001p.m. We'll go ahead and call the meeting to order. Today is Tuesday, August 26, 700 p.m. Starting High School. We'll start with the pledge of allegiance. Ready? Begin. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. All right. U any changes to the agenda, Dr. Finch? >> No changes. >> All right. Communications response to public comment. >> Yeah, that's a placeholder. didn't have public comment last time. >> A staff retirement recognition. >> Is Deb Bole here? I don't think so. We wanted to recognize Deb Bole. Uh retired recently from our transportation department with 35 years of service to the West Valley School District. So, I appreciate Deb's service. I would like to give
002her a hand even though she's not here. That's the positive karma platform. And next we have item C. >> And we have a nice letter from Epic Head Start. The ex uh CEO of Epic is uh Mimi Barbosa. Epic's been a longtime partner with the district and they just received notification that they will be the grantee for the Head Start grant moving forward. And so uh very excited that uh we continue this partnership. Epic runs state funded preschools at Autanum Valley and Mountain View. and then the federally funded Head Start at Wide Hollow. And so they'll be able to continue those services in the upcoming uh years by having that uh Head Start grant be awarded to them. And they they expressed appreciation for their partnership with the district and we certainly express our appreciation
003for the partnership that they have with us. Thank you, Dr. Finch. Next, we come to item six on the agenda, public comment of non-discussion agenda items. I want to get my little um notes to remind everyone. Members of the public who would like to provide public comment will sign in. Speakers will be called in the order that they they signed in to speak. Speakers will be given three minutes for their comments. Public comment is not the proper forum to address concerns about a specific staff member. If a person has concerns about a specific staff member, they should make an appointment with the superintendent to address their concerns. So, with that, do we have any request for public comments? >> All right. No one signed in. >> No one signed in. >> All right. Anyone in
004the audience? All right. Not hearing any request for public comment. Public comments are closed. We will go to the approval of the consent agenda. There are a few items on there. We can take them separate or in entirely depending on if someone would like to make a motion. >> I'll make a motion to approve the entire consent agenda. >> Okay, we have a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented. We'll go ahead and vote. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Oppose. Same sign. Motion carries. 5 Z. Next we come to discussion items. Item number eight, long range facilities planning. So we have five items there. Dr. Fish, do you want to add anything to those? At our last uh board meeting, the board asked me to bring forward a proposal
005uh regarding the defeasence of 7.5 million from the uh remaining funds from the previous project of Summit Eonap Valley and then also to develop a proposal that we could bring to the community to address u the proposal that had been presented for uh consideration on a bond that would be run in February and that would address the facility needs for the district. And so I have been able to bring that both both items to the district um to the table here for consideration and then some background information as well. So first I'd like to just take us there's some information in the board packet but for our audience and just want to take us through um an updated presentation that Corey Plagger had done for the school board here from DA Davidson. So I think
006uh Stephanie's ready to kind of take us through that presentation. Okay. So the first page is the cover page. Second page kind of gives an overview that will talk about the defeasance update, look at the upcoming levy, look at a replacement bond, and then what the total cost and a tax rate would be for all that combined. Uh just a reminder that we do have a operations levy coming up in to be renewed in February. And then we have opportunity with the high school bonds being paid off or retired uh in the upcoming year. Then we have opportunity that we could move forward with the facility needs for the district and there would be no increase to the bond tax rate for the community. Uh it basically be a replacement bond. So the next page
007talks uh number three from Corey's presentation. It's the bond defeasence update. So what we'll see in the next couple pages is is a defeasence of 7.5 million and that's the 7.5 rem remaining that's funds that are remaining from our previous projects of some summit up view and apple valley. Next page shows what the defeasants um would basically return to the voters. It'd be a decrease in the tax rate and it' be over um a period of time there from 2026 to 2038. Uh it would start off with a defeasence or a reduction of the tax rate of 12 cents per thousand. So 12 cents in 2026, 12 cents in 2027 and then a defeasence of 11 cents in 2028. A reduction in 11 cents 2029. So a few years there 11 cents and then the
