've brought this BAR before you.

The amount of money is over $250,000 so your board policy requires that it come before you and then Director Burke asked the question as we go forward will you Richard be continuing to bring additional contracts before you?

We will.

We will be bringing design contracts that exceed $250,000 if any before you.

We will be bringing a bar for purchase of the portables before you.

And we will be bringing construction contracts that exceed $250,000 before you.

We will also be bringing before you the final disposition of where we believe we are going to need added capacity classrooms and then classrooms for K-3 grade size reduction.

So questions to school board.

Director Blanford.

I have two questions.

The first one is you were going through the list of things that you were planning to bring before us.

It's more wish than anything and I doubt you're going to be able to satisfy it.

That we would get all of those together.

No we won't have all those together.

We have, right now we have a general outline of the costs on a per school basis and we are going to, we are in the process Director Blanford at this moment in time of doing all of our due diligence.

We have past experience that we have drawn upon to project that we are going to need $6.5 million for these 65 classrooms that we are adding.

But we are continuing to gather information at this moment in time.

And I figured that was your answer to the question.

I'm wondering if there is a way that you can flag the board action items when they are coming or board action.

items coming before us if there's a way to flag them so that we know that one element of the work is around capacity management rather than just seeing atomized school X needs we need to move it for some reason.

If we know that it is it's about capacity management then it's easier to see the forest for the trees.

And then my second issue is you said something earlier about the prior board made a strong statement around our primary responsibility is around K-12.

And priorities.

And I remember that conversation and I remember the statement that was made but I also remember that the board recognizes that we have strong partnerships with many of our community-based partners And we recognize that our academic goals for our students cannot be achieved by Seattle Public Schools alone.

That the partnerships are an essential element in us achieving our academic goals and even more important in us achieving our equity goals.

our partnerships play a key role in that.

And so I just, I wanted to say that because what I heard was just the first part but there is a second part that is important to, that is guidance that the board provided to the staff that I think is important to accentuate.

We recognize those symbiotic relationships are all in the best interest of students and couldn't agree more with your statement there.

Director Harris.

Again at the risk of being a negative Nelly to this conversation I'm really wondering whether or not Seattle voters appreciate that some of the pre-K schools will cost us before and after child care.

one group of folks at the expense of another and with respect to sustainability the pre-k partnership is only funded for X amount of years whereas some of our childcare facilities and community-based partnerships have been in effect for some of them for probably over 25 or 30 years.

And in terms of how do we send that message and as being the recipient of probably I don't know 60 childcare emails in the last four days and having been the beneficiary of some terrific albeit very expensive childcare for a whole lot of years.

This allows people to go to work and to feel secure about their children and I don't know any of the answers, absolutely admit it, but I wonder whether that has been framed out and addressed.

So let me answer that question this way.

We are in the process of evaluating these 19 childcare facilities.

Are we impacting before and aftercare or are we impacting preschool?

I can't tell you at this moment in time.

I'm to receive that information this coming Friday.

I'm sitting down with that staff member to review that information this coming Friday.

I needed to give him some time to do the investigation work.

With a before and after childcare program occupying a classroom we could break that lease but then turn around and renegotiate a lease where they potentially used a multipurpose room and gymnasium for before and after childcare.

I have experience in other districts in which we have done exactly that.

And so before and after childcare just because we say we are relocating childcare programs doesn't mean that we are not going to be coming with a potential solution.

The impact to the pre-K programs would be more significant.

I just can't tell you at this moment in time what that makeup is of those 19 childcare programs that we potentially are going to impact.

Keeping us closely looped in with statements like that help us to communicate with our communities.

Okay.

Thank you.

Okay.

Great.

Dr. Burke.

Dr. Pinkham.

I have three points.

The first one is one that I feel as a new board director but also I'm hearing from the community and coming up on a levy and looking at engagement with the city, all of the different places where our capacity crisis or challenges are facing us.

Can there be a big picture, you know the capacity planning work that the district has Can you put that in a big picture context so that we can say yes, we are looking at this ask this year, next year we think it's going to be this, the year after that we think it's going to be this, and this is why.

