WVSD #208 School Board Meeting 07-08-2025

001ended at 6:55. Five. Nice. is 700 p.m. Today is Tuesday, July 8th. We'll go ahead and get started by calling the meeting to order. Uh first of all, thank you for those of you who came out on this hot summer day to be here and join us. All right, we'll go ahead and begin 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. Uh, any changes to the agenda, Dr. Finch? No changes. All right. Communications. Just one communication. We have a response to public comment. At the schoolboard meeting on June 24th, a community member commented regarding prayer at schoolboard meetings. Uh the response is this.

002The community member mentioned an occurrence that took place at a city council meeting in California. A schoolboard meeting is different than a city council meeting. Case law has addressed this issue specific to schoolboard meetings. A school board is prohibited from sponsoring or endor endorsing prayer at a schoolboard meeting. A schoolboard meeting is an open public meeting. This means that it is a meeting of the school board that is open to the public. The public comment section of the meeting is intended as a time for the public to provide input to the school board. Is not intended as a time to circumvent the prohibition from sponsoring or endor endorsing prayer at a schoolboard meeting. Case law notes this specifically and prohibits quote the creation of a de facto opening invocation during the public comment period close

003quote. That concludes the response to public comment. All right. Thank you, Dr. Finch. Next, we go to uh let's see item six on the agenda, facilities master plan. Do we have a presentation for this? Yes, we do. All right. Long awaited. All right. Well, I appreciate the board uh had requested it was time for us to look at our facilities master plan. The last plan was presented to the board in 2020. uh it's a effective practice to uh revisit the plan at least every five years. And so here we are 2025. We had a study and survey uh last summer and then we had a facilities long range facilities master plan um long range facilities planning committee that began in November and is now culminating in this presentation here July 8th. So very excited. We

004have Natalie Sherzad and Tony Fina are representatives of the committee and they've agreed to present. We have our consultants Phil Crocker and David Bodin here this evening. And then we'll have another presentation uh regarding the bond rate. That's from Corey Plagger from DA Davidson who's here this evening in person as well. So we'd like to have the board go ahead and join the audience. So we'll be able to look at the presentations. We'll go through both both presentations first and then we'll have the board come back and have some question and answer for our consultants. We don't need to have question answer. I told Natalie and Tony they don't have to be prepared for question and answer but we we have our consultants that can do that. What's that? Uh no I do have Thank

005you. All right. So, we'll just go ahead and jump right in. So, good evening board. Uh I'm Tony Fina. This is Natalie Sherzad. Uh obviously, we are excited to be here and present to you with an update and recommendation from the Long Range Facility Planning Committee. So for a little history and background, uh the long range facility planning committee was formed after the successful completion of the high school in 2006 and the failed bond attempts that followed. It was clear that the public wanted a wellthoughtout plan to address address the district's uh maintenance and of aging buildings and their teaching plan to best utilize the space they've been given. A study was commissioned and paid for by a grant from the OSPI to study and survey the buildings for two things. One is physical condition

006and two is the functional adequacy. That survey was used to create a long-term plan that became the basis for the 2019 bond to replace Apple Valley and Summit View along with returning the elementary schools to K5. Part of that plan is to reassess the schools every 5 years. So, a new study was completed in fall of 2024. Uh, that study graded the physical condition of all the schools and scored them on a rating of poor, fair, good, and excellent. Uh, as you know, kids in time are hard on buildings. Uh, the survey also graded the functional adequacy uh of each school. uh which is uh looking at each at the classrooms, the size of the classroom, the number of students per classroom, technology in the classroom, the safety of the of the uh facility, uh

007specialty spaces such as music and science, and the support spaces uh for admin and custodians. Uh that too got graded uh on a rating of good, fair, poor, and unsatisfactory. What's that? Oh, okay. So, um we brought back together our long range facilities planning committee in November of 2024 about eight months ago and um some of those group members are here tonight, but um we had 30 members of the community and staff um of the district staff total along with our expert consultants that are listed there. Oh, no. Yep. Okay. So we worked over six work sessions since last November to study the facilities condition reports on the educational programming and financial information and all of the data that was provided um that Tony just mentioned the functional adequacy of the space and then also

008the facilities conditions and um determined the needs based on that data and educational programming needs of the district. And we also considered the community's response to to what our recommendations would be. And and um so we had some overarching goals and objectives for our planning team. Um the first one was with the high school bond retiring, we wanted to keep the bond rate at or below the current rate that it's at now. And we also wanted to keep community assets like the junior high gym, the junior high auditorium, and the central kitchen that are located at the junior high right now. Um those are used by the entire district right now. So recognizing the importance of those and then also we really wanted to define the mid-level campus. Right now it's kind of two separate

009buildings that are an ad hoc one campus but um we wanted to move all those kids into one building grades 6 through 8 to just really um serve them as one school. And then we wanted to obviously update facilities with the highest needs, the ones that were more marked poor condition um on our functional adequacy and physical assessment. and then also if we could address any additional district-wide needs when possible. So with those goals and objectives in mind along with the building report, this committee worked hard and asked the tough questions to explore all the different possibilities as we move forward into the future. We are proud to make the following recommendation for the board to consider. Uh this recommendation fixes the schools with the poorest condition rating and lowest functional adequacy scores along with

010aligns with the teaching goals of the district. Uh we would like the board to run a bond in February of 2026 to one replace uh a Tanam Elementary with a modern school and expand its size. Two, update Mountain View Elementary with a full refresh uh which isn't a new school. It's going into the existing school. uh and um make updates for safety. Uh we want to combine the mid-level campus from a middle school and a junior high to one middle school and it'll house grades six, seven, and eight. Uh we would then like to repurpose the junior high into a district office and maintain the gym, the auditorium, and the central kitchen. And we want to complete uh the necessary capital improvement projects uh from across the district. So let's go into each school. So,

011the first one's going to be a TANAM. A TANAM was built in 1950 and was last updated or even touched in 1993. It's rated poor from a physical condition and a functional adequacy. Uh we're proposing a full modernization much like Apple Valley and Summit View. Uh this is going to add six classrooms, a cafeteria, and much needed specialty space. um a TANM that that the footprint of uh within the district is the largest. It pulls from the largest area all the way from Tampa down to what is that 53rd or almost 52? Yeah, 52nd. Uh so and the Atanum Valley is ripe for uh future growth and expansion. So we want this school to be able to have that capacity to handle that space. Uh the total cost of this project is going to be

01238 million in today's dollars to add the additional space and do the full remodel. Uh next up is going to be Mountain View. So Mountain View was built in 1949 and was last updated in 1993. I was actually there in 1993. That was my last year there. Go Mustangs. I can tell you it looks the same now as it did when it was updated in 1993. Um it it now is rated poor from a physical condition and a functional adequacy. Uh this is a refresh uh and update to make it look and feel like a well-loved school again. Uh it will update the water pipes and improve uh safety. The total project cost of this is going to be 2.3 million. Okay. Okay. So then at the mid-level campus, like we talked about earlier, we

013right now we have grade six in the middle school and grade eight in the junior high and across the parking lot from each other and then the seventh graders move back and forth throughout the day. Um so it's not ideal for safety, students being outside um unsupervised doors being locked um that sort of thing. And then it's also really not um efficient from a educational programming because you have teachers in one building or the other and they can't serve all the students together. Um, so we really wanted to keep them or put them all together. So to do that, we're would add a big addition onto the middle school um and move all the students over to the middle school. That would also that building also needs a um full upgrade to the HVAC system.

014So we do that as well. Um and then um we would repurpose the junior high. We can leave it mostly as is with a little bit of updated maintenance um and use it for district offices. And then also we keep the kitchen and the gym and the auditorium that are really important district resources there. So um it the junior high was built in oh 1978. So the junior high right behind TAM and Mountain View is our next oldest building. So if if we were to keep it as a school, it would need a massive amount of capital to update it. So, I think in our group that we all discussed, um it was cheaper to add on to the middle school than to try to redo the entire junior high. Um cuz the middle school

015was built in 1995, so it's it's newer. Um it doesn't need as much updating. So, um that's the plan for that one. It also enable us to use our state matching funds for the middle school building. So, there's kind of a domino effects of the timeline that they all kind of work together. So, this timeline assumes that the bond would be passed in February of 2026. Um, that's kind of what our recommendation is. If it doesn't happen at that time, it would obviously cause all of these things to happen later. So, um, in 20 assuming February 2026 passage, then um, we could start on some district projects in the summer of 2026 and start doing some minor upgrades at the junior high to just keep it up going for the next several years. Um, and

016then we would start construction on the mid-level addition and expansion in 2027 and 2028. And then once the seventh and eighth graders move out of the junior high, the junior high could be could house the Atanum students for two years while their school is being redone. So that creates some efficiencies for the Atanum construction project with having the students offsite for two years. Um, so they would that's good use of the junior high. And then eventually when a TANM is done and those students move back to their new school, the um junior high would be turned into district offices um like we discussed. So that's kind of a high level timeline. And then um so here's the the capital costs for the middle school campus um or the middle middle school building and the HVAC

017upgrade and the 85,000 foot addition 71 million in 2025. And then the junior high um has Oh, wait. Did I go too high? Yeah, there. Okay. The junior high has um 3.3 million in minor updates needed just to keep it going. Um and then to convert it to district offices. Um you can see gym floor, auditorium upgrades which would be used in the long term and then um water piping and the district administration offices. Thank you. Okay. And then um we had some other capital projects that the other schools in the district that aren't getting major upgrades. Um Cottonwood needs some foundation repair. Wide Hollow has some flooring. And then um gym floors at the innovation center in the high school. And then finally, once those district admin offices move off of Zero Road, we

018would um convert all of that space to parking for the football fields and um play other play fields. So that's those are kind of the other five minor projects relative to minute. Okay. So you can see now all of the projects that we just went through outlined for you. In the middle is the 2025 cost and then looking at the timeline we know those are going to need to be escalated for the out years of our timeline. So you can see the cost on the right for the the full value is 141.3 million and that's assuming a 2026 bond. The good news is we don't have to shoulder this all ourselves. There is state matching money available uh and it's going to be on the two biggest projects. So, uh, because a TANM is a

019full replacement, we have we can maximize our match there. And because the middle school is an expansion and a replacement of the junior high, um, we can use we can utilize our full match there as well. So, of the 1.4 or 141.3 million, uh, we've got 43.8 million available in in state matching. So the total cost to the district would be 97.4 million. Um one of the things that the we one of the things that the board had asked us uh back at the June 2023 board meeting was they asked this committee to come back for recommendations uh for utilizing 2 to6 million so 2 million to $6 million worth of the existing bond funds. So, we did take that into consideration and we'd like to propose using 4.9 million in this project. So, by

020using 4.9 million of the previous or existing bond funds, uh this will allow us to start the construction and start that timeline in the summer of before the bonds are actually even issued in 2027. Um, so it would allow us to start the timeline and make a lot of those improvements in advance. Um, it also reduces by starting it early reduces the escalation costs. As you saw in that slide, things get expensive because this is a six-year timeline between 2026 to 2031. Um, uh, it's also going to lessen the tax burden because we're going to ask for less um, in the next bond. Uh it addresses the needs to safety and mechanical systems now uh before they become expensive emergency repairs. Uh so here are the recommendations for that 4.9 million. Uh we at the

021junior high we would do the auditorium now. We do the gym floor and uh upgrade the water pipes. at Mountain View, we could do the entire Mountain View facelift uh without utilizing any of the bond money uh or the new bond money, I should say. Uh Cottonwood has some foundation cracks that need to be addressed and the gym floor needs to be restored. Uh Wide Hollow is flooring throughout the building, staff uh side uh lot, parking lot, sidewalks, and the gym floor. The innovation center is the gym floor, locker room, and locker room floors. At the high school, it's gym floor refinishing and restriping. And then the dis uh um by the district office is going to be the tennis courts uh refinishing those. So those are that's going to be 4.9 million in existing

022funds. Uh so looking at the total cost if we utilize that that 4.9 of uh of existing funds um it brings the total cost uh of the bond. So this is going to be the total bond cost is going to be a request to the to the taxpayers and to the voters of 92.5 million and that's maximizing the matches uh utilizing some of the remaining bond funds that we already have. And what I found really appealing about this is um if we spend 92.5 million uh and get 43.8 million match, that means we're we're getting a 47% match on our money. So that's really impressive. You don't see school districts getting a 47% match on what they spend. So looking at the bond rates, uh again as Natalie said, our goal was to keep bond

