|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
The Pleasanton school board is set to debate the district’s facilities needs, polling results on a possible new bond measure and supplementary retiring planning for employee turnover during a busy special meeting Thursday.
The trustees will start by deciding whether to enter into a Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) supplementary retirement plan with the Association of Pleasanton Teachers.
The conversation will focus on separation incentives, as employee retirements and resignations can help districts and employees to achieve fiscal savings, honor employees and facilitate operational efficiencies, according to Pleasanton Unified School District staff.
The district experiences savings from normal attrition meaning the financial benefits from employee retirements, resignations and other occurrences that result in new hires with a lower compensation cost, staff said.
Employees who are eligible for retirement are at the top end of the salary schedule and new employees generally are at or near the beginning of the salary schedule resulting in potential savings for the district. With separation incentives, the resulting salary differential covers the costs of the plan, staff said.
The administration recommends the trustees approve or decline participation in the PARS supplementary plan for certificated non-management, certificated management, classified non-management and classified management employees.
A financial analysis and recommendation will be provided and uploaded at least 24 hours prior to the meeting and the staff will need time to complete the financial analysis and determine if savings metrics can be achieved, officials said. The goal is to promote a professional culture that values collaboration and supports efforts to recruit, develop and retain a diverse and highly qualified workforce.
The special school board meeting is scheduled to start at 5:30 p.m. Thursday (May 19). Read the full agenda here.
In other business
* Next, the trustees will hold a presentation and discussion in a workshop about updating the Facilities Master Plan that provides direction to the district about its present and future facilities.
The district entered into an agreement with LPA Architects in late 2021 to work on a comprehensive update to the master plan. Since then, many meetings have been held with the Facilities Master Plan Committee, the Facilities Advisory Committee, site administrators and other groups.
Additionally, numerous surveys have been conducted with principals, students, staff, teachers and the public to conduct critical research into the needs of PUSD’s facilities, staff said. Site evaluations have been completed to assess all the existing facilities conditions at PUSD.
At the meeting the staff and LPA will provide the board with a Facilities Master Plan process review, website update, program cost estimate, the next steps to complete the plan and will include the board in a prioritization activity. The Facilities Master Plan update process is estimated to incorporate approximately $983 million in project needs.
The prioritization activity will help align board priorities for facility improvements with the input from district and community stakeholders to develop a project list for future funding.
Together with the bond consulting firm, architect, staff and the board’s feedback at the meeting, a project list will also be developed to align with the amount of a future bond measure.
The administration recommends receiving feedback and providing input on the various components of the presentation. Coordinate with bond consultant for alignment of project list, update Facilities Master Plan website with current site plans, review and get feedback from advisory committee, review draft facilities prioritization list on June 9 and the final acceptance by the board on June 23.
* The board will review the results of community polling about potentially placing a new school bond measure on the November ballot.
In 2016, the voters of the PUSD passed a $270 million general obligation bond addressing facility needs, safety improvements and building modernizations to support 21st-century learning environments. The bond makes up one third of the $856 million for facilities improvements that were identified at that time.
A bond team has been assembled including an architect to develop a Facilities Master Plan, financial consultant, bond consultant and bond counsel.
This March, bond planning meetings were held to develop a strategy for determining the feasibility of a potential November 2022 bond measure.
The district is also nearing the completion of updating the Facilities Master Plan which will identify districtwide facilities needs. These needs will be prioritized to fit into the potential November bond, staff said. Some of these project types have been included in the polling, such as gyms, athletic facilities, theaters and a new educational options center school.
In total, 475 voters were polled between April 14-20 and data was collected via online and telephone interviews. The results indicated support for a future bond, although not highly desired. Initial support is essentially at the vote threshold of 55%, staff said.
The poll data showed that voters think it’s crucial that Pleasanton continues to have excellent schools even if it means raising taxes. The polling data also reveals a lack of understanding of the facility needs of the district with about 60% indicating there is great or some need, staff said.
For a successful bond, substantial community outreach on the district’s needs would be crucial, they added.
* The board will consider an agreement for Phase 2 bond consulting services with Clifford Moss. This item follows a prior board agenda item regarding polling results. If the trustees agree to proceed in pursuing a November 2022 bond measure, then this agenda item is presented for consideration.
* Next is a possible action on agreement with Westside Landscape and Concrete Inc. for drop-off landscape at Foothill High School. As part of an ongoing improvement for Foothill, the district entered into an agreement with Gates and Associates to design and improve the landscape along the drop-off zone.
The district received five bids, but the lowest bidder Sierra Services officially withdrew their bid on May 2 due to a clerical error, district staff said. The next low bidder was Westside Landscape and Concrete Inc. in the amount of $135,455.
* The trustees will discuss the purchase of Apple iMacs for digital media labs at Amador Valley and Foothill high schools.
The digital media labs were equipped with iMacs in 2013 and have not been replaced or upgraded since, staff said. The replacement cost for each lab will be $84,227.31. Apple offers a leasing option to split the total cost into five annual payments. A guarantee buy-back option is available in the last year of the lease plan, allowing the district to sell the devices back to Apple for purchase credit on future replacement.
Amador Valley and Foothill will cover the first payment through the site or PTA funds, and the district will cover the remaining payments.
* They will consider action to sunshine the initial proposal for 2022-2023 collective bargaining agreement with the California School Employees Association.
* The board will consider an employment agreement with a new assistant superintendent of teaching and learning, with a base annual salary of $238,312. The draft contract is available, but it does not identify who the final candidate is.
Not again with placing a new school bond measure on the November ballot. The last one failed and our economic situation was in a much better place. Why does the PUSD love spending our money on consulting services? I thought a good portion of our property taxes funded the PUSD, plus any previous passed school bonds, plus financial help from the State and Feds.
Inflation, Crime, School Choice, Immigration, Parent’s Rights. These are issues that Sri “Steve” Iyer will address. Meet him tonight in Pleasanton at Amador Recreation Center, 4433 Black Ave at 6:00pm.
Details here–> https://events.r20.constantcontact.com/register/eventReg?oeidk=a07ej7ae3of8bb8e410
I read this piece, and frankly had to put my iPad down and ‘mind-wander’ or ‘free-think’ about what I just digested. We have been witness to schools, school boards, and Teacher’s Unions rub the tax payer’s nose in ‘me, me, me,’ with no noticeable product since December 2019. We lost three generations to experimental teaching they knew would not benefit the students except the Teachers’s Union, and power to the political faction that profits from their support.
I no longer have kids or grandchildren in the Public School system (thank you God), but my last adult child, if and when they have children, I would advise them to be part of the million plus parents in this country pulling their kids out. There are much better and safer alternatives. How dare these government educators (whatever that means) continually go back to our pockets and fleece us again. It’s like going to a restaurant time and time again, but getting the same bad meal. Furthermore, what is this article addressing as broached by the flowery, hidden, obscure wording regarding retirements? Did anyone review this article before publishing? Or is it just to fly UAP over the public? Basically, they are going to give teachers they would love to retire incentives to leave so they don’t hang around.
And don’t get me started on, “The board will consider an employment agreement with a new assistant superintendent of teaching and learning, with a base annual salary of $238,312.” Wow, that’s a lot of money for a title that produces what?
There is so much to ‘deep dive’ on this article, but I refuse to lose IQ points in addressing it. Whatever I can vote against that is put on the ballot I will.