Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
November 12, 2013
9913
l. PRELIMINARY
Shepherd called the November 12, 2013, meeting to order at 6:00 p.m.
Roll Call The following members were present:
JulieMarie Shepherd, president Cathy Wildman, vice president Jane Barber, secretary Dan Jorgensen, treasurer Jeanette Carmany, director Matthew Cook, director Mary W. Lewis, director
Also meeting with the Board of Education were:
D. Rico Munn, superintendent of schools Brandon Eyre, district legal counsel Damon Smith, chief personnel officer John Youngquist, chief academic officer Lisa Escarcega, chief accountability and research Adrienne Bradshaw, chief financial officer Tonia Norman, assistant to Board of Education
Pledge of Allegiance/Welcome to Visitors
Shepherd led the Board and audience in the pledge to the flag. She then welcomed visitors to the meeting.
Approval of Agenda
The November 12, 2013, agenda was approved as written.
Approval of Minutes
The minutes of the regular meeting of the Board of Education held on October 15, 2013, were approved as written.
Student Performance
Hinkley High School students, under the direction of Marie Hayden, performed a selection from their upcoming production of “Big River.”
Recognizing Excellence
Munn expressed that it is more essential than ever that we give our students the tools they need to be successful later in life. This year, Aurora Public Schools will again join public school districts throughout the country to celebrate American Education Week, November 18 through November 23. This year’s theme, “Great Public Schools - A Basic Right and Our Responsibility,” reminds us of the importance education plays in society. Please take some time to recognize your fellow coworkers and community
November 12, 2013
9914
members, including teachers, support staff and parents, for their commitment to ensuring that our students are leaders of the future. Wildman congratulated Board of Education Treasurer Dan Jorgensen on behalf of the Board and Leadership Team for earning his doctoral degree in Educational Policy and Administration from the University of Denver.
Opportunity for Audience
Classified Employees Council member Kimberly Ausman recognized and thanked outgoing Board members, Jane Barber, Jeanette Carmany and Matt Cook, on behalf of the Classified Employees Council. You all will be missed!
II. INFORMATIONAL REPORTS Board of Education Report
Board of Education Election Shepherd shared that election results for four open board seats have not yet been finalized. Election results are expected to be certified in Adams County on November 19 and Arapahoe County on November 22. Current Board members will remain seated until results are finalized. Munn recognized Board candidates who were present in the audience. He thanked them for attending the meeting and staying engaged with current issues. Leadership Team Report
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2013 Adrienne Bradshaw, chief financial officer; Jodie Cates, senior auditor, BKD, LLP; Hilary Robinson, CPA, BKD, LLP; and Mary Temple, director of finance, provided an overview of the required audit of the district’s eleven funds and seven component units, including the APS Education Foundation, Aurora Academy Charter School, AXL Charter School, Global Village Academy, Lotus School for Excellence, New America School (Aurora), and the Vanguard Classical School. The accounting firm BKD, LLP, performed the district’s audit and audits for three component units for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013. Four of the component units were audited by firms other than BKD, LLP. The APS Education Foundation ended the year with positive new assets and received an unqualified or clean opinion. Five district charter schools ended the year with positive net assets; one district charter school ended the year with negative net assets. The Board was presented with BKD’s required communication to those charged with governance, which includes BKD’s management letter and the district’s response to the letter; the single audit report of the district’s federal grants; the Accreditation Report in accordance with C.R.S. 22-11-104; and the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report. Cates highlighted specific areas in the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report for the Board to review, including the letter of transmittal; management’s discussion and analysis; government-wide financial statements; fund financial
November 12, 2013
9915
statements; required supplemental information; schedule of revenues; expenditures and changes in fund balance budget and actual; and the statistical section. The district was issued an unmodified opinion for financial statements and three component units for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013. Separate independent auditor results were issued for each of the four component units. Munn noted that BKD has prepared his personal taxes for the last couple of years. Bradshaw shared that the Comprehensive Annual Financial Report and the Accreditation Report will be included on the consent agenda for action on November 19. She pointed out two compliance exceptions at district charter schools, including incomplete financial transparency websites at four charter schools, which have or will be corrected, and an unassigned deficit fund balance of $352,000 at AXL Charter School. The finance office is working with AXL staff to monitor the financial condition. Temple acknowledged Print Services Manager Brenda Darveau, the print services team and the BKD auditing staff. She also acknowledged district accounting staff who were present in the audience, including Lisa Bollers, Mellissa Haakinson, Theresa Larson, Louise Tipton, Tom McNish; and Internal Auditor Peter Doan. Policy BCB – Board Member Conflict of Interest District Legal Counsel Brandon Eyre provided an overview of revisions to Policy BCB, Board Member Conflict of Interest, to better correspond with Colorado Department of Education regulations. Wildman requested that the following sentence be stricken from Policy BCB: “In addition, the Board shall not hire the spouse of any of its members as an employee of the district nor allow a spouse of a newly elected member to remain as an employee of the district.” Barber moved and Jorgensen seconded to table the discussion related to Policy BCB, Board Member Conflict of Interest, until the new Board is seated. Roll Call: Barber, Carmany, Cook, Jorgensen, Lewis, Shepherd, Wildman #8277 Disapproved on a vote of 5-2 Barber and Jorgensen voted to table the discussion related to Policy BCB, Board Member Conflict of Interest, until the new Board is seated. Eyre will revise the policy and include it for action on the December 3 consent agenda. A copy of the proposed changes to Policy BCB, Board Member Conflict of Interest, is appended to the November 12 minutes. Policy DJB – Purchasing Guidelines Bradshaw provided an overview of proposed revisions to Policy DJB and DJB-R, Purchasing Guidelines. She shared that Board approval is required on purchases exceeding $750,000. She also noted that district staff will now utilize
November 12, 2013
9916
either a purchase request or a p-card as payment options. Site checks are being phased out and will end with the implementation of Oracle R-12 in February or March of 2014. This item will be included on the consent agenda for action on December 3. A copy of the proposed changes to Policy DJB and DJB-R, Purchasing Guidelines, is appended to the November 12 minutes. APS Enrollment vs. Capacity Challenges 2014 and Beyond Anthony Sturges, chief operating officer; Amy Spatz, director of construction management and support; and Josh Hensley, planning coordinator, provided a summary of current and completed bond projects as a result of savings from the 2008 bond program; current facility challenges based on enrollment growth at district elementary and P-8 schools; future enrollment trends and capacity challenges based on expected growth over the next three years at schools near the E-470 corridor; financial challenges and options to address enrollment and capacity challenges; and the reallocation of a portion of bond funds designated for a kitchen/cafeteria addition at Mrachek Middle School. A number of current and future options to address growth and capacity challenges were highlighted, including purchasing additional mobile classrooms at overcrowded school sites; adding eight-classroom wet mobiles at Murphy Creek and Aurora Frontier P-8; exploring construction of a new mid-size P-8 school on the Traditions site east of Vista PEAK P-8; exploring construction of a core P-8 school on the Traditions site with three eight-classroom mobiles; exploring construction of a new mid-or-large sized P-8 school on the APS Community Campus off of Airport Blvd utilizing Certificates of Participation (COP) dollars as a possible funding option; purchasing or remodeling existing buildings in the Aurora area to school sites; and converting some schools to year-round schedules. Bradshaw expressed that new school construction and renovations have been funded utilizing the district’s general obligation bond program. She noted that the recession has limited the district’s ability to issue new bonds, but emphasized that bonds sold since 2002 have been well within the bond debt capacity. She reviewed funding options for the design and construction of a new mid-or-large-sized P-8 school utilizing COP financing, which does not require a bond capacity or voter approval as it is considered a lease purchase arrangement. She noted that a trustee would be required if the district elected to utilize COP financing. Sturges highlighted the following recommendations to address enrollment and capacity challenges:
Design, construct and open a large P-8 school on the APS Community Campus by August 2015 utilizing COP financing.
