001Good evening everyone. How's everyone doing? We have just transitioned from our schoolboard meeting and coming to our study session where we're picking up our conversation on um getting background information on community input around options for our bond and levy um ballot initiatives coming up this coming February. So, um, I'm going to turn it over to Superintendent Irish in a sec. I, um, we were talking about kind of framing today. The fact that this study session is after the board meeting is a little helpful if we flexibility of time. We don't want to, you know, be here till midnight, but um, yes, but that does give us more flexibility. So, I know director Hayes is totally ready to be here till midnight. So um when I >> right I know I know director Gord and I
002have a deadline so we will not but um so we definitely have still have to pick up the conversations around the background with the with all the details on the bond. Um, and then I do though want to leave some time at the end because then we'll want to transition as a board from fact gathering, information gathering to starting to process, right? Because we have one more study session um before our next meeting in two weeks. And so we h we have to kind of kind of move it along. So that's kind of where what we're thinking. Again, no strict time, but I just want to kind of set the expectation that after we we finish with information gathering, we'll start to chat as a board. Does that sound good? >> Okay. Do you want
003Do you want to kick it off? >> Sure. Can you hear me? >> There's >> Hello. Hello. There we are. Okay. Uh, thank you, President Cass. I just want to extend a thank you to the team for um listening to the board's uh feedback at the last session, listening to their questions, and they have worked really hard to revise and add more information to this slide deck based on the questions and the feedback and the discussion that you had at the last study session. So, thank you team. Very excited to share um the the the next third of um or the the the final third of our presentation around capital projects and um turn it I guess. Are we starting with you Forest or No. Okay. Okay. Because I was looking at this. Oh, yeah.
004Back to Dre. Okay. Thank you, Dree. >> Okay. Wonderful. Well, thank you everyone. Um, so we are going to jump back into the presentation on the on the capital bond um planning task force work. And so at our last meeting, we had the opportunity to go through some background and then also talk about what we call the $450 million level. Um we're going to take a step back just talk about the stack, what the stack represents, what it means in the context of the work that the task force did and the um the information that's going to be presented today and then also uh um thoughts for your consideration and then the team is going to go into a little bit more detail on some of the elements um as well as talk through the
005other levels that we didn't get to. So, uh, what I would just want to ground us in right here is this stack that we presented over the last two, um, study sessions and really highlight the fact that this stack represents, we call it the stack, um, it represents the prioritization of uh, potential projects uh, based on the information that was presented and discussed during the nine months that the capital bond planning task force had together. So the levels that we had kind of began to give an overview of are lines that we've drawn that group work together. But each um each line item in the stack is prioritized based off of the order in which uh the group had decided these projects would take place. So if for instance you did not want to draw
006the lines where we did, you could still reference the order of the projects based off the way this order exists. So, we really just wanted to highlight that there were some questions last time about the particular um uh stack, the particular line items that we had presented and the fact that there was a 450 level, the 6 and7 and so we just wanted to make sure that it was clear that this list is prioritized in order. Um so with that said uh we are going to jump uh back to talk a little bit more about the first um section of projects um everything that leads up to this $450 million level and go into a little bit more detail about that work and what it entails. Um and so with that I will pass it
007on to William. William Okay, so last time we talked briefly about the projects in the list and so uh we thought we' just do a quick recap in case there were any questions that kind of got missed due to lack of time uh last time round. So um the first major project that we discussed and that was prioritized were the two-phase projects. So, Ingamore High School phase 2, Leota Middle School Phase 2. Um, Leota will be a a fully brand new complete project at the end of it. Uh, Leota will be and Inglemore will be um uh sub substantially complete in regards to phase two. Um, with potentially around about 120 million of building work remaining um for what would be a phase three. Um we would establish uh new vehicular pack patterns, new bus
008uh drop off, new parking as part of phase 2 uh for Inglemore. Uh and then depending on the scope uh the field um may also be renewed as part of that phase two also. Uh and then we go on to the facility condition assessment. Before we do that, I want to mention in that um survey that we did, community survey, one of the things that was prioritized in that or that resonated with um the people who were interviewed was completing the projects that we had started. So these are those phase 2 pieces and for sure it's why it's number one for the task force as well. It was we've started these projects. we need to um kind of see them through. >> Thank you. Uh so facility condition assessment. So in line with the OSPI
009study and survey, um we went through all of our properties. We hired a third party consultant to uh look at the structure, look at the uh mechanical, the electrical, the building, uh the parking lots, the building exterior, and then to create a list of deficiencies. And then we also had a cost opinion generated for each of those efficiencies which we also um uh verified and confirmed uh with uh additional consultants the scope of those individual line items. So, we're talking, as I mentioned last time, windows, HPAC, electrical, even, you know, some wholesale uh carpeting projects, um, windows. There's still a lot of lowhanging fruit for sustainability in the district, even just replacing some of the exterior facade of our buildings, some of the windows, increasing the uh the thermal efficiency of our roofing. Um, so
010the facility condition assessment items are really outstanding deficiencies that we need to uh tackle on all of our buildings in order to a make them more sustainable and also give them another uh 10 20 30 years of life uh depending on which project we're talking about. >> I think also important to note with these are building improvement projects. These are the ones that, you know, if we have a boiler go out or heater go out, that can potentially impact the ability to keep school going, right? So, we've worked um we started with a really big long list. We worked through the consultants as William pointed out, but he also worked a lot with our maintenance team to talk about the specifics that were needed. and we don't have it outlined here because it really would
011take like 12 pages and they told me my slides were ugly. Um, but in those small improvement projects, a lot of those are like the specific things that we need at those schools um that aren't huge cost numbers necessarily, but they're certainly more than we have in our maintenance bucket. Um so I just these slides really highlight the whole of support services. It incorporates the consultants but it also incorporates the knowledge of our staff who maintain these buildings every day. And then moving on from the building improvements facility condition assessment work items, we um have a our first seismic uh so these are seismic retrofits um to ensure our buildings are safe for at a life safety standpoint. So that's the key word here is what do we need to do to our buildings to
