Bond Community Involvement Committee 2014 School Bond Final Report

Transcription

1 Bond Community Involvement Committee Recommendation to Superintendent December 2013 December 2013

2 Acknowledgements Bond Community Involvement Committee Pam Treece, BCIC Chair, Westside Economic Alliance Executive Director Hal Bergsma, Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District Lloyd Bernstein, Elementary Level Parent, Stand for Children Todd Corsetti, Southridge HS Principal Linda Degman, Beaverton School Board Member Tom Franklin, Community Member, Key Communicator Mark Fryburg, Portland General Electric Stacy Geale, Beaver Acres ES Principal Beth Gilstrap, Secondary Level Parent, Parent Volunteer Leader Ronda Haun, Highland Park MS Principal Tyrone Henry, Secondary Level Parent, Key Communicator Karen Hoffman, Beaverton Education Association (BEA) President Pam Burdett, President, Oregon School Employees Associate (OSEA Chapter 48) Ian King, City of Beaverton, Council Member LeeAnn Larsen, Beaverton School Board Member Greg Malinowski, Washington County Board of Commissioners, District 2 Michael Monnier, Nike, Director of Facilities Projects Matthey Shipley, Intel, Construction Manager Karen Stratton, Sexton Mountain ES, Fifth Grade Teacher Justin Wood, Home Builders Association of Metro Portland, Assistant Director Beaverton School District Staff Supporting the Committee Jeff Rose, Superintendent Ron Porterfield, Deputy Superintendent Carl Mead, Deputy Superintendent Richard Steinbrugge, Executive Administrator for Facilities David Etchart, Administrator for Facilities Development Maureen Wheeler, Public Communication Officer Clarie Hertz, Chief Financial Officer Steve Langford, Chief Information Officer Maureen Callahan, Chief Academic Officer Jennifer Garland, Demographer Scott Johnson, Project Manager Leslie Imes, Project Manager Sheri Stanley, Project Manager Project Support Frank Angelo, Angelo Planning Group, Committee Facilitator Shayna Rehberg, Angelo Planning Group, Recording Secretary

3 Table of Contents Executive Summary... 1 I. Bond Community Involvement Committee (BCIC) Process... 3 A. Bond Community Involvement Committee... 4 B. Bond Community Involvement Committee Charge... 4 C. BCIC Organization / Membership... 5 D. BCIC Meetings... 6 E. Community Open Houses... 7 F. BCIC Recommendation... 7 II. BCIC Supporting Materials... 9 District Enrollment Trends... 9 Need for New School Capacity... 9 Existing High School Capacity, With and Without Portable Classrooms Existing Middle School Capacity, With and Without Portable Classrooms Existing Elementary School Capacity, With and Without Portable Classrooms Bond Financing History New High School Site Location New Capacity Map Appendix A: 2014 School Bond Project Sheets Appendix B: Issue Papers Appendix C: BCIC Meeting Agendas and Follow-Up Materials December 2013

4 Tables and Figures Page Table 1. BCIC Recommended 2014 Bond Projects... 2 Table 2. BCIC Schedule of Meetings... 4 Table 3. Actual and Projected Enrollment by Grade Level... 9 Table 4. Portable Classroom Capacity Figure 1. District-Wide High School Projections vs. Existing Total Capacity, with Percentage of Occupation Figure 2. District-Wide High School Projections vs. Building Capacity with No Portables, with Percentage of Occupation Figure 3. District-Wide Elementary (K-5) Projections vs. K-5 Existing Total Capacity, with Percentage of Occupation Figure 4. District-Wide Elementary (K-5) Projections vs. K-5 Existing Building Capacity (No Portables), with Percentage of Occupation Figure 5. District-Wide Middle School Projections (includes 6-8 Grade Levels at K-8 and Options Schools) vs. Existing Total MS Capacity, with Percentage of Occupation Figure 6. District-Wide Middle School Projections (Includes 6-8 Grade Levels at K-8 and Options Schools) vs. Existing MS Building Capacity (No Portables), with Percentage of Occupation Figure School District Bond Rates Figure 8. BSD Outstanding General Obligation Bonds - Actual and Projected Bond Rates Figure 9. Possible Bond Program Phasing Figure 10. High School Location Map Figure 11. New Capacity Map December 2013