00810 cents there for one, two, three, four years and then a reduction the tax rate of 9 cents and 20 36 37 and 38. So bottom line is that what would happen, we work with DADavidson. They would take the $7.5 million. It would uh be used to purchase uh state and local securities that would generate um funds to be able to pay the bonds to pay the the debt service to the bond holders. And instead of asking taxpayers for that 12 cents per thousand and 11 cents per thousand, 10 cents per thousand, instead of asking taxpayers to help with that debt service, we would have the state and local securities that would pay the the bond owners. And so there would be a reduction in the tax rate for the West Valley taxpayers. So that's
009uh 7.5 million defeases. The next page is page five and that just shows what that uh rate per thousand would show a reduction in a person's tax rate. And it kind of lays it out there. If the house was 350,000 value, there's the reduction in their taxes over the years. If it's uh 500,000, there's the reduction. Just kind of gives you a sense of what the reduction in the person's tax bill would be over those years. So just again just to clarify, it's not a rebate. There's not a check going to the taxpayers. It's a reduction in their tax rate in the future. Next is talking about the levy. So we talk about bonds are for buildings, levies are for learning. Uh the levy lid in Washington state is now $2.50 per thousand. Uh we've
010always looked at $150 per thousand as the tax rate for West Valley. With a $150 per thousand, you're able to maximize the local effort assistance, which is also called levy equalization. And so, um, we're looking at a$150 per thousand and the renewal of the levy. And you'll see in the next, uh, slide that the rate has actually gone down because the assessed value has gone up. But, uh, when you look at the total tax rate, it would be lower than all of our upper valley districts except for CILA. I know Yakama ran a a levy at $2.50 per cent per thousand. We're not recommending that. We're looking at a $150 per thousand upcoming. That's still to be decided by the board at a future date, but this is just to show a projection of what
011the total tax rate would be with the levy and the bond if we were to have those passed in February. So, the next page is uh eight and that shows that we, you know, met the $150 per thousand back in 2019. Um there was it went up to $1.77 and then there was a correction to a$125 so that we were averaging the$150 per thousand and then over the last few years the tax rate has actually gone down because assessed value has gone up but because of that we have actually lost money through uh from the opportunity that we had for levy equalization and local efforts assistance. So that's why we've continued to have quite a few reductions in the district uh to have a balanced budget and also we've had quite a bit of deferred
012maintenance in the district and that's kind of the situation we're in right now with our deferred maintenance. If we were able to get to the $150 per thousand and have that be a steady rate, we would be able to increase our uh maintenance budget and be able to be in a position where we're not having to always try to catch up on deferred maintenance. So next is looking at replacement bond planning and that's uh slide number 10. So bonds are for buildings and we have this potential where the high school bonds are being retired and so we have opportunity to have a bond to address our facility needs and there would be no increase in the tax rate because it basically be a replacement bond. Number 11, page 11. We're looking at the first line
013shows the 2006 high school bonds and how that rate is 95 cents per thousand 2025 86 cents per thousand 2026 and then they'll be no payment on the bonds because they'll be retired. So there's opportunity there in 2027. We have the Apple Valley and Summit View bonds. Uh you can see the tax rate there. And then the proposed bond to address our facility needs would be approximately 84 cents per thousand. looking at a total tax rate of $153 per thousand. Next page, this shows the combined replacement bond with the 84 cents and the 69 cents. And then if we look at the next page talks about bringing the defeasants into the equation. So page 14 shows that if there's the defeasence, so that's reducing the bond rate from Apple Valley and Summit View. You got
014the $150 per thousand for the levy rate. You got the 58 cents, 57 cents. That's the Apple Valley Summit bonds. It's been reduced because of the defeasants. And then you have the new bond looking at our facilities needs that we'll talk about here in a moment. That'd be 84 and 85 cents per thousand. So the total tax rate would be $2.92 total. We're trying to keep that steady over time so that our taxpayers don't have a fluctuating rate. They would have something to be able to have consistent expectation for their taxes. So 292 and we'll look at that comparison here in a second. Next page talks about the timeline. So, if there's an election February 10th, resolution needs to be filed at the absolute latest on December 12th. Would appreciate if we made a decision
