Board reviews $84M draft Measure SOS prioritization; public urges Mira Leste pool in Phase 1

District staff on April 2 laid out a draft project prioritization for Measure SOS Series A, a starting list staff sized at roughly $84,000,000 (a point‑in‑time hard‑cost snapshot that excludes many soft costs and contingencies). The presentation emphasized safety, security, modernization and seismic mitigation as the primary prioritization factors.

Staff said the district’s building stock is aging (average building age exceeded 65 years) and contains failing mechanical, electrical and plumbing systems, deteriorating cast‑iron drains and low‑voltage infrastructure past life expectancy. Presenters recommended focusing on "must‑have" critical repairs first (code upgrades, seismic retrofit and safety systems), followed by “should‑haves” and “nice‑to‑haves,” and said projects were selected to limit repeated intrusive work (for example, to avoid opening walls multiple times).

Seismic and schedule considerations: Staff reported recent seismic screening work and an MHP analysis that identified about 29 structures of concern; high‑risk secondary sites were proposed for Phase 1 seismic design. The board heard that DSA (Division of the State Architect) approvals vary in duration (roughly nine months to a few years depending on project scope) and that DSA approval can be extended. Staff also described the process to convert initial hard costs into a full budget (adding architect fees, construction management, DSA fees, testing, abatement, contingencies and escalation rates).

Mira Leste pool public comments: A series of public commenters — students, parents and community members — urged the board to prioritize renovation of the Mira Leste Intermediate School pool in Phase 1. Speakers said the project already has DSA approval, earlier district investment (they cited ~$280k–$400k in pre‑construction costs), student safety concerns from deteriorating pool surfaces, and local value as an instructional and community resource. Commenters asked the board to "uphold the promise" to voters and to move the pool into the first wave so it could be ready for the coming school year.

Board questions and staff response: Trustees asked whether the draft Phase 1 list included all known high‑risk seismic needs (staff said high‑risk secondary sites were prioritized, and that further screening for elementary sites may be prudent), how exclusions and soft costs will be budgeted (staff described an approach to apply escalation and soft‑cost loadings and return refined numbers in May), whether HVAC/electrical work would be standardized or deferred, and whether doing seismic work opens opportunities to bundle other work for efficiency. Staff said projects that require DSA may take longer and that some work will likely carry over into subsequent bond series; they forecast spending the Series A proceeds over multiple years while managing encumbrances and contracts.

Next steps: Staff will demo bond accounting platforms, interview and recommend architects for Board approval on April 23, host town halls April 24 (in‑person) and April 29 (virtual) to solicit community feedback, and present a refined final prioritization for board consideration in mid‑May.