November 2010

Citizen Oversight Committee Minutes
November 17, 2010

Members present: Ginny Markell, Heather Hobson, Dick Jones, Kristin Michell, Julie Volpel, Yvonne
McVay

Staff present: Tim Mills, Ron Stewart, Garry Kryszak, Jim Langstraat, Eve Adams, Dave Frick-Wright, Joe
Krumm, Leslie Robinette

Board Members present: Rein Vaga, Linda Moraga, Cheryl Myers

6:30 p.m. Pledge of Allegiance

Report on Summer 2010 Projects (see handout for details)

Alder Creek upgrades
Clackamas High School East Campus
Concord Elementary
Oak Grove Elementary
Riverside Elementary
Sojourner School
View Acres Elementary
Rex Putnam High Schoool

Bond Promises list: (see attachment for details)

At this point, very few promises from the 16-page list have not been kept.

No walkway to Wysteria due to change in plans
In the process of expanding Rowe parking by 17 spaces
Some minor work at Wichita remains to be completed.

Projected work for Summer 2011

See handout for details. Sites with minor remaining projects include:
Clackamas High
Milwaukie High
Putnam High
Sabin North Campus
East Campus of Clackamas High
Rowe Middle School
Campbell Elementary
Linwood Elementary
Mt. Scott
Scouters Mountain
Duncan
Technology
Security system upgrades
Wichita Center
Administration
Transportation
Bond Program Management
Improvements for Wichita are focused on building upkeep.

Report on Administration Building and Transportation

Transportation: $1.1 million in the bond

Dilemma: We want to move the site, but there is no funding for this now. The possibility of partnering with the
county on a new site fell through. Roofing for the current site is the current priority. We will invest the
minimum possible now, and will continue looking for an opportunity to move this facility.

Administration Building: (see overview on handout)

2.5% interest rate
$1 million in bond funds
Building is the right size and location. It is available.

Q: Will this allow us to bring all the administrative departments together so we don’t have to rent office space?
A: Yes, all administrative offices but technology and transportation would move to the new site.
The plan would be to move in 3-5 years from now as the existing tenant leases run out.

Dick Jones: I think it’s a great idea that makes good business sense. This allows the opportunity to combine
offices without an increase in cost. A good long-term plan. The current building design does not allow for
additions to be easily made. Other businesses are making decisions like this now, while real estate prices and
interest rates are low.

Ginny Markell: I’m delighted the site is on the west side. Long-term it makes sense. I’m concerned about the
public perception of this at a time when we are canceling school days and furloughing employees. How do we
convey the message to make this palatable so the public understands the reasons? Crafting the message is key.
The communication needs to be proactive, carefully crafted, and also communicated by the COC.

Dick Jones: The bond funds can only be spent on property and capital expenses. Same with the excise tax.
The bond has covered our current capital needs, so that frees up the excise tax for this purpose.

Yvonne McVay: Is the building large enough to serve the district long-term?
Answer: Yes, including parking.

Q: What are the remodeling needs?
A: There are a range of options to make the building meet our needs. We expect the cost would be in the range
of $80,000 to over $1 million.

Q: How many district office sites that are not currently at central office would be eliminated?
A: One rented facility costs $30,000. Administrative programs currently housed at Alder Creek, and the
Physical plant would also co-located, enabling easier communication and collaboration between departments.

Q: What would happen to the current building?
A: It could eventually be sold to help cover the cost. By that time, the real estate market may improve so we
could get a better price for it.

Q; How old is the Freeman building?
A: 18 years old, but it had a complete major remodel 4 years ago. There was another remodel in the last 6
months. It is 20 years newer than our current site.

Q: How long are the leases for current tenants?
A: Three to five years. All current leasers have been reliable rent payers.

Q: Would the rented office be a candidate to move to this site sooner rather than later?
A: Yes.

Julie Volpel: I think it’s a great proposal. It makes good financial sense for the district. This is one of the
better deals we’ve seen in the last few years. We should take advantage.

Dick Jones: In communicating with the public, we need to reinforce the point that the funds we are using
cannot be used for operating costs, only for capital expenses. The funds for this purchase would not come out
of general funds.

Kristin Mitchell: It make sense, given how low interest rates are now.

Heather Hobson: I think it makes fiscal sense to consolidate offices. This is a better idea than adding portables
to the current site.

Yvonne McVay: This is a great idea if it’s a long term solution. My one selfish concern as a resident of this
neighborhood is that I worry what would happen to the current property, and how that would impact the
neighborhood.

Ginny Markell: We need an administrative building that looks administrative.

Tim Mills: If we don’t make this choice, either we give up the bond funds dedicated to the administrative
building, or we invest them in a much older building. There won’t be any visible movement into the building
until three to four years from now, and by then, times could be better. If we wait, the odds of finding a price
this low, a building in this location, and an interest rate this low are slim.

Dick Jones: It is a highly visible location that will be easy for the public to find. Also, there’s more parking.
All six of the Citizen Oversight Committee members present (the most regular attendees over the past four
years) voted to advise the Board to purchase the Freeman Building.

Bond Financial Report: (see attachment)

Jim Langstraat presented an update on bond spending.

Proposed Bond Budget Allocation Adjustments/
Suggested budget surplus to return to taxpayers

See attached handouts. (2)

We will be able to return money to taxpayers. This is unprecedented.

Ginny Markell: $1 million returned to taxpayers is a good number. This helps us the next time we must ask
voters for money.

Dick Jones: This shows the Citizen Oversight Committee accomplished its goal, and promises to voters and
taxpayers were kept. $1 million to $1.5 million would be a good number.

Should the COC survey principals on their satisfaction with bond projects? The group did not reach consensus
on this. Several felt this was not needed as the principals have worked closely with the bond project team
throughout the process.

The new property was purchased at the top of the real estate boom, so prices were higher than anticipated.

Report on 10-Year Master Plan (see handout)

School districts are required to have a 10-year master plan.

A Bond final report is planned to detail a complete history of each bond project. A piece of that will be a
history of how the bond got passed. This will be information useful in future bond efforts.

Planning for COC bond report to the community

Committee members will send ideas and priorities to Leslie by December 15.

Leslie will draft a report and send it to the committee for feedback in January.

This one-page report will be part of the district’s annual report, mailed to all households.

Proposed bond closeout schedule:

Updates will be sent to COC in February and April 2011.

A final meeting & Celebration is planned in October 2011.

Tim requests that the COC make a final report to the school board next fall