Facilities staff presented three proposals to design tennis‑court replacement and field/turf work. The proposals came from Peter Consultants (lowest tennis‑court design quote listed at $19,300), Murata Maine (amount unclear in transcript), and ELA Sports (engineering/design component listed as $40,500 in the packet discussion). Administration recommended ELA Sports because that proposal best matched the district’s requested scope, including drainage and core work that the lowest bid had omitted.

Administration said a USDA facilities grant could help fund construction but requires having design documents before an application; staff estimated a grant application might be in the neighborhood of $200,000 but characterized the number as approximate and not guaranteed. Administration cautioned the board that construction would likely require splitting projects across fiscal years; staff estimated construction outlays could reach into the mid‑hundreds of thousands to low millions for full build‑out and recommended first doing design and grant pursuit rather than immediate construction.

Some trustees urged caution and asked that the board not commit to construction funding until the district’s budget and tax impact are clearer. One trustee noted that taxes have risen in recent years and questioned adding construction that could affect tax rates. Administration will place a design engagement on a future voting agenda so the board can consider awarding design work and enabling a grant application.

No final construction contract was awarded at the work session; the board asked staff to provide clearer scope comparisons and return this item for a formal vote.