 that the United States of America and the Republic for which it stands, one nation under God and invisible with the liberty and justice for all. He said Justin would be about five minutes. Yeah, he said he was five minutes. We'll start with additions or provulsions. Yeah, under personnel. Mental health, the mental health school liaison, Sarah Eckstein, and there's a resume if anybody wants to look at it. We have that in motion. Anybody have any questions? Anybody proposed? Moving down to principal reports. This is at the Combination Music Concert, Mission Valley. I don't have anything else to add other than today is the first day of the fourth quarter. It's hard to believe we're there, but we need to hang on because it's going to go fast. So it's that time of year. A lot of activities. We thought we just came out of that. A lot of activities, which we did, but there's more to come. So if I can answer any questions, I'd be happy to try. Thank you. The other thing to add was I had mentioned in my report that we had a literacy training in February. I got very positive feedback from the teachers on that, and they're excited. We're going to have a follow-up PD to it, like a continuation on March 24th. So there will be four to that. We held the first one at AES, so we're going to hold this one down at Maple Hill. So the teachers or both buildings are going to the trainings. I don't have anything extra. I've got a question for Josh. On, I've read in your report, what's the sharing money? You're right. So that percentage is based on your free and reduced lunch? Mm-hmm. Really? Oh, did you? I mean, I found that fascinating that there's so much, I guess, money there, right? It is so based on free and reduced lunch. Mm-hmm. I think it might be important for our patrons to fully understand what free and reduced lunch means, and how that affects our district budget, and the added opportunities it brings. I mean, I don't know. I had no idea that it was that big of a deal until I got on the board, but I did read that and thought I'd bring it up. And we were in a bit of a confusing situation this year in that or the last couple of years that Kansas opted to, you know, provide all students free lunches. And so a lot of families that normally might have signed up didn't because they're like, why do I need to? Well, that rate at which people fill out those applications still affects a lot of our programs but directly use that to determine how much funding we get or at what, in the case of E-rate, at what percentage we can claim like reimbursement from our pool of funds. So it is important. And we tried to, we tried following up with them, calls, emails, et cetera, of people. And specifically the, quote, selling pieces would be then reduction in or free, then on your fees, too. So, you know, the things that they were having to pay. I mean, I've got a freshman in high school but I've never rolled my kids once so I have no idea what that process even is. It's complicated. What's the qualifications I would assume? Yeah, all they have to do on this one is that it was a family economic status sheet that you filled out. And it was, I think, less intrusive than or, you know, not any more intrusive than the previous one. And we had to fill out the previous one. Because, yeah, before people were like, well, I'm not filling out. And then we tried to, there's two things. One, they won't say that you have to have people fill it out. In other words, it's like we put it at the front of the packet and made it so, look, it's one of those things you have to fill out and they still didn't fill it out. But legally, we can't make them fill it out or even try to make it because we've looked at that angle, too, that in role, you got to fill it out. And can't do it. Is there any video we could put on our web page or anything that would just explain what free and reduced lunch means and what it actually does for our district? I mean, there's a lot of dollars there that he, I mean, 10% swing in that deal is a lot of dollars to a budget. Yeah. I was just curious. Yeah. We can, sure, put something on there. Thanks, Josh, for sharing. Right. So I guess when we came on, unless there's any other questions or comments on that, we'll move down to the consent agenda. We will have that. Anybody have any discussion or questions on the consent agenda? Do we have a motion to approve it? Sorry. One second. All opposed? Say that. The older new business. The rural housing incentive. Yeah. The Bunsen County Economic Development Administrator, Jim McGregor, they've talked to the board. I attended, they had a meeting with the city council and had a representative for the developer out there at the city council meeting and attended that and listened to their presentation and the city council unanimously. They asked, well, what effect would it have on the school? What's the school's feelings? Those kinds of things. And so I told them just the same information that's listed in the Starnes Notes about these possibilities and the fact that we possibly could gain so many students at roughly $8,000 per student on your weighted FTE, on your Form 150 for your general fund, and what that could mean to the district annually and the fact that if you don't do anything, you're getting 6,800, 8,600, whatever it was on the lots just themselves not having them developed. And if you chose to have them developed, what would cost, et cetera, over those 24.18 years. And basically he explained how the developer for their infrastructure depends on it could be 24 years, it could be paid sooner, just depending on how much they get and where they get going. But it's on them to develop those 16 houses. So