4J Intranet Site Map
Schools of the Future Home Page : Facilities

February 28 Minutes: Facilities

Time: 7:00 - 8:30  pm
Location: Ed Center Mozart Room
Present: David Brewer, Kathy Ging, Patricia Hansen, Bill Hirsh, Nadine Jackson, Donna Libby, Stan Manley, Art Paz, Tony Reyneke, Ron Sanetel, Tod Schneider, Beverly Sept, Dennis Urso, Jeannie Webb, Valerie Wedel, and Ellen Wojahn.
Absent: Patrick Bayes, Jeff Faust, Jack Harris, Nori Hemphill, William McConochie, Christopher Ramey, and Michael Roberts.
Notetaker: Pat Bonney
Time Topic Presenter
.

Review Agenda

Jeanne Webb convened the meeting by reviewing the agenda and introducing Mary Bauer, a guest who wished to speak to the Task Group

Agenda Packet Contents: 

  • Agenda
  • February 21st meeting minutes

    • Draft – Topic Headings & Interests for Sharing with Schools of the Future Committee
 Jeannie – 5 min.

Public Comment

Mary Bauer reported that she is a member of a group called the Work Place Environment Committee which has been meeting for several years.  This Committee includes folks from 4J’s Facilities & Risk Management Departments as well as individuals both within 4J and the community who have concerns about environmental quality.  There are many studies out now that show environmental links to the increasing numbers of children who have health problems such as asthma, autism, ADD, memory difficulties, etc.  She wanted the Task Group to know there is an abundance of information available on the various aspects of environmental quality and her group has collected quite a lot of data.  She wondered how much the Facilities Task Group had taken environmental quality into consideration in its deliberations and recommendations.  She asked how our two groups might share and benefit from each other’s work.   Her Committee is trying to identify gaps that exist and let people know there is a process going on and to make use of the information it has collected.  They have an overview handout of information on what they are all about.

Much discussion ensued.

Discussion Points/Questions:
  • Facilities Mgt. can make recommendations in line with environmental quality concerns, but cannot dictate final decision. For example, Facilities can recommend installing tile on floors as opposed to carpet.  (Tile is more economical.  It’s easier to keep clean and doesn’t need replaced as often.)  But, teachers and administrators often still insist on carpeting even though it can’t be vacuumed every day due to lack of custodial time.  Consequently, in carpeted rooms children are exposed to more dust, dirt, mold, etc. 
  • Creating a district-wide policy would be very helpful, but it would be politically difficult because of site based decision making/school culture.  A lot of education would need to happen in order to develop good environmental quality policies.
  • Have building audits annually.  Share information with & develop policy that relates to each stakeholder group. 
  • Part of the Facilities Task Group’s issue is what do we do with the schools we have now?  Do we renovate and still have poor buildings or build new?  Some things just can’t be fixed or changed in old buildings.  Others can only be partially fixed so older buildings generally cost more to run/maintain. 
  • Facilities Mgt. has compiled data showing how cost efficient each school building is to run/maintain.  Gilham Elem. which is 2/3 new is the most cost efficient building in 4J.
  • It’s important to consider the impact of what we’re doing here.  The community needs to know how inadequate and obsolete our school buildings really are healthwise, instructionally, mechanically, etc.  They all need to be replaced.  The community is being told that the City of Eugene has to replace a 35 year old public building because it’s obsolete.  All of our school buildings are older than that,  some a lot older.  The public needs to know of the School District’s needs, too, so they can make a choice of what they wish to fund. 
  • Environmental information needs to be conveyed to the public so we can change the culture, e.g. convince teachers classrooms should not be carpeted and why.
Nadine Jackson reported that the art students at Cal Young are planning a presentation of school buildings they have designed.  It would be most helpful if some folks from this task group could attend.  We wanted kids to be involved in the schools of the future process and these students have done that and will be sharing their school design ideas in a presentation on Friday, March 10 in Room 2 at Cal Young at 10:30 a.m.  Please let Nadine know if you can attend.		 Jeannie – 30 min

Facilities Task Group - Business Items

Two handouts were passed out.  One from Tony Reyneke related to the School Funding Section and one from Bill Hirsh also related to the Funding Section.  (Tony had to leave early to attend the 4J Budget Committee meeting.)