012create a life safety environment where in a seismic instant there would be uh very well a lower and mitigated risk of injury um uh due to building parts falling. So a lot of additional strapping a lot of additional bracing um putting in shear walls uh we were fairly um uh thoughtful as well when it comes to grouping of the seismic. So when we're replacing a roof for example, we also say well that gives us a great opportunity to do a project which involves the seismic upgrades at the same time, maybe putting new diaphragms into the roof structure. And so when we we group these together and and kind of put them close close, um well there's definitely going to be efficiencies in doing uh multiple projects at the same time. Hollywood Hills is is a
013good example of that. Anything else on seismic tree? I think just this was one of the things that we talked about doing a district-wide study as part of the 2022 bond. And I think that there was a really good question that Director Hayes asked LA last time, which is some of the schools that we just did major projects at are listed as needed for seismic. Uh which is true. In our major projects, we really focused on removing portables and coming up with a scope that replaced the functions that were in those portables. And what we did in the um study is beyond what we would do in a typical scope for a project like that. Um, so that's uh it's we still have some old parts of our buildings since we focused on modernizations and
014expansions. So we do still have to take care of and they will require additional care some of those older parts of our buildings. And as William said, I think this gives us an opportunity. I think frankly I was a little surprised by the number of buildings that we had come back uh with need but it does give us an opportunity to group projects together and make them as efficient as possible uh potentially doing a design build package so we have the same engineers designing multiple sites uh and gaining efficiencies in a lot of those ways. So this is the stuff that really is behind the scenes that you don't see unless you specifically go looking for it um which we did. So, and then I get to talk about the fun part, the playgrounds. Uh,
015I don't have a lot to add to what we talked about last time aside from just highlighting which schools we're talking about. Uh, we have them listed there at Wellington, Canyon Creek, Sunrise, East Ridge, Lockwood, and Arrowhead North. Arrowhead actually has two different play areas, and this is their larger one. Um, but these are uh playgrounds that I think are important so we have some accessible play for all of our students. Uh, it makes it so uh we're not relying strictly on fundraising at individual schools and uh is just a really amazing place for our students to get to do outdoor learning as part of their day. uh technology. We covered that. Um if we have specific questions, I have some experts at the table who can answer them. But this is really the infrastructure
016piece. These are the uh pieces that are underground, usually involve digging. Uh and they are what kind of make the backbone of our technology work. Uh, so we get to do all the cool stuff that people see in the classrooms, but these are more the wires and trenching work. Security, I got to be as part of the security uh process this time. And Ashley actually led a group of folks, many of them who participated in the security uh group who met as part of the 2022 bond. So, we got to see them really come to a consensus of how to rank, prioritize um the things that are most important. Like all the other line items, we could spend way more than we have uh put in here to bring all of our schools up to
017X standard, but in reality, this is what uh we feel like will um accomplish the list of projects that that uh committee put together. And um last but not least, uh William already talked about the second group of facility condition assessments, but last but not least is that contingency piece. And I did want to note the overhead piece. We plan to be about 4% of the bond, whatever number we end up at. That's generally where we like to uh result. Uh the contingency piece, we're looking at roughly 2 to 3%. Uh again, this is for extraordinary changes to more global scale uh potential things that could come up and that have come up in the last couple years when it comes to the construction industry. William, did you have anything you wanted to add with
018those? >> No, no, I think you hit it on the head. Skip. >> Would this be a good time to pause and see if there's any questions on this this group of projects? I think it would be please. It was maybe a bit of a recap last time. Okay. Like everyone did their homework really well. You read all of my 264 page uh seismic report that got sent to you. All right. Now we get into the real fun. I'm turning it over to William. the large I would say the biggest conversations we had were over which elementary schools to um include and what order to include them. So we'll talk um quite a bit about why Shelton View, >> right? And just a little bit of background about that. So with the major projects, we
019kind of divided it into two categories. Uh one was uh a replacement and Shelton View fell firmly into the replacement. As we look through all these categories, fields, uh, uh, play areas, um, seismic, uh, hazardous materials, um, Shelton View has them all. And, um, we could, uh, tackle them one by one as an individual category. Um, but really Shelton View is in need of a full demon and a rebuild. So, Shelton View fell into that category. The other category we're going to be talking about when we get to cook is um due to enrollment, due to condition of portables, number of portables, etc. Um that's more of an expansion um similar to what we've been doing in the 22 bond. Uh Fernwood is actually really good comparable to to Coin, but with Shelton View, it's
020um it's located in an area where we have capacity in adjacent schools. uh we worked with our transportation team and we looked at the numbers. We had discussed through the process the potential of a swing site within the district and we had looked at a property that we own uh close to Sorenson um for a potential swing site. Um when we did the numbers for that we got to a minimum of 30 million uh even more if we were going to add uh ancillary items in areas such as uh commons, kitchens, libraries etc. So that was really just a 30 million price tag for for a swing site that wouldn't be a full elementary school. Um but would take a number uh of of students. And then when we looked at the capacity in the
021surrounding schools, we realized well maybe we could do this by filling up everywhere else rather than that expense. And so that was the direction that we took. And so within the budget, there is uh a line item for um student relocation, whether that be working with transportation on additional buses, um supplying furniture and equipment to uh other schools which will need that to take in an influx of additional students. But Shelton View would be um uh it would be tight to do in a year. It would be most likely a two-year project. It would be working with the jurisdiction early on uh discussing exactly what they would be looking for in terms of uh right-of-way uh improvements. Uh I'm I'm assuming we're probably being asked to do a lot where Shelton View is concerned, whether
022that be under grounding utilities, improving roadways, uh walk paths, etc. So, we're probably doing a lot outside of the site. As we get into the site at Shelton View, we would probably go vertical with the construction. Um, so we uh would kind of minimize the footprint of the building. Uh, we would put a new field in there. They've currently got uh two play areas either side of the campus. We would consolidate that into one area. Uh, we would make sure that the site is secure. There's currently two roads which lead there. Uh, we would probably do away with one of them and just focus on having one entry into into the site. So there wouldn't be that uh access um to the to the uh to the other neighborhood apart from for emergency use. Um
023so it would be uh a massive improvement for that site. It would take away a lot of their needs in regards to heating, cooling, play areas. Uh it would rem remove hazardous materials. It would give them a new commons uh gym area. They've got leaking roofs there at the moment all throughout their gymnasium. So it really came up as being a priority project. Um and uh and it it was I think throughout the process the um the top pick for an elementary school project. >> We did also in that same kind of category of these projects or these buildings might need to be replaced. We looked at Morlands, Arrowhead, West Hill, um and Wellington were kind of the other top runners. then you could make an argument frankly for most all of them. Um, as
