Pomona Unified School District officials on Aug. 15 asked the Board of Education to prioritize how the district will spend the first issuance, Series A, of Measure UU, requesting $100,000,000 to address a range of facility needs across the district.

Darren Knowles, presenting staff, told the board the study session was meant to narrow broad categories and "seek consensus from the board so that we can move forward with more detailed plans." He said the district would use the facilities master plan, community town halls, bond-survey results and work-order data to identify the highest-priority projects.

Why it matters: the district's facilities master plan identifies roughly $2.6 billion in needs, and Measure UU's first issuance is limited in size. Knowles said the board and staff must prioritize whether bond proceeds should go first to health and safety items, infrastructure repairs, programmatic support, curb appeal or emerging needs.

Community and staff input cited repeatedly during the session included plumbing failures, roof leaks, HVAC and gym ventilation, failing restroom facilities, aging electrical systems, outdated public-address systems, ADA improvements and outdoor learning and shade. Associated Pomona Teachers representative Mary Morales told the board, "Facilities are key to providing safe and nurturing learning environments that benefit all stakeholders." Parent commenter Claudia Cano asked for detailed prior-bond accounting, saying, "taxpayers deserve to know as to how the $535,000,000 in Measure P bonds from 02/2016 were spent before starting to wage measure UU $385,000,000 bond."

Board deliberations focused on sequencing and limits. Multiple board members urged an "outside-in" approach that treats roofs, the water system and other structural elements before cosmetic work. Board members and staff discussed federal and state grant funds and prior bond or ESSER expenditures that have already paid for some HVAC work; Knowles said the district will present a clear accounting of prior expenditures and any remaining balances.

On prioritization, staff recommended five categories: health, safety and security; infrastructure improvements; programmatic support (for TK, CTE and arts); campus curb appeal; and emerging needs. After discussion, staff said the board's direction was to treat health and safety as the top priority, followed by infrastructure and then programmatic supports, with curb appeal lower in the near term and emerging needs handled carefully to avoid creating a broad "gray area" in spending.

The presentation also covered process: design phases, Division of the State Architect (DSA) implications, and how cost escalation and DSA re-submittals can change project scope and timing. Members raised specific questions about the Lexington project, noting earlier renderings showed an amphitheater the board later removed from the budget; staff said PBK (the architect) will provide updated renditions and cost estimates.

Operational and procurement concerns surfaced. Board members asked staff to broaden consultant and contractor procurement (new RFQ/RFP for architects and engineers), to ensure replacement parts and vendor support for playground equipment, and for clearer tracking of work orders and temporary patches for safety issues. Facilities staff said they will provide a work-order list and that some temporary cold patches are being used while longer-term projects are scheduled.

Next steps: staff will return with site-specific project lists, timelines and budgets and will provide the board and public with an accounting of prior bond expenditures. The board tentatively scheduled a follow-up study session for Nov. 7, 2025, beginning at 3:30 p.m., to review detailed recommendations.

The meeting recorded no formal vote or binding action on project-level allocations; staff said the Series A issuance process is expected to close in late September and that many projects will require phasing across multiple issuances.