5 Executive Summary Recommendation to the Superintendent: 2014 School Bond Program On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 the Bond Community Involvement Committee (BCIC) reached unanimous consensus on a Bond Capital Improvement Program recommendation to forward to the Superintendent of the Beaverton School District. The recommendations are: Project List (Scenario E) that totals $680 million. o o The Project List includes 27 projects that will ultimately touch each school throughout the District with some level of physical improvement. The recommended program will retain the current $2.11/1000 bond tax rate that is in place in the District. Consequently, the $680 million program will not result in an increase to the current tax rate paid by District residents and businesses. The Committee believes this is very important to the community. o The complete Project List is shown on page 2. The Bond Program should be placed before District voters in one bond election May 20, The BCIC considered splitting the program into two separate elections and strongly supports one election. The BCIC conducted five meetings between September and December The Committee s purpose was established by the Beaverton School District School Board: To assist the School District develop a Capital Bond Program to present to District voters at the May 2014 election. Committee members will provide advice and share their interests and perspectives to provide a broad representation of the community s values regarding a bond program that addresses capacity increases, modernization, and technology. Committee recommendations will be provided to the Superintendent. The BCIC meetings were the source of extensive discussions on bond financing, project alternatives and program implementation factors. The BCIC meetings were open to the public and public comment was welcomed at each meeting. In addition to the five BCIC meetings, two Community Open Houses were held to share the Bond Program project alternatives with District residents and businesses and to gain further community input. The BCIC strongly recommends that the Superintendent forward the recommendation that the $680 million Bond Program be placed before District voters in May, The Committee agrees that the bond program represents an equitable and fiscally responsible approach to provide for the learning and physical environment needs for current and future students in the Beaverton School District. December 2013 Page 1

6 Table 1. BCIC Recommended 2014 Bond Projects BCIC Recommended 2014 Bond Projects Cost Estimate ($M) Page # (Appendix A) Modernization: Replacement Projects Arts and Communication Magnet Academy (ACMA) $28.3 A-1 Hazeldale K-5 $24.6 A-3 Vose K-5 $24.8 A-5 William Walker K-5 $24.6 A-7 Modernization: Renovation Projects Capital Center Improvements $5.0 A-9 Critical Equipment Purchases $24.0 A-10 Five Oaks $21.1 A-11 Maintenance Facility Improvements $10.0 A-13 Physical Facility Improvements $98.0 A-15 Raleigh Hills K-8 $9.7 A-25 School Kitchen Improvements $0.8 A-27 Springville $2.0 A-28 Modernization: Regulatory Compliance Districtwide ADA Compliance $2.0 A-29 Domestic and Fire Protection Separation $0.8 A-30 Green Energy Technology $5.0 A-31 High School Title IX Compliance; SHS and AHS $4.0 A-32 McKay ADA Upgrades $0.4 A-33 Security Upgrades $10.0 A-35 Seismic Upgrades $4.2 A-36 New Capacity New Elementary School Site, Land Acquisition - South Cooper Mtn. $3.0 A-37 New High School South Cooper Mtn. $109.0 A-38 New K-5 in North Bethany $25.0 A-40 New Middle School on Timberland Site $51.6 A-41 Technology HVAC Control System Upgrade $0.8 A-43 IT Data Center at Capital Center $2.9 A-44 Learning Technology: Classroom Systems $56.0 A-45 Unified Communication System $7.2 A-47 Program Implementation Requirements Pre-bond planning reimbursement $ Program 10% of Total Project Value $45.4 A-48 Cost 3.0%/ year of Total Project Value $52.8 A-50 Bond Implementation/Management $2.5 million/year $20.0 A-51 Bond Issuance 1% of Bond Value $ Grand Total $680.0 December 2013 Page 2

