March 21, 2025 Joint Assembly-School Board Facilities Committee Meeting

I'm calling the Joint Assembly JSD Facilities Committee meeting to order. Miss Atkinson, will you do the land acknowledgement? Yes, Madam Chair. We would like to acknowledge that the city and borough of Juneau is on Tlingit land and wish to honor the indigenous people of this land. For more than 10,000 years, Alaska Native people have been and continue to be integral to the well-being of our community.

We are grateful to be in this place, a part of this community, and to honor the culture, traditions, and resilience of the Tlingit people. Gunalchéesh.

Thank you. Miss Hendricks, will you call roll?

Miss Wall. Present. Miss Atkinson. Here. Mr. Steininger.

Here.

Miss Sorenson? Here.

Miss Chony Haywood? Here.

Madam Mayor? Here. Excuse me, here.

And Mr. Muldoon is absent. You have quorum. Thank you. That brings us to approval of the agenda, um, One change, um, we are going to move the Jessica Heaney playground project above the potential JSD project for bonds. We're going to switch items 2 and 3.

And just as a note, um, Mr. Kelly is here. He is officially part of this committee, but, um, because he is conflicted out of the playground discussion, um, as I could Ms. Atkinson has again agreed to step in his place so that we can have representation on this committee. But when we get to the JSD bond projects, um, Mr. Kelly is going to join back onto the dais, and Ms. Atkinson can do what she likes. She can hang out as a non-voting member, or she can move on with her day. So, um, any other agenda changes?

All right, seeing none, that brings us to approval of minutes. You have the January 22nd, 2025 regular meeting minutes. Any objections or edits to those minutes?

Seeing none, those are so approved. That brings us to agenda topics. We are going to start with the Desmond Kahini Playground project. Um, Miss Koch.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I'm starting on page 13 of everybody's packet. There's a great and very informative memo there from our chief architect, Ms. Wren. I would add to that just a little bit of context in terms of the, maybe the fuller arc of how we got here, just as a reminder that Initially, there was a $75,000 CIP for design for a playground. There's never been, uh, we do not have a CIP for construction for any playground of any size.

There was only CIP for design, uh, and in general, I think the thought process was that $75,000 in that design was given thinking that maybe there'd be a playground in the $750,000 range. That was some of the, the thought process there. It's also really Important to note that with the iterations that have been requested for the different designs, that we have exhausted those $75,000 design funds. So just something for the body to keep in mind as, as we move forward. And then of course, once there's any decision on construction, that would need to be a funding source would need to be identified for that as well.

And then if it pleases the chair, I was going to see if Ms. Wren could walk us through at least Attachment A.

Thank you. Can you— is this working?

Okay, so, um, Attachment A begins on page 14 of the packet. Um, there's a summary table. Um, we looked at options between 575 $1.8 million total project cost, divided the difference equally, and then worked back, um, to a construction cost by, uh, dividing by 1.4, which is our standard factor we use in budget development based on construction costs to account for the total project cost, design fees, permitting, etc. And the summary is all the options that are in these scenarios have a concrete slab with play surfacing because we've heard loud and clear that, you know, just a concrete slab itself was not desired. And there already is a large concrete slab under the covered play shed at Santa Kiwini.

All options include an ADA-compliant sidewalk. In these, these budget ranges, we were not able to do anything with fencing. So, um, the option, uh, for the $880,000 total project cost and $1.5 million option costs, um, provide some equipment and also areas completed with play surfacing to receive future equipment. The idea being it would be easier to add equipment later than it would be to add concrete slab in place surfacing later. Um, the $880,000 option, uh, we could only get in one piece of K-5 play equipment.

Uh, the $1.2 million and $1.5 million options have equipment for both K-5 and Pre-K. So, and then, uh, behind the table is a graphic presentation of what we were able to include in those. And then, um, did you want me to speak to Attachment B at all, or—.

I, I would look to the chair and see, do you want us to pause and see if there are questions, or do you want us to keep going to Attachment B? Let's keep going to Attachment B and then we'll do questions. So Attachment B is a summary of the play facilities at all the schools in the district, elementary schools. Um, and it should be noted at Zanti Kahini, we also have middle schoolers and high schoolers, but Um, so it— you can see a comparison, and we did it alphabetically of field space, covered play area, which schools have pre-K areas, which schools have K-5 area. And I did— we did add a separate column for the options we're looking at in Zontikehini to identify finished play surface area that would be included in those options but don't have equipment.

Thank you. Um, and I'll, I'll note that there's also, um, a helpful memo here, um, from the board. Last, last we talked about this conversation, the direction was, um, to have staff work on these options and then bring it to the school board for, for review and comments. So we also have those. Um, I'm going to open it up for questions, um, to start.

So questions you have for staff, um, some of us might have some questions for the Board of Education folks given this memo. Um, so happy to take questions from committee members.

Mayor Weldon.

Thank you, Madam Chair, and I'm going to keep my video off just because where I am in a place in the airport. This is probably an obvious question, but why do we need concrete slab for a play area? That is interesting.

Madam Chair, that arose from the public input meetings. The existing site is a field that is not well draining. Clay surfacing holds up better over time. Alternatives to concrete slab with clay surfacing— I mean, some playgrounds have pea gravel, which is challenging when you want to provide an accessible playground.

