September 19, 2006
Cody Holiday Inn
Senator Henry H.R. “Hank” Coe, Co-Chairman
Representative Del W. McOmie, Co-Chairman
Senator Jim Anderson
Senator John J. Hines
Senator Mike Massie
Senator Kathryn Sessions
Representative W. Patrick Goggles
Representative Debbie Hammons
Representative Alan C. Jones
Representative Mick Powers
All Committee members were present
Representative Jeff Wasserburger
Representative Elaine Harvey
Dave Nelson, School Finance Manager, Brenda
Long, School Finance Analyst, Matthew Sackett, Associate Research Analyst, Joseph
A. Rodriguez, Staff Attorney
Others Present at Meeting
Please refer to Appendix 1 to review the
Committee Sign-in Sheet
for a list of other individuals who attended the meeting.
The Committee met
for one day in
The next meeting of
the Committee will be November 8, 2006 in
Co-Chairman McOmie
called the meeting to order at 8:38 a.m.
The Committee adjourned to executive session. The
following sections summarize the Committee proceedings by topic. Please refer to Appendix 2 to review the
Committee Meeting Agenda.
Mike O’Donnell, State's
Counsel, provided the litigation update during executive session.
Director Shivler of
the SFC addressed the Committee. The SFC
is working on improving the system of school building assessment. The SFC is looking for a nationally
recognized and standardized scoring system.
The number one issue facing the SFC is the cost of school buildings. Construction costs have risen drastically in
recent years. It costs more to build in
Brenda Long of the Legislative
Service Office supplied the Committee with Appendix 3. Ms. Long discussed the 2007/2008 school
capital construction profile. After the 2006
Legislative session it was estimated that approximately 33 million dollars of
the cap con account would be unobligated at the end of the 2007/2008
biennium. Ms Long also discussed the cap con
appropriation, spending and major maintenance payments. The total cap con appropriation is around 789.5
million dollars over time. The major
maintenance payments reflected in the appendix are actual payments. The total major maintenance payments total
just over 268 million dollars over time.
Director Shivler anticipated
the needs in school construction over next two years are about 625
million. The SFC can only build about
200 million per year and realistically will need between 200 -250 million
dollars during the biennium for school construction
The SFC staff
discussed with the Committee full day kindergarten and the standards. The Committee was given Appendix 4 and
Appendix 5. The SFC by resolution, in
response to Enrolled Act 23, resolved to verify that the ADM calculations used
in the major maintenance payments included full day kindergarten. The SFC has done that. The SFC also resolved to ascertain that all
districts providing full day kindergarten had adequate space to do so. Not all schools have adequate capacity for
full day kindergarten. The short term
solutions to the capacity issue are increasing class sizes, modular classrooms,
reconfiguring space and bussing short distances. The long term solutions are adding space to
existing sites and reconfiguration of schools.
The SFC thinks that there is a need for a further in-depth utilization
study focusing on how schools are utilizing their buildings. The figures contained within the appendices
reflect the 2005/2006 ADM.
Nancy Thompson of
the SFC addressed the Committee regarding historic school buildings and
presented the Committee with Appendix 6.
The SFC conducted a study regarding historic school buildings. The initial study was to identify school
buildings that are 50 years or older.
There are 242 buildings on the SFC inventory that are 50 years or
older. Some of the buildings are storage
buildings, pump houses, teacherages and some truly historic buildings. The State Historic Preservation Office will
make recommendations to the National Registry of Historic Buildings about which
buildings should be given historic designations.
Charles Lanham of
the Cheyenne Historic Preservation Board addressed the Committee. Mr. Lanham provided the Committee with
Appendix 7. It is important to
understand that a school is not historic just because it is 50 years or
older. There are explicit standards for
what makes a building historic. One
factor is the physical integrity of the building. Another factor is whether the building was
designed by a prominent architect. State
Historical Preservation Office is trying to focus and target schools that
should be kept.
Nancy Thompson of
the SFC addressed this issue. Ms.
Thompson gave the Committee Appendix 8. Ms.
Thompson raised the issue of the different set asides and major maintenance
payments. The 2004 8% one time set aside
could be spent by the districts for enhancements with the approval of the
SFC. Any unspent money could be carried
over by the district. A 10% set aside approved
by the 2005 legislature is currently available to the districts. The SFC does not allow carry over of this
amount. The Committee suggested that this
set aside should also be carried over as well.