I understand that's a really complicated thing, especially at the building level, but if we can identify that as the challenge that faces our district.

because of growth, because of McCleary, we see it as numbers on board action reports.

If we can prepare, you know, one-page graphic things that we can have as directors, that we can share with the city.

Some of the concerns that Superintendent Island brought up really feels to me like more people need to understand the magnitude of this problem and that we are doing long-term planning around it.

So Rick you'll note in our background information that we provide you with enrollment information has for the past several years increased between 1.9 and 2.8.

That I don't think has been the difficult challenge.

The difficult challenge has really been the K-3 class size reduction and McCleary.

And the uncertainty concerning what that looks like in those grade levels and so that's where the significant challenge is from my perspective.

I'm going to punt to Associate Superintendent Herndon to further answer.

Yes I mean it's an excellent question and a difficult one to answer simply because growth throughout the city is uneven.

And so a pattern can change fairly quickly within a year or two so what we may be projecting in one particular area may bubble up somewhere else.

Some of that does have to deal with the number of let's say housing starts that the city has granted and they come in at different times and different price points which have different impacts on some of our schools.

The other things are all of the variables that we look at for enrollment growth, things like birth rates and the number of families or students who are opting in or out of the district.

So sometimes those patterns can change a bit.

So it does make it a little bit different or a little bit of a challenge.

The farther out you try and project the less viable those numbers are going to be obviously.

So you know if you're trying to go long range with 10 years down the line which is excellent planning but to really rely on numbers that far ahead gets to be a challenge.

That's why we kind of do the five year projections.

It reels us in a little bit closer and the numbers get a little bit more reliable.

But as far as coordinating with the city we definitely try and do that, let them know.

We also try and get the information from them.

Our demographer that we have on staff has had very close communications with the city demographer to really help us out with information that they can bring to us which is a good one.

And then as Richard was mentioning the speed of funding K-3 class size reduction is something that also is a bit beyond our control.

So that is the legislature figuring out when and how quickly they are going to fund that.

They have been doing some incremental funding of that and been focusing on more of the high poverty schools first doing that but if they were to meet that obligation under the current proposed timeline which would be 2018 I don't think that's going to happen but if all of a sudden they decide to do that that would be a pretty big challenge because the jump from K3 from our current levels down to the projected piece if you as the superintendent has pointed out several times 17 to 1 might not necessarily mean 17 to 1 but that could be a significant acceleration of what we would need space wise.

So in a way them taking a little bit more time and not funding it buys us a little bit more time in finding additional capacity.

But as Director Harris has mentioned and others, I mean it's a real challenge.

We are at this crux now where we may have had several decades of partnerships with folks because we have the space.

If you think about the decades that we've had of declining enrollment and really the last five to six years of an increase that's after 40 years of a pretty steady decline and the community being used to having that kind of space.

So as we increase back in there.

It's a challenge for us.

Obviously it's a welcome challenge.

I've been in a lot of districts with declining enrollment.

Believe me I'd much rather be in a district with increasing enrollment than declining enrollment.

Superintendent Nyland.

To add to what we've heard, the other challenge is that it's very variable.

So as Richard indicated we go in and we look at each school and we look at every available space.

It might be a cascading, well if we move this program into the faculty room and if we move this program here.

we can figure out how to keep everything that we have.

So principal is usually quite often the biggest advocate of what else can we do to save that before and after care.

maybe in a gymnasium rather than in a classroom because we don't want to lose that service for parents or for our kids.

And then it shows up as another one of those bubbles in the carpet kind of a thing.

In one school it will show up and what do you mean you're taking my playground space?

And in another school it shows up as what do you mean you're taking my library space?

And in another school it shows up as in Gee we've got a 20th teacher but we only have 19 classrooms and in another school and for each one of those we hear them, you hear them as this is unconscionable, this is unacceptable, you just can't do this.

You should plan better.

Thank you to our staff they're doing great jobs to invent if you will 65 classrooms at about $100,000 a classroom compared to a million dollars a classroom for new construction.

So I hear you we'll keep working on figuring out how to message it because everybody sees their problem as everything's been fine in my building for 40 years and now what are you doing to my building.

Well we hear you.

