Any opposed? It is unanimous. Thank you very much, Miss Kissle. And this one, a late addition. Um, we have a very similar item. We're looking at architect selection for the building D, uh, reconstruction construction at PV. Thank you. So, um, we're in, uh, an emergency situation with the fire at Pleasant Valley High School. uh we know that we are going to have to uh reconstruct the building. We don't know to what extent yet whether the building will have to be demolished or if there are parts of the building that can remain and then we build around build it back the way it was before. We do know that we need an architect and we need one really quickly. Um so we put out a request for qualifications uh to architects. We advertised it in the newspaper. They were due yesterday. We received two uh statements of qualifications.
One from Nicholls Melberg and Rosettto here in town in Chico and the other from HMC Architects out of Sacramento. I read both of the statements of qualifications and my recommendation is that we go with HMC Architects out of Sacramento. Their former name was Rainforth Grow RGA. Um although both both architects do have experience on the Pleasant Valley High School campus, which is a plus for both of them. HMC architects just finished renovating that building less than two years ago. So they are extremely familiar with it and we're going to have a very expedited process and the information in the statement of qualifications was very compelling that they understand what we need to do. There's a DSA rebuild program that they mentioned that they're familiar with. they have already um created an appointment with the state architect's office just in case they're selected tonight so that they can hit the ground running right away.
Um the other architect mentioned the building one time in their statement of qualifications and did not indicate that they were familiar with the DSA rebuild program which comes into play in these types of emergency situations. uh we do really like both firms but we feel strongly that HMC uh will serve the district very well in this situation. So that's my recommendation this evening. Thank you very much.
Any questions for Miss Kell on this one? You guys? Not a question, but thank you for the thorough explanation. I appreciate that. Yes, same. Do we have any public comment on this item? Seeing none, uh, do we have a motion regarding item 1026? I move approval of acceptance of the bid from HMC Architects for the DBU reconstruction construction project. Boy, that was an exciting night. I I was very close to that fire both times. It was quite spectacular and I had what I com I'm sorry I commented that night that I thought oh my gosh I just watched the reconstruction of debuilding because I you know we were we were involved in approving um when we got that grant and then had to stand there and watch it all burn. Pretty sad night. Yes, it was. I'll second Very well. We have a motion by member Robinson and a second by member Hayes.
And it's HMC is used to be reinforc. Yes. Okay. Thank you. Very good. Uh any further discussion or debate on this topic? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I.
Any opposed? It's unanimous and we will move on to what are we on? 1027 now which is bid approval for yeah it's it's all it's the Julie Kissle show um bid approval for the restroom projects package A okay so we have divided the restroom district-wide restroom projects into uh manageable bites and the first project that went out for bid was package A and it includes uh renovations at Chico High School, Chico Junior High School, Emma Wilson and Little Chico Creek Elementary School. Um, my bedtime reminder just went off. So, we received three bids. Um, Randy Hill Construction, United Building Contractors, and GO Construction, all local firms that we've had successful projects with. Um, Randy Hill Construction made an error in their bid form. Uh each public bid is required to uh have a subcontractor list where subcontractors who are being uh included in the bid that are performing more than one half of 1% of the project must be listed and there is really no wiggle room unless the general contractor says I'm going to self-perform that work which we have had that come up a couple of times but in this case.
Uh Randy Hill Construction is not um licensed to perform that work. It's abatement of lead. So um he had to step away. And then our second low bidder was United Building Contractors. So tonight we are asking you to award the project to the uh lowest responsive bidder United Building Contractors in the amount of 1 million1,794,000. Thank you.
Any questions? Seeing none, do we have public comment on this item? In the absence of that, do we have a motion regarding item 1027? I motion that um the bid approval go to United Building Contractors for the district restroom projects package A. I'll second that motion. Right. Motion by member Hayes, second by member Robinson. Any further debate? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I.
Any opposed? It is unanimous. Thank you, Julie, for everything. We're almost done with you here. Let's look at item 10.2.8, which is the charter schools measure K project requests for this this goround. Okay. So, the last Monday of May, the measure K charter school facility uh committee met and brought forward uh five projects for me to present to you this evening. Uh, Corb, but as you know, is building a new track and field on their campus. Um, so they're bringing forward three requests. One for a new multis-port scoreboard, one for discus netting and softball bases, and then one for removable field lighting system. So the costs that are represented in their request are for portions of that equipment that um can be removed and moved to another location. Um admittedly not easily, but none of the underground um footings, concrete, rebar, electrical, conduit, none of that is included in these costs.
Those will be on corbute to fund themselves and the above ground equipment will be funded by measure K. And then Sherwood Montasauri School had a cost overrun on a project that they brought to you previously for a new Bard unit um heating and air conditioning unit that goes on the back of one of their portables that they had to replace. So, they're asking for $2,000 additional for that and for um several security cameras for their their campus that's on the Chapman property. Um there has been many situations where uh both Chapman and Sherwood have wished that they had good uh cameras around the campus so they could see the going on. And so they think that um this would be a great project for both the security of both schools and I agree with them. So we're bringing forward those five projects for your review and hopeful approval tonight.