Bill included in his handout a memo from Evie Matthews thanking the Task Groups for all their hard work and sharing additional information regarding process.  Bill also shared a memo from Ron Sanetel regarding possibilities related to the replacement of elementary schools with new, efficient buildings and the potential cost savings that would result.

 Bill - 5 min.

Task Group Work Time 

  • Review summary of interests & category topics
  • Determine next steps for task group report
Bill reviewed his attempt to draft the Funding Section.  The Task Group made a couple of suggestions for changes but basically approved the contents.  On the first page under 2.1, to find the average age of buildings, identify the oldest and youngest and average the rest to figure median age.  On page two, under Replacement of Schools...., in #1 eliminate the words “on a school for school basis”.

Bill reported that the District is expecting a budget shortfall of $5 million dollars next year and must reduce spending of this year’s budget by $1million.  It’s important that we do our advocacy now to make the public aware of our needs.  They are hearing about the need to replace City Hall because it’s obsolete at 35 years of age.  What about schools? 

Art Paz asked which schools are worst?  Bill responded that Facilities Mgt. has already studied and identified the 10 worst buildings.  Bill will bring that information to the writing group meeting on Thursday, March 2nd. 

The remainder of the meeting was spent fine tuning Section III. School Funding Priorities, and Section IV. School Safety & Security.  Those sections are attached as reworked by the group.  The Writing/Editing Group will take it from here and share their work via email so the rest of the group can offer final suggestions, kudos, etc.

 David/Jeannie – 45 min.)

Debrief/Closure

Jeannie Webb suggested having an ending meeting for the whole group to bring closure after the final report is all done and turned in.  It was decided to meet at 4:30 p.m. upstairs at China Delight on Friday March 10th.  The whole Facilities Task Group is welcome. 		 Jeannie – 5 min.

Next Meeting (Editor Group)

Only the Writing/Editing Group will meet on Thursday, March 2nd in the Mozart Room at 5:30-7:30 p.m.  Dinner will be provided.  Those expected to attend this meeting are: Ellen Wojahn, Bill Hirsh, Ron Sanetel, Art Paz, Jeff Faust, Tony Reyneke, and David Brewer. 
Meeting adjourned 8:35 p.m.

Facilities Task Group Report DRAFT (2/28/00)

Section III  School Funding Priorities

(This section to be combined and coordinated with school funding drafts provided by Bill Hirsh and Tony Reyneke.) 
 
Preamble
Schools need a system with secure adequate funding.
 
Funding
  • Operational considerations - policy/project investment.
  • Two high schools @ 40 million each = 80 million.
  • Four middle schools @ 15 million each = 60 million.
  • Eight elementary schools @ 7.5 million each = 60 million.
  • Total = 200 million.
  • Identify oldest & youngest schools and average the rest to figure the median age.
Design Considerations
  • Consider future replacement cycle.
  • Build schools to a 75 year life cycle.
  • New schools are more cost effective than remodel (over a 50 year period).
  • Close/consolidate some schools.
  • Determine whether the proposed repairs are likely to result in a building that will meet District goals.
Summary/Closing
(To be drafted.)

Section IV School Safety & Security

Preamble
(The italicized portions need to be reworked and elaborated/clarified.)
Our schools must be safe havens.  They must also be places that create hope, and set a tone that is positive and welcoming to all. Safety must be a top priority in the design and maintenance of the school campus.  All security/technological improvements must mitigate the problem(s) they are designed to address in a cost effective and non-threatening manner.  Further, school safety must incorporate the entire day of a student, from the time they leave home until they return.
Design Considerations
  • Security/technological improvements basic concepts of “Crime Prevention through Environmental Design” (CPTED).
    • natural surveillance
    • natural access control
    • territoriality
    • special emphasis on office entry as in a “guardian” role
    •  Card-key systems.
    • Operational considerations - dark campus.
    • Cost effective and labor efficient security measures incorporated into design.
    • Design must not turn schools into prisons.
      • design should create school climate that boosts confidence
Summary/Closing
(To be drafted)
Special Note:  Mailserv list for Facilities Task Group – SFCFACIL
< Return to Facilities > 

4J Home Page| Schools of the Future | Site Map | Search



Please send comments or questions to the 4J Web Team.
200 North Monroe Street - Eugene, Oregon, 97402 Phone: 541-687-3123
Eugene School District 4J