Sherwood School bond oversight committee hears schedule, geotech and HVAC updates; bids to be advertised in late April

The Sherwood School Bond Oversight Committee on an evening meeting pressed the project contractor for clarification after committee members spotted shifts between a February Gantt chart and the April update, and heard technical and funding updates that shape this summer’s work.

Committee Chair Jim Arena opened the discussion by saying he compared the February 4 schedule with the April 2 update and saw design, committee and contract line items had shifted; he asked the contractor to explain why and whether the changes could affect project costs or energy‑savings timing. “I compared the last Gantt chart of February 4th compared to the one we received on April 2nd,” Arena said, asking the contractor to address the changes.

The contractor (identified in the meeting as Scott) told the committee the February chart was produced before the district engaged designers and specialty consultants. After receiving designer cost estimates and hiring architects, roofing consultants, geotechnical engineers and surveyors, several line items moved by roughly three to four weeks as the team reconciled schedules and staffing. He said roofing and parking‑lot work will be advertised for bid with a three‑week bid period; the intention is to present bids to the school board at its May 20 meeting and begin construction on June 22 to avoid conflicts with summer events.

On funding and incentives the contractor said Energy Trust of Oregon staff (Christina Skelton and Brian Morrison were named in the discussion) are reviewing lighting designs for available incentives and that the district has about $94,000 in Senate Bill 49 funds available to apply. He described ETO incentives as a post‑project reimbursement and SB49 as an authorization model that requires a qualifying project before funds can be spent.

A substantial technical detail came from the geotechnical work on the high‑school parking lot: “We have about 12 inches of undocumented fill under our parking lot,” the contractor said. Probes found that the top 12 inches in some areas are fill that does not behave consistently; for those areas the plan is to remove the asphalt down about 12 inches, replace it with engineered structural fill, and recompact. In other areas the work will be limited to grinding and an overlay. A geotechnical engineer will monitor excavation and compaction during construction and contingency funds will be used selectively where soft spots extend below the planned depth.

On building systems, the contractor said initial design consultant reviews recommended replacing all rooftop HVAC units (estimates ranged between 15 and 18 units), but the committee lacks budget to replace every unit. The district will hire Zond Group to perform a more detailed retro‑commissioning of each unit to assess remaining life, determine what repairs would extend useful life (for example, three years versus 10 years), and create a prioritized replacement plan rather than replacing every unit at once. “If we extend it 10 years, okay then it probably is worth that,” the contractor said of repair outcomes.

Committee members also reviewed a more detailed construction budget breakout, including an estimated $156,000 in 2027 for flooring abatement. Staff said the district will use a base‑bid plus alternates procurement strategy so the district can pursue additional abatement or scope if bids allow and then recommend priorities to the school board as remaining contingency becomes clear.

Why this matters: schedule shifts and the geotechnical finding affect bidding strategy, contingency needs and the district’s ability to capture energy‑efficiency incentives. The committee asked that outstanding questions submitted by email be collated and given to the contractor for written responses so members have documentation ahead of the board decision.

What’s next: staff said bids will be advertised in late April (advertisement and bid schedule noted for April 29 in the packet) with awards presented to the board on May 20; construction was described as tentatively scheduled to begin June 22. Several funding decisions remain pending — including the seismic grant decision expected in mid‑May and final ETO incentive calculations — and the retro‑commissioning report will determine which rooftop units are replaced this cycle.

The committee approved routine minutes earlier in the meeting (vote recorded as “Aye” by members present; specific tally is not specified in the transcript).