anchorage, alaska asd memorandum #46 (2014-2015) …file… · recommendation. the ciac deliberated...

ANCHORAGE SCHOOL DISTRICT ANCHORAGE, ALASKA

ASD MEMORANDUM #46 (2014-2015) September 15, 2014 TO: SCHOOL BOARD FROM: ED GRAFF, SUPERINTENDENT SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FY 2014-2015 BOND PROPOSAL ASD Core Value: The district will be open, transparent & accountable to the public. RECOMMENDATION: It is the administration’s recommendation that the Anchorage School Board approve the following bond proposal comprised of Proposition 1 – Capital Improvement and Building Life Extension Projects in the amount of $59,250,000. The bond proposition is summarized below: Proposition I – Capital Improvement and Building Life Extension Projects:

Gladys Wood Elementary School Intermediate Renewal Design & Construction

$17,750,000

Mountain View Elementary School BLE & Expansion Design & Construction

13,050,000

Rabbit Creek Elementary School BLE & Site Renewal Design & Construction

11,450,000

Turnagain Elementary School Intermediate Renewal Design & Construction

15,050,000

Capital Improvement Building Life Extension Projects 1,950,000

Proposition 1 Total $59,250,000

PERTINENT FACTS:

In August 2014, the Capital Improvement Advisory Committee (CIAC) held four meetings to begin discussion and preparation of a potential school bond for 2015. Facilities/Capital Projects staff prepared a list of potential projects for the CIAC to consider in an April 2015 bond, based off of projects identified in year 2 of the District’s current Six-Year Capital Improvement

2

Plan (Attachment A), and results of the most recent facility assessment data (Attachment B). Project options for each of the elementary school renewals were also provided to the CIAC for their use in preparing their bond recommendation. The CIAC deliberated on the project list, and voted on a recommendation to bring forward to administration and the board. The co-chairs prepared a summary of the committee’s work (Attachment C). After project costs were adjusted, the CIAC’s recommendation totaled $58.97 million.

In conjunction with the CIAC’s deliberations, Building Design Committees (BDC) were formed for the proposed five elementary school projects in year 2 of the CIP: Inlet View, Gladys Wood, Mountain View, Rabbit Creek, and Turnagain elementary schools. The BDC’s, led by the school principals, were presented with renewal options developed by the architects of record for those school projects. Their task was to review and discuss the merits of each option, and submit a recommendation to administration (Attachment D).

The administration carefully reviewed the recommendations from the CIAC and the school BDC’s, and also considered the current projected debt retirement amount of $59.29 million. In order to bring forward a recommendation less than the payoff amount, the administration recommends a bond proposal totaling $59.25 million. The costs of proposed renewal projects were adjusted by applying a 5%+ reduction of construction contingencies, Inlet View renewal was deferred, and a small increment of emergent projects were included (Attachment E).

On September 4, 2014, the board and administration discussed the capital planning process, the CIAC’s 2015 school bond recommendation, the BDC recommendations, as well as administration’s proposal. The discussion included a status report on facility condition and educational adequacy assessments (FCA and EAA), and how that information was used to prioritize projects, the amount of bond indebtedness to be retired in FY2014-15, and the five proposed elementary school renewal project options.

Overall Debt Service

As of August 2014, the District has $580.485 million of bonds outstanding. This is the lowest amount of debt the District has held since FY 2004 - 2005 which is largely due to paying off $269.635 million of debt in the last five fiscal years. During that same time frame, the District has received authorization by voters for approximately $188.187 million of new debt to fund capital improvements.

3

The District also works closely with the Municipal administration and financial advisors to engage the market to reduce the debt and interest rates regularly. Over the past three years the District has refunded $53.6 million in existing debt reducing the overall debt service by nearly $3.5 million. The District is currently exploring refinancing up to $97.8 million in existing debt with the potential to reduce cumulative debt service on the order of $8.5 million.

In the next five years, the District will be paying off on the order of $305 million in principal, averaging about $61 million each year.

The District is planning a bond sale in November 2014 for $70 million to cover cash flow requirements for:

o Girdwood K-8 School Construction [$23 million project] o Airport Heights Elementary School Addition / Renovation [$22.8

million project] o West High/Romig Middle Schools CTE Addition [$14 million

project] o Component Renewals [$4-5 million/each]

Bayshore Elementary Eagle River Elementary Huffman Elementary Susitna Elementary

o And other projects including West High/Romig Design, Bartlett Café/Kitchen Renovation Design/Construction, Steller Electrical System Upgrade, Aurora Elementary Gym Addition, and Wonder Park Elementary School Traffic Safety Improvements

The future total debt service requirements and local municipal share of the debt service associated with:

o Existing debt service, including potential refinancing November 2014,

o The $70 million bond sale slated for November 2014 o The $60-$69 million bond sale anticipated for the fall of 2015, and o The prospective bond sales associated with the projects proposed in

the $59 million April 2015 bond proposition are illustrated in Attachment F.

State Debt Reimbursement

Since 1970, the State of Alaska has provided school districts debt reimbursement for qualified and approved school construction projects that

4

are approved by voters. Of the current bonds outstanding, the State debt reimbursement program will cover 56.76 percent.

Senate Bill 237, approved by the Legislature in July 2010, provides for 60 percent or 70 percent debt reimbursement on school construction projects that receive local voter approval after October 1, 2006. School construction projects that do not add space are typically eligible for 70 percent reimbursement. The estimated debt reimbursement percentage for each project has been identified on the attached project list.

House Bill 278, approved by the Legislature in April 2014, amends the debt reimbursement program by providing 50 percent or 70 percent debt reimbursement on school construction projects that receive local voter approval after May 1, 2015. Under this law, approved school projects that add space are eligible for 50 percent reimbursement. School projects that do not add space are still eligible for 70 percent reimbursement.

Cost of Potential Bond Proposals to the Local Taxpayers

The approximate amount of annual taxes on $100,000 of assessed valuation to retire the proposed debt of $59.25 million is $5.59. The calculation of estimated taxes is based on an estimated 5.0 percent weighted interest rate for twenty years, as shown on Attachment G.

