District leadership presented a draft community survey and preliminary cost estimates for a potential multi‑series bond, asked the board for feedback and discussed timing for a possible ballot measure.

The presenter said the list of requests adds up to roughly $330 million to $350 million but that, “based on the current financial and tax rate, we can probably generate about $220,000,000 without raising the tax rate,” leaving a gap between the projects requested and what the district expects it can raise without a tax increase. The presenter described a goal of sending the survey to the community in November and said the board would need to decide what to include on the ballot by about January in order to meet Department of Treasury timing for a November election.

Why it matters: a bond package would fund building construction and major capital projects; the district said it is exploring a multi‑series bond (selling work in multiple series over years) to phase projects and manage costs.

Scope and categories discussed: presenters and board members reviewed roughly 16 categories including new 5–6 school construction on the south side, converting an early childhood center into a career‑technical education (CTE) satellite, a 56 (grade 5–6) building on the south side, a new field house/indoor competition facility, safety upgrades (badging, cameras, interior door hardware), technology and infrastructure, building‑wide air conditioning (an estimate discussed of roughly $43 million after prior estimates of $71 million), playground upgrades, furniture replacement, roof and exterior repairs, stadium and turf work, and additional practice/competition fields on the south end of the district.

The presenter said the district has been working with architects and planners (OAK, GMB, GMB/Jeff referenced in the meeting) and that focus groups, administrative feedback and surveys informed the draft. Board members discussed sequencing priorities, the possibility of a multi‑series bond similar to a prior two‑series approach and the timing of elections. One board member suggested linking the survey to contextual material about prior bond work so responders could see what was previously funded.

Numbers and timing: aside from the $330–$350 million universe of requests and the $220 million estimate without a tax rate change, the presenter said the district typically goes to the Department of Treasury about four months before the election and often plans six months ahead; she suggested April as the month to begin Treasury review to put a question on the November ballot. She also noted voter turnout and timing matter: November elections draw a larger and different electorate than May.

Discussion versus decisions: the transcript records a review and discussion. The board did not adopt a ballot measure or make a final scope decision during this meeting; the presenter said the board could table the item and return with additional feedback.

Ending: the presenter asked for feedback on the survey and offered to follow up with board members and community outreach once the survey is refined. No formal motion or vote was recorded in the provided transcript.