By Harriet Halbig
In response to conversations at the December board meeting and Jan. 10 work session, the board was presented with detailed information on the condition of facilities, a strategy for funding improvements, a letter to stakeholders, and an amended budget for the 2022-23 school year.
Facilities capital planning
At its December meeting, the board declined to purchase additional school buses due to uncertainty in the economy. Board President Chris Taylor requested that Executive Director of Operations and Development Chris Coulter determine the condition of the district’s facilities, including the cost of regular replacement of such items as turf on playing fields. In this way funding could be prioritized.
At the Jan. 23 meeting, Coulter and Chief Business Officer Brett Ridgway reported on the results of conversations with principals and building managers at all district schools regarding the condition of their facilities. This investigation did not include Monument Academy because theirs is a separate budget. Feedback from the two high schools had not yet been received.
Improvements include such major items as roofing and paving and such minor projects as painting and replacement of carpets.
Coulter recommended spending $3 million per year to have all facilities in good condition by the 2026-27 school year.
Coulter said that during the pandemic it became impossible to get guaranteed estimates from contractors due to fluctuating oil cost and supply chain issues. At present, estimates are often only guaranteed for a week or a month or so.
Consequently, Coulter and Ridgway said that they would like to prepare purchase orders for many of the needs as soon as possible and to have assurance from the board that the purchase orders would be funded after July 1. Coulter said that $2.3 million would be required this year to begin work. They assured the board that bids would be sought from contractors known to the district.
Board Vice President Theresa Phillips asked about the 10% contingency included in the estimate.
Coulter responded that the contingency funds could be used in cases of emergency repairs and for such purposes as upgrading playgrounds and transitioning to touch-free bathrooms district-wide.
Taylor said that because the list was incomplete, the board need not vote to approve the expenditures at this time. He also referred to a board policy which stipulates that expenditures should be prioritized toward the greatest educational result. He asked that were the district to budget such a large amount to facilities, would we be sacrificing curriculum or salaries? He requested that Superintendent KC Somers look at the big picture.
Coulter said this process is part of the regular budgeting procedure and intended to make the board aware of needs so it would not be surprised later. Ridgway concurred and added that it is important to know if the board is hesitant.
When asked if this list included school buses, Coulter said it did not because buses would be funded from the transportation fund.
Strategic plan update
Somers reported that work is underway to update the district’s strategic plan to include a provision for operations and facility planning. The strategic plan is a work in progress and previously included provisions for a safe and healthy learning environment, world class education, caring for our people, fiscal responsibility, and communication and relationships with the community.
Somers said that his focus this evening was on valuing our people in response to the defeat of the mill levy override in November and concerns about compensation.
Somers said that his approach was based on compensation (regular and supplemental and benefits), professional development to include recognizing certification, calendar concerns regarding how time is allocated, program design and efficiencies, and the district’s culture regarding values and beliefs.
Taylor commented that he recalled that 10% of staff assessments were based on performance. He asked if that were still the case.
Somers responded that he has heard from staff that they do not support this. He has not discussed it with the Staff Collaboration Committee. He is not aware of a Colorado district which includes performance in its assessment process.
When asked if this was included in surveys, Somers replied that it was not.
Taylor said that some community individuals seem to be in favor of it.
Somers reported on results of an investigation into transitioning to a four-day school and work week, as requested by the board at its December meeting. He said that emphasis is on recruiting and retaining quality staff, and the Staff Collaboration Committee would meet in a few days and could discuss the matter.
Based on conversations with some staff, Somers said that a four-day schedule was not favored, although he couldn’t say whether staff would choose to work elsewhere if it were implemented.
Staff seems to be more concerned with being competitive with compensation, and compensation would not change with a four-day week.
Assistant Superintendent Amber Whetstine commented that another district in the region tried using a four-day week and there was a lot of turnover as a result. She said there are concerns among parents regarding child care and the impact on learning. Although there is not an indication of impact on achievement, there appears to be an impact on growth, she said. There is a concern that families may opt to send their children to school in another district should a four-day week be implemented.
The only change in the calendar for the 2023-24 school year is to eliminate some of the delayed starts and replace them with full days of professional development. If the four-day work week were approved, it would not go into effect until 2023-25.
Upchurch recommended that one or more members of the board should attend the Staff Collaboration Committee meetings.
Somers said that the district’s proposed pay schedule will be presented at the March board meeting.
Taylor requested that there also should be a pay schedule as it would be had the MLO passed. He said the community wants to know how the district would spend the $4 million if it were approved. This could be a way to demonstrate the need for additional funding.
Board letter to stakeholders
The Board of Education issued a letter to stakeholders in mid-January which was also published in the Tribune newspaper.
In it, the board said that there is still a need for sustainable funding for compensation. While the board continues to explore ways to cut costs without sacrificing educational excellence, the primary source of sustainable funding would be a mill levy override. Other local districts have successfully passed overrides over that past few years. The last successful one in D38 was in 1999.
Although per pupil revenue from the state is forecast to increase in the next few years, all districts would benefit equally, and therefore the gap between D38 compensation and neighboring districts would remain.
The board encouraged citizens to attend board meetings and volunteer to help educate the community.
Phillips said there have been emails from community members offering to help. Some also explained why they voted against the measure.
Upchurch commented that the letter implied that there would definitely be another ballot issue this year when that is not yet the case.
Phillips suggested scheduling some Elevate and Engage sessions with the public to improve participation.
The board approved an amended budget for the 2022-23 school year which included mention of the one-time compensation action in early January.
Policy revisions
The board approved two policy revisions. The first reversed the requirement that parents pay the tuition for concurrent enrollment classes if the student fails the class. The second changes the hierarchical nature of district committees.
Many committees are required by state or federal law. Some of these were placed as subcommittees under the Parent and Community Advisory Committee. Instead they are now independent committees.
To view the presentations from the meeting, please go to: go.boarddocs.com/co/lewispalmer/Board.nsf/vpublic.
**********
The Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education usually meets at 6 p.m. on the third Monday of the month at the district’s learning center, 146 Jefferson St. in Monument. Because the schools will be closed on Feb. 20 for Presidents Day, the board will meet on Feb. 21.
Harriet Halbig may be reached at harriethalbig@ocn.me.
Other Lewis-Palmer School District 38 Board of Education articles
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, June 16 – Board finalizes plans for HSEA structure, approves 2025-26 budget (7/3/2025)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, May 19 – Whetstine named superintendent; board receives annual committee reports (6/7/2025)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, April 22 – Board announces finalists for superintendent, approves construction and location of Home School Enrichment Academy (5/3/2025)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, March 17 – Board posts superintendent position internally, receives updates on Home School Enrichment Academy and Transitions Services (4/5/2025)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, Feb. 18 – Board recognizes achievements, hears about Arts Education and Career and Innovation Center (3/1/2025)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, Jan. 21 – Superintendent resigns; Grace Best School to be demolished (2/1/2025)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, Dec. 16 – Board learns about Information Technology Department; Career and Innovation Center update; annual mill levy certification (1/4/2025)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, Nov. 18 – Board reviews revision of district boundaries, approves lease/purchase agreement for Career and Innovation Center (12/5/2024)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, Oct. 21 – Board approves Unified Improvement Plans, selects contractor for Career and Innovation Center (11/2/2024)
- Lewis-Palmer D38 Board of Education, Sept.16 – District performance framework, bullying policy revision (10/5/2024)
Leave a Comment