Everybody is feeling it in a little bit different way and at a little bit different time.

I really appreciate the richness of that conversation.

In the interest of time I'll take my other two points and try to make them quickly.

One of them, the impact at a child care or pre-k level in a building is one of the factors is that our surplus spaces we don't charge for.

So is that, I'll just put it out there, that's something that maybe could be considered as part of the mitigation strategies is looking at how that funding stream at a building level could work and the value per square foot of that space.

So we have taken a look at that, currently we do have a board policy and community alignment agreement that does not charge for that so we would have to change that, not to say that we couldn't obviously but we could take a look at that.

The other is really on that position if we have the decision, it's not really much of a choice but if there is only one classroom left and there is a childcare provider in there and we need the 20th teacher we have to go with the 20 a teacher that's our mandate that we need to do.

So that's the challenge that we come up with.

It's sometimes not about charging for the space it's just about the plain availability of the space.

But I know that we did have the conversation about charging for square footage or rent in the places where we do have that available.

But it's something that we are taking a look at and something that would have to change in either the community alignment agreement or board policy.

Absolutely, I just want to try to think of creative solutions.

The third is purely a comment and I want to bring it back to the importance of CSIPs.

When I think about how would this be if it were perfect, it would be Buildings would understand what their growth trajectory is.

As a scenario, best case, worst case, they'd have a two to three year projection, it would be built into their CSIP.

And they would say, it looks like year two, we might be impacted in our child care.

What do we as a building How do we as a building want to address this?

They're best suited.

They're the ones that are impacted.

They write that in their CSIP.

They work with central staff to understand what are the tools, what can they do in terms of additional space, what can they do to stay within policy.

But that, the ownership of that decision happens at the building level.

And I see the CSIP as just a critical vehicle for that.

So I'll just leave with that as a possible growth path for some of our enrollment planning challenges as we move forward.

I very much appreciate the hard work and have heard so much about the capacity crisis and I know that with every room you are looking at the big picture and that the communities are forcing you to engage sometimes at a great extent.

But I also know that when you are talking about something where you are displacing a lot of child care programs, you are impacting the families who don't likely have the ability to engage with us on a regular basis because they are working all day long and they so appreciate that their kids are going to school close to, or they're going in care close to school because they don't have that extra leg to negotiate.

This is a foreseeable area of great anxiety for our families when we just come out and say, we need to remove those programs.

And so because it is foreseeable, in my mind, and we quickly see the results coming through our emails, I would like to think that Although it is not your area because your area is very complex but there's family support people in this district who should be consulted with before we necessarily come out and say this is where we're going.

There are community-based organization outreach people within our district that need to be talked to before we just put something out and cause all this anxiety.

and we have communications people in this district who can help put that together so that when we release this kind of information and create this kind of anxiety within our city, we hopefully are also bringing in possibilities, redirections, hope, people to talk to, and not just creating first the anxiety and then the answer.

I'd like to see us really work collaboratively to reduce that initial negative reaction to the hard and necessary work we have to do so that we're not coming up behind having to explain it, but that we're letting people know that we know what a huge impact this is having on their family, their life, them.

And, you know, some communities we're going to have to touch harder because it means more for them.

It goes back to the equity equitable issue.

And so let's just all work really hard To identify when we hear something's happening within the district think about our people who we touch and think, hey, before you do that, maybe we can work together to mitigate the impact that I see that it's going to have on my families, or I see that it's going to have on my, you know, community-based organizations, and come up with a plan for them up front.

And I know that that's, in your world, it's a lot more, it's a lot to ask, but I think that's just a matter of all the way around communication.

Please.

Thank you.

Thank you for this.

Kind of following up with Director Geary, it says like conversion of 19 childcare classrooms to 19 homerooms.

Do you have an idea how many rooms are being used for childcare this year?

Is that all of them?

Is that 19 out of 19?

I don't know.

Those kinds of information.

And appreciate that I know like Northgate Elementary their space is in the gymnasium which then they shouldn't be at risk of being relocated.

Could we possibly look at Are those, if there is more than 19 working with those to probably relocate them to the gymnasiums now for possible future expansion?