there's two things that could happen after the city approved it and they approved it unanimously, that the county commissioners could say no, we don't want it, or the school district could say we don't want it. And then we have up to March 22nd, I believe, to have a resolution saying that we're against it. But it's one of those types of things I think that basically you're investing money to make money. And housing is a big thing for the county and for our school district and trying to find them. And it's all on them to take care of that piece of it and develop it and to work forward. So they're wanting to develop it so that they can then continue and have their infrastructure paid for. So I don't think it's a negative thing at all to... I mean, yes, potentially you could lose some money if all 16 of those lots were developed without this. But I don't know if that's going to happen and or when. I think if it was going to happen, it probably would have. That's why they've got a program like this in place. I mean, if it was naturally occurring, it wouldn't be offering these types of incentives, I suppose. Well, the state ripped this up. The state doesn't have anything. The state will get their money no matter what. School districts will get some, so they figured they would keep them from offering, but ones that lose out is our county for 25 years or however long it takes. And if we don't look at it as a county, whether the people across, you know, they're all going to look and point, why are they getting everything? And we're taking in and doing our share, but they're getting by and this developer is getting paid. That was my conversation. Commissioner Fager singing Friday. I don't know how they voted today. I'm not sure, I'm not sure either. He said there were concerns with them also, but I don't know what they did. But I know there would be residents down there that just finished up paying their special taxes that might have a lot. Wondering why, why did I pay for 20 years or have them on this and now you're going to let everybody else have it for free. And there are some walks down there that probably won't be developed or bought with the intention to be an insulator from around so you're going to develop that. Streets, curves and all that for them at no cost. So there will be a lot of conversation about it. I don't know what, like I said, I don't know what the commissioners have done. But it takes the risk up the city. The last time they did, they passed a bond. So each person was assessed special taxes well. Then the ones that came in and were going to do great things and they built 14 houses and it stopped. Economic times kind of turned credit when they were doing that. But then the city, the guy went bankrupt or whatever and turned it back so the city at large, everybody in the city picked up all of that, that bill. So it was kind of egg on their face in that way. I don't know that this is the right way or not. I just had feelings that way. I know there were patrons in town that paid a pretty considerable sum to go. They owned almost a city block. So by the time they met three sides around it was a pretty good chunk of change that they had to pay. I'm sure they'll have feelings. So there's not much we have to do except if we don't want that thing to happen with a resolution that we can cancel. That is correct. And since we wouldn't have a meeting before then we'd have to have a special meeting and if the feeling is that the school district would want to be against it. The pass a resolution against it. Otherwise you don't have to take action, it just happens. Unless the county does the same thing. I guess the thing that you're talking about, that's kind of what they're there for. The commissioners need to be involved in it. Is there anything negative for the school district? No, the school will still get money no matter what. And when we get that to full, we would have, but we won't get money. And then there is a chance that they would have families that they would bring in. I mean we don't know that. It could be retired people that move in and those too. But just with our district hat on though it would be tough for us to say no to it, correct? It would be tough for us to say no to it, correct? Just looking at it from a school standpoint. From a school standpoint it would, but if we let you have it from a county standpoint then it's a totally different picture. And John said he was going to ask for some things that they would do. According to him at that point in time he wasn't in favor of it unless they put some caps on it. I don't know if it would be interesting to see if I've ever seen anybody in the neighborhood ask them how the meeting went. But I'm not sure it is. Are all the families one way or the other? I think the county can figure out questions that probably will be raised. Just a discussion on it, right? Correct. Okay. Move on to the public opinion. Again, over 2,300 tests administered and all the testing has slowed down quite a bit. Well, not quite a bit, a lot. And 36% I believe of staff and 24% of somewhere around there of the students as far as those that we know about that have COVID. Yeah. It's still open if people would like to know as far as getting tested. Next discussion, which is the bond. Updated the last time we had a meeting on the one or two locations just as FYI. And then in your packet are maps showing if we went to one or two locations what that would look like and the ability to do that. And we would have to have modulars or do something with classrooms if we chose to do that. Which the board may choose to be able to do at any point in time without just as a motion and action to do that. And