024we look at how we are ordering projects, if you look at kind of a 30-year touch cycle for buildings to do some kind of major project, it is important that we uh keep in mind that we do have that um we got to touch all all the parts at some at some place. And in the past last bond cycle when we really focused so much on um expanding and touching numerous sites, this is a little bit different approach. It also enables us to focus on one site. If we did tried to do multiples of those uh the other ones that I just mentioned, we would either a need that 30 to$50 million swing site or um we can't the system just can't bear having multiple schools that were moving students around. This cycle we did
025most of our areas that we could do with students occupied campuses. Um, but for these ones, um, Shelton View really just rose to the top through all the voting. Uh, next I get to talk about fields. I think, um, this is, you'll notice the first group of fields that we've put in here. Uh, it is interesting how things start. Fields were one of the very first things that we talked about as a task force and in that they wanted to put all of the fields in. Um but by the end when they start to juggle out the dollars and how things um end up, this is this is where we resulted. So, Woodenville High School soccer field, uh, Fernwood Soccer, Hollywood Hills soccer, Kenmore Soccer Field, both High School football, um, are the areas that
026we're looking to do significant, if not full replacements, rejuvenation of those fields. uh lots of discussion, had several coaches who were involved in these conversations, and we do realize how important those outdoor um instructional areas are because they really become instructional areas for a lot of our schools. Uh with that, um I'm turning it back to William. >> Yes, thanks. And then just just to add on to the fields portion, um the the fields have got a lot more expensive um in recent years. the King County Storm Water Manual in particular has put a lot more emphasis on storm water uh detention uh and and storm water quality control as well. And so that's added a lot almost doubled those projects. So we've done a lot of projects recently where we've been able to term
027it as a maintenance activity and we've been able to take very little disturbance off of the off of the field uh the existing graph grass fields go over the top with an artificial pitch or field. Um, and that's been able to save us uh quite a lot of money. Uh, moving forward, we're not going to be able to do that. Nearly every jurisdiction, if not every jurisdiction, has now absorbed either the King County Storm Water Manual or something similar, and that puts a lot more uh engineering and uh storm water work into each of these projects. It becomes even more um difficult when we're surrounded by wetlands, which is a situation we have at Keml Elementary. um because then sometimes we're not able to uh absorb the additional impermeable which is classed as impermeable uh
028into our adjacent storm water and we have to come up with expensive and manage and uh thoughtful engineered solutions. So the fields um I think we budgeted well for that and we're feeling confident that we will be able to uh complete those projects within the budget allocated. Moving on to kitchens. So, kitchens, uh, we've been doing a little bit of, um, onesie twoosy, uh, equipment replacements throughout the district, um, with this bond, uh, and taking some funds from, uh, uh, leftover 2018. We've done a good amount of work. Our food services team has been excellent to work with. Our construction manager, Martha, who's sat right over there, has been working on that as well. And we've made a lot of progress. And then as part of as part of this bond process, uh we came
029up with a extensive list of those items which we expect to fail and we're being proactive and preventative in planning for equipment replacement. It's also going to allow for those items which are reactive um to have some funds available as well for capital replacement of equipment. >> And much like the last bond cycle, we talked a lot about seismic. This time we're talking a lot about ADA access. Uh so you see this year alto together we have about almost $50 million of seismic work that needs to be done. Uh I don't know what it will look like with ADA, but we do have several schools that definitely do not meet current ADA. So, this we expect to be a really thorough um look at where we have shortcomings when it comes to our ADA and
030put a plan in place to uh address them. Whether it's over one year or one bond cycle or two bond cycles, we'll at least know where um the deltas are. Uh and then again, contingency and overhead. And and just to touch on the on the ADA again, um if you go and look up um University of Washington transition study for ADA, uh that's a really excellent document which they produced. We look we're looking to do something very similar. So we don't know what we don't know. This will give us uh information as to where uh we have shortcomings and put a plan into action as how we're going to get to um uh full uh accessibility throughout all of our schools. So this is this is the starting point uh in order to get to
031that that place. >> All right, Ashley, over to you. Okay, next we get to talk about our next school which is Coin. Coin is um our school has most portables remaining. It also has a large number of students. It also is a site that we can um do while it's occupied. We can do an extension while it's occupied. It also because it has a lot of students and one of our few schools that is still showing growth um happening to its population. It's current structure is just overused when we're talking about those common spaces, right? whether it be the gym or even the sizing of the hallways and other things. It's just a lot of students in um a small space and it has uh it's not one of our oldest schools, but when you
032look at the facility condition, it just teeters between fair and poor. So, as we're looking at a school that could potentially help, if we look at adding a few seats for boundary line changes in the future, it is one that could be helpful in that conversation um just because of its location. And then its need is just right up there as far as um it goes. in working with our enrollment and demographics task force. This was their number one recommended school. Uh they looked at a lot of different things um to come up with that recommendation as far as uh the demographers report as far as long-term forecasting for the various counties that we are in. Um and really put forth this as their strongest and highest recommendation. And with it being also on the
033bond planning task force's list for a number of reasons, it ended up getting voted as like that number two school. And again, because we don't have to do a swing site for it, it um it kind of elevated its vote because it's uh has enough breathing room for us to do a actual construction project without having to send the students somewhere else. Um William, is there anything you want to add about cook? >> Uh well, yes. Uh so one of the big um negatives with Kokane is is going back to the accessibility being on a on a hillside site. That would be something we would try and tackle as well. Um it does have ADA circulation, but could be a lot better. And then the portables, some of our worst portables in the district are
034at Kokane. Um they're full. A lot of our portables on some less enrolled school campuses are are not in use. They use every inch at Coin. Um, and they use it well. In fact, it's it's so busy there, the way it was originally designed with the bus loops, the bus buses don't fit anymore. They're too long. There's too many of them. And so along with just a a new building, a new admin area, we would be um we would be uh adjusting the circulation of the site as well um for both near-term and and long-term. So and then this is our last group of seismic um and that it's that includes everything that we had in that study that was shown. And then again another another line for overhead and contingency. >> And just just