7 I. Bond Community Involvement Committee (BCIC) Process The Beaverton School District (District) has a long history of working with parents, business representatives and educational practitioners to monitor enrollment growth and identify the facilities needed to maintain its level of educational excellence. District voters have strongly supported efforts in the past to provide new facilities and modernize existing facilities to keep pace with the needs of the growing district. Since 1996, District voters have approved roughly $500 million ($629 million in 2013 dollars) in three separate capital improvement bond programs. Since the last capital bond was approved in 2006, the District s enrollment has grown by 2,600 students. District enrollment now exceeds 39,000 students. Looking to the future, over 4,200 new students are projected to be in the District by 2025 when enrollment passes 43,000 students. Over the next eight year period, the District will be retiring a series of previously approved capital bond measures that will make available an estimated $680 million in bonding capacity without any increase to the current tax rate that District residents and businesses are assessed 1. This outcome reflects a conscience decision on the part of past and present School Boards to phase capital bond requests to residents and businesses in a way that maintains a level bond tax rate. As would be expected, the District s facilities have been well used and have experienced normal wear and aging. While new facilities provided by previous bond programs are now available, portable classrooms have been extensively used to provide needed additional classroom capacity at specific schools and to respond to continued growth in enrollment. Over 140 portable classroom buildings are now in place throughout the District, representing over 200 classrooms. As well, the nature of educational teaching practices has changed and learning technology is evolving at an accelerating rate, requiring new equipment and physical changes to the teaching environment. The continued enrollment growth, coupled with the new capital bonding capacity that will become available, offered the District the opportunity to work with community representatives to develop a comprehensive capital program to address identified needs in three categories: Capacity Projects providing additional student capacity through new facilities or expansions at existing facilities in order to reduce current overcrowding and to accommodate forecasted additional enrollment growth; Modernization Projects extending the useful life of existing facilities through replacements or renovations and providing important safety and security improvements. Technology Projects accommodating technology advances in delivering educational content and replacement of obsolete technology and classroom infrastructure. 1 Current (2013) Beaverton School District Bond Tax Rate is $2.11 per $1,000 assessed value. December 2013 Page 3

8 A. Bond Community Involvement Committee Bond Community Involvement Committee In order to develop a comprehensive list of projects that would provide a district-wide benefit, the School Board appointed the Bond Community Involvement Committee (BCIC) to work with staff on the program elements. The BCIC was 20-member committee representing a cross section of parents, business representatives, elected officials and educational stakeholders. The committee met 5 times between September and December These meetings were the source of extensive discussions on bond financing, project alternatives (the Committee considered 5 alternative bond programs). BCIC members visited five schools (Vose, Five Oaks, ACMA, William Walker and Raleigh Hills) to get a first-hand understanding of the physical conditions and issues that the Bond is intended to address. Each BCIC meeting was open to the public and public comment was welcomed at each meeting. In addition to the five BCIC meetings, the District held two Community Open Houses to share the Bond Program project alternatives and BCIC deliberations with District residents and businesses. B. Bond Community Involvement Committee Charge The Beaverton School District School Board formally established the BCIC Purpose and the committee schedule in August Purpose To assist the School District develop a Capital Bond Program to present to District voters at the May 2014 election. Committee members will provide advice and share their interests and perspectives to provide a broad representation of the community s values regarding a bond program that addresses capacity increases, modernization, and technology. Committee recommendations will be provided to the Superintendent. Schedule of Meetings Table 2. BCIC Schedule of Meetings Date (2013) Type of Meeting Objective September 11 Committee Meeting #1 Understanding role, construction history, needs, & financing capacity October 2 Committee Meeting #2 Present conceptual program packages October 8 Community Open House Input on program packages October 23 Committee Meeting #3 Refine program packages November 13 Committee Meeting #4 Review tentative final program package December 3 Community Open House Present & discuss with community December 11 Committee Meeting #5 Finalize recommended program December 16 School Board Meeting Present recommendation December 2013 Page 4