the first one was the PK at PAX Co. And then that would also entail that we would use the middle school and then the 7 through 12 would go to ALMA. And then the second one with the two location pieces if we had PK 2 at the ALMA grade school and we'd possibly have to use the modulars and 3 through 6 here at the junior high. And then 7, 12 at ALMA. And we looked at all those things. And then as made reference the one and two locations your biggest savings is going to be in personnel. And so we went through and you can see what we did with personnel and relatively the same as far as the amounts with personnel in one or two locations other than the sharing of a library and media tech piece. And those result in that 384,000 savings, 370,000 in two locations. Then took into the square foot difference at about 84 square foot that's insurance utilities. And we then added back in the square footage for additional enrollments. So that's why the difference is that we added back in 4,000 square feet for classrooms if you had one location and two classrooms if you had two locations for classrooms. And so those were then the amounts as far as then the savings square foot difference by doing that. And then transportation and that's relatively that's as close as we can get with what we've been through and looking but roughly and because we don't know for sure but if you just use the federal mileage rate 184.65 in savings as far as with the transportation differences in time and et cetera. Then the deferred maintenance it's all off the roofs of the trim pro when we had our roof study in 2017. If we had one location we'd have roofs both at the junior high and Maple Hill that we wouldn't be replacing. So that's a one time savings of the 699,000. And then excuse me if it's two locations it's at Maple Hill which is 315,000. There's also and this is where we added in potential loss of students at 8,000 per student. Our 425 students with the weightiness become 840.3 students. So if we say we're going to lose 10 to 15 students then and if you say at one location you're going to lose more used 15 times that 8 to get 120,000 and use 10 if we have two locations for the 80,000 and again that's just who knows. And then the total savings and taking everything together 352,000 annually at one location 337,000 in two locations. Savings of the difference between 15,000 and over 15,000 annually between the two locations. And then if you did go to a 25 year bond then what that savings would look like over 25 years 8.8 million for one location 8.4 million in two locations. So then the bottom one is if you take everything including your deferred maintenance which again those are the one-time scenarios then you get 1.01 million and 652,000 again that shows that $399,000 difference which was reflected up above with the savings so in the roofs. So that gives you an idea of one or two locations and what that may look like and again updated to include potential loss of students. So I spent quite a bit of time in this spreadsheet here over the last week and I've always overlooked the deferred maintenance because it's a one-time savings but it does not that the fact that it's deferred maintenance does not eliminate it from the need of our budget to be able to hold it, right? My point being is we've built all these buildings across our district. There's a certain amount of maintenance whether it happens every single year or it happens every 10 years or every 20 years that you still have to be able to save up for in order to do it, i.e. roofs. You don't put a roof on your house every year but you do on average every 20 years. And thus the deferred maintenance that we're looking at is part of the reason why we started down this bond path, right? The deferred maintenance is there because we don't have the operating budget to do it. If we had the operating budget to handle the extra deferred maintenance we wouldn't have a deferred maintenance number on this sheet. So I think that becomes a large play into how you make a decision in my opinion on to move forward with two locations or one location. One, if you choose to go with two locations you must then know that the savings to your operating budget is not really what it says on here. It's actually less than that because you've got to save more money because you have more square footage, you have more roofs, you have more locations to have that deferred maintenance issue. Otherwise 15, 20 years down the road we're going to have another large deferred maintenance bill. If that makes sense. So the last meeting we brought this all around and we said, okay, financially what's the impact of the difference of these? Well, that $700,000 divided by a 25-year bond is $28,000 a year in deferred maintenance that must be taken care of in our operating budget before the patrons really understand why... That's been a reoccurring question is why don't you have the money to repair the roofs? The reason is because we've been spending it on salaries, wages, heating, air conditioning, buildings instead of being able to put it into our capital outlay to use it. Is that accurate? Yeah, then you're exactly right. Capital outlay monies in the past that were general fund monies have been shifted to capital outlay because we didn't have the money in general fund to run it with salaries. So we've put salaries into capital outlay out of general fund that are supposed to be there. Correct. And across the board we've had discussions about school bus driving pay. We were at $10 an hour three and a half years ago. You can't hire anybody for $15 an hour today. That's where we're at today and you still can't get bus drivers. Cooks, same way. And until