035a a reminder on the seismic the way that we group them between high, medium, and low is the the gross area or square footage impacted at each school. Not necessarily saying that the low doesn't need work. Um just that the risk of total area at each school is less um within the lower brackets. I have a question. >> Awesome. When the study was done for the seismic, was it when I'm thinking about the schools that had additions to their square footage added, was that taken into account or not into account when they were looking at it? Because it was probably those schools hadn't been under construction yet. So, that's probably not a part of that footprint piece. >> That's right. >> Yes. Correct. >> Okay. Just checking. >> Director Hayes. >> Yes. Um, you'll be
036shocked to hear that the ADA thing triggered my lawyer brain. So, if we are aware that we are not in compliance with the ADA, can we afford to wait two bond cycles to fix it or are we then on notice that we've got to address it? William, do you wanna I'm like he's turn he's hitting his computer for some reason. >> Yes. I mean, so you're right. Um, it's almost the way that the, you know, I reference the University of Washington transition study, right? That's what we're going to be creating. That's a mechanism. And, you know, lawyers in the room, I won't say too much of my opinion, but uh um don't want to be legal legal challenge here. uh but what we will do is we'll take that document and we will use it
037to plan out a course of action. So once we know what um where we are deficient, we will have funds um set aside uh to do the the most critical items um within this next bond cycle as soon as that transition study has been completed. The transition study will also lay out a future pathway to having everything completed. And the way that the University of Washington structured their plan is almost as that document not necessarily protects them, but shows and indicates that they do actually have a pathway to get there and they're not ignoring those requirements. Now, if you have an existing building which was to code at the time, you're technically compliant. Are you along um with best practice? No. Are you doing the right thing for your students and community? Probably not. You
038can improve on it. But in terms of building code, at the time it was constructed, those buildings have been signed off occupancy granted uh in that condition. >> I was going to start with that part. Um because it it's like the seismic. We were compliant when it comes to seismic, right? Uh but the codes change, the uh the zones have changed since a lot of these schools were built. So, we are compliant with all of the rules. Uh, and we do constantly make small upgrades as we can, especially as we have students with needs as they go through. We do, uh, specific adjustments for them. We've done some this summer and, uh, we'll continue to, but, there's a difference, again, as William pointed out, between compliance and really providing the best experience for our students
039with different needs. >> And we're going to go above and beyond uh, ADA. We're going to we're going to reach try and reach for gold standard in ADA design. So I'm a bit biased. So in the UK we have another document called the DDA and uh it's very ownorous. We got to do a lot of things even more um intense and and volume right now and move to the next piece. Um we head to overhead and contingency. Uh and then we go to our last um bond level. This was if we got to do kind of all the things that we uh deemed as important, it would be contained in this last group, which puts us close to $790 million. uh as we surveyed our committee, this they felt like was too high uh as
040far as numbers go, but they do still think all of these are very important projects, whether it be the fields, um multiple groups, whether it be the sewer and storm repair. Uh we have done some of the sewer and storm repair as we've worked on major projects, but we do still have storm water intrusion into our sewers. Um some of the energy efficiency projects we would like to accomplish. Uh and then some initial ADA projects. We don't know what those would be yet, but just as a placeholder to get some started. Uh we always have unanticipated projects that we anticipate coming up. Um and then the last group of facilities condition assessments which is um in large part our uh our HVAC system at Timberrest. It is actually working really well and has worked really
041well for a long time but it is 30 plus years old and really likely needs to be replaced very soon but it is a very large number for that one system. So, um that is the list that we have. Um Director TR, >> thank you. I know how much work went into the committee that reviewed the bond and what what assessments were involved. So, thank you for that report. I'm wondering if there were considerations in the committee for different types of sports that are up and coming. Um not suggesting we change anything here just for future right is you know pickle ball and and um cricket. Thank you. >> Yeah cricket fields. >> Yes I think these are things that we do need to look at as a district. We currently focus on the WIA
042sports. Um but I always think that there's room for conversation. We did not spend a lot of time specifically on fields. They did a presentation kind of of the state of our current fields. I think that um would require kind of a larger conversation about if the district wants to provide additional um supports for some of the sports that aren't currently covered. So, this group didn't get into that too much. I don't think there's more. I think we're at the end of our >> Okay, presentation. So, I see a slide 31 though might be kind of handy for the board. That one just has a summary of them. Okay. Yeah. No. So, any any remaining questions about this? Um, I do want to shout out our awesome committee. We have a couple people here. They
043really did amazing work. >> Okay. >> And we're open to questions if you think of them after your conversation tonight as well. Thank you so much for letting us present. >> Oh, thank you very much. This is great. This is great. Okay. All right, board. It kind of pivots to us then. Go for it, Director Hayes. >> I'll I'll kick off thoughts. Um, so first, uh, before I get into my thoughts on the whole thing, um, I just want to remind us and and any community members that our tech levy is purposely vague. Um, we don't name specific types of devices. um with the one we passed in 2010 is our famous one because two months later the iPad came out and it wasn't in the tech levy because we didn't know it was going
044to exist. So since then we've we talk in generalities. We're not going to list out specific items in our tech levy or even reference them because we don't know what assistive devices may exist and we want to make sure that we'll be able to purchase them. So I just wanted to share that. Um, so my hope for the 26 levies and bond is that we could do it all because we know the state isn't funding and we need all of it. Nothing that has been proposed is fancy or extravagant or sparkly. It's all desperately needed. Um my worry that all three of these B measures are binary. So it's not like we can put it out and people are like, "Yeah, we don't want to go that far." It's an all or nothing. So if
045we ask for too much for what the community can support, we get nothing. So our job is to figure out where where that level is. What do we think the community can support? And it's it's tough economic times. Every day we hear of more people being laid off at Microsoft. Um I know my eggs are still $7 a dozen despite what I was promised. There's not. So I worry that asking for all of it will be more than what our community can support. So trying to figure out what we can ask for. Um I think we need to max out our EPO options. I don't see the legislature coming in and um supporting us anytime soon. So I think for the next four years we need to max that out. Um so that means the
046other two we can't do the full amount. So trying to figure out where that is. Um I'm going to do a little Tetris with the uh bond um because we get to do that. Um, and I again really appreciative of the community and the committees that have put together this and their recommendations and the thoughtfulness. Um, my concern is now that the seismic is out there, parents don't hear it's low. They hear my school, my kids school has seismic concerns. So, I think we need to put all of the seismic together and just do all of them. So, so I appreciate all you're saying. I'm sorry. I know I'm interrupting you. >> Okay. >> I have a process question. >> Okay. >> So, how do we want to start start discussing this as a board?