We've had challenges with maintaining, um, the pulverized rubber chip playgrounds, and not only at JSD but at our CBJ Parks and Rec facilities as well. So the recommendation from the consultant and also the, um, desire of— from the public input was to have an accessible playground that was easily maintained.

Thank you. Other questions?

I'll ask one. Um, in the Attachment B, the comparison table between playgrounds, um, I found this, this helpful for me not knowing these sites. Um, the column student capacity is helpful as we compare facilities, though, Tazakahini, you know, my understanding is, has— it may have a lot of capacity for students but has not a lot of elementary school-aged students there currently who would be using it. So what, what is the current size of the K-5 student body at Zonta Kahini or the capacity for— yeah, both of those. Uh, Chair Wall, the current enrollment projected for FY26 for the Zonta Kahini campus, which includes Montessori Borealis, Juneau Community Charter School, and Yakushka Da Kahiti, is projected around 340-350 students.

And that is pre-K through 12th grade. There's about 86, a little over 80 students right now projected for Yokosuka Dakehi.

Other questions? Mr. Steininger. Just to follow on that, you said 300 for 350, but that's K through 12. And then was your 86, is that the answer to the specific question, K through 5? Or am I not understanding the answer correctly?

Pre-K through 5 would be Montessori Borealis and, uh, JCCS. So you're looking at approximately 250, 260 students, pre-K through 6 actually.

Mayor Walden.

Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. You asked one of my questions. Uh, my other question is, what are the music elements and are are they— is the reason they're included on everything is because they're inexpensive.

Through the chair, another request was to provide some playground elements for children who may not be as physically capable or as other students, um, and the music element is one of those interactive elements, and there's also a communications board Um, it is less expensive, obviously, than the swing set. Um, but yeah, I think that's why we were trying to include those components. Thank you, Mr. Steininger. Um, thank you. And at the last meeting, there was a $575,000 plan that was discussed.

Pretty austere. Um, can you describe the difference between that playground design and this $880,000 playground design? I'll do my best. We had 3 versions of that $575,000 design. Uh, we were not able to include the ADA sidewalk in most of those versions.

Uh, some of those 3 versions were concrete slab only. Um, so the point being is you can't do a complete playground for $575,000. Um, so they were insufficient, and I think we were only able to afford one piece of play equipment with that option. Mayor Weldon.

I just forgot to lower my hand. Sorry.

All right, I will, um, ask a question. I'm definitely curious from, um, either Mr. Hauser or the Board of Education folks here on this memo. Thank you for reviewing these in the Facilities Committee. Um, There are a number of comments here about insufficiency to make— to meet ADA requirements. I, I think my question is, do all of the proposals not meet standards?

Does the one point, the original proposal that was put together by the designer, um, lacking in the same ways that these proposals are lacking? And then certainly curious about our other playgrounds at elementary schools, how they compare to these comments that, that are here.

To Chairwoman's question, thank you very much. Um, in looking at the comments that were made, that really is looking at the Alaska School Design and Construction Standards that were established in 2022 and referencing some of those. I can speak to the design. One of the big things that was already stated earlier was ADA compliance and Accessibility on the playground, which, um, to speak to an earlier question from Mayor Wall regarding the concrete slab, what that is, is the concrete slab has the play surfacing on top of it. And so the concrete slab really is the foundation for the play surfacing, for the safety surfacing that would be fully ADA accessible to all the play equipments and elements that are on that surface that is being discussed as part of the playground, uh, kind of ground areas where all the equipment's on.

In regards to comparing the different playgrounds across the district to the Zonta Kahini design currently with the playground equipment and how they apply to the Alaska School Design and Construction Standards as of 2022, Many of the playgrounds were constructed prior to 2022, so there would be some, I would imagine, and I don't have a list and we'd have to go through and try to see if there's, you know, what those are. But because that latest iteration is from 2022 and many of the playgrounds that we have are prior construction, I would suspect that there are elements that wouldn't necessarily align with the 2022. But as we're looking at developing and designing and hopefully building a new playground for the Zontakini campus, for students in the Loma Creek area, we would want it to comply with the Alaska School Design and Construction Standards that were established back in— were updated, I should say, back in 2022. Okay. Yeah.

Thank you, Madam Chair. I would like to just add a comment. In the month of January, and our Facilities Committee is aware of this, we had the senior risk agent Auditor, I don't know his title, I'm sorry, and through our city insurance company. Lucas Davenport walked through all of our facilities as a security assessment. And then we also did a comprehensive playground safety assessment on 3 of our facilities.

And he also worked and trained our custodials on— our custodial staff, because they are doing daily, weekly, and monthly playground safety assessments. And part of that included not only looking at the size for entrapments or entanglements in the equipment, but also the fall surface. And we have some work to do for fall surfacing on some of our current playgrounds. Um, Ms. Wren mentioned pea gravel as an option. On the day that we toured and the assessment was held for one of our playgrounds, the pea gravel was frozen.

Technically, that playground should have been closed, and all of the areas with the pea gravel, all of the climbing equipment should not have been used by the students because the fall surface was not adequate. When the pea gravel is frozen, there's no catch. And certainly we have all of that information of a 60-inch depth, height, and all of those spans he was comparing. And it was eye-opening for me, new to the position, not knowing all of those intricacies that go into it. Um, certainly from the beginning of this project ADA accessibility has been a goal, and we would like to see moving forward that all of our playgrounds achieve that so that all areas of the playground are accessible to those who need ADA accommodations.

