A citizen steering committee recommended the board place a $495,000,000 bond election on the November ballot to fund prioritized repairs, upgrades and modernization across the district, committee chair Fred Morrison told the Board of Trustees during a presentation at the board meeting.

The recommendation was presented by Deb Caldwell, the district’s facilities lead, and by Morrison, who said the committee’s work was rooted in the district’s long-range facility plan requirements. "What makes tonight's report different is that we are bringing forward recommendations to invest in the buildings we have and to modernize our assets," Morrison said.

The recommendation follows a district contract with Gordian, a third-party facilities assessor, which the board approved in September 2023 and which delivered an assessment by cluster in August 2024. "Education code and your own board policy CS legal outlines the need for a long range facility plan," Caldwell said, adding the committee used Gordian data and additional in‑house assessments to identify nearly 2,000 projects and prioritize them with scoring rubrics.

Why it matters: The committee packaged projects across five subcommittees — safety and security, technology, operations, extracurricular, and facilities — into a single investment strategy. Morrison said the $495 million recommendation includes funds for project management and contingency to address market volatility in labor and materials. The committee also recommended revisiting facilities planning in four years rather than waiting a decade between bond programs.

What the recommendation would fund: The committee’s high-level list includes perimeter fencing and secured vestibules; cameras and keyless door access; student iPads, Chromebooks and classroom AV systems; HVAC systems, boilers, roofs, fire alarms, elevators and other infrastructure identified by Gordian; bus and playground replacements; auditorium, stadium and turf improvements; CTE and magnet program upgrades; and kitchen and cafeteria renovations at specified campuses. The steering committee reported the projects were scored using rubrics that weighed factors such as student impact, facility age and districtwide reach.

Timing and next steps: Caldwell told the board the presentation was informational and that any board action to order an election would occur in August. If the board orders an election, staff will send the recommended project lists to the bond attorney to confirm eligibility for bond funding and to draft ballot propositions consistent with current law. Jorge Cabello, the district’s executive director of construction management and engineering, said implementation of the bond program would occur over a maximum five-year schedule, with the first year focused on planning and design and subsequent years for bidding and construction. "Every single project that is being brought to you for your consideration will be identified by its planning, procurement, and implementation phase," Cabello said.

Board response and questions: Board members asked about prior bond history and taxpayer impacts. Caldwell said the district’s last bond program was a five‑year program purchased in 2015 for $499,950,000 and that the district is aiming to implement the new program without increasing the current debt service rate, though ballot language will note a potential tax increase under state ballot rules. Caldwell and Cabello described the district’s use of commercial paper to access funds early in a program and then selling bonds later as projects are ready for funding.

Prioritization and flexibility: Committee members told trustees that the project list reflects top-ranked projects within each subcommittee budget but is not presented in simple, districtwide rank order. Cabello explained that construction sequencing considers disruption to learning, project type and whether projects require full architectural design; some projects (equipment and technology) can be completed quickly, while others (major renovations) may take one to two years to build. Board members and committee members said the committee sometimes deferred very large projects to avoid consuming the entire bond allocation.

Data tracking and maintenance: Board members asked how completed projects will be tracked against the Gordian assessment. Caldwell said the Gordian platform includes a dashboard to update project lifespans and noted the district will continue to maintain and update that data as projects are completed. Caldwell also noted some projects approved in the current fiscal year (chiller replacements at Reagan and Churchill) will be reflected in Gordian as they are completed.

Public engagement and committee process: Morrison said the steering committee met 11 times between December 2024 and June 2025 with 16 appointed community members (including six parents and seven principals) and 14 staff subject-matter experts; subcommittees developed rubrics and scored projects. Morrison said the committee voted June 3 to recommend a bond election and offered meeting recaps and an online voting option so absent community members could participate in the committee’s decision.

No board vote tonight: The board did not vote or take formal action on the recommendation at this meeting; Caldwell asked trustees to review the full project packet and directed questions to the superintendent and staff. If the board orders an election in August, staff said the bond attorney will prepare ballot language and staff will return with refined cost estimates and proposition groupings for the trustees’ consideration.

Staff and committee acknowledgments: Trustees and staff thanked the committee members and staff for months of meetings and the hours spent developing the recommendations. "You showed up each time. You worked, together," one board member said in recognition of the committee’s work.

Ending note: The board’s next formal opportunity to act on the packet’s recommendations would be during the August meeting window for ordering bonds; until then, the presentation remains an advisory recommendation from the facilities steering committee, not a board directive.