015prior to that so that we could get that uh legally filed in in a timely way. The ballots are out on January 23rd and the county certifies the election February 20th. So, the election is February 10th. And then there's a final page there with DA Davidson. So, I'd like to jump over to the upper valley tax rate and look at that next. Stephanie, you can take us there. There we go. So, the total tax rate comparison, you can see again if we ran the levy and bond together, had the defeasants, West Valley would be at $2.92 total tax rate. You can see comparison to other upper valley schools. The Nachis is at $3.82, East Valley at $3.38. Yakamat $3.26, 26. Highland at $2.98. West Valley would be $2.92. Sila at $287. And then that EP
016and O levy, the operations levy, you can see West Valley would still be the lowest at the $150 per thousand. The other districts have a higher tax rate for their levy. So it would still be even though it would be an increase in the tax rate to get us back to the$150 per thousand, that still be lower than all surrounding districts. And then the final um that that basically covers the defeasence um I'll go ahead and finish the presentation and then we can just have a free discussion here from the board. The next um list then is the spreadsheet that shows updated. There we go. Those those are the needs for the bonds. So the the long range facility committee had identified Autanum Valley Middle School in Mountain View as our areas of priority. In
017addition, there's districtwide needs. And so the board had looked at well, would we be able to address all the needs and keep the bond at the 92.5 million because that is the number we're shooting for. So there'd be no increase in the tax rate for taxpayers. So if that's the parameters, then I was able to work with our administrative team, identify what our needs are in the district and adjust the scope slightly from what the long range facilities committee had recommended. Remembering the commit committee had recommended using some of the remaining funds, but this plan does not dip into the remaining funds. We're able to defease the 7.5 million and we're able to address all the needs in the district. We're able to do that by uh adjusting the scope of the parking that had
018originally been in the first plan that was presented in July. So by keeping the warehouse building, which is an asset that would be beneficial to the district, we could still get around 120 parking spaces we feel for our events. Maybe some more if there was um a way to bring in the other side of that campus of the district office. But by um by not demolishing the warehouse that frees up funds uh to address the other needs which was namely Mountain View uh being able to have that be part of the bond project. So just to go in order from from the top and valley we would renovate the school add classrooms add a cafeteria we there would be a cost the estimated cost for that but then there would also be the state match
019that's the SCAP um acronym there. So that's the budget for that. The middle school we would add on to the current middle school building put all kids under one roof in grades six through eight. There'd be a large addition there, two stories. We'd have additional gym space. We'd have all the needs met for grades six through eight under one building. And that's the cost there with the estimated match that we would have from the state. For Mountain View, we would add safety upgrades, add security cameras, refresh the interior. The upgrades of the campus would include redoing the playground which is very uneven right now and then also additional work on the uh parking area and improving the safety there as well. And that originally was proposed to be paid for from the remaining funds but
020now we would use uh the bond funds. We would not dip into the remaining funds for that project or any other project. And then finally the districtwide is a cost of 8 million. If you look down, that's the uh the total there, the 8 million that below there. So, across the district at Cottonwood, we would add security cameras. Currently, there are no security cameras in Cottonwood, so that increase security there. And then add foundation support to stabilize the foundation of the school. White Hollow, we'd add security cameras. There's no cameras there currently. We'd upgrade the intercon system, it's original from 1987. We'd upgrade the flooring in the school. We fix the parking parking lot curbs, refurbish the gym floor, and add a HVAC system for the gym and kitchen. There's been no HVAC for that
