Anna Local Schools. Community Meeting

Transcription

1 Community Meeting May 18, 2015

2 Goals For Tonight Welcome Andy Bixler, Superintendent Introductions Role of Facility Planning Committee (FPC) Master Plan Options Possible timelines Getting your feedback Answering Your Questions

3 Master Plan Process via Community Engagement Understand what is important to the community Identify needs Evaluate sites/facilities Review costs Set priorities Finalize master plan

4 The Facility Planning Committee (FPC) Composition - Introductions Responsibilities: Gather data - Be objective Previous meeting dates April 1 April 21 Consensus not unanimity Make a recommendation to the Board

5 Facility Planning Committee MICK ALTHAUSER MIKE AMBOS JEFF BANKS PAUL BARHORST DAVE BAUMER DALE BENSMAN DOUG BERNING KAY BILLING ANDY BIXLER JODIE BLINDAUER JIM CAIN ANDY COUNTS KEITH DOSECK MARK ELSASS CLAUDIA FOX LINDA GLESSNER KRISTA HOYING GUS LARGER RANDY LOCKER JEFF MAURER CHRIS McVETY KRISTA MEYER DENNY NAGEL CINDY NASEMAN JENNY PLEIMAN DENNY RABERDING MISSY RIVERA BRAD SEITZ MARIAN SPICER JOEL STAUDTER MIKE STEWART FR. JOHN TONKIN SANDY WELLS JEFF WUEBKER TED ZIMPFER

6 The Big Picture Should Anna Local Schools Not participate with the OSFC and pay repair costs as they occur? Not participate with the OSFC and plan for a Permanent Improvement levy to address future repair and maintenance? Move forward with a complete OSFC project with 53% State funding? Move forward with a segmented OSFC project with 53% State funding?

7 Community Engagement Process Create awareness of opportunity Demonstrate need and ways to address concerns

8 Building Community Consensus The Best Master Plan for Anna TurningPoint Real time feedback on issues Instant view of input Everyone has an equal voice Participants feel a part of the process Provides a greater understanding of the community s wishes

9 The original name of Anna was: 1. Anna 72% 2. Green s Crossing 3. Carey s Station 4. Shelbytown 5. Annapolis 16% 5% 8% 0% Anna Green s Crossi... Carey s Statio... Shelbytown Annapolis

10 I m in the following age group: 1. Under 30 42% % Over 60 15% 6% Under Over 60

11 Are you or your spouse employed by Anna Schools? 1. Yes 2. No 77% 23% Yes No

12 Do you have children or grandchildren attending Anna Schools? 1. Yes 2. No 71% 29% Yes No

13 How long have you lived in the Anna School District? 1. Less than 5 years 35% years 23% years 19% 17% 4. More than 20 years 5. Lifelong resident 6% Less than 5 ye years years More than 20 y... Lifelong resid...

14 The last time I was in a classroom at the Elementary School was: 1. Today 31% 30% 2. This month 3. Within the last year 4. Within the last 5 years 11% 13% 12% 5. More than 5 years ago 3% 6. Never Today This month Within the las... Within the las... More than 5 ye... Never

15 The last time I was in a classroom at the High School was: 1. Just a few minutes ago! 2. This month 32% 25% 28% 3. Within the last year 4. Within the last 5 years 5. More than 5 years ago 4% 6% 4% 6. Never Just a few min... This month Within the las... Within the las... More than 5 ye... Never

16 OSFC/OFCC and Anna Local Schools OBJECTIVES: Ohio School Facilities Commission Established in 1997 Functional, Cost Effective, High Quality Educational Facilities Promote Equity Among School Facilities Establish a Framework for District Choice

17 Districts near Anna that have received OSFC funding

18 Where You Are The Board has said Yes to participating in the active planning process for a possible FY 16 project (July 2015 fiscal year) No Obligation to proceed with a project If proceeding, Board must pass a resolution by October/November for a March 2016 project

19 Why Now? 90% 85% local 15% state 80% 70% 60% % local 53% state 50% % 30% 20% 10% Local State 0% State Local Year and Anna s Equity #