023rates at or below existing bond rates for the taxpayers. So in 2027, the high school bond is paid off and done. So you can see the high school bond is gets removed in 2027. Um, and that's where we would then propose a 84 and we're projecting this uh to be 84 cents uh for every uh was it $1,000. So we'd be asking for an 84 cent. So the total taxpayer liability is going to be one one $153 per thousand which is in line with 2025 and 2026. So the tax rates stay essentially the same and results in no increase to the taxpayer. So in closing, our recommendation from the committee to the board is to run a bond for 92.5 million in February of 2026. This will uh address our three oldest schools with the

024lowest functional adequacy rating and the poorest condition scores. It utilizes it maximizes our match uh from state money with 43.8 million. Uh and it meets our goals of keeping taxes the same or less. It brings together grades six, seven, and eight all under one roof, which also improves safety and creates efficiencies uh in one building over two buildings such as reducing maintenance and staffing costs. So, this is the next step in our over 10 years of long-term facility planning. And uh we ask you to consider this uh as our recommendation. All right. And we'll have Cory come on up. Perfect. All right. It's great to see everybody again. I was here last uh April to talk about the bond defeasance. But for those in the audience that haven't had a chance to meet me, my

025name is Cory Plagger. I work for a firm founded in Great Falls, Montana. I'm based out of the Spokane office and I strictly support Washington K12 school districts. I have the luxury of working with Sheila and Peter on anything tax that's service fund related. We put together some information for you today and we're going to kind of get to the same punchline that the uh committee just shared, but I'm going to do just a little bit of background here as we go through. So, what we're not going to talk about today is the education program and operations levy. also incredibly critical for your student success and that existing EPO levy is approved through 2026. Um those are levies are for learning whether it's for extracurricular athletics uh janitorial special education transportation as I said very

026critical but we're not really digging that too far today or a capital projects levy. I don't believe the district has a history of doing capital projects levies. You've been able to satisfy a lot of your uh infrastructure needs with bonds. Bonds are for buildings. That's what we're going to focus on today. It could be new construction or renovation. Um, and you have up to 40 years to issue bonds. However, um, most schools try and balance how far out you go with taxpayer impact. So, you're not going to try and minimize interest earning or interest costs too much and do like a 5-year bond. It'd be so expensive for taxpayers. So 20 years tends to be that sweet spot where we can find that balance between trying to minimize interest and trying to also minimize impact

027to your citizens and your homeowners. Uh your debt capacity right now the committee said please do 225 million. That's as high as you can go. That's your legal limit. It's not your logical limit based on taxes. Um since the high school bond was issued the district leadership team has refinanced bonds twice and saved taxpayers over 4.2 $2 million. So, what that means is they waited for the call date. Uh, and once that was eligible for tax exempt refinancing, they jumped on it with the board's approval. And, uh, that is $4.2 million that you did not need to collect from taxpayers because the debt payments were reduced each time he refinance that debt. And I know Michael was on each of those. And I think Mark also was a part of that as well. A little

028bit of a lag here. Uh real briefly in the green colors are the success of your education program and operations levies. You'll notice that every school district we review has a little bit of a roller coaster. Whether there's a recession, whether there's a different president in office, there's always something to kind of indicate the this voter sentiment, but you'll notice overwhelming support for almost every education program levy. And then the bonds are a little bit more tough because of course 60% supermajority but you'll notice in 2019 60.8% 2006 uh little I used the worst color font there what 61%. Um another thing that's interesting too is each of these bond attempts have had a different amount. So you can see that the board and the committee and the community has adjusted the plan as time

029has gone on. So in April 2015 this was attempted. there were made adjustments to the plan up and down and um those adjustments ultimately got a lot of support in 2019. You'll notice in 2022 the EPO levy did a little bit less than you've received support historically. That's common statewide after we had some of the challenges with the pandemic. So just a little bit more about bonds. If you've seen a new library, you've seen a new park, a new bridge, um new city hall, almost every single municipal entity, if they're doing improvements, they're doing it through voter supported municipal bonds. Rarely we'll see federal grants or we'll see military bases or other things that are done uh differently, but for the most part, if you're seeing improvements, it's with the support of the people. Um

030so most bonds are tax exempt. You will hear people say, "Well, now isn't the right time to do a bond because mortgage rates are 7%." Well, the good news about being a municipal tax exempt available entity is we're borrowing in the 4% range right now. So, yes, is that 4% higher than normal? Yes. But it's still not that 7% that we get to borrow from if we're doing a car or a home loan. The 60% is still the biggest hurdle. In green are the states that have 60%. You'll notice there's not many. Uh there's states that we have an office in Dallas and they're doing high school football stadiums for 30 40 million and they're passing like crazy and we're having a hard time getting elementary bonds pass in Washington state because of that 60%.

031So we're you might have seen legislation to try and get that changed but it takes a few years to get that kind of support whether it's 55% or 50%. And one of the keys is validation. You won't have to worry about that. Your voters are consistent voters. You always have to look back to the prior November and make sure at least 40% of those people turn out. And because you'll be looking back at a non-presidential election, you have enough turnout. So validation is not a concern in this instance. So why now? Um now is a great time and it's it's perfect when the facility uh convenes and has a recommendation and it just happens to be at a time when other debt is maturing. Right here we are sitting in 2025. After 25, we have

032one more year of payment on that uh those high school bonds that were split into two sales. And then you'll notice from here on out, we just have the final few what eight or nine 10 years on the elementary bonds issued in 2019. So if the board was to do nothing, you'd notice a significant decrease in your tax collections for infrastructure support. That doesn't mean it's going to be easy. You heard the committee recommend earlier that this would be a level tax rate. There is some skepticism there, right? When people say, "Okay, why is it not going to cost me anything?" It's going to take some education from folks saying like, "Okay, I have a 16-year-old and I bought him a car because my car just ended their car payment, so our budget's unchanged." So,

033it still means they're going to be paying a tax, but it's not going to be more than they're paying previously. So, it takes some education cuz there's some skepticism when you tell folks, "Hey, great news. We can do all these projects, but what you're currently paying, we're that's a hurdle still. It's not as easy as it sounds. Uh just one more slide uh to talk about the bond success rate. I mentioned that uh levies have done great here for the last 20 25 years. As far as our records go back, bonds are a little bit more difficult this year. 45% of bonds are passing and you'll see there's only been 11 attempts this year, but we've had a little bit of a dip in success. You'll notice 40 to 45% of measures passed over history.

034After the pandemic, we had 0% 20% 10% passing. So, we're optimistic now with the results in 25 that we're kind of through all that. There's been some time to help us heal some of these wounds. So, we're optimistic heading into 2026. You might ask the question, is now a good time? I know our EPO levy is up for renewal. Uh we don't want to jeopardize that. What do you think about the data behind running two measures at once? And we don't know the real answer why, but we know that there's hundreds of examples on both sides of this. Districts that just run an EPO levy and just run a bond on the far left. If you just run a bond, it passes 42 42.7% of time. If you just run an EPO levy, 92% of

035the time pass the trade. them both together and that's the right hand side on the same ballot. The bond is really unfased about a 2% higher success rate but the EPO levy passes 100% of the time. We think sometimes they look at the two and some people just want to support one. Uh, and we're not trying to challenge the voters to say no to the Epo levy by saying look at the statistic, but overwhelmingly since 2015, and I could go back to 2008 and the data is the same, is that there's no real challenge here. So why is this? Anecdotally, if you can ask people at once for taxes and say we won't be bothering you for a while, right? Four or five years, uh, that's some power. And when you can explain the two

036differences side by side, it's easier than passing one than coming back a year later and passing another one. They'll say, "I just passed that." Because some people don't quite fully understand what you're asking for. They just are supportive, but sometimes over time they can adjust that opinion. So, uh, this data says, uh, don't be too hesitant about running them together, but you know your constituents better than me and my data. So, just kind of planting that seed. We shared these slides in April, but I think they're worthy of revisiting. In April, I shared how your tax base has grown significantly over time. And a good chunk of that increase has been new construction. This year, for example, 77 million. You've had almost a half a million in new construction in the last 6 years. You've

037had almost 750 million in the last 10. So, one thing I think about is how to have those folks help with this new infrastructure. Right? they moved to town. They're helping offset the taxes for everybody else that's here. But you'll notice there's been a lot of reassessment of existing homes as well to keep in the back of your mind as you consider this. Things have settled down a little bit this year, 3% growth. Uh we've noticed that statewide. Things are just kind of gotten back to normal after the chaos post pandemic when our home values went up 20% just here and there. Um and I think there's been a little bit less flexibility now for people to work remotely. So that's kind of having an impact too on Eastern Washington. We also shared this slide

038in April. What happens when your property values boom, but the district's asking for a locked in bond amount and the EPO levy hasn't been inflated significantly. You'll notice that tax rate just slowly declining over time. In 2025, the rate is 277. If we go back right before the pandemic, it was $410. Has that decline in rate meant that people aren't paying more to the school district? I can't say that. It depends on each individual home, but that sure does help offset some of those property value increases. But I'll say there's some entities within the county that can tax you based on rate, whether it's a cemetery, fire, library, county. So, they might be benefiting. And so, I would say most people are paying more, but I can't say that the school district's getting a lot

039more, right? So, there's other entities that are maybe a little bit more responsible. And fortunate for them, they don't have to ask for voter support like we do every few years. I'm not sure how important this is for decision-m, but want to get this in front of you for the record. This shows you any school district that has territory within Yakama County and what they have. So, you'll notice a few schools don't have bonds like Highland, Mton, Mount Adams, some of the smaller schools, but for the most part, each school has a bond. Uh, a couple schools have capital levies. Uh, really just to summarize this, I sort this alphabetically because I work with many schools in Yakama County. I don't want to highlight who's number one easily, but I'll tell you this. I think

040you're ranked 11th right now. So, ranked kind of in the middle for the most part, but this is just something to put in your back pocket. I don't think somebody says, "I'm going to run a bond because I want my tax rate to be right here." I think a lot of it comes down to what are the needs and uh I'll consider rate when it comes to do we want to be the highest tax in the county probably not uh but and as I said just more data points for decision-m so on the home stretch here just a couple more slides what goes into the bond plan you saw from the committee what that levy rate looks like but what goes into that levy rate how do we plan for that first part is interest

041rates we just issued bonds last week for Lake Steven School District to the tune about $110 million and we received 4.3% and they have a rating very similar to you. So that's what we're expecting right now for your school district. As I mentioned, not in the 7% range, 4.3ish. Um, we have an interest rate cushion built into this model. So, we're not going to pretend that things are going to stay rosy and level right now. It's been a little volatile in our world. So, we built in interest rate cushion. I'll share that later because we don't want the board to go forth and make a recommendation and tell the neighbors, look, level rates and then interest rates go up because of tariffs and now you're telling your neighbors, sorry about that. You said yes and

042we promised this. So, we're we're putting a cushion and we hope we don't need it. And if we don't need it, that means we're overstating the rate right now and the rate will be lower in actuality and that's happened over time. But we'll show that in the next slide. your rating. You're a double A3 rated school district, which means it's investment grade credit, highly desirable uh across the nation. Most of your investors will be institutional investors in New York, Boston, uh Los Angeles. They're going to be big vendors. Uh we're going to see some interest locally as well, but for the most part, your interest rates are too low for your citizens to want these bonds for the most part. So, we're going to see usually bigger investors. And on the tail end, a lot

043of insurance companies like State Farm, All State, um, Liberty, there's be a bunch of investors of that, uh, sort. Um, as I said, high bond rating, and you get the state to essentially co-sign on your bonds, and they're guaranteed by the state, which gives you extra credit power as well. We already talked about your assessed value. That's who's paying the bills. We've seen that grow. You're a $5 billion tax base now. And the last piece that we're not going into too much detail, but I mentioned you have up to 40 years that you can do a bond, but 20 is that sweet spot. I'm going to show you the 20-year structure. That doesn't mean you can't consider 21 12 years, 25 years, and try and stretch out this uh this bond a little longer. Uh

044but this model I'm about to show you is a 20-year model. And so you saw the slide. One thing that um I added to the slide is my assumptions down below. So, it's pretty clear. It shows that we're taking advantage of when the high school bond falls off to add this new bond. As I said, it's very convenient and it's very fruitful, but how do you communicate that to folks as well? But down below, I have a February election and I have 20-year terms. We're using conservative AV growth. Your VA AB growth rate right now is about 8% average over the last 5 years. We're using 3% in the first few years. That means if you continue to boom and new construction continues to come, then this tax rate of 84 cents is overstated. I