021area of the school since it was built. All of our other elementary schools. Well, all of our schools have HVAC in their gym and kitchen area. The junior high, we would remodel that for community use and district offices. So, that's the cost there. We'd also refurbish the gym floor. Originally, there was a curtain uh that's needed to be able to teach two classes in the gym. It's often needed for repair. Uh we feel that's an immediate need and so we're going to use current district funds. We're not going to wait for the bond to uh fix that need. And so we'll uh we'll be able to work with our existing >> cost of that. I forgot. >> Uh I'll phone a friend in here. Ryan McDaniel is our new assistant superintendent. So >> I don't
022have that information. Yeah, maybe you can pull it up for us. I think it's uh the innovation center uh for their innovation center in high school. They have security cameras currently, but they're quite old models. The high school has original and so, you know, we're retiring the bonds in the high school. So, the cameras are not 20 years old. The bond, you know, but they're about 15 to 16 years old. Think about what your cell phone was 16 years ago. And uh so the cameras that we currently have in the new building, Summit View in Apple Valley, they are high quality. You're able to zoom in. You're able to really see anything that's happening with the cameras at our high school and our innovation center. We need to upgrade to get to that quality. And
023so this uh this would be a important upgrade for us here for security both at the innovation center and the high school. Innovation center would be upgrade to the security camera, upgrade the intercom system, refurbish the gym floor and refurbish the locker room floor. High school would be same. Upgrade the security cameras, upgrade intercom and refurbish the gym floor. And then finally, we had the district uh project to resurface tennis courts. That's needed. Um that's needed as soon as possible. And then the final was uh convert the existing administration building, demolish that, convert it to parking for um the various events that we have at the stadium. And so we'd be able to have additional parking there. that would be a benefit for our district as well. So, we're able to move all of those
024projects into the bond and we have the estimated match there as well. So, I basically feel like I've been able to u come back and deliver what the board had asked to be able to see if we can make all the facility needs upgrades as needed for the district, not increase the bond rate and not dip into the remaining bond funds. Ryan, >> what specific project were you looking at? >> The curtain. It was combined. It was the the gym floor and the curtain and we took away the curtain as the cost. So, we can get back to you on that actual house. >> All right. So, I I think that's enough of my presentation. I would certainly want to give the board a chance to discuss. But, you know, discussion that we need to
025have is uh is this a proposal that uh the board can support moving forward? If so, we're we would be able to bring a defeasence uh resolution to the board at the next board meeting. We've had the community uh meetings previously. Uh defeasence was included in the previous resolution and so we're ready to move forward with any defeasants as the board sees necessary. And then um also we had talked about doing a community forum quite soon in two weeks. Uh personally I would request of the board that we move that community forum a couple weeks out maybe uh to October 1st. that would give some time to work on present having this information that I presented tonight having in a real readable format and presentable that we can communicate on that. You know, it's basically
026a a first draft proposal to hear feedback from the community. Is this something the community wants to see us move forward with and is this something that they can support? Uh it would be nice to have some materials that would be a little more user friendly and by moving the community forum to October 1st, it would give administration some time to prepare those materials and have it be more user friendly. >> All right. So, I'm gonna stop talking now and uh it's all floor is all yours. >> Anybody? >> Well, I I'll just say I appreciate you guys uh waiting on me. I did go back and watch the the board meetings. I missed being sick and all and I do appreciate you guys waiting on me on the decisions and stuff. And so, um
027and I I think this is really a good presentation. I appreciate the work you put in to come back and put all these things together. And I am honestly in uh support of this proposal. I feel like we've had lots of conversations around this and back and forth and kind of been on both ends of the spectrum, but I think this is a good good place for us to be. Um when I think about the bond, uh it is not going to be easy to pass the bond. Uh but I think uh the the defeasement is going to go a long ways in in helping us to pass that bond. Uh you know what we we're we're at a a temperature of taxes right now that uh where it's just it's getting harder on folks.