This calculation is based on the assumption that the District will receive 70 percent State debt reimbursement on $1.95 million of projects, and 60 percent reimbursement on $57.3 million of projects. The debt reimbursement projects have not yet been reviewed by the Alaska Department of Education and Early Development (DEED), so the 60 percent and 70 percent reimbursement rates have not been confirmed as of this date. The District has submitted these projects for debt reimbursement and is awaiting final determination prior to Municipal action in October 2014.

EG/MF/MA/RML/EK/SJ Attachments: A. CIP Recommendation by Year, 2014-2020 – Table 1 B. Facility Condition and Educational Adequacy Indices C. Summary Report and Recommended Project List of the CIAC D. 5 Elementary School Building Design Committee Recommendations E. 2015 Proposed School Bond – Administration Recommendation F. Debt Service & Debt Service Mill Rate Projection G. 2015 Bond Reimbursement Rate and Taxes

5

Prepared by: Rachel Molina Lodoen, Project Support Manager Edie Knapp, Acting Construction Manager Sue Jolin, Executive Director, Finance Approved by: Michael K. Abbott, Chief Operating Officer Mark Foster, Chief Financial Officer

Table 1 - CIP Recommendation 2014-2020

1 2 3 4 5 6Year 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20

CIP Total $57,285,000 $49,905,000 $57,955,000 $57,495,000 $49,340,000 $49,530,000Elementary SchoolsRabbit Creek Elementary School $9,830,000

Mountain View Elementary School $10,920,000 Inlet View Elementary School $3,820,000 Airport Heights Elementary School $22,800,000 Gladys Wood Elementary School $1,000,000 $9,825,000 Turnagain Elementary School $1,475,000 $9,825,000 Bayshore Elementary School $5,035,000 Willow Crest Elementary School $2,805,000 O'Malley Elementary School $1,000,000 $11,215,000 Chugiak Elementary School $3,710,000 Chinook Elementary School $4,155,000 Lake Otis Elementary School Northwood ABC School $5,265,000 Susitna Elementary School $4,290,000 Campbell Elementary School Birchwood ABC Elementary School Homestead Elementary School Taku Elementary School Rogers Park Elementary School Wonder Park Elementary School $4,985,000 North Star Elementary School Mount Spurr Elementary School Orion Elementary School $5,420,000Tudor Elementary School Nunaka Valley Elementary School

Eagle River Elementary School $5,320,000 Ursa Major Elementary School Klatt Elementary School Huffman Elementary School $5,265,000 Ursa Minor Elementary School Kincaid Elementary School Aurora Elementary School Fairview Elementary School Girdwood K-8 School Alpenglow Elementary School Trailside Elementary School Spring Hill Elementary School

Project scope, costs, and priorities require annual verification. They may be adjusted based on recommendations from Demographic information and from design and facility audits.

ATTACHMENT A

1


Year 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20CIP Total $57,285,000 $49,905,000 $57,955,000 $57,495,000 $49,340,000 $49,530,000

Bear Valley Elementary School College Gate Elementary School Creekside Park Elementary School Ocean View Elementary School Government Hill Elementary School Ravenwood Elementary School Ptarmigan Elementary School Bowman Elementary School Abbott Loop Elementary School Fire Lake Elementary School Kasuun Elementary School Northern Lights ABC School Scenic Park Elementary School Muldoon Elementary School Russian Jack Elementary School Tyson Elementary School Chugach Optional Elementary School Williwaw Elementary School Lake Hood Elementary School Baxter Elementary School Sand Lake Elementary School Denali Montessori School Chester Valley Elementary School

Middle SchoolsCentral Middle School $45,645,000 Gruening Middle School $2,475,000 $35,775,000 Mears Middle School Romig Middle School (40% West Romig) $1,080,000 $16,060,000 Mirror Lake Middle School Goldenview Middle School Hanshew Middle School Wendler Middle School Begich Middle School Clark Middle School Southwest Area Middle School

High SchoolsWest High School (60% West Romig) $1,620,000 $24,300,000 Service High School

Project scope, costs, and priorities require annual verification. They may be adjusted based on recommendations from Demographic information and from design and facility audits.2


Year 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20CIP Total $57,285,000 $49,905,000 $57,955,000 $57,495,000 $49,340,000 $49,530,000

Bartlett High School $2,605,000East High School $2,605,000Chugiak High School Dimond High School Eagle River High School South High School

Alternative SchoolsMt. Iliamna (50%) $1,640,000 $17,580,000Whaley School (50%) $1,640,000 $17,580,000Steller Secondary School $1,715,000 King Career Center SAVE High School Aquarian Charter School Benson Secondary School Polaris K-12

Support FacilitiesPupil Transportation Kennedy Data Center Facilities/Maintenance Student Nutrition Operations Building Purchasing/Warehouse Information Technology

DistrictwideDistrict Wide Emergent Projects $5,925,000 $2,405,000 $2,730,000 $2,855,000 $3,575,000 $3,740,000District Wide Relocatable Upgrades Career & Technology Education Projects

Total $57,285,000 $49,905,000 $57,955,000 $57,495,000 $49,340,000 $49,530,000

Yearly Totals:2014-15 $57,285,000 Studies and/or Analyses to be performed:2015-16 $49,905,000 - Middle School Analysis2016-17 $57,955,000 - Facility Requirements for programs and 2017-18 $57,495,000 services provided at Mt. Iliamna and Whaley2018-19 $49,340,0002019-20 $49,530,000

$321,510,000

Project scope, costs, and priorities require annual verification. They may be adjusted based on recommendations from Demographic information and from design and facility audits.3

