HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - August 17, 2022 School Capital Needs Workgroup Agenda - with notes ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
CHAPEL HILL-CARRBORO BOARD OF EDUCATION
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION
Capital Needs Work Group
August 17, 2022
Meeting— 8:30-10am
Due to current public health concerns, the Capital Needs Work Group is conducting a Virtual
Meeting on August 17, 2022. Members of the Group will be participating in the meeting
remotely.
Attendees: Bonnie Hauser, Rebecca Crawford, Patrick Abele, Gary Donaldson, Jean Hamilton,
Jonathan Scott, Rani Dasi, Al Ciarochi,Nick Mincey, Travis Myren, Andre' Stewart, Alan
Dorman, Greg Wilder, Kirk Vaughn, Dr.Nyah Hamlett
1. Welcome—Commissioner Jean Hamilton, Chair of Work Group
a. Dr. Felder unable to attend and others due to school starting next
week
b. Change order of agenda to review draft information prior to
people leaving meeting
2. Review Draft Final Report
a. Jean: does this draft reflect the work we did?Yes
i. Any errors or changes in facts?
1. Rani: 3rd paragraph — while the county's
contribution per pupil ranks in the state for
operating expenses (clarify between operating
and capital)
2. Patrick—OC doesn't qualify for some other state
capital grants — other districts may have more
capital funding outside of the county than OC
a. Patrick to send more verbiage about this
from his research
b. Each school district in the state completes
a facility needs assessment to the General
Assembly each 5 years. (could be in an
appendix or a part of notes)
i. https://www.ednc.org/wp-
content/uploads/2022/05/2109—B
SOP-8—FNS-2020-Report-
FINAL-2021-08-
25-275 569m3mz5 fkgkdn0bgbxa
j Orawln.pdf
3. Bonnie: clarified that we are a tier 3 county based
on county resident income, but that the
legislature was exploring ways to unpack
counties so that low income areas are not
disadvantaged by a Tier designation.
a. Recommend Patrick reach out to Greg
Meyer or Valerie Foushee to get an
update on the tier distinction and how it
could help OCS
4. Rani: include in recommendation that the BOCC
start considering alternative funding ideas —
important the community sees we're making that
an ask for the BOCC—current funding structure
wouldn 't support the work we're doing—need to
start thinking differently (task force to think
differently and look at how other districts are
looking at other funding)
a. Jean — this is part of what we're hoping
the consultant to do
i. Rani — would like to do some of
this work prior to consultant so
we don't lose time
ii. Gary — Guilford is using tax rate
to fund their big capital campaign
1. Bonnie — using tax rate
increase and adding
quarter cent sales tax
(which they didn't
historically use — we've
already integrated that
into our school funding)
2. Renee — agrees with all
said so far
b. Jean: Schools to complete Table B with school building
inventory — please send by 8/19 (both districts agree they can
submit by then)
c. Jean: Major recommendation is to hire a consultant—have them
come up with a plan, timeline to do work
i. Travis—is the prioritization a needs based prioritization
vs existing method, which is by Average Daily
Membership
1. Jean—thinks it should be needs based. We have
multiple schools with huge needs and have to
shift to accommodate. Consultant should be able
to help work through. Schools with worst
conditions would be first on the list
2. Rani — could leave that to the discretion of the
consultant. Long term planning for buildings
could be done differently. Wouldn't want to be
too prescriptive.
3. Bonnie — important the consultant be
independent. Could put into contract that they are
prohibited from doing any future work so no
conflict of interest. Also want info about our
processes, tools, metrics in addition to actual
buildings. Could use FCI (Facility Condition
Index) as a metric.
4. Jean — committee/subcommittee would work
with county staff to describe what we want from
the consultant
5. Renee—Under Recommendations section of the
report—should be more clear that the two school
systems agree to this—maybe a preamble(county
can get the consultant but then schools are on
their own to implement the recommendations) —
boards will change — this is a JOINT school
capital planning endeavor
a. Jean—so we need buy-in from the boards.
This is a recommendation from our joint
committee and then the final report will
go to all boards to see if they agree.
b. Bonnie —this is the elephant in the room
— schools receive money but don't
necessarily want the county to dictate
how to spend the money. Is there a way
to add transparency and metrics without
micromanaging?Could the FCI help with
transparency?
i. Dashboard with shared metrics
and standards?
c. Bonnie—what do Aland Nick think about
micromanaging thoughts?
i. Al — both district strategic plans
are different, constituencies are
different — don't want to be too
prescriptive
ii. Would be better to have a
program manager to prevent
internal bias (is a program
manager an external party?)
1. The more prescriptive the
approach, the less
flexibility.