028And so as much as we can help people and keep moving forward, I think this does a good job of doing that. So, um, I'm in favor of it and I do appreciate the work you did, Dr. French. >> Thank you. >> I said a lot last week, so say a whole lot this week, but I didn't really expect all this, but I excuse really appreciate Dr. Finch taking the time putting all this together. And I I agree. I like I like this proposal. I think it honors the facility committee. I think it honors the community. I think it honors I think it's just a good balance all the way across from all our discussions >> and uh I I have since last time we met, you know, really looked a lot at this. We
029thought some of the things that were said and I I do pretty much stand by what I said two weeks ago. I don't really change my mind on that, but I really like this proposal and this switch. So, um I'm in support of this and I appreciate all the work. >> I also said a lot uh as well. I concur with this proposal. Um something that Mr. Walcott uh said in the last um in our last discussion that really resonated with me was the um the I'll call it $3.5 million that um was air quotes new projects to use for the remaining bond proceeds if I didn't say that exactly right. uh you know, basically it would be it would be an amendment to the to the prior bond proposal to amend for those those
030new projects so that we could complete them with remaining bond proceeds. And that resonated with me um in that as again not to put words in Mr. Walcott's mouth, but but essentially this idea of of of again sort of having the hearings, asking for the permission, and then asking for more money, couldn't we just make it all? And so, um, Dr. Finch's proposal of let's here's the bond rate, here's how we can make some adjustments so that we're not making another amendment to the prior bond resolution, still defeasing. I think all of that makes a really a lot of good sense. I'm I'm uh I'm excited that uh I'm excited that no matter what happens relative to um the levy, our upcoming bond that we are doing something that I think according to DA Davidson
031is the largest defeasance that they've ever heard of. Um I mean they're they're like the number one of the number one uh you know financial advisors for you know school districts and so they're pretty in tune to all of this. So I'm really proud of of I'm really proud of that that I'm really proud that we are discussing moving forward with that. I think that's a no matter what happens, I think with with regard to our EPO level and and our bond, um that's a good thing for our community and I'm I'm glad that we're heading in that direction or at least it it appears that way. So, um thank you Dr. Finch for all this information together quickly. I also support uh allowing a little bit more time uh a couple more weeks on
032the uh uh community form. I think that's I think that's also good. I do too. That's a good >> Thank you. >> This is really excellent, Peter. Thank you so much. Everything about it strikes the balance of all the concerns that we had. It really honors all of the principles that we talked about. I love the idea of the October 1st. It gives us something to celebrate and gives us clarity in what we're talking about. It honors the long-term facility plan. I think it does it all. So, great job. >> And also, just FYI, I was able to crunch the numbers here. So the curtain is 43,750 and we'll take that out of our current maintenance budget so that we can move forward with that. That's immediate need. They need that to be able to
033teach classes at the junior high. It's an immediate need this year. So we'll work on go ahead. >> Okay. >> So um I think I'm in similar agreement. I had someations previously at the last meeting and it took me a little while to talk it through and think it through. So, I've kind of come to terms with a lot of the things that um were said here tonight. I totally agree. You did a great job on putting this together. Peter, I think the thing that moves the needle for me a little bit more or quite a bit more is the fact that we were able to incorporate the long range facilities plan into this essentially and not increase the overall uh bond rate that we're asking for. So, I like that immensely. Um, the one
034hesitation I have, but not enough to stop me from supporting it, is I do like the financial cushion that extra $3 million would have given us if we had kept that in there. But I I I can go along with this because it does do more of what we what we need and what we want. Um, I also like the fact that uh I think the timing is very good for this right now. Just, you know, the economic climate is changing. we're giving money back instead of asking for more. It just sends a nice message that resonates with the community for me. So, I'm ready to support it. I mean, you all heard my reservations before. Um, however, you know, in the best interest of what's I feel is best for the school district. I
035think it's time to move forward and get this thing done. So, >> can I make a slight clarification to something that Mr. Strong just said? >> Yes, I know what you just Go ahead. >> We're not giving any money back, >> right? We are asking for less. >> Right. Right. I Yes. >> That's an important I mean again not that's an important thing to say. >> Yeah. >> I wish I could I wish that the board could write everybody rebate checks but that's not >> within the law >> um to do that. So the the the whole thing is is is we are we are asking for less >> and this is going to go to you. this is going to go to pay the debt service. >> Yeah. And I I stand corrected phrase