047Do we want to kind of do the same because you started off with, you know, kind of general thoughts, approaches, philosophies? Do we all want to weigh in on that before we get specific? Because I think like for example, the EPO levy, I think we need to talk about an approach of what would be the pros to maxing that out, right? and going into that a little bit and then going in um if right and that way we can kind of have the conversations at the same time and then move on and then move on is is is that and give me feedback but um I think that would be a good approach. I'm going to go with I'm going to facilitate here. So let's talk about let's talk about So thank you Director Hayes
048for that for kicking us off and getting the ball rolling because we have to get this ball rolling. So, and appreciate when you were talking about the balancing. I was picturing a seessaw, right? Like we have this tradeoff that we have to think about. We have an incredibly supportive community and yet we we know not everyone has one Powerball. Although I tried this weekend, but not everyone has one Powerball. So, we have the seessaw of trade-offs that we have to do. So, I mean, what else is the rest of the board thinking in terms of how to approach this this? Anything else you'd want to provide input on in terms of thinkings and approach and how to how to approach that? The seesaw. >> Is it a seesaw or a fulcrum? >> I think it's
049a fulcrum. Thank you, Dr. McCordy. I appreciate that. >> You can always count on me for things like that. Um, I agree that um the the EPO I I think we we do have to max out because I think um state funding isn't isn't going anywhere fast and so we've got to be able to to cover the the necessities. um in and you know there's I'm not sure that that um the recommendation is embedded in in this is the top level of anything. um which is which is a good thing and and I think as long as our community's overwhelming global concern for the safety of their kids coming first, you know, I think that's that's caught in, you know, the the 700 million dollar level with all the the seismic and the buildings that
050people may feel like they're about to fall down. you know, we're we're going to get those taken care of. Um, the other thing I think about in terms of of how much we want to to go for is how inflation has been moving over the last four years and where we were four years ago. looking at that that same consideration um and the I guess percentage of the previous level or previous bond and levy amounts that we were increasing by over the last several uh terms if you will and I feel like you this is this would be consistent with that um and I I don't didn't bring the numbers off the stop here. But, um, I think as long as we're not, you like doubling or tripling, you know, what we did the last
051time, I think the community is going to want to get these things addressed. >> Thank you. >> There you go. >> Thank you. >> Generality. >> And I see your sign up, Director Tran. >> Yes. Thank you. I had a couple thoughts when I was listening to both of you speak on this regarding the fulcrum and finding where that balance is at. I would love to understand what we did in the past to really understand our community and gauge where they're at. And then the second part is maybe editorialized. at the EPNO. I'm glad that the legislation gave us this opportunity to max it out. It's just we have to keep in mind how inequitable that is across the state. Um, and when we're prioritizing out WASDA, maybe keeping that in mind and keeping like
052the districts who can't afford to pass their EPO levies. See, I should have put my sign up because to to talk about the EPO levy. Um I was explaining to this I got a question from a community member about why if mccclary happened in 2017 18 why we're in this spot and it's there's this one thing that I think was really there were a lot of things that happened obviously but one thing that really illustrates why we're in this spot and why we're we're we're really reliant on increasing our EPN our rich our I don't even know what EPO stands for anymore. Isn't that funny? our our levy, our local levy that supports instruction. Um because when that bill was passed for funding in 2017, it didn't tie the increases to actual inflation. They picked
053a number that was lower. So, we've had eight years of so-called inflationary increases that were deliberately set below the actual inflation. So, here we are eight years later and we have a gap. And if we don't utilize the ability to close that with our local levy, um we're just going to keep having this financial systematic issue. So, um and it is inequitable because we happen to have a tax base that a lot of school districts across the state don't have. It is very inequitable. But if if we want to to do our spot by our students and to shore up instruction, we you know, we um we know class size is an issue. If we want to have even a chance at addressing that, we we have to we have to max out what we
054can legally do for the the locally funded levy. Yes, director attack. >> On that note, um we aren't even asking as much as other districts in Snomish County or in King County. So, you know, they're they're they're asking for a lot more than we are um to support their students. And um you know I think it's really important that we realize that whether or not the state is taxing someone to get funding for education or we are asking for money from someone to get money for education that it still needs to happen. And without money there can't be building maintenance. And without money there can't be access to technology that supports students. And without money, there can't be all of the things that we need to educate students and make sure that they succeed. So,
055it's while it's it's hard to envision, you know, increasing people's taxes, we are lucky in that we have more houses, a lot more houses with which to spread that love. Um, so I think that's to our benefit when thinking about the levels at which we want to request things from our community, knowing that it's spreading a lot further than it did a few years ago and even a couple cycles prior to that. Um, which even with the raised limits is, you know, to our to our um community's benefit in that they're spreading the wealth as it were further um to support students. And I just have to really quick make a side note. Our fine superintendent just helped me understand what EPO stands for. It's educa educational and operational levy. So I was getting support
056and I was appreciating the timeliness, hence the chuckle. So yes, director McCordi, >> just sort of a a followup with Director Soot's comments. Um, I just I'm I'm always maybe too much so keenly aware that the what we're what we're asking approval for is a rate per $1,000 of assessed value. And you know, we have the chart which shows where our rates fall, but if you'll notice, Burer Island, I believe, is at the bottom of the rates. Um, but it's a function of the the tax base and the property values in any particular district. Um, so I don't know that we're we're asking for perhaps a lower rate than many, but the absolute amount that we're asking for is a very different thing and that's going to be dependent on the size of the district
057and hence the need of our district. So the value that we coming up with that whether it's the 700 or $600 million that's a function of how many buildings we're talking about and how many students we are supporting with with EPNO and our our tech levies. Do do I hear um a consensus that we are going to move forward hypothetically speaking we're not deciding anything with with modeling out the maximization of the EPO levy to support instruction. Okay. Okay. Thank you. Anything else on that? Check it. Okay. Would it be helpful to pull up one of the tax rate slides when we're doing this or this is this is great. You were just referenced it, Director McGordy, so I just wanted to see if it would be helpful for you. >> I mean just for
058not Yucks, but I I would be interested in in seeing what the different values are. >> So that that's slide seven. >> Oh, look at this. We have a new one. 33 is new. So yes, if you could please explain, Deputy Superintendent Bergie. >> Yes. So on the slide, you'd asked us to increase the value of a home, the average price of a home. So when we asked AI, it said a million dollars roughly for our school district. Uh so this is and it's an easy number to ramp up from or down from. So in the first column, we are reminding ourselves what our total rate was in 2022. So we went out to the voters with a tax rate of $328 for everything all in all three measures. Uh the annual taxes there, the
0592026 estimated tax rate. So remember 2025 is a little bit lower because we're selling the last trunch of bonds, that last $75 million of bonds. This is what the estimated tax rate will be. it'll be about $310 or so. Um, so that total rate all in as it's fallen over time is is a little bit less at $3,100 a year. So then we started modeling different scenarios, different pieces, just putting it together in different ways so you could see what additional we might be asking um depending what the board picks. I'll just go right to the end. If we asked for uh $3.36 in total, a $600 million bond, a $40 million tech levy, the max EPNO, that is an increase of $260 a year, $2167 a month, 71 a day. Now, in all of
060these scenarios, the way that the math works, the bond rate will be lower than it was in 2022. The real drivers are the increase in the tech levy and the EPO. Those are the only reasons these rates are going up is because obviously tech is becoming more and more important to our everyday lives and how districts actually function in the 21st century in the real world. And so those costs are disproportionately increasing because everything is going from a book or a piece of paper to online to AI to instructional technology. So that increase from our current $20 million a year to the 30 million to the 40 million is reflecting that. And then the EPO, you're very well familiar with why those rates are increasing. That is really the way of the legislature did not
061fund it at the state level. They really pushed it to the locals and locals are deciding whether or not how much they're collecting with EPO. So the largest rate increase is sitting in the EPO levy and we recall two reasons. We have asked for less than we could actually collect in the past. Uh and then we had the legislative changes. So getting us all the way caught up to that max is that real increase that we spoke of last session. And then we have the technology levy that is also increasing. >> Should we go through the other couple slides right after this because it addressed some board questions. >> Yep. So you asked for Snomish County school tax rates. They're listed on the screen. You can see that we're slightly above average. Um I mean
062like slightly ranging from $2.17 in Monroe all the way up to $410 in Snomish. And then this is put it all together. So this is King County districts and Snomish County districts. Again, we're slightly above average. It doesn't really look that way on that map, but that's where we are. We're slightly above average there. And you can see um it's a mix of districts in both Snomish and King County. We're really in the middle of the pack and you know we'd we'd come up obviously we'd be right above snowy valley if we were modeling some of those numbers that we looked at in the prior slide. So we'd move up maybe five slots or so we would not be near the top. Thank you. Okay. So to pick up where I interrupted Director Hayes, do
063do we want to move to talking about the bond options, the bond levels now? Would that make sense? Okay. Sorry, I had to put a pin in it, but do you want to kick us back off? Well, now I'm confused. So, um, and thank you for this, um, slide with the the actual the annual dollar increase because that's what people will focus on, right? So, um, and I do remember that that the levies cause a much bigger difference to to the tax rate than the bond does. Um, so for me what would be helpful is the break out and maybe it's in here and I just don't remember where it is. Uh, of what the difference impact to that tax rate because I did the the math that one cent difference is $10 difference, right?
