Facilities director warns aging roofs, HVAC and lighting strain Richland School District maintenance budget

Brett, the district’s facilities director, told the Richland School District board on April 14 that the district’s annual asset‑preservation assessment shows widespread aging components — notably roofing at several schools, outdated building automation and inefficient lighting — and a decline in preventive maintenance that is increasing corrective repair work.

The presentation explained how the state’s asset‑preservation framework scores buildings and sites and flagged several campuses as nearing major repair needs. Brett said the district’s preventive‑maintenance work orders peaked at about 52% of total work orders in 2021 but have fallen to roughly 11% in the most recent 12‑month period while corrective work orders grew to the majority of requests. He told trustees the maintenance crew shrank from a peak of about 16 FTE to as few as seven during the recent budget squeeze and is now at about 10, a staffing level he said still constrains preventive work.

Why it matters: deferred preventive maintenance increases long‑term cost and raises the chance of unplanned failures. Brett walked the board through examples: Richland High’s flat roofing showed widespread bubbles and patch repairs, Carmichael and ELC both need substantial roofing and HVAC work, and Chief Joe and River’s Edge have aged fire‑panel, lighting and mechanical systems that lower their overall condition scores. Brett said some failures (for example, an elevator control board or an aging chiller circuit) are not preventable with routine PM but that many grade‑lowering items — lighting, finishes, cracked paving — are addressable.

Brett gave district‑level metrics and cost context. He said an aggressive lighting conversion example at Jason Lee Elementary would cost roughly $24,700 to replace all fixtures; the district’s share would be about $7,400 for parts (installation costs are additional) and estimated yearly utility savings of roughly $3,000 for that building. On staffing and systems, he summarized: "We have 148 air handlers in our district," and later, to underscore the scope of physical plant items technicians manage, he noted the district has "959 toilets, 294 urinals and 530 sinks" across campuses.

Board members pressed for detail on what moves the scores and how subjective the state’s scoring can be; Brett said a single component (wall finishes, a mechanical subsystem or a failing rooftop membrane) can drop a building several score bands. He emphasized preventive maintenance as the preferred approach but acknowledged that PM programs require up‑front investment and staffing to sustain.

Next steps: Brett said staff will use the asset‑preservation report to prioritize life‑safety and high‑risk repairs, pursue eligible grants where available, and request budget support to raise preventive‑maintenance capacity. Trustees agreed to weigh those priorities as part of the upcoming budget process.

Ending: The board thanked Brett for a thorough presentation and signaled interest in restoring PM staffing and funding in the next budget cycle.