Just a quick follow-up on that, the, the original design that was presented by the contractor was They are there.

Were those design standards incorporated into that design? And I guess I'm struggling with the difference between a $1.5 million and a $1.8 million, and if the school board would have made the same comments on all of those proposals about lack of accessibility to that. So. The $1.8 million design from Corbus Design Group met ADA and drainage requirements. That was another point in this letter.

The $575,000 options, um, did not meet ADA. I believe they met the drainage requirements. The most recent 3 options between the high and low meet ADA and drainage requirements. And we've been basing those variations on the 65% design documents we got from Corvus, and they have a civil engineer on board. So, um, yeah.

Mayor Weldon.

So, still kind of a follow-up there, because I'm a little confused about the letter. Um, are none of the proposals except for the $1.5 million acceptable then?

Maybe we wouldn't mind hearing from our, uh, school board folks here on, on kind of high level what you were trying to, um, communicate. In this memo regarding, um, these, these proposals? And yeah, I'll stop there.

Well, um, we have a couple of concerns. I mean, from someone who has spent many hours supervising children on playgrounds Um, I would really hope that we would include people that supervise large groups of children on a playground because it's very different from taking your child to the park. I mean, when you have a park, you have, you know, on a big day, 50 kids on the playground. When you have a school, you can have up to 100 students on the playground.

3 Times a day. And when you're supervising them, you want visibility, which is why when you look at school playgrounds, say, as opposed to a park, you have individual play structures that are spaced so that you can supervise and see where children are and that they're not all balled up in one place. And you also have play structures where you can see them easily.

Or they're, if it's like a tube slide, they're not going to be in there a really long time.

So, and you have other than, I mean, swings are a place, and lack of swings is really a big, big thing for me. Because swings are where introverted students, which is probably 30 to 40% of our students, go to get fresh air and be alone. In addition to all the vestibular attributes that they provide for calming, uh, toys that spin are not necessarily a great playground option. So again, I would hope that we would look to people with experience with large numbers of students on playgrounds as we're— when we actually select however little or how much, you know, we spend. You know, I mean, I believe it's going to be one of those things that buying the biggest, cheapest thing possible is not necessarily the best choice.

The other thing is the fencing.

I live at Sunny Point.

I watch bears come under Egan Drive from the Schweitzer area. I used to watch it many times a summer or spring or fall walking my dog.

I taught at Mendenhall River for a long time, which also has, you know, bear— there's a lot of bears in the valley. It is important to have that playground be fenced so that it's safe. I mean, you're right up next to the woods, you're right up next to where you're going to have bears. We know they're there.

You can't just say, well, you know, we've kind of got like a fence, this other fence on one side, and it'll be fine. It's just not fine. You need to be able to control the area. So the lack of gates or fence panels is concerning to me from a safety perspective, you know, because I mean, it's— bears are a reality, and they would both at— even at Riverbend or Kuxkewuhin, you'd occasionally wind up with a bear that came through, you know, a gate. Auck Bay, their playground, they can close it off completely and they don't have to worry about that.

And I would hope that the way this one is designed, we will be able to close it off and not to worry about bear access, because once they get in, it's really hard for them to find their way out. I mean, at Mendenhall River, that was a big problem. I mean, you just have to wait until they found another hole in the fence to go, you know, opening the fence to get out. So, you know, having perimeter fencing is a big deal. I mean, again, it's not a park.

It's someplace where you're going to have students on the playground once the weather is better, before school, morning recess, lunch recess, after school potentially, so, or afternoon recess. So I mean, the functionality of the whole thing is important to me. You know, the surfacing is important, the play structures are important. Um, I appreciate that, you know, it's the city's dime, but You know, you can— what turns out to be on the playground that works best for a school, you know, money's money and it can be divided up and provide for whatever, however much it is, can provide for the best possible structures for the functionality, for the, the purpose.

Miss Tony, did you have anything you wanted to add? Thank you. Um, yes, so I serve as the site council rep for Montessori, which is one of the schools in this building, and the fencing has been an issue since the start of the school year. Um, in addition to bears, also, um, keeping bears out but keeping the students in. Um, you know, if you have 100 students on a playground at any given time, um, or more, um, trying to keep track of everyone is a challenge.

Um, and I think that there's a stream fairly close by, so there's just some other concerns. It's definitely been one of their biggest priorities is trying to get adequate fencing this year for that site as it currently exists, let alone any of the improvements that might be had. I think also our concern is just making sure that while I think this asset would be kind of dual purpose and that it would serve as a park for the community but also is a playground for the schools that are in that building now, I think that we need to make sure that we're maintaining those construction standards. I don't know them well, um, and, uh, but I think that we've linked the document, but making sure that we have taken those in and that they're adequate. Thank you.

Miss Atkinson. Uh, thank you, Madam Chair. I, I was actually going to ask, um, some, some of the concerns, uh, you brought up, Miss Rinson, were, uh, I don't I guess, didn't really touch too much on the design standards and what specifically might need to change on that front, because obviously we did really want this to meet ADA requirements. Um, I, I don't know if that's something either of you can speak to, because I get that this might be a little in the weeds, but, um, do you know what those changes would look like when you were looking at this in the Facilities Committee?

