Facility Planning Process for Great Falls Public Schools

Welcome! Board Work Session Monday, March 30, 2015 5:30-7:30 DOB Aspen

Community Process Goal Great Falls Public Schools is embarking on a facility planning process to ensure that our school buildings are viable educational institutions for many years to come. The Board desires community input as it embarks upon this process.

To Date and Beyond 2009: Facilities Task Force 2011-2012: GFHS Master Plan Task Force $8.1M McKinstry Energy Project 2013: GFHS Funding Sub-Committee November 4, 2013: Board Work Session to Review GFHS November 11, 2013: Board directive for a community process for discussion about all buildings 2014-2015: STEP 1: Communicate Facility Concerns February 25 (Staff and Community) SURVEY RESULTS STEP 2: Generate Ideas to Address Facility Concerns Community Informational Meetings: Monday, March 2 5:30 7:30 pm Roosevelt gym Tuesday, March 10 5:30 7:30 pm Longfellow cafeteria Wednesday, March 25 5:30-7:30 pm GFH Auditorium STEP 3: Discuss Ideas and Next Steps Board Work Session: Monday, March 30, 5:30-7:30 - Aspen STEP 4: Conduct Public Survey? Hire a survey consultant April STEP 5: Determine Next Steps Board Work Session: Monday, May 11, 6:30 8:30 Aspen (After Board meeting)

Tonights Agenda Reviews of information gained from community meetings Public Comment Board Planning o Pros and Cons o Options Public Comment Survey? Next Steps

IDEAS TO ADDRESS INCREASING ENROLLMENT AND PRESCHOOL Assistant Superintendents Ruth Uecker & Tom Moore Director of Student Services Dale Lambert Director of Curriculum & Instruction Chris Olszewski

Increasing Enrollment Concerns: Projected Increased Enrollment trends Classroom size Functional Capacity and overloaded classrooms o Enrollment increase is most urgent in Elementary schools. Middle and High Schools have capacity to handle projected growth. Grade level configuration of schools (PK-12) o Neighborhood Schools Concept o The current middle school team concepts are working well o Maturity level and behavior of students must be considered

Elementary Enrollment K-6 Elementary Enrollment Grades K-6 5900 5800 5700 5600 5500 5400 5300 5200 5100

Overload Trend K-6 Overloaded Classrooms 90 80 80 70 62 60 60 56 50 50 50 38 40 30 20 10 0 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15

Kindergarten Enrollment Kindergarten Enrollment 920 900 892 884 880 865 862 860 851 851 840 820 812 808 802 800 798 800 793 780 766 760 740 720 700 2002-2003 2003-2004 2004-2005 2005-2006 2006-2007 2007-2008 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 2013-2014 2014-2015

Projected Kindergarten Enrollment Numbers 2014: 892 Actual Enrollment 2015: 871 2016: 924 2017: 863 2018: 886 2019: 930 2020: 930

Functional Capacity: 70% Accredited Potential Classroom s Overload Max Capacity Oct 1 Enrollment (2014) Plus/Minus Functional Capacity Plus/Minus 70% Overload Accredited Max Capacity 70% Overload School CJ LC LN LF +100HS LY ML MO MV RV RS SC SS VV WT WH SK EMS NMS CMR GFH PGEC Totals 22 26 20 554 654 503 642 758 583 388 458 353 450 531 409 310 433 432 78 25 -79 140 98 -23 29 26 26 20 19 21 18 21 22 21 33 17 19 45 42 73 95 59 674 730 654 654 503 478 528 453 528 554 528 830 428 478 1350 1260 2190 2850 1770 18477 846 758 758 583 554 612 525 612 642 612 962 496 554 1350 1260 2190 2850 1770 19917 511 458 458 353 335 370 318 370 388 370 581 300 335 945 882 1533 1995 1239 12940 593 531 531 409 388 429 368 429 450 429 674 348 388 945 882 1533 1995 1239 13951 416 397 482 314 326 448 313 433 452 403 498 257 102 729 754 1445 1369 217 10530 95 61 -24 39 177 134 49 95 62 -19 55 -4 -2 26 176 91 286 216 128 88 626 1022 3421 9 -78 5 -63 -64 -33 83 43 233 216 128 88 626 1022 2410

