001Okay. So, this public meeting of the board of education's facilities improvement and oversight committee meeting for March 17, 2026 is called to order. Good afternoon. Welcome everybody. Um, thanks for being here. And before we get started, I'll share a preview of today's agenda real quick. We'll have public comment. um an update on the Jefferson High School Shell option, an update on the schedule and projects for um athletics, including uh the Grant Bowl, Pal Park, and several of the athletic hubs, a status update on the bond audit, followup, and procurement and land use updates. Um I'm Virginia. I chair this committee. I live in Northeast Portland and um obviously member of the PPS board of directors. And we have a new new person joining us. You want to go first? >> Uh yeah, I would love
002to. Sorry. Press the button. Turn on when you're speaking. >> Okay. Uh, hi. My name is Alexander Oeter. I'm a student at Lincoln High School and I'm going to be the student council representative today. Yeah, >> we're excited to have you. >> Welcome. And a soon to be Northwestern student uh next year. Congratulations. I know. Um, I'm Michelle Depass, board vice chair. >> Michelle Chase Miller, board member. John Franco, senior chief of operations. >> Hi, Liz Large, uh, contracted senior legal adviser for the district. >> All right, let's get going. So, next we'll have public comment. Please make sure that when you begin your comments that you clearly state your name and spell your last name. You'll have two minutes to speak and we ask that once you hear the sound of the alarm go
003off that you quickly wrap up your comments. So, with that, um, I just my computer just went to sleep and [laughter] we'll start with, uh, Elizabeth Super. And actually, I'll call up two at a time. We've got Elizabeth and Brian Kenyon. All right. Good afternoon. My name is Elizabeth Super, last name Su Per. Um, I'm a member of the Cleveland High School uh baseball and softball board as well as the turf pile park advocacy group. Um, my two children attend Cleveland High School and they've been members of the football, baseball, women's soccer, and softball teams. I've had the pleasure of serving on the Cleveland softball and baseball board for three years and continue to work with Turf Pal Advocacy Group. As a pediatrician, I witness every day how school athletic communities play a vital role
004in reaching teens who might otherwise feel disconnected or isolated from school. Today, I bring you updates from Cleveland High School, specifically an ask for the details of the land use agreement negotiations between PPS, Parks and Recre, and the city of Portland to facilitate improvements to Pal Park. The May 2025 schoolboard bond has passed and the plans have been drawn, but we are still waiting. This spring, 23% of Cleveland High School students are participating in a spring sport. That's 345 students. Unfortunately, we still have only one turf field, which is three blocks from school. Our baseball team plays at Pal Park. Our softball team plays 2.2 miles away from school. Actually, one of our varsity baseball players was hoping to come today to testify, but he was injured at Pal Park last week during practice, and
005he has a knee MRI today. It's unclear if he will be able to play this season, but this is what he wanted me to share with you. [snorts] We can't stand at home plate to even do batting practice when it's been raining because it's so muddy and unusable. They covered the area with a rubber mat. I planted my foot, but it got stuck and injured my knee. If they had turf, this wouldn't have been an issue. Two years ago, a soccer player broke his leg at Pal Park. These are not routine baseball and soccer injuries, and I worry if the current field conditions persist, PPS is in danger of lawsuits due to negligence in providing safe practice areas for PIL athletes. In February, there was significant vandalism at Pal Park. The outfield fences that were
006supposed to be um put up by Portland parks were not put up at either Pal or Woodstock. We've spent $367 already to buy 10 outfield posts that were stolen. Uh we spent $270 on infield turface um for the for the parks to be usable for practice and games. Um and on Saturday, March 7th, over 50 parents and students helped clean up the parks to get them ready. Uh Portland Parks promised Cleveland baseball that the electrical park would be working the season. For the scoreboard, it is not. >> Liz, I'm so I apologize for to keep things equitable. We need to wrap up, but can you email your comments to us? Definitely. >> Yeah, we're just asking for slide 14, which is on the presentation today that notes baseball improvements at Pal Park to please be
007fixed for softball improvements. >> I've got it on my list. >> That was updated. But we thank you again for everything you're doing for our athletes and really hope to improve our southeast community. >> Thank you. >> Good afternoon. My name is Brian Kenyan, spelled B R I A N K I N I O N. Uh, I'm part of the Lincoln baseball and school community. I'm here on behalf of our high school baseball and softball programs who both have games and practices tonight. I'm also here to ask for clarity regarding the status of the West Silvin Middle School athletic field improvements. In 2017, Portland voters approved a bond measure that included improvements connected to the Lincoln High School rebuild. As part of that work, the West Silven Fields went through a full land use and
008design process. A planning commission hearing was held in March of 2020 and the project included site design, engineering studies, lighting analysis, storm water plans, parking analysis, and architectural drawings. In other words, the project had already advanced well beyond concept planning and into formal entitlement and technical review. Now, with the 2025 bond program underway and the district engaging Prescidio as program manager, I'm hoping the district can clarify how this previously completed work is being evaluated before additional time and public funds are spent. Specifically, I would appreciate the clarification on several points. Has Prescidio reviewed the March 2020 conditional use approval and associated engineering work? Which elements of that approval remain valid today? What portions, if any, require actually require resubmission? And what is the cost difference between revalidating prior approvals versus starting over? And given that
009this project previously went through the approval and design work, how is the district determining its prioritization within the current bond program? This matters not only for stewardship of voter approved bond funds, but also for our students. Lincoln baseball players still leave school early to travel to off-site fields, which means lost instructional time. I'm simply asking that previously completed work be fully reviewed so we avoid unnecessary duplication and move this project forward efficiently. And if the committee could request a brief written update from staff or Prescidio on the status of the 2020 approvals and the next steps for West Silvin, that transparency would be greatly appreciated by this community. Thank you for your time. >> Thanks to both of you. Um, next to Antonia Lawler and Meline. Is it Moya? Director Lefort, while that person's coming