Transfer approximately $2.2 million of remaining bond savings to a mobile account to address growth challenges through 2016.
Reallocate approximately $2.4 million that was originally approved for the Mrachek Middle School kitchen/cafeteria addition and work with stakeholders to hire an architect to design a new school.
Purchase two eight-classroom wet mobiles for Mrachek and relocate seven existing mobiles to other overcrowded school sites.
Pending Board approval of the first three recommendations, an attendance area review committee would be convened to review and recommend boundary adjustments for a new large P-8 school on the APS
November 12, 2013
9917
Community Campus. Jorgensen requested that the Board be provided with information that outlines how potential boundary changes and a possible year-round school schedule might impact student achievement. Youngquist will provide information to the Board. Lewis voiced concerns about the number of kids being bused to Murphy Creek P-8. Cook asked for clarification regarding the trustee selection process if the district elects to utilize COP financing. Bradshaw shared that the district would appoint a trustee and suggested utilizing U.S. Bank as the possible trustee. Cook noted that utilizing COP financing might limit future Boards’ abilities to providing wage increases and other benefits for employees in the event of another recession. Lewis is looking forward to hearing additional information related to COP financing. A series of district and community outreach meetings will be held with interested stakeholders to review enrollment and capacity challenges, options and recommendations. This item will be presented as information on the December 3 Board agenda and included for action on the December 17 consent agenda. A copy of the APS Enrollment vs. Capacity Challenges 2014 and Beyond report is appended to the November 12 Board minutes.
III. CONSENT AGENDA
Wildman moved and Barber seconded to approve the consent agenda and approve the following items as presented:
Application for Committee Appointment, District Accountability Advisory Committee, Laura Johnson
Policy DFA/DFAA, Revenues from Investments/Use of Surplus Funds
Expenditures Summary and Financial Report as of September 30, 2013
Personnel Smith congratulated the eight retirees listed on the November 12 consent agenda for all their years of service to the district:
Roll Call: Barber, Carmany, Cook, Jorgensen, Lewis, Shepherd, Wildman #8278 Approved on a vote of 7-0
IV. BOARD WORK Ends Conversation and Open Dialogue
Policy Perception Checklist Did the Board receive information at tonight’s meeting that requires a policy change?
November 12, 2013
9918
The Board will be provided with revisions to Policy BCB, Board Member Conflict of Interest, on December 3. Did the Board receive information at tonight’s meeting that requires additional information or monitoring? Information requiring additional monitoring will be provided to the Board. Open Dialogue
Board Handbook The Board requested that review of the handbook be tabled until the new Board is sworn in. Outgoing Board members will be provided a copy of the revised handbook for review. Lewis requested that additional information be provided to sites regarding available free resources for students and staff at the Resiliency Center in Hoffman Heights. Barber thanked staff for the beautiful artwork adorning the walls of the boardroom.
Board Self-Monitoring
Shepherd noted that tonight’s meeting covered a lot of information. She appreciated how everyone stayed alert and engaged. She shared that good questions were asked by all and was most appreciative of Jorgensen’s request for information related to the impact that potential boundary changes and year-round scheduling might have on student achievement. She shared that the entire conversation around capacity and enrollment challenges speaks to the Board’s job. Shepherd thanked staff for providing information to the Board.
V. CONCLUDING ITEMS
Next meeting date The next meeting of the Board of Education will be held electronically on November 19, 2013, at 6:00 p.m.
Adjournment The regular meeting of the Board of Education adjourned at 8:53 p.m. _________________________
President
ATTEST _________________________ Secretary
AURORA PUBLIC SCHOOLS APS Code: BCB
Adopted July 1983
Revised June 2003
Revised October 2007
Revised August 2013
BOARD MEMBER CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Page 1 of 3
Public office is a trust created in the interest of the common good and for the benefit of the people. A
conflict of interest can arise when a public officer is unable to devote himself with complete loyalty
and singleness of purpose to the general public interest.
It is the intent of this policy to protect the public trust placed in directors of this School District. For
purposes of this policy the Board declares that a conflict of interest is a personal, pecuniary interest
that is immediate, definite and demonstrable and which is or may be in conflict with the public
interest.
A Board member who has a personal or private interest in a matter proposed or pending before the
Board shall disclose such interest to the Board, shall not vote on it and shall not attempt to influence
the decisions of other Board members in voting on the matter.
However, if a Board member has complied with statutory disclosure requirements by notifying the
secretary of state of his interest in the matter, he may vote if his participation is necessary to obtain a
quorum or otherwise enable the Board to act. If a member votes under these circumstances, he shall
state for the record the fact of the potential conflict of interest and summarize its nature.
The written disclosure to the secretary of state shall list (as applicable) the amount of the member's
financial interest, the purpose and duration of any services rendered, compensation received for
services or such other information necessary to describe the interest.
The Board shall not enter into any contract with any of its members or with a firm or corporation in
which a member has a financial interest unless one or more of the situations listed 1-5 below apply:
1. The contract is awarded to the lowest responsible bidder based on competitive bidding
procedures.
2. The merchandise is sold to the highest bidder at a public auction.
3. The transaction involves investing or depositing money in a financial institution which is in the
business of loaning money or receiving money.
