001No, we're good. >> So, we're live. >> You're live. >> Okay, terrific. Um, good afternoon everyone. It's Thursday, October 23rd, uh, at 1:34 p.m. We just need to get all the way set up in here. Um, thank you for your patience. Um, Kelly Lessons, member of the Anchorage School Board and chair of the finance committee. And to my left, roll around for introductions. >> Higgins, board member and committee memberson, COO. Tom Penn, senior director, capital planning and construction. >> America Sullivan, executive assistant. >> Katie Barrett, senior director OMB >> Cory East. >> And online, we have >> Member Hollow. And we will keep tabs on anyone else who may show up. I believe that member Bellamy is the other member of this committee and she is at a conference right now. Um, so we'll update
002as needed. Um, we have four items on the agenda today, starting with the 2026 bond. And I wanted to take this opportunity um to allow the administration to share any more they might want to share about the bond and allow board members to potentially reflect on what to me felt like an open-ended ask uh at the work session a couple of weeks ago uh with respect to the Ursa major question. I don't know whether there was any clarity >> uh that you guys got during that conversation. So this seemed like an opportune >> okay >> moment. >> Can you pull the slides up? >> Yes, >> so while she's pulling up the slides, um this is a much slower smaller slide deck. So we can focus on really the one or two things that that
003we really want to know. And one of those is we know that we have 50% bond debt reimbursement. We know it's the governor's last year to make modifications to anything that gets approved by the legislature. Um, you know, what are we comfortable with? Because we know we're going to have this huge PR campaign that says this is for the taxpayer that the lowest the lowest impact on your taxes since 2014. Um, and and it's it's really, you know, if you go so big, we know that no matter what our outreach is, whether it's flyers, website, radio, every community council meetings, that there's going to be a huge part of the population that doesn't understand that in April. Um, and as it gets enacted and we start reinforcing it over the next couple years, I think
004people are going to finally get it that that 50% of this is being paid for by the state. Um, but I don't know the board's comfort zone. And then the second big one really to talk about is um Ursa Major. And and when we get to that, we'll we'll talk about it because, you know, there's a there's certainly a long-term um reason why we would rebuild Ursa Major even if it cost us an additional 5.4 million. And it's and and we'll get to that slide and we'll talk through it. Um but for now on the next slide um we we'll talk about it again at the end because I know I don't know who's online. I know >> and and okay so so have four at least four of us can we don't have to
005talk about it now like what are your thoughts? Um I think at the end though as you see the the other uh projects and you and you talk about Ursa Major really the most relevant thing is what are we comfortable with? Um I think if you threw 100 million out the first time knowing that it's going to take a long time before the average voter really does understand what state bond debt reimbursement is. Especially when people like me mess up and call it SBDR and I and when I write it and they don't know it's it's just going to be a a lot it's going to be an education opportunity. Um everyone understood pretty quick when it went away. Uh because the bond passed in April, they passed the legislation in June and backdated it
006to January. So that year in 2015, everybody knew what it meant. Um but since then it's been so long that I think you know a lot of people just don't know. Um but I'm certainly we can talk it now. Um we definitely want to close though with that being probably if you were to give us guidance the most important thing as we modify um the the uh non-action item for for the next board meeting. We can talk about it again then. Um it's it's not unrealistic to expect amendments on on the on the following board meeting. So we really have, you know, several weeks to talk about this and think it through and kind of get an idea of how do we approach this now. >> Yeah. Yeah. In in the past, we've gone different
007directions with this, right? At one time, we used to have components of different parts of bond and we broke it out differently. So if we were trying to do something for a school, of course, that would be different. If we're trying to do something for from a safety standpoint, if it was equipment, if we would care technology, that bond passed in the upper 60s time. That was a shocker. It wasn't for me, but it it wasn't shocking to the administration. They didn't want the bond, but we got it through. Then the assumption was then the problem was you got the bonds approved this year but if you don't get it approved next year then you got all your staffing issues and and how do you manage that? So they put all the bond together in
008one big one. So we either get it approved for two years and that gives us better planning to do things. That's when we started off with the 100 million kind of plus and went for Mayo. >> Yeah. I did some historical looking at it and it and it looked like towards the end of of when there were two or three bonds, voters started saying, "Well, I'll support this one but not this one." >> That's right. >> Um and and I wasn't here. you were on the board actually when we switched to go back to everything on one bond. >> Yeah. Um, so I can go by what George Visas remembered and and others was that once people thought they could they really could still support the school district and approved one out of three and
009they're still doing good that and I assume it was the board working with the administration said let's put it all in one package and >> the administration pushed it because they didn't want they wanted to be able to project for two years of of activities and and so staffing could be adjusted and they could you know plan better that way. So they put the big bonnet together every other year was kind of like the approach. Yeah. What their plan was. And then uh that kind of uh then it became one of the administration municipality saying the assembly we're not going to give you more than what you what you pay off and we went to a bond. >> Oh, that's who pushed that. >> That's where that's where it came from. Came from the municipality.