we as a district are able to address those things financially we should look at the ability to save as much money as we can. That's $28,000 annually. With the $15,000 that you projected as other operational savings, that's $43,000 a year that we are willing to leave on the table, walk away from because of the location of our buildings. I think that is a huge number times 25 years. It shows for itself it saves an additional $500,000. I didn't come up with the numbers. I'm just stating them. I want to make sure that we're looking at that because deferred maintenance is one of the reasons why we're here today. And if we don't work on a reasonable budget that's going to get rid of the deferred maintenance issues the patrons that I talked to are going to be holding me accountable and saying why are we doing this bond if it doesn't fix your operating budget to where you're coming right back to me to borrow more money. Whether it's to build another school or do improvements versus us in the rears we're just trying to catch up facilities. There's a lot of other school districts out there doing bonds that are making huge strides for improvements versus us saying my god we just have to step back and collect our thoughts again before we know what we've been very good the last couple years about buying buses but our buses fleet has been one of the longer aged bus fleets in the minis league. So I just think you guys really need to consider the fact that we're walking away from so much deferred maintenance money by going to two locations. The last thing I'll leave you with and then I'll be quiet this 10 to 15 students potential losses. I think that those numbers rightfully I guess not rightfully so but I understand the reasoning behind making them different but that's $40,000 additional difference and I guess I would argue that if you move your K through 6 to all one location here whatever town it is this situation says Paxico I'm not Maple Hill Paxico or Almatyte I actually live in the country I don't know what town it's in but I believe that that number is equal no matter where you move these schools we move them from Maple Hill Paxico to Alma we're going to lose the same amount as if we move them from Alma to Paxico and Maple Hill. So I believe that this budget is $40,000 skewed on the fact that we have one location being heavier than two locations I still believe you lose the same amount of students. If you want that to be 15 and have it be 120 that's fine but put it 120 on both scenarios not on just one scenario because I believe you lose the same amount of students either way. So either you drop the one location by 40 or you increase the other by 40 either way in your scenario it's a $40,000 difference which takes your $43,000 that we just discussed to $83,000 those numbers are not numbers that I believe we should walk away from as a school district. Just forward on November election and the costs are I'm going to say are really close we can get HKK to come in and move them up or down I still think it will fit in in $15,000,000 and everything goes in Alma and so I move to move forward with this for November So recap you've got a $15,000,000 bond total. If you can't understand that I'm sure can help you we need $1.5 million for the roofs if we consolidate in Alma so maybe that's too high where are the roofs? So this is as I understand this is for one location in Alma okay I'm not exactly sure what that total I mean the biggest one is going to be at the high school but there's multiple roofs are any of these in Naval Hill or Peck School? they're not so the number is close maybe it's one five four I'm sorry to interrupt you we were a total of the entire district is 2.6 million so the numbers are you can argue about them being off 500,000 either way the issue comes down to the fact that it's a $15,000,000 bond to bring facilities up to current to add room at the elementary for the junior high and all the elementary there remodel the high school building rooms on the east end of the elementary school for possible football lockers and remodel the ag shout oh and a new basic gym there'll still be three gyms right? and you know maybe that gym costs more than that but I think like Justin said I'm sure there's close enough to be adjusted within 400,000 more than is there these are numbers we've all seen over and over on this list after list you took all those numbers you looked and said prove me wrong all seconds for motion I like it well tell them it's wrong I think the $15,000,000 numbers what people have been discussing that they are willing to support I think it's what our tax payers will support I I go back to what my previous conversation at the last board meeting that 15 which is presented here 15, 16 million what I said last time is a number that our board will that our patrons will approve no matter what we approve here decision but if that's the number we have to consolidate if the number is 20, 25, 30 million if the number is 60 million you move it wherever you want but that's not the number and so I go back to the fact that when the patrons told us our number was too high and around about way they told us you've got to consolidate they might not have really come out and said that but by looking at the efficiencies of our operating budget there's no way to get it efficient enough to last another bond cycle without consolidating into one location that's why I support that's why I support this I like it I would go forward if everything was here and I would go forward if it was all in Maple Hill because the town doesn't matter I'm decked out and will bungee outfits and none of it says a town I believe in our will bungee charger spirit