I think that the surfacing is the primary ADA compliance piece. My concerns speak from the idea of functionality for school usage as a school playground. Um, if you go to any of our playgrounds on the weekend, any of our school playgrounds, you'll see that they're operating as, quote, parks, if you will, for student play. On the weekends. I mean, in the summer when, you know, ball fields and things are in use, there's many younger children playing on playgrounds.

So I mean, a playground is a playground. Um, the, uh, but if you were to think about how something that is completely a park is used, it is not the, the play equipment and things are not used and supervised in the same way that a school playground is used. I mean, some of the pieces might be the same, but there's a different level of usage and durability that's required.

And Miss Sorenson, just for clarity, did you have— do you have these same concerns about the original design that were presented by the contractor at $1.8 million, or is it kind of—. Well, I've always been concerned about the giant play structure, but I mean, again, I feel like that is a cost that could be examined and get input from people who spend, you know, many hours of their job performance supervising playgrounds. So I'm— and now we have, you know, more safety information too. So, but my concern is about the— I don't want money spent that won't be used in a way that provides the most purposeful equipment and, and whatever for the playground. I mean, I am not a playground design expert, but I have— I mean, and the other part of this, I mean, I, I too am a board liaison for the charter school, and the charter school is you know, really looking at if we can, you know, how, how there we can look for other community support to help, help with the project.

But the, the, my, my biggest concern is that it's a safe, useful school playground. And the 270-some kids is only probably about 50 students less than several of our elementary schools. So, you know, it's not that this is just a teeny bunch of kids and we're wanting to build this big, giant, expensive playground for a few kids. I mean, it's, it's about the same number of children with the capacity to grow that you know, our other schools are.

Thank you, that's helpful. Um, well, I will definitely take, um, suggestions on how we move forward. I mean, I think the challenge here, as I see it, is that, you know, a design came before the assembly and they said— the assembly, the vibes from the assembly was, we don't have or don't— we don't have and/or don't have the appetite for spending $1.8 million on a playground. And so I think our steps were to try to figure out, is there— and we went maybe too far in one direction where we chose a number that wasn't getting us any playground. And so we're trying to figure out how we move forward between those two, those two points.

If, if the answer is we can't build a playground for that amount of money, then I think the assembly will want to know that, but I don't think that's going to result in them redesigning the process with more dollars. So I'm definitely— I don't have a suggestion on a way to move forward, but looking for it from my committee members. Mayor Weldon.

I don't know if I can help with that either, because I'm just— I'll be honest, I'm totally confused. Um, after listening to Ms. Sorensen and also reading their letter, I'm getting the impression that the only one that satisfies them is the $1.8 million one, and I don't even know if that includes a fence. So does this mean we have to start over again and put a fence up first and then start going down through one of these phases? I mean, that's what I see is it's a phased project, but it doesn't sound like the school district is behind a phased project, so I'm looking for clarification on that.

I don't think that the school district is opposed to a phased project. I think that the— some of the big pieces are, uh, ADA compliance, a useful play area, and a perimeter fence that provides playground safety. Um, and my suggestion would be to consult with potentially the school district to determine what are the most used, most desirable play structures and how we can get them phased in on this, whatever the, the potentially $1.5 million plan is.

Because I mean, we, we need to move forward, or these children who are there now will be graduating from high school and still playing in the street. Thank you, Miss Sorensen. Um, I have Miss Atkinson and then Mr. Steininger. Uh, thank you, Chair Wall. Uh, I am definitely not opposed to a phased approach.

I think that's— we talked a lot about that last time. Um, And I'm hearing about the fencing, and that makes good sense to me. I am a little hesitant to spend any more design dollars than we already have. We allocated a good amount, and I don't— if we're not spending money on a playground at that point, it feels like money out the door with no real results back. So I agree, I want to move forward.

I am a little hesitant on going back to the drawing board in any way, shape, or form. 'Cause I think, you know, certainly maybe think some things need to be tweaked. Maybe we need to add fencing. That's one thing, but I think I'd rather move forward with the phases that we have here than twiddle our thumbs for a little while longer and spend more money. Mr. Steininger.

So, I guess I'm going to echo the mayor's statement of a little bit of confusion. Um, in terms of listening to the comments from, from Miss Sorensen and some of the design requirements that you brought up regarding fencing, you talked about the spinners not being a very popular playground feature and some of the sightline issues that you brought up. And I think all of those are very valid perspectives on the design. And I guess my question is for Miss Ryan. In terms of, you know, how these designs were formulated and how different features were prioritized to get to these options that we have in front of us.

You know, like, it looks like a spinner was prioritized over swing areas in terms of, you know, it being featured in the middle chunk, and the lack of fencing on A and Z, the designs. How were, you know, some of these use case scenarios brought up by Ms. Sorensen incorporated into the design process?

Go ahead, Miss. I'm going to defer to Director Germain. She wants—. I can speak to it as well, but she has some comments. Yes, thank you.

We did form a committee which included the principals of both programs that are currently housed in Santa Kahini. We also had Tamara Rocroft representing the neighborhood and myself. Members of the engineering department, and then also Mark Edeas, who's our maintenance supervisor. We held 2 public meetings, and at those public meetings, Corvus Design presented at the first, um, options of play equipment. And we actually had kind of the dot voting version where we had students present, which may or may not have been a complete representative group.

