Pacific Grove Unified School
Measure D Minutes
Address any questions to the Assistant Superintendent, Mr. Robin Blakley,
or call the Business Office at 831-646-6509.
February 6, 2007
Measure D Oversight Committee Minutes of February 5, 2007
1. The meeting was called to order by Chairman Cameron at 7:00pm.
2. Roll call found the following members present: Sam Teel, Alan Cohen, Mark Cameron, Julia Winslow, Carl Miller, Richard deSaulles, Dan Miller, Jennifer Jansen, Jean Ottmar
Absent: Jim Quinn
Public Present: Linda Williams
3. Adoption of Agenda: Motion was made by Ottmar, seconded by Teel to approve the agenda with the addition of a discussion of a possible site visit for members. Motion passed 9-0.
4. Approval of Minutes of 8/31/06: Motion was made by Teel, seconded by Ottmar to approve the minutes as submitted. Motion passed 9-0.
5. Individuals desiring to address the committee: None
6. Information/Discussion: Update on Measure D Projects: Blakley reviewed the status of the 6 projects that have been approved to proceed. A written status report was provided to committee members. Discussion occurred concerning the status of the previous Board discussions concerning school reconfiguration. Committee was informed that at this time the Board is no longer looking at reconfiguration that involves the relocation of the Middle School or the closure of either elementary school. Some discussion still may occur concerning grade changes at the 2 elementary schools as specific projects are identified.
Ottmar reviewed for the committee her experience addressing the Board as an individual concerning the use of Bond proceeds for reconfiguration activities. Member Winslow concurred that the Bond language had not specifically addressed the possible use of the funds for reconfiguration.
Discussion occurred concerning the amounts allocated for the identified projects, Blakley indicated that these were the amounts allocated by the Board at this time and specific Board action would be required to add additional funds to any project.
Concern was expressed by Member Dan Miller, for the large portion of the Bond (15%) that had already been allocated to the stadium project. The discussion followed, in which, it was again reviewed that committee members can address the Board at any time as individuals with respect to project priorities, funding levels and selection, but that the committee’s role was clearly defined within the legislation and bylaws as reviewing the expenditures of the district to ensure that they were in accordance with the Bond language.
7. Information/Discussion: Update on Selection of Additional Projects: Blakley reviewed that the Board had engaged HBFL Architects to update the Facility Improvement Plan prior to making any further decisions on project identification. The January 11th agenda item for the Board was reviewed to identify what the scope of work would consist of. It was also reviewed that the initial Plan on which the Measure D Bond was based took approximately one year to develop and it is possible that a similar time period may occur for this revision.
8. Information/Discussion: Update on First Bond Issue: Blakley reviewed that the school Board will be considering adopting a resolution authorizing the first series of the bonds to be sold in the amount of $6,000,000 to cover the initial cost of the first identified projects. It was discussed that the Bond is sized at the minimum amount to both fund the anticipated expenses but also to be relatively attractive in the Bond market. Decisions on future Bond sales will occur as further financial needs are identified. It was also emphasized that minimizing the initial Bond issues has the beneficial effect of maintaining a lower property tax rate until it is necessary to have that increased.
9. Discussion/Action: Meeting Schedule: In discussion, a question was raised by committee members as to when the committee’s first report to the Board was due. It was noted that no specific date is established, however, it was noted that a report to the Board, and public, of the committee’s activities should occur hopefully by June. It was also noted in the discussion that it is the District’s responsibility to conduct a performance audit through an independent auditor annually and that this report would ideally be available to the committee in the preparation of their own report. Questions were raised as to whether the performance report would be required in the first year since no activity had occurred. (Subsequent to the meeting, it was determined that a performance audit is required within the first 12 months after the approval of the Bond Measure and therefore the District is beginning to obtain this
audit). Discussion also occurred concerning the format of the committee’s report noting that examples from other districts and community colleges may be useful to review. Blakley indicated he would be willing to assist in the drafting of the report with an identified member or members of the committee. After further discussion, a decision was made to hold the next committee meeting on April 30th at 7:00pm at the District Office.
10. Site Visits: Member Ottmar indicated an interest in visiting school sites that she was unfamiliar with to assist in understanding the projects being proposed by the District. Request was made if other committee members would be similarly interested, Member deSaulles indicated similar interest. Blakley will coordinate site visitations with the members.
11. Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 8:15pm on a motion by Teel, seconded by Cohen.
Ref: Bond 2006 Measure D Meeting 2-5-07 Minutes