Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Educational Facilities Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Facilities master plan presented; staff shortages and new development impacts highlighted
Summary
Facilities staff presented the 2025 Educational Facilities Master Plan to the board for a 30‑day public review. The presentation highlighted understaffing in maintenance and custodial services, enrollment projection methods, and the effect of several proposed residential developments on future school capacity.
Darryl Bariclo, supervisor of facilities and design, presented the draft 2025 Educational Facilities Master Plan (EFMP) and asked the board to release the plan for a 30‑day public comment period before the board considers approval at a subsequent meeting.
Bariclo said the EFMP is required for the Interagency Commission on School Construction (IAC) submission and serves as the first step in the annual capital improvement plan process. He said the district will post the EFMP for public comment and return to the board for approval next month to meet the IAC submission deadline.
Key points Bariclo highlighted include staffing levels and enrollment projections. He said the maintenance group is currently staffed at about 11 full‑time equivalent (FTE) positions versus a recommended 21 FTEs for the district's square footage; custodial staffing showed a shortfall of roughly 19.5 FTEs against the recommended level. Bariclo said those staffing gaps contributed to longer lead times for work orders and maintenance tasks.
On enrollment projections, Bariclo said recent forecasts were accurate: the 2022–23 projection missed by 37 students and the 2023–24 projection matched the actual enrollment (7,478 students). The EFMP now includes by‑district tracking of planned subdivisions and their estimated student yields. Examples noted in the presentation: a proposed 82‑unit townhouse project near Chester (Lowry/Dream Farms) was included but is unlikely to yield many school‑age children; Aspire Farms in Grasonville was identified as a development that could yield about 146 students and was included in future‑year projections.
Bariclo also described a change in public documentation: the state requires school floor plans be included in the EFMP submitted to the IAC, but the district will omit floor plans from the publicly posted EFMP and instead note they were omitted for public safety.
Board members asked clarifying questions about which planning district definitions were used (election districts vs. planning commission districts) and asked staff to double‑check that certain subdivisions in Election District 1 were fully accounted for in the projections. Bariclo said he would verify mapping and development listings with county planning records and return with any corrections.
Public comment during the meeting included concerns about class sizes, pre‑K distribution and student supports — remarks filed during the public comment period that staff said would be considered within broader planning and budget discussions.
Ending: The EFMP will be posted for 30 days for public comment; staff will return to the board with any updates and a request for approval prior to state submission.