045have an interest rate cushion of 75 basis points in sale 1 of June and 26 and I have a 1% cushion in 27. If interest rates actually stay level or go down, I'm overstating that 84 cents. Our goal here is when we ultimately sell these bonds that maybe the tax rate is 74 cents or 76 cents and that as your community keeps booming that rate keeps coming down over time. So 10 years from now you're in a position to do this again if you'd like. One thing that I'll also share is that Apple Valley and some of you bond uh mature in 2038 I believe and that's when you have another step down. So you'll be able to reconvene your committee at that time if the needs aren't earlier and be in the same position

046to do another bond hopefully with a minimal tax rate increase. So we're not absorbing all of that with this new bond, just a small a slight amount. So that is the and and one final note, none of these numbers include the defeasence, right? Um so we're kind of keeping that on the side. I saw the committee requested can we utilize that for this project? It's, you know, there's not a huge difference between uh lowering the bond amount versus defeasing it when it comes to the impact on the tax rate. There wouldn't be a financially beneficial way one way the other. It would just be public perception on what their preference is. So, it's a lot of information. It went pretty quick, but happy to answer any questions. Did you say that last part? Yeah. One

047last time. So whether you utilize uh I think it was $4.5 million of the previous uh unspent proceeds from your bond towards this project or defease the $4.5 million right now and then ask for 92 million cuz if you defease those bonds it comes down 8 9 and then you ask for 97 million instead the impact to voters would be almost identical. Well, just clarification, there could be a use of those funds and then there's still funds remaining to defease as well. So, there's like could be 6 million to defeze and you were thinking that be About 10 cents if we best of both worlds, right? If we defease six or we defease 11. We defe 6 million, it's about 10 cents. Uh let's go ahead and have the board join uh back up front

048and we'll have Phil Rocker and Bane come on up and ready for any questions that you might have. Make sure we give credit to Phil and David. Phil led us through facilitating. David was there for all technical questions and appreciate their work to help this uh plan that we presented tonight. Okay, I'll kick it off since I have notes. Um, first of all, great work uh for consultants and the committee. I read through all this stuff and took a lot of notes and uh great detail. Um, really appreciate it. Well thought out. Um, most of the recommendations make a lot of sense to me. I mean, appreciate that. And I'm kidding by saying this, but I'm a tennis player, so I love the tennis court. I have a few question and questions and comments and

049I'll ask the questions and then Mr. Strong, I guess it's up to you if I save my comments for later or or use them now. But um my first question is a little bit in the weeds. Um but I'm just curious. I think I know the answer. Um but I'm on page 3-8 on this document um where it talks about utilization rates. I'm assuming that it's using the best estimate figures from page 2-3. Holy smokes. That's my document and I don't have it. Thank you so much. I want to say yes. I I would assume that cuz you're probably not going to use the higher or lower, but what it is Oh, for utilization. Correct. For for when we project out for your utilization into the future. Correct. It's the best. The best. Correct. Okay.

050Thank you. And it's a good question though because some committees decide like we think we're growing faster than the projections or slower, but this committee felt and I think we were I think we were 99% accurate. We looked back the last two years on the tool we use for the projections. very positive. You're not very volatile. Okay, great. Thank you. Um, and I don't know if this is who this question goes to. Mountain Views improvement, does that include something that helps with the traffic on Stone or was that addressed with the new parking lot? It might not be you guys question. I don't know whose question that is because I've still heard that that's a problem on Stone with a lot of traffic and I didn't see anything in the Mountain Views improve improvements that

051include that. I'm just I'm just curious. Well, we're still we're still working on adjusting the current parking lot so that traffic flow we can kind of maximize that more than it currently is. So So that wouldn't be in I'm not sure if that's but the site itself I when I met with the principal they are doing they're trying a couple different patterns and trying to address that. Um I there there is a sheet that the district has that lists that's on the district's uh sheet and I there was some changes there but I I I don't think there would be a major one because that would be a sign significant cost to be repaving. I noticed there was some repavement in the in the recommendation. I didn't know if that had anything to do with

052traffic flow. No, I think that the district has made changes there and then the the the school is working to restructure like what's parking and what's flow for parent. It's mainly parent pickup. Okay. Is the is the primary issue there. Thank you. And you were talking about the um 20 and 25 year bond. It it'd just be nice to to see at some point just another slide at some point what it would look like the other way. Um I could summarize real briefly. um because you have outstanding debt with the Apple Valley and some of you bonds through 2038. Stretching it out doesn't build a benefit up front from a tax rate perspective, maybe a penny or two. What it does do is in 2038, it builds a bigger drop down. So if you push

053more bonds into the tail end, it could mean that bigger instead of a 30 cents, it could be a 75 80 cent drop down for the next round of bonds. And you can see what that generates based in your tax base. So 25 years gives you more flexibility because if the board adopts a 25-y year plan when it comes down to the actual pricing the bond, you could do 23, you could do 20, you do anything shorter and trying to meet your tax rate goals if interest rates go down. But if you do a 20-year bond, you can't go the other way. So there is some flexibility. Uh but for the most part, the impact is not upfront as much as in 2038. Okay, that makes sense. Thank you. on the presentation from Natalie and

054Tony, the um the one slide mentioned was using 2 to6 million of existing bond money. And I guess just to clarify, my understanding is we have 11 million left of that bond money, but it said 2 to 6 million existing bond money to save on the requested amount. Yet on the next slide, your total requests 4.9. Are there different recommendations that would be lower than 4.9 or why was it two in there on the one slide? That's that's what the board had given us as parameters. They said if we if you had 2 to 6 million, what would you do? The previous No, no, that was just recently because we were looking at defeasants. I don't remember. Yeah, we're looking at defeasants and then there was a question if we could defease either you know

05510 86 million then there's still some money remaining for projects and what would be the projects that might be needed right so that's why there was just kind of so you were working within the range correct okay thank you and I'll take responsibility for defining that range because it came through conversations that we heard from through the superintendent from the board so if it was slightly correct that was me and the committee ran Okay, great. Um, let's see. Oh, regardless of the bond rate staying the same, etc. Was there any discussion on the committee about splitting this into two bonds over a few more years or anything like that or was that just not a consideration? I I don't have a opinion really either way. I'm just wondering if that was considered at all. Phil,

056go ahead and you can answer. Yeah. No, we we we we came at the total amount and then you saw the it's a it's a pretty complex package in the sense that the committee the committee again at a consensus recommendation which which wasn't where we started um came to like look we can offset the cost of finding a place for the kids in Tan Valley. We can we can maximize the use of the spaces through construction by doing this all together as a single package. So that was part of it. And then again with the defeasement being able to to chop off sort of the things that could that weren't part of the dependency flow. That's I think where those came from. All those other items are fairly dependent. Um which the previous committee which

057we had the pleasure of working with also came to that conclusion. And that's why it was like that was too big to add, you know, to get at in the last planning session because there were so many dependencies. And I'd add you if you were to split that, you wouldn't be a you want to try and capture the entire amount that's coming off. And so then you're asking for a tax lift whenever it is you're trying to go out to the rest. Yeah. And it was also largely m trying to maximize that state match. That large middle school project is a huge piece of the state match. Correct. Okay. And my last question um and I'm not sure who this goes to. If we were to eventually approve this concept of recommendation or something similar,

058what are the next steps of approval by the board? I mean there's not a lot of I mean there's this is broad it's a lot of information but it's not how much detail does the board approve? Yeah, I can run you through the the Peter and we just talked about that that so basically if the board decides like okay so thank you you know you've accepted their their proposal you discuss it you decide yeah we're going to do that and then you have to run a bond measure and there's a process you do with that and then you yeah by November by no correct there's some dates so we usually see by Octoberish is a good board meetings to go through all that get your bond resolution you generally do a community-based uh bond committee

059that doesn't do the planning what they do is the advocacy And I would guess that many members of the planning committee would be happy to be advocates because it's their hard work that you're promoting. And so they talk to their neighbors about the work that they defined. They're all experts now. And then you have your vote. Um and there are there are some pieces to that you can if you feel very confident, you can start some early design planning piece to speed things up. But again, with your project base, I think you flow it's pretty quick. You flow right into February. And then you decide with Corey when do you want to sell the bonds? When do you need to start selling bonds? that's what his expertise brings up. How much detail does the board

060um have on decision making as far as detail after some things passed? I mean, honestly, I was on the board years ago and the high school was being voted on. I don't remember some of the questions I'm asking, but um so yeah, I'm happy happy to take that. So, early on, one of the first steps you do is start building what they call ed educational specifications. So, that's working with staff. The board has to approve it and that's where what is the buildings consist of right from x amount of classrooms what size those classrooms are and build out a full foundational framework and and then it's constant you know boards getting presented to through the design iterations and getting their approvals to continue to proceed through each step of the design. We did the same

061thing uh with the elementary school projects each step of the way. So the board is integrally uh part of it and then there's monthly reports that come from the owner rep firm kind of keeping you in the loop and being able to balance questions. You guys had a advisory committee throughout the last bond as well that reported uh as well to the board of how the citizens were feeling toward Mr. Strong. I have more questions. I'm going to have comments and I'll save them to discuss. Sure. I'm taking too long. Great question. Well, I think I think another part of it being the package together was looking at Ottown Valley because even though it looks like it's a large amount of property at OT Valley, a lot of that is the drain field for the

062septic system. So, you really would not be able to construct a school by having and having the kids still on campus. So, you'd have to find a place for the kids to leave so that you could construct on that footprint. That's where at times the the committee was considering maybe property property acquisition or something like that but then there's a lot of cost when it comes to property acquisition. So that's why it made sense when uh the sequence is important where you have the middle school you build on capacity there you can move all the kids of middle level over grade six 78 and into that facility then that frees up the junior high to move the valley kids there while the construction happens. So that's kind of why the whole package all fits together.

063And the other thing that we hadn't talked about really much here is the the fact that there is additional need for more parking for our playfields and the events. Uh so it does make a lot of sense that where the current administration building is, you would uh demolish those buildings, make parking for events, and then instead of having to build a new administration building, you would be able to repurpose the junior high, which really makes a lot of sense on um you know, utilization and efficiency of the resources that we currently have. I we've done this for 25 years. I was very impressed with the committee's uh fidiciary stewardship of continuing to say, "Okay, but is there a better way to get at it? Is there a least expensive way to get at it?" And

064that final package is very complex but really efficient from a financial standpoint. So I I I was very impressed. And then also on the timeline, Corey, can you talk about the defeasance because that was also part of the board's consideration and that if they're going to decide to move forward with defeasance, it would, you know, it would be good to do that sooner rather than later. So that, you know, we can use that as part of the information that we're sharing with the community. You know, the defeasence is happening. The tax rates going to be going down for that part of the defeasence. Um, just when what's the timeline for that? Yeah, you know, if you look at the defeas and I'll take a step back on how that looks in the resolution. So, you're

065working towards that November adoption. You could adopt early. If you'd like to get it in October and get some more messaging out there once you adopt that resolution to put this ballot proposition forth to the county, that's when things warm up, right? That's when your committee kind of gets to hit the road. The volunteers, the district has to be soformational and data driven that you can't be advocating for it per se. Uh, but the volunteers can. So once you adopt that, it kind of gives them the green light to start working. That resolution will have like the presentation that was just shared at that level will be in the resolution. And you've gone through this before where there's proceeds left over state match and you like to you go back to that resolution. If it's

066not covered by the resolution, that's where that change of use has to be done or that defense has to be done. So when you're building this next resolution, you make sure you have that flexibility and what the committee's intentions are in there, but it is still pretty high level. And there's always just a little bit of flexibility built in there. But the defeasants uh Sheila's and and the the finance team are going to validate that uh levy collection for next year in November. So while right now we're budgeting uh the actual validation happens in November and if there is any kind of adjustments with the defeasence, but that defecence most likely won't impact tax rates until 27. So you you have plenty of time. The defecence isn't a lengthy process to be honest. We did

067the last one in about two months. So it's not like a bond where we have a six to nine month ramp up. Um so to me I would say that the board doesn't have to rush that decision. But the earlier you decide we can make it more comprehensive. Right now it is isolated. This is exclusive of the defeasence. But if you'd like to see what it looks like with the defeasence, the earlier the better. Can I've got I I got a few questions I guess. And um and by the way, thank you guys for for all your work. And I am like I'm for I'm for the bond. And so I want the bond to go forward. I want it to pass. Um but I also want to ask some critical questions cuz I think

068to be honest, I think it's a hard sell um to get 60% and this really short time because we're talking about doing a resolution in October and November. That means we have three months to sell it to the community. And so one of the things that um came to mind is Mountain View. So we're we're doing a refresh. Um you know why why only a refresh? Why not a modernization? um is, you know, cuz you know, as a community member, you can walk into Mountain View and um Mountain View has a tile floor that's a gym slash cafeteria and it's got portables with no running water and the kids have to go inside to use the bathroom or wash their hands, you know, and so slapping up some paint, I feel like if we're going

