Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facility Master Plan topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
MUHSD staff outline $93.5 million of identified facility needs and May/June decision window for a potential bond
Summary
District staff told trustees facility needs across campuses total roughly $93.5 million before public input, highlighted per-site estimates for near-term infrastructure and access control, and said the board would need to decide in May or June whether to place a bond measure on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot.
District staff presented an update on the fiscal and facility master plan and the timeline for a possible facilities bond, reporting substantial capital needs across Merced Union High School District campuses.
Dr. Waymer reviewed identified needs that staff tallied before broader site input: CTE match needs ($15 million), basic infrastructure ($17.5 million), access-control upgrades ($21 million) and facility-standard projects ($40 million), yielding an initial total of about $93.5 million in identified needs. Dr. Waymer said near‑term infrastructure (roofs, HVAC, concrete repairs, electrical upgrades) is estimated around $2.5 million per site and that access‑control improvements (card access, single point of entry, audio enhancements) could run roughly $1.75 million to $3 million per site.
Staff outlined a timeline tied to grant and ballot deadlines: site stakeholder input in April–May, a May or June board meeting to provide direction about a bond versus district facility options, and a target to place a bond on the Nov. 3, 2026 ballot if the board decides to proceed. The presentation noted ongoing CTE facility grant opportunities that would require matching funds if awarded; staff said state grant decisions are expected in December and that some projects (for example, the Golden Valley High School pool renovation) are in design phases and will proceed through DSA review.
Trustees asked about timelines and the extent of stakeholder survey participation; staff said surveys returned several hundred responses and that additional site-level input would be used to refine the list of projects and costs before a final recommendation.
What happens next: Staff will continue collecting site input and return to the board with refined project lists and cost estimates at a May meeting; a final decision to place a bond on the November 2026 ballot would require board action in coming months.