Facility Condition and Educational Adequacy IndicesAs of September 2014

School - Name

Orig

inal

Constructi

on

Last M

ajor I

mpro

vemen

t

Total

Educatio

nal Adeq

uacy In

dex

As of S

eptem

ber 20

14

Facili

ty C

ondition In

dex

As of S

etem

ber 20

14

Elementary SchoolsWillow Crest Elementary School 1960 1994 2.85% 0.50

Chugiak Elementary School 1974 1994 2.68% 0.42

Orion Elementary School 1958 1998 0.91% 0.42

Ursa Minor Elementary School 1954 1998 8.11% 0.42

Wonder Park Elementary School 1968 1994 10.08% 0.42

Mountain View Elementary School 1958 1983 3.69% 0.41

Inlet View Elementary School 1957 1985 19.82% 0.39

Scenic Park Elementary School 1963 1998 7.03% 0.39

Rabbit Creek Elementary School 1961 1984 5.96% 0.38

Homestead Elementary School 1972 1990 6.86% 0.34

Taku Elementary School 1972 1998 4.94% 0.34

O'Malley Elementary School 1967 1987 5.51% 0.33

Gladys Wood Elementary School 1970 1984 12.69% 0.32

Rogers Park Elementary School 1963 1991 3.73% 0.32

Turnagain Elementary School 1956 1983 8.66% 0.32

Aurora Elementary School 1954 1996 1.83% 0.31

Northwood ABC Elementary School 1963 1987 2.14% 0.31

Campbell Elementary School 1965 1995 2.07% 0.30

Lake Otis Elementary School 1955 1990 1.20% 0.30

Mt. Iliamna Elementary School 1962 1995 23.10% 0.30

Alpenglow Elementary School 1995 6.02% 0.29

Susitna Elementary School 1970 1994 4.83% 0.29

Birchwood ABC Elementary School 1967 1994 4.10% 0.28

Chinook Elementary School 1968 1995 4.82% 0.27

Klatt Elementary School 1983 1.52% 0.27

Original Construction - Last Major Improvement -

Total EAI -

FCI -

A percentage index derived from the summation of the Deficiency EAI and Missing Space EAI

A percentage index derived from dividing the cost to correct building component/system needs by the facility's replacement cost

Year the facility was builtMost recent year that a significant improvement was made on the facility

Elementary Schools

ATTACHMENT B

1


School - Name

Orig

inal

Constructi

on

Last M

ajor I

mpro

vemen

t

Total

Educatio

nal Adeq

uacy In

dex

As of S

eptem

ber 20

14

Facili

ty C

ondition In

dex

As of S

etem

ber 20

14

North Star Elementary School 1961 1994 2.64% 0.27

Mt. Spurr Elementary School 1954 2002 5.29% 0.24

Nunaka Valley Elementary School 1959 1998 3.12% 0.24

Williwaw Elementary School 1995 2.25% 0.24

Tudor Elementary School 1967 1990 1.94% 0.23

Ursa Major Elementary School 1952 1995 4.91% 0.23

Fire Lake Elementary School 1985 2.58% 0.21

Kincaid Elementary School 1996 4.63% 0.21

Northern Lights ABC School 1998 4.63% 0.21

Fairview Elementary School 1998 1.30% 0.20

Lake Hood Elementary School 1996 4.63% 0.20

Muldoon Elementary School 2000 4.63% 0.20

Ptarmigan Elementary School 1971 2004 3.55% 0.20

Russian Jack Elementary School 1999 4.63% 0.20

Abbott Loop Elementary School 1958 1991 3.71% 0.19

Creekside Park Elementary School 1959 1999 3.20% 0.19

Ravenwood Elementary School 1985 2.63% 0.19

Tyson Elementary School 1996 4.63% 0.19

Bear Valley Elementary School 1984 2.65% 0.18

Kasuun Elementary School 1996 4.63% 0.18

Ocean View Elementary School 1971 2000 5.18% 0.18

Spring Hill Elementary School 1985 1.86% 0.18

Trailside Elementary School 2000 4.63% 0.18

Baxter Elementary School 1973 1999 1.83% 0.14

Bowman Elementary School 1991 1.15% 0.14

College Gate Elementary School 1970 1995 2.79% 0.14


Total EAI -

FCI -




2


School - Name

Orig

inal

Constructi

on

Last M

ajor I

mpro

vemen

t

Total

Educatio

nal Adeq

uacy In

dex

As of S

eptem

ber 20

14

Facili

ty C

ondition In

dex

As of S

etem

ber 20

14

Eagle River Elementary School 1961 1984 4.02% 0.14

Government Hill Elementary School 1965 2000 2.23% 0.14

Bayshore Elementary School 1976 1991 7.78% 0.11

Chugach Optional Elementary School 1973 2005 2.42% 0.10

Huffman Elementary School 1973 1987 5.40% 0.09

Airport Heights Elementary School 1954 1973 24.07% 0.08

Denali Montessori School 2004 3.33% 0.07

Girdwood K-8 School 1981 1985 66.66% 0.07

Sand Lake Elementary School 1958 2010 1.06% 0.01

Chester Valley Elementary School 1964 2010 8.80% 0.00

Central Middle School of Science 1962 18.75% 0.51

Gruening Middle School 1984 14.99% 0.35

Mears Middle School 1985 8.59% 0.29

Romig Middle School 1963 1995 10.01% 0.24

Mirror Lake Middle School 1997 6.92% 0.18

Goldenview Middle School 1997 7.83% 0.12

Hanshew Middle School 1984 11.25% 0.11

Wendler Middle School 1960 2004 6.78% 0.11

Begich Middle School 2007 4.34% 0.01

Clark Middle School 2009 1.80% 0.00


Total EAI -

FCI - A percentage index derived from dividing the cost to correct building component/system needs by the facility's replacement cost



Middle Schools

3


School - Name

Orig

inal

Constructi

on

Last M

ajor I

mpro

vemen

t

Total

Educatio

nal Adeq

uacy In

dex

As of S

eptem

ber 20

14

Facili

ty C

ondition In

dex

As of S

etem

ber 20

14

West High School 1953 1996 8.28% 0.29

East High School 1960 2005 5.63% 0.26

Bartlett High School 1971 2006 7.08% 0.22

Chugiak High School 1965 2003 6.52% 0.14

Service High School 1971 2006 8.55% 0.11

Dimond High School 2003 3.37% 0.10

Eagle River High School 2005 10.89% 0.03South High School 2004 7.71% 0.02

Whaley Center / School 1972 1991 19.70% 0.31

Aquarian 1966 1972 0.27

King Career Center 1974 1991 0.26

Save High School 1984 7.68% 0.26

Steller Secondary School 1949 1983 19.93% 0.25Benny Benson Secondary School 1991 4.05% 0.14