Increasing Enrollment Ideas: Grade Configuration Options: oPre-3, 4-6, 7-8, 9-12 option oK-2, 3-4, 5-6, 7-8, high school o6th grade in one location oGrades 5-6 one location oGrade 6-8 configuration( school within school concepts for 6th graders) oGrades 7, 8, 9 configuration Boundary changes Keeping neighborhood schools oStudents, staff build relationships earlier oStudents with siblings provide support in many areas (i.e. walk together to school) oTransportation/travel issues will be reduced by being close by oSmall neighborhood schools desirable Build on to Meadowlark Build on to Sunnyside Build on to East and North Middle Schools Open Skyline as an elementary oBuild a wing onto Skyline Open Lowell as elementary Repurpose Roosevelt Build new school buildings oRebuild Longfellow was discussed oBuild elementary south of Meadowlark oBuild on the Little Russell location oBuilding new high school Schools share stadium Share swimming pool CTE programs Open 3rd Middle School oWest was built as a middle school oMove West elementary to Skyline building(will require addition) oParis -Alternative/middle school oCo-habitat middle school with alternative school oSkyline Middle School (would need remodeling) Mega Elementary Buildings 5 buildings in one (1500+ students) Repurpose GFHS to accommodate administration offices and other programs DOB to become pre-school

Questions: How does Great Falls compare to the growth rates in Montana, Pacific NW? What configurations are best for student growth and development? What properties are available for building? - the district has a number of smaller properties - not all are conducive for school locations Early Edge if it passes into law, what would we do for Pre-K increases? When moving 6th grade back down to elementary 10 years ago, how did the environment change? - it did change dynamics of behaviors and atmosphere - it also showed gains in growth academically How would moving 6th grade up affect sports? (i.e. Heisey vs. school sponsored)

Pre-K Concerns: Greater concern about 4 year olds mixed in with older students as compared to moving 6th grade to middle school Putting Pre-K back into schools wouldn t be the best approach because many elementary schools don t have facilities designed for 3-4 year olds (i.e. bathrooms, playgrounds) With every elementary building, we will have emotional connections oHowever, we are limited by many factors here at Roosevelt and other buildings Pre K Opportunities: Would like to see Pre-K expansion happen There is such value in the Pre-K program there is a noticeable difference between students who did or did not attend Pre-K Right now, there is a waiting list for Pre-K oHeadstart s waiting list is around 100 Pre K Options: It would be nice for parents to have more regional approaches oIt is difficult for some parents to travel/transport to and from the Skyline location There are strengths from a centralized location oSupports for students, teachers oAdditional services (i.e. Library, support services, personnel) There are many benefits to the one-stop shop of the services provided by the Early Childhood Coalition With the number of students now and increase in projections, it would make sense to build some new elementary buildings, regional Pre-K Space is limited can we do swap-land options with the city? Purchase land? There is a huge benefit for having Pre-K placed inside the elementary schools oTransportation oNo transition to Kindergarten school oContained in their local neighborhoods oOne less transition for young students oBegin building relationships sooner oAbility to walk with siblings oSupports family structure Options for Regional Pre-K s: oSkyline northwest oLowell northside/eastend (not a lot of traffic) oWest oLittle Russell oParis

IDEAS TO ADDRESS CRITICAL BUILDING NEEDS AND TECHNOLOGY Director of Buildings and Grounds Shaun Hammatt Director of Technology Jeff Patterson