010Uh there was some conservatives on the from the assembly. They were adamant and they made a big point. You can't do more than what you pay off. Well, >> obviously >> what we did 20 years ago is not going to cost the same as right now anyway. Yeah. >> And so it's a little bit ridiculous that way. And uh and we look at the total amount that we've got in bonds. It's come down >> a lot. >> So we've got a lot of sales and we got a billion and a half been deferred maintenance. We got all this other stuff. But we we can we can break out of the issues. And we talked about this before. Energy efficiency. We save money if we just do some stuff. We may not even cost that much,
011but we got some things that will be very popular and other things that can be closer together, I think. So, I am not I'm not a supportive of of keeping it, you know, really small and it's it's a problem. We're not being able to keep the schools up and and prevent massive repairs later. Well, Tom did the did the math on if we were to want to stay exactly where we are right now. We keep all the same facilities. We keep them maintained at um at the level that we're able to maintain them at. It's $80 million a year. And that's not even eating into uh really that that one and a half billion. 80 million is is like a steady state right now. Um >> so this package is to me that >> it
012is but we do have this discussion on there major that that we should come to grips with. >> Um and when we get to their major slide we've put a lot of thought into it. I'll be honest, initially uh initially we were not in the place that we got to once we started really looking at, you know, if you could build a building with 80% of it paid off by the federal government. Um and we didn't need all four schools on base, none of them have been condemned. You could just give one back at zero cost. um if if that's what the enrollment pattern would would uh lead us to and we'd have a building that's good for 30 years before it would need anything really. Um, so we want to leave room in here
013between 70 to 80 for that discussion and then anything else that pops up because I knew member Higgins was going to bring up um some other things and they're they're all legitimate. Um, and we've talked a lot. It's just what is that what is the upper limit we're comfortable with on the very first year of state bond debt reimbursement? Um because I think you got to go you got to go higher in the future. >> I think if you go with 100 million you got all kind of problem. You break it out you got a better chance and you can sell the different components. But what we can't do is to break out locations of the municipality because Eagle River will only vote for Eagle River. I'm sorry. >> And that's what happened in the
014past. >> That's right. We do not break into one bond and everything. So whatever we do without anything involving them has to be municipal wide or else we lose their votes. I mean we it's consistent. We've been there our group comments at community council. Well, we should be on our own anyway, right? We we can do this and we can do that. We don't have to worry about you. >> It's like losing the guard vote because they only have one school. You can't put them on every bond and >> although their students go to South and other choice sort of options. Um, >> right. >> Okay. Well, let's >> Okay. >> Keep moving. >> Next slide. So, this is the 2026 bond. It's the year one basically. Uh again wanted to stress that it's a
015$74 million bond but to the taxpayer it's really a 34 or $37 million bond because of state bond debt reimbursement. The focus is pretty consistent what we've done over the last couple years. We're focusing on safety and security. So that includes 15 schools and a access control upgrade. Um, it also includes renovating some of our our older schools and bringing some of those deferred maintenance uh aspects of the school up to to the current level that we expect in an educational facility. So that means we're going to um looking at upgrading roaming uh Lake Otis Plat Elementary and that's got some specifically some seismic improvements that need to be made in the school structurally. uh tutor is getting a secure vestibule in addition to its its renovation. And then lastly, our student nutrition facility needs
016a bit of work to to keep up with the especially the increased load that student nutrition is providing for the district. You know, it's interesting. This year we have about 800ish less students. Um there well over a 100,000 more meals sold than this time last year. So all those things with the uh traditional service in elementary school was huge. I mean, every single school, they eat more and there's less trash and they're just they got to expand that environment to be able to produce more and they're producing a different kind of food instead of all packing the tray with a little >> where the broccoli is cooked to the same temperature as the chicken. Um, it it just it's reconfiguration and good. Let me ask a question about I recognize two the elementary group I
017knew there were problems there, you know, it's got issues. >> You've been talking to me about that for seven years. >> Yeah, I have. Uh but oh, I think it's only been five, but that's okay. >> It feels like >> uh it's but the issue of the secure entrance kind of thing they have right now. You go in through the door, you have to press the button, you get it released, you be able to go forward. What is the issue there that how much is that going to cost? because it seems like that shouldn't be that high a crisis kind of situation. >> Well, the many of the early secure vestibules, we did the secure vestibule, but we didn't have the access control element, the open path system. So now you you have a fob
018basically and use that fob um to enter into the building. All the buildings um are either real close to having a secure vestibule where you have to you enter through the first set of doors after being buzzed in and then you enter into the main office where you use the visitor management system and then you're allowed to enter into the the main school area. um with these secure uh vestibule access control upgrades where we didn't have access control, we didn't have the fob system at multiple different entrances. Let's say at the staff entrance, it's >> not just a front. >> Yeah. If you go into my office on the as you walk through my office door which you're familiar with on the right hand side up against the wall there's this uh it's about this
019thick inch and a half inch thick white board and it looks like it has a lot of bullet holes because APD shot it with every kind of round they have um and we put bulletproof panels in there um so and and glass that's reinforced so everyone in the office is safe. We've only had one incident, but we did have one where two adults were in a parking lot. Uh, one shot the other one. Uh, the injured man made it through the first vestibule, but no one in the office knew that he was safe at that point. There was it was pretty chaotic. Um, but because they were able to lock it down, the other guy kept trying to get in, but he couldn't get in and APD got there in time and saved the guy's
020life and u protected the school. So the secure vestibules that we've done in the last eight or nine years are significantly different than some of the initial um controlled entry which is a little different. >> But what's two things that are missing? What the issues here? One is um well uh are we putting anything into that because that that school is a disaster. Uh, and it seems like we should be putting something in there to get the player prepared for the whoopy leaks, for the ventilation. >> Well, they're doing the designs now and then the designs will inform us as to the costs. >> Um, what do you normally wait 65 or more? >> Yeah. For the the final estimate, but Bartlett itself, you'll see on the the overall sixyear CIP, there's two different additional
021phases. Uh so it's going to get a lot of work >> overall is like a $75 million project that number >> over probably 10 years >> over many years. Yeah. >> And then the last on 2027 through 2021 >> D the administration the municipality has not told us anything in writing or anything else that they want at the food level uh you know in the future. Uh that's >> I there's been nothing official only comments at joint assembly meetings by really a couple assembly members and then one board member has mentioned discussions with the assembly but >> so so assuming that like is not closed what is there plans or is there a contingency or what you're going to do >> and I built a slide to talk about that and >> okay ahead of