It was a meeting open to the public in the evening, so those who elected to come. And then also parents, and then we additionally put out a survey and showed the designs. So electronically, people could share their comments. And then at a second meeting, when we were at the 65% design phase, we shared that fencing was costed out. And in just our committee work and looking at what would come in the final design, we felt like there might be other funding sources for, fencing and to prioritize the play surfacing and the play equipment, recognizing that fencing would still ultimately be an obligation.

So I think that could speak to some of the confusion on that part of it. And then really our priorities going into it were the ADA accessibility in the fall surfacing and then also the maintenance of the equipment, because what we've heard from our maintenance department really is we need to keep up the equipment. And there have been items that we've had around the district at other times that have been taken out. So for instance, there's a big thing at Harborview that had all this webbing and it was really cool, but when it came time to replace the webbing, it was cost prohibitive. So thinking of that, just to make sure that we can maintain the safety of the play equipment.

And the spinner came into the design because it got the stars and the dots from the public input.

I do want to move us on because our next item is, is also time sensitive. So, not— I'm looking to the committee for where we want to go from here on this. We can hold it in committee for future discussion. We can forward on options to the assembly. We don't have to forward one, we can forward multiple ones.

I'm open to any of those, but I do think that we have to put it, you know, make a move to our next agenda item here soon.

Miss Atkinson, thank you, Madam Chair. I think we should move this on. I don't know how much more corrective work we should do in this committee, so I have a motion if that's. Perfect. Um, go ahead.

Uh, okay, perfect. I would, uh, forward to the full assembly the $880,000 total project cost option and ask unanimous consent.

Any objections to that motion? Mayor Weldon.

Thank you for that, and I appreciate Ms. Atkinson's motion. However, if we're confused at this committee, it makes no sense to forward this to the assembly where we're just going to be as confused there. I think more conversation needs to happen between us and the school district, and maybe not necessarily at this committee, but it— I just can't get a clear vision of what they want. It seems like they want a fence, then they want parts of this, but I, I keep feeling, and I apologize for this, just speaking directly, I keep feeling that to them it's one, the $1.8 million option or nothing. So I'm going to object to moving this on.

I don't think it does us any good to go to the full assembly without clarification of exactly what we're looking at.

Any other comments on the motion?

Miss Atkinson, if the mayor and other folks want to keep discussing this, maybe not in this committee. I'm happy to remove my motion. I was just trying to move the conversation along, not trying to rush anybody.

Um, would you—. Do you want to remove your motion or remove my motion? Okay. Mayor Weldon, do you have a motion?

I don't think we need a motion to keep it in committee, but that would be my motion if you need one. All right, anyone object to keeping this in committee and reconvening?

I'm happy to talk to the school board folks offline to make sure that, um, we are— when we come back to this conversation, that we have a bit more of a productive conversation, which is on me. Um, I should have had that conversation before, so happy to do that. All right, I am going to move us on. Seeing no objection to that motion to keep it in committee, which brings us to, um, JSD projects for bonds. Mr. Kelly is going to come join us at the dais.

I'd love to get a time check from committee members. I know these are always lunchtime meetings that happen. Sometimes they go long, sometimes they don't. Are there people with a hard stop at 1 o'clock?

Okay, I'm going to try to keep us close, not too far, but just want to make sure that's not the expectation. Okay, um, that brings us to Miss Koch, I believe, and I may also, if it pleases the chair, sort of pass the baton to, to Mr. Maine. She was the The author of the memo.

Thank you, Chair Walt.

So the conversation from a previous finance meeting was to look at the option of a bond at the $5, $10, and $15 million range, recognizing that the moratorium on school debt bond debt reimbursement may be lifted or not continued. Um, so in speaking with City Architect Ms. Wren and knowing our ongoing list of maintenance projects, it seemed like possible bonds coalesce around 3 main project types. And so that is what is included in the memo, and specifically looking at those as roofs, heating and ventilation, and safety and security projects. So what you have included is a copy, um, page 8 is the departmental CIP that was approved by our school board and submitted in December, and then page 9 is that same document with some extra comments, and that was following the conversation that Ms. Wrenna and I had right before the March 11th school board meeting where I presented the concept of the 3 main topics being— or areas for the bond— roof, HVAC, and safety and security. So looking through how those CIP projects would fit.

And then the second page there is page 10, and this is a list that was submitted with our CIP, our deferred maintenance planning list, and The school district greatly appreciates not only the help of the engineering department and the city architect, but also the $1 million deferred maintenance fund that we do receive annually. And my understanding is that is currently voter-approved through FY '28. So this is our planning list of things so that we're organized and working ahead to achieve that deferred maintenance. And then the next item is number 11, and this was prepared by Ms. Wren. On proposed roof bond package.

The priority listing for us from our maintenance department really is the JDHS partial re-roof, and that is something that has been presented to our DEED CIP, so the Department of Education, and also to the CBJ CIP. And then next would be Glacier Valley And then following that, although Sayik Gastineau has recently had a re-roof, it didn't include some sections. So that would be the roof for the sections not previously included. So over the gym, library, entry, and then to the covered area. And then the last page from what I submitted is page 12 in your packet.