AURORA PUBLIC SCHOOLS APS Code: BCB
Adopted July 1983
Revised June 2003
Revised October 2007
Revised August 2013
BOARD MEMBER CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Page 2 of 3
4. If, because of geographic restrictions, the District could not otherwise reasonably afford the
contract because the additional cost to the District would be greater than 10 percent of the
contract with the interested member or if the contract is for services that must be performed
within a limited time period and no other contractor can perform the services.
5. If the contract is one in which the Board member has disclosed a personal interest and is one
on which he has not voted or has voted as allowed in state law following disclosure to the
secretary of state and to the Board.
Except as described above, a Board member shall not be a purchaser at any sale or a vendor for any
purchase made by the District.
The Board shall not hire any of its members as an employee of the District nor allow a newly elected
member to remain as an employee of the District. In addition, the Board shall not hire the spouse of
any of its members as an employee of the District nor allow a spouse of a newly elected member to
remain as an employee of the District. The Board shall not approve of any compensation for a
member for services rendered to the District except for services rendered to the Board as provided by
law. Members may be reimbursed for authorized expenses in carrying out Board duties as provided
by law.
This policy shall not apply to any employee who is employed prior to July 1, 1992, or to any Board
member who is seated prior to July 1, 1992. It shall apply after July 1, 1992, to any employee who
has left the employ of the District after July 1, 1992 and later is reemployed by the District and to any
Board member who is elected or re-elected to the Board after July 1, 1992.
A member of the Board may request an advisory opinion from the secretary of state concerning issues
relating to his conduct and potential conflict of interest.
A copy of this policy will be filed with the Colorado Department of Education according to the
provisions of Colorado statute. Following acknowledgement of receipt of the copy by the
department, the Board shall be exempt from the provisions of C.R.S. 18-8-308(1) and (2). A copy of
the Department of Education's acknowledgement will be attached to this policy file as an exhibit to be
identified as file BCB-E.
AURORA PUBLIC SCHOOLS APS Code: BCB
Adopted July 1983
Revised June 2003
Revised October 2007
Revised August 2013
BOARD MEMBER CONFLICT OF INTEREST
Page 3 of 3
LEGAL REFS.: Colorado Constitution, Article X, Section 13
C.R.S. 18-8-308
C.R.S. 22-32-104 (3)
C.R.S. 22-32-108 (6)
C.R.S. 22-32-109 (1) (y)
C.R.S. 24-18-109 through 24-18-111
C.R.S. 24-18-201
C.R.S. 24-18-202
CROSS REF.: BEDF, Voting Method
Proposed Changes to
DJB and DJB-R
Purchasing Guidelines
Board of Education
November 12, 2013
11/12/2013 1
Proposed Changes to
Purchasing Guidelines
Total purchase price
exceeding $750,000
BOE Approval, executed
by superintendent or
designee
Authorization requirements for purchases totaling:
Division Chief
Approval
Total purchase up to $25,000
Principal, Director,
Program Manager, or
Designee Approval
Total purchase over $25,000
Excludes insurance and
approved construction projects.
11/12/2013 2
Proposed Changes to
Purchasing Guidelines
(1) Exceptions made for certain purchases such as conferences, speakers, postage, legal fees, insurance,
utilities. See regulation for more information.
Total purchase up to $2,500 Total purchase over $2,500Total purchase price
exceeding $750,000
Purchase Order (1)BOE Approval, executed
by purchase order or
contract
Purchasing Card
(P-Card)
Recommended method of purchase:
11/12/2013 3
New guidelines for:
– Sole source purchases
– Competitive purchases
– Specific brand name purchases
– Emergency purchases
– Unauthorized purchases
Proposed Changes to
Purchasing Guidelines
11/12/2013 4
Proposed Changes to
Solicitation Guidelines
Guidelines for bid processesLess than $5,000 $5,000 to $50,000 Greater than $50,000
Competitive process Informal procurement
processes
Formal bid/proposal
requirednot required
Purchasing Office will use the formalized process for lesser dollar amounts when in
best interest of the district.
11/12/2013 5
Proposed Changes to
Solicitation Guidelines
Public works contracts exceeding $500,000
– Requires 80% Colorado work force
– Resident bidder reciprocity
– Does not apply to federally-funded projects
– Mandated by HB 13-1292
11/12/2013 6
Proposed Changes to
Procurement Guidelines
• Sites will have choice of two methods of payment: – Purchase requests
– P-cards
• Site checks will be eliminated in two phases – Site check requests will end when Oracle R-12 is
implemented in February/March 2014
– Employee reimbursements will be gradually phased out • ER will occur on monthly paycheck
11/12/2013 7
• Revised purchasing and solicitation guidelines
– Will improve internal controls
– Are intended to save money
– Will be implemented along with Oracle R-12
– Will bring our policy into line with state law
– Intended to simplify school procurement procedures
• Opportunity for questions or concerns
Conclusion Proposed Changes to Purchasing Guidelines
11/12/2013 8
APS Enrollment vs. Capacity
Challenges
2014 and Beyond
11/7/2013
DIVISION OF SUPPORT SERVICES Our job is to work with stakeholders groups to create, maintain and
support safe and highly functional school and work environments
that accelerate learning for every APS student every day
Goal 3 of Vista 2015: Construct and maintain facilities that
support 21st Century learning
Objective 1: Anticipate and prepare for projected community
growth and changes in student enrollment
11/7/2013 2
PURPOSE OF THE PRESENTATION
Provide a status update on the 2008 Bond Program
Review enrollment trends and explain why APS’ growing enrollment is projected to create facility challenges due to overcrowded schools over the next three years
Options to address overcrowded schools with a focus on schools east of Tower Road
Financial challenges and options to address enrollment growth