The Buildings Pre-School Skyline Center o 31 IDEA students o 69 Title 1 students o Headstart o Parent Participation Pre-School o County Extension Agency 3 High Schools o CMR 1446 students o GFHS/Fieldhouse/S. Campus 1369 students o PGEC 204 students 15 Elementary Schools o 257 students to 498 students o 5814 students Buildings and Grounds at Lowell Little Russell Storage 2 Middle Schools o 1483 students District Office Building Annex Buildings and Grounds Shop Warehouse Total of 28 buildings Paris Gibson Square (leased)

Great Falls Public Schools School Building History DATE BUILT Average Age of School Buildings = 57 years old BUILDING CENTRAL SCHOOL/PARIS GIBSON SQUARE ROOSEVELT GREAT FALLS HIGH SCHOOL WHITTIER LOWELL RUSSELL PARIS GIBSON LINCOLN LONGFELLOW WEST ELEMENTARY LEWIS & CLARK EAST MIDDLE SCHOOL ADMINISTRATION BUILDING ANNEX MEADOW LARK MORNINGSIDE RIVERVIEW SUNNYSIDE VALLEY VIEW CHIEF JOSEPH SACAJAWEA LOY WAREHOUSE CHARLES M. RUSSELL MOUNTAIN VIEW SKYLINE NORTH MIDDLE SCHOOL BISON FIELDHOUSE GROUNDS SHOP GFHS - SOUTH CAMPUS Age 1896 1928 1931 1938 1939 1939 1948 1951 1952 1952 1953 1957 1959 1959 1960 1960 1960 1960 1960 1962 1962 1963 1964 1965 1970 1970 1970 1979 1989 1998 119 87 84 77 76 76 67 64 63 63 62 58 56 56 55 55 55 55 55 53 53 52 51 50 45 45 45 36 26 17 Decades of Buildings: 1890 s 1 1920's 1 1930's 4 1940's 1 1950's 5 1960's 9 1970's 4 1980 s 1 1990 s 1

Critical Infrastructure Concerns By Category: Asbestos, Asphalt, Boilers, Floors, Cement, Doors/Locks, Electrical, Elevator, Fire Alarms, HVAC, PA/Notification Systems, Painting, Plumbing, Remodel, Safety, Structural, Technology, Water, Windows, Other By School By major repair items vs. maintenance items Identified timing of major need: o 0-2 years (purple) o 3-5 years (red) o 6-10 years (yellow) o 10+ years (orange, green, blue) Identified estimated costs (verified) Doing work as we speak

Total 0-2 3-5 6-10 11 & beyond Building Chief Joseph Lewis & Clark Lincoln Longfellow Lowell Loy Meadow Lark $ 226,290 $ - $ - $ 1,049,387 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 540,628 $ 90,000 $ 1,038,326 $ 90,000 $ - $ - $ 1,157,627 $ - $ 300,000 $ 225,000 $ - $ 585,582 $ - $ 1,383,917 $ 540,628 $ 390,000 $ 2,312,713 $ 90,000 $ 585,582 $ - $126,000? Morningside Mountain View Riverview Roosevelt Sacajawea Sunnyside West $ 126,050 $ 205,867 $ - $ 248,705 $ 40,000 $ - $ - $ - $ - $ 62,526 $ 504,593 $ - $ - $ 376,624 $ 350,000 $ - $ 217,073 $ 312,493 $ 217,073 $ 205,127 $ 296,624 $ 476,050 $ 205,867 $ 279,599 $ 1,065,791 $ 257,073 $ 205,127 $ 673,248 Valley View $ - $ - $ - $ 113,334 $ - $ 325,000 $ 2,722,726 $ 322,965 $ - $ - $ - $ 701,138 $ 610,000 $ 1,453,171 $ 5,352,490 $ 1,323,675 $ 225,000 $ 568,747 $ 225,000 $ 1,175,000 $ 2,461,272 $ 451,594 $ 2,225,000 $ 710,130 $ 225,000 $ 568,747 $ 225,000 $ 1,989,472 $ 3,071,272 $ 2,229,765 $ 10,300,216 $ 2,356,770 Whittier Skyline East North CMR GFHS* Paris Gibson Totals $ 5,380,324 $ 12,143,171 $ 11,908,342 $$$???? $ 29,431,837+ * GFHS has its own study that identifies needs up to $55,000,000