022the game >> another reason that we put this headroom for discussion purposes is is because every decision the board makes regardless of what the decision is there is an impact. >> Yeah. >> Um so if on the 18th of November the board doesn't close Lake Otus then I'm hoping that that and we're trying to get a cost estimate. Um I'm hoping that there would be an amendment to get Abloop up to a standard that is acceptable for many years. Um, it won't be a full renovation. It won't be a $30 million bond, but everything that really would have to be done. Um, because that's the impact. I mean, >> oh, >> it's not personal if Lake Otus closes or not. To me, it's it's making sure the board understands if we don't close it, then
023we have another project that we need to add to this bond because we need to start getting the design going. If we do close Lake Otis in November, knowing that there's um a a project, a bond project to renovate that building, we still wouldn't want them to move in next year because we can get the renovation done much quicker if there's no one in the building while you're doing it. It's like any DIY project at home. It's a lot easier when no one's in the house. Um, so whichever way the board does vote on Lake Otus, both ways do impact other following decisions. >> I want Hold on, Member Higgins. I know that member Jacobs has a question. If we could hit that and then also just be mindful of a number of items on
024the agenda and getting through this one. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Um, can I first just confirm the year 1 2026 slide we're looking at is what's currently in our CIP or is this new information? >> Uh, the only difference was that 200,000? >> Oh, he's talking about from last year's CIP is all of the year 2's last year. What is the change? Is that what you're saying, Carl? Or do you >> correct? Yes. How much of that changed from last year's CIP? Uh, President Jacobs, we I remember asking specifically a series of questions about those differences in the work session and there were a number of changes >> uh that the administration reviewed >> like we intentionally put the SBU for tutor while you're already doing a renovation. It's much cheaper to do
025both at once instead of uh and the the trust we didn't know about the trust structural issue at Tutor. um last year because we turned out this summer and >> the rolling cost had gone down because you actually broke it into two projects. That was a big not difference. >> We Yeah, we had to break it into two phases. You know, a lot of it is we we've definitely seen the lack of the lack of personnel available to do construction in Anchorage. Um, and in some trades it's even more, especially those trades where there's not um, a great deal of um, union workers available like trim carpentry. Um, every single SBU was delayed this year. They everyone knows once you do a CWA, you can only get the labor from the union shop, right? So,
026you go to the hall and if none of the non-unions signed up at the hall to pay the fee rates, then you can keep going back like we did this year looking for trim carpenters. They're just not there. But you've already done the contract, so it is what it is. Um, but it delayed it by probably two months. Um, but it but it's the other the other thing is it's not this is not anti-CWA. But the other impact is there's so much construction in Anchorage and not enough people to do it all that if you don't want to sign on to a CWA, there's enough projects now. You you don't need us anymore. >> Um and it's just business. Everyone's competing for the same limited workforce >> and if we don't expand that workforce, it'll
027always be so expanding the workforce. So, Madam Chair, I'm going to interrupt and get to my question. Um, >> so understanding that the differences are significant but but not a major overhaul. Um, I was curious where if Lake Otis was a new addition or if it was previously on the CIP and it was my recollection it was on the CIP. >> We planned Lake Otis already. >> Lake Otis has been on the CIP >> for years. >> Wonderful. Okay. So again my question um since this this document contained legotus before the recommendation to repurpose Legotus for a charter program >> absolutely >> what what I think I understand is ASD doesn't have a pass a significant past practice regarding how it handles capital investment in a district or a municipal owned school building that's occupied
028by a charter program. I think that there was one which I may have been aquarium that was handled previously that was put on a school bond. Um and and so this this would be if Lake Otis was repurposed potentially precedent setting or at least more recently precedent setting. And so is administration if the building is repurposed as administration suggesting is it comfortable with the current prioritization level of Lego Elementary? Do we want to keep it in that spot? Should the programming change from a neighborhood school to a charter immersion charter program? >> I'm comfortable. I mean, once once we already picked a charter school and said we we are now going to treat all students as I mean, we always treated all students as ASD students. Um, but once we get a bond for Aquarian,
029I think and and we really are in more of a landlord mode when a charter school moves in than anything else. So, Rick Schula's at Abbott Loop. If Lake Otis doesn't close, we need to fix up Abbott Loop. Um, if we fix up Abbott Loop, they certainly don't have the fund balance to do it. Um, we would need to bond for that. I I think I think the years where people could save fund balance and grow and grow um other than potentially if you're a homeschool program with very limited capital requirements those those days have passed. I mean we just didn't keep up with funding. >> If I could just interject President Jacobs as a reference point um I believe I was an active participant in preparing the 2022 bond. We reinserted the Lake Otis
030project, which at that point was under $13 million as a building life extension, uh, to that bond package, and it focused on special education spaces, lighting, the playground, the roof, exterior doors and windows, HVAC, the water system, sanitiz sanitary system. Um, those were things that were known issues four, five years ago, >> right? Um, so the building itself is it if it's going to remain an ASD facility, >> right? I mean, if these upgrades, >> yes, this this predominantly represents the deferred maintenance on the building over the last 10 years or so. >> So, Madam Chair, could I follow up just really quickly? >> Yeah. >> So, where I was getting with the kind of those two questions is is as follows. if we're going to and I I think it does make sense that
031you know all charter schools are public schools and all all real case students or all um aquarium students are students and so I I think it tracks that if they occupy an ASD building we should prioritize capital investments where it's needed u to safeguard municipal property and not um prioritize a building based on what program it it houses as long as there are students there. The the one caveat I would add to that is I expect and I hope and I will force a board vote if needed to um ensure administration continues to hold charter programs accountable for ensuring that we're examining of how we can break down the barriers of access which include transportation and for some programs meal service. Um, and if we're going to make it a a formal practice that all
032buildings are equal, regardless of what program um, is housed, I I think that's probably a pretty good time uh, when that precedent is being formally set to start having those or continue having those conversations. And so, um, I'll leave it there for now, but I'm I'm just providing administration a heads up that that's of interest to me. You know, Carl, if if you think about it, Carl, we put $3.5 million into Lake Good this summer to give them a brand new SVU. Not because I mean, we we weren't going to go to Alaska Native and say, I mean, they need an SBU. Those are our kids. We got to protect them just like we did with Aquarian. Um just like we did with Stream. I mean, it's I I think we've passed that point where