and I believe in what town my kid goes to school at my family's a diehard KU fan my dad would turn over his grave and he found out I graduated from K-State I'm a true K-State fan today being part of their environment so things change things change having a third gen available modules are all great things and I think that we should work towards I do like the one location I think in the long run I think that's best for our district is to be in one location and I think that as a board we've got another option react to and at least the majority of people can get it Jim, do you have something? I guess just at least online conversations with community members input that we've gotten from PSA or two locations are viable solutions I don't think it's a one option only situation that we're in as a district in terms of deferred maintenance probably have a little more cost if you have two locations versus one basically to Jim Daisy administration is pretty similar cost cost wise I think either way with one or two options we'd be saving money we'd be better positioned to in a long term have a capital outlay that would be able to handle the deferred maintenance I think the option that was brought forward by the committee this most recent time is why was that what was that tell me what that was the two location model with a pre-k36 impact it's what I've found that's gotten the most widespread I look at it from a black and white thing and the most money that we can save is the way we should be looking at it when we shop for buses we try to go not always we try to go with the least expensive the cheapest isn't always the best but this is cost saving so it's not letting that be cheapest it's looking at what will save us money and I think that the patrons would look at that as ultimately up to them whether they say yes or no to the plan we're just presenting this to them but I can make a conscience which I did second and vote for this plan in the savings that it brings it just makes sense to be in one place I think if you asked our former transportation director or current transportation director they could tell you it's a whole lot easier if you were leaving from one place and returning to one rather than having buses pass each other on the road and it only takes one flat tire one dead battery or anything that can happen to throw that all in a big mess well we thought it would be black and white it's fine but people don't generally some of them do don't vote off black and white they're going to vote off emotion and emotions will be high they're going to be really high and it'll start at McFarland road and it'll come this way and it will be it's not, I just from what I've been told there will be, just like there was in Alma last time there was a group there there was actually people around here too because of the number, multiple reasons there was multiple reasons everybody had their own reasons which is fine but I just think the divisiveness that this will cause will be interesting I think and I could be wrong I could be totally wrong this is just what I've been told by my patrons and the numbers I think will lose more students but that's my personal opinion so I think that number actually gets wider but that's people that have told me what blank who knows and that there are two so I, yeah I think obviously and that's why we've all talked three and a half years we've talked about this so we all, I think everybody pretty much knows where everybody stands and there's, we've talked, I don't know how many reasons everybody has a reason so but I just I feel like this decision isn't totally black and white, I get that, that's easy actually that's the easy way out but I don't think it's that my personal opinion probably wrong I don't think the decision we choose is going to be a problem but they should have people should have a choice to vote and then they vote it down that's fine, can we just start I didn't say they should never vote but I mean I'm on this planet and everybody's going to be there may be a negative group and that's fine but if they vote it down I'm not sure there's any options left except who's consolidated by force or whatever we where we have to do and they can live with their decision I will live with their decision I just wanted to add from Tony's comments is that decisions are not black and white they influence them but they're not so black and white and the previous bond election that we held created divisiveness in that so I think that any bond we put forward will create that again at this point it's just to the level of the old free and yeah we would all love to have the status quo and keep everything like it is now but it's it's just not possible at this point we no longer have one in the school houses we know 15 in this area or something like that it's just not possible and more for us and I think that that's and that's part of it that's why I have to look forward more than what our feelings are and what is best for our district in the long run hopefully we're making a decision that will impact it for a long time people need to look beyond but what is it going to do for my town trying to look at it as a district at the surveys we sent out like Jim talked about did anything they were 48, 52, 52, 48, 51, 49, 50, 50 I mean that's the divisiveness that you're talking about has brought back a 50-50 split on any decision the last one failed by 300 votes I mean it was a tight race I don't remember the numbers quote me on 300 but a point again that whatever we decide is going to be very, very split we are the only unified school district in Wabasi County with declining enrollment the other unified school district is now larger