And I will apologize in advance, I added an extra zero in one spot, but the math does total up. Um, so Verkada is a vendor, and I've met with, um, the city— I'm sorry, Parks and George's— okay, yes, thank you. Um, so with the Parks Director and with Building Maintenance, and Verkada is our city standard, or is moving to be the city standard. So that is why we have worked with them for security cameras to get an estimate. Currently, the school district has 189 security cameras.

Not all of them are in working order, and they are on 3 platforms. So any use of a security camera, you're either toggling on your phone or computer. I can speak personally— Floyd Dryden has 2 systems. So anytime I would look through cameras, we need to go through 2 different systems. And our hope in such a bond or project would be to achieve one cohesive system which would also be in line with the city, and that is also at the hope of JPD.

If there were to be an active intruder situation or something from that aspect of safety and security, we would want to be able to share our cameras immediately with first responders. And as a reminder, we did have in January the comprehensive security assessment, and this was a recommendation there, along with some other projects that are listed, um, would be entrances. So updating for schools that don't have the double entrance where you can see, identify, and buzz someone into the secured areas of the school.

Questions on this item for staff or each other? Mr. Kelly. Thank you. I'm just curious. I noticed that Glacier Valley has a warranty expiration of 2006.

The others are much more recent, but it is listed as the second priority. Uh, why? Just kind of be able to get an idea about the thinking around that. Is there anything that's something that's a little more imminent, perhaps with JDHS?

The quick answer would be the amount of water coming through into the school and the frequency. So, at JDHS, there are constant ongoing leaks, um, the Glacier Valley leaks. Currently are in areas that do leak to outside. And then the safety concern is that they're creating large ice rinks, kind of where, where the playground kids line up. And this year, with our mild winter, it wasn't as much of a concern, but certainly in recent, in recent winters, there's been large rinks.

Thank you.

Mayor Weldon, uh, this is actually a question for Ms. Koch. Are any of these, um, projects listed in their CIP included in our CIP list?

Through the chair to Ms. Weldon, uh, I, I couldn't vouch for each individual, but I do agree with this process where they had looked at the 6-year— they identified 6-year 6-year CIP as a place, the logical place to start for what the priorities are. So it wasn't something that was new, but I think many of these projects are on those unfunded out years in the 6-year CIP.

Mr. Steininger. Thank you. On the security camera item, The— was this project ran through anyone at department or at the law section? I'm just vague recollection of past discussions on bondability. I don't know if software licensing is allowable or not.

I could be 100% wrong, but just curious if it's been ran through them, or maybe make that as a note to check into. I can speak to that. You're correct, software licensing is not allowed, but purchase and installation of equipment and the front-end, you know, workstation or brain, computer brains, is an allowable capital expenditure.

I'll ask a question. Um, the trick with putting together bond proposals— I mean, there's several tricks, but some of it is, you know, how do we create packages that are going to appeal to the voters? Some of these have other potential funding sources, um, included, but it's unknown whether those will come in or not. Maybe you could speak a little to how that— those question marks would play into whether we would want to put those on bond proposal.

Thank you. Through the chair, I've never written a bond, so I don't know that I can speak knowledgeably to that. But regarding additional funding sources, um, I think a great example is the HVAC. Um, we have received a grant through, um, the Alaska Municipal League, and it's the Renewing American Schools grant. And currently we are only funded in the audit, which is the first phase and there's no guarantee of the construction phase.

And that our, our HVAC system is in need of tremendous help as far as our ability to control and also maintain. And I say this partly because my husband works for the maintenance department, and so I hear about it frequently, but also in hearing from our maintenance supervisor, additional contracts that we've put out, we've hired companies to help us and train our staff, but also just the controls, the computers are outdated and not very energy efficient. And then also looking at, for example, our JDHS boiler experienced a catastrophic failure, which we have are patching and replacing a section and then ultimately replacing both of the boilers through our deferred maintenance funds.

I don't know if that completely answers your question, but my thoughts related to it. That was helpful. And I think maybe a follow-up for Ms. Koch. I imagine if we were to put together a bond proposal, we would, you know, there's a level of specificity that we include, but there's a level of vagueness that we include so that if voters pass something that fits into these categories, but funding is found to cover a particular piece of it, that we could still include roofs, HVAC, safety and security, and deal with the uncertainty that way. Is that—.

Madam Chair, I would agree with that, uh, that characterization and trying to have that balance of being communicating to the voting public with some specificity about what those funds would be used for, but not totally painting ourselves into a corner. There's a little bit of— there's some space in between those 2.

Thank you. Mayor Weldon.

Ms. Germain mentioned a capital improvement fund. How much money is in that fund?

Um, this is Jean. Um, for the deferred maintenance fund, um, I think it's currently funded at $3.5 million, but we've allocated all but a million, a little over a million of that. Um, we just added the replacement of both boilers at JDHS, which obligated $1.5 million right there. So, um, the school district is spending it well.

Mayor Weldon, do you— did you have a follow-up? I do, because if you look at the chart, it shows that the boiler room renovation is set for FY27. So that's— is it already been spent or is it just allocated to be spent?

So the CIP request was put together before the boiler failed at JDHS, and the one that failed was the newer one of the two. So we decided it was prudent to replace both at the same time because ideally you have 2 boilers for redundancy. So you're never reliant on just one for a school full of kids. So that request could be revised for the out years. Um, there's still a balance of another— well, the total renovation for the boiler room at JDHS is estimated at $3.5 million.