9 The Board directed District staff to work with the BCIC to: Provide an understanding of future student enrollment trends and how that translates into the need for new school facilities and capacity. Present funding scenarios that demonstrate how future projects can be provided in a costefficient manner. Develop construction bond packages / alternatives that address project needs in three program areas: o Capacity Increases (new construction / expansions) o Modernization Projects (improvements to existing facilities) o Technology (technology and learning environment enhancements) Develop a recommended 2014 Bond Program to be presented to the Superintendent in December C. BCIC Organization / Membership Continuing its practice of engaging residents, businesses, community stakeholders and educational practitioners to help develop recommendations to present to the Superintendent on capital projects, the School Board appointed the following individuals to serve as the Bond Community Involvement Committee: Pam Treece, BCIC Chair, Westside Economic Alliance Executive Director Hal Bergsma, Tualatin Hills Park & Recreation District Lloyd Bernstein, Elementary Level Parent, Stand for Children Todd Corsetti, Southridge High School Principal Linda Degman, Beaverton School Board Member Tom Franklin, Community Member, Key Communicator Mark Fryburg, Portland General Electric Stacy Geale, Beaver Acres Elementary School Principal Beth Gilstrap, Secondary Level Parent, Parent Volunteer Leader Ronda Haun, Highland Park Middle School Principal Tyrone Henry, Secondary Level Parent, Key Communicator Karen Hoffman, Beaverton Education Association (BEA) President Pam Burdett, President, Oregon School Employees Associate (OSEA Chapter 48) Ian King, City of Beaverton, Council Member LeeAnn Larsen, Beaverton School Board Member Greg Malinowski, Washington County Board of Commissioners, District 2 Michael Monnier, Nike, Director of Facilities Projects Matthey Shipley, Intel, Construction Manager Karen Stratton, Sexton Mountain ES, Fifth Grade Teacher Justin Wood, Home Builders Association of Metro Portland, Assistant Director December 2013 Page 5

10 D. BCIC Meetings Bond Community Involvement Committee Five meetings of the BCIC were held between September and December A project website was established on the Districts website where all meeting materials were posted in advance of a meeting: The five meetings were organized primarily around a series of Issue Papers that provided committee members with pertinent background technical issues, scenarios for bond projects, and responses to questions raised by committee members. The Issues Papers and meeting materials are provided in Appendix B of this report and are noted by BCIC meeting as follows: Meeting #1 (September 11, 2013) Committee Purpose and Role Issue Paper #1: 2010 School Facility Plan Issue Paper #2: School Enrollment and Capacity Issue Paper #3: BSD Bond History Issue Paper #4: Bond Financing Capacity Issue Paper #5: Bond Project Program Approach Meeting #2 (October 2, 2013) Follow Up Items from BCIC Meeting #1 Issue Paper Overview of 2014 Bond Projects Issue Paper #6: Capacity New Issue Paper #7: Modernization Replacement Projects Issue Paper #8: Modernization Renovation Projects Issue Paper #9: Modernization Regulatory Compliance Issue Paper #10: Modernization Security Issue Paper #11:Technology Facility Technology Issue Paper #12:Technology Learning Technology Issue Paper #13:Program Implementation Requirements Meeting #3 (October 23, 2013) Follow Up Items from BCIC Meeting #2 Issue Paper #14: New High School Site Selection Background Updated 2013 Enrollment and Capacity Chart (Update of Issue Paper #2) Learning Technology Project Documents (three papers) Issue Paper #15: Bond Evaluation and Sorting Tool Proposed Bond Package Scenarios: o Scenario A: $680M; 8 to 10 year program one election in 2014 o Scenario B: $680M; 8 to 10 year program two elections, 2014 and 2018 o Scenario C: $350M; 4-year program in 2014 Meeting #4 (November 13, 2013) Follow Up Items from BCIC Meeting #3 High School Location Map (Including proposed HS #6) Physical Facility Improvements Distribution Matrix Survey Results Proposed Bond Package Scenario o Scenario D: $680M; 8 year program one election in 2014, or two elections, 2014 and 2018 December 2013 Page 6