than us and they have a combined K-12 well if we have an opportunity to grow I believe it's as a united front in a location and not spread out it seems to be parent's first choice is deciding to go to something that is more collective located with everybody together my kindergartners with my freshman I can go pick them up and go to the games all at once and that's proof in the many sleeves look at them grow they're still spread out as Jim's pointed out pointed out but they're a five-day school they don't have they have to have the space they can't build fast enough but it's going to be a fighting divisive My only thing to mission valley we don't just take a location a little bit to do with that we're going further away to where they're drawing their students from because it's a fact where they're drawing their students from it is there's kids from Rossville to go there there's kids from Alma to go there there's kids from Topeka there's kids from Northline County why don't they go to Northern Heights you're saying they're drawing kids from there from Northern Heights yeah and there's no easy route to get to mission valley now there's no as far as ease of access goes it would be the most complicated school around us the staff members that I know say they're drawing from Topeka we should be drawing some from Manhattan pretty quickly let's get closer to Manhattan I mean that's cool we're going to get too big we all know the middle of the district is just near Alma it's much nearer Alma than in Plexigar the center do you direct the center of the district to help me we don't have a population center across the street from me that might be an impairment I asked a farmer a local farmer last week why he did not support the previous bond and his exact comment was I couldn't support the previous bond because it was in too many locations the reason he had for that was I have three feedlots within ten miles of each other why would I put working facilities at every single feedlot when I have working facilities at home that I need to invest more money in I'm going to just add more pens that's easy for me it may not be for some people but when he put it that way the patrons already built the working facilities and I didn't I couldn't even vote in the last bond it was barely old enough to they built the working facilities there though I didn't do that I think this is everybody has good level points if you're looking at it black and white and the financials of it it's logical but when you factor in the emotions it's hard but I agree with Kelly in that we need to stop looking at this how does it benefit each town because we're a Buncie school district I think it used to be PACS ago middle school or whatever and then you've got Alma and I don't know all that district exactly but we are one school district we need to do what's best for the school district and I do think the patrons should have a vote I don't know that I agree with the comment that if this particular vote fails if it goes up for vote in November if it fails then we really don't have any other option but to force consolidation because I think I think we do have to just point to viable options we have two viable options we have the two locations and we have the one location with the 50-50 split on every vote that we threw out there and every survey we threw out there that was a viable option too if this failed if this goes up for vote and it fails Pandora's box by asking this question I don't even know what the author wrote out there you know if it fails then why couldn't we go back to the option that was presented by the committee and say okay so the first option that we presented it failed because of cost and buildings and then all the other millions of reasons that were thrown out there and if we put this up for vote and it fails then that question answer right but they could we go back to at least put this forward to vote right there's nobody else that there's a so I don't think that is true that we don't have another viable option I think then I think they're both that I think that they are both good options always said that then I would I mean I guess my suggestion would be if this one is the patrons say no we don't want it all in Alma and I guess we do need to maybe we should give them that opportunity to say yes or no because that has been the main source of contention with this bond discussion is which location or locations so maybe we do need to get that answer and then if it's the answer that they don't want it then I say that we do what the community says and say okay fine we'll put that price tag on two options and see if it works they're both good options you know if we support this as a board and we put this up for vote and we all agree that this is something that we you know um then I still would ask that if we if this failed and it went back to another option that we would still have that same support looking at another option instead of just deciding that we're just going to force them all into Alma because I think that that is not that's not what's best for our district and I and I do believe we still regardless of whatever factors you throw into it need to try to do what's best and if everybody's going to come to Alma I believe it needs to be with a bond so it's done correctly and in a way that is beneficial to our students and not detrimental to the district and so like I'm sorry that comment just fired me up and I'm sorry I'm getting fired up here but I just don't I hate that the idea I detest the idea of saying that because the community doesn't pass something that then we're going to force them to do something they're going to force us to do something