And just the other final comment is that we are talking about 65 new homerooms but the list you provide lower down is 66.

So we are talking about 65 homerooms we also have one issue that we want to resolve at Katherine K-8 school.

And so we are, we have four portables that we are relocating from Thornton Creek Elementary School.

Both of those are double wide portables.

And so we are relocating one of those double wide portables to a school.

We didn't have it, it's not related to capacity for next year and it's not related to class size reduction, it's related to resolving an existing problem at a school.

So that's why you have 65 homerooms related to capacity and enrollment or capacity and class size reduction and then you have one that is related to resolving a problem where we are housing some kids in an existing school.

To provide better classroom space.

So could that make, hopefully make clearer in this document so that people will know as they look at this, well they are saying 65 but they are dealing with 66. Dr. Harris.

To a couple of Director Burke's points I would suggest that the highest cost of childcare is labor.

I would suggest that the people that take care of our children especially in the childcare arena ought to be paid a heck of a lot more than they are.

I would suggest that if we were to charge rent it would automatically be passed downstream to folks that are working real hard that can't afford it.

So there is an equity issue there as well.

Second I would suggest that perhaps the CSIPs might not be the place to count cranes but that the executive directors and the board directors can be more tightly aligned with I'm seeing this trend in our neighborhood or yo associate superintendent Herndon are you aware of what's going on in Westwood Village as relates to Roxhill school?

And more of an early warning system for some of the granularity that we hear.

Dr. Peters.

Okay this is a very fruitful conversation.

I just have a couple sort of questions that I think are just getting to the details and that is so regarding those 19 classrooms is the purpose to reclaim classroom space for K-12?

Or more specifically K-5?

K-5.

K-5 okay.

So it's not to reclaim space for preschool?

Okay so very specifically K-5 classrooms.

All right.

And then let's see.

And then what is the answer to Director Pinkham's question about 19 out of how many roughly how many of these before and after school classrooms do we have throughout the district?

I can make sure I get that I don't have that answer off the top of my head but I'll make sure I include it and send it out to all board members.

But this is not all of them.

Correct it's not all of them and to Director Pinkham's point what we can do is once I identify we get the number of all of the before and after care providers we can let you know kind of where they are.

So some that are in dedicated classrooms, some that are already in cafeterias or gymnasiums so you have an idea about the schools where that happens in a multiuse space versus a dedicated space.

And then can you give us a sense of the timeline because I wasn't immediately aware that this looks like it's happening very quickly and are any of these programs that are in these 19 classrooms being asked to vacate before the end of the school year?

No.

Okay.

There are a couple of things on this so the planning especially for the portable section for us takes quite a while because we have to file for permits with the city, we have to have conversations with the manufacturer so that process takes a little bit longer.

the construction or reconfiguration of a particular classroom a little bit more under our control.

Some still require permitting but usually it's not as extensive and so the lead time isn't as much.

So that's why as Richard was mentioning earlier to Director Blanford's question these don't all happen at one time so we can't just bring them in one package and get them done they kind of take a little bit of time.

they sprinkle themselves out over the spring and summer.

As far as the, I'm trying to remember your first point of this question.

When this all will take place?

So identification, this is the other part.

The notification to the community-based organizations as we are getting right around the end of this month we have our initial projections for schools for their enrollment next year and then we know after open enrollment that can change a little bit.

But identifying the specific schools we are going to give them notification as soon as possible which would probably be the end of this month or the beginning of February just to let them know to kind of get to Director Geary's point about letting people know ahead of time even though Most of our leases have a minimum 90 day notification.

We are not trying to wait until 90 days we just want to be as specific as possible in the building so we are also not creating much of a yo-yo effect with somebody to say well let's work on a different place and then if the school projection comes out to be a little bit different say oh well I guess you can remain in that particular location.

So we are trying to be as as complete as possible without creating undue anxiety.

Obviously in the fall when we sent out the letter to all community-based organizations to say just to make you aware we do have a very significant space crunch within the school district and as we get more information and get to the point of making decisions we will let you know specifically whether or not you are being impacted.

That is the time that we are coming to right now so that first part on the timeline is as soon as we get those initial projections we can have conversations with a couple of those community-based organizations and say we have noticed that you are in a dedicated space.