036that correctly, >> but it's just I think it's it's an it's it's something that as we've gone through even before um in the defeasence process and the and the and the use of the excess bond proceeds. Um it's very important to be very clear about what this is and what this is not. Yes. Yeah. >> And I think we're clear on that. We're not giving back checks. That is clear. So, I think everyone knows that. But, thank you for the clarification. >> Um, so with that, I think it sounds like we're all kind of in agreement here with what to do here. And I I also support the the change of the date for the community forum as well. Um, that's an important point. I do think that's an important step as well. community must
037be informed and a chance to express their concerns about any part of this plan. So I support that date change. I didn't hear from the others anybody that absolutely >> yes sir. >> All right. So Peter, you have a marching orders there that go forward. >> All right. So just to summarize, I'll bring a resolution for the defeasence of 7.5 million at the next uh school board meeting. uh we'll begin uh pulling together materials that are very uh user friendly and we'll advertise uh October 1st uh community forum that we'll have here at the high school auditorium and we'll make sure to really advertise that and make sure everyone knows to come and give us feedback about this bond proposal >> and I think I I think at the agenda meeting I think I might
038have asked for it but if would you be able to look into schools that have passed a bond on recently in the last few years successfully, right? >> And and maybe somewhat some of the outreach stuff that they did. >> Oh, yes. To help kind of get the word out just so that we can maybe >> copycat them. >> Yep. We'll do that. And then also, yeah, we had talked about this at the previous board meeting, but there's some uh new people in the audience that uh previously they uh Dia Davidson, Cyer had shown that when you run a bond and a levy on the same date, you actually have a better chance of passing a levy. And that's probably because you're working to get out the vote for the bond, the bond has a
03960% threshold, 60% majority pass, the bond, the levy has a 50%. So maybe that's why that you actually have a better chance of passing the levy when you run the levy and bond on the same ballot proposal. >> I thought he said that it was a better chance to pass both. >> I believe so. I mean you're right. Yeah. Okay. Was both. >> I guess the main the main thing was people were wondering well does it hurt the levy to run a bond and a levy at the same time? It actually you have a better chance of passing the levy and it's probably because you're working to get off the vote. >> Okay. >> All right. Any more comments? Any more discussion from the board members? >> All right. So, we will move on to
040public comments on discussion items. Same kind of rules are in effect here, but if anybody has comments on any of these discussion items, um you can step up to the podium there to speak. Good evening. I'm glad you guys are finally going to vote next time. Um, Stephanie, can I steal your your >> So, on page I think, yeah, this on page eight, just some point I had a email discussion with Dr. Finch because when I originally saw this, I was a little confused. And you'll notice if you look at the 4-year period uh the previous levy which runs from 2023 to uh this current year you see that total amount that's bracketed 27 million and I know you guys need to review this to make a vote and that $150 and Dr. a claim
041to me says hey it's just placeholder right now and the finance department is going to come up with you know it's there however for me tax something to think about this comes to your attention so I'm not I haven't made mine mine up personally either um the $150 amount um unlike the previous le you notice it's in a static straight across amount and I know that um you know the actual number the estimated number because Dr. Finch didn't know what it was. You know, if you just kind of ballpark it, looks like it's about 35 million, maybe a little bit higher because you have the 3% growth. Not sure. So, we'll have to see what that number is. And so, D Finchy did alluded in your your open preamble. I think it's very important as
042a taxpayer so we understand. I like the idea that you mentioned to me before the group here about deferred maintenance because if we look over the history, we did accumulate a lot of um items that weren't addressed. And so, this could be a museum. At the same time there's a little give or take, right? So if you go to page 14 which has it combined and it shows the um the 292 figure which total so um you know >> facility maintenance that's needed in our district. So not just the tennis courts but we would be doing it for the tennis courts but also for the HVAC systems and and all the things that we kind of ran into recently that had all been deferred maintenance. So you're absolutely right. And then what we would do