064So if it goes up one cent in the tax rate, then the annual increase goes up $10. >> Yes. Okay. Thank you for reaffirming to catch up, but yes. >> Thank you. So it would be helpful for me to know the difference in the tech rate for 30 million versus 40 million and the different bond levels. >> Slide three. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Okay, that's what I needed. Now I will do more math. >> Okay. I've just been percolating. It's a Monday night, so there's lots of percolating. >> A lot of percolating. >> Yeah. >> Um I'm kind of interested and I know it's not one of the options listed on um slide 33, but um and I don't know if the community would bear it, but I'm interested in Maxie Po, the $700
065million bond, and the $40 million tech levy. Um, keeping in mind specifically what was said about the additional costs for technology and the new ways that we don't even know about that it's going to need to be implemented and the different ways we're thinking about curriculum and other ongoing costs. Um, I um just really am wondering about that. >> Yeah. So what I would say is look at the max EPO 640 million. So every hundred million in bonds is about 10 cents. So if you added that new number would be about 3.46 and then you could calculate down from there. So if it was 700 bond 40 tech max EPO it would be about $346. Chris check me. Yeah, we might be about three cents lower than that with the refunding. We'll have some final
066numbers for you next week, but that is the ballpark that you should be working with is every hundred million in bond is about 10 cents. The difference between those because of the way the structure of the repayment. >> Director McCordi, if >> Thank you. Um so just just sort of a a side step um the EPO and the tech levy the amounts that we're asking for that's every year. Is that correct or is that 40 million or 35 million over the four years? >> That's every year. >> Okay. Thank you. And so that that's where the different impact comes from. Correct. The EPO and the tech. Whereas the with the bonds, the amount that we're asking for is over >> likely over 20 plus years payment. That's right. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. So,
067Vice President Sotak, you're looking at a combination of maxing out everything. I I Well, and it's not obviously max maxing it out, right? because I know that there's bond recommendations that could have gone over that um level, but um really thinking about sort of the conundrum that the district has been in the past when we haven't maxed things out and and haven't been able to get as much as uh we could have and how that's like what that's looked like for the district. particularly thinking about um lack of access to funding from the state um and and what the kind of predicament that puts us in, especially when prices and things that we'll need to access in the future are kind of unpredictable. This creates predictability in the system which is something that I I
068think is as important as possible to have in place when there's other things that are unpredictable. >> Okay. Sorry. Yeah. Not max out but the recommended recommended. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> Okay. >> The not wish list level. >> Yeah. So if if if feels like to me we can look at this two ways, right? Like look at the the packages from basically from the two from the bond and the tech levy or we can look at it from the chicken versus egg scenario of looking at it from tax rate and then going from there and and you know tax it is true like things in the list are so necessary and inflation is so unpredictable. Um, I'm just concerned about that jump because historically we've never had that jump. We've we it we've been so
069lucky to have our tax base grow that we've we've um every four years when we've gone out the tech levy jumped but then the bond rate had gone down because again we had so much more assessed value to spread it out. So it was as a package right pretty coherent. So um that would that would be you know in terms of your question director Tran in terms of of community feedback that we've gotten um you know this the surveying that has been done with the community and all people people do appreciate um the priorities that the task forces came up with but there is also a lot of hesitation over over the financial cost as well. I feel like that's part of the fulcrum. What is a four-sided fulcrum, director McCordi? So, the cost the
070overall cost, right, for appointed fulcrum, right? Like that. So, so you know, um I I I just want to throw it out there. That's something I think we there is a threshold and it's we don't have the crystal ball because we do want to get as as much support for our students as humanly possible. Um but I feel like there there is a threshold that we should think about. >> Are there other proposed uh taxes on homes uh in that election cycle or there's some in the prior >> in in the prior >> November right >> in November. And I think the parks and wreck >> group is coming out with the proposal for a community center. >> Evergreen >> and Evergreen Hospital is coming again in november because it didn't pass. Wait, help me.