Polaris K-12 School 1995 2006 2.56% 0.01

Student Transportation 1979 0.44

Operations 1976 0.44

Student Nutrition 1988 0.38

Facilities Maintenance 1976 0.24

Purchasing Warehouse 1973 0.23

Kennedy Data Center 1962 1998 0.13


Total EAI -

FCI -

High Schools

Alternative Schools

Support Facilities

Year the facility was builtMost recent year that a significant improvement was made on the facilityA percentage index derived from the summation of the Deficiency EAI and Missing Space EAI


4

Date: August 26, 2014

To: Ed Graff, Superintendent

Thru: Mike Abbott, Assistant Superintendent, Support Services

From: Jason Bergerson, Co‐chair, Capital Investment Advisory Committee

John Bulkow, Co‐chair, Capital Investment Advisory Committee

Subject: CIAC Recommendation of 2015 School Bond

The CIAC met on August 7th for the first of four meetings to discuss the ASD bond proposal to be sent to

voters in April 2015. Each meeting had at least a quorum of the CIAC membership. Two of our meeting

sessions included on site tours of Inlet View Elementary and Gladys Wood Elementary, and

presentations from principals of Rabbit Creek Elementary, Turnagain Elementary and Mountain View

Elementary. The committee began the discussion by agreeing the bond package content would be

developed from projects contained in year two of the current CIP.

Staff presented updated FCI and EAI information, and more detailed cost estimates of the year two

projects in the context of a Building Life Extension (BLE), Intermediate Renewal (IR) and Expanded

Renewal (ER). Cost estimation figures from the early design process were used to replace “placeholder”

numbers that were estimated in the prior year. The FCI index is now presented as a five year look‐

forward estimate, whereas previous years used just a single year look forward. The revised FCI time

scope resulted in a substantial shuffle of the FCI rankings and prompted much concern about whether

some of the schools with newly higher FCI rankings should replace the year two projects in the 2015

bond. Given the state of design already begun on the year two projects and the understanding that the

schools with higher FCI rankings rose to their new ranking based on systems anticipated to need work

toward the end of the new FCI scope, the committee chose to keep the year two projects in the 2015

bond recommendation and address the new FCI rankings in the next CIP.

We also discussed legislative changes in the School Debt reimbursement statute that will affect future

bond packages after May 1, 2015. Building Life Extension projects are generally reimbursed at 70%, and

other projects that involve square footage additions to facilities are reimbursed at 60%. The legislative

change would reduce reimbursement of non‐BLE project from 60% to 50% after May 1, 2015.

The committee held a frank and detailed discussion on each project contained in year two. Each project

was reviewed with respect to both facility condition (FCI) and education adequacy (EAI). The top priority

projects were carried over from last year’s original list, Mountain View Elementary, Rabbit Creek

Elementary, Gladys Wood Elementary and Turnagain Elementary. Inlet View Elementary was also

discussed, but, other than including the school's water system in the emergent projects, a

recommendation was not made to address this facility in the 2015 bond.

ATTACHMENT C

1

As part of this year’s recommendation, the committee specifically considered multiple alternatives

involving the scope of recommended improvements at the top 4 elementary schools. We also

entertained discussion about possibly recommending a bond package that would exceed the targeted

debt retirement figure of $59 million by $10 million.

During our fourth meeting on August 25th, we condensed our discussions to the three alternatives for

consideration. The options are included in the attachment to this report.

Deliberations on the three options lead to a discussion about exceeding the target bond retirement

amount. The majority of the committee felt we have been consistent in the past with adhering to that

target and that the voters have responded positively to this process. We also discussed what we

thought would be the best scope of a school renovation. Should we advocate for minimal project

scopes to maximize the number of schools addressed, or attempt to address the most work that can be

accomplished to improve both facility condition and education delivery on fewer schools. The CIAC

opted for the latter option. This excluded Option B from further consideration.

Continued discussion on scope clarified for most on the committee the difference between BLE projects

and expanded and intermediate renewals. The marginal benefit beyond a BLE was considered

important and favored by the committee. This excluded Option C. Finally, the importance of addressing

Energy Efficiency improvements, Component Renewals and pre‐design activities related to implications

of the expected policy decision on middle schools also was a priority. We also discussed the importance

of not grouping renovation projects too heavily in one area of town. Gladys Wood and Turnagain

Elementary have the same FCI, but Gladys Wood has a higher EAI. This finalized support for Option A.

The CIAC proposes submitting a 2015 bond package to the Superintendent and School Board at

$58,967,365 as outlined in the attached documents. The committee did not provide a separate

prioritization of projects with the list, as we did last year. All of the recommended emergent projects

are expected to be safety and health related. Following the pattern of our past recommendations, this

level of funding is very close to the revised estimated debt scheduled for retirement this fiscal year of

$59 million.

The CIAC also discussed the proposed Charter during its August 25th meeting. The primary area of

recommended change was to include a provision that allows the CIAC to make recommendations to the

Administration and Board on projects that may not directly be related to the physical plant of the

District, but will indirectly affect the physical plant and delivery of services.

Your future guidance will provide the missing element in our CIP planning process – what will be done

with middle schools? These decisions will greatly impact middle/junior high school capacity utilization.

The middle/junior high school decision will also affect the planning for elementary schools and their

revitalization and replacement scheduling that will be discussed again as we develop the new Six Year

CIP Plan.