So there's still a lot of equipment, piping, et cetera. There's a chimney stack that has been needed to be replaced for years. So we can revise the total dollar amount in the out-year request to reflect the balance of the work needed to be done.

Thank you.

Any other questions?

Mr. Kelly, um, thank you. I appreciate all these options being provided to us, you know, roofs, HVAC, safety, and security. And I appreciate all the helpful responses we've gotten from both school district and our own staff. I would be interested perhaps in hearing from the school board members at the table which of these they— perhaps they see a particular priority on or if they have any thoughts.

I guess I'm just kind of opening the door to get your thoughts on— We have the 3 different, you know, the roofs, the HVAC, safety and security. And so, um, I'm kind of interested in getting your perspective on which of these perhaps, um, you have, you prioritize, or which of these, um, you've talked about, anything that you really want to share.

I think it's hard to prioritize roof over HVAC over safety, right? I mean, we have a number of issues that are concerning for parents as far as, like, safety and having those measures. Um, I am happy that we now have the audit, um, through the insurance company, um, to provide us with more information on how to move forward with that. I mean, I think that to me, a roof is always important because it protects the rest of the structure. Um, and so leaking and water in a climate like ours, um, is, you know, I think that that has to be a priority, but we're also cold, right?

We're cold climate. And so having adequate heating and Dealing with, you know, catastrophic failures of boilers is also like, it's just stuff that has to be done. Um, so it's good. I feel like it's a hard question to answer. Understood.

Thank you.

I think too, when we talk about, um, our HVAC systems and then being outdated I think that it's important to understand from— I mean, having served on the Facilities Committee, that our maintenance department is shopping on eBay to replace technology because it is so dated that otherwise entire systems won't work without it. So, I mean, so they're shopping for equally dated equipment that that still works in order to— So I would like to echo what Ms. Choney-Haywood said about roofs are important. Heat is really a big deal, and many of our schools do, you know, have maybe one window that opens in a classroom because we've been really energy conscious. So we need to have— and plus we learned in the last pandemic that air circulation is important. And air filtration is important.

But it's also important to be able to have the capacity to monitor our buildings and keep both the buildings and the children in the buildings safe. And being able to have, um, the ability for first responders to be able to be able to access our security systems and actually to have the building be able to monitor its security systems without having to switch between different programs or actually have— having all of their cameras working, but they can't really replace them because the system that the camera is part of is outdated. So, I mean, they're all, they're all important.

Thank you, Mayor Walden. Thank you, Madam Chair. So, looking at the paperwork, um, I see that they're only proposing one bond package for $5 million for the roofs. So I don't know if the other stuff is just Hey, this is what we're still looking for, or I don't see anywhere that it says, well, here's our $10 million idea, here's our $15 million. I don't know if they're looking at potentially a $7 million with the roofs and the security cameras.

So, um, I would like to see more concise packages of what they're looking for. Mayor Weldon, I think it was the charge of this committee to come up with those 3, um, those numbers. And so I, I believe that if we need more information from staff, we can, um, we can ask for it. But there is a, um, kind of what I would say a summary at the top of, um, page 9 of kind of what was identified by staff as kind of potential needs And maybe I'll look over at our staff and see if that's— if I'm characterizing their understanding of this process correctly.

Can I have a follow-up then?

Uh, let me see if they have any response to that in case I'm mangling something. Yes, I mean, I think that this is sort of scalable and, and both, uh, EPW and I believe the school district were looking for a little bit of, uh, also your guidance on what level of bond package you'd like for us to present.

Mayor Weldon, do you have a follow-up?

I do. Then, so I'm a little— they'd use the word confused again, but so on page 8 with the Capital Improvement Plan, 6-year priorities. Is all of this— some of it seems to be funded and some of it doesn't. So that's confusing me. Maybe it's all unfunded, but it seems to be funded in part.

And so I guess I'm confused.

I'm so confused on their ask and where, where things they're asking for. So 'Cause on page 9, it's the same thing. You know, they're, they're saying it looks to me like they've already planned on what they need, what year, and some of it sounds like it's been funded. But I guess I'm not quite clear of that. The buckets don't seem to me as clear as they, I need them to be.

Mr. Hauser. Yeah, thank you to the chair. Um, just a couple highlights, and I think it was, uh, mentioned earlier, utilizing the department capital improvement plan, 6-year plan, is kind of a basis to go through. Um, at this point, short of the deferred maintenance funding that's in there, the other items are, are not funded. Uh, we did receive the Renew American Schools grant for controlled machining funds for the HVAC systems that are identified on Item 3 on that priority list, but there is a requirement of that 25% match, and those funds are not guaranteed yet.

And so at this point, this is our plan moving forward, but none of the funding has actually been identified and allocated towards the list, the CIP list that we have listed here. Looking at the bond is an option to be able to provide if if we were able to put together a $5, $10, or $15 million bond, be able to provide that certainty if it went before the voters and they voted to approve that. What we're trying to do is identify the highest priority items that we know we've got. As you saw on, I believe it is page 10, a much longer priority list of items that could definitely, if we were able to get a bond passed, to address some of these higher priority lists that are on the CIP list, we have other items that we could continue to address. Roofs, HVAC, safety and security items are definitely at the top, and we believe we'd be able to put together a bond that would address that and still be able to have items, if it were to pass, to move up into that priority list once those get guaranteed funding.