Explain how reallocating a portion of Mrachek Middle School’s bond dollars will benefit Mrachek and provide immediate assistance to other overcrowded schools
11/7/2013 3
Completed Projects, $158,923,032, 74%
Projects Under Construction, $8,849,000,
4%
Projects Under Design, $5,095,606, 2%
Projects Not Yet Started, $10,994,162, 5%
IT Projects Completed, $14,603,000, 7%
IT Projects in Progress $2,632,000, 1%
IT Projects Not Yet Started, $2,165,000, 1% Construction Program
Administration, $5,777,250, 3%
Contingency, $5,210,950, 3%
2009 to 2014 Bond Program Status August 15, 2013
11/7/2013 4
2008 Bond
Project Summary –
Completed Projects
New Buildings (Completed) Renovations and Repairs (Completed)
Vista PEAK High School $45,250,000 Aurora Central HS, Addn., Repairs, Renewal $3,650,000
Aurora Hills MS Replacement School $24,207,000 Hinkley HS, Roof, Pool Bldg Rprs, Renewal $3,305,000
Vista PEAK P-8 School $20,500,000 Columbia MS HVAC, Mech & Renewal $2,117,000
CDC Meadowood $4,500,000 Side Creek ES, HVAC, Repairs & Renewal $2,081,500
Vista PEAK Campus Infrastructure $4,375,000 Clyde Miller ES, HVAC Repairs $2,000,000
Rangeview HS Kitchen & Renewal $1,830,000
Whole Building Remodels (Completed) Side Creek ES, Two CR Addition, Roof Repairs $1,750,000
Tollgate ES, Whole Remodel $8,200,000 Yale ES, HVAC & Roof Repairs $1,325,000
Elkhart ES Whole Remodel $7,884,000 Roof Repairs at South MS $1,197,900
Altura ES, Whole Remodel $6,611,500 Kenton ES. Two Classroom Addition $950,000
Lansing ES, Whole Remodel $5,643,000 Laredo ES Gym Addn. & Renewal $921,000
Gateway HS, Flooring Repairs & Renewal $900,000
Information Technology Projects Gateway HS Roof Repairs $888,000
Completed Projects $14,504,453 Va. Court ES, 2 CR Addition, Renewal $862,500
Wheeling ES Gym Addn. & Renewal $859,500
Schools with Building Renewal Only Fuel Tank Replacements $790,000
Completed Projects
$2,665,000
Facilities Compound Yard Expansion $766,500
ESC 4, Repairs & Renewal $422,000
Facilities Snow Ice Melt Storage Facility $300,000
ESC 1, Windows & Renewal $300,000
11/7/2013 5
2008 Bond
Project Summary – Projects in
Progress or Not Yet Started
11/7/2013 6
District-wide Projects (Still in progress) Remaining Balance
HVAC Control Upgrades $912,000
Prox Card Entry Systems $100,529
Energy Efficiency Projects $2,498,000
Future Construction 2013-14, 2014-15
Gateway HS, HVAC, Repairs $7,249,000
Mrachek MS, Kitchen/Café Addition $3,264,250
Pickens Tech Roof Repairs $2,244,500
Sixth Ave. ES,CR Addition, Roof $1,591,300
Virginia Court ES, Kitchen Addition $650,000
Roof Repairs at Vaughn ES $600,000
Roof Repairs at Peoria ES $600,000
Information Technology (Still in Progress) $5,645,547
Gateway High Recarpet and Floor
Repairs, ($0.9M)
New Storage Building at Facilities Complex,
($0.3M) Modular Classroom
Purchase and Relocation Account,
($5.0M)
Side Creek Elementary Two Classroom
Addition, ($0.9M)
Tollgate Elementary Remodel, ($8.2M)
Sixth Avenue Elementary
Two Classroom Addition ($0.9M)
Kenton Elementary Two Classroom
Addition, ($0.9M)
Added Technology Projects, ($6.5M)
Districtwide Energy Conservation Projects
($2.7M)
HVAC System Replacements at Two Elementary Schools,
($3.0M)
Virginia Court Elementary Kitchen
Addition, ($0.7M)
Roof Replacements at Eight Schools, ($5.7M)
2008 Bond Program Savings Projects
$36
Million
Savings
11/7/2013 7
0
500
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014
2008 Bond Program Cumulative Seats Added by Level
ECE K-5 6-8 High (704) (1513) (313) (1550) 4080 total seats added in ECE to High
11/7/2013 8
Traditional K-12 School Enrollment Percent (%) Change
-3.5%
-3.0%
-2.5%
-2.0%
-1.5%
-1.0%
-0.5%
0.0%
0.5%
1.0%
1.5%
2.0%
2.5%
3.0%
3.5%
19
70
19
71
19
72
19
73
19
74
19
75
19
76
19
77
19
78
19
79
19
80
19
81
19
82
19
83
19
84
19
85
19
86
19
87
19
88
19
89
19
90
19
91
19
92
19
93
19
94
19
95
19
96
19
97
19
98
19
99
20
00
20
01
20
02
20
03
20
04
20
05
20
06
20
07
20
08
20
09
20
10
20
11
20
12
Oct
ob
er 1
, 201
3
The average growth rate for the previous five years (2008-2012) was: 1.87% The average growth rate for the previous ten years (2003-2012) was: 0.77% The average growth rate for the previous twenty years (1993-2012) was: 0.98% 11/7/2013 9
11/7/2013 10
12,000
13,000
14,000
15,000
16,000
17,000
18,000
19,000
20,000
21,000
22,000
2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Unofficial*
2014 Proj. 2015 Proj. 2016 Proj. 2017 Proj.
Traditional Elementary and K-8 School Enrollment Totals by Year 2008 - 2017 Projected
Total Capacity Standard Capacity Elementary and K-8 Enrollment Elementary and K-8 @ 2.0% Growth Elementary and K-8 @ 2.25% Growth Elementary and K-8 @ 2.5% Growth
*2013 Unofficial Based on October 1, 2013 Daily Count **Reflects 2014-15 Sixth Avenue 2-classroom addition (+50) and 2014-15 Vista PEAK Exploratory 2nd two-classroom mobile
Enrollment Growth: 3.34% 4.57% 1.26% 2.39% 2.26% 5-Year Average Growth: 2.76%
Total Capacity Including Mobiles
Standard Capacity
2015 Projected Enrollment @ 2.5% Growth: 19,326 2015 Standard Capacity: 18,542
Percent Capacity in Mobiles
Greater than or equal to 20% = 11% of schools
Greater than or equal to 15% = 28% of schools
Greater than or equal to 10% = 40% of schools
11/7/2013 11
38%
30%
26%
22% 21%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
35%
40% Ly
n K
no
ll ES
Vis
ta P
EAK
Exp
lora
tory
K8*
Lare
do
ES
Sixt
h A
ven
ue
ES*
Mra
che
k M
S
Mo
ntv
iew
ES
Elkh
art E
S
Vir
gin
ia C
ou
rt E
S
Vas
sar
ES
Vau
ghn
ES
Cly
de
Mill
er K
8
Alt
ura
ES
Ken
ton
ES
Sid
e C
ree
k ES
Cra
wfo
rd E
S
East
MS
Par
is E
S
Bo
sto
n K
8
Lan
sin
g ES
Sab
le E
S
Dal
ton
ES
Ark
ansa
s ES
Jew
ell E
S
Yale
ES
Peo
ria
ES
Fult
on
ES
Ran
gevi
ew H
S
AW
CP
A 6
-12
Wh
eelin
g ES
Au
rora
Cen
tral
HS
Mu
rph
y C
ree
k K
8
Sou
th M
S
Tollg
ate
ES
Au
rora
Hill
s M
S
Au
rora
Qu
est
K8
Au
rora
Fro
nti
er K
8
Co
lum
bia
MS
Iow
a ES
Gat
eway
HS
Hin
kley
HS
No
rth
MS
Cen
tury
ES
Flet
cher
ES
Par
k La
ne
ES
Vis
ta P
EA
K P
rep
arat
ory
HS
Will
iam
Sm
ith
HS
Dar
tmo
uth
ES
2014 Percent of Capacity in Mobiles for All APS Traditional Schools
*Includes 2013 two-classroom additions to Sixth Avenue. Includes second 8-classrioom mobiles for Vista PEAK Exploratory.