010up, I just wanted to note that um Antonia did cancel and we have another person who signed up and they'll be virtual, so I'll bring them in after. >> Okay, that sounds great. >> Hi, thank you for the opportunity to speak. My name is Maline Moya, M O Y A, and I'm a parent of a kid at Cesar Chavez School. I want to raise concerns about the lack of a formal accountability process around board policies and resolutions. I have specific concerns over board resolution 7109 that plainly states that seismic safety is an equity issue and that equity considerations will inform the prioritization and implementation of all seismic improvements. Those considerations for equity were not incorporated into the formula for allocating bond funds for seismic retrofitting. So I must ask broadly speaking when this body passes
011a policy who is responsible for implementation what is this body's obligation to their publicly stated commitments how does the board follow up without clear ownership benchmarks and reporting requirements policies risk becoming performative statements of intent rather than commitments to action. Second the term equity is used frequently but often in ways that are vague and unactionable. If equity is truly a priority, it must be defined with numbers and measurable outcomes. What student groups are we prioritizing and what metrics are we using? Without quantitative measures, equity becomes subjective and impossible to evaluate. We also urgently need clear parameters for school closure policy, who makes recommendations, what criteria are used, and when decisions are triggered. Those criteria must be transparent and consistently applied. Similarly, any funding allocation, especi especially for seismic upgrades, should be governed by a transparent
012formula that explicitly incorporates equity. Otherwise, we risk reinforcing historic patterns of unequal investment. PPS committed to producing a comprehensive systemwide plan for all schools by September that is not materialized. Instead, we have detailed provided on the analysis only for schools selected for retrofit without that same analysis available for other schools in need of seismic work. The formulas and calculations that are repeatedly referenced are still not available for the public to assess. Finally, it makes little sense to separate seismic funding from the school closure process. With limited resources, these decisions are inextrinkably inextricably linked. Rather than focusing solely on the highest risk buildings, we should ask, how do we deploy funds to make the greatest number of students meaningfully safer while centering equity? Our community deserves clarity, transparency, and measurable accountability. >> Thank you. >> And
013then we've got somebody on online. >> Yes, Nate McCoy. >> Hello. Uh, thank you for having me here today. Uh, for the record, my name is Nate McCoy. I, uh, McCoy, MCCOY. I am the president and CEO of the National Association of Minority Contractors for the state of Oregon. Happy to be here with you, chair and members of the facility improvement committee. Uh today I'm here representing Nymac, Oregon in partnership with Prescidio on the Portland Public School Bond, representing and supporting contractors, workforce partners, and community stakeholders who we all are supporting to try to get the Portland public school bond delivered for all of our students across PPS sites. Uh my personal involvement and nameac professional partnership with PPS go back many years uh including the time when board Tom Kohler uh Pam Nulls and
014Amy Constam were both on the board with Superintendent Carol Smith. Uh two years ago Nyak issued an equity focused contract to review PPS's procurement policies and been working diligence ever since. Uh today we are at an important point where NEAC in partnership with Prescidio are trying to support the deliver projects. Uh and I think there will be some folks testifying today that will support some of the movement and momentum I think we're starting to gain. Uh there has been some public narrative suggesting Prescidio may not be the right choice for this assignment. And from Nyak's perspective of being rooted in the construction and me being a Portland native and many on our team as well that went to PPS schools, we just want to make sure that we can keep focus on the full picture
015of getting these schools built uh in a timely fashion. Knowing that these capital programs require time, alignment, and clearly consistent leadership to achieve the intended outcomes, we wanted to come and were compelled to come today and make sure that it was clear that we are working towards shared values and shared prosperity alongside you all as commissioners. Um, and some of the the doubt uh is leaving uncertainty for contractors and some of the workforce. I'm happy to see that Jefferson is moving forward and bids are being put out as we speak. Um, and I'm looking forward to a minimal way for transparency um about changes and accountability and addressing kind of these dates and some of the budget concerns um can be addressed at this committee level in future meetings or in any other progressive way
016to make sure that PPS leadership um and our team a part of the Presidio owners rep role um are responsive to your concerns. So lastly, I will just say >> [music] >> um we are encouraged by the committee's work uh and the path forward and hope that we can be a party that you lean on to hear from to make sure the oversight is happening um to your to your targets and to your goals as uh the leaders for PPS. So again, I appreciate the time today and looking forward to the conversation. >> Thank you. >> Thanks, Nate. >> Thank you, Nate. >> Okay, so that wraps up our public comment. Uh thank you everyone and Dr. Dr. Franco, would you like us like to get us started? >> Yeah, thank you again. John Franco,
017senior chief of operations. So, as Director Lefort mentioned, we have several things to talk through on the agenda today. First, we are going to be discussing uh the Jefferson High School Shell option uh to provide an update. We have a comprehensive athletic projects update that we're going to be providing which includes project details and uh tenative schedule. also uh updates in in regards to uh some audit items. So we want to give you a status update there. The bond procurement uh program procurement update and then modernization land use. So quite a bit uh big meeting and so we will look to uh roll through these as quickly as we can. So after each segment I'll go ahead and pause for any questions um that you may have as opposed to waiting till the very end.