20 Classroom Facilities Assistance Program (CFAP) The Wait Your Turn Program Participation dependant upon equity rank, Anna Local Schools is currently #282 of 612 school districts School district and OSFC agree on Master Plan and project cost The project proceeds only after the OSFC, State, and Anna community have approved project funding

21 Anna and the OSFC What is this opportunity? Based on this ranking (282/612) the State will pay 53% of the *Basic Master Plan Cost UP TO $9.1 MILLION FROM THE STATE

22 How Does the OSFC Work? Process Enrollment Projections - 10-year DRAFT projection (1,219) Building Assessments Master Plan Options

23 How Does the OSFC Work? OSFC Assessment Process The Anna School Facilities were assessed by the OSFC in December The OSFC assessment identifies how much it will cost to renovate the current buildings to like new condition - The cost to renovate is then compared to the cost to build that same size building new - To participate and qualify for the shared State funding, Anna must agree to a Comprehensive District-Wide Facility Master Plan

24 OSFC Guidelines OSDM Rule New construction must conform to Ohio School Design Manual standards to qualify for OSFC funding participation 350 Student Rule: Facilities must have a minimum enrollment of 350 for OSFC funding participation 2/3 Recommendation: If cost of renovation exceeds 2/3 of the cost of New Construction then the OSFC recommends a new facility Site Selection: OSFC must approve proposed site, or re-use of existing site

25 OSFC Will Fund: OSFC Will Not Fund: A district-wide or segmented Master Plan that includes new or renovated facilities Focus on educational space Design professional and construction manager fees Technology infrastructure Loose furniture Security systems Building demolition and abatement Land Purchase Athletic fields Oversize gymnasiums Material upgrades Buttoning up existing partial buildings to remain Utilities from off site Bus or Maintenance Buildings Computer Hardware/Software Administrative offices These are called LFI s (Locally Funded Initiatives)

26 getting to the right master plan Quality Facilities for the Students of Anna Local

27 2014 OSFC Assessment of the Existing Facilities Identifies items of major repair or replacement Assume renovation is to like new condition * Costs are being updated to 2013 cost guidelines *

28 OSFC Assessment of Anna Middle/High School Overall Renovation/Replace ratio is 46% (under the 2/3rds ratio) 1937 Original Building 56% 1963 addition 58% 1973 addition 53% 1999 addition 19% Building Area RENOVATION COST 126,316 sf $15.3 MILLION COST TO BUILD THE SAME SIZE BUILDING NEW: $29.9 MILLION EXISTING SITE SIZE RECOMMENDED SITE SIZE 3 ACRES 32 ACRES

29 OSFC Assessment Renovate existing Middle/High School Renovate existing 126,316 SF No new additions or changes to existing room sizes Major system replacements: HVAC, Electrical, Lights, Roofing, Security, Emergency Lighting, Fire Alarm, Technology (except at 1999 addition) Interior renovations to include ceilings, floors, paint, classroom casework and equipment, partial replacement of loose furnishings (except at 1999 addition) Minor sitework improvements to replace sidewalks, provide parking and replace deteriorated paving Hazardous material abatement Requires phased construction and modular classrooms for swing-space to renovate while occupied

30 OSFC Assessment of Anna Elementary School 1992 Original Building 17% Renovation/New (under the 1/3 rd ratio) Building Area RENOVATION COST 66,783 sf $2.5 MILLION COST TO BUILD THE SAME SIZE BUILDING NEW: $15.7 MILLION EXISTING SITE SIZE RECOMMENDED SITE SIZE 15 ACRES 15 ACRES

31 OSFC Assessment Renovate existing Elementary Renovate existing 66,783 SF No new additions or changes to existing room sizes Replace HVAC system controls Replace water treatment system Masonry cleaning and sealing Replace ceilings carpet and kitchen equipment Replace security system and emergency lighting Allowance for minor sitework remediation Add a generator Minor replacement of loose furniture Complete update of technology