11 Meeting #5 (December 11, 2013) Presentation on tax rate impact of $710 million program (follow-up from Meeting #4) 2014 BCIC: Purpose and Roles (Previously distributed and discussed at BCIC Meeting #1. Provided again to restate the BCIC decision-making process). Proposed Bond Package Scenarios o Scenario E: $680M; 8 year program one election in 2014, or two elections, 2014 and 2018 with ACMA building replacement funded. E. Community Open Houses Two Community Open Houses were held at Beaverton High School one in October and the other in December. Each Open House was an opportunity for participants to learn about the planning that was done on the bond program. Following a short presentation, staff was available to discuss the various program elements at various project stations. Participants were encouraged to visit the various project stations, discuss ideas on specific projects and offer thoughts on the overall bond program and financing approach. BCIC members were invited and participated in both Open Houses. Information at the Open House was presented at the following stations: District Enrollment Trends and the Need for New School Capacity New School Capacity Projects School Modernization Projects Technology Opportunities and Projects Financing Strategies Comment forms were provided and collected at the end of the meeting. F. BCIC Recommendation On Wednesday, December 11, 2013 the Bond Community Involvement Committee (BCIC) reached unanimous consensus on a Bond Capital Improvement Program recommendation to forward to the Superintendent of the Beaverton School District. The recommendations are: Project List (Scenario E) that totals $680 million. o o The Project List includes 27 projects that will ultimately touch each school throughout the District with some level of physical improvement. The recommended program will retain the current $2.11/1000 bond tax rate that is in place in the District. Consequently, the $680 million program will not result in an increase to the current tax rate paid by District residents and businesses. The Committee believes this is very important to the community. o The complete Project List is shown on page 2. The Bond Program should be placed before District voters in one bond election May 20, The BCIC considered splitting the program into two separate elections and strongly supports one election. December 2013 Page 7

12 The Committee agreed that the Bond program represented an equitable and fiscally responsible approach to provide for the learning and physical environment needs for current and future students in the Beaverton School District. Key Issues for BCIC The BCIC members identified a number of key issues in that supported their recommendation. These issues included: The BCIC emphasized the district-wide nature of the recommendation. All schools and all areas of the District will benefit in some manner from the program. The BCIC recognized that the $680 million figure is a large request to present to District voters, but felt that it was appropriate and necessary to keep pace with the needs of the growing District. The BCIC understands that the Bond program will result in shifts in attendance boundaries as new schools come on-line. The attendance boundary shifts will enable the District to better balance school enrollment at all levels and will, hopefully, result in fewer portable classrooms. The Bond program represents a good balance between new capacity (35%), modernization of existing facilities (55%) and technology enhancements (10%). The BCIC felt that it was absolutely critical to stay at $2.11/$1000 tax rate to retain the no increase in tax rate message and to remain consistent with past School Board practices of strategically phasing capital bond requests to residents and businesses in a way that maintains a level bond tax rate. December 2013 Page 8