20% Total Capacity in Mobiles
68% of APS Schools have at least one mobile building on site.
95% or Above Standard Capacity
76%
Below 95% Standard Capacity
24%
2013-14 Current*: Percent of Schools At or Above 95% Standard
Capacity
*Based on October 1, 2013 Daily Count
Elementary and K-8 Schools Elementary and K-8 Schools
90% or Above Total Capacity
65%
Below 90% Total Capacity
35%
2013-14 Current*: Percent of Schools At or Above 90% Total
Capacity (with mobiles)
11/7/2013 12
11/7/2013 13
Capacity Challenges at schools east
of Tower Road (especially Vista
PEAK)
Vista PEAK P-8 is expected exceed total capacity including mobiles in 2015 or 2016. Enrollment will exceed campus design capacity by 35% to 63%.
Vista PEAK P-8 is projected to grow between 10% and 12% annually through 2017!
11/7/2013 14
Aurora Public Schools East of Tower Road
Residential Development Key Pink – Currently building homes Green - Planning approved / not started Blue – Zoned residential
11/7/2013 15
2,464 2,510 2,530 2,580 2,580 2,590
2,620 2,680 2,680
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
3,000
2013 Projected 2014-15 Projected 2015-16 Projected 2016-17 Projected 2017-18 Projected
Capacity vs. High & Low Enrollment for K-5/K-8 Schools East of Tower Rd. (Excluding Vista PEAK)
2013-14 to 2017-18
Total Enrollment Low
Total Enrollment High
Standard Capacity
Total Capacity
Standard Capacity (without mobiles)
Total Capacity (with mobiles)
11/7/2013 16
1,045 1,147
1,254
1,387
1,536
1,181
1,340
1,509 1,699
0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
1,600
1,800
2013-14 Projected 2014-15 Projected 2015-16 Projected 2016-17 Projected 2017-18 Projected
Enro
llmen
t
Capacity vs. High & Low Enrollment Projections for Vista PEAK Exploratory P-8
2013-14 to 2017-18
Low
High
Standard Capacity
Total Capacity
For the 2013-14 school year, 18% of Vista PEAK Exploratory’s enrollment is in mobiles. In 2014-15, 30% of Vista PEAK Exploratory’s enrollment will be in mobiles.
Standard Capacity (without mobiles)
Total Capacity (with mobiles)
11/7/2013 17
K-5 /K-8 Capacity Challenges and Opportunities
East of Tower Rd.
2014 and Beyond
Analysis of Five Schools Based on 2015 High-end Enrollment Projections
Factor Murphy Creek
P-8 Aurora
Frontier P-8 Clyde
Miller P-8 Side Creek Elementary
Vista PEAK P-8
Total Students on Campus 680 660 570 710 1,340
Campus Design Capacity 663 663 513 613 926
Number of Students In Excess of Campus Design Capacity
17 -3 57 97 414
Enrollment to Total Capacity (including mobiles)
95% 100% 93% 100% 101%
Enrollment to Permanent Capacity (without mobiles)
103% 100% 111% 116% 145%
11/7/2013 18
Options to Address
Enrollment vs. Capacity
Challenges
11/7/2013 19
Option 1: No New Permanent
Construction/Purchase Mobiles at Accelerated
Rate
Pros
1) No additional expenditures for new or
remodeled schools
Cons
1) Likely severe crowding at Vista PEAK
Exploratory and other schools east of Airport Blvd.
2) Additional mobiles will add strain on core
building spaces; i.e., cafeteria, gym, restrooms to
meet the needs of large enrollments
3) Significant expenditures for mobile classrooms
4) Added security challenges
5) Boundary adjustments at some schools
11/7/2013 20
Option 2: Add 8-Classroom Modular to Murphy Creek and Aurora Frontier Sites in 2015
Murphy Creek
•Cost: $1,200,000
•Capacity Added K-8: 200
•Cost per seat added: $6,000
Murphy Creek
Pros:
1) Room available on site for one mobile
Cons:
1) Mobile classrooms are smaller
than standard classrooms
2) One two-classroom mobile
added last summer
3) Requires multiple boundary
changes that will likely
change again if a new school
is constructed
11/7/2013 21
Option 2: Add 8-Classroom Modular to Murphy Creek and Aurora Frontier Sites in 2015
Aurora Frontier
•Cost: $1,950,000 --- $1,200,000 for modular building + $750,000 for parking lot
•Capacity added K-8: 200
•Cost per seat added: $9,750
Aurora Frontier
Pros:
1) Room available on site for
one mobile
Cons:
1)Mobile classrooms are smaller
than standard classrooms
2) Will need to take up part
of playfield
3) No on-street parking is
available near the school and will
require construction of additional
parking lot.
4) Requires multiple boundary changes
that will likely change again if a new
school is constructed
11/7/2013 22
Option 2: Add 8-classroom mobiles to Murphy Creek and Aurora Frontier
11/7/2013 23
Option 3: Build a Mid-Sized P-8 School on the Traditions Site, Open in August 2015
• Cost: $23,000,000
• Capacity added K-8: 688
• Cost per seat added: $33,500
Pros:
1) Permanent capacity added
2) Site available
Cons:
1) Design and construction would need to be
accelerated, potentially increasing cost
2) School start date may need to be
delayed
3) Would need to use general fund dollars
to pay for the Certificate of Participation
4) Boundary adjustment will be necessary
5) Increase perception the district is
disproportionally providing resources
to Vista PEAK area.
