Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Facilities topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
District details $11 million priority roof work, proposes asset review and 10-year master plan
Summary
Facilities staff told the board the district faces mounting deferred-maintenance costs — roughly $2 million a year to run facilities and a prioritized 'warm, safe and dry' plan that trimmed initial $30 million estimates to $11 million focused on roofs. Staff recommended a 10-year master facility plan, selling or leveraging nonessential assets and a TMCO leak-repair contract.
Facilities staff opened the board work session with a lengthy operations briefing that framed the district’s capital challenge as the tension between day-to-day reactive repairs and longer-term planning.
The presenter told the board the district spends about $2 million a year on routine facilities operations (utilities, parts and reactive maintenance) and said a districtwide prioritization exercise reduced a previous five-year needs estimate from about $30 million to roughly $11 million by focusing on roofs and life-safety items. Staff said roofing vendor TMCO/TDA assessments documented leaking and moisture intrusion at several K–8 roofs and provided line-item estimates; Echo Hills and Riverview were called out as sites with active leaks requiring immediate repairs.
Staff detailed a set of near-term procurement and operating changes intended to lower recurring costs, including consolidating vendors for paper and custodial SKUs (projected paper savings ~$5,000 and custodial-supplies optimization to ~$14,000 annually), renegotiating the district printing contract (current incumbent ~ $148,000), and switching mobile service from Verizon to AT&T FirstNet (projected FY27 savings ~ $18,000). Technology and security investments were flagged as time-sensitive: wireless access-point replacement costs around $160,000 and building-entry technology and background check changes could reduce annual security-associated spend from ~$30,000 to an estimated $15,000 while retaining visitor-screening protections.
Transportation and fleet needs were a further pressure point: the district’s recommended fleet-replacement schedule calls for about 14 bus replacements in the next two years to keep the fleet younger than 12 years; the presenter said the fleet average is 13 years, which increases maintenance costs. A multi-stage in-ground fuel-tank replacement (removal, testing and above-ground replacement) was estimated at about $400,000 including installation.
To address limited capital, staff proposed three strategic options: develop a 10-year master facility plan that may include reducing the number of physical locations, selectively leveraging or selling nonessential properties (central office appraised near $1 million; Forestbrook ~ $865,000; Hley Road property ~$740,000; a cell tower lease valued conservatively at $300,000–$700,000 pending gear inventory), and consider targeted service contracts such as TMCO’s proposed $133,000 annual agreement to proactively inspect and repair leaks.
Board members expressed concern about asset sales as short-term fixes, emphasizing the value of land and long-term options; the discussion included questions about community impacts, mowing/maintenance costs for lands shifted to school use, and whether consolidation could generate operating savings without forfeiting long-term property options. Several members asked for additional cost and condition data before deciding whether to pursue closures or sales.
The facilities presentation closed with a staff recommendation to continue the public conversation and return with detailed 10-year options informed by condition assessments, enrollment forecasting and more exact bid and life-cycle cost estimates.