13 II. BCIC Supporting Materials Bond Community Involvement Committee District staff provided information at each BCIC meeting describing a number of topics to support the Committee s deliberations on alternative bond programs. Appendix A of this report presents the Project Sheets that describe the individual projects that were identified by the BCIC to include in the recommendation to the Superintendent. Appendix B of this report presents the Issue Papers that were presented at each BCIC meeting and were the foundation of many BCIC decisions. Appendix C contains the detailed meeting agendas and follow-up materials presented to the committee based upon discussions at the prior meeting. The following information presents a summary of some of the key decision factors that supported the BCIC s recommendation: District Enrollment Trends At the first two BCIC meetings, District staff presented information regarding the historical and projected student enrollment trends that have created the need for additional facilities. Additionally, information on existing physical student capacity at the elementary, middle and high school levels was provided. This information was key in establishing the need for new student capacity at all levels, as well as highlighting the critical need for modernization and new technology at existing facilities. The BCIC was presented with information on the anticipated growth in student enrollment to 2025 (see Issue Paper #2 in Appendix B and Meeting #2 Follow-up in Appendix C). This information was prepared by the Portland State University Population Research Center. PSU forecast s an increase of 5,438 students, or 14%, between the 2012 and 2025 school year. This increase translates to an average of roughly 400 new students entering the District each year between 2012 and Table 3. Actual (2012) and Projected (2013 and beyond) Enrollment by Grade Level* School Year** Elementary (K-5) 17,952 18,402 18,401 18,550 18,555 18,595 18,633 18,798 19,071 20,680 Middle (6-8) 8,847 8,960 9,156 9,264 9,454 9,430 9,581 9,623 9,630 9,916 High (9-12) 11,034 11,363 11,624 11,734 11,872 12,171 12,260 12,450 12,636 12,675 Total 37,833 38,725 39,181 39,548 39,881 40,196 40,474 40,871 41,337 43,271 *Source: Beaverton School District Population and Enrollment Forecasts, Portland State University, Population Research Center, April, **These estimates do not include students enrolled in alternative programs, Pre-Kindergarten, Self- Contained Special Education, or Early College. Need for New School Capacity The BCIC looked at existing school capacity and the need for new school capacity from two perspectives one that continued to rely on the use of portable classrooms to provide permanent capacity and one that reduced to the use of portable classrooms. The following figures provide an understanding of the school capacity that is currently available at the various levels in the District under both circumstances both with and without portable classrooms. At the present time there are currently 144 portable classroom buildings in use throughout the District. As noted in the following table, these portables represent a total of 209 classrooms (see Issue Paper #2 in December 2013 Page 9

14 Appendix B and Meeting #2 Follow-up Item #5 in Appendix C) Table 4. Portable Classroom Capacity Grade Level Number of Portables Equivalent Number of Classrooms Elementary School Middle School High School Options School Support 10 n/a Total The following figures present the impact of future student enrollment growth on school capacity at the high school, middle school and elementary school levels. Existing High School Capacity, With and Without Portable Classrooms Figure 1. District-Wide High School Projections vs. Existing Total Capacity, with Percentage of Occupation Figure 2. District-Wide High School Projections vs. Building Capacity with No Portables, with Percentage of Occupation December 2013 Page 10

15 Existing Middle School Capacity, With and Without Portable Classrooms Figure 3. District-Wide Middle School Projections (includes 6-8 Grade Levels at K-8 and Options Schools) vs. Existing Total MS Capacity, with Percentage of Occupation Figure 4. District-Wide Middle School Projections (Includes 6-8 Grade Levels at K-8 and Options Schools) vs. Existing MS Building Capacity (No Portables), with Percentage of Occupation December 2013 Page 11

16 Existing Elementary School Capacity, With and Without Portable Classrooms Figure 5. District-Wide Elementary (K-5) Projections vs. K-5 Existing Total Capacity, with Percentage of Occupation Figure 6. District-Wide Elementary (K-5) Projections vs. K-5 Existing Building Capacity (No Portables), with Percentage of Occupation December 2013 Page 12