Mr. Hauser, and of course, many of these things, if they continue to— if we don't fund them by bond, will be on the CIP in the future, and maybe in the assembly's CIP. But we're— we— the assembly is not— you know, that CIP list is just a list until the assembly passes a budget. So, um, Mayor Weldon did that clear, clear up For you, go ahead. Not 100%. Because like on page 10, where they have their deferred maintenance planning list, there's no dollar signs, so other than the top 2.

So are they saying we just want the top 2? Because that's not how bond works. We don't make it that big that it could be used for anything. So I'm still struggling with what exactly. We're trying to get to, but hopefully you guys will lead me along.

I would say I think they're looking for direction. If you're— if by them you mean staff, I think they're probably looking for direction from us as well.

I meant the school board members. I do not think the school has approached us with an ask for this. Um, I do not think that is what is being represented here. I believe this is a depiction of what staff have come up with based on the guidance that we gave them to— if that's helpful, Mayor Walden. Thank you, that is.

Okay, so usually I had a lot of questions walking into this, so usually I would be more prepared for what our motions might be. I'm feeling more confident with potential directions now that I've heard answers, but haven't— don't know where everyone else is. Does people have an idea on how they would like this conversation to move forward? And I will say for the school board, just so you know, if we— the assembly has asked several committees to come back with ideas on bond proposals for this coming October. Our deadlines will be coming up here to make those decisions.

I think any work that we do now could be helpful in the future if the assembly does not put this or any bond on the ballot, but we would, you know, it is something we need to, um, you know, put a more outline on soon to get where we need to go before a bond deadline. Mr. Kelly.

Mayor Weldon, I'll go to you first.

Sorry, my keys are sticking. Well, it seems to me that they have a $5 million bond already out there, so I would say our next step is try to identify things to go into a $10 million bond and then to a $15 million bond.

Do we have other ideas? Mr. Mr. Steining, or, um, yeah, and I think that's kind of just reformatting what the mayor just said, um, because on page 9 we have the, you know, roofs 2 to 5, HVAC 2 to 5, safety security 2 to 5. We have the roof list really well laid out. I like that.

I'd like to see that for the HVAC and safety and security, but then also maybe, you know, there might be an HVAC project ranked higher in your minds than the Gastonau roof project. So just across all three, how would you rank those so that we could drop down to $5 million, $10 million, $15 million, or wherever we land? That makes sense. Makes sense to me. I think hearing from our school board members All of these are in these— we could obviously do a 5 at, you know, on roofs, roofs plus HVAC, you know, all 3, or we could say all of these are going to combine all 3 of these priorities.

And so what I'm hearing from school board members is, you know, if we can put a package that includes all that, that's preferable. So, um. Maybe that, you know, is the right way to go.

Mr. Kelly, so then would it kind of be your intent, and do you think we'd have enough time then that we would possibly refer this back to the School Board Facilities Committee and have them come back with those proposals? I think we could bring this to the assembly based on this conversation. I think my real question is for you all. At what point does the school— you are just 2 members, I don't think, you know, at what point would the school board want to review? You know, if we came up with a bond proposal, sent it back to the school board for comments, or what, what involvement would you like to have from the full body?

Well, I appreciate Mr. Steininger's suggestion. That we flesh out roofs, HVAC, safety and security, uh, a little bit more completely for you and get it back to you. I mean, and run it, run it past the board so that the board all understands it, but get it turned around as quickly as we can so that we're sure of what we're asking for specifically, and you're sure of what we're asking for specifically, and our best imaginary guess of how much it will cost.

How do staff feel about that general direction? Sounds like we'll send it back over to schools in the school board for more discussion, um, and then bring it on to the full assembly. I don't see a need for this committee to get together again, um, feels like it might be more efficient to make sure the school board's okay with those 3 topics at various 5, 10, 15 levels, and then the assembly can have that conversation. Mayor Weldon. Uh, thank you.

And just looking at numbers quickly, one thing they may want to consider, not other than just saying may, um, the roofs, it looks like they could do 2 boilers because it sounds like the JDHS has already been done, and the security cameras. I think we lost you. Can you hear us? I can hear you. Can you hear me?

We see you, but we can't hear you. Bummer. Oh, we can hear you now. Sorry. I would say just looking roughly at the numbers, $10 million would be the roofs, the 2 HVACs, or the 2 boilers.

Or HVACs. I can't remember now because I'm not looking at the screen right now because JDH is done and the security system, I think that would come up with a 10 and then they could come up with something for 15.

Just help trying to help with— oh, you can't hear me again. We can.

Maybe my question is for staff. Do you— what direction are you looking for right now that we haven't given? And, uh, yeah, thank you for the question, Cheryl. Um, I, I think from the district's perspective and looking over at the engineering, I mean, I think we have a good clear expectation of what, um, we need to put together, uh, to bring before the assembly and show for the board, uh, to move forward. So thank you.

Great. You can let us know what that is. No, just kidding. We feel good too. Okay.

Um, uh, next meeting date, we will figure that out, but I will try to get something on the calendar for the playground as soon as we are able. Um, I know you all are in budget We're in budget, so we'll do our best to get something, but I know there's no reason not to wait. So, um, look for that soon. And other than that, we— I will move to adjourn.