071No, Evergreen was just in August, I thought. >> Yeah. And I thought it passed. >> Okay. So, Evergreen Hospital had an increase and it passed. Um and then yeah, the parks and wreck um group is asking for a bond to um support a community center and and so in your collective memories of people who have been doing this for a while um because I'm not asking anyone to do any more work. we're just remembering from collectively. Um, has it been the case that we've had large community asks from other groups that have had a significant impact on people's tax rate prior to us and and how has that gone? >> The sound transit year, we passed our bond by 261 votes. There were a few other things but it people were tired. >> And so
072when we think about the impact that evergreen and the parks are having and then is there anything in Snowomish County that's also isn't there a King County levy in November? I need to look that up. I think there is. I think there's another King County levy increase. >> And so what is that going to do to people's um bandwidth? >> Well, see again, the sound transit increase was in November and then we were shortly after. >> Yeah. >> Okay. That was my >> And as a reminder again, especially for folks playing along at home, the bond has to pass by 60%. >> But we and and and we we do bonds. Are they separate? >> They are three separate ballot initiatives. Okay. When we explain the ask to the community, we combine the math for
073folks so they can understand. And I and we're lucky where I have a very involved community. If you know with effort and getting out there, people can follow along and do the math and and think about it together once once we put the it takes a lot of effort to explain, but they're able to get to get that. >> Okay. Thank you. I think the parks, what is it called? Northshore Parks and and PRSA. I know the acronym, but not really what all the letters stand for. I think they're keeping it at the same rate, aren't they? As they have. >> They're looking That's a good question. And we could find that out by next week, by next meeting. >> Okay. And then the hospital, I'm not sure, Evergreen, I'm not sure if they changed
074their rate. I haven't did. >> Um, it did go up though. It was a levy, so it went up. Um, it did pass though. >> Can you Yeah. So, what is King County considering in November? >> Um, no. It we actually already voted on it in August. Um, it was a replacement parks levy and it increased property taxes by 23 cents per per thousand. Um, so it's going to the our homeowners will see an increase of $198 a year for a median homeowner. I don't know what that is in King County. That may be a little different in our neck of the woods. There was a Yeah. So, Superintendent Irish is looking up. There's a medic one coming up on the November ballots. A renewal of a medic and it is going to increase. Oh,
075setting it. Yeah. So, it would in would it say whether it's an increase or maintenance? I'm trying to scan. It might be a maintenance for medic one. Yeah. Okay. So, to sum up, there's a lot out there and that's people will maybe hopefully not quite be to sound transit levels, but people will be frustrated and concerned. Um, so I have concerns that of a $40 million tech levy and a certainly an 800 but maybe even 700 million for bond. Um I worry again given the binary concept of these and because that bond needs that 60% um I worry that 700 is going to be a huge jump for the from 425 that we did four years ago. So um those are my reservations. Um, I don't see how we whatever level we come up with
076in the bond, I think we have to do all of the seismic. Um, I think parents, even if it says low next to it, I think they've heard there's seismic issues at their kids' school and they will want to know why we're not addressing it. Again, me, the ADA, I think that money needs to be there for whatever pops up. Sorry, we don't have the UK gold standard, but um uh I think that we we need to have that. We need to be prepared to start doing that work. >> Well, Dr. Yeah, Director McGordy, there we go. >> Um I I agree. Um, and the numbers are the numbers are going to scare everybody. Um, with respect to the bond, again, I think everything that's included in there up to the 700 level, that's so
077much about safety and equity across the district. I think beyond that are nice to haves. So we definitely need to to question beyond the 700 million level. Um I think we need to ask for the EPO. So that leaves us with tech. Um and again with according to the uh the the slides we have here it looks like up to the 35 million level are things one that are maintaining our our technology and systems um between 30 and 35 looks like it's an enhancement but things that are to keep us up to date and you guys can correct me if I'm wrong But that's that's where I'm I'm looking at the tech levy. Is there room for savings, if you will, with that? Um the over 35 million seems like things that would be really
078really great to have and we may need to have some time, but maybe not necessarily right away. And is it is that an area where we can be a little um more conservative with our dollars? I'm gonna push on that just a smidge. I think about specifically when you look at like the $35 million level instructional devices and technology for special programs. I'm thinking about our students receiving special education who need additional um technology to access the school. And then I know we talked about uh video and audio in school commons and gyms. I know that there was mention of some ancient systems out there. Um, so I I agree that like some of it is maybe um not as imperative, but I I I do wonder about replacement like life cycle things particularly for
079um things that are going to impact students who need access to things. Is that an accurate representation of that some of that stuff at that 35 millionish level? Uh thank you for that question. Uh yes and uh the difference between the specific projects that we call out in the tech levy and say specific projects in the bond is that I can't build half a building with no doors and windows right but in technology we could limit scope a little bit like you know when we think about digital resources the estimates for that project list very specific content areas in which we know that we're going to need to adopt curriculum We might reduce that number by changing the scope. Not necessarily taking out uh a content area per se, but looking at things like open
080educational resources as opposed to a paid enterprise platform from say Pearson. So we can still accomplish goals that are set forth in these projects even if we have to reduce a little scope. Um again the um estimates are based on you know the best the most reliable the most you know semi-predictable it it is technology right um but one way to fit within parameters would be to either reduce scope or potentially eliminate projects that either could be um funded in a future levy cycle uh or you know perhaps we find grants perhaps we find capacity in other And to um to go back to the earlier comment question about really those first two and a half tiers of recommendations from the the advisory committee really were to maintain what we have now. you know, to
081make sure to ensure that we have uh the technology on a replacement cycle and reduce, you know, additional repairs or ongoing support. Following up on vice president, so tax comment, if we were to take the special programs that's in that included in the tier 4 and include it into the tier three and then cut us off at 35.46 because that's what it would in be um as opposed to 35.37. Um, I'm curious what the math would be on that and how that affects the rate. That seems very minor to to include it. That' be great. >> Yeah. So, that was to include the instructional computing special program devices. Okay, >> great. >> Can we I'm sorry. Can we use microphone? >> Every five million was about 7 to8 cents for the tech levy. >> Oh,
082this isn't even five million that we're adding. So, yeah. >> Yeah. And we were just uh just one second passing it up and down the row. Uh earlier this morning we started talking about okay how might we uh plan out different scenarios you know uh at a little more of a micro level of like all right if we're not going you know the big 10 million pops um where can we do be a little more fluid and adjust within that. I also just want to acknowledge the work of our tech advisory committee. And I would want to be sure that we're continuing to honor their recommendation and not just wholesale be like, well, we need to squeeze that point of sale system in a little higher. Um, I'd rather us try to problem solve and