The intent was for the 10% to be used in the same manner as the 8%. School districts cannot build anything new
with major maintenance monies; they can only maintain that which already
exists. The Committee directed staff to
draft legislation, containing both options, to deal with the issue of the carry
over of the 10%. In regard to general
bond issues the district is responsible for determining if the bond is going to
be tax free. A district can issue
general obligation bonds for building enhancements. The districts can include a sinking fund the
interest upon which the districts can use for the maintenance of the
enhancements. By requiring a sinking
fund as part of the bond issue the State can ensure that the set aside can be
used for major maintenance in providing the basket of goods and that the
district can use the sinking fund for major maintenance of enhancements. In a bond issue situation not only will the
cost of the enhancement be known to the voters but also the true cost of
maintaining the enhancement resulting in a more educated voter. The Committee directed staff to draft
legislation that if you choose to enhance with a bond issue any new bond issue,
after July 1, 2007, must include a sinking fund for maintenance expenses.
Modified Building Assessment
System
Jim Whitaker and
Leslie Zumbrunnen of Facility Engineering Associates addressed the Committee
pertaining to building assessments. FEA
works extensively with governmental agencies doing asset management and
building condition assessments. Their
goal is to aid in the development of an objective and credible asset management
plan that will allow the SFC to assess the condition of schools statewide, prioritize
needs and capture data in robust applications.
The Committee was presented with Appendix 9 by FEA. This is the firm selected by the SFC to develop
a new assessment system.
SFC Data Systems
Nancy Thompson of
the SFC addressed the Committee. Ms.
Thompson supplied the Committee with Appendix 10. They are in the process of implementing a new
data system generated by a software company called Maximus. The software is called Facilitymax. The software is being used by several
agencies in
Major Maintenance Program Audit
Report/Update
Pam Robinson of the
Department of Audit gave the report to the Committee. Ms. Robinson also gave the Committee Appendix
11. She performed the audit of the capital
construction program and on major maintenance payments. Ms. Robinson discussed the reason for the
audit and the procedures used in conducting the audits. Overall the audit determined that the capital
construction program was running efficiently.
There were a couple of recommendations made to the agency such as
putting more of their processes in a policy and procedures manual and streamlining
the process to make their payments on a more timely basis. Ms. Robinson is currently working on the
major maintenance audit. The main task
was to determine if the formulas used by the SFC comply with statute, which
they do. The only real finding they have
so far is that there does not seem to be a clear understanding of what is or is
not major maintenance. The Committee
felt like this issue could be handled by the SFC through rule and regulation.
SFC Budget Matters
Teresa Kunkel of the
SFC addressed the Committee regarding this issue. The SFC is going to make a supplemental
budget request. Ms. Kunkel referred the
Committee back to Appendix 5. The SFC is
going to request two additional positions, one position being an administrative
position and the other being a project manager position. The SFC wants to have project managers strategically
located across the state. The SFC is
going to request a replenishment of the inflationary funds spent this year. The
SFC is also going to request money to address unanticipated projects.
Lauri Cadrich of the
City of
Representative
Harvey addressed the Committee regarding constituent issues with major
maintenance and construction items in her school district. Many of her constituent concerns are in regard
to ongoing construction while the elementary school is in session. At the elementary school playground equipment
is in disrepair and concrete around the school is torn up. A power pole was dropped during recess
blocking the entrance to the playground forcing students and parents to walk
several blocks for ingress and egress to the facility. Representative Harvey urged the Committee to
look at the timing of major maintenance and construction activities and wants the
process implemented by the SFC refined so no other community has to go through
what Lovell has.
Senator Massie addressed
the Committee regarding pre schools, childcare facilities and empty school
buildings. The number one problem is
finding suitable buildings in which to provide early childhood services. Senator Massie would like to find a way for
the programs to be housed in empty school facilities. Specifically requests that when space is
surplus the district have the option of putting pre-schools and child care
facilities in the excess space and allowing districts to continue to receive
maintenance payments but not counting against the district allocation. The Committee agreed to direct draft
legislation be prepared to deal with the issue to look at during the next
meeting.
The next meeting
date will be announced.
There being no
further business, Co-Chairman Coe adjourned the meeting at 3:50 p.m.
Respectfully
submitted,
Senator Coe,
Co-Chairman