17 Bond Financing History Since 1996 District residents have voted to approve approximately $500 million in capital improvements ($629 million in 2013 dollars). The past three school bond programs have provided the following improvements: 2006 Construction Bond $195 million Two new elementary schools (Bonny Slope and Springville K-8) A new performing arts and educational building at ACMA Purchase and renovation of the Capital Center building Refurbishment of Merle Davies Annex at Beaverton High School Major additions to 7 school buildings Added almost 200 new classrooms and 500,000 square feet Furnishings & equipment valued at $6 million were installed Alterations and improvements were completed at 50 schools Acquisition of property for next comprehensive high school 2000 Construction Bond $150 million Aloha High School renovation and expansion New Beaverton High School cafeteria building New K-8 (Aloha-Huber Park) Conversion of Aloha Park ES into International School of Beaverton Expansion of Stoller Middle School Land acquisition for two schools (Aloha-Huber Park & Bonny Slope) 1996 Construction Bond $147 million Two new elementary schools (Scholls Heights and Jacob Wismer) One new middle school (Stoller) One new high school (Southridge) Modernization and improvements to many schools The BCIC was presented with information indicating that the current tax rate supporting debt service for Beaverton School District existing general obligation bonds is a little more than $2.00 per $1,000 of assessed value. The BCIC was interested in where that rate placed the Beaverton School District in relation to other large school districts in Oregon. The following comparison was provided to the committee: December 2013 Page 13

18 Figure School District Bond Rates Bond Community Involvement Committee The BCIC was informed that, because some old debt obligations are being retired, principally in two segments at 2014 and 2018, there will be capacity for as much as $680 million of new debt without increasing tax rates. This outcome reflects a conscience decision on the part of past and present School Boards to phase capital bond requests to residents and businesses in a way that maintains a level bond tax rate. Debt capacity and tax rates are important considerations in that they have a financial impact on the community and therefore affect the potential public support for a new bond measure. The following figure notes the bond capacity transitions that will occur in 2014 and 2018 that will lead to the $680 million of new debt capacity without increasing tax rates. Multiple bond sales totaling the $680 million figure can be scheduled over several years in order to maintain the current tax rate. December 2013 Page 14

19 Figure 8. BSD Outstanding General Obligation Bonds - Actual and Projected Bond Rates The BCIC focused on developing a comprehensive long-range capital program that utilized the new debt capacity that will become available to the District while holding true to the principle of maintaining a level bond tax rate. The Committee was presented with two options that achieved this approach: A single bond measure of roughly $680 million to be phased-in over two steps (2014 bond distribution and 2018 bond distribution); or Splitting between two separate bond measures of $340+/- million each in 2014 and 2018 (requiring two separate votes). The following figure notes the bond capacity transitions that will occur in 2014 and 2018 that will lead to the $680 million of new debt capacity without increasing tax rates. Figure 9 notes how a $680 million bond program could be phased-in without increasing existing tax rates. December 2013 Page 15

20 Figure 9. Possible Bond Program Phasing Bond Community Involvement Committee New High School Site Location The BCIC had a number of discussions regarding the location of the new high school that is a part of this bond program. Staff noted that considerable analysis went into selecting the new high school sites. The BCIC was provided with Issue Paper #14 (see Appendix B) that presented the 2012 analysis that evaluated 25 separate sites and provided the decision document for the Districts selection of the southern (South Cooper Mountain) site for the future high school. The School Board selected the site in 2012 based upon this analysis. The committee was informed that: Finding a satisfactory location for a large HS site is challenging within the mostly urbanized area where BSD is located. The 25 sites were evaluated using criteria that included: site size, number of parcels needed to assemble a 40 to 45 acre site, land use and zoning restrictions, transportation access, topography, and other environmental constraints impacting development. The SW site provides long-term balance in HS locations: 2 north, 2 middle, 2 south. The proposed HS site is in an area primed for significant growth due to Metro s expansion of the Urban Growth Boundary in South Cooper Mountain in 2012 and the projected development of 4,440 residential dwelling units within BSD s boundary. December 2013 Page 16

