Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Capital Bond Infrastructure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District reports $1.4 billion bond progress; trustees raise questions about pipeline easements at Ranchland site
Summary
The district’s bond program manager reported construction progress on elementary and high school packages and预计 additional guaranteed maximum price (GMP) approvals; trustees raised concerns about pipeline easements on the former Ranchland property where new high schools are planned and asked for greater transparency and due diligence.
Midland ISD staff reported construction progress across most bond packages Sept. 16 and detailed schedules for new elementary and high school sites, while several trustees raised new concerns about pipeline easements affecting the Ranchland property and asked for more transparency.
Bond program manager Michael Edwards told the board the 2023 bond program has 93% of its $1.4 billion in active work across design and construction packages. He said Lone Star Trail Elementary opened on schedule at the start of the school year and contractors are mobilized on the two new high school sites; vertical construction is expected before year‑end. Edwards said the district priced a bond refunding on Sept. 15 for roughly $41 million, yielding roughly $48 million in savings and increasing total refunding/defeasing savings since 2012 to about $157 million.
On the new high schools, Edwards said the district expects to present a second GMP in the $200 million–$240 million range to complete major subcontractor packages; the first GMP previously approved was around $580 million for the two campuses. Edwards also outlined schedules for elementary packages, middle school conversions and multipurpose building work at Alamo and Abel.
During discussion, trustees raised a separate issue: several board members said they had recently learned the Ranchland site contained six pipeline lines in the easement area but had earlier been told of only four. Trustee Robert Burleson and others said the discrepancy would have affected site selection and contingency planning. Trustees asked for more detailed information about original ownership of pipelines and any easements, and some said the information was new to them despite prior facilities committee discussions. Board members said the district would pursue due diligence and present findings publicly.
No bond‑related action items were voted at the Sept. 16 meeting; staff said they will return with additional GMP approvals and off‑site utility agreements for board consideration in coming months.
