Operations requests: review grounds MOU, restore contract custodial services, add routing manager and replace Aspen SIS

District operations leaders presented a package of facilities, grounds and transportation requests for FY26 and discussed timing and procurement constraints.

Grounds maintenance and MOU with the city: Staff reviewed a longstanding understanding with the city that assigns mowing and large‑equipment grounds work to city public works while smaller maintenance (hedging, mulch, weed‑eating) has been handled inside the district. Operations said there were missteps in school openings this past year tied to city staffing shortages and that some building leaders pressed for greater reliability. The operations team proposed, as an option, bringing grounds services back to the district using external contractors rather than hiring an internal crew; they urged a measured approach given procurement timing and summer scheduling and recommended further negotiation with the city and a year to plan any transition.

Contract custodial services: The team requested $1.6 million to reengage contractor custodial services at six high‑need schools, a service formerly provided by a vendor and well received by principals. Staff also requested temporary custodial resources and clarified the difference between temporary staff pools and longer‑term vendor contracts.

Transportation and routing: Operations requested an additional $500,000 for specialized transportation vendors who serve McKinney‑Vento students, special‑education students, administrative placement students and preschool routes. Staff said McKinney‑Vento student counts have risen and cited a 25% increase (667 students) from last year; operations asked for a routing manager to handle increased routing complexity and relieve the small routing team that also functions as a customer service line.

Student information system (SIS): Operations noted the district will move away from Aspen to a different SIS and requested a coordinator role to support implementation and training. Questions from board members focused on whether existing business‑applications staff could manage the migration; operations said the new system’s rollout and district training needs justify dedicated coordination.

Procurement cautions and next steps: Several board members asked for clear vendor performance language in future solicitations (for example, limiting subcontracting) and urged that turf maintenance issues be addressed in specifications. Operations said procurement staff will manage competitive bidding and contract terms and that any grounds transition would require time and careful planning.