21 Bond Community Involvement Committee Figure 10. High School Location Map December 2013 Page 17

22 Bond Community Involvement Committee New Capacity Map The BCIC recommendation on the 2014 Bond Program will result in a substantial increase in available student capacity following construction on the bond projects. Following the BCIC s recommendation in December, staff prepared the map below that displays where and the amount of new capacity that will be constructed. Figure 11. New Capacity Map December 2013 Page 18

23 This page intentionally left blank. December 2013 Page 19

24 Appendix A: 2014 School Bond Project Sheets The following are the individual projects that are included in the BCIC Recommendation for the 2014 School Bond in four categories: Modernization; New Capacity; Technology; and Program Implementation Requirements. Page # BCIC Recommended 2014 Bond Projects Cost Estimate ($M) Modernization: Replacement Projects A-1 Arts and Communication Magnet Academy (ACMA) $28.3 A-3 Hazeldale K-5 $24.6 A-5 Vose K-5 $24.8 A-7 William Walker K-5 $24.6 Modernization: Renovation Projects A-9 Capital Center Improvements $5.0 A-10 Critical Equipment Purchases $24.0 A-11 Five Oaks $21.1 A-13 Maintenance Facility Improvements $10.0 A-15 Physical Facility Improvements $98.0 A-25 Raleigh Hills K-8 $9.7 A-27 School Kitchen Improvements $0.8 A-28 Springville $2.0 Modernization: Regulatory Compliance A-29 Districtwide ADA Compliance $2.0 A-30 Domestic and Fire Protection Separation $0.8 A-31 Green Energy Technology $5.0 A-32 High School Title IX Compliance; SHS and AHS $4.0 A-33 McKay ADA Upgrades $0.4 A-35 Security Upgrades $10.0 A-36 Seismic Upgrades $4.2 New Capacity A-37 New Elementary School Site, Land Acquisition - South Cooper Mtn. $3.0 A-38 New High School South Cooper Mtn. $109.0 A-40 New K-5 in North Bethany $25.0 A-41 New Middle School on Timberland Site $51.6 Technology A-43 HVAC Control System Upgrade $0.8 A-44 IT Data Center at Capital Center $2.9 A-45 Learning Technology: Classroom Systems $56.0 A-47 Unified Communication System $7.2 Program Implementation Requirements -- Pre-bond planning reimbursement $1.0 A-48 Program 10% of Total Project Value $45.4 A-50 Cost 3.0%/ year of Total Project Value $52.8 A-51 Bond Implementation/Management $2.5 million/year $ Bond Issuance 1% of Bond Value $6.0 Grand Total $680.0 December 2013 Appendix A: 2014 School Bond Project Pages

25 This page intentionally left blank. December 2013 Appendix A: 2014 School Bond Project Pages

26 Appendix B: Issue Papers Issue Paper #1: 2010 School Facility Plan Issue Paper #2: School Enrollment and Capacity Issue Paper #3: Beaverton School District Bond History Issue Paper #4: Bond Financing Capacity Issue Paper #5: Bond Program Development Approach Issue Papers #6 - #13: 2014 Bond Program Projects Issue Paper #14: New High School Site Issue Paper #15: Bond Project Rating Criteria Issue Paper #16: Bond Scenario D December 2013 Appendix B: Issue Papers

27 This page intentionally left blank. December 2013 Appendix B: Issue Papers

28 Appendix C: BCIC Meeting Agendas and Follow-Up Materials Date (2013) Type of Meeting Objective September 11 Committee Meeting #1 Understanding role, construction history, needs, & financing capacity October 2 Committee Meeting #2 Present conceptual program packages October 23 Committee Meeting #3 Refine program packages November 13 Committee Meeting #4 Review tentative final program package December 11 Committee Meeting #5 Finalize recommended program December 16 School Board Meeting Present recommendation December 2013 Appendix C: BCIC Meeting Agendas and Follow-Up Materials

29 This page intentionally left blank December 2013 Appendix C: BCIC Meeting Agendas and Follow-Up Materials