We are probably going to need that for a classroom.

We also know that when you move to the multi-use space you have to get that license to be okay to be able to use those spaces.

So each space that you're using for childcare or pre-K you have to get licensed and that takes time.

So that's why we want to do as much early notification as possible without over notifying, I mean I don't want to send out a blanket everybody you're going to lose your space because the process of going through that licensing, it all costs money and it all takes time so I don't want to do that if we don't need to.

Okay and just to follow up so can we tell our constituents that nobody is going to be asked to leave before the end of the school year?

I believe that is accurate.

This notification piece is for the 2016-17 school year not the current 15-16 school year.

Is that?

This is all for next year.

This is capacity management.

I know it's to address capacity of next year but it looked like some of this had to begin this year.

Well the notifications will happen this year.

They will be impacted for next year.

So they would have to give up their space by the end of the summer or whatever it is.

It depends on if we have to do modifications and get in there to do construction.

that might have to happen during the summer so they may have to vacate the space at the end of June in order for us to get in and do modifications so the classroom is ready in September.

Well the wording I'm looking at that says to implement this under the recommended motion to implement annual capacity management actions in spring semester 2015-16 and summer 2016. That's the design process.

Yeah permitting, Director Peters, procurement of portables because it takes time to manufacture those portables, that's what we are talking about when we say this.

We are waiting until we get the information from open enrollment before we finalize this list but we need to order those portables now.

Well I think there is a slight sense of panic in the community about some of these dates so what would be really helpful I think to us is if you can give us some I don't know like some FAQs on this.

I don't know 5, 10 something that clarifies what exactly is going on especially the timeline.

And also please include the fact that we are looking at alternatives that might allow them to stay within the building just in a different room.

I think that could be really reassuring to people.

I just want to highlight you know Director Burke talked about what you are looking at from a long-term vision.

With our BEX IV schools with all of the childcare classrooms that we are planning at the elementary schools, we are planning two each, we are planning those childcare classrooms to be easily convertible without the use of additional modification funds for a general ed classroom and we are also planning for them to be used as a pre-K classroom.

In addition to that we are making measures such that the gymnasium and the multi-purpose room can be used for before and after care so we've got a designated space in those gymnasiums so if they have to give up that classroom they've got a space in the gym and the multi-purpose room that will work for them.

So we've done some deeper level thinking about what does that mean for BEX IV.

Some of these classrooms, some of these pre-K classrooms were built fairly specifically for pre-K without the thought of being converted to a general ed classroom and that's why you are seeing some rather significant construction costs.

But as we move forward we are looking at can this be pre-K, can this function as a general classroom, where do we come together and we are engaged in those conversations and have been for several years now in the design of the BEX IV schools.

Director Blanford.

Director Blanford.

I think I heard during our intermission that some of the community-based providers are all meeting in the next couple of days, is that correct?

I am wondering if there is an opportunity being as there is going to be a lot of community-based provider leaders all meeting together that there is also staff here to have the type of conversation you are having with us with them.

Is that part of the plan?

Or should it be?

Since I don't coordinate with the community-based organizations I'm not sure if staff are, I was not aware of that particular meeting on Friday so there could be someone within SPS who is aware.

I'm not that person so I'm not sure who is.

And I'm not either I wasn't aware of it.

Good evening so Carrie Campbell the director of school and community partnerships is hosting that meeting and pulling people together to do some creative problem solving and talking and listening to people's concerns because this is an issue that we know that we will have to attend to and tag team with Flip's team.

Excellent great thank you.

Director Harris.

With respect to transparency and communication, this is clear as mud.

Our discussion however has been very fruitful.

How can we get this out there as soon as possible?

In terms of FAQs, in terms of bringing down the anxiety level.

I can work with our community relations office to get an FAQ sent out and I will try to work with them to make that happen by Friday and send it to you and your Friday memo to the board.

Thank you so much.

Any more questions?

Comments?

Okay we are going to move on to our next item.

recommendation to award contract for furniture procurement 2016 projects.

This also came to the ops and committee recommended that we bring it to the full board for consideration.