11/7/2013 24
Option 3: Build New Mid-Sized
P-8 on Traditions Site
11/7/2013 25
Option 4: Build the Core of the Traditions P-8 and Locate Three 8-classroom
Mobiles on the Site
•Cost: $17,000,000 total project cost --- $14,000,000 for site and permanent construction + $3M for modular buildings
•Capacity added K-8: 688
•Cost per seat added: $25,000
Pros:
1) Saves approximately $6,000,000 over Option 3
2) Builds some permanent space but requires successful
bond election to complete the building
3) Site available
Cons:
1) Design and construction would need to be
accelerated, potentially increasing cost
2) School start date may need to be delayed
3) Will spend approximately $1M in the future to
relocate the 8 classroom mobiles
4) Would need to use general fund dollars
to pay for the Certificate of Participation
5) Majority of student body will be in
modular classrooms except for electives
6) Mobile classrooms are
smaller than standard classrooms
7) Boundary adjustment will be necessary
11/7/2013
26
Option 4: Build New Mid-Sized
P-8 on Traditions Site
11/7/2013 27
Option 5: Build a Mid-Sized P-8 School on the APS Community Campus,
Open in August 2015 •Cost: $23,000,000
•Capacity added K-8: 688
•Cost per seat added: $33,500
Pros:
1) The additional 688 seats will ease crowding at
Vista PEAK and other schools
2) Site available
3) Existing prototype would fit on the site, saving
on design time and cost
4) Reasonable construction schedule for an
on-time completion
5) Reduce transportation cost and student ride times
6) Building new school west of Tower Rd. may garner
more widespread community support
7) Opportunity for enhanced parental engagement
with Buckley families and other families who would
be relocated to new school
Cons:
1) Would need to use general fund dollars to
pay for the Certificate of Participation
2) Multiple boundary adjustments will be necessary.
3) Most students would be bused to the site
4) Would need to complete road to Sixth Avenue
5) Increased traffic on 6th Avenue and Airport Blvd
11/7/2013
28
Option 5: Mid-Sized P-8 on
APS Community Campus
11/7/2013 29
Option 6: Build a Large P-8 School on the APS Community Campus, Open in
August 2015 • Cost: $30,000,000
• Capacity added K-8: 926
• Cost per seat added: $32,500
Pros:
1) The additional 926 seats will ease crowding at
Vista PEAK and other schools possibly including
schools west of Tower Road
2) The additional seats from a large P-8 will provide
capacity options if the district is unable to
successfully pass a bond in the near future
3) Site available
4) Existing prototype would fit on the site, saving on design
time and cost
5) Reduce transportation cost and student ride times
6) Building new school west of Tower Rd. may garner more
widespread community support
7) Opportunity for enhanced parental engagement with
Buckley families and other families who would be relocated
to new school
Cons:
1) Large P-8 will cost more
2) Would need to use general fund dollars
to pay for the Certificate of Participation
3) Larger building may require longer construction
schedule than mid-sized P-8
4) Multiple boundary adjustments will be necessary.
5) Most students would be bused to the site
6) Would need to complete road to Sixth Avenue
7) Increased traffic on 6th Avenue and Airport Blvd
11/7/2013
30
Option 6: Large P-8 on
APS Community Campus
11/7/2013 31
Option 7: Purchase and remodel warehouse or retail space
Example Using 14401 East Exposition Avenue
•Cost: $9.9 Million Total --- $6.9 million for renovations +
$2.95 building acquisition
•Capacity added K-8: 500 K-8 students
•Cost per seat added: $19,800 per seat
Pros:
1) Could be completed by August 2015 on traditional
design schedule if purchased in 2013
Cons:
1) Would need to use general fund dollars to pay for
the Certificate of Participation
2) All students would be bused to the site
3) Insufficient space for playgrounds and fields
4) City of Aurora has expressed displeasure with
traffic issues from charters who have occupied similar
spaces
5) Locations are not ideal for reducing overcrowding in
Schools east of Airport Blvd.
11/7/2013 32
Option 8: Convert some
schools to year-round
schedules
Pros:
1. Cherry Creek and Douglas have operated year-
round schools for years as a means to address
overcrowding
2. Adds about 25% to school capacity
Cons:
1. Typically a 12- to 18-month process that includes
multiple stakeholders
2. Added operational cost (utilities, personnel, etc.)
3. Potential challenges with some stakeholder
groups
11/7/2013 33
Support Services recommends using a
combination of bond savings and
general fund dollars to add more seats
in the near term.
Enrollment vs. capacity challenges can be
effectively addressed through new
construction, additional mobile
classrooms and strategic boundary
adjustments.
11/7/2013 34
– The district currently has no bonding capacity
• In the opinion of our bankers, the earliest likely date to recover
sufficient capacity for a new bond election is 2016
• The bonding amount would be approximately $200 million
• The earliest a new school would open is August 2018 pending
successful passage of a bond question
– C. O. P.s do not require bonding capacity
• Certificates of Participation do not require voter approval
• Structured to pay interest only for next five years
• Interest rates are currently very favorable
Opportunities and
Challenges of Funding a
New School
11/7/2013 35
APS Assessed Value
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
$1,800
$2,000
$2,200M
illi
on
s
Collection Year
<---------Estimated--------->
11/7/2013 36
APS Mill Levy Rate for
Bond Redemption Fund
10.000
12.000
14.000
16.000
18.000
20.000
22.000M
ills
Collection Year
<---------Estimated----------->
11/7/2013 37
APS Bond Sales
Since 2002
11/7/2013 38
Bonds Authorized Current Legal Debt
Year by Election Bonds Sold Capacity
2002 225,000,000$ 84,185,000$
2003 150,000,000$ 225,765,000
2004 194,155,000
2005 164,305,000
2006 75,000,000 221,230,000
2007 212,925,000
2008 215,000,000 132,685,000 336,955,000
2009 326,905,000
2010 82,315,000 395,340,000
2011 380,585,000
2012 362,295,000 355,985,282$
2013 344,985,000
2014 329,190,000
2015 310,700,000
2016 291,445,000
2017 271,370,000
2018 250,420,000
2019 228,525,000
Total 440,000,000$ 440,000,000$
Current Debt
Outstanding
Current and Future Mill Levies
• APS has the second highest mill levy in the state
– 47.58 mills - General Fund
– 16.25 mills - Bond Redemption Fund
– 63.83 mills total
• Estimated 2014 mills
– 47.322 mills - General Fund
– 19.641 mills – Bond Redemption Fund
– 66.963 mills total, +3.133 mills
11/7/2013 39
COPs vs. Bonds
• Not subject to voter approval like the District’s General Obligation Bonds
• Not subject to the 20% of AV statutory debt limit
• District pledges essential assets that aren’t already encumbered by other debt and
have value equal to (or greater) than the par amount of the COPs. Debt on assets
can’t exceed 10 percent of historical cost.