069to sell it, like I I feel like there should be more for Mountain View included in that um along I and and and if if there is is that state match increase then at that point because it becomes a more of a modernization type thing. Um you know and I um you know you mentioned the uh just the uh the complexity of it. I think that brings maybe another hard cell. Um because I I I can understand everything that we're doing, but to to sell it to the community, you have to be able to explain it in a way that everybody can understand. And when you start going down all these things, and so for me, it's like I want to do it, but how do we sell it to the community um in order

070to get that buyin in such a short window? Um, and sorry. And then if the bond fails, how long before we can run a another bond? Um, you know, and so I guess I don't know if you guys can speak to the Mountain View and then also to some of those how to sell questions. That'd be Phil. Go ahead. Do you guys want to speak to the Mountain View? I'd be happy to. How's that sound? I didn't want Tony to have there's a lot of limitations at Mountain View. Yeah. That didn't make sense from a from a financial outlook. You know, there's only 225 kids there. So, if you compare that to the kids to the amount of kids going through the middle level campus, right? That's the entire district. So, and Mountain View's on

071a septic system and well, so you can't make it any big and the footprints can't go any bigger. So, um, the amount of money it would have cost to redo Mountain View is huge compared to the amount, you know, if you look at it for student, it doesn't make a lot of sense. So, we thought, we talked about closing Mountain View actually, but the community or, you know, our committee felt like, no, this is really important, like, you know, there's really good culture out there and it's important to the community, so we wanted to keep it going. But, um, so it's kind of like, what could we do to keep it to make it better, but not put all of the money out there? Yeah. You can't you can't make the footprint bigger because of

072the well because you'd have to put sprinklers in at that point, right? Yeah. And and the space cuz you got the hillside, right? Yeah. So, we did explore we explored buy more land. Yeah. We explored a lot of different options. Yeah. Uh but it did go against our goal of keeping tax rates the same. So, if we expanded that one Yeah. Uh then it broke that goal of keeping tax rates equal. And then the match, correct me if I'm wrong, but the match uh to redo that just wasn't as robust as the other schools. Gotcha. And there was a driving issue that was your first question um about the utilization in the future. You're on a a slight glide path uh downward pretty even. Nothing that but you currently have sufficient capacity across the district

073for all elementary kids. If you read boundary district doesn't need or want to reboundary. That's that's that's impactful on families. we've done it and we had to get out of town fast. But um but you have to do it when you bring your own new school. I mean there's something you have to do. So why do it when you don't? So that's what the committee struggled with. They're like, "Well, we don't really need more space." So So you're you you all good questions. And those are all questions the committee struggled with. And just as good stewards, they said we just can't justify dumping all this money into a space that maybe in 10 years another group will say it is time to close that building because it's our oldest, it's our smallest and you know

074we've got capacity in other places and we we don't continue. So they're but at the same time they felt like but it's not fair also to tell them like well you know deal with that. So I think some of those things you talked about could be made better and that's what those that 2.9 or $2.7 million is. So it's great questions but that's what they struggle with. Yeah. Does that answer your question? Well, that and then also I think in all of those things, the complexity of it, the 4% rate, um you've got um um you know, the defeasement, you know, how how how do we go about in selling this in such a short time? Because I I I would I I hate I hate to fail. So, and you know, and I don't

075want Well, we'll talk about the timeline. I'll talk to Corey for this the second bond thing. Um that is a standard I would say. um in our 20 plus years of doing this, the October to February dance is the standard. Your community has so much um capacity to pay attention. Yeah. And so districts that try to talk about it for 18 months, people kind of lose track. So that three or four months of real focus and as Cory talked about, you can start it as early as Octoberish isn't bad and you get a little more time for your committee. But um it's it it kind of works. It really does. Now you saw the numbers about less than half of bonds are are passing. So what happens when the bond fails in February? Yeah. So

076you have two opportunities in the 2026 calendar year before your tax rate drops off. And then so right now it's a replacement bond, right? You get to use different language. If you make those two attempts in 26 and they're not successful, now you're trying again in 27 or you pause. It's no longer replacement bond. Tax rates have gone down. Now you're asking for people who'd like to get used to this lower amount to pay a higher amount. I wouldn't say there's any data out there that actually shows that's easier or harder to be frank. Uh the data is just people need to be connected to your project. I think one thing that's changed over time uh since your last bond is the one you have 28 people on this committee that are going to be

077really vocal, but um you'll see these new grassroots social mediadriven models of getting information out there and that could be for and against you. Uh but for the most part, people are able to do a lot more of education information, whether it's now Facebook or other social media streams, and the district can pump out a lot of uh social media posts that are factual in nature, but as this committee's out there, the volunteers, they can actually share a lot of information and get out there quickly. Uh it's also easy for disinformation to get spread as well. But I would say that um this is right on schedule, if not, you know, there's districts right now that are considering measures that haven't even gotten to the numbers yet. They're still thinking about February and they'll be

078working this summer on it. So, I think you're right on scale, right on time, but it it really takes a lot of the volunteers folks to take it and run with it. And Cory, what what are the dates? There's February. What are the choices to run? So, basically, if you're looking at this model, four months are February, April, August, and November. Okay. The only time we see somebody go February then straight to April is if you're at 59%. You just need a little bit more. And after you do that first election that you haven't done election for a few years, after you do that, you have a whole bunch of data. Which neighborhoods were you struggling to get the vote out? Which neighborhoods supported it? So now you have something to roll with. If that

079first one is 56%, then you take a pause and say, "Do we need more time?" And then you have August or November. Nobody really picks August ever because it's so critical to have support from your educational leaders in your district. and they're taking a muchdeserved break. So August's most horrible success percentage out there. So really your options would be uh February with a plan B of April and or November before the tax rate drops off. Do you have any experience with our city is considering raising property taxes right now? Do you have any experience how that affects bonds or levies if the city raises? Well, we kind of got like a rock paper scissors thing that's out there. you know schools beat hospitals but fire districts beat schools so we when we compare measures uh

080there it's not optimal when other folks are considering things but we have seen things succeed at the same time it dep as I mentioned before it depends on how much people connect with your projects and that's why it's different when the board says we've determined we're going to do these projects and push it out versus the community pushing it to the board for consideration that's really one of the game changers for support we've seen out there is they're communitydriven instead of top down driven. I I'll I'll give you two examples of two districts that didn't pass the first time and not most districts assume they're going to maybe need two runs at it. At both board meetings the community came and they were upset that it didn't pass and they really pushed the board and

081said you don't change the plan. The plan is right. Let's get at getting it passed differently. And then both those districts have passed the second time. And I think that's the testament to a community based committee bringing it to you is that the plan is solid. So it's just about how do you get at your community to pass it. Um districts that try to start playing darts to figure out what someone will pass it usually just sort of spins and devolves into something and then you don't have the right stuff. That connection is lost. Yeah. I feel like I guess the other thing you'd share is you you kept telling me like how engaged the community members were and it was the majority community members and just that I mean you can just share that

082with the board. Yes. And yes I mean it's important that you know it's not a committee made up of principles, teachers and district office staff like that's that's kind of thing. So we had good community members. They really uh they had us on our heels often, really great questions, like really complex questions, really smart questions, and we had to go back to the drawing board multiple times cuz we brought data and they're like, "Okay, like what about this, what about this?" So, um, we feel like it's one, again, I don't see the complexity as a negative. I see it as a refinement, but it is really tight and refined approach that is perfect for your committee. it again. I've had that pleasure being around you for quite a few years and I really do feel

083like this is the perfect set of projects and then with getting the state match of almost 50 cents on the dollar, it's it it's just like districts would kill for this opportunity quite honestly. And to add to that, you and I were talking before the meeting, your citizens are paying that stat tax regardless of if you run this or not, that tax will be paid. So, and this isn't me trying to sell you to run this bond. It's saying that to get that, would it be nice to get it back? $44 million. If your community's tax dollars are sitting at OSPI, how about we get it back? Because every year these bonds aren't passing and we have this 300 to 600 million year mark for SCAP. And as schools haven't been passing bonds, the state

084just sweeps it into their rainy day fund. So, one of our comments lately has been, do you want that back? And I don't work with many schools that get this much. I've been working with we're doing chalan down the way and I think it gets seven million out of 72. So to me this is a hu I haven't seen a number this large for a while from a from a ratio perspective and part of that is your district's done a really good job with the buildings you have and you haven't needed to to rebuild for a while. So now is your time. So it's all like I said the the the puzzle pieces really are lining up pretty well. Have have you seen school boards? Um, so I look at like the defeasement of the

085current uh funds as an opportunity to give back to our people so that we can so that we can get more buy in on this bond, you know, and and and I think if they see that, I think I think it gives them the ability to do trust that that we're doing right by them. How have you seen defeasement processes happen in school boards and how did those school boards communicate that to the community? There's only been one defeasement in the last 15 years. So we did Ephraa last year as a defeasement and we've seen defeasement in other governmental entities but that was maybe 10 years ago. So it's rare ground. For the most part, schools out there are struggling to do projects and running out of money, let alone adjusting and pivoting and having

086resources remaining of state match. So, it's a rare situation, but Aphraa came to the conclusion we would rather defease money and ask for a little bit more later and have the voters approve it than to absorb it. Yeah. So, that was their decision. Has it will it result in an approved bond that they're going to run in 27? We don't know yet. But that was their end decision-m. Most districts, I've done probably six defeasment presentations. We've only done it one time. So, I've been to six different schools out of the 120 we work with, and everyone has been just let's just redesate those funds. So, um I can see the perspective of I'm going to give this back to you rather than just utilize it or the combination of the two because I think there

087is some goodwill there and there's some stewardship. Yeah. Any more questions for this group? Yes. Um, in the in in um Tony and Natalie's presentation, there was a bullet uh near the beginning that talked about uh in the in the slide that the committee conducted six work sess session or six work sessions over eight months studied facility education so on and so forth. And then the last bullet is included consideration of community's responses to recommendations. Um can can anybody speak to that a little bit more specifically? Uh sure. I'll wrote it. I'll I'll tell you what I think it means and then we'll open it up to you guys. Color. Um we did bring the we don't always bring bond rates to a to a planning committee. Sometimes their job is just to define the

088project. It's it's grounded in program and data. Here you go. Go do your good work board. And then Corey comes in fresh and they talk about it. In this case, we actually brought those they asked again they what's it going to cost? What's the impact on homeowners? We got to know before we finalize. So we brought that information in and Cory was great. He did a couple versions for us that let them get a sense of impact. So then they said, "Okay, all right." So they they they kind of chewed on that for a couple meetings and said, "No, we this doesn't deter us. We still think this is right." So that that was what that's I see. Yeah. It's the community members on the committee that you were gauging, not the overall. I thought

089we did not do it. No, we did not do it like a thought exchange or something like that. Okay. I thought I was missing something. That makes more sense to me now. Clearly included that graph. Yeah. Yeah. And that and and you know, you you can do that throughout the plan process. You can do it afterwards, but we the committee really chewed on that and felt that no, this is this is very palatable. Yeah. um to the um to the range of of $2 to $6 million uh to utilize from the remaining bond proceeds. Um and then that would potentially mean we would fees part and use part. Was there any discussion and I'm I'm specifically curious of the community members of the um the wisdom the goodwill sort of to James' point was there

090any sort of debate or discussion about about that about that item and how that impacts the possibility of this proposal and and if you aren't prepared to answer that question because Peter said at the beginning we're not allowed not asking questions. I'm fine with that. But that is a question that if was not discussed would be something that I would be interested in the community uh in the not the community the committee deliberating on and bringing back to the board for our further consideration. So is your and that's speaking for myself only not a directive of the entire board. I So is your question did we consider defeasment or not? No, my my question my question is this. I'm I'm I'm a little bit like James, but I'm going to say it like this. I'm

091interested in passing a bond resolution that has the chance of passing and I'm not as concerned about the complexity. I'm speaking now with my comments, but there's a question. This is this is this is like I'm in court now, you know? I don't do that anymore. Um, no. What I guess I'm trying to say, here's where I'm coming from. I'm interested in passing a bond resolution that can pass. I don't think I don't think anybody disagrees with I mean, you know, everybody's nodding their heads. Of course, we're not going to waste everybody's time, but I know the committee member I know most of the committee members that are from the community and I know that they are wellversed in the consternation of some of the community relative to the board's decision to amend the 2019