2. Can be some construction
standards to get the
greatest ROI
a. Who is reviewing
everyone's plans
to prevent scope
creep?
iii. Alan — for OC facilities (about
—45) — just having a facility
assessment for each facility isn't
enough (also need costs to keep
up,what is the use of the building
and how does it fit into county
program needs) — we use that
when deciding what to do about
county facilities
iv. Rani — agree with collaborative
planning — especially for HVAC
replacements — can we use
economies of scale in
purchasing/contracting?
1. Also important to allow
districts to have flexibility
to meet local needs
v. Al — Knowing OC is the pass
through — there could be joint
RFPs for certain bids such as all
facilities to have solar arrays (in
each CIP but use single company
that manages that and keeps to
agreed upon standards)
1. OC happy to be a part of
that
vi. Nick — after finishing a large
project at Orange High(converted
to geothermal while school was in
full function) — his biggest
concern about the report is extra
swing space
1. Able to push through a ton
of projects already funded
but don't have enough
swing space
2. Lots happening behind the
scenes that no one will see
— would like to start
making it more clear what
accomplishing
3. Having an entire school to
relocate if could renovate
an entire school — Wake
does it (could use Cedar
Grove
Elementary/Community
Center)
vii. Andre echoes the need for swing
space (single structure could be
jointly used by both districts)
viii. Renee — various individuals have
wanted this discussion for years
but this is the first time all three
entities are moving forward with
a joint effort and we should
recognize that milestone — doing
this now with county buildings so
have an outlook for planning in
advance
ix. Rani — supports Renee's
comments—would like to include
in the report that the task force
sees value in collaborating and
communicating about these
efforts
x. Renee — add into an appendix
about the FCI and other examples
of deliverables?
1. Jean says maybe we add
this in a future iteration of
the report
d. Jean—do we want to include any pictures in the appendix of the
final report?
i. Al — agrees. When speaking with parents about
experiences in newer schools, they don't know the
condition of the older schools. It helps with recognition,
especially for those that don't have time to read a
comprehensive report
1. Consensus from the group to add pictures —
schools send pictures to Rebecca by 8/19 (Good,
bad, and ugly)
a. Andre' requests until 8/26—Nick agrees
i. Could take pictures as facility
teams are opening schools over
next week
b. Al — overall pictures of school,
classroom, library, cafeteria, mechanical
systems, etc.?Yes.
e. Bonnie—any issues that haven't already been discussed?
i. Nick — have some schools that aren't sufficient for
current learning(lucky to have Cedar Ridge and it could
be helpful for the consultant to look at the breakout areas
and other space usage at that school)
ii. Renee — still should consider Pre-K, especially with
space needs, OC residents living in Mebane and impact
on space
f. Next draft of report (except for pictures) out to group by 8/23
and ready to go on 8/31
i. Renee—bring to a work session(9/13)to be discussed
1. Discuss at collaboration meeting on 9/29? Could
all potentially vote at later joint meeting? Will
know more after the work session
a. Deon recommends this approach —
Renee, Deon, and Will can meet to
discuss and propose
ii. Bonnie —to OCS meeting on 8/30? Will most likely be
later in September
1. Should we include a joint resolution for each
entity to vote on?
a. Jean- Approval to hire a joint consultant
iii. Rani — could we delay the final draft of the report until
the pictures are added? (9/15 is first CHCCS BOE
meeting)
1. Jean clarified the draft on 8/23 is just for the work
group to make sure narrative is correct. Then will
go out to boards
2. When will final draft go out to get on school
board agendas?
3. Renee—how much$ are we talking,which fiscal
year would it hit?
a. Travis — would do RFQs to get idea of
cost
b. Gary need a clearly defined scope
i. Renee — boards will want a
general scope and timeline for
when we want the consultant on
board and work to take effect (is
this for the 2023-24 budget cycle
or beyond that?)—in abstracts?
ii. Rani — agrees about a general
scope, general cost, timeline
3. Orange County Unified Development Ordinance (UDO) School Design
Standards
a. Jean—want to point out this is what is on the books and the work
was done in collaboration but a while ago. This group will need
to discuss if we need to draft new standards.
b. Should review state standards
4. Discussion and Next Steps
a. Jean — discuss scope of work and timeline at next meeting to
have ready for the 9/29 collaboration meeting
5. Next Meeting is Wednesday, September 21, 2022
Adjourn
Capital Needs Work Group virtual meetings are open to the public to attend remotely. Should
any member of the public wish to view this meeting, please click the following link to register:
Capital Needs Workgroup Registration Link
After registering, you will receive a follow-up email which will allow you to access and view the
meeting. If you have any comments or questions, would like to submit any written comments to
the group, or would like an emailed copy of the entire agenda package for this meeting, please
email Rebecca Crawford at rcrawfordkoran_eg coun . nc.gov before 3:00 pm on August 16, 2022