033it's it's absurdly strange that a charter school would be in a brick and mortar building. I think those days are gone. Um, you know, if we could have if we could have found a place and and we are trying to figure out what is the future for schools like Highland and how do you put that in the next year and how do we talk about helping them and and other charter schools. the valley is building a charter school academy right complex. Um, you know, I I I think once once we all say they're all our kids, then they're all our kids and you know, we do what we can because the BSA was never designed to provide capital money ever from the the very first day it was written. That's why state bond debt reimbursement
034existed was because bonds and state bond debt reimbursement were capital. everything in the in the general fund was for instruction and and running the operation of the school. So, I don't think it's weird or or odd. It's just and I don't know why for years I Pat would know. I I'm sure there were discussions, but I I don't know why it it 20 years ago, 10 years ago, it was so odd to to bond for a charter school. I just >> it was a it was administration commitment. administration was not fond of charter school and the from the superintendent standpoint if they want to be on their own they can do they find their own damn place and that that's almost a direct quote okay uh so you had this if they want to be
035on their own they don't want to be part of us they don't want to do this they want to go off on their own they let them do it they did provide oversight so we had mismanagement financially of what they were doing as well but nobody was looking at that uh and so it got out of hand with that it was like you know you were like a a publicly paid private school uh is the way they treated it. And so they didn't care about the facility. I disagreed with that strongly obviously and I disagree with it today and I've been vocal about it. Um but that's really what was going on. It was the charter schools were managing their funds, right? We had issues of buying religious stuff or or contracting out private, you
036name it, violation of the Constitution. We had finances where they were shifting money off to the PTA. Large amounts of money where the PTA would rent the place and rent it to the facil to the charter school and keep the money separate so they could spend it any way they want without oversight or the principal being paid to do clean up the yard and getting the extra money that way. There's a lot of stuff that took place on the board that the APA wanted to get paid for developing uh it stuff that they were buying. Okay. So, it was it was really nasty and that's where we're at. >> Thank you for um a lot of historical memory. I do want to really respect folks's time and we have a very full agenda. Um so,
037let's um be forward. >> Oh, and also the Betty Davis East was because the electric company only owned it up to the corner of the street and now they're going to replace that whole length of power. Um and and now they'll be able to maintain it and repair it. >> I did notice the $300,000 increase in the planning and design from our last briefing. Just very briefly, >> we put that for um as part of right sizing if schools get closed. Um and we start moving programs around. We'll we'll need some design funds to be able to make sure um the projects probably won't be bondable level projects, but we will need designing so we can make sure that we're ready by next first day of school next year. >> Thank you. Okay. >> So,
038um one of the things we wanted to talk about today is a major discussion. Um we found PCBs in the building. It's going to cost approximately five or six million dollars dispose of those PCBs. Um that wasn't included in the budget and it doesn't fall under the reimburseable monies from the federal government to do that. So basically we're looking at we've already put forth $11 million. There's $41 million that the federal government is still willing to match to to build this school. Um the decision is providing the additional almost $6 million to move forward with the demolition and disposal of the old school and get ready to build the new school. I I have some initial thoughts. Um, and I think initially it's tempting to think about leveraging $10 million to help offset the deficit
039that we are steering at. That was sort of the initial thinking that >> I thought the same thing. >> Um, it's it is it is absolutely a direct way to help shore up some of that projected $75 million deficit. However, if the district may eventually be responsible >> for we or we will be responsible for the full cost, there's not a lot of money then that we're actually saving and thinking about the importance of Alaska in terms of global security and quite frankly thinking about the realities of climate change. I'm not a military expert, but it does seem to me that Anchorage is positioned to have a strong military presence >> Oh, yeah. >> for the foreseeable future. And >> and that eight and a half is going to be 10 million in the year
040>> by the Yeah. with inflation. So, my personal inclination after thinking about this is to support adding that $5.4 4 million to the bond and continuing to move forward with putting Ursa Major on the bond. And I I haven't spoken to other board members about it, but that is a bit of the evolution of my my own personal thinking that I wanted this is an opportunity about it because it sounds good to me. >> Carl, >> I'm sorry. Was there a question asked to me? Uh this is essentially an open open mic uh opportunity to share any thoughts you have. Um Mr. Anderson and the team at our work session a couple weeks ago indicated their interest in understanding board members thoughts about adding the Ursa Major demolition to the bond and there was no
041resolution or thoughts publicly shared at that time. Um, does the the additional 5.4 million is that subject to an 8020 split as well or is this money we have to 100% add to the total cost of the project? >> It would be 100% added to the total cost if all of the other schools on JB also qualify for this same program if it exists when we get to that point. Um if we had known that all the school that this school was contaminated with PCBs when we um put in for the grant then it would have been part of the budget and then it would have um for the other three schools. Tom already has people going through the schools. There's a contract and they are determining um do they have the same level of
042PCB usage within those buildings. So, we will know in the future um if there's ever an effort to try to replace one of the other three schools with a 8020 match. >> Good point. >> Thank you. Uh Madam Chair, could I ask a a quick question, >> please? >> So, I guess the other question I have is regarding I mean I don't have an opinion right now. Um I understand from a it seems to be a modest investment and a significant uh match from the federal government which is why I was a strong advocate initially. I am interested in hearing administration's position on where we are with enrollment and what our ability to serve the Jbear community would be without that school without adding that school back into our portfolio. What I think I understand
043is we're serving all those students comfortably now. Um, and while we don't know what's going to happen in the future, I think I understand that we would be adding potentially another underresourced school to the rotation if we um split up base families into an extra building. And so I'm curious what that looks like with the budget situation, how students could be negatively impacted while the state addresses um foundation formula funding adequacy and whether or not enrollment continues to bear out the fact that we want to add another building in this section of the MOA. Well, unlike unlike the bulk of Anchorage's schools, even by the deed capacity and the ASD capacity, not by classrooms, they're still well into the the upper 70s and 80s in terms of uh capacity. They also though are seeing um
044the same things we see in every school with putting programs for students with more needs than others and much smaller people per class and things like that. um the whole capacity percentage. I'm very hopeful that in the next several months we can change the way we all see the actual capacity within a school as opposed to a percentage by the 114 square feet for an elementary school. I also I I said it earlier um but probably not very clearly. If you rebuild this school and if Jbear does start having a a decline in enrollment um it gives us a very simple easy solution to just re release one of the other schools on base um if it got low enough. Right now it would be packed like sardines if you if if you did that.