092bond resolution and utilize some of those proceeds. And so I'm really grateful for the work that was done to hey consider the two to six, but I'm I'm I'm interested in the committee's opinions about whether or not that's wise to do or not. I get the wisdom. I get the math. I get the financial part, but I'm talking about the possibility part of it. And and and maybe that wasn't part of the discussion, but if it wasn't part of the discussion, I would because to to Phil's point, a lot of smart people who I have a great deal of respect for, I would love their opinion about this for my consideration and our consideration. Yeah, we we did talk about it quite a bit. Um, and there was a lot of different opinions as you

093guys all know and even looking across the board, you guys have debated this too. Some people look at it and say, "Hey, I voted for two schools and you did that. I want some of that back." and others are like you did that and you saved money you can keep it. Uh so there was a lot of talk of that public perception and going after those voters now and trust is part of that conversation. Tax rates are part of that conversation. Even smart use of money. We're giving back what is that original bond half a percent 7.8. So we're giving back money we borrowed at point8 to then ask for it back at 4.3. Mhm. why why would you pay off your lowest credit card to or refinance your house at a higher rate? So

094there there was a lot of that conversation, but it ultimately from the committee from a lot of us that comes back to you guys. So we didn't spend a lot of time. We didn't have a solution for you. It just it was something that was always in the background and that was always the part of it of what's the board going to do? Do we do we use it? Do we not use it? Do we make it part of the recommendation? Do we not? and how will that public perception play off with the voters? So, I think we had a lot of the exact same opinions, thoughts, questions, and ultimately what do we do? But the consensus of the But the consensus of the group was to spend 4.9 of the remaining bond proceeds as

095part of this. Am I Am I I don't think we were I don't think we had that decision. It It was I felt like we were told if you were going to spend 2 to six, what would you spend it on? Correct. Thank you. We didn't have the decision of not spending. We were just kind of making We were answering a question brought to us by the board. Yeah. Cuz the board our understanding was wait until your plan is finalized. So if we do do spend any of this money, it's against the plan. It's not just what do we want? So we finish the plan and then we look then we then we brought that question forward and I would say um that the committee felt comfortable and glad on two points. One the math

096works with or without. So you can fit underneath you can get you can achieve the flat rate without the 4.9 barely and you can fit comfortably under it with it. So it didn't change it didn't need to change the recordation one one way or the other. And secondly they there was a good feeling I think about it was a split. It wasn't all of it and it wasn't none of it. So that it because everybody was I see some heads on here because everybody had different opinions. It's representative of It's representative I'll just my commentary is it's representative of the community forums that we had. Yeah. Well, good. I'm glad I found I mean that's my again that's an opinion of mine and to Natalie's point we didn't we weren't definitively saying you now if

097it it would have been different if the whole package wasn't possible without it because then the committee would have had to make a decision but we didn't have to come. I I appreciate the clarification. I appreciate the last clarification that if we removed that piece out of the equation, we could still do this project. You will ask now goes to Cory. I'm going to toss back to what Cory said earlier. It the math is a little different, but at the end of the day, it sorts out the same for the tax rate up front. It's going to be very similar in tax rate. This all goes back to 2038. What's going to be the step down? So, it's this is fractionally different. 4 million out of 94 million is going to push it some some

098pennies, but it's it's not going to strategic significantly change the plan. But we can run it we can run it different ways. We can run the full defense. We can run partial. So we're we're at the ready to run any number. Taking notes over here. No, no, it's okay. And I and I'm I I'm I'm sorry if I'm asking an unfair question. Um, I'm sorry if I'm asking I I an unfair question or an impossible question because it is sort of an impossible question, but anyway, the rest the rest is part of my comments. So, I'm going to just leave it at that. Tony and Nintendo. Well, Michael, I would say we are the board already approved to spend some of the money, right? So, as a community member, when we were told, okay, we're

099going to if you wanted to spend two to six more, I in my head and maybe Peter and other board member or community members can chime in, but I was we already spending the money like it's already been spent. So, the defeasement decision was already made in some ways as soon as we started spending money that wasn't at Apple Valley and some of you that doesn't make it any more that doesn't make it any more comfortable for this board member. I mean in in in reply to that just because I mean I I hear that and that's since I've been reading this since last Friday that is that's what I've been strugg you asked for that's what I've been struggling with because because of course I'm I'm I'm I'm doing the complete debate in my

100own head about just what you're saying. you you asked for just our comments as committee members and I I do have one little thought um because I helped run that last bond well the last two bonds I helped run and I chaired the the last levy um what if so we got to sell it's a sales pitch right to the public so what if we actually had a bullet point in the sales pitch of if there is savings if because you want to encourage the district to save money uh in the project if there is savings we will split split that 50/50 between giving it back and letting the district utilize it. So, actually addressing it cuz that's the problem. It wasn't in that last bond. So, there was savings and now what do we

101do? And everyone's got different opinions, but actually do you state that with let's encourage the district to save money and and be good stewards in this project because we've built in cushions and inflations and escalations and if they can do it, it gets split 50/50 back with the voter and the district. Just an idea you Thank you, director. You've now reopened the conversations we had. That's it. I'm stoked because I I could sales right after but I could talk about this for an hour. I could I I mean and I and and I I want to I want to sit here and debate my good friend Mr. Fina. Just an idea. Well, no, I know that. But yeah, again, I'm going to get back. I'll save my rebuttal to your Thank you. I'm going to

102I'm going to cuz some of these things are branching into when we get to discussion. Let's If you have questions for the presenters, please ask your questions to the presenters. There's a separate section where we can discuss these things. So, any more questions for the presenters. Okay, good discussion. I say that they're much appreciated because they are things that need to be aired out. So, I I thank you for that. All right, we're going to move on in the agenda. Thank you, guys. All right, next we go to item seven on the agenda, public comment for non-discussion agenda items. Are we there? No one signed in. Okay. Next, we go to action items. Number eight, approval of board me uh board meeting minutes. Um if anyone has any questions about it, this is the time

103to ask. Otherwise, I'll go ahead and entertain a motion to approve the June 24th board meeting minutes. So move. Thank you. We have a motion. We'll go ahead and vote on the board meeting minutes from June 24th. All those in favor signify by saying I. I I oppose same sign. Motion carries 5. Next we have approval of resolutions update appointment of investment officer, auditing officer, signature uh of warrant registers. These are not new items. I think these but we have new information on them. Uh this is uh the resolution that will approve the signatures for the district which are Peter Finch, Ryan McDaniel, and Stacy Drake. So the substantive part here is that it's removing Joe Connley and adding Ryan McDaniel. Correct. So, okay. Thank you. All right. Anyone care to make a motion for

104that? So moved. Thank you. We have a motion to approve and update the appointment of investment officer, auditing officer, and signatory of warrant register. Now that we have a motion, we'll go ahead and vote. All those in favor signify by saying I. I. I. Oppose. Same side. Motion carries. 5. All right. Now we get to discussion time where we were where we were. Sorry everybody. No, that's okay. That's all right. Those things need to be said. Now this is the place for us to discuss these items. So go ahead Mr. Well, let me just to to answer uh Mr. Fina just a second. And and and he and listen, all ideas are good ideas and I appreciate that. I I think where the my and Tony, you know this from when we when we did

105the when we did the Apple Valley and some of you bond is is that in the in these bond resolutions is kind of standard uh language in it that says that or other or other projects that are approved by the board. Um, you know, clearly number one is is that I like the idea that you propose or an idea that you propose that if the board uh if the school district spend is able to save money, this is what is going to happen and that be part of the actual bond resolution. The question is is whether or not we can legally put that in the resolution. I don't know. That's that would be a question for bonds bond legal council to to the point. I like something like that because what frustrated me about the

106whole process that we went through was when we when we said we're going to build Apple Valley and Summit, that was the whole that was the whole pitch. We're going to do this, nothing more, nothing less. And it's ended up being more to the district's favor, by the way, to Natalie's point. I mean, you know, and and that and and and even when we were going through the process of of like, okay, well, I would have spirited debates with my good friend uh Mr. Strong, who wanted me to compromise my position, but um uh but we would have spirited conversation about about a very good discussion about the wisdom of using the money and the savings that it has and and even some of that is woven within this plan, which which I like. I

107feel much better that this plan, which I think is really good by the way, and I really appreciate all of the committee's efforts. Um I I like this a lot. I'm even happier that uh to learn that that we could do it even without utilization of the remaining bond proceeds. That's not to say that I've made up my mind about using $4.9 million under the what I would say Natalie's approach of, well, you've already spent the money, you've done a pretty good job. I think we can sell that. I absolutely feel that we've done a really good job and done a lot of really great things for our our our our school system and our school district and our infrastructure. Um those have been good those have been good decisions that that it would be

108hard to quantify exactly how much money we have saved because we were able to do those projects without that rather than waiting. Um but but James's point resonates also with me which is all of this is is um there's a there's a lot to there's a lot to explain about that and um you know but but I also would say that that that I have I have uh faith in in the me the the the people of this community uh that would take that information and and take get under consideration. So, I don't have a I don't have a great I don't have a great answer on the and it really I have a great answer on the on the proposal. Love it. Makes a lot of sense. I think it's I think it's awesome.

109It's a lot different than I had envisioned it might turn out. And um when I read all of this whole thing, I was enthralled. I'm going to read it again because it was just I wanted to hear the discussion. It was just it was it's just first rate. So, I I I just think it's terrific and and I'm I'm I'm grateful for that. The the piece that that again I'm just real uncomfortable of is is is this $4.9 million utilization. That's the piece that I'm I'm just It just makes me uncomfortable. I have a couple of comments, too. Um Thank you for letting me ramble. That's okay. That's all right. We This is This is the place to do that. Uh, number one, I one of the things that I was most happy with with

110this plan is it really for years we have and you've been on here with me longer than we wrestled with what to do with the with the mid-level campus, you know, and this is a I think a good solid plan that addresses that. And I also like that I don't know who brought it up, the idea of demoing the whole admin area and coming up with some parking instead of parking on the street after football games where kids are crossing the street back and forth and families with little kids. I think that's a great idea and great intuition to think about those things. So, it's good. Um, Mr. Walcott brought up something a while ago and I just kind of wanted to address that a little bit. So I think it was either you or

111somebody else brought the question getting the message out to the community. Well, if I recall the last time around we did a series of community forums which I think is a great tool for us to use. This gives the community a chance to interact directly with us and back and us to hear sometimes we can talk directly back. So I think you know whatever we wind up doing I think that's going to be a piece of it because again that draws the community in. It gives them a chance to react to what do we what happens if we have leftover funds, you know, let's address it up early. Let's have a plan for that. And I like the idea of doing it early this time and making it fundamentally clear what's going to happen, whether

112it's a 50/50 split or we identify without even a cost particular items that need to be addressed regardless at some point down the road. If there are funds left over and a portion of that could be used to address critical items which have already been pre-identified, that's great. But I think the whole point of it all is just having a plan of action that's clear and communicated to everybody so that there is no doubt left over. So those two things stood out to me at least especially the mid-level campus. I really like what what the planning is for that and I do want to compliment I sat in on a lot of the meetings I was there and just listening to the community involvement was just really rewarding because for two reasons. Number one, we

113had a lot of input from a lot of people and people were listening. And then number two, we had great facilitators to help move things along to get us to a point of conclusion without dragging this on forever and ever. I think it was a well-prepared product and a lot went into it and it just shows in the end. So, I'm going to stop talking. I won't rap out. I want to turn it over to anyone else who has comments or I mean this is the point where we discuss here with ourselves what we're thinking. So, anybody ke I don't I don't know if Joel wants to talk. Yeah. Well, I just a lot of the same things that you've said, Mark. Um if we do anything with a bond or levy, I would like

114to see a special a note attached. this is how excess funds or funds that come under the budget are used so that it's clarified, it's clear and we all understand its purpose. Uh I do also want to just say thank you to the committee for meeting. It was so creative, hardworking, thoughtful. Um, you guys really spent so much time putting everything together and it strikes me how different the conversation evolved over those months of just what could be and really dreaming about um the best interest for West Valley. And I especially enjoyed the humility and the sacrifice in those conversations where um people didn't put their their own wants above everybody else. It was always what's best for the community and that that shined through. I think in the long term, our next long-term facility

115plan really does need to address what do we do with Mountain View? What is the the goal? What is the direction? Um, we struggled with that in conversations. How much money to pour into Mountain View? What's the best use of it? And the reality is we just don't know what the future will hold for. But we should have an answer. We should have a direction. and we should plan for that. And then I think as we talk about feesment as all of those things, Michael, I'm on the same board with you, the four uh the 4 billion makes me uneasy. We can look at all sorts of ways in which we've saved money, the best use of money. Um but it comes down to an issue of just it's not my money. I always struggle