Thank you. Are there any questions? I I did have a question. Um so on the um the core but um if you go to the attachment for for that one um $195,000 is c is circled and then it's replaced by 130 and then on the next page it's um the 195 is struck out 130 and then below that. Can you explain that? Yes, they were asking for the whole installation and when we met at their meeting, I indicated that I couldn't bring forward a recommendation for underground um electrical and conduits and footings that are not movable. I see. Okay. Thank you. So, that's why they're reduced. Gotcha. Thank you. Um, do we know I'm trying to figure out how to will these uh sports equipment and uh facilities upgrades at Corbute be used by any organizations other than Corbute? I'm glad you asked that question because um I just spoke with their uh director, superintendent, principal u a couple weeks ago and she said their facilities are used all the time.
Uh their gymnasium is used all the time by community groups and they expect that their track and field and uh stadium will also be utilized by the community just like Chico Unified facilities are used all the time. So, will there be do they anticipate facility use fees and things like that or is this don are these donated? I'm just curious. They are allowed just like we are to um collect actual costs. How is that worded? Actual costs. And from my point of view, that's all well and good. Um, I remain nervous about upgrading a facility on a church campus um and the potential entanglements that that brings. Um, so I [Music] would it would be frustrating to find out that it was primarily used for instance for church activities um when it wasn't being used by the school. And I just it's a line it's a very fine line and one continues to make me uncomfortable.
I have no knowledge of the church using the property that the school rents from them. Um but we can certainly investigate that. I know that the timeline for these items getting them on order you know for the timeline of their construction project is very important. But um we can certainly ask. Well, it's awkward because I don't want to, you know, I'm not trying to single out any one group. It's just that there are, you know, um significant constitutional issues about where public money goes. Um so I was just curious honestly. Um, I hear you saying that they're going to be used like any other school facility where other outside community organizations can come and use it. I love that. That's awesome. Um, these are public spaces. Um, and that's my concern is it, you know, is is it on what is actually public land? No.
So, how do they manage who gets to does the organization that owns the land they're on get some say in who uses those facilities? And I don't know the answer to that one. Do you? like could the church say no this outside aid group can't come in to use the school facilities? I don't know the answer to that. Um I believe that is worth investigating. I'm not going to say no to this, but uh I would hate to find out that um we were exposing ourselves to any potential um litigation in the future for building facilities that were controlled where access was controlled by someone other than us. President Lando, I share your concern. Just to let Miss Kell know that there's another board member with that same concern. I also have a concern about whether or not you have any experience with the particular um scoreboard, sports field, specialties, field lighting.
How removable are they? You know, I I just this doesn't it doesn't quite fit a definition of something that you would consider removable and that concerns me. Um admittedly it's not easy. Uh I can use an example. Um, when we renovated Pleasant Valley High School Stadium across the street, it already had lighting and we replaced its lighting. So, we took down the poles, we took down the lights, um, and we stored them at the courtyard, right? And then we donated them to the, uh, the bike guys, the moto motocross um, BMX track. and then they didn't take them. Uh so um they're still sitting there in the yard. So you can take them down and store them and then install them elsewhere. Scoreboards very similar. Okay. Um, I gotta say that, um, this is one of the issues with bond dollars being utilized for all of our charter schools and those that are not on Chico Unified property.
It's really really hard for them to spend their dollars. [Music] Um, so it's it's difficult to um, you know, assess what can be what can be done. So yes, it's difficult, but yes, it can be done. Okay, thank you, Miss Kell. So I uh just texted Mary Cox, the uh CEO at CORE, and she said, "It is our facility. The church has no say. We rent it from them on a 30-year lease. They cannot dictate who uses the field or our equipment." Good. Thank you. And uh if you're watching right now, thank you very much, Mary. I appreciate you getting back to us so quickly. And I do. I love Mary. She's a great human being. Okay. Um having said all that, any other questions for staff? Yeah. Do we have any public comment on this one? Uh do we have a motion? I move approval of the project recommendation committee.
Is that what they're called? I'll second that. Measure K. Charter School Facilities Committee. Yes. I hear a motion from member Robinson and a second from Vice President Conchan. Any further debate on this one? And thank you all for your patience while we air our concerns. Um, all those in favor signify by saying I. I. I.
Any opposed? It is unanimous. Thank you. Thank you. Is that it for you, M? I think it is. It did it. I think it is. Good job. Thank you so much. Thank you. So, we are moving. Oh, wait a sec. I know. Oh, this is this is Miss Krueger next. All right. Moving on to 10.2.9, which is resolution 1692-25. This is an emergency declaration that requires procurement of restoration services and replacement equipment regarding PV. Yes. So, as you're fully aware, we had the fire at Pleasant Valley High School on April 25th. So the resolution in front of you this evening is asking um at least four fifths of the board to approve that there was an emergency and what this resolution would allow is for expedited procurement of our restoration services of measure of building D um once we can get in um as well as replacement equipment.
So, a concern is that um August is right around the corner and with lead time for getting some of the technology that was in our digital arts classrooms ordered um and here by August for our teachers that we would need to um order that immediately. And with board meetings, the next board meeting not being until June 18th and then the then a regular until July 30th, I believe. um those large gaps in time could inhibit our ability to order the requirements that our teachers need for their classrooms. So, this resolution allows for that expedited those orderings to be done in between the board um meetings. Um it will require that I come back at every regular board meeting going forward and give an update on that um for the June and July meeting and then um back in August um with with the resolution to hopefully dissolve at that point.
Excellent. Thank you. All right, the quick version. Anybody have questions about about this for Jacine? Any public comment? Seeing none, uh, do we have a motion on this item? I motion to approve. I'll second that. All right, we have a motion by member Olsen, a second by member Lando. All those um, any debate? All those in favor signify by saying I. I.