2

2015 Options considered

Option Estimated State DR

Estimated Anch. share

A1 Mt. View Elem. Exp. Renewal

$16,317,236

Rabbit Crk. Elem. BLE + $12,000,000

Gladys Wood Elem. Int. Renewal $17,250,129

subtotal $45,567,365

Energy Efficiency, Component Renewal & pre‐design for high FCI/EA facilities

$8,400,000

Emergent critical systems $5,000,000

total $58,967,365 $37,680,419 $21,286,946

B Mt. View Elem. BLE $12,604,087

Rabbit Crk. Elem. BLE $10,999,477

Gladys Wood Elem. BLE $15,245,994

Turnagain Elem. BLE $13,173,037



$12,000,000


total $69,022,595 $48,315,817 $20,706,778

C Mt. View Elem. BLE $12,604,087

Rabbit Crk. Elem. BLE $10,999,477

Gladys Wood Elem. BLE $15,245,994

Turnagain Elem. BLE $13,173,037



$2,000,000


total $59,022,595 $41,315,817 $17,706,778

3

Inlet View Elementary 1210 N. Street

Anchorage, AK 99504 Mike Abbott Anchorage School District 5530 E. Northern Lights Blvd. Anchorage, AK 99504 Re: Proposal for Building Expanded Renewal (ER) Dear Mike Abbott: Inlet View Elementary is pleased to submit a building expanded renewal recommendation for consideration. We believe Inlet View belongs at the top of the District's renewal list. What distinguishes Inlet View Elementary from other neighborhood Elementary Schools are the following:

Of the five schools under consideration, we are currently rated with the highest impact

based on the Education Adequacy Index with a score of 19.80 o There is no MPR program space

This has a direct impact on scheduling for Physical Education classes and collaboration with other school master schedules

o Security and safety concerns Our front office has no visibility to the outside and is located several

yards within the building. o Our resource classrooms are significantly undersized and partially housed in

relocatables o We need to become a functional facility and achieve educational standards so

external classes will be within the building. Our music program is housed in a relocatable and kindergarten and first graders have to travel the full distance of the building. Access to the bathroom during music is challenging due to locked outside doors.

o We currently have only 54 students on zone exceptions with 22 of those students grandfathered in due to NCLB

o There are major concerns with our traffic pattern o Major water filtering issues

Since 1957 Inlet view has been a community landmark in downtown Anchorage Inlet View playground serves as a community park and recreation area year round. Demographics have changed and families with young children are moving back into the

neighborhood Inlet View students have greater access to Cultural activities in the downtown area and

walk to many events throughout the school year

Thank you for your time and consideration. We look forward to Working with you! Sincerely, Bonnie Goen Principal 907 742-7630 [email protected]

ATTACHMENT D

1

Date: Aug.29,2014To: Mr.MikeAbbott,ChiefOperatingOfficerofSupportServicesFrom: AudreyChapman,Principal,GladysWoodElementarySubject: BuildingDesignCommittee’sRecommendationforGladysWoodElementaryTheGladysWoodBuildingDesignCommittee,consistingofthreeparentsandcommunitymembers,twoclassroomteachers,ourassistantprincipalandmyselfmettwice.Duringthefirstsession,wemetwithengineersfromMcCool,Carlson,andGreenandrepresentativesfromtheASDFacilitiesDept.wherethethreeproposals…theBLE,theIR,andtheERwerepresentedtous.Wethencommunicatedviaemailtodiscusstheseaswellasthefullsetofdetailedplansthatwerelatersharedwithus.Duringthesecondsession,ourteammettogethertodiscussourfindingsinperson,andtodiscussourreasonsforourchoiceofproposals.Attheendofthesession,wemetwiththeengineersandthefacilitiesfolksagaintoaskclarificationquestions.Inordertosupportourschooldistrict’sDestination2020Goalsof:

90%ofstudentswillbeproficientinreading,andmath. 100%ofstudentsandstafffeelsafeatschool 90%ofparentswillrecommendtheirchild’sschooltoothers

…itisourcommittee’srecommendationthatwesupporttheExtendedRenewalproposal.Thereasonsarefollowing. TheBuildingLifeExtension(BLE)addresses: safetyconcernsbyenclosingclassrooms, removingexteriordoorsfromtheclassrooms, remodelingtheadministration/entrancevestibule. Itdoesnotaddresscreatinganadequatefunctioningofficeadministrationarea

wherethereisamoreefficientworkallowedwithouthavingconstantinterruptionsbecauseit’sanopencorridor.

Itdoesnotaddressthehealthconcernsofhavingbathroomsintheprimaryclassrooms,aswellasasinkineveryclassroom.

Additionally,itdoesnotaddressupgradingclassroomsizestomeetdistrictspecifications, adequatespecialclassroomstomeetthegrowingneedsforspacetoprovide

suchsupportservicesasSpecialEducationResource,EnglishLanguageLearners,IndianEducation,OccupationalTherapy,PhysicalTherapy,SpeechPathology,nor

MusicRoomwithinthemainbuilding(whichisalsoasafetyconcernbecauseofchildrenhavingtotraveldailyoutsidethemainschooltoaportable).

Italsodoesnotaddressenclosingthelibrary,whichcurrentlysitsatthemeetingpointofallthreepodswherethereisconstanttrafficbytheclassroomsmovingtospecials,thelunchroom,andthecomputerlab.Thelibraryalsositsdirectlyacrossfromthemainofficeandadjacenttothemainentranceofourschool,wherephonesareringingconstantly,andpeopleareenteringandexitingthebuilding.

2

TheBLEdoesn’tincludeupgradestoourinadequatefoodpreparationandservingarea,aproperloadingdockarea,andappropriatestorage.

Finally,theBLEdoesnotaddresstheneedtohaveafunctioningsoundsystemintheMPR/Gym,thegatheringpointforschoolassemblies,communitymeetings,andPTOeventsandactivities.

TheIntermediateRenewaladdresses: ThesafetyandhealthconcernslistedintheBLE anoperablewallandacousticalpanelsatGYM/MPRthatwillsupportthelearning

environmentduringPEclassesbydecreasingdistractionsandinterruptionstolessonstakingplacetherewhentherearetwoconcurrentclassesandallowfortheflexibleuseoftheGYM/MPRbytheschoolandcommunity

expandsandremodelsthecurrentstagetoserveastheMusicRoomwhichwouldpreventstudentsfromhavingtotraveloutsidethebuildingstrengthenthemusicprogrambyallowinggreatermovementandtheabilitytospreadouttopracticemusicalinstruments,stagemusicalproductions,etc.Theincreasedsizeofthestagemakesitmorefeasibletostageperformancesandpresentationsbytheschoolandcommunity.

anenclosedlibrarythatwillgreatlyenhancethelearningenvironmentbydecreasingdistractionsandinterruptions,andincreasingsafetyandsecuritybydecreasingthenumberentry/exitpointsintothearea,optimizesthespaceandallowsforgreaterflexibilitywithitsuse(i.e.testing,smallgroups,meetings,conferences,etc.),andseparatesthelibraryfromthehallwaysandentrancearea

upgradestheKindergartenandPre‐Kclassroomstomeetdistrictspecifications. Itdoesnotaddresstheadditionofclassroomspacewhichisneededtohouseour

everincreasingclasssizesandadequatespacetoprovidesmallgroupinterventionsintheclassroom,northemuchneededspaceforsupportservices,noradditionstotheofficeadministrationarea.