045But um you could release that building that has not been condemned like Ursa Major was back to Jbear. They could use it for any military purpose that they wanted or community purpose and it wouldn't cost us anything to give it back. We wouldn't have the $8.5 million for demo. It wouldn't be demoed. It's they're perfectly functional if we thought we didn't need it. So, you know, it definitely gives us more flexibility for future decisions in almost every way. And this 8 and a half million right now, it will be 10 million in a year and a half. So, if we're looking at trying to capture that 10 million for just next school year, by the end of next school year, we're going to owe 10. And I I don't know, the math doesn't seem to
046work. But my first gut feel was to to give it up until Jar Lawyers came back and demonstrated that it's our cost either way. >> We pay less >> to do a bond and build a new school than we're going to pay to demo. I think the the other important thing to consider is if populations do go down, you can always move like population to Ursa Minor and Ursa Major in Ursa Major and taking into account that >> Ursa Minor, Aurora, Orion also scored highly under the the PMSI program. Yes, that's what so they could potentially get a grants and we could renovate let's say Ursa Minor while we're housing all our students in Ursa Major. >> Sure. >> It becomes an impulse piece of the >> they're always going to be our cheapest schools
047in the district. >> Hold on. I know that member a question and then hopefully we can wind down conversation here and pivot to um one of the next items on the agenda. public schools on military installations. Thank you. >> Member member Jacob. >> Yeah, thank you. Uh so yeah, just one last question on this topic. Um this additional funding, is this something that we could potentially seek to get from the state through the project waterfall or through just a direct appropriation in the capital budget? Um whether or not we make the initial investment oursel, it would seem to me that this would be something that would be looked on pretty favorably from the um from the legislaturator's view. This is a a $5.4 million investment that serves military families. Um the Anchorage School District and
048the municipality have already put in a significant amount of the the funding. we've achieved a federal match and um you know for this cost the legislature could serve you know a core key constituency within the MOA and within the state and so I wouldn't think it would be a a a huge uphill lift but I guess I'm interested in feedback. I I think you know in the last I don't know half a dozen plus years I've seen almost every line item that comes to ASD get vetoed. I mean that that's just fact. Um, I think the the representatives that would uh maybe be the easiest dissuade to put it into legislation are are probably ones who also have had some of their bills vetoed more frequently than than others. Um, I I think I I
049don't know. I think a bond you you know if you have it or not. Um, as we saw last year, we didn't really know until right before school started how much money we had. Uh, when you look at the major maintenance grants that used to be plentiful, um, over the last several years, a lot of those have been vetoed down to very small amounts um, because of the state's budget difficulties in prioritizing education facilities. So, we just haven't been all that successful in in the recent past at getting additional capital money. This that's my concern. >> Very fair. Member Jacobs, did you have a followup? >> Yeah, know I everything Mr. Anderson said is correct. The reason why I asked the question is because this is very much unlike anything we would have ever put
050forward. um a 2080 split with a small additional capital investment required that exists on a military base that our state, you know, proudly supports for very good reasons. And so I would think if any project could get approved and escape a line item veto, it would be this one. And so um you know, we have a billion dollars in deferred maintenance. I feel like these are the questions we're obligated to ask. And so I understand why we're why administration is leaning towards a bond. I just want to make sure we're looking down all the different pathways before we get started. Thanks. Well, if you look if you look at the timeline, Carl, if you put it on the bond, you know, in April that you can start demo in May. >> If you wait for
051legislation, you may not know until 30 June, and then you're waiting for an override, and you're not going to probably do demo next summer. It's going to push it an entire another year. All right, member Jacobs, I really out of respect for um everyone's time, if we could have 30 more seconds on the bond question and then pivot. >> Oh, Madam Chair, that's all I had. That's all I had. I'm good. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. I'm sure we'll continue more conversations at the board level. >> Any any final bond item slides? Okay, this is the last slide. Oh, discussion. >> Uh, we talked about >> Yes, >> that you that we would need an amendment. >> Every decision has an impact and and that decision has an impact and not >> that the
052cost estimate is being developed is what it sounded like. >> Yes, we we know that trying to run it as a standalone water or fire suppression is not going to work. >> Okay. Okay. It didn't we didn't get a single bidder last time. Will when when does the administration expect that the cost estimate for an abbot loop renovation would >> we'll have a r estimate on the um we'll we'll have it before the vote on the 18th >> before the 18th. Okay. >> And obviously we'll make sure we share that information. >> Great. Thank you. Okay. Um I am um preemptively going to request that we extend this meeting until 2:45. uh to allow us a fighting chance of getting through some of the other items if folks need to leave. I understand um the
053second item on the agenda is Western Alaska relief and I think that's still in Mr. Anderson's support. >> It is I I can uh I'll provide a a quick overview of where we stand on uh you know figuring out the funding piece of it. Uh just yesterday we finally the state received the federal government's um approval that it is a disaster relief and they set aside x amount of dollars. So the state is working right now um we may have it tomorrow. It very likely is going to be Monday though. How to break out what would be reimburseable by state? What would be reimburseable by the federal government? And what might the path be to provide the information and what are the requirements to get those reimburseable? We have a meeting with Dr. bishop and
054her entire all of her key staff, all of the chiefs um tomorrow at one o'clock and Katie um just make sure you know uh and we're going to go through all of those internal things because we have we have a lot of stuff that that is is complicated and we're trying to work through the mechanics of how to do it. And I'll just use um you know there's 33 kids that qualify for prek. We can't do the special ed testing on them to see if they qualify for special ed because they're still in trauma. Many don't speak English. This is going to take a long time to get that. We know that DE has told us they're going to give us full um ADM, but there's a difference on ADM for GenEd PreK, which is.5
055FTE, and SPED preK, which is 1.0. Um, and then there's there's a host of other things that we have to talk about with the deed staff because that's that's a third uh really angle um and direction to get funding and it's a completely different kind of funding because Dr. Bishop has access to other federal monies that the state has. And so we we know that we have a little bit of work. Um I would think in the next couple weeks all of that will be cleaned up. um because no matter what they talk to us about today and even at the state EOC, they're going to have to send all of their documents through legal and make sure everything is just right dressed before um Annie and Katie get it and then we'll clean everything