116with that. I can't decide how to spend money that's not mine. And that's how I always feel about money that is um not identified. I recognize that the I recognize that it costs more to give it back when we look at all the things that we could use it for. Except that I I think it costs the most important thing which is trust. If it's not my money, I don't have the right to delineate where it goes. And so those are just the the thoughts of where I'm at with it. I I yeah, I probably agree with that. I think uh it it is good math to use the 4.9 million now. Uh but what you can't quantify is the goodwill that it it buys to defease the 11 million at this point. Um because

117I do think that that's going to buy a lot more goodwill and trust from the community. And I think in the long run, that's going to be better math because if we go forward, I think I think the 4.9 million, whether you use 4.9 or you use 11 million, I think you lose that goodwill. And so I think in the long term, the bond fails, it's going to cost even more because we're going to have to run the bond at a later date. Um, and so I would my I I would be uh for this. Um, but I think mine my thought is to defease the full amount. Uh, and like he said, it's rare ground, right? You know, and and that's going to buy some attention um from the community that we are walking

118on rare ground. I'd like to look more into Afraida and just to kind of see what happened with that. Uh but um I do think I think I think the plan is great. I um there are maybe just I get the the the Mountain View um you know what do you do with it? But I I think we do need to have a plan for it of like in 2038. uh it's going to be demolished and this is the plan that we're going to look towards because I think people ask those questions, you know, like like people have said like it's a it's a special school, right? So for for those that that that have had their families out there, right? It's out there in the outskirts and stuff and so people want to know

119what why is it special and what are we going to do with it? And that's going to be part of I think the people buying into this bond is that if we know what is the plan uh for for Mountain View um because it's for our future kids. So that's my thoughts. I've got more if you don't. I got a little bit. Um again I want to reiterate I keep looking at you too. Is there anybody else here? Oh yeah. Thank you. I keep looking over there, but thank you all that were on the committee because it it is it's a great plan and I did I love all the parts of it and it it's no secret that before I ran for the board that I was confusing the money because there wasn't a

120lot of clarity. Um the the juryy's still out a little bit for me on this because the final decision of the board was to, you know, spend 13 and defeat six. So right now I'm at the point where I think I think because of that decision more or less a decision after those forums at minimum we have to defease at six. So I'm pretty I'm pretty strong on that. The the other I I'm haven't totally decided yet. I've got to think through a lot more uh looking at this. But you know I wrote down before this you know I think we need to offer a plan that shows that we value the community's money. We keep our word and we care for students and our facilities. And I think that's really important. And I think

121this plan shows that we care for our students and facilities. I think, you know, valuing their money to keep it to keep it uh the same as before. Um but I am concerned about the passibility because and I know there's the other side of the coin. I totally get that. But you know, I had so many people say because of that issue, I'm never voting for a bond again. you know, and I know there's other people that are going, "Yeah, but look at the dollars. Look at the money." And so I understand there's both sides of that. Uh I'm just my whole thinking is just really the passibility because I don't want to get out there and go. Well, we're going to use all the money. We're not going to defuse anything, but we want

122you to pass this. So go. I'm I'm a little concerned about the possibility. Um but again, I'm sort of like Mr. Thorner. I haven't fully made up my mind on amounts. Mhm. So, I guess I'll I'll offer my thoughts here. Like like most of you guys, I haven't totally made up my mind, but I am kind of leaning one way versus the other. And it's no different for reasons um that you're explaining. Um you know, I think some in many cases there's no time like the present um for some of these things that we need. I go back to just basic math. You know, it's going to cost us more to wait. And I think there's an element of saying to ourselves, we generate goodwill by being wise stewards of the money and figuring out

123what is best to do with it. Um that's that's why we're here is we were brought up here to to make these kind of decisions. I think we do it with community involvement. I think we talk to the community. I mean, if we get an overwhelming group, an overwhelming majority says, "No, we want it all back." That's great. But that's not what really happened last time. I think it was actually tilted the other way. Probably a little bit more of the community said it's wise to use the money now before these things become prohibited to be expensive, which is what we're running into. The other thing is, yeah, I just have this belief and maybe it's just too basic in my mind, but when we talk about bonds and how much it cost to run

124them, the last bonds were they were high, but now we're talking about another 70 or $80 million that we were asking the community to spend, I think if we're talking about what really matters to them most is really how much are they going to have to come out of their pockets and pay again or now. We're already talking about just keeping things level without making any real changes. But if we start raising the price or things start to go up by delaying and they're going to cost us they're going to cost us more just 2 or 3 years down the road or even as much as 30% more. It's going to look kind of I don't know. I just feel like we wouldn't be doing the best possible job. I think it's wise to think

125it through thoroughly figure it out. Get a lot of community input. There's many times I'll talk to some of my friends and ask them what do you think about this or what did you think when this happened? Some of them are afraid to venture their thoughts with me. Others simply say flat out what they think. And I will say that in my mind scales are tipped toward a little bit more. Use the money wisely. Use it now for the things that we know we need. I mean look at some of the things that we're talking about. Pipes being repaired, you know, asphalt and safety issues. Those are things that matter to people when we talk about spending their money wisely. And if we don't do it now and we wait and say, you know what,

126four years, okay, this cost us 4 million before, but now it's 6 or 7 million. Have we really gained goodwill by doing that? I don't know. I'm not saying we have or haven't. I'm saying I don't know because I can't make that judgment just yet in my mind. One thing is for sure for me, my family as a taxpayer, as someone who pays for the for some of the things the school district uses, I don't want to pay more just because I think I'm gaining something from my neighbor here. And that it's important to me. Sure, it is. But again, I think at the same time, it's wise to do what we can for the least amount of money, for the greatest maximum benefit of the students and the community in in general. Um, it's

127a tough decision to make, but you know, I kind of lean that way. And I'm hoping that if we go this route and we have some more community forums, we're not afraid to get that kind of input and feedback back from the community. We need to know what they really think. I really like the clause of putting something in there says what we're going to do if there's leftover money because that wasn't clear the last time. This time, we make it clear. And if the community says by overwhelming, you know, an overwhelming tone, no, all the money should be the fees back, I can live with that. But it wasn't clear then. And I'm not so sure we would be wise to just say, hey, I'm going to defease all this money back when we've

128got, you know, some critical projects identified that need to be taken care of right now. Anyway, I'm going to stop rambling too because I can go on and on. But those are my feelings about what would what would uh what would it look like timeline to set up a community forum and and begin cuz honestly like if we're going to do this bond like I agree with something I forgot who said about not being a little bit too early, but the community forums can be set up in rather quick order. It's not like it takes us months to plan. We could do it in a couple of weeks and just set it up and just pick a location and invite as many people. It doesn't have to be just one form either. We could do

129a couple of them or three, whatever we feel is appropriate to get the maximum input, but I think that is one option. There's other ways of doing some of those things, too. But I think that's a good one because we get to hear directly back and forth in front of us. So, would it be a resolution October the earliest and then at that point we would set up for community forums? The resolution would typically take place in in November. Yes. And so to kind of reverse engineer back to from because I have my have my calendar out right now because I was I was on the same wavelength as you on the timeline. you know, so you know, bond council needs to know what, you know, we we need to direct Peter to work with

130bond council to have a a resolution for the board to pass in probably early October so that so that in November we could we could pass the bond resolution. Um, so let's just say that October 10th, which is a Friday, um, is about a month before that resolution would have to be. So, uh, if we were to do some community forms, it probably makes sense to to do them, um, in September, um, when school is when we're back in school and people are talking about school and and, um, um, so that I mean, we could start them in August, too, but but I'm just thinking that September would be the month to to be gathering that information. Um I think also though and maybe I'm I'm hearing the our discussion wrong but I think I

131hear that the board. So we got two different things. We have the proposal from the committee of here's the bond that we would like you to run. Now, that does have a $4.9 million component in it for utilization of remaining bond proceeds. However, we just heard that we could still do it without Mhm. So, the bond resolution, I mean, we I mean, I'm not saying we should should turn bond council loose on this sooner rather than later. I don't think that's the I don't think that's the debate, right? I think the debate more is what to do with the remaining bond proceeds at this point. I think that's more of that they're two separate issues. I and and they're two separate resolutions and the running of the bond is is really mutually exclusive of the

132defeasence. The defeasence helps us potentially with the goodwill promotion of the bond, which is why we would want to have some decision about that in the earlyish fall so that that would springboard the bond campaign. If I'm if I'm I'm just saying that out loud. if I'm saying that out loud, right? I'm just I think that's the the order of operations. I I agree. I mean, I I'm hearing that. I just think that the way that the the the plan was put together, they're a bit interwoven in there. Um and yes, we could and maybe we should. I don't know. I'm just saying that it seems to be a partial component of the whole plan to do something like that. And the question to me is I guess another question has the community even has

133they have they moved on from some of these issues that we can continue to raise. I mean I look at the football field and first I was worried that people wouldn't really adapt to it or really like it. But I've heard nothing but positive comments about it and there's a lot of other projects that we have done some of these things with with some of that money that just clearly make sense. I say that in the sense of not that we should shouldn't consider them separately. I just want to make sure that if we do separate them that we're able to link them back together because they're kind of tied. We're trying to get that one two punch. Right. Right. But that's what I'm saying is is that we have these community forums in September.

134I'm saying September, but having them in September as and and then with with the idea of, you know, late October, early November where we're passing the bond resolution. At that point, we will know based upon those community forms and then our further discussion what what way we're going to go on the defeasants to again springboard the to springboard the to springboard the bond campaign. That's what I'm trying to say is is yes, they are connected, but what I think I hear the five of us saying is is we like this proposal from the committee. It's it's about a $4.9 million piece though. Mhm. That um does impact the bond resolution a little bit, but not much in the actual wording that we have to pass. There's two resolutions, defeasence resolution, bond resolution, but they have

135they have connectivity to them for the campaign and the goodwill and the gesturing and and but to Mark to your point, I think it's the reason I you might be right. I want I I'm I'd like to take the temperature of the community about this issue because maybe maybe now that they see what we have done, they're like maybe maybe some people's minds have changed about this. Maybe some people feel better about that. Um, I do think a a question that has that I would be interested in knowing sooner rather than later from bond legal counsel from our from our legal counsel that would write the bond is can we put in this bit about the 50/50 or can we put in something about about other can we put in additional language other than uh

136and other projects authorized by the board Because my sense is is we can't but we need somebody that actually knows what they're talking about to answer that question. My my s my sense is we're not going to I I I have a feeling our legal council is going to tell us that's a bad idea and they're going and it'll be well reasoned, but we need the district's lawyers to tell us that, not me. I I I agree with you. I like I like your logic on all of that stuff. The way you you just clarified that. Um I do I do wish I'll put it like that that there was some way to put some language in there. Maybe a little non-specific where we don't have to be, you know, 50/50 or something, but a

137clarification that spells out to the community because that that option was always there before, right? That the board could say what's there's leftover money from that. the board. We had the Yeah, it was just the same language or other projects approved by the board, which was the opener for how we amended the how we amended the bond resolution. And I I think what Mr. Fina is suggesting is is that we literally put and what what I hear is subtraction from the other board members is is that would be a really good thing to put in. Yes. If we can. Yeah. If we can I think or to clarify that statement that's already in there. I don't think I don't think you're going to see this happen again really because we're talking 59 million and there

138was almost a whole another school left over, right? So, it was this huge number. Um, typically it's going to be not that much left over. And so, that phrase that's already in there no one thinks about. I mean, this is a one time that happened and I think it was a huge dollar amount and it became a big issue and you've heard my opinions on it, right? I just Yeah, but I I don't know. I I think if you're if you're selling it, I mean, you can sell it like him and the school can use leftover money. I mean, I don't know how much you're going to The problem is, this gets to the whole heart of the matter of why this was so frustrating to me from the very beginning. I thought it was

139very clear when we sold this in 2019 relative to the bond. We're we're we're bringing up the same conversation. And what we're trying to do is is memorialize the promise. Mhm. And that's that's effectively what you're saying or what we're trying to say. And I don't know what that exactly looks like. And this is the intersection between I want to do I I want to ensure I believe it's important to ensure that we follow through with what we say we're going to do. and um and and again there's there's a legal issue that has to be addressed in that process and then there is the issue of okay we are where we are right now and what are we going to do about it so or how are we going to how are we going

140to solve the issue I I think and and and um sorry Mr. woke was just touching on a point I was about to say and that is I think one of the the things that we didn't do well the first time around was to highlight that particular section and again just making clear to the community okay for those of you who were around the first time or last time around you remember what happened we we had this amount of money absolutely correct we had no way and that was part of the big problem in my mind is we had no inkling at all that there was going to be that much money left over. I mean, who I I just think who in their who who wouldn't think that that's a wise thing to do

141is to use some of that for these critical projects that would cost us more money. Okay, that being said, I'm not going to rehash that whole whole issue again with you, Mr. Thorn. I know we've discussed that to to because because you're not going to because because the bottom line is is you're not going to change my mind on what was said in 2019 because I was a part of that. That's fine. I totally agree with you that that's fine. I'm just saying it. I wasn't a part of that promise that was made. But I don't want to go back if we retrace that. What has happened has happened. My point is in this new whatever we come up with this new process, this new resolution. I just think it needs to be spelled out.

