Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Infrastructure topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

FAC recommends near‑term repairs, like‑for‑like HVAC replacements; Julian roof may move up to this summer

Oak Park Elementary School District 97 Board of Education · March 24, 2026
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The district’s Facilities Advisory Committee recommended completing Priority 1 and 2 projects within five years, favors like‑for‑like rooftop unit replacements after HVAC modeling showed full electrification carried high upfront costs, and signaled an urgent need to address Julian Middle School’s roof, with bids planned and a potential timeline shift from 2027 to this summer.

Oak Park Elementary School District 97’s Facilities Advisory Committee (FAC) told the board on March 10 it recommends prioritizing critical health, life‑safety and mechanical repairs in the first five years of a 10‑year master facility plan, while deferring more costly full electrification until costs become more favorable.

FAC presenters outlined a prioritized framework that separates work into four groups: Priority 1 (first five years: critical health/life safety and failing systems), Priority 2 (near‑term linked projects), Priority 3 (years 6–10) and Priority 4 (beyond 10 years). FAC said most near‑term costs are for rooftop mechanical equipment and roofs, and recommended replacing failing rooftop units with modern, more efficient like‑for‑like units at Brooks and Julian Middle School rather than installing full geothermal or full electrification systems—options that the FAC’s modeling found would reduce greenhouse gases but carry steep initial price tags.

Jennifer, FAC’s technical presenter, described seven modeled HVAC/electrification scenarios using Julian as a test case. She said some options showed large GHG reductions—an example geothermal install was modeled at $29 million with roughly 40% GHG savings—but that the first cost and life‑cycle projections did not justify taxpayer investment compared with lower‑cost measures (LED lighting, targeted controls, solar). FAC therefore prioritized lower‑cost items that produce larger near‑term impact per dollar.

Administrators also reported a recent string of contractor inspections on Julian’s roof and said the probability of needing to move up roofing work from the 2027 plan to this summer is “real” because the roof is in poor condition. Staff plan to issue bids next week, present solar bid results on March 14, and return with funding/projection options; board action to approve the 10‑year plan is targeted for March 28. Preliminary modeling presented to the board estimated an approximate $86 million 10‑year program if elevators at Hatch and Mann and other FAC recommendations are adopted; administrators said staff will present funding scenarios to finance that work.

Board members asked about summer program impacts, options for staging work (multiple contractor teams, afternoon starts), and whether classrooms could be air‑conditioned districtwide. FAC staff said AC was not part of the near‑term recommendation and provided a rough district estimate of about $50–52 million to add AC across elementary classrooms; they said administrators would return with counts and more precise pricing should the board want to pursue that option.