043if we were able to run the levy for example at $150 per thousand there would be additional funds then that would be generated. They would come into the general fund and then we would be able to take those general funds from the levy and transfer them into the capital projects. It does get confusing because when we run the bond that's going to be money that we sell bonds and they go into capital projects and we do the big remodel of middle school and the autonum valley and all that. So, that's where it gets confusing because the levy goes into the general fund, the bond money goes into the capital projects fund. Um, but you're right, it would be good if we were at a place where we could transfer more money over and have designated
044funds for maintenance of of many of our assets in the district. Uh, unfortunately, we're really not in that place right now. And one reason is because um we've been uh having declining revenue. It's a little different difficult to talk about because the way the state funding is and such, but basically we've lost the regionalization funding from the state. We've been a reduction in the local local effort assistance, the ley equalization because our tax rate did go below $150. And so you're starting to lose every every time it's lower than that. Um and then um over time, you know, there was this additional federal money that was coming into the district and that's all gone away, the ESSER money. So, there's just been a lot of reductions that we've had to deal with over the last
045couple years. Um, and we're really not in a place where we could transfer more money, but that would be a good thing to do. And and down the road, I'm hoping we're going to be in that position that we can have more money designated for maintenance and and long-term projects like that when we're setting money aside that we'll be able to address the issues when they arise. >> Dr. French, you mentioned the um when our our levy rate goes below a certain point, then the what we would get from the state drops out. >> Exactly. >> So, and what is that point? >> It's the $150 per thousand. When it goes below the $150 per thousand, then you're starting to lose levy equalization. So the state um has a system where for property poor districts
046and so West Valley is considered property poor cons compared to Mercer Island and Bainbridge Island and all those uh districts around Puja Sound area. So that there's actually money to support West Valley if we have that $150 per thousand. As when it starts going below that then we start to lose on that equation. we lose the levy equalization money and that's that's why we've had to make reductions over the last couple years. We've been losing revenue. >> So just to counter Mr. Mayor's thought, but um is there so what if you make it a $151? Cuz I'm just curious like if we were above $1.50 at what point did it drop below that? >> Right. That's why we we that's why we have uh in the past we've been targeting the $150 per thousand uh
047because that's that's where we said our community would like to be at where we're maximizing the local effort assistance but um but not going over it because we're able to live within that budget. uh if you when they did the mccclary uh reform they had a limit of $150 per thousand for all districts and then after one year there was a lot of lobbying especially from the pug sound area that they could raise more money and why are you limiting them so they allowed it to go to 250 per thousand and then that's the cap right now got so there's been a lot of um political discussion about the levy cap over the years prior to mccclary there was even greater discrepancies in levies among districts and there So this this effort to um basically
048cap the levy and have more equality um or equity of funding across the state. One year later they raised it to 250 uh but allowed the levy equal equalization at $150 and we west valley we've always been shooting for the $150 per thousand. That's been our target. >> Okay. Thank you. So, um, that that raises another question because for review, when we're going to when we're going to pass the resolution to put the the replacement levy on the on the ballot, it's not asking at a rate. It's asking at a total dollar figure. And that total dollar figure is as then divided into the uh total assessed value of all property within the district. So, it's not like, "Hey, will you support a $1.50?" That is how it's advertised, but in actuality, it's it's it's
049it's a number that is it's a num it's a total number. Um, it's a total number. And that's why over the last several years it was $147 and $127 because the assess because the total assessed value has gone up over time. So my my question back to I think the Mr. Keart's point is so that comparison of $1.50 that's based upon the that's based upon the what the voters approved as compared to the assessed value which is outside of our control. >> Correct. So you're so in terms of trying to crunch the numbers and and and the team will do that is is trying to figure out okay well where does where does the total assessed valuation of property value in west valley land in 2026 and in the years beyond. We've always been very