Safety Needs Cameras Line of Sight Doors and Locks Lighting Limited Access Alert Systems Fire Alarms Safety category: Total: $315,993

Vacant Property North of Skyline School 20 Acres South of Skyline School 1.12 acres Immediately across the street. Ayrshire Property 40 acres south of Great Falls. Rancho Grand Vista 10 acres south of Meadowlark Elementary School Mountain View Elementary 1.63 acres south of Mountain View Elementary Loy Land- 2 tracts Directly west of Loy Elementary 30 acres are currently being used for soccer complex. 10 acres are vacant.

CONCERNS: With the understanding of the critical needs, what can our taxpayers afford? Do not band-aide repairs if plan to last for another 50 years. Do it right. Safety concerns need to be priority #1. GFHS open space is limited. Parking is a huge issue. CMR is settling. Needs some kind of multipurpose space. Every school needs work and a plan. OPPORTUNITIES: As address buildings, need to consider the future of Career and Technical Education programs and be sure to consult the Advisory Committees for advice Parkdale will be a viable low-income housing development for years to come. Enrollment from this neighborhood will continue to be stable All buildings must be considered in upgrade funding New buildings offer opportunities for energy and maintenance savings that will pay for themselves for years to come could realize $8 million dollars in energy efficiency savings over 40 years which equals almost half of an new elementary building cost While not a standalone reason to bond, interest rates are low making more of the money available for projects Upgrades and new buildings add value to our community, neighborhoods and kids Technology must be considered in all upgrades and/or new construction Need a specific plan and then publicity

OPTIONS: Build some new buildings oExplore a variety of sites city-wide oMatch sites to growing and predicted enrollment OR super-sized elementaries oPossibly 2 elementary schools Roosevelt new location Repurpose or tear down Roosevelt Lowell Site (one level) Longfellow Don t put $2M into the repairs not going to cut it for 50 years Need good engineering studies to build on the current site Open Skyline as an elementary school oPreschool? Sunnyside addition oUGF married student housing oCastle Pines addition oTalus Apts. (MV) New high school nice, but On the newest buildings, determine maintenance items and long-term repair items and do them Tidbits: A legitimate business expense: 3% of replacement cost = annual facility expenses o@$200 sq/ft x 1.9M sq ft. approximately $400M worth of buildings o3% of $400M = $12M 25% of population are in GF school buildings during the day for 180 days per year $30M/$400M = 7.5% about the same as $25,000 kitchen for a $300,000 home

IDEAS TO ADDRESS FACILITY FUNDING Director of Business Operations Brian Patrick Community Connections Manager Dave Crum

Categories Process Interest Rates Other Financing Options Building Reserve vs Bonding Programming

Process Hire a consultant Develop a strategy to gain community support Develop a strategy to pass a bond issue More time is needed to study needs and educate the community on the importance of proposed rates

Interest Rates Take advantage of low rates now Don t allow low interest rates drive the project Explain the difference between Market Value and Taxable Value when presenting cost information

Other Financing Private Donations o Major Gifts for Naming Rights (Policy) o Major Gifts that provide enhancements Check for Federal Support Investigate grants and other forms of funding

Building Reserve vs. Bonding Educate the public on the differences between the advantages and disadvantages of each option

Programming What are the educational needs going to be in the next 10, 20, 30, 40, and 50 years Study student demographics Develop 5, 10, 15, and 20 year plan for upgrading facilities Expand Career and Technical education program Is the ground stable enough at Longfellow to re- build a school building on that site. If so, does the building need to be as big? It is important to show long term planning Do not re-purpose Great Falls High School!