then it forces us to do something and I would argue with your viable option and Jim's viable options one cost less clearly we all know one location will cost less over the 25 years we all know that you're speaking you're both speaking of viable options well this might pass that means this is viable and this is viable but that's not what we're talking about we're talking about we know the budget problems the voters do not so passing a two location plan they're going to wonder well why can't you afford to maintain these schools and for it we've done this twice now and we still don't learn our lesson and we're not viable options because we know they're not we live in the long term they don't know that so to say that they're equal equally viable is just not it that's my opinion and to say that even to say what's best for the district if the voters vote for a two town solution that can't possibly be what's best for the district because we know where we'll be at the end of the volume we know that because we're there now so to pardon me it exponentially grows so right now we're here but what happens over time is our buildings age and we can't invest the money because we don't have money in our capital alley because we're spending it on salaries it exponentially grows over time and at some point in time we get to a point where that building is no longer worth it costs more to fix it and repair it than it will to if we would have done something five years ago or ten years ago and the longer that we put off trying to do something with our budget the longer that we put off trying to either pass it on that helps to reduce our overall operating costs and tend to fix our maintenance issues that exponential curve just goes up higher and higher and it goes along for a while and then it exponentially and actually when we should be spending well here's what I know about we should be spending about 2% a year of the replacement value of that building is what we should be spending on maintenance each year and so we're either spending it each year or saving it up because then we have roof that we need to do or an HVAC system but we need to be spending at a minimum 2% per year those would be industry standards I just wanted to add that so that we know that we can't wait each year that we wait the deferred maintenance is going to go up even more than it is now and the other thing I would add I know that a lot of these figures probably got from what we had information that we got from the architects and the construction costs are inflating quite a bit so that we know that it may be different than this and our patrons know that that might have been 15 million 2 years ago but it inflation is that's a valid point it was actually 12 million the girl brought it up the first time oh so it's added for inflation well I don't know you need to vote on in November can I just add something that we would want to refine this yes right because it may not be present this option and then BHS will help us right okay thank you I just didn't want us to get stuck on something denied in these things and then we need to that's a good point to make so all in favor no presenting bond option with one location of the road in November I'll oppose I'm not going to approve okay so should we then put you on this this oil to refine this I would assume that at our next meeting we would discuss the details which is good because your next item is approving the construction manager at risk contract with BH BHS so anyway my point is though is that next steps would be to get them involved in what we discussed and they can finalize some numbers to be discussed at the next board meeting would be what I would suggest would we also be involved in HTK is that not yes okay so maybe either through BHS and or if you remember BHS then started going through the stuff and then could bid based upon what HTK was giving okay so maybe we contact them and see if we can get some estimator numbers on this a little bit for construction manager at risk to get them to be on the contract no it's just an official contract we've selected them but it's actually a sign of the contract I so will I'll oppose that next one would be Taxico Middle School Brad just as far as for putting it up for sale and did talk to Steve Murray about being the representative and what that would look like and he agreed to do that and he said he would do dependent upon advertising and how long it took because he is percentage as far as commission is based upon advertising so three to four percent could be looked at and just again what the asking price should be so we just need to discuss whether or not is it recommended by the HTK if we get a recommendation from them I feel like we have a response saying that we have plans for a potential bond but maybe that's is that correct well I thought the recommendations were that if we had a buyer she'd lean towards us going ahead and selling if we were going to try and pass another bond then there might be the possible need to have that extra space or they would like as in the last bond there would be temporary costs for temporary spaces for kids I don't think that she recommended we keep it if another bond is being put up for a boat temporary we sold the one for 2,400 bucks didn't they were like 3,500 a month or something like that wouldn't it? yeah if this is the bond that we passed we won't need extra space and so surely you don't want to argue that we're going to save three more years in case we need the space we don't think we'll need it though we're adding on we keep all schools open until we move it over there it's the fastest I would hate to keep it if you're having a building that the