018Are we good with that? Okay, great. So up at the dis uh with me is executive director of rise sir Norman. Also we are going to be joined up front. I don't know if Joanna are you coming up now? Might as well come up now. Uh we have TJ um who's one of our senior directors. TJ Hopkins overrise and then Joanna Evansson uh who's also one of our senior directors as well. >> All right. Well, thank you. Thank you uh Dr. Franco. really appreciate the introduction. Um, I am Sarah Norman. I work for Prescidio. I am I serve PPS as the executive director of RISE Real Estate Infrastructure and School Enhancements. Um, in October of 2025, Prescidio delivered an analysis of potential options to expedite the movein date for Jefferson High School. In late November,
019early December, PPS asked Prescidio to proceed with a feasibility study on the shell option presented in the initial report. Prior to getting to the findings in the report, I would like to introduce Andrew Collis and Stephanie Coyle. uh both uh Andrew the president and CEO of Kis Hoffman and Stephanie Coyle um project executive for Hoffman Construction as they are referenced in our in our report and I'd like to give them a chance to speak to the process that we just went through. [clears throat] >> It's green. Okay. Good afternoon. Would you like us to restate names and spell or >> Yes, please. >> Okay. All right. So, Stephanie Coyle with Kas Hoffman. Uh, last name is spelled C O Y L E. >> I'm Andrew Kas with Kas Hoffman. Uh, C O L A S
020and D E R E W. Okay. Well, Sarah asked us to join this evening uh this afternoon to talk a little bit about the process and so uh that's what Andrew and I uh would like to do today. We're well aligned but uh uh I'll share just a couple of thoughts and turn it over to Andrew. Um but uh you know what one of the the tasks that the RISE group uh asked our teams to investigate was the idea of a shell option in an effort to try to accelerate turnover of at least part of the Jefferson High School. Um the net result of that uh it produced a fairly modest savings in schedule. There was a cost associated with that. That information was shared with Prescidio and the RISE group and um eventually uh
021a decision was made. Our team was directed not to pursue that option. And although we all hope that the outcome would have been a greater amount of savings on schedule, I I do feel that from a process standpoint, I think this is an example of a high functioning team and a process that went well in that uh this team examined uh the opportunity objectively. We we did so aggressively. Time is of the essence. uh shared those findings, factual findings with the RISE group uh and then the RISE group dispositioned uh our feedback and provided us direction. So, um you know, when I think about what we're attempting to to do here, which is get Jefferson built as quickly as possible, I think time is of the essence when it comes to those decisions. And and
022that's uh that's how the process has gone so far. I think there will be lots of opportunities in the future, be them big or small or medium ideas. it's it's important that we continue to function uh following that same process. So, thank you. >> Yeah, just building on what Stephanie said again, Andrew Kas. Um first and foremost, I'm Portlander, born and raised here, went to PPS. Uh I graduated from the same school as you're about to graduate, Alexander. So, congratulations on uh that upcoming accomplishment. Uh and went to Benson my first two years. So, um, [clears throat] I think what Stephanie said is really important and when we're looking at these complex projects, we have to continue to look outside the box, right? Um it's very normal in projects like this for us to work
023together with our our ownership groups uh which is the RISE team at this point um to look at different ways that we can accelerate schedule while making sure that we're maintaining the safety for not only the people that are working on site but most importantly uh safety is critical to the entire facility. Right? we have a building that's going to have students and we have to make sure that whatever we're doing, we're looking at it from a lens of safety. So, uh, as we're examining all these different changes and ways that we can try to accelerate schedule, we're also thinking about how do we keep this the students safe, how do we keep the teachers safe, how do we keep faculty safe, and how do we keep the construction personnel that's going to be building
024these buildings safe? And when we went through that analysis, uh, we determined that the shell option wasn't going to be the right move. But I think what we've been able to also realize through this process is the ability to share and think outside of the box. So some of the other examples that have come from this process and you know we have a really good team uh collectively uh that we've been working with since we were selected on this project. we have a great architectural partner on this project. Um, also asking what are some other ideas that we can work with from our team? And some of the simple ideas that some people don't necessarily think about are the systems that we're using. Uh, the system that we use for uh, all of the reporting
025in construction. There's a program called Procore. So, all of our subcontractors, all of our teams use it on a regular basis. There's another program program called Ebuilder that PPS is used to using. Well, we were able to come up with a solution in which we could do a lot more of the work utilizing Procore so that our teams could be most efficient collectively and PPS teams they were able to say hey if we are working in that system will that help you all save time and it really helps immensely. These are little small details that people normally don't think of, but when you're having an atmosphere when people are able to think outside the box, we have really good teams uh and we empower our teams to come up with ideas. And when you're working