So I am again Richard Best capital projects and planning director and I'm going to ask that Anita Hornby our manager for furniture fixtures and equipment come and talk about these contracts.

This is a one-year contract that we are entering into.

It is to furnish our BEX IV projects that we are opening this summer we are opening six schools.

this summer.

In addition to the 65 classrooms that we're talking about this is a contract, there's actually eight different contracts that we are projecting will exceed $250,000.

We don't know the total amounts but we have selected the furniture and we've given you an estimated amount and I'm going to ask Anita Hornby to speak to you more about this.

And Anita again is our manager of furniture fixtures and equipment for Seattle Public Schools.

Good evening.

This was a public bid, competitive across any vendor who is willing to submit.

All the products that we had on the bid were all district approved by stakeholders within the district including purchasing, risk management, facilities, and capital staff as well as staff from schools, representatives.

And so what we are looking at is not only on the BTA projects and the BEX projects but also any school in the district is able to use this contract to purchase out of their school funds furniture that they may need as well.

So in that way we propose the best estimate we can on what we anticipate will be the amount of furniture.

In addition to that in our contract we state that we are not obligated to award that full contract so we at our discretion fulfill the furniture that we need from that contract estimate.

Are there any questions or comments?

Thank you.

I'm going to move on to our next item is BTA3 final acceptance for contract K5053 Regency Northwest construction incorporated for the electrical fire sprinkler and seismic upgrades at Lowe elementary school project.

And this also came to Ops and the committee recommended that we move forward for full board approval.

So as I shared with the operations committee and knowing several of you are new, one of the board's responsibilities is when we complete a project and we have collected all of the closeout documents and literally there are 30 tasks that we implement in the process of closing out a project, when those tasks have been completed the board has to finally accept the project.

And what that does is it allows us to notify state agencies, there's three state agencies that we work with, Department of Labor and Industries, Department of Employment Securities and Department of Revenue to make sure that contractors have indeed paid, they will come in and audit the contractors books and they will look to make sure that the contractors have indeed paid.

The prevailing wages required in the state of Washington, they will look to make sure that their workers' compensation insurance has been paid for those employees working on our projects and then they will look to make sure that their taxes have been correctly paid.

If not they will file a lien against the project which we will then take from the project retention.

After a period of 60 days if we have received the three documents from the state agencies releasing their lien rights we will release project retention to the contractor.

We have project retention on all projects or we have a retention bond in which we could make a claim against a surety and so this is a formal action that you take for this project Lowell Elementary School.

And at Lowell elementary school we implemented some seismic improvements, some electrical improvements, some mechanical improvements and then some fire safety improvements.

So questions the board has on this project.

Any questions, comments?

Director Blanford.

Would you go through again the improvements?

Fire, seismic, electrical and mechanical HVAC improvements.

That's the one that I wanted to hear.

I know that frequently there are complaints from Lowell parents, students, and staff about the difference in heat depending on what parts of the building you are in.

So I am happy to hear that that is the case and hopefully it resolves that issue.

And I'll just tell you Director Blanford from my experience is that generally it takes about a year to get the HVAC system dialed in.

And the reason it takes that long is you're trying to do it first and you know In the fall and the spring, you don't get a lot of complaints.

Winter and summer, you get a lot of complaints.

And you're dialing in the mechanical system on the heating side in the winter.

You're dialing in the ventilation system in the late spring, summer, and autumn.

fall, early fall to address with occupants being too hot.

And it has almost always taken a year to get that programming language correct in the DDC system to operate those valves correctly, get the right amount of water flowing through that system.

Most of our systems are hydronic in nature.

And so not uncommon for that first year.

I will say we have two great mechanical electrical coordinators on the capital project staff, Mike McBee and Mike Kennedy who put contractors through their paces to try to prevent those problems but they're not perfect.

And sometimes there's engineering mistakes, sometimes there's construction mistakes.

Both of those individuals are on site almost on a daily basis in our projects watching the plumbing and mechanical systems be installed and the electrical systems be installed because it's their area of expertise and they can identify when we're not getting the product that's required in the contract documents.

Director Peters.

Well these problems with Lowell are very familiar to me.

I had children in Lowell for about six years.