TheExtendedRenewaladdresses: thesafetyconcernsoftheBLE theremodelingtoimprovemanyoftheprogramdeficienciesoftheIR Italsoincludesrecommendationsthataddressoursignificanteducational,program,

andfacilityinadequacies. Thisisthefirstproposalthatexpandsclassroomsto1000SF,expandsthe

administrativearea,relocatesthelibrary,thetechlab,andmorestudentserviceareasintheCPod.ItisalsothefirstproposalthatexpandsthefoodserviceareatomeetASDstandards.

Furthermore…itistheBDC’srequesttosupporttheExtendedRenewalproposalbecause:Currently,ourschoolservesadiversegroupofstudentshavingmanyconcernsincludingpoverty(approximately60%qualifyingforfreeandreducedlunches),languagebarriers,socialandemotionaldifficulties,andseriousattendanceproblemsduetotheaboveissues.Thisyear,over50%ofourstudentsarenotmeetingstateanddistrictstandardsofproficiency.Itisourbeliefthathavingclosedclassrooms,library,androomsforinstructionalinterventionswouldhaveatremendousimpactonourstudents’proficiency.TheExtendedRenewal(ER)proposalistheonlyproposalthatwouldadequatelyaddresstheinstructionalneedswithinourschool.Thisadditioninclassroomsizewouldallow

3

teacherstodesignclassroomspacetomeetthediverseneedsofthestudents.Studentengagementandconsequentlytheirsuccessaslearnerswouldincreaseasadequatespaceisgivenforproperinstructionalpractices.Itwouldboostinstructionbyallowingforgreaterflexibilitywiththeuseofthespacetosupportstudentneeds(spaceforsmallgroupinstruction,studentprojects,cooperativegroupwork,classlibrary,scienceactivities,storageofinstructionalmaterials,spaceforinstructionaltechnology,aswellasaspaceforpermanentstoragewithintheclassrooms,whichiscurrentlynon‐existent.Anincreaseinspacewouldallowforsmallgroupinstructional,spaceforcenters,spaceformovement,andspaceforinstructionaltechnology.Permanentwallsareimportantforreducingclassroomdistractions.Manyclassroomsareinterruptedseveraltimesadayastheneighboringclassroomswalkthroughtheirroomstogotospecialclasses,duringbathroombreaks,andtosharesinkspace.ItisimportanttonotethatbecauseGladysWoodcurrentlyhasmoveablepartitionsdesignedtoseparatesomespacebetweenclassrooms,thebesttimetoexpandclassroomsto1,000SFwouldbeduringtheExpandedRenewalprocess.Additionalexteriorwindowswouldincreasenaturallightingintheclassrooms,andprovideforairflowduringthewarmermonthsofschool,whichisveryimportanttothephysicalandemotionalwell‐beingofourstudentsandstaff.Currently,theclassroomswhichhaveonlyexteriordoorsandnoseparatewindows,haveabsolutelynoairflowandcanbestiflinghotandstagnate.Forsafetyreasons,theyarenotallowedtoopentheirexteriordoors.TheERalsobringsallinstructioninsidethemainbuildingincludingart,healthandmusic.Whenstudentsnolongerneedtoleavethebuildingtoattendaspecialclass,theygaininstructiontimeintheregulareducationclassroom.Relocatingthelibrarywouldstrengtheninstructionalprogrambycreatingaclassroomatmosphereandlesseningthedistractionsandinterruptionsthatcomewiththeopenwalls.Thiswouldalsoallowforgreaterflexibilitywiththeuseofthelibrary.TheERisthebestsolutionforhousingouradministrativeofficestoprovideasafe,secureentryforourstudents.ThenewdesignofthecentralofficecreatesamoredirectwalkingpathforstudentstoandfromPE,Library,andArtclasses.Thisallowsmoretimeforinstructionandiseasierforteacherstoviewtheirentireclasslineastheywalktothesespecialclasses.Expandingandrelocatingtheadministrativeareawouldenhancecustomerservice,decreasedistractionsforinstructionalareas,andincreasesecurityfortheschool.Finally,theERistheonlyplanthatadequatelyexpandsthefoodserviceareatomeetASDstandards.Respectfullysubmitted,AudreyC.Chapman,PrincipalGladysWoodElementary742‐6769

4

Date:8/22/14To:MikeAbbott,AssistantSuperintendent,SupportServicesFrom:MountainViewElementaryBuildingDesignCommitteeSubject:BDCrecommendationforbuildingrenewalTheMountainViewElementaryBuildingDesignCommitteemetonAugust14,2014andagainonAugust21,2014.Thepurposeofthesemeetingswastoviewthedesignsforthepotentialrenewalofourschoolandtoachieveaconsensustomakearecommendationtotheschooldistrict.Thecommitteewascomprisedofapproximatelytwelvemembers(onlytenwerepresentforthedecisionmakingvote)withstaff,parents,andcommunitymembersallbeingrepresented.AtthefirstmeetingtherewasathoroughpresentationbythearchitectfromBezek,Durst,Seiser,therewasmuchdiscussionofthevariousoptionsandtherewereseveralquestionsaskedandansweredbythearchitect.Thesecondmeetingcontinuedthediscussionandthearchitectfieldedmorequestions.Oncethediscussionhadrunitscourse,avotewastaken,theresultsofwhicharebelow:Option1:Donothing—received0votes.NojustificationneededOption2:BuildingLifeExtension—received1vote.Justification:

Mostlikelytobepassedbyschoolboardandvoters. Providesneededsafety,seismic,acoustic,mechanical,andcosmetic

upgrades.Option3:ExtendedRenewal—received6votes.Justification:

Providesneededsafety,seismic,acoustic,mechanical,andcosmeticupgradesasinBLE.