026collectively with groups that support that thinking outside the box, you're able to come up with really good solutions. That's one of those small solutions that's going to be really big, not only for our project, but the other projects that are going along the way. So, what I'll say is that there there's a lot of work to do, but what we're really excited about is, you know, we're we're going to be starting that first phase of construction coming up very soon for Jefferson High School. Um, it's going to be early July. We're going to be breaking ground on that first phase and we're working together collectively to uh ensure that we're going to be opening opening that new school. uh we're going to have an incredible asset for the community and the students and everybody that's
027going to be a part of that while at the same time making sa sure that safety is always at the focus of everything that we do. >> Thank you so much. >> Thank you >> musical chairs today with uh but that's awesome. Excuse me. Um, yes, please. I wanted to just make a comment. Um, thank you so much for testifying, um, Hoffman and Cas. Um, I wanted to say that, um, you know, we're a learning organization. That's the focus of our business here is education and learning. And, um, I like that you've taken the lessons learned. Also, u, you've demonstrated your agility in this space, and that's something that I haven't seen in my six years on the board, the ability to quickly um, take in new information and and make a decision. And it's
028you you've already you've demonstrated that right here with this, you know, we're going to we're going to look at this option and see if it works. We're going to throw stuff on the wall and see what sticks. If it doesn't stick, then you kind of change. And that's that's what we're in the business of doing is learning, applying those lessons. And so I really appreciate that. I also appreciate the um you talked about the ripple effect of what one discovery can make down the line. I I also appreciate that. That's a [laughter] a a pebble in a pond or a boulder in a pond. And a pebble sometimes is really effective, too. So, just um thank you for being here. I know you could be doing a million other things tonight probably. Thank you. >>
029Thank you, Director Pass, and thank you, Andrew and Stephanie. Truly appreciate your partnership with PPS. Um now, um I will present the findings of the feasibility report which have been um which are up on the screen now. Um, so we held a couple of different workshops and also had multiple email and uh and phone conversations between Bora uh and callus Hoffman throughout this process that began in December through February. Um what we identified in the workshops the the first things we identified in the uh feasibility study were schedule uh the accommodations can we accommodate the increased enrollment um in the first two floors of the building. Um we also um reviewed cost associated with expediting and then we also uh addressed operational concessions for early occupancy for the school administration. So during the first we
030identified all of these things in our first workshop and then the holidays hit and everybody kind of everybody left the workshop with their homework to do and then we came back together in January. But during the feasibility study, the team was able to identify efficiencies within the proposed schedule. Um, students would be able to occupy early. However, that early occupancy was only recognized kind of to July June of of the 29 school year. So, really not an early occupancy of the school, but um, we were able to recognize efficiencies within the schedule itself. For accommodations, we were able to um incre the increased enrollment, we were able to accommodate all of the students on the first and second floor for the 2829 school year. Uh projected enrollment currently is at 770 with an 85% utilization.
031Um six temporary science labs would be needed and could be accommodated in CTE labs and general education classrooms. um cost. Although we were able to shorten um the schedule and would identify savings within general conditions and general requirements which were approximately a half a half a million. Uh due to the potential for increased labor inefficiencies, the net outcome of the exped um expedited expediting the schedule would be a potential increase to the project budget of a 600,000. some of the operational um concessions that the administration would have to endure during that construction typical of an active construction site. Um increased noise, dust, safety um considerations are inherent to an active um job site. Uh temporary instructional spaces, site constraints, and parking logistics. Um while technically feasible but due to the minimal schedule advantage identified throughout
032the feasibility study um PPS leadership along with RISE fully are in full agreement and have determined that the best course of action is to remain on the current project schedule with an anticipated move in date of August 2029. And this is just an updated schedule that you all have seen on on probably multiple occasions regarding Jefferson High School. Um our fir our public hearing which was very successful for the public uh for the Jefferson High School modernization uh was held on February 11th. Our groundbreaking is scheduled for the 29th and our South Fields will start construction summer of 2026. >> So I'll pause there for questions. Um hi, I am curious about whether um the shell option was ever a foregone conclusion. No, >> no option is ever a foregone conclusion until you put pen
033to paper and do the work to understand what is what is required to make that happen. And so that is exactly what we did over the last couple of months for PPS as we were tasked to do. Thank you. That was my understanding based on past conversations, but I just wanted to confirm that. Thanks. >> Thank you for going through that and thank you for your testimony as well. Appreciated that. So, um, for the goals, I feel like we call it the Presidio Report. It sounds like a movie. [laughter] So, but the goals of the original scope of work were to reduce costs and accelerate the timeline for the Jefferson modernization by up to 12 months. And it sounds like that's not going to happen. We're staying the course with the original timeline. That's correct.