• District “sells” the asset to a leasing corporation and leases it back over the life of the
COPs
• Lease payments flow through a trustee to the certificate holders
• COPs are typically rated one notch below the District’s General Obligation rating of
Aa2
11/7/2013 40
APS Certificates of Participation
New “Mid-Sized” P-8 School
Structure Comparison
20 Year Term 25 Year Term
Par Amount $22,295,000 $22,495,000
Project Fund $23,000,000 $23,000,000
Final Maturity 12/01/2033 12/01/2038
All-in TIC 4.27% 4.56%
Maximum Annual Lease Payment – Principal + Interest $2,107,200 $1,783,463
Average Annual Lease Payment $1,825,925 $2,041,481
Total Lease Payments $36,518,500 $40,829,625
Lease Payment Through 12/1/2018 (Interest Only) $998,025 $1,040,663
Assumes 10/28/13 market rates. Callable at any time with General Obligation Bond Proceeds.
11/7/2013 41
APS Certificates of Participation
New “Large” P-8 School
Structure Comparison
20 Year Term 25 Year Term
Par Amount $30,105,000 $30,125,000
Project Fund $30,000,000 $30,000,000
Final Maturity 12/01/2033 12/01/2038
All-in TIC 4.62% 4.90%
Maximum Annual Lease Payment – Principal + Interest $2,844,763 $2,372,350
Average Annual Lease Payment $2,465,363 $2,764,890
Total Lease Payments $49,307,263 $55,297,800
Lease Payment Through 12/1/2018 (Interest Only) $1,334,025 $1,419,763
Assumes 08/19/13 market rates. Callable at any time with General Obligation Bond Proceeds.
11/7/2013 42
Finance Proposal
• Finance the entire proposed project with
COPs
– District pledges new P-8 school as collateral
– Increases annual debt burden on General
Fund
• Ranges between $1.0 to $1.4 million per year for
the first 5 years (interest only)
• Subsequent years $1.8 to $2.8 million per year, if a
bond measure is not passed (principal & interest)
11/7/2013 43
Utilizing Bond Savings and
Adjusting the Scope of the
Mrachek Bond Project • Transfer $2.2M of bond savings into the bond mobile
account
• Reallocate $2.4M dedicated to a kitchen/cafeteria
addition at Mrachek Middle School
• Use the reallocated funds in a more strategic manner
at Mrachek Middle School
• Repurpose the existing mobiles at Mrachek Middle
School
11/7/2013 44
Mrachek Bond Project
• Background: – Year School Built - 1975
– Enrollment vs. Capacity – Total Capacity 1,676
Standard Capacity 1,376
Current Enrollment – 910
2015 Projected Enrollment – 896
– Number of Mobiles - 7
– Bond construction budget - $3,264,350
• Mrachek kitchen/cafeteria addition - $2,467,500
• Building renewal - $271,000
• New Mrachek roof - $525,850
– Information Technology budget for instructional technology
equipment renewal - $258,300
11/7/2013 45
Mrachek Bond Project
Proposal - $2.4M earmarked for the
Mrachek kitchen/cafeteria addition could
be more strategically used to: – Make minor kitchen/cafeteria improvements at
Mrachek
– Form a Mrachek Design Advisory Group, bid and hire
an architect to design a new Mrachek
– Purchase two 8-classroom wet mobiles and move the
seven existing mobiles to enrollment “Hot Spots” in
other areas of the district
11/7/2013 46
Mrachek Bond Project
Benefits of Reallocating $2.4M – Improve current learning environment by adding more classrooms,
bathrooms and office space via two 8-classroom “wet” mobiles
– Free up the seven mobiles currently at Mrachek to provide Support
Services greater flexibility to address enrollment challenges at other
school sites. Doing this will save the district money compared to
purchasing new two classroom mobiles ($100K vs. $200K for new mobile
on average)
– Improve security by reducing the number of trips between the main
building and mobile classrooms
– Accelerate the construction of a new Mrachek since the design would be
completed prior to a future bond campaign
– Promote the completed design for a new Mrachek as a positive
messaging tool as part of a future bond campaign
11/7/2013
47
Mrachek Bond Project
Rationale: – It is not in the district’s best interest to invest $2.4M for a
kitchen/cafeteria addition to a building we hope to replace in
the next five years
– Mrachek will be at or near the top of the Long Range
Facility Advisory Committee’s list of school sites that need
new construction
– Support Services will continue to pursue a replacement
school grant through the Building Excellent Schools Today
(BEST) program
11/7/2013 48
Recommendations
Support Services recommends using a combination of bond savings
and general fund dollars to add more seats in the near term.
Enrollment vs. capacity challenges can be effectively addressed
through new construction, additional mobile classrooms and
strategic boundary adjustments.
• Design, construct and open a new large P-8 school on the Aurora Community Campus site by
August 2015. Fund using Certificate of Participation (COP) dollars
• Transfer approximately $2.2M of the remaining bond savings into the mobile account to address
enrollment capacity challenges district wide through 2016
• Reallocate approximately $2.4 million that was originally approved for the Mrachek Middle School
kitchen/cafeteria addition. Working with Mrachek stakeholders utilize these funds to hire an
architect to design a new Mrachek Middle School
• Purchase two 8-classroom “wet mobiles” for Mrachek Middle School. Relocate the seven mobiles
at Mrachek and place them at overcrowded schools
• Form an attendance area review committee that will develop and recommend boundary
adjustments for a new large P-8 school on the Aurora Community Campus. The committee will
also develop and recommend boundary adjustments as needed for other schools
11/7/2013
49
Enrollment vs.
Capacity Timeline Request CBOC and BOE support for the
financial and facility recommendations by
December 2013 in order to:
• Have sufficient time to design, construct and open a
new large P-8 school by August 2015
• Order, construct, transport and install two new
8-classroom “wet” mobiles to Mrachek by July 2014
• Relocate the seven mobiles at Mrachek and place
them at overcrowded schools
• Form an attendance area review committee to begin
the boundary assessment process
11/7/2013
50
Appendix
11/7/2013 51
In the 2008 program, due to the recession, cost of
construction dropped sharply between the time we planned
our projects and the time we executed them resulting in
lower than expected bids for many projects. Bid savings in
the 2008 program were approximately $36 million.