Is the flooding in the basement now taking care of as well?

I'm assuming so.

I would assume so.

It's not a project that we tackled but I'm going to guess that the facilities department has addressed that.

Okay so the sprinklers were something that was part of, was it the BTA III?

Correct this is a BTA III project.

So this was a while ago and I can remember actually at one point testifying before the board and mentioning that we didn't have sprinklers yet at Lowell.

So is that all complete now?

Is this telling us that this is all done?

The project is done?

So now we are just.

Implemented in this construction contract is 100% complete.

And I'm assuming that it was completed fairly recently.

It was completed in the summer of 2014. And we've been working on the HVAC system throughout all of that past year.

And addressing hot and cold complaints to dial that in.

Okay so the construction, the actual, so there was still some work going on in the last year.

Correct.

There's still some work going on in this past year.

Okay so this is a multifaceted project.

So it was seismic and mechanical okay so lots of different things.

I'm just wondering why it took so long for the sprinklers to be installed and I'm just wondering if you could kind of explain to us a little bit why these projects don't happen quicker than they do.

Why it took so long for the fire suppression system to be put in.

I mean that's just funding you know and it's establishing priorities both in the facilities office and the capital projects office and I would say that with fire alarm systems.

Heating systems are more of a priority addressing hot and cold thermal comfort issues because that benefits the educational program.

Addressing roofing problems benefits the educational program.

Our safety systems are If you don't have a fire suppression system there's many buildings in the state of Washington, many buildings in the city of Seattle that don't have fire suppression systems.

They do have fire alarm systems to notify them when a fire is going to occur.

As a facilities manager, yes you want a fire suppression system but you have other priorities because end user comfort is more of a priority than having a fire suppression system.

So from a priority standpoint.

Because that benefits teaching and education.

I mean, in that it's not too hot, it's not too cold in that environment.

And then not to have a roof leak.

Roofs are generally top priority.

Because I can tell you, you will impact that teachable moment with a roof leak.

Well it must be very hard to prioritize these because they all have their importance.

And I can also remember the temperature changes and my children having to dress accordingly.

I will say though that because Lowell is where we have some of our most medically fragile special ed children the concern, I remember what I testified about was that we need to be sure that we have the sprinkler system in there if there was a fire because it takes a little bit longer to evacuate a building with children who aren't as mobile.

So I'm glad that all these different projects are now taken care of at Lowell.

Thank you.

Director Blanford.

I just wanted to say in response to Director Peters question because Lowell is in my district and I've gone in there several times and they are very clear about what their needs are.

They have given me a couple of lists a couple of different times about where the needs are and nowhere on that list was flood control down in the basement.

So I think it has been resolved.

Director Harris.

You have so officially depressed me with the last statement that fire safety is the third priority.

I guess I am going to ask the question next.

How many of our schools do not have sprinkler systems?

Next question is where does earthquake and seismic safety come in on this hierarchy?

I will take your latter part first.

Seismic, when the BEX IV projects are complete all of our schools will have had seismic improvements implemented to them.

I cannot tell you how many schools we do not have fire suppression systems in.

I can tell you at 100% of our schools we have fire alarm notification systems in.

So if we have a fire in a school we will have a fire alarm go off.

and the building occupants are trained to evacuate that building.

So I don't want to say that fire safety is not important.

Fire safety is mission critical and we test our fire alarm systems on an annual basis and we do that with Seattle Fire.

They look at those documents after that certification of that fire alarm system testing has been completed.

Fire suppression offers a second layer of protection.

And so I'm not, from a educational standpoint, I would say roofing is more important.

that teachable moment in that classroom, the thermal environment in that classroom is more important, providing that second layer of fire suppression system would come after roofing HVAC improvements.

But I'm not trying to say that it's not important.

It is important, but fire safety, we can get through our fire alarm systems, and that's a higher priority.

And one of the reasons I asked that question was so that it could be clarified for the record.

Thank you.

Life safety is numero uno.

On that note, I actually wanted to ask about, I noticed one of our schools actually went without heat and with the weather the way it's been, you know it's been pretty cold, you know what are we doing to actually keep schools from breaking down heaters where they have to be in the building for a good period of time and no heat?