083find ways to make sure that we're meeting the goals without dismantling completely the tech advisory committee's recommendation. Did we have a breakdown in that paro chart between the EPO, the capital projects levy and the school bond like on slide six. So that would be the bar graph with the different [Music] >> new clickers for everyone. >> So slide six. >> Everybody gets a clicker. >> Yeah. >> At 40 million per year. Okay. Thank you. >> I'm wondering that while you're pulling it up, I'm wondering if there's a utility because I don't want to add more work. Asking the folks here, is there more utility in adding the 2025 2026? Well, it'll be 2025, right? Uh bar on that chart. Is it going to help us decide? Is it going to help the community see this
084a little more clearly? I could I could go either way. The the chart as as it was made on what is that slide 33 is helpful to me as well. So um you know seeing just the tax rates in general with the different package >> that is very helpful. >> Yeah. For me personally since you asked I think then the only difference is the tax rate. Yeah, I I like the ch the table in 33. I think the only thing is the breakdown of the tax rate of Yes, we understand it's max EPO and everything, but what is the tax rate amount? I think that's like three rows to add and then six. So, I'm just gonna do something I shouldn't do and guess that if we're talking a 700 max EPO, 700 million bond
085or just under and then 35 million tech levy, it would be about $3.32 cents because I just split the difference. I don't think it's I don't know if it's linear, but just to guesstimate. >> Yeah. So 2025 we're estimating it to be about 295. 2026 we're estimating it to be about 310. And then you said 2027 with those parameters was 332ish. >> 32ish if it's linear. >> Y which we can definitely add on projection to this slide. This was just really to show history, but we can definitely add it if that's helpful. It's not that hard for us. >> The only reason I ask for that because the visual helps and then it also helps to have a comparison with the history like what you did here, right? But with the projected depending on the
086>> sure >> package we decide. >> Good point. >> And so what am I modeling for 2027? >> That's a good it's a good question. I have to say um I I am having a really tricky time here because I I see so $35 million in tech levy. Yes, I think that'd be helpful to model. Um $35.46 million. Um and then for the bond, I'm I'm struggling and I know it's because of the increased in construction cost that it's gone up 30%. I get that. Um, but again with the up or down vote, I struggle. I look at that list and I don't know what I would swap out to get it lower. And yet I'm I'm worried about that number. So just to help frame it again, Chris, what is the every $5 million
087in tech? >> It's about 7 to8 cents. 78 cents. Every hundred million dollars in bonds is 10 cents. So that's a u kind of a way to think about it. That's why that jump exists when you have the higher tech levy and the lower bond. It's higher. >> It's higher the 700, >> right? Because levies are more expensive than something that's getting repaid over such a long period of time, right? That's >> your mortgage versus your car payment. >> Yeah. Okay. >> So, we can we can do two. We can do a 2027 at a what am I modeling? A 600 and a $700 million bond with a 35.46 46 um tech levy. Okay. [Laughter] 35.5. Okay. I have a question that perhaps some of our more experienced members might know an answer to. What
088was the um the bond amount two cycles ago? >> 300. So 2014 was 177 and then um 2018 I think was 275 and then this last one was 425 and the change in the value of houses has kept pace with the bond amount >> and then well and we also saw explosive growth right during that time. So that shared >> the burden and that really was the driver that helped those number because you can just track the that that's North Creek right there. All those houses that's why that's going down. Um and we don't I just don't know if we're going to have that luxury in the next round. I mean there's been pretty big growth since the last bond cycle with number of houses. >> Yeah. >> But we can't we can't when we
089communicate. >> Right. >> Yeah. >> We have to plan for the status quo. >> Right. Right. And when we went out in 2014, the number of developments that were in the planning was in the thousands. And we don't have anything close to that right now until the Snomish County thing gets settled. We can't make any predictions. >> Is there a timeline on that anyone knows about or is it just >> I'm I'm I'm right where President Cass is, but I I understand. I was there in 2010 where you can see the explosive growth and we had nothing in the 2010 bond for growth and it was people were furious with us. Why didn't you knew this was coming? Why didn't you plan it? We can't build schools until kids are there. Despite what the legislature
090thinks is how we do this. Um but we can't we can't plan for growth if we don't have any indication that it's coming >> and and that's why Kokane is such a >> preen's recommendation right because of the location besides the the conditions on the campus. >> Yeah. And I'll just I'll just reiterate this is why this is so gut-wrenching because nothing that has been proposed isn't easy. Yes, we can we can nickel and dime all sorts of things at the next level of. We're going to just have to say this is what we think the community can bear and this is what we're going to move forward and there's going to be some really important things that we can't pay for. And that stinks. >> Until somebody wins that power ball. >> I tried.
091>> So, we have a request to do some more modeling for the board, bring it back for the next time. Um, other requests for any other clarifications or information from any of our teams? I think just making sure that we have the list of other levies and other things going on would be nice just so we have line of sight. Okay. And this is more for the staff that haven't got to do this experience with us in the past. We will get this done next time. We are really close. It may not sound like it in the moment, but we'll get this done next time. So, it's just going to be some tears. I >> I've experienced not close. This is not it. >> There's just going to be have to be some tears and
092stomping of feet at in in private and then we'll come back and be ready to go. >> This is this has been a a really thoughtful discussion which is what it what it should be what it should be. So, not trying to rush. >> Cool. What should we be asking that we're not asking? >> I think we're asking everything we should be asking. We're we're thinking about the the fulcrum, right? It's it's the cost I'm sorry to use the term costbenefit analysis, right? Like like how we know this is all necessary, but then if it gets to the point where it flips to a no and right like and and trying to gauge that is that's the that's the question. And this is pretty a pretty similar process as other school districts. I assume you
093have the discussion multiple times and you kind of converge. >> Well, okay. >> And we have the um we have the package which >> right some a lot of districts do them in different years. So it >> I think it helps our community but it probably for the five of us it adds a different level of complexity. Um, so just a reminder, we purposely do it in February because then we still have three more elections. We have an April and August and a November election um to get it done before we start collecting. >> You can only run two, >> right? But we would have to decide the second time. But it costs us money to run this election. So that Yeah. How much is it costing us to do this? >> Yeah, 100,000 about.
094>> So, it's north of 100,000. It depends on who else is on the ballot with you, right? So, we'll have a lot of company on the 2026 ballot and those costs get shared. You run a loan, it's expensive. >> So, that's the other kind of thought process in terms of we want to do a oneandone because otherwise then we tinker around and we try to run it again. It will cost us another $100,000. All right. Anything else? Are we Yeah. Yeah, please. >> I think this one should be easy. Um, when was the last time Northshore wasn't able to pass the bonder? Nope. Okay. excited. Spin the wind. >> It we haven't >> Okay. All right. Wow. >> Sorry. >> Don't put bad juju out here. >> Also, there's salt over my shoulders. >> That's
095why That's why we're taking four meetings to work through this, right? >> Yeah. Okay. It's No, it's a good question. It's a good question. >> Yeah. No, we can we can break out all the sports superstitions in the world. >> Everybody grow your mustaches. >> Yes. Let's do it. Let's go full Stanley Cup. >> Yeah. >> No, you got to grow it for good luck. Okay. Should I adjourn? I think that I I think the weighty decisions are getting to us a little bit. So I think we have reached a point. So again, we are going to come back in two weeks. And again, we we don't vote in study sessions, but we will we will start getting it to a consensus so we know what to bring to the disc board meeting. So because
096that's where we we do do the official action. Anything else I'm forgetting besides acronyms? Okay. >> No, just a huge thank you. >> Yes, huge thank you. Thank you so much, everyone.