$36 Million Saved in 2008 Bond
Construction Program
11/7/2013 52
• Add 200 student capacity
• Improved security over 2-CR mobiles
• Use less land, closer to school buildings
• More cost efficient
• Only suitable where major capacity need
• Restrooms
• Fit on Vista PEAK and future Traditions sites
• Second 8-CR modular at Vista PEAK in 2014
Features of 8 Classroom Mobiles
11/7/2013 53
Exterior of 8 Classroom Wet Mobile
11/7/2013 54
Interior 8 Classroom Wet
Mobile
11/7/2013 55
11/7/2013 58
23 14 10
45
0 3 1 4
395
131
84
38
66
27
46
111
182
82
42
25 33
22 27
48
118
36 39
22 20 12
52
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400
450
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 To Date
E-470 Development - Certificates of Occupancy (CO) by Quarter (2006 - 2013 To Date)
1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter
11/7/2013 59
190
51
18
9
30
14 18
50
197
76
45
29 35
23
50
37
82
15
50
22 18 20
47
77
24 25 19
28 22 19
49
0
50
100
150
200
250
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 To Date
E-470 Development - Building Permits (BP) by Quarter (2006 - 2013 To Date)
1st Quarter 2nd Quarter 3rd Quarter 4th Quarter
Temporary Classrooms (“Mobiles”)
• Configurations and Costs o Relocate two-classroom “dry” mobile: ~ $100,000
o New two-classroom “dry” mobile: ~ $190,000
o New two-classroom “wet” mobile”: ~ $240,000
o New eight-classroom “wet” mobile: ~ $900,000
• Advantages o Enrollment fluctuates over the life of a school. APS can’t afford to
build every school for peak capacity demand.
o Quicker and lower cost than permanent construction.
o Can be relocated to other sites when no longer needed
o Disadvantages o Smaller classrooms
o Housing students outside the main school building creates both
operational and security issues.
o Dissatisfied staff and parents (especially in new housing areas)
11/7/2013
60
*Assumption that Vista PEAK will add a second 8-classroom mobile in 2014.
Capacity vs. Enrollment for P-5/P-8 Schools East of Tower Rd. (Excluding Vista PEAK)
Capacity 2013
Projected 2014 Projected 2015 Projected 2016 Projected 2017 Projected
School Standard Capacity
Total Capacity
2013 %total
cap Low
%total cap
High %total
cap Low
%total cap
High %total
cap Low
%total cap
High %total
cap Low
%total cap
High %total
cap
Aurora Frontier
663 663 621 94% 640 97% 660 100% 640 97% 660 100% 650 98% 670 101% 650 98% 670 101%
Clyde Miller
513 613 536 87% 550 90% 570 93% 550 90% 570 93% 540 88% 570 93% 530 86% 550 90%
Side Creek
613 713 677 95% 680 95% 700 98% 690 97% 710 100% 710 100% 730 102% 720 101% 740 104%
Murphy Creek
663 713 630 88% 640 90% 660 93% 650 91% 680 95% 680 95% 710 100% 680 95% 720 101%
Total 2,452 2,702 2,464 91% 2,510 93% 2,590 96% 2,530 94% 2,620 97% 2,580 95% 2,680 99% 2,580 95% 2,680 99%
Vista PEAK
926 1,126/ 1,326*
1,045 93% 1,150 87% 1,180 89% 1,250 94% 1,340 101% 1,390 105% 1,510 114% 1,540 116% 1,700 128%
Capacity vs. Enrollment for Vista Peak
11/7/2013 61
8
3
8 7
9
3 3
8 7
0
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013
Summer Mobile Moves 2005 to 2013
Total site to site moves: 56 Estimated total cost: $5 million
• There are 66 mobiles currently being used in APS.
11/7/2013
62
Small
– 2 round
– Boston model
– Capacity:
• 463 K-8
• 32 ECE
– 58,000 sq. ft.
– 5 to 10 acre site
– In-fill / replacement
– ~ $16.0 million
Capacity Options - New P-8 Schools
Mid-sized
– 3 round
– M. Creek model
– Capacity:
• 688 K-8
• 64 ECE
– 80,000 sq. ft.
– 15 acre site
– New developments
– ~$22.5 million
Large
– 4 round
– Vista PEAK model
– Capacity:
• 926 K-8
• 96 ECE
– 105,000 sq. ft.
– 18 acre site
– New developments
– ~$29.5 million
11/7/2013 63
• Centrally located in current new development area
• About ½ mile from Vista PEAK Campus
• 15 acre site, but atypically long and narrow
• Borders park on south end
• Only available district-owned site in area of need
• Suitable for mid-sized P-8
• Design funding available in 2008 bond ($1.5 million)
• Construction funding would require C.O.P. ($21 million)
Traditions School Site
11/7/2013 64
11/7/2013 65
1,045 1,147
1,254
1,387
1,536
1,181
1,338
1,509
1,699
926 926
1,614 1,614
1,126
1,326
2,014 2,014
0
500
1,000
1,500
2,000
2,500
2013-14 Projected 2014-15 Projected 2015-16 Projected 2016-17 Projected 2017-18 Projected
Enro
llmen
t
Current Vista PEAK Exploratory Attendance Area Capacity Change With New Traditions P-8 Building Added
Low Enrollment
High Enrollment
Standard Capacity
Total Capacity
Traditions P-8 Built (+688)
Traditions P-8 Built (+688)
Vista PEAK 2nd 8-classroom
mobile (+200)
Standard Capacity (without mobiles)
Total Capacity (with mobiles)
11/7/2013 66
New School Project Timeline
August
2016
Design 12 months
Construction 12 months
Move in 10 weeks
Mar
2014 Bid
6 weeks
Normal Acquisition Schedule
Decision point for funding design from 2008 bond savings: March 2014
Decision point for funding construction from C. O. P. : ~ ~ Dec 2014
11/7/2013 67
Project Year Cost
Murphy Creek P-8 2005 $11,813,000
Aurora Frontier P-8 2006 $12,370,000
Vista PEAK Campus Infrastructure 2009 $ 4,344,000
Vista PEAK P-8 2010 $19,991,000
Vista PEAK High 2011 $44,920,000
Side Creek Elementary Classroom Addition 2013 $900,000
Various Temporary Classroom Structures 2012 / 13 $1,400,000
Total $95,738,000
Schools Serving E-470 Corridor Area Capital Investment in Added Capacity Since 2005
11/7/2013 68
School Year Added K-12 Seats
Added
Cumulative
K-12 Seats
Clyde Miller P-8 1981 513 513
Side Creek Elementary 1987 563 1076
Two 2-cr Mobiles at Side Creek ES 2002 & 03 100 1176
Murphy Creek P-8 2005 663 1839
Aurora Frontier P-8 2006 663 2502
Vista PEAK P-8 2010 926 3428
Vista PEAK High 2011 1350 4778
One 2-cr Mobile at Clyde Miller P-8 2012 50 4828
One 2-cr Mobile at Murphy Creek P-8 2013 50 4878
One 2-cr Mobile at Clyde Miller P-8 2013 50 4928
2-cr Addition to Side Creek Elementary 2013 50 4978
One 8-cr Modular at Vista PEAK P-8 2013 200 5178
E-470 Corridor Capacity Additions
11/7/2013 69
11/7/2013 70
148
98
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
Construction Information Technology
Total Number of Completed Construction and
Information Technology 2008 Bond Projects