32

33 Master Plan DRAFT 01 Renovate Anna Middle/High School 648 students in grades 6-12 Approx $15.3 million ALL NUMBERS ARE ESTIMATES Renovate Anna Elementary NOT FINAL FIGURES 527 students in grades K-5 Approx. $2.5 million Project Agreement LFI (Locally Funded Initiative) Renovation of the auditorium and board office $584,714 BASIC OSFC PROJECT COST TOTAL LOCAL SHARE REQUIRED Approx. 3.8 mill ballot issue (30 years) Approx. $130/year for a $100,000 home = approx. $17.8 million = approx. $8.7 million 210

34 Master Plan DRAFT 02 - Segment Renovate Anna Middle/High School 648 students in grades 6-12 Approx $15.3 million No work at Anna Elementary LFI (Locally Funded Initiative) Renovation of the auditorium and board office + LFI for indebtedness limit Approximately $1.1 million ALL NUMBERS ARE ESTIMATES NOT FINAL FIGURES BASIC OSFC PROJECT COST TOTAL LOCAL SHARE REQUIRED Approx. 3.5 mill ballot issue (30 years) Approx. $122/year for a $100,000 home = approx. $15.4 million = approx. $8.1 million 210

35 Questions Cost to build a new 6-12 same size as existing? New 6-12 building: 126,316sf + 6,250sf for Ag Building Total cost approximately $31.5 million State Share would be capped at $9,162,506 Local Share would be approximately $22.4 million Approximately 8.8 mill ballot issue (including ½ mill maintenance) Approx. $305/year for $100,000 home

36 Questions Would it be possible to demolish a portion and build an addition?

37 Questions Would it be possible to demolish a portion and build an addition? Possibly, however: State funding would be further reduced Complicated demolition and reconstruction Keep only 1999 section? Keep 1973 gym section? Site limitations Swing-Space for months * OSFC has not yet created or approved this Master Plan

38 Questions Additions to the High School building? Partial Demolition? New Entrance?

39

40 How would you rate the overall condition of the Anna Elementary building? 65% 1. Excellent 2. Good 32% 3. Average 4. Below Average 1% 1% 1% 5. Poor Excellent Good Average Below Average Poor

41 How would you rate the overall condition of the Anna Junior/Senior High building? 46% 1. Excellent 33% 2. Good 3. Average 17% 4. Below Average 4% 0% 5. Poor Excellent Good Average Below Average Poor

42 Anna school facilities compared to our neighboring school districts are.. 40% 34% 1. Better 2. About the same 3. Worse 4. I don t know 19% 8% Better About the same Worse I don t know

43 If you were on the building tour, what is your opinion of the building conditions after the tour vs. before? 41% 1. Better than I thought 2. About the same as I thought 3. Worse than I thought 4. I was not on the tour Better than I... 30% 16% 13% About the same... Worse than I t... I was not on t...

44 Knowing what you do now about the condition of the HS/JHS, do you feel this building needs No renovations 43% 47% 2. Minor renovations 3. Major renovations 4. Total replacement 10% 1% No renovations Minor renovati... Major renovati... Total replacem...

45 Knowing what you do now about the condition of the Elementary, do you feel this building needs No renovations 72% 2. Minor renovations 3. Major renovations 4. Total replacement 27% 1% 0% No renovations Minor renovati... Major renovati... Total replacem...

46 Should the Ag Building be updated as part of any facilities Master Plan? 58% 1. Yes 2. No 3. I don t know 18% 24% Yes No I don t know

47 If the school district decides to proceed with a facilities master plan, how should it be funded? 1. A property tax bond issue 2. An income tax 3. A combination of property tax and income tax 4. I need more information 35% 31% 17% 17% A property tax... An income tax A combination... I need more in...

48 Timeline March 2016 Bond Campaign State Consent Application Nov 9 File Election Proceedings * Dec 9 TASKS APR MAY JUN JUL AUG SEP OCT NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR Determine Maximum Dollar Scope of Project Determine Exact Scope of Bond Issue Bond Campaign Board decision on Master Plan Election Day March 8, 2016 Election Day March 8, 2016 * Note that this timeline requires election proceedings to be filed prior to OFCC/State approvals January 21, 2016 OFCC approval February 8, 2016 Controlling Board approval

49 Next Steps The Facility Planning Committee will continue to meet through next Fall 2 nd community meeting in September Possible recommendation to the Board in October