034Are there any cost savings? The I mean with the shell option, we did not recognize 12 months. However, we were able to recognize 2 to 3 months >> which will provide PPS an opportunity to execute and begin owner provided services such as Otis and FFN on an expedited timeline which is beneficial to the district as a whole as we are delivering three high schools in the same summer. These time savings would not have been recognized without this process. Okay. um what was the total cost um in both direct and indirect of developing and analyzing the um the options that were presented including the deeper analysis of the shell option. Sure. Presidio's original contract um at the time of the initial analysis was delivered was $149,500 which included this deliverable and also the interim director position
035for OSM. No additional cost or time were incurred by the district during this feasibility study. In fact, the study provided the sav uh the district's savings from the exercise. In broad strokes, the savings identified a one one and a half month savings of general conditions which is which totals to $47,748. So, not only did this this feasibility study generate ideas for us, it also paid paid for our contract that was initially executed by PPS for the feasibility study. >> Um, were there were any feasibility concerns about the shell option identified during the earlier stages of review, including by the OSM staff? There was significant opposition and high level of frustration at the time that this option was introduced because the Jefferson team had been asked to rework this project on multiple occasions. However, once we
036were in the same room and investigating options, we all rolled up our sleeves to do the work to see how and what we could do to deliver this project for our students and our community on time and on budget. >> Okay. And when when was the shell option determined to be infeasible and um how and when was that communicated to district leadership? >> The shell option is not infeasible. It was determined that the anticipated outcome to do significantly significantly offset the required input at this time is not worth pursuing. Um it was presented to leadership in February. It was determined by the team that we should continue to focus and identify processes and areas where we can continue to find efficiencies within the schedule and the budget. >> Thank you. That's all my questions. >>
037Okay. Thank you. So our next on the agenda is to provide an athletics update and Joanna Evansson will be taking the lead on this. >> Hello Joanna Evansson. I'm the senior director for RISE. Um this is a brief scope overview of each of the planned athletics projects and a preliminary planning schedule. So first up we have Grant Bolt. This is a two-phase project. The first phase is the lighting upgrade. All the permits have been approved. Coordination is continuing for some of the project requirements which is pre uh tree protection across the site. The power utility is scheduling a time to begin their work and hopefully they'll have that in scheduled by the end of the month. Phase two will include seating upgrades, restroom, and concessions, and that phase is currently in planning and schedules are
038still being developed. Next, we have the Jackson Hub. This is a multi-phase project. Phase 0 is set for construction this summer. It's the replacement of the existing track and field with new track and synthetic turf field. Phase 1 A is the construction of the new multi-use field striped for soccer, baseball, softball, and lacrosse. Schematic design will begin on this at the end of the month. And phase 1B is the construction of a new hitting facility which is currently in pre-planning and the schedules are still being developed. Next is the Marshall Hub. This is a two-phase project. The first phase is a replacement of the existing track and field and the tennis courts as well as improved lighting. This work is underway and will be ready for use by the time Cleveland students occupy the site.
039The second phase is the construction of a new multi-use field for soccer, baseball, softball, and lacrosse. This is currently in pre-planning and the schedules are still being developed. And next we have some pictures from Marshall for the ongoing work here getting ready to replace this turf and field. Next, please. There we go. They've taken out the old track and field and it's ready to go for the new stuff. [laughter] Next, we have uh Powell Park. Um so this is field enhancements. And I realized it says baseball field enhancements here. So, just to clarify, it is a multi-use field and that incorporates both soccer, lacrosse, a baseball, and softball. So, all of that would be included um for this improvement along with some seating and some lighting, potentially a restroom. Um PPS is still working with
040parks to come to a use and improvement agreement on this. We are meeting regularly um to work through what that's going to look like for both parties. So, we hope to have that in the next couple of months. [snorts] Next is Roosevelt. This project uh is the baseball and softball field enhancements and a grandstand improvement. Um this includes work on two different areas of the school site. Uh the grandstand expansion would um almost double the size of the existing grandstands and then we would do new synthetic field turf uh for softball and baseball and a new hitting facility. Um because it goes across multiple areas of the site. This is still in pre-planning and the schedules are still being developed. [snorts] Next we have Oh, I missed one. Okay. Did we skip over one? >>
041Sorry. >> That's all right. Uh, so Franklin is a baseball and softball field enhancements. This includes improved synthetic turf fields and bleachers and a new hitting facility. Again, this one is currently in pre-planning and the schedules are still being developed for it. And next we have the West Silvin fields um in support of the Lincoln cluster. This is a multi-use field enhancement, a new multi-use field striped for soccer, baseball, softball, and lacrosse with lighting. And this is currently in pre-planning and the schedules are still being developed on it as well. Next, we have an overview of the athletics planning schedule. This schedule shows the initial phases and timelines for the athletic projects. Some of these projects, as noted above, are still in pre-planning and this overall schedule depicts anticipated timelines. Um, what we're not showing
042clearly on this schedule, so just wanted to clarify, um, is the Jefferson Southfield, which will start this summer. I think that's it. Any questions? Um just a couple. Um so for the grant bowl, it sounds like electric. Has that actually I know how hard you've been working on this. Has it actually been scheduled yet or we're still waiting for >> the power company to >> We're still waiting for that. So they're >> they have to this it's a completely new service to the site. So we're not using the school's electrical service. So, we're bringing completely new service to that west side of the um bowl. So, that it's actually going to require a new pole, power pole as I understand it, which we hadn't originally planned for either. So, we keep going down the road.