056up. Uh we we almost finalized I think well after we talk to deed we'll be able to finalize what levels are they willing to uh track because if we track everybody's costs for everything they did only to find out that some of it's not going to be reimbursible at all because it was during the duty day or for some other reason then any cost number I would give you would not be the cost number we give you in two weeks and that always creates confusion. So, we prefer not to really give it out because we've got things like each we sent two containers with enough shelter supplies for a thousand each. But we don't know what the Red Cross has actually used. And we won't know until we get those containers back and do an
057inventory. And then we know we'll get reimbursed for everything that they actually use. And those are both sitting over by the Egan Center. um they had to empty them because it's it's there's a lot of places in town where you don't want to leave a container out. Um so we know all of the supplies are in the building. We just would have no idea what's being used. So we need a couple weeks to to feel more comfortable that any number we put out there is not going to be changed within 12 hours. Um we do know there was over 180 hours of instructional staff alone. Well, that's it as well. Not counting bus drivers. Um, staff efforts, over 180 hours last night have been put into supporting this. Um, dozens and dozens and dozens of
058buses at $125 an hour to operate. Um, so we use buses for uh the airport obviously. Um, showers because the Egan center had no showers initially. Alaska Airlines didn't have enough showers and many people hadn't taken one in in days. They'd been, you know, in transit. Um, laundromats uh signed up to do laundry for free. So, we sent buses to take people to go get their clothes clean. Uh, we took them to gymnasiums so they could get out of this really hectic, chaotic environment and go play basketball or or do what they wanted. And we've also there was a a pot lock over at Egan where we moved the Alaska Airlines community over there so they could uh you know really just get a mental break. Um and and then the schools as of Monday
059we we already had buses lined up to take them to Benny Davis East Anchorage High School, Wendler Collegegate andCCS. And as students find places with family members around town, they are enrolling in other schools as well. Um and CIT is working that piece. So CIT is working crazy hours making sure everybody who stayed at the sites at the two shelter sites and those who immediately left as soon as the bus dropped them off with family members trying to make sure we get everybody enrolled and you can imagine with no phone numbers that that takes a little time um once they've left the shelter site. We've sent registration teams um to the shelter sites u to direct direct work with the family members on the ground. Um Sven and and all the instructional folks figured out
060a new way to enroll the kids. So it was expedited for those who had nothing. They have no ID, no forwarding address, no anything. And and so they were incredibly successful um at doing that. We have had translators with the registration teams. They've also been translating documents for ASD. Also, the American Red Cross and FEMA because American Red Cross and FEMA had experiences where they had gone somewhere and used Google Translate or whatever to try to get signs made only to find out that that created more problems. Um, so Sven has been talking to lower uh the LKSD lower custom school district multiple times a day since we started. Most of our staff has talked to them. Marty has reached out to them. Um, so we've got great comms with them. Um, in fact, this
061afternoon their assistant superintendents on the ground uh with with some staff members and I think I think our communication with them. We were their source of communication on what's happening um in Anchorage the first several days um because we were here obviously comm's um shelter container. I'll hand over to Marty for um how we're going to work personnel who are working in our schools but don't work for us. >> Yeah. On that. So yesterday and I actually took a tour of those four sites that have enrolled the largest number of kids and we were able to pick up uh Lori Russell who was a administrator principal from Quig who was here in Anchorage and have her tag along with us so they could get a visualization to where a lot of their kids had landed
062and uh boy that was powerful. It was really cool to see how all four of those schools have just embraced that effort. Um, but we've been having regular conversations with their deputy superintendent and uh, director of HR just about how they might be able to move staff here then to support those kids. So to the greatest extent possible, now that we've congregated them in a small number of schools, can we congregate them in classrooms that keep those groups together and then provide a staff member from LKSD so they just have the greatest chance of having some continuity with what they lost when they were displaced from their community. And so the agreement that we have worked out um through the attorneys is we will enroll the students. They will be ASD students um for all
063intents and purposes. Um and then LKSD where possible will dispatch staff and house them here in Anchorage and they will remain LKSD employees but they will work in those schools where we have those high concentration of former LKSD students. And the reason for that arrangement we kind of landed on pretty early on is this situation is going to be dynamic and it's going to change a lot over the next couple of months, right? We may have an influx still of more students. We may have students who are enrolled with us for a while, but then a lot of them when they have the opportunity may move to Bethl or another community in Western Alaska. And so that allows LKSD to sort of bend and flex with the the enrollment fluctuations around those students. Um, and
064you know, enrolling students from one district to another is not particularly problematic. ending one person's employment relationship with an entity and starting it a new with another. You know, it's different collective bargaining agreements, it's different leave rules, it's different, you know, it's just a lot of differences. And so this allows their staff to experience really the least disruption as possible to help them, you know, get their feet under them and then be able to support their kids who are here at Anchorage. So, we think we've got a good mutually uh working relationship and agreement around that and uh so we're pretty excited um to start to receive some staff and support those kids. >> Great. Well, um I appreciate everything everything that the administration and it staff members are doing. Um, and maybe this is
065just an open invitation for future finance meetings to have Western Alaska updates sort of as a recurring agenda topic to update the board as needed. >> Unfortunately, I mean it this was a whole team at effort, right? I mean, it's everybody seven days a week really the first week. Um, so all the students will be able to be tracked by where they came from. You know, you hear a lot about Kipnick and Quig and as as the two main villages, but there's actually students from five or six villages uh here. Some of them were here for AFN only to find out they have no they couldn't go home. >> Yeah. >> Um so it's every variant of everything to get your head wrapped around it and uh yeah, it's been a amazing team building effort.