Providesincreasedinstructionalefficiencythroughre‐configurationofseveralinstructionalspaces(art/health,music,kindergarten).

RemovesIgniteprogramromreloclassroomandbringsintobuilding. Electricalupgradesincreasesafetyandaffordsincreasedlevelof

instructionaltechnology. IncreasedenergyandoperationalefficiencythroughuseofLEDlightingand

trashcompactingunit. Retainsandrestoreshistoriccharacteroftheoriginal1958buildingwhile

alsoconvertingtomoderneducationalstandards.

5

Option4:BuildingReplacement—received3votes.Justification(inadditiontomostpointsaboveinextendedrenewal):

Provideslong‐termupliftofcommunitymorale(ClarkMSreplacementcitedatanexamplebycommunitymembers).Investmentsinneighborhoodshavemanypositivelong‐termimpacts.

Provides“upstreamintervention”throughimprovededucationalopportunities.

BDCRecommendation:TheMountainViewBuildingDesignCommitteerecommendsthattheschoolboardapprovetheextendedrenewaloptionforMountainViewelementary.Pleaseseejustifications,above.Wealsorecommendthat,iftheBLEisselectedasthebestoptionbydistrictadministrationortheschoolboard,thatthemusicroom/stagere‐configurationbeaddedtotheBLEasitprovidessignificantinstructionalefficiencyimprovements,withminimaladditionalexpense.SubmittedbyChristopherWoodward,PrincipalonbehalfoftheMountainViewElementaryBuildingDesignCommittee.

6

Date: August28,2014To: MikeAbbott,AssistantSuperintendent,SupportServicesFrom: GregBalcao,Principal,RabbitCreekElementarySubject: RecommendationoftheRabbitCreekBuildingDesignCommitteeTheRabbitCreekBuildingDesignCommitteemetonAugust13andAugust20ofthisyear(aswellasinSeptemberoflastschoolyear)todiscusswhichschoolupgradeoptionwouldbestfittheneedsofRabbitCreekElementary:theBLE(BuildingLifeExtension),theIntermediateoption,ortheExpandedRenewal.Ourcommitteeconsistsof:LaurieWade,oneofourschoolbusinesspartners,ValBuckendorf,ourcurrentPTApresident,SarahKrug,parentadvocate,LiRetus,Kindergartenteacher,BethTaylor,Igniteteacher,BethOndra,intermediateteacher,KarenArnold,Musicteacher,PattiPaiz,SpecialEducationteacher,andmyself.OurcommitteeweighedtheprosandconsofeachoptionandconcludedthattheBuildingLifeExtensionwouldbestmeettheneedsofourcommunity.Ourbuildingisstructurallysound,butisinneedofamoreefficientandeffectiveheatingsystem,upgradedplumbing,anewgymroof,bathroomsforourkindergartenclasses,andreconfiguredinteriorspacestobetterserveallmembersofRabbitCreek.Iwholeheartedlyencouragetheschoolboard,oursuperintendent,andyourselftomoveforwardwithincludingRabbitCreekElementaryontheschoolbondpackageforthisupcomingspringelection.cc:GlenNielsen,ExecutiveDirector,ElementaryEducation

7

Turnagain Elementary School 3500 West Northern Lights Blvd., Anchorage, Alaska 99517

To: Mr. Mike Abbott

From: Mrs. Carissa Cote`

CC: Yuki Janson and Mary Cary

Date: August 27, 2014

Re: Turnagain Building Renewal

The Turnagain Building Design Committee met for two meetings, August 7th and August 12th. Twelve members composed the committee including parents, community members, and current and past staff members. The purpose of these meetings was to view the designs for the potential renewal of Turnagain Elementary School and make a recommendation to the school district. The initial meeting consisted of the selected design firm, NVision, presenting the five options to the committee (maintain current structure, BLE, IR, ER, and Building Replacement).

Option 1‐Maintane Current Building/Do nothing‐zero votes

Option 2‐BLE‐zero votes. Discussion included safety of main office location, not having adequate view of Northern Lights, or people entering and exiting the building. The location of the bus loop was inadequate due to the distance from the building, and logistics of keeping students and staff safe entering and exiting buses, as well as the negative impact on the neighborhood. Dangerous drop off/pick‐up, and designated crossing areas.

Option 3‐IR‐four votes *with elements of ER included. Safety was the main focus, eliminating the relos, and getting all students inside the building. Improving ventilation and air quality systems. Improved and energy efficient lighting. The creation of a loading/receiving dock, with Immersion storage. Many of the parents serving on the committee have their children enrolled in the Russian Immersion Program, and voiced a need for storage of materials. Increased square footage for the kindergarten classrooms (Russian immersion enroll twenty‐five students per class, and neighborhood enroll on average mid to high twenties per class).

Option 4‐ER‐eight votes. The following are justifications recorded as to why the ER was selected:

‐Need for improved ventilation system that includes heating and airflow

‐Designated classrooms for SPED students and teachers, not in relos, or (currently) in storage rooms

‐Safety, elimination of the relos housing staff and students

‐Loading dock essential for a school of almost 450 students

‐Larger Office area, allowing for support classes to be centrally located (SPED, IGNITE, ELL, etc.)

‐Additional square footage for kindergarten classrooms. Immersion kindergarten classroom enroll twenty‐five students per room, and neighborhood classrooms have average mid twenties the past four years. Increase kindergartens room to code.