043[laughter] Um, >> do you still anticipate installation in May? >> It is possible. I think we're still working through getting all these different parts and pieces together. Also, I know there was conversations today and I don't have the update from that about planning around athletic student use. So, we're gonna obviously our students first and work to make that happen. >> I was going to ask about that if the if we were doing May if it was going to be after track season concludes and um hopefully have the opportunity for our seniors to um be able to use the facility before they graduate. So, I know we've got a tight tight window there. Um, let's see. For Powell Park, I think you answered one of my questions which was about the softball facility. Um, that is
044included even though I think it's just a baseball. Softball's included. Um, so the softball field just so I understand because I know there was an option where it was going to be at Hoffsford a couple miles away. It is definitely going to be part of the PAL park upgrades. Right. >> Yes. There's a multi-use field that is soccer, lacrosse, and ball. And then another ball fields, two ball fields. >> We do want to clarify. I just want to clarify. We are still in negotiation with park and wreck. So we are we are identifying our planned upgrade to Powell Park. Should we be able to bring that negotiation to fruition. So I just want to just want to clarify that because I think it's an important point for this board and for all of us to
045realize that we are open we're in open negotiations with park and recreation. So, I saw that in the in the timeline it looks like you've allowed through the end of May to hopefully get through that process and anything over that I assume would cause a delay. >> So, yeah. So, we have regularly scheduled meetings with parks at this time and like Sarah said, right, we're we're talking about it. The things we've shown are all what we hope for our planning. We're still doing the work. Um, and then we'll just continue to do our negotiations and discussions. So, they're going well. Um so in terms of the sequencing excluding modernization um how is the sequencing uh accounted for schools that have students missing the most instructional time due to inadequate facilities? So obviously instructional time is
046super important for us, right? However, each of these projects in the end is a field, right? So they all have kind of the same result, but to get to that result, they each have very unique sites, layouts, planning. Um, some need co coordination in order to get the modernizations going, right? Some of them have longer land use planning times whether we're doing a single piece on the site or the full site. Um some are require negotiations for land that we don't own. Um so all of these different attributes are informing the timelines here. Um to Brian's uh public testimony questions at the beginning um we did have the conditional use approved in March of 2020 and the design was complete. Are we able to utilize that info or we starting over from scratch? >> We
047are t starting over from scratch. We may be able to use some of the design information that was done at that time, but as far as the land use process goes, we have to start the entire process over because it has expired. >> And I had some questions about Roosevelt's turf being in the 2012 bond and about Lincoln's facility being part of the 2017 bond. And I think Roosevelt is in the first. We've got kind of two phases here. Um, forgive me for scanning. We got Roosevelt starting. I guess what I'm just going to cut to this. Is there any way to fasttrack any of the Roosevelt turf? So the part of the Roosevelt that was in an earlier bond is the grandstand, right? >> But because we are doing these two separate portions of
048the site in order to prevent an expiration on the land use for one, we're going to go for a much the full site land use. So that's taking that time, >> right? If and and just to clarify for you Joanna um in order yes the Roosevelt grandstands were in an earlier bond. Had we pursued just that land use process we would have limited what we would have been able to do at Jefferson High School in the future. So instead we are approaching that as a master planned planned upgrade through our land use process. By doing that, it allows us the flexibility within planning and permitting in order to incorporate not only the not only the what is included for Roosevelt in past bonds, but also what's included um for Roosevelt in the 2025 bond. So,
049we stopped that process on purposely so that we would not pigeon hole ourselves or have Roosevelt waiting longer for any sort of upgrade to their campus. And then for um West Silvin, knowing that this has been we've already gone through this process once with them, what was the rationale? Because I'm looking at the the staggered schedule here and it looks like it's going to be completed last. What was the thought throughout process in terms of in terms of sequencing why it's last versus earlier in the process? I I hate that we're looking at this as though it's last. I don't I I there are there are many many fields that we have to get to and there's many different planning processes and permitting processes that we have to get through just because they're they're listed
050or listed last to go in. We are currently planning and programming and getting people in the right positions in order to execute this work. So any type of expediting that we can do to these schedules, we will. But we can't build everything at one time. It's impossible. We can't build it all at one time. There's only so many there's only so many contractors that will do this work. These are spread out around around the district and so we are trying to um just address these as they come about as they all have unique situations from a permitting and planning perspective and that is a little bit of what influences where they are on the list. >> Yeah. Thank you. I have a one more question uh about the grant lights. Um, is that work that