So that's a facilities question that Bruce Skowra typically addresses and Richard looks at from some of the HVAC systems.

Some of the buildings are older and they rely on a boiler system which takes time so the boilers generally are not very efficient and if you've ever seen that system you basically are heating up a giant barrel of water to then have heat go throughout the rest of the building.

So if there is any breakdown in that system for a short amount of time it means the recovery time is just going to be longer because it is a delayed system that will heat that up.

So as soon as we are notified about that we did get folks out there to try and fix it as quickly as possible but it doesn't turn on It's just a delayed system that takes a little bit longer.

Ideally we would love to replace all those systems because A they are not efficient and B they take a lot of time and they are kind of maintenance intensive so that's why when we try and upgrade the HVAC systems that's one of the areas that we try and update.

Thank you.

Dr. Geary.

Now this is just sort of a technical question about the presentation and correct me if I'm wrong and as I get better I'll try and be more organized.

This is all new.

When you presented this at committee I recall there was sort of a checklist of all the final items that need to be gone through but I don't see that in the attachments here.

I thought that was a sort of clarifying document I thought it was interesting and a good part of the record to show all the steps that we have had to certify as being done before we get to this position.

Okay.

And I'm looking at both of these last two action items and not seeing that document and I was my memory and I wanted you to explain that to me.

That's a document that we use internally, Director Geary, to make sure that those tasks are done.

And sometimes a project manager will indicate, hey, this is applicable to my project, but we use that document internally.

We can make it part of this record.

if you would like to make it as an attachment to the bar so that you have the assurances that that work has been done or at least thought of that it's not applicable to the project.

But we use that internally just to track completion.

We don't, we haven't attached it previously to the bar.

I found it personally helpful to know all the steps that have gone before you're asking me to certify as a public or before we're asking these people who aren't part of the committee.

Okay.

to say yes this is ready to be signed off on and so that document with indications as to completion and who was responsible for making them done I think is an assurance to the rest of the board and the public all the steps have been completed.

Sure we can make that part of your board package.

Director Pinkham.

And just to hopefully clarify too, I recall that that checklist didn't have any place for anybody to sign their name and date it so you may want to make sure you add that as well.

No we actually have them initial it.

We do have them initial it but each task is done there is a little check lot and we look for their initials.

Thank you.

Any more questions?

Comments?

Thank you.

We are going to move on to our last item, BEX IV final acceptance for public works contract K5037 with Three Kings Environmental Incorporated for abatement of hazardous materials from the existing Pathfinder K-8 school located on the new Genesee Hill Elementary School project site.

This also came to ops and it was recommended by the committee to move forward for full board approval.

So again similar to the Lowell project this is a recommendation of final acceptance.

This is a BEX IV project, Genesee Hill Elementary School.

Prior to demolishing Genesee Hill Elementary School we issued a contract to come in and have the hazardous materials removed from that school.

Items such as asbestos that's in many different building materials.

Mercury in the thermostats that are in those buildings has to be removed and handled in a special way.

And then also there's window putties and things of that nature that have to be handled specially as well.

Three Kings came in, did that work for us.

We had some unit pricing, so in there we didn't run into as much hazardous materials as we thought, so we were able to take a credit.

And then we did run into a little bit more asbestos in the boiler flu than we anticipated, so that dug into the credit a little bit.

The credit was, I believe, $13,400 and then the additional work associated with the demolition or the asbestos removal from the boiler flue cost $3,000 so that's how you got to the negative change order of $10,400.

Any more questions or comments?

Director Harris.

I just I find the wording of this awkward and I wonder the existing Pathfinder K-8 school which of course is gone now and given the painful business about Pathfinder and Cooper and everybody else is there a way that we could change this to just talk about the Genesee Hill elementary school site?

Or is this in conjunction with the resolution where you started and it was there?

This work predates my arrival here at Seattle Public Schools.

I do know that Pathfinder K8 was the last occupant.

This was the title on the specification document that was issued for bid.

We don't like to change those ones.

Fair enough.

Thank you.

Any more questions?

Comments?

This is it.

Meeting is adjourned.

You're welcome.