Independent School District 196

Rosemount-Apple Valley-Eagan Public Schools

Educating our students to reach their full potential
Strategic Planning Facilities and Equipment Task Force
12 p.m., October 14, 2014
District Office-Minnesota Room
Present: Task Force members Khia Brown, Michelle deKam Palmieri, Tom Idstrom, Karen Kellar,
Cathy Kindem, Julie Olson, Mark Parr, Randy Peterson, Jeff Solomon, Steve Troen and Rich
Wendorff. Absent: Task Force members Mary Kreger and Mike Schwanke. Guest: Scott
McQueen and Josh Greiner, Wold Architects.
Co-chairperson Jeff Solomon called the meeting to order at 12:05 p.m. and reviewed the agenda.
Mr. Solomon stated that Julie Olson, Mark Parr and he provided the School Board with a status
update on the progress of the Strategic Planning Facilities and Equipment Task Force at the board
workshop prior to the regular board meeting Monday night. A simplified version of the
elementary capacity summary analysis was also shared by Julie Olson. She explained the need
for additional rooms to compensate for instructional space being used that does not meet the
standard room size and the addition of 4-year old early childhood space. The School Board
members were very supportive of having 4-year old programming at each elementary school.
Because it may be hard for the community to understand the need for additional space in light of
the fact our enrollment is fairly stable, the board felt it was important to communicate what a
standard classroom size should be and how the current space is not designed for what the
district uses it for now.
In addition the Strategic Planning Facilities and Equipment Task Force PowerPoint presentation
and capacity concerns were shared during the regular School Board meeting. This is a first step
to begin getting the word out to the community regarding the possible facility and equipment
needs of the district.
Secondary Capacity Study
Dr. Parr shared that he will be meeting with secondary school principals next week to discuss
capacity issues at the districts secondary schools. Based on initial analysis results, three
schools (EVHS, SHMS, and RMS) are over capacity but Parr has the sense that capacity will not be
considered a terrible problem at the secondary level once key assumptions are re-evaluated. He
will bring his findings to the next Task Force meeting.
Building/Departmental Additional Facility and Equipment Requests (priority and cost)
As requested at the last Task Force meeting, Wold Architects added costs to the list of equipment
and facility needs identified by principals. Mr. McQueen shared the updated spreadsheet with an
estimated cost of $196 million. This does not include STEM, capacity, safety/security or
technology needs.
Mr. Solomon talked about having items fit into the concept of a three-legged stool; safety &
security, technology and space. The general consensus was that $196 million is a high number.
Dr. Olson met with elementary principals and put their requests into buckets of safety &
security, early learning/elementary capacity, technology, STEM/magnet/equity, other and
alternative facilities. After reviewing the list principals were able to remove some of the items

they felt were not as important as others. Olson will continue to refine the list over the next
week.
Dr. Parr met with secondary principals to discuss their list of requests and presented a list of high
school and middle school facility priorities as identified by our secondary building leadership
team. These lists were prioritized by strategic area and school. One important reccomentation
made by the high school principals was to take the turf request off the list. They understand this
is a controversial request and suggested the task force consider developing alternative methods
to finance.
The lists will be merged into one spreadsheet for the next meeting.
Tentative Scope Overview
Mr. Solomon shared a tentative scope of cost estimates based on project targets identified at this
time.

Technology Plan-fund a capital projects levy - $4 million annually - ($40 million)

Elementary capacity needs - ($43.9 million)
STEM Pathway/Corridor-updates to VMS and AVHS - ($12 million)
Safety and Security - ($24.6 million)
Site considerations-entry and traffic flow - ($11 million)

This totals approximately $132 million and is exclusive of the $196 million on the facilities and
equipment requests spreadsheet. If another 10%, or $13 million, would be added to this total
from the other category, total project costs could be approximately $145 million. To give this
amount perspective several smaller districts are asking $100 million plus in bond questions this
fall and next spring.
Mr. Solomon shared a handout showing the districts existing debt, alternative facilities non-bond
levy and other levies with the option of adding the potential capital project levy ($4 million for 10
years) and building bonds ($100 million) in 2016. For 2014 the annual debt service levies total
slightly less than $25 million. Although the handout indicates the debt is lower in 2015 the
School Board chose a tax strategy to keep the total levy (inclusive of debt) at the same level as
2014 by moving up the timeline of some alternative facilities projects and requesting a one-year
variance to a debt service reduction. Over the next several years existing debt will be paid off
and this creates an opportunity for the district to keep the estimated tax rate stable or minimize
the tax impact with the possible addition of a capital projects levy and building bonds.
Community Feedback Site Councils/PTA/PTO
Mark Parr shared feedback from the secondary site councils:
Lots of support for safety & security-do what you feel is necessary-high priority;
Need more information about how additional technology will be used for learning;
Space/capacity issues in the elementary schools-understand that full-day kindergarten
created a space issue but need more information on standard classroom sizes;
Early learning is a difficult concept for secondary parents to grasp. Need deeper
discussion to learn more, and
Turf is too controversial to add to bond.
Julie Olson shared feedback from elementary site councils:

Very supportive of the technology initiative and want equity moving forward;
It is about time to look at boundary adjustments;
Priorities are appropriate;
Want the 1:1 technology timeline moved up and provide explanation on how it improves
learning;
Consider building another school;
STEM efforts should be looked at across the board;
Space issues were brought up;
Recognize the need for security, and
Want more information and what is the tax impact.

Community input is the next step. Focus groups would provide more qualitative feedback from
our larger district community. In the past Budget Advisory Council members have facilitated
focus group discussions regarding budget adjustments and bond/referendum questions with
good results. The Task Force thought asking BAC members to facilitate the focus groups would
be appropriate. The Task Force will develop a plan for the focus groups at the October 28
meeting and this information will be shared with the BAC at their October meeting. The Budget
Advisory Council meets October 29 and will discuss this opportunity.
Communication
Mr. Solomon reviewed the updated calendar and noted the addition of a Task Force meeting in
December. That meeting will take place on December 9 from 9 a.m. - 12 p.m. in the Minnesota
Room.
Task Force members were reminded not to share project cost estimates at this time, outside of
the task force membership.
Principals may share with their staff the process the Task Force is following and some talking
point about the technology initiative.
Adjournment
The meeting adjourned at 2:40 p.m.
The next meeting will be Tuesday, October 28 at 12 p.m.