051Presidio has been supporting because I don't I might be wrong but I don't remember that as like part of the original scope of Prescidio's work. I'm asking Sarah. >> It it is not in our original scope of work but yes we have been supporting it. >> Thank you. >> Okay. No further questions. We are going to uh next >> I have I do have one quick question. Sorry, just just the answer to sort of is has there been if it's not part of Prescidio's scope of work, is there a new scope of work? >> No, she's referring to our she's referring to our contract and what is in our current contract. And as we showed in the board of education meeting um about what is managed by Presidio and what is managed by PPS, it
052is designated through following the guidelines of our current contract with uh PPS. So it is in there. >> It is not. So is there any issue not having it in the contract and having the team working on it? >> So one of the pieces in the contract is uh general oversight right provided by Sarah uh overarchingly and now because we have uh Joanna very specifically uh tied to consolidated projects we're have much more clear pathways in regards to that piece. Sounds like we're really benefiting from the collaboration. So, thank you. >> Yes. And I'll just say this, it has been outstanding um the collaboration as you mentioned, director Chase Miller, moving forward. So, our next piece is uh TJ's going to go ahead uh we'll tag team item as well uh is going to provide
053some uh updates regarding um audit. >> Thank you, Dr. Franco. My name is TJ Hopkins, senior director of the bond program and uh I'll be providing you with the bond audit recommendation updates. So, we've got several recommendations that have been open from from the 2017 and the 2020 bond program. So I'll start with year 2 recommendation number seven is conduct a post project completion analysis for the Madison and Lincoln high school projects to evaluate benefits and challenges of the CMGC delivery method overall as well as specific aspects such as timing of guaranteed maximum price also known as GMP contract amendments and make process changes as warranted. The evaluation should consider components suggested by Oregon Revised Statute 279.103 and provide a comparison of actual pro project cost against original project estimates change order number value and
054type as well as descriptions of success and failures during design and construction. So the implementation um shown as complete is gather examples of OS279C.355 compliant post project evaluations for CMGC projects completed by other contracting agencies. Develop post- project evaluation template for CMGC projects. Gather findings in support of alternative contracting methodology documents for Lincoln and McDaniel uh former formerly Madison. Gather applicable data from Ebuilder. Analyze data, write narratives, and assemble reports. I I have a question about that. That sounds like a big body of work going and and a look back. And so I'm just curious about staff time that that's taking up uh when we're trying to move forward on the projects. >> So one thing I want to say is a lot of these recommendations were were prior to our arrival with PPS. Uh
055this has been staff work that has been ongoing within OSM uh prior rise. Uh we have submitted all of these responses to our um our program auditor and marked them as completed. We've submitted that tracking list that they've sent to us and we've submitted it to them. We actually met with them in February and we have gotten no more we've gotten no further comments from them to date as of this meeting. So we are we are truly trying to put this in the review mirror and trying to really look forward. >> Okay. And then is is the data that was um requested in Ebuilder and is it easy enough to pull out? I'm concerned about this work displacing the work of moving forward. I mean, if it's if it's in Ebuilder, it's easy enough to
056pull a report. That's one thing. If it's manually derived, that's that's another. >> It's I mean, it's a >> and it's also really old. I mean, there's some Is it worth it? >> It's a little bit of both. It's It's not a It's not an easy question. It's a little bit of both because it was worked on outside of Ebuilder and then worked on in Ebuilder. So it would be gathering information from it would be gathering information from both both systems I guess for lack of a better way to say it. >> Thank you. >> Um C do you can you send us a copy of the evaluation template that was created? >> Yes, we can. Thank you. Okay. Year two recommendation number eight again 2017 bond program memorialize and discuss underlying rationale and decisions
057related to the timing of GMP negotiations with the bond accountability committee and present to the board for future CMGC GMP contract amendments as appropriate and again this implementation is considered complete. RISE already discusses GMP timing extensively during bond accountability committee meetings and we will look to include it as a specific update at BAC meetings for projects that have not yet completed their GMP negotiations. The bond accountability committee provides a report to the board quarterly and RISE also provides all BAC meeting materials and minutes to the board as part of RISE's quarterly report. I have a question about that, too. So, we're getting reports to the BAC, which the board doesn't see. We're getting reports to the board, and we're getting the same report here. >> We're getting the same report three times. >> Yes. So,
058so again, I want to just clarify. Remember, this is a comment from 2017. >> This is a comment from an audit of the 2017. We have the rise has made strides to regulate reporting. In fact, since Prescidio's involvement, we have actually standardized reporting to not only the BOE, to the FIO, FIO, and also the BAC. By doing that, we are providing reporting on a regular basis that is standardized across all committees. >> Okay, great. >> And just so we we are going through all of the recommendations from previous bond audits that were not addressed by prior boards to check at these off and close them out. So um was this so one of the recommendations here was to present to the board memorialize discussion underlying rational decisions related to the negot negotiations and present it