066>> Yeah, it's been good. >> Thank you. I know many of us talked about it at the board meeting, but it's it is impressive. I'm going to pivot to the fourth item on our agenda out of respect for time, which is FY27 budget planning, and then we can circle back to that for uh because we'll address that in another board meeting. We can't fully get to it today. >> Um so, this is agenda item four. We're moving option number three. Yep. Um and really kind of wanted to focus on how we're going to do the community engagement within our for our 27 budget. We're spinning up this balancing act software simulation that we did in pre and we started doing it last year. Uh we're going to make a few changes to it. Uh one
067being that not allow changes to revenue categories where people can't just make up revenue that they think they we should have. Um and really get the public and whoever uses this tool to balance the budget the same way that we're going to have to go do it. Um that's that's kind of one of the biggest changes. A couple of the things that we did put in and we're still kind of finalizing these numbers. So this isn't a public uh facing thing yet. Um really just it'll be the same similar uh opening statement and everything. And really kind of the goal is to get more people involved in it. And then at the end in December, you know, when we had the board work session where we went through it and had everyone kind of fill
068this out, uh the idea would be to have a more robust community engagement in with, you know, the legislature, the assembly, deed, governor, whoever. We can invite media to come and play with this and see if they have the ability to balance it as well. And if they do, what would they cut? But really force them to get to a balanced budget to see what what they would cut to be able to get there and see the challenges we're having. So if I so I realize this is uh internal beta testing right now but I see a $78 million deficit rather than 75 point something >> right and that's I mean we're as we get further into this and see what um you know I think maybe healthcare is like a driver of that is
069our increases in that are above the three or 4% average that we used when we're kind of doing those really rough estimates to begin with and again I mean one of the one of the problems with pushing this out early this is probably change again as we finalize our revenue because I don't know how many kids we're going to have still because they keep we're enrolling all these kids from Western Alaska um doing our intensive needs count. So, there's still a lot of stuff in flux. So, this will probably change again, but it's in the >> ballpark. >> Um if our difference was only 3 million really. That's not too bad. >> Yeah. >> So, um one thing I tried to do is tie a BSA equivalent to that 78 million, but I haven't got
070the software to actually work for me yet. >> Um so, a couple of changes that I've made. By and large, the categories are all the same. One thing I we did include was a we have for 27 we'll have four contracts that are going to be unsettled at that time. Um so we have built in you know 3% or so increase in our uh wage scales and $150 in our health insurance. So we put some toggles on here. So, if you want a 1% increase in wages for those four those groups, here's how much it adds, you know, and you can see that deficit go up as you add those percentages. So, there is some that's already built in. Um, it'll be described, it's described in the notes here if you click in it. And
071we'll add more information as we go, but just kind of want to get this in front of the board just make sure we're kind of on the right path if there's anything else you want. uh similar with insurance $100 per member per month the change that that does you know across the entire uh bargaining units it would affect. So that's one big thing that we put in there like a new thing just because that's you know top of mind frankly is what what that effect has on our deficit. The other thing I I updated was on the class size um and start calling it as a class size versus a ptr because a lot of people don't necessarily maybe understand the full terminology ptr versus class size. Ours our ptr is closer to a class
072size than others who might have all their you know all their certified staff divided in the number of students um and co-director specialists and stuff. So I'm interested in this because it looks like you've given a bit of a ballpark for the additional cost of implementing the the evidence-based model, the pike model. Remember anything? So >> um so on the balancing act software he's incorporated the evidence-based model the cost to implement that and so I think that was a question that arose >> over the last month like what would that updated figure look like right >> and so that is over and you know the cost over and above maintaining you know where we are now >> that's yeah from what 15 K3 and 25 >> and that doesn't include the money it takes to
073be able to recruit and retain teachers as well. >> No, that's just clearly the staff cost. >> Yeah, that's assuming we can question. >> Hey Andy, for um the the plus ptrs or minus ptrs, can you add um what that would do for FTE or like the number of positions that would be lost so that people have context around that >> because I I mean you look at that and >> yeah, >> I'm not even sure I have the right context. I can make a guess, but >> the challenge is it ties to it being only teachers that would be cut, which wouldn't be unrealistic. >> Well, in the PTR it would be, >> right? But the other impacts on parros and other stuff as those classes get away. >> I think then you should
074clarify that that this is for, you know, classroom educators or something like that. You know what I mean? Certificated educators or I just think it gives context. People don't really appreciate what that means. Um, we could see if there's a spot to put in the FTE because when we have that, it's >> I wouldn't use I don't know if I use the word FT because that also gets confusing, but just I'll let you I mean just some context on what that would >> what that means in terms of a reduction staff and you guys can >> Yeah, we'll see how we could probably work it in on there. But >> but that was kind of one of the changes to add that Senate Bill 57 target and the evidencebased model targets. Mhm. >> So um
075>> um and that's not a multiple choice option. I mean that's you can either choose evidence-based model or the Santael 57 model. I mean >> Right. Yeah. Because they're different calculations. >> Yeah. You can only choose one. >> Okay. >> Uh but they have an S bill 57's fairly close to like a ptr minus three. So three of us kids in our class. The Senate one is if I see this, this is 23 at grades grade through K through six and 30 at K through 12. >> Oh, good catch. That should be seven through 12. >> Huh? >> That should say 7 through 12. >> Working the bugs out here. >> Yeah, I see. You know, remember President Jacobs has his hand up. >> Yeah, thank you, Madam Chair. Uh, is the evidence-based model referring
076to the Picasso study we had refreshed or is that something else? It is the Pyason study yet. >> Okay. Is there any way to make that evidence-based model class size like a hyperlink someone could click on if they wanted to or does the software not allow for that? >> I think we might be able to do that. >> We'll see. It's not that robust of a software. >> And our latest the the study that the board commissioned about two years ago is still located on the school board's website via a link. It's a publicly available document. >> Yeah. I just I don't know that question. >> I guess folks aren't gonna know what that is. >> You could say if you want more information, >> right? I mean, there's like a place on here like
077you can only put 400 characters in here, but there's another spot where you can add more details to it. You can put hyperlinks in there. >> Okay. >> So, we could do part of that. >> Great, great question. >> Um, but the rest of it is really kind of about the same as we had last year with respect to the different categories and everything. Um, it just updated for the amounts. The school closures, we're going to I'll take out the three and four, but we'll have the one and two in there because we want to post the two. But we do still have that. And then the other thing I wanted to change at the bottom was um the suggestion and having the amount in there because that can really that was another place that