142Now what that language look like in terms of spelling it out, I don't know. I guess it comes to council. Yeah. I think we have our council spell that out so that it's clear to the community. There's no if, ends, and buts. This is one option. This is another option. But the community forum should help us define what that should be because we ask them at that point. How do you feel about if there's maybe we I don't know what legal counsel is going to sell us, but I'm going to just give you a range. For example, if there's $10 million left, can we use some of that money or can we use a portion of that money for critical work items or does it have to be a higher dollar amount? I don't know

143what it would look like, but if we could come up with something that's manageable or something that the community better understands, at least it would be out there in in more clear terms than it was the last time. So, oh, go ahead. Would a to-do item then be Peter, if you just contact the legal council on this? And I think that will get the the question. We'll find out. That's the big question that we need to know. And then the next followup would be really discussion on what to do with the defeasement. I think is that am I correct? And and yes, and just so you know, I don't want to get hung up on that cuz I agree wholeheartedly that's probably once in a lifetime that we're going to have that kind of money

144left over. It's just that was just a fluke that things worked out the way they did. Just one thing after another connected to bring us to that point. But um if I and I wasn't on the board then, Mr. Thornne, you probably were. We go back to the prior bond or when it was passed. It seems to me that there was some rate some remembrance of what happened with the high schools. There was leftover money. It wasn't spent the way the community liked and so I don't even know how that was addressed back then. But I want to say I wasn't on the board then. But you weren't okay. But you you heard about it though. Yeah. But it was again it was the same but it was the same it was the same thing.

145The board the from my understanding the board operated legally under the clause of there was remain there were remaining proceeds uh from the high school project and then the board went through a similar process of identifying needs and it utilized those needs and the community had a disagreement about it and some were upset about how those monies were used and that that um stalled our efforts on two bond issues that while I was on the board that failed until we then got the Apple Valley and some view which was that and I just want to clarify that I the the the the answer that I'm seeking from our council is is about what can we put in the resolution about defeasence upfront not necessar I'm not necessarily married to like you know like it has

146to be 50 I'm just saying can can the resolution even can the resolution even address that specific issue? That's that's the that's what I'm asking. And then and then and then in terms of the defeasence issue, I do think um I I do support the idea of taking the community's temperature and hearing from the community through community forums in the early fall to help that will help me figure out where I'm at on on the do we defeze it all? Do you know do we okay we are where we are and and are we going to defease part and use four point that'll help me that'll help me it'll be a piece as I continue to think about this a lot James I think to answer your question is make have that discussion after these

147community forums so we have more information and kind of that pulse of the community I I struggle with the the timing on the the community forum though when do you want to do it I mean I I I think it should be sooner Because I think if you're going to make that decision, you're making it so close to when you're doing the bond resolution. And I think it would be beneficial if we were to vote to defease all the funds. I think it would be beneficial to have a little bit of space in there so we can communicate that to the community that it's and so I and I know August is like a horrible time, right? Everybody's gone. There's there's no good time. Yeah. That's why I'm suggesting September. But I mean, we could

148do it tomorrow. As far as I'm concerned, we could have as many of them as we want starting right away. I mean, is there an alternate way other than a community forum to gauge the temperature? We can do surveys there. We used to have something called survey monkey or something like that, but I think they're not as effective as a community live forums are, but you know, it's up to the board to decide. I just one more point I want to make about timing. Um, I agree with Mr. corner here um about the timing being closer in September because it's closer to the actual date you want to do things if you do it in my opinion based on what I heard also you do it too far out it's kind of like people you

149lose you lose them a little bit it's like if you write it write a document my my trainers always told me get your point out in the first two or three sentences because if you have a full page or five pages you're going to start to lose them after a while same concept here is if we do it too early you know you might start the discussion but you also may start something more than we want. We want to focus on these two issues in particular, I think. And then if we narrow the focus and keep the timing close, I think we're going to have a better chance of getting what we want. That's just my opinion. That makes sense. What about if we were to commit to making a decision about defeasance by September

15030th after having some community input and then by the end of October that we would have um the uh bond resolution completed? September 30th, the fourth Tuesday. Uh September 30th is the fifth Tuesday. I'm just I'm just choosing the end of the month. There's no magic day except I'm just saying by the end of September, we're going to have we're going to have clarity on that as a springboard to the campaign that we would then pass a bond resolution in probably the BIS at the business meeting on October 28th. Mhm. Assuming that that's uh correct with the timing for the uh for the county auditor's office for the election. Yeah. Are you fine? So just to make sure I haven't been brain dead here, we're suggesting having forums on the bond issue on the defeasement

151of funds. Well, you could do both. Is that what you're suggesting? I'm suggesting how many I'm suggesting. I'm just Do we really want to rehash that on what? Good question. Those Honda fees. Do we really want to rehash that? Well, we know where people were or some of us disagree on where they were. So, um, okay. First of all, I think that the I think the community forums are to try to gauge um where the community is at on defeasance only. I I think that we have a community they I love how this was said that this proposal is a community generated proposal for the bond. It's not a board generated proposal. So I think we all like the community generated proposal for the bond. The issue is the 4.9 the the 4.9 million. So

152the community forms are about take at least in my mind are about okay here's what we did and we're about a year later from these projects that we did here's where we are right now. The board is has received a a proposal from the long range facilities uh committee and here it is. We intend to act on that. We intend to act on that in the form of a bond resolution. Here's this. Here's this. What is your feeling community about us using 4.9, defeasing it all, defeasing some other amount, keeping a little bit? What What is your What is your feeling about that? That would I mean, we don't have to do it. I'll make that decision on my own without the community. But I do there is something that I like about asking them

153at least taking the at least getting some temperature on that. I would like I would appreciate that that but if we don't want to do that, I'm okay with that, too. But I'll I'll I'll I'll vote the best I can on it. I I I I think kind of after hearing it and and you talk I think I would be more for a community forum in regards to the bond and the defeasement is maybe a part of the conversation but it's not the conversation I guess you know the the I think the the community forum bond becomes a um here's the information about the bond and what we're trying to put forward so we're getting the word out there but I the making the community forum about the diffusement I I I would I would

154rather go the the survey route for that, right? Are you talking about checking the possibility or the specifics? I'm concerned about the passibility, right? And so then is that what you're wanting the community form to be about the possibility or are you wanting it to go into the specifics of how it's allocated? I think yeah, I think the possibility because um I do think if we open up the can at a community forum about defeasement, I think we're opening up a can that maybe we don't want to open up. Um we want everybody's uh opinion on it and and I think we've gotten a lot of people's opinion on it. Like it's I feel like it's a conversation that's been going on for a long time. So let me ask you, are you suggesting then

155the 4.99 million that the committee is recommending to use for some of these project? Are you saying not to use any of that at all or are you saying the fees the whole 11 million? Actually, I thought the number was 13 million, but let's let's just say 11 million for right now. So you suggesting the whole thing or part of the money going toward the the plan? Oh, I think at this point I'm I'm suggesting defeasing all the money. that that would be my opinion and my thoughts towards it. Well, yeah. So, my and that goes towards the goodwill and and the passibility of this bond. I I to me I just think that's something we ask the community. I I like Mr. Thorner's idea. You could theoretically you could have a community one community

156forum or a couple of them devote the first hour to one issue, the second hour to another issue or where you could separate them. It just depends on how much time we're willing to devote to them. I do like the idea of taking the community's temperature because things have changed in the last 15 years or even since we did this last bond that that passed and built these fabulous schools that people are still talking great things about. Um I think we owe it to them also to ask. You know, there's no harm in asking. Um, we still have the right to vote because it's the board has to make that decision, but I would like to make it with input of the community knowing what people are and it may be a tough decision. It

157may be very close, you know, maybe 50/50. It's hard to make up your mind sometimes on that. Then you you're stuck with using your best judgment, your conscience for what you feel is right. But I think at a minimum, we owe it to him to ask though. More comments, more discussion, Mr. Heath. No, I'm good. So, so where where are we going from here? So, um I suggest when is our next meeting in two weeks. We we we send a get a message out with some possible dates and be prepared to discuss it at the next meeting. What we want because this is just this is still in July, right? So, it's not like we have to rush to do this today. Plus, we're going to take public comment now. So, anybody that wants to

158speak on this issue is true. It's more input and then we can talk about it in two weeks. I I I I like that. Yeah. I I think we don't rush through something as important as this. So, okay. Any more more discussion? That's a nice healthy discussion today. I appreciate that from everybody. All right. But we do have one more item before we get to I think the the public comment and that is the West Valley Little League partnership which I read through. I really like immensely. Yeah. So, item B is uh West Valley Little League partnership and I included this in the board packet that West Valley Little League has approached us and said that they would like to expand uh the number of ball fields that they have uh at the Cottonwood campus.

159Uh there is uh land that is east of Cottonwood that we could look at and it does not need board vote on this. However, I definitely want to have direction from the board that I'm not moving forward without uh you know direction from the board. I have the authority to sign off on the permits that would be needed. There's um some advantages here for our kids and having more ball fields, but also advantage to the district that if uh this project has uh eventually a connection to the Aqua City wastewater and sewer line, that would be really good for the district to be able to have eventually cottonwood connect to that. And so, um, you know, there's some benefits there for our facilities and then also of course benefits for our kids and just looking

160for direction from the board. I just have a couple questions for you real quick on that. I was there at the agenda prepping when we talked a little bit about this. So, what I wasn't clear on and maybe you have a better feel for this. Is any of this land that they would use part of the land that is, you know, that's a big swath of land there. Is this going to use up the remaining piece or is there still another parcel of land that will be unused? They're still in the planning phases and so we are looking at either the empty lot that is far east or the soccer field that's currently not being used because uh the soccer field is not used by the community. Uh I guess all the community use now

161is really over at Sooso and uh there that soccer field was not scheduled all during this last year for any community use. So much. So there's opportunities either direction and they're kind of looking at what the cost would be to get the sewer line out and um we you know we're just is basically I think we're going to say the same we we we pulled up on the the parcel and I I believe I remember correctly it's one parcel. It's not using the whole parcel but that's what I thought. I just wanted to clarify that. So cuz I didn't realize that the soccer field was not being used at all. It might be a wise idea to use that but again I I'm I'm totally okay with whatever you decide on that Peter. as just

162if we had that vacant parcel of land, it would leave us an option down the road to do something else with it, like sell it or do something that we might want to do with it. That's my only concern. And then the last piece I had on there, so in reading through it again this time, um it said we have the option to connect, but we would pay half of it. We're still working out the details on what the feasibility is. Um, so we're not in a position where uh nothing's finalized at this point, but I didn't want to have people put a bunch of time and energy into a project that wasn't supported by the board. That's why I'm all for it. I'm just curious about future costs. I'm I'm for it, too. I

163think the what's new is the cost, splitting the cost to the sewer and the water. And so I would want to know more about that. But otherwise, I think Joe Connelly said it that it's really a no-brainer. It is. I agree. Um, for those I guess weren't there, um, it's really a donor that's or maybe a couple donors that are just paying the cost um, for land that the the district owes to upgrade it to some nice baseball fields. Um, and they already have the lease, so they're going to continue using it either way, right? Um, they just want our permission to make it better, right? Additional parking, a concession, and restroom facility. And that's where the sewer line comes in. Yeah. Yeah. I just only reason I asked that question. I'm just wondering if

164you I mean I I totally accept it makes more sense to do this. I totally accept if it's going to cost us something. I just wondered if you had a ballpark figure because if we find out later, you know, well, it's $3 million to do this. It's a different discussion versus, you know, 300,000. So, if we if you know, we're we're thinking that it's really kind of a minimal amount down the road, even if it is half of it that we pay, I'm I'm still totally for it because I think it's a great idea. It's a great use of that space anyway. And again, I go back, it's for the community and the kids that live here. So, I like it a lot. We're still we're still looking and like what the cost would be.