Public Comment

Board Discussion

THANK YOU SO MUCH! The CHALLENGES of today make OPPORTUNITIES for tomorrow!

Modern Educational Environments Academic o Science, Technology, Engineering, Math (STEM) Science lab needs Computer labs Career & Technical Education o Career and Technical Education (CTE) Programs at the middle school and high school levels give students skills and experiences in growing fields such as Industrial Technology (welding, carpentry, automotive), Health Sciences (Med Prep), Culinary and Textiles/Interior Design, and Business/Computer Science education. Co-curricular o Auditoriums and stages GFHS seating Both technology advancements Extra-curricular o Gym access o Memorial Stadium Track Field Seating Costs are unknown at this time

Technology GFPS believes that the effective use of technology supports student achievement as it prepares students for the pervasiveness of technology in the world they will live and work. GFPS is dedicated to ensuring students learn the knowledge and skills they need to succeed in an increasingly global, technology infused, modern workplace.

Technology Concerns Increasing costs: Over the last decade, GFPS has made significant investments in hardware, software, infrastructure, professional development, and support services. Currently, GFPS funds technology investments via a $225,000 perpetual annual technology levy, via E- rate and since the passage of the operational levy in 2014, $300,000 for software subscriptions. The costs of these investments continue to increase. All GFPS buildings were built before the proliferation of technology. They are not equipped to handle the requirements of a technology rich environment that schools must be.

Technology Concerns Other Concerns: Fast and reliable wifi is a concern in some schools. The construction of some schools is so dense that wifi solutions are challenging. The age of the GFPS phone system is a concern. GFPS is tasked with finding a replacement communication system which will undoubtedly incur additional costs. The refresh schedule is not adequate. Currently GFPS is on a 7.5 year refresh schedule. This is added to refurbished machines that are already 2 years old when the District purchases them. There is also a concern regarding the number of cameras buildings are installing. As the technology changes, there needs to be a plan to refresh the cameras and related technology. The number of devices is expanding. This requires additional technical support as well as the need for professional coaching for the staff so that the devices are utilized to best support teaching and learning.

Building Reserve Budgeted = Board Adopted Restricted = There are constraints on the fund that are EXTERNALLY imposed by the state constitution and legislation Funded by $ remaining from a previous building project levy. Fund balance on June 30, 2014 = $211,123 Designated to spend balance for safety related facility projects.

Building Fund Non-Budgeted Restricted = There are constraints on the fund that are EXTERNALLY imposed by legislation Used for foreseen and unforeseen building issues across the District Revenue can be generated from the sale or rental of property and/or insurance settlements and restitutions. Fund balance on June 30, 2014 = $1,059,795 Determining facility needs at this time and will utilize these funds for priority items.

Capital Improvement (One Time Only Deferred Maintenance) Non-Budgeted Restricted = There are constraints on the fund that are EXTERNALLY imposed by legislation Used for foreseen and unforeseen building issues across the District Revenue generated from a one-time payment from the Montana legislature for facilities. Fund balance on June 30, 2014 = $718,642 Determining facility needs at this time and will utilize these funds for priority items.

Impact Aid Non-Budgeted Restricted = There are constraints on the fund that are EXTERNALLY imposed by legislation (revenue) May be used for a variety of purposes. Using for staff salaries as well as unforeseen costs. Federally funded to mitigate the impact of federally connected students (military & low income housing) Fund balance on June 30, 2014 = $9,738,095 Less allocation due to sequestration and fewer federally connected students. Anticipated expenditures: security, staffing, technology and facilities

GFHS Task Force Estimates HVAC Electricity/Lighting Plumbing/Sinks/Toilets Windows Connector (enclosure, commons, food service, new office area) Parking Shop Classroom upgrades TOTAL $ 7,000,000 $ 4,416,000 $ 552,000 $ 2,415,000 $ 8,900,000 $ 975,000 $ 6,000,000 $27, 500,000 $57,758,000