078people kind of took their liberty to put something wild in there and really skew the data. Um but since every every one of our dollars is accounted in these other areas um we may not have them cost field but we certainly want the feedback what else we could do and it might be just in the closing commentary or something but I kind of want to get away from where people can make these things that are going to skew our data sets wildly depending on what >> can you show us I I know from the time I spent on the board that people are often interested in cutting administration. Is there a way is that disagregated? I mean, I saw the $57 million. Okay. So, there are >> sub sub there are areas that people could
079toggle within the concept of administration. Is there we had a great work session maybe a couple of years ago on what do we mean by administration? >> Yes. Because this isn't the definitions of the within the state chart of accounts. Okay. >> Um and particularly within like academic services where most of this falls under instructional u or student support for instruction. Um in that state function it would include a librarians. It includes the principal supervision teaching learning professional development all goes into this thing. So we tried to separate it out between more what's in this building versus um what is kind of just like direct classroom stuff >> is there. >> Although this this one we need to do some work on too because it probably has a lot of professional development agenda that are
080being paid to staff in schools. It seems like it's an and I don't know what the the product should look like at the end of the day, but if you could help folks by you know if you decrease you know if you if you click decrease once on business management you know what is there a way for someone to know what that $415,000 would pull off? I mean, >> not not a good >> or you would just essentially say, "Hey, we want to shrink this area. There's not an under there's no way of understanding what the effect of that minus $415,000." >> Yeah. It doesn't show like what Well, and I think that would be a whole lot more detailed conversation on, you know, with all the departments say, "What do you what would you
081cut if you someone decided to cut 50% out of this?" And I'd probably just say for business management, I cut myself, go find a new job because our audits and um get taken over by the state. >> Yeah. >> The thing that's really challenging is that some of those functions are we're legally obligated to maintain them, >> right? >> At a certain point, we can't cut payroll because we won't be issuing paychecks. So, I think it that's a hard conversation to sus some of that out because um you know some of the levels I think we may have already reached at the point where we're starting to push in where it's going to make it very difficult to to you know maintain some of those legal obligations and things that we're really supposed to be
082doing. There are a lot of people in these areas within the budget that do uh required state reporting to put together and compile our financial data so that we can produce a clean audit. And so um while there is the ability to cut back on some of these potentially, you're also I think um it will have a an effect to the the compliance infrastructure of the district. >> Yeah. And so this is kind of what I want to show like what the like kind of that secondary level of detail is. So when added to mine like when you click on the information it'll give your 400 character thing here and then it has this more details button that you can put in charts or links into it. >> Okay. >> So this is just what
083we put in for business management. It's kind of the historical staffing change we passed. >> So if somebody wanted was curious and wanted to learn more about the effects or ramifications of their selection they would have a path. >> Yeah. When we do the community event, I think the idea would be to have these departments around there and have little stations they can walk up to, have their device and say, you know, what is it you do and get more details and a better explanation. >> We have a target date for this sort of community event. >> Believe we're looking at December 6th. >> Okay. >> But hopefully I'll have a better >> December 6th. Yes. Yes. December 6th. >> Thanks, MJ. >> Thank you, MJ. But yeah, hopefully we'll have a better preview by
084the board meeting on the 4th and then I would like to go through it with our principles and leadership at their next general leadership meeting to kind of to get their take and maybe like even disagregating these different data sets of what different groups of folks think. >> So I'm going to pivot and say the student advisory board may also be a great source of student feedback. >> Yeah. >> Um see that is the on there. >> Yeah. If they have a meeting, we can certainly show up to that and let them do the same thing. >> Okay. Terrific. Um, >> the only thing I was going to suggest is that there's a way to have the questions and answers type things added as you do it. One of the things that I will say
085at Alaska, we did that, but then we were able to ask the questions we wanted them to ask, we could answer it. That's not a bad way because you got all kind of information coming out that you you hear about. So, it's it it it helps diffuse that type of false information about administration. they come up with something new, we have a chance to respond, you know, rather than leave it to to a couple of people that are very vocal about coming out facts that they create. >> Yeah. >> Disgusting. >> Yeah. So if you see anything, if you think of anything in the next uh after after seeing just a very very brief preview of this um any thoughts you have about from last year now I think we took some notes and made
086some changes from the last version but uh if you think of it let us know happy to >> well add more details. >> I'm really appreciative that um you're doing this again and this is the second year that ASD is using this tool. There was a great presentation to that Keith Perro gave the board sort of processing this information and um and team ASD was was commended by the makers of the software for having done a really fantastic job. >> Um so I feel like that's important to to shout out. So good job. Um before we pivot possibly to the aer the one question that I had was about the projected BSA gap for FY27. We've seen some charts. >> Oh >> um >> that's what I forgot to bring the chart. There is one
087on the website now the one and I think we're it was the same one that we used in the last work or we did with the committee with the finance committee and the joint assembly meeting. So that'll show the BSA and the gap >> and this is so if we use so there's a new a new URL which is asdk12.orgfy27 FFY27. Is that what we're referring to? And then it gets longer, but >> I'm going to guess. >> But if I tie it in, I mean, I just typed in FY20 FY27. >> There's like a hot topics I think we'll go to on the website. >> But I it looks like >> Yes. Yes. >> for the great >> the gap between the FY11 inflation proof versus >> current. >> In fact, I see that
088right there. So So if anybody is curious, asdk12.orgfy27 FFY27 and um it shows using this figure from FY11, right, the 2010 2011 school year, which is useful because legislative finance last September identified uh that as really the last year that um the BSA was inflation proof. And so that's the purpose of um following FY11 inflation. I'm going have to excuse myself and go to a parent teacher conference. >> Um, we are right at 2:45. That clock doesn't match this clock. >> Yeah. >> Um, so maybe we need to adjust timing. >> If they're like you, I can >> I guess just to put in on the act review process. Can you tell us um is there anything really important that we need to know right now? But my understanding is that the board will review
089the act for in >> the uh you will >> upcoming meetings. >> Yes. November 4th the auditors will come and discuss it with you. >> Okay. So we will have a chance to discuss the audit >> and then we can put this on the meeting for November as well. >> Okay. So a followup we can put this at the top of the finance meeting in November. Um but it will be um we will begin talking about that for at our public board meeting about the weekend. >> Correct. >> Okay. Thank you for patiently sitting through this meeting. Um I guess it was heftier than I anticipated. Um we appreciate your time and efforts with that. We are a little bit late. Thank you everyone for your contributions and questions. Our next meeting will be in
090about a month. >> November 20th. >> Thank you. on November 20th at the normal time um health theme sandwiched between governance and communications. >> Thank you.