059to the board. Was that presented to the board? I believe that I do not know if it was presented to the board. Okay. We would have to follow up with you on that. >> I've I've only been here for so long too. So, I totally understand, director. >> Well, you were on the board. Was it presented to the board? >> Was it just It says complete. That's why I'm asking. >> I just know that we have a whole new project team that seems to be um addressing some of the >> moving forward >> conditions and the key questions that haven't been answered in 13 years. So, appreciate your work. >> Thank you. >> Okay. The year 4 recommendation one complete development of and memorialize policies, procedures, and ebuilder processes related to construction closeout as well
060as train project staff on new closeout protocols before the remaining 2017 bond projects are completed. Again, this implementation is considered complete and has the following. Gather requirements and design project closeout workflow step actors required documents. Develop document templates. Develop Ebuilder project closeout process. Develop training materials. Conduct training with staff. Identify pilot projects and execute pilot. Make adjustments following the pilot project. Go live with project closeout process for all projects. These are all items that have been executed in our biz is complete. I believe this is our final one. Year four recommendation number six from 2017 2020 bond programs require general contractors to consistently report specific safety performance data to RISE. implementation is considered complete and and has the following. Update the project status update process and eBuilder to add required safety performance data fields. Develop
061and deliver training to project management staff. Update contracts to require contractors to report on standard safety metrics at regular intervals. These are these are completed. Um our these protocols have been put in place for all rise staff um and it is a responsibility of our CMGC's to establish their own safety programs that are then reported to the district for monitoring and reporting. >> Thank you. >> Okay, moving forward. Procurement and land use updates. All right, this is the same procurement schedule that's been presented to the board on many occasions prior. So, this is for owner provided services. Again, broken down into three phases. And we're super happy to report that the first phase of our uh not to exceed contracts will be going before the board March 31st. So, that's approximately two weeks ahead of
062of where we plan to be. So that's exciting news. Any questions on the procurement? Okay. Land use status. So today is St. Patrick's Day, a day that we associate with green and luck, but I can assure you there is no luck in the work that's being done on this team on the rise team. It's it's a team of subject matter experts. It's required a lot of fortitude, perseverance, particularly upfront in the design and the land use process. So, I think it's important to just acknowledge that the immense amount of work that has gone into this process. Um, Cleveland High School, so we've had a milestone achievement there. conditional use hearing was on March 4th and we expect that conditional use permit uh sometime in May. So IDAB Wells were also celebrating milestone achievement uh anticipated
063timeline for their land use permit application that actually occurred last week. Last week. So, we're anticipating their land use hearing for June of 2026 and uh Jefferson High School. So, again, there's there's been an immense amount of work in speaking with senior project manager U Steven Efos. He relayed to me that historic resource review approval on March 4th was a work three years in the making. And um I'm I'm just excited to to be able to relay this information. This is essential and critical on the path to construction. So the next the next milestone will be achieving building permit um for Jefferson High School. So we're very excited about that. Uh they also received conditional use uh earlier this month. I also just want to add um the teams are just incredible. The people that
064are working on these projects are so talented. Um and we couldn't do any of this without our senior planner Heidi Bertman who has driven this process for the district and truly we are we are just building support around her. So I just want to say that and also I want to say the community and the outpouring of community for the Jefferson High School project and the Cleveland project. Both of those hearings were so positive. It was amazing. I mean, the Jefferson project, I mean, really, I mean, just so awesome to be just part of that hearing and then the Cleveland project as well. And we are looking for our um design um review um meetings that we've had on IDW Wells have also been very productive and so we're looking forward to that meeting as
065well. So, it's just been a really great great process. Um that's really fantastic to hear about the historic design review at Jefferson because that um neighborhood it's a borderline there's a historic design overlay like literally right across the street and so I was concerned about that going through. So also very impressive uh the time between on Jefferson the conditional use uh hearing and the decision is two weeks. That's unheard of. >> That's like go Portland. Okay. >> Okay. >> Anything else you want to add? >> No, I mean just uh it actually didn't take you know we we went through it. I mean [laughter] it was very impressive but that kind of shows too I mean when we the planning and the preparation that goes into these meetings and preparing material. So we are available
066if you have any more questions otherwise uh we have nothing left to uh present. >> Great. Okay then. So, the next FIO meeting will be April 21st at 4:30 p.m. Um, for agenda items, um, we'll be talking more about that offline, but I do want to include the, uh, district-wide seismic improvement plan that's been requested, uh, was requested by the board in May and, uh, has been, um, mentioned by the community a number of times. I think it's time to tackle that. And, uh, indoor air quality in our schools. And, um, board members, do you have anything that you want to add to the agenda? I just want to let you know that the indoor air quality is also coming through the policy committee and um as part of the climate uh crisis response. Um
067so I don't know I I'm still doing some investigatory. I'm not sure where it lands. >> If it's facilities or is it policy? Okay. >> So it's just a a question. >> Great. All right. So with that meeting is adjourned. Thank you everybody. Thank you. >> Thank you.