maintenance costs are going to continue and it's going to just deteriorate that was not being used and we have some that we think is interested and I just think it's my thing yes it is I so moved to get the extra middle school set up and ready to sell under the current Betsy help us out that appropriate motion can they ask you a price of 125,000 all in those can I assist them originally when we were talking about selling that building I thought we talked about no competition clause or something to that effect yes and that's in here too that's a good point is saying that with the 125,000 with the no competition clause educational competition yeah okay what are the negotiations what are standard things we do have to negotiate amount of work as far as hours amount of work production and torso if that's a scenario salary and wages health insurance we already have met and talked with them about and have changed to the drop the green bush plan and went to the blue cross for shield gap plan of the things that would be included in the in the letter we just need to have just a new sign of this or use your stamp I'll do a wedding got it again the personnel there's one other thing I messed up I didn't get on their grounds fertilizer growth control on the agenda yeah I yeah I feel to do it when we were changing the agenda I yes and the reason I say that is if you have something that comes out of negotiations and somebody negotiated executive session that then they can say come out of executive session make a motion so yeah I move to add grounds keeping to the consent agenda to the regular agenda that's fine I say a little rubber standing all right all of those we, Tree Green has been who's been doing it in the past and Dustin Severs who's been doing some work for us has asked and he's starting a business with that and basically long story short when it all came down through everything about $40 difference that he was a little higher 40 bucks worth and wanted to keep things local and I think we need to do that with our local patrons and taxpayers so we'd recommend that we go with Dustin Severs bid for the grounds fertilizer growth control that's when I move to new stuff all of those are new discussion all of those say hi no other than I did remember to get Sarah on there as a school mental health liaison one thing I would say just quickly that on our positions we, you know, we went the standard way with newspapers and those kind of things, the website all that kind of thing and we I don't remember the exact one that we had before where we went O for transportation director position and we advertised in the Pico Journal which then as a part of that it included indeed and indeed is then what we have started using on some of these other positions and it's a little more expensive just depends on how much you use it some it's by day some it's by application but long story short then it's helped us to get some good people I mean we had 11 for the school mental health liaison position quality applicants so not all of them showed up to be interviewed which happens I think on a regular basis with jobs right now but anyway we've got a great candidate and so I just wanted to let you know that if you see well we're spending quite a bit more on these advertising or things but we backed off some of the paper stuff so to do that so and we're moving forward with positions like bus driver like food service and again getting them to show up to actually interview but you're interested so you scheduled it for interviews and I just want to show it to you okay are we accepting employment as submitted as it's listed here yes so or just on video I wish thank you I mean it's not like that beyond doesn't care since eMotion to have you read it all alright so promotion to approve employment and to extend Mrs. Hutley's contract then principal all offers contract this is Kent Park's contract and then and then accepted resignation retirement of David Amer of district mental health liaison and Spanish teacher that work chance in AES fifth grade teacher Sarah Eckstein as the mental health that is correct assumption so promotion in seconded all opposed say aye just to remind April 5th at 2 p.m. the Maple Hill KSD challenge award presentation I sent a calendar invite if you can make it that'd be great and I want to include you our state board of education representative and Ma will be here to make the presentation to Maple Hill and as more time or information comes out then we'll get it out there and I think I shared with you what it was about so that's April 5th at 2 p.m. and that's all I have to do I've just kind of been picking on the high school a little bit on the since the last meeting at least once a week they've been scrubbing both boards as I've witnessed them do it so that's the only thing I see though I went into the bathrooms checked the bathrooms and the locker rooms and both gyms were getting scrubbed so hopefully some improvements have been made in that area so I appreciate the staff taking that up with them thank you they've been very good about and we've been up front with them I called the Paul if you remember the vice president or executive with position exactly with APS with us from Nebraska that came and presented and just said hey this is where we're at and so instructed and we will be withholding and so we've done that and working with their managers both regional manager and they've been coming out a lot more and also been our regular onsite manager as well so hopefully we can continue to move forward with that and be a good scenario for everybody thank you and like Mr. Oliver said the fourth quarter snap your fingers in the sky okay all opposed