050conservative in that estimate because you don't want to uh go the other way right where you've got this big number thinking that that the assessed value is going to go much higher than that. So, we've always been a little bit conservative, which is why that number has gone down. So, um it's TBD to determined, I guess, at this point. But you got good questions, uh >> and good questions about what that number would be, the uh the actual amount that would be go on the ballot. Uh basically, we've really been focused on getting this prep preparation for tonight's board meeting with the defeasants and what the bond would look like. And really the next step now is to really start focusing on the levy and what that what we'd start um you know bringing to
051the board for consideration on that. >> It should be pretty close >> to the assessor being able to tell us what the total assessed value in 26 will be for >> uh I mean that should be really soon I think next month right something coming up very soon so we'll should be able to hone in on that pretty soon. >> Yeah. And I just wanted to go back to a point that Mr. Walcott brought up and it just started getting me thinking about this. You know, why don't we put X number of dollars aside for each project? And I'm thinking to myself, part of that reason could be that some of these items like when a HVAC system goes out or boiler goes out, we can't predict when that's going to happen and so how
052long those items could last 10 years, 20 years or 5 years. So that makes it more difficult. But the concept I think is a good one. You know that we should explore a little bit more down the road and just figure out even if it's not to like a football field. We know that in 10 years it's going to take us a million dollars to replace it. But those other items even if we could come up with a number that on average we have done every year we come up with a better number than what we have been. I think in the past it's been a result of how much money can we put in there rather than the reverse calculation of okay this is about what we've been spending every year we need to
053put that maybe a little bit more so I like that idea it's just something we should explore a little bit more so >> all right um >> I'll make a motion to pass >> all right we have a motion to approve the first first item on the agenda number one transfer of funds. We'll go ahead and vote. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I oppose. Same sign. >> Motion carries. 5 Z. Next is item two on there. Anyone have questions or would someone like to make a motion? [Music] >> I'll move to approve uh 258779 surplus of uh personal property technology equipment. >> All right. We have a motion to approve 25-08779. We'll go ahead and vote. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Oppos. Same sign. Motion carries.
054Next, we have item C on the agenda here. Um, under 10, approval of the updated fee schedule. There are two items there. One item really, but anybody have any questions or concern about any of those? Just the only the only change from the previously adopted fee schedule is the adult lunch price is moving from $4.75 to $525. That's the only change. >> All right. Anyone care to make a motion? >> I'll make a motion to approve the the fee schedule. >> All right. We have a motion to approve the updated fee schedule for 2526. We'll go ahead and take a vote. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Post. Same sign. Motion carries 5. Next we have items arising. Item 11. Anybody? [Music] All right. No items arising. Uh item 12, reports,
055travel log, district travel log. Dr. Finch, anything? >> No, no, nothing to add there. >> Okay, moving on. Item 13, superintendent report. just provide a written report uh if the audience was interested in reading that about uh update on the PAL program. But just the summary is that we looked at enrollment last spring. We made a decision to go to multi-age classrooms, a grades 3, four combo and a four five combo. Um as we looked over the summer and uh families made their decisions, it turns out that all of the in district students who were offered placement have been placed. In addition, three out of district students have been able to be placed in the classroom as well. I know we had testimony last spring that there were out of district families who were hoping
056to have placement and so we were able to place three of the out of district uh students back into the PAL program and that's where we're at. Um we had the teachers working over the summer to develop a scope and sequence for project based learning so that students wouldn't have the same projects every year. there' be a real, you know, a great sequence of learning with the projects and then also uh met with the teachers before school started and they're working on identifying a date for a showcase of our highly capable programs from across the district. We'll house the showcase. We'll we'll have that at White Hollow and that'll be in February as families are thinking about coming to the PAL program, but we'll have the middle school and high school students there as well
057and just share all the great things happening in our highly capable program. So that's the update from the superintendent report. >> Thank you Dr. Finch. Um item 14 for reports for development hearing. None. We will go into executive session. It is 7:50 30 minutes. >> I think it'll be shorter than that. >> 30 minutes. Okay. 15. >> Yeah, I think 15. >> Okay. We'll go in to executive session. 15 minutes. No action be taken. No. >> All right. So, we'll be back at 7:50 at 8:05. >> 8:05. All right. So, we the meeting is adjourned officially uh today, August 26, Tuesday at 8:03 p.m.