8

2

‐Safer bus loop, removing parking spaces and replace with sidewalks, southeast parking lot

‐Safety, improved sidewalks and designated crossing areas, to reduce students walking sporadically across grounds

‐Safer drop‐off and pick‐up design, and two way traffic (enter and exit) at west end of school

‐Safer main entry, visual of Northern Lights and people entering and exiting

‐Nurse connected to main office, with a bathroom

‐Reduce/eliminate shared space (currently school psych shares with SPED, Counselor shares with ELL, Library also shares with ELL and counselor)

‐Additional Storage within classrooms

‐Addition of a conference room(s), currently no space for meetings

‐Replacement of all finishes due to school’s age and years of usage

‐Location of computer lab (housed within the Library) and specials would reduce interruptions to student’s learning

‐Additional toilets, not enough for community events with current design

‐Storage needs, specifically for the Russian Immersion Cultural and School events

‐Lighting, upgraded and energy efficient

‐Energy efficacy upgrades throughout the building

‐ Provides long‐term uplift of community morale

‐Improved and increased educational and cultural opportunities for students, staff, and families

Option 5‐Building Replacement‐Zero votes

Please note many members were supportive of an IR Plus design, but ultimately votes ER to maximize the vast amount of needs for the school. It should be considered that Turnagain is a large school, housing close to 440‐470 students the past decade. Enrollment has steadily increased within the neighborhood program. There are two programs under a single roof, neighborhood and the Russian Immersion Language Program. The dynamics of a language program pose uniqueness to our needs as reflected in use of space, storage, and a community center after hours and on weekends. Turnagain is used to house events for MIR, which encompasses Turnagain, Romig, and West High schools. We are asking the School Board and District Administration to strongly consider the ER option, but could suffice with an IR plus option.

Submitted by Carissa Cote`, Principal and member of Turnagain Elementary BDC Committee

9

2015 Bond Administration Recommendation

Project Title

Administration Options

Project Cost

Estimated % of Debt Reimb. Scope of Work Notes Current FCI FCI Impact Adjusted FCI

Capital Improvement Projects

Gladys Wood Elementary Intermediate Renewal plus classroom expansion, reduced contingency

$17,750,000 60% Encloses classrooms, replaces roof sections, interior doors and windows, improves front office security, upgrades mechanical systems, addresses structural deficiencies, improves interior and exterior lighting, renovates space for four kindergarten classrooms, encloses library, enlarges stage for music program, adds art/health, resource classroom, OT/PT spaces, expands classrooms from 820 sf to 1,000 sf.

0.32 0.19 0.13

Mountain View Elementary Building Life Extension plus Music room

$13,050,000 60% Site improvements, improves front office security, replaces casework, flooring, ceilings, doors, wall finishes, renovates primary classroom toilets, addresses structural deficiencies, replaces roofing sections, improves interior and exterior lighting, reconfigures stage to house music program.

0.41 0.28 0.13

Rabbit Creek Elementary Building Life Extension plus site improvements

$11,450,000 60% Site improvements, improves building security by relocating main office to face main visitors parking, replaces casework, flooring, ceilings, doors, wall finishes, reroofs Gym, MPR and 1983 addition, addresses structural deficiencies, upgrades mechanical systems, improves interior and exterior lighting.

0.38 0.22 0.16

Turnagain Elementary Intermediate Renewal, reduced contingency

$15,050,000 60% Site improvements, improves front office security, replaces casework, flooring, ceilings, doors, wall finishes, reroofs Gym, MPR and 4 classroom pod, addresses structural deficiencies, upgrades mechanical systems, improves interior and exterior lighting, improves site circulation, renovates library (IMC), renovates art/health and improves entrances.

0.32 0.21 0.11

Sub-Total for Capital Projects $57,300,000

2014 Emergent Projects

West High Pool Building Soffit $300,000 70% The soffit located in the pool area is damaged and in need of repair. 0.29 0.00 0.29East High Bus Loop $160,000 70% Replace 15,000 square feet of existing gravel roadway, curb, gutters and sidewalk. The

gravel roadway will be replaced with asphalt and the installation of new curb, gutters and sidewalk.

0.26 0.00 0.26

Fire Lake Elementary Roof $945,000 70% The metal roof at Fire Lake Elementary School is nearing the end of useful life. The roof area is approximately 44,500 square foot area. The metal roof will be removed and replaced with asphalt shingles.

0.21 0.04 0.17

Inlet View Elementary Domestic Water Improvements $545,000 70% The existing domestic water system through out the entire building. The system is failing and in need of replacement.

0.39 0.02 0.37

Sub-Total Emergent Projects $1,950,000

Grand Total $59,250,000

1

Proposed $59 Million Bond Proposition (April 2015)

ATTACHMENT F

Attachment G

[1] [2]Bond Est. State Annual Debt Per $100,000 State Debt Property

Proposition Debt Reimb. Prin. & Int. Assessed Val. Reimb. Per Taxes PerAmount By Project 5.00% 33,710,026,043$ $100,000 $100,000

Proposition I- Capital Improvement and Districtwide Life Extension Projects

Gladys Wood Elementary School Addition/Renovation Design & Construction, 60% Reimburseable $ 17,750,000 60% $ 1,424,306 4.23$ 2.54$ 1.69$

Mountain View Elementary School Addition/Renovation Design & Construction, 60% Reimburseable $ 13,050,000 60% $ 1,047,166 3.11$ 1.87$ 1.24$

Rabbit Creek Elementary School Addition/Renovation Design & Construction, 60% Reimburseable $ 11,450,000 60% $ 918,778 2.73$ 1.64$ 1.09$

Turnagain Elementary School Addition/Renovation Design & Construction60% Reimbursable 15,050,000 60% 1,207,651 3.58 2.15 1.43

Districtwide Emergent Projects, 70% Reimburseable 1,950,000 70% 156,473 0.46 0.32 0.14

Proposition 1 Total $ 59,250,000 60.33% $ 4,754,374 14.11$ 8.52$ 5.59$

[1] Municipality of Anchorage provided the 5% interest rate on September 10, 2014[2] Municipality of Anchorage provided the assessed values as of September 10, 2014

ANCHORAGE SCHOOL DISTRICTAPRIL 2015 PROPOSED BOND PROPOSITIONS

CALCULATION OF ESTIMATED TAXES FOR DEBT SERVICE ON $100,000 ASSESSED VALUATION

anchorage, alaska asd memorandum #46 (2014-2015) …file… · recommendation. the ciac deliberated...

Documents