165Maybe uh you know nothing's by line but maybe Westside Low League would pay for the connection to the restroom facility that they're making and then if we wanted to have Cottonwood connect we'd pay for the rest of that line. Okay. Just kind of looking at what still looking at options at this point. Okay. But anyways other board members just I think we're okay. Very good. All right. Well, thank you. All right. That's what I was looking for. All right. Now we get to the part where we have public comments regarding discussion items that we just talked about. So Mr. Marinachi, please stand up to the mic. Is there a mic? There's podium that what a fascinating discussion. Uh I was thinking about um what is his his name pronounced? Cory Plagger Plagger Plagger. Um I

166talked to him before uh the discussion and I was thinking about Mr. Wilcott's question about 25 years. So my recommendation to the board is to totally jump after that 25-y year option. But as uh Mr. Pagger was saying, if you don't do it, you're not going to get that option again. And you guys had this really interesting discussion about the the 4.9 million and commentary that yeah, we think we're going to get under. Well, he even said he has to go back and check and said, you know, it might be really close. If you go 25 years or 23 years, like you said, you have all that flexibility. Um, Mr. Keer made a comment. I want to win, right? It's I want this thing to pass. Mr. Thorn said, I want this to pass. From

167my standpoint, I think the best one of the best sales pitches to our community that we can make is we're going to go under. Not flat, but under. I think that's a powerful message to the community. And if you go 25 years, you get there. Okay. So, what's the negative? The negative is you're going to have higher interest expense. Well, guess what happened with the high school bond? We had two refinances. And uh Sheila can attest to all the money that we saved by doing that. So over a 25 year period there's a chance that we could um effectively refinance get a lower rate and a little bit like I say have our cake and eat it too. Now is there again I'm a finance guy. Is there going to be ultimately a higher interest

168dollars out of their pocket? Absolutely. We can't kid ourselves and that is a consideration for us as taxpayers. At the same time, by having that available room and the potential to recoup part of that with a refinance, I think it's something that we should really take seriously. So, that would be my recommendation. Doug Finch knows I've been pushing this all along since since the get-go. The other thing that ad nauseium talked about, we don't want to go through what we went through the last time and we're going to hear about from bond counsel. However, the bomb council and I tend to recall potentially from when this was talked about. I I don't think we can do it, but if we can't do it, um an idea I have is twofold. Can you establish with our

169existing policies that you create a new policy that stipulates if we want a bond, this is what we do with excess money, we're going to go ahead and do fees back to the community. So, I don't know the dark finish if that's an option. Um, but I'm just throwing it out there because the message you want to send to the community is you don't want it to be nebulous. I mean, clearly everyone spoke about how monstrously painful this whole thing. And I attended all those community meetings and we had about three of them. And you know, it was probably 50/50 between people saying, "Hey, give the money back." And people saying, "No, spend it." We want to obiate that ever happening again. So whether we can do it through the bond council says we can

170do it or we can have a policy um or the school board just votes just makes it crystal clear. Another thing and I talked about this with Tony because I knew he was presenting today and I was going on vacation and this is a sales presentation to the community and Mr. Strong brought it up a little bit. You got to keep this simple. You get in the weeds. So the quick elevator to the community is what are we doing? And I really liked this page is pretty close. I had to make a few edits, but this is what Tony and Natalie were presenting earlier and it just makes it crystal clear, you know, we're going to do these three schools. Uh whether or not we include the, you know, the the capital budget, you got

171to keep it simple. If we can't com, you know, go to our neighbors and say, "Hey, Mr. Thorn, this is what we're going to go ahead and do here. We got three projects on and then we can dive in a little bit deeper." Because you already know I had somebody who already asked me before this meeting, what are you doing at the junior high? What? Hello. And we have to be quick on our feet to explain what that storyline is and say, well, look, actually, this is a really good deal. We're taking this we're moving to the mid high. We're doing a midlevel campus. We're getting the maximum dollars with the match. I mean, my goodness, the match is a great sales point for this whole thing. And what do we do? You know what?

172It's going to have district offices. We're still going to have it available to the students, you know, so it's not going away. And it's going to have a community use, which the pubes want. Anyway, I'm just giving, you know, some ideas. It has to be crisp to the point we can't get in the weeds. If we get in the weeds, we're we're lost. Um, and I, you know, there's a little bit commentary just about this, uh, you know, this 4.9. I'm of the opinion if you go negative, that's going to work against us. and and I I think I I just feel there's a a sense of yes as community members however a big community forming I guess my gut feeling have to process it a little bit more might be no cuz I think

173the community spoke about it you guys have heard all the story line do I think you should get a pulse of the community by asking maybe a survey great having a community no the the main event here is the new bond you already said the 4.9 out of 90 the main event is the new bond. I think we need to get focused in on that and find a way how we can make a pitch to the community and our committee and again I don't want to I mean what um Phil talked about and Dave we challenged them we said no this is bogus go back on on this thing and I think we have a better product as a result and I think we're being wise stewards of the taxpayers money by utilization to you

174know have a global campus and one thing that wasn't talked about we're not going affect the fields so we don't have, you know, the the sporting fields. Um, anyway, that's my two cents on the flight. So, thank you. Thank you. All right. Thank you for your comment. Anyone else? Yeah. Yeah. You're a taxpayer in West and I should remind everyone I we we Mr. Marinachi is like a regular face here. Please introduce yourself, your name, Frank Syrian. Amber Stgill. Um I I am a taxpayer and a mom, but I'm the principal of the junior high and I just I appreciate Mr. Strong what you said about our um 4.9 million and the critical projects that are on there. And I want to bring just a tiny bit of life to some of those projects. I

175think it's easy like to talk about whether or not the money should be diffused and and if that's all it was as a taxpayer, I'm like why? I get it, right? But I would be remiss if I didn't advocate for our staff and our students. Um the water is a critical issue. The piping that's something that really I mean we'll be lucky if if we decide to not go that route and it's just lumped in say to the bond and say the bond passes. I feel like we're going to be lucky if it lasts that long. So that's a concern because that's money that's going to have to be spent either way, right? And that's a lot of money. So I think that's just something to keep in the back of your mind. Um, this

176may seem like a small thing to some people, but to me it's a big deal. It affected one student this year, but that's this is one stu. Every student matters. So, the lack of ADA compliance in our auditorium concerns me. It It's disheartening to see that we were not able to perform in there because that would mean that one of our students couldn't perform in the auditorium. That makes me emotional because I care about our kids. And so having to move and perform somewhere else because that one student couldn't get on the stage, it it concerns me. Um along with just the lack that we've had to take chairs, the seating in the auditorium, they're old and our custodians have done an amazing job of taking chairs out and repurposing them when chairs break and

177you know, people come in and they weld them. And so we're losing capacity in that auditorium that's used K12 for our community and and even outside of our musical and our plays. You know, we have other dance organizations and people that come in and perform. And so I just think all of our kids in our community deserve to be on that stage. Um, and then lastly, like this is going to sound so tiny, but you talk to our PE teachers and this is something I've been hearing about for the last three years, but the curtain in the gym breaks every single year. It is old. And so that's on the list. And it's a tiny deal, but it's a big deal because that's their classroom, right? And so we run two PE classes in the

178gym every period and um use it for JOTC and we pull the curtain down so that we can use use it as multiple classrooms essentially and then we also of course pull it down for basketball games, things like that. So just like I said, wanted to bring life to some of those things that are on the list that seem so small but they really add up and they make a big difference for our kids and for our staff. So thank you. Thank you. Can I ask a clarifying question? I know we don't respond comments, but um wasn't one or two of those things included in the 13 million? Correct. Yeah. Which one? We were holding off on any improvements to the junior high because we were waiting for the long range facilities playing committee to

179do their work because we didn't want to put money into the junior high and then eventually say, "Oh, well that's going to be demolished." So, we were waiting for tonight's report. Okay. But the two projects that Amber just talked about, the domestic water piping replacement and the ADA compliance for the auditorium, those have been approved by the school board, but we are putting on hold to move forward until tonight's presentation. Thank you. Anyone else, please? My name is Shane Moore. I have three students in the district and my wife is a substitute teacher in the district. Um not a many member of the planning team or anything just saw this was on the agenda and wanted to be here tonight. Um I am excited about this bond issue. Um my kids did go to a

180tandem for two years before they were redistrict to Somerville and that school it is a family and my wife loves to sub there but there are struggles having no cafeteria. The teachers have to be in the classroom during lunch and that just adds more. My oldest just finished seventh grade and having to commute back and forth every day and she's a trombone player and has to carry that with her every day and I'm sure they're their backpacks are heavy cuz they have all their books in them and my daughter is not that big and so having them all under one campus. I was telling my wife about this plan when I read it cuz I read the board packet every Friday when it comes out and I mentioned this was on it and my daughter

181says good but I don't get to experience it. I can't do that tomorrow. So I am excited to see this being done. Um I would say and I know there are so many more pressing projects longterm. I would also say as a district that prides itself in its fine arts our auditoriums and our space for our fine arts do not hold up. as a district that says it has one of the best music programs and band programs in the state. Um, just two weeks ago I was at both High School for a different type of meeting and we use their auditorium and I got to tell you it's one of the best auditoriums I've ever fine arts facilities I've seen and if we want to continue to say that we have one of the best

182fine arts programs, our facilities have to keep up as well. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Next. Anyone? Ben Jensen. Uh I was on the committee and I wasn't here for the presentation, but I'm sure they did a great job. Um uh we actually talked about the 4.9 quite a bit on the committee. Uh if if uh if I remember right, correct me if I'm wrong, but um be because some of those projects uh would have an escalation, right? If if we didn't do it today, the 4.9 it would be5 a half or $6 million at a higher rate, right? So, I mean, from a financial perspective, you know, I I thought it made a lot of sense to do that. I I totally understand of we need to get the buy in from everyone,

183right? That's that's the biggest thing. Uh, and you know, if if you actually look at it, uh, I I think when it was presented to us, um, if we use the 4.9 to Peter's point, we could definitely be under what we currently are, right? The big the biggest thing is be under the current rate that we are right now. Like that was as a committee, that was our whole goal, right? We want to be we want to make sure that we're under that rate. Um, and with that 4.9, we could be under that rate for rate for sure, right? by two or three percent. If we didn't use that that 4.9 there was a possibility that it would be flat or you know somewhere somewhere in there. And so with that we we as a

184committee I thought we if we use that we could for sure be under that the the current rate. So um but I would also uh what was your name? Shane. Shane uh I have five kids in the district. I'm going to be here for a long time and my kids participate in the um music fine arts programs and I would echo his comments. Thank you. Good comments. Anyone else? Please. My name is David Kobia. I wasn't planning to be here until my wife asked me to come and attend. she's part of the committee and uh I wasn't going to say anything but I thought it would be good to get perspective of somebody that's in the community has kids in the school but isn't as involved as a member that's on the committee um I

185was actually really surprised we're even still talking about defeasence I thought we had the community forums I thought we had feedback the fact that the decisions not already made I think if you bring it up to the community again there's going to be a lot of frustration like we're talking about this still what's going on? Why can't we make a decision? Let's move forward. I'm super excited about the bond. That's that was really exciting to see all that uh work that's gone into preparing for the schools and you know where the money is going to go. That's awesome. But for me, I mean, for me personally, I I don't feel like we need to defease anything. There's I think there's a reason why it's only happened once in the last 20 years. And I I

186think being good stewards of the money that we have is is critical. So, we can talk about that and it's been talked about a lot but I just felt like it was important for me to communicate how I responded just hearing about this after hearing all the different community forums and being involved with those in the past. So thank you thank you anyone else last call. All right we will close uh public comments uh regarding the discussion. Thank you all for your participation. Uh, moving on to item 11 on the agenda, items arising. Uh, any board members? Anything new like to bring up? All right. All I can say is I'm looking forward to the start of the new year and the new sports seasons for our athletic teams. It's going to be a fun

187ride to see them back on on the courts, depending on how you look at it. Uh, superintendent report, it's in the packet. Anything you'd like to add? I just talked about our summer programming. So, we do have some summer programs going on. We have uh summer reading and steam for all elementary students on Tuesdays at Wide Hollow from 10:00 a.m. to 12:00 noon. And then we have play and learn for families with children birth to age 5. That's at the innovation center in the family engagement classroom. And that's on Fridays 10:30 a.m. to 12:00 noon. That's all throughout the summer both uh Tuesdays at White Hollow, Fridays at uh innovation center and some other uh special categorical uh projects that we have and that's in the board packet. So thank you share that. All right.

188Uh moving on to item 13, board reports, board development. Anyone? All right, I'll go ahead and call the meeting. Thank you everybody for being in attendance today, especially our presenters and other members of the community. Uh meeting is adjourned 9:24 p.m. Tuesday, July 8th. Thank you.