Re-vetted school bond set for ballot

Published 3:00 pm Thursday, August 6, 2009

If voters see a Bainbridge School District capital bond proposal on their November ballots, they’re not likely to notice any change from the measure that narrowly failed in May.

The school board was expected to approve a resolution Thursday evening that would send the $42 million proposal back to voters in the general election. Over the last month, the board and district staff have poured over the costs bundled up in bonds with the help of consultants and a panel of local construction professionals. Estimates for the reconstruction of Wilkes Elementary School and the roughly $9.5 million in district-wide capital improvements were each reassessed.

Going into Thursday’s vote, the $42 million stood, but board members felt they had more information to back up their request.

“It’s wonderful that everything has been validated and I don’t think we expected it to turn out any differently,” board member Patty Fielding said. “I think the important thing is that any questions people might have about the bond now, whether its scope or cost, the information is here.”

The board feels that public uncertainty about cost estimates contributed to the May defeat of the bond proposal, which fell just 0.02 percent short of the 60 percent it needed for approval.

In the weeks leading up to the vote, several islanders – most vocally, Robert Dashiell – questioned the district’s cost estimates for the Wilkes reconstruction project. Dashiell’s criticisms of the project costs were alluded to throughout the school board’s last two meetings.

The Wilkes project was initially estimated at $32.47 million by the Robinson Company. In July, district staff requested a second estimate, by Rider Levett Bucknall company, which came in at $31.03 million. Using a “best fit approach” the district has settled on $31.35 million as a new project estimate.

For further assurance the district assembled a panel of 10 community members, including architects and construction professionals, to review the project numbers. The group reviewed cost estimates for the proposed building and compared the Wilkes estimates to other elementary projects in the state. Panel moderator Rick Walsh said that by the end of the discussion, most panel members were satisfied with the construction and soft cost estimates compiled by the district.

Panelist John Pettit, who has worked as an architect with a national school design firm, told the school board that he liked the district’s plans but it could still be a hard sell in the community with only estimates in hand.

“It’s a good budget,” Pettit said, “it’s a reasonable budget, but it’s difficult communication at this point. You’ll never get 100 percent of people to agree with these costs.”

Dashiell participated in the panel discussions and said that while he appreciated the district’s effort to provide more detailed information, he remains skeptical of the numbers.

Dashiell has done his own comparison of the Wilkes proposal to other elementary projects completed in western Washington, using numbers provided by the Office of Superintendent for Public Instruction reported for state’s construction assistance program.

Dashiell said the Wilkes project seems comparatively high.

“They have crafted a premium priced school,” Dashiell said in an email. “The basic square-foot construction costs are on the high side but not unreasonable. The soft costs (in my opinion) are unusually high.”

According to district capital programs director Tamela VanWinkle, the OSPI numbers do not represent full construction costs and many of the “soft costs” the state does not match. In addition, VanWinkle said the Wilkes site has stormwater and septic issues that will be costly to upgrade and the school would be built to higher sustainability standards than many other schools in the state.

Another variable feeding into Wilkes reconstruction plan is demographics – specifically how the student population will change over the next decade.

In preparation to relaunch the bond proposal, the district requested Reed Hansen and Associates to update to a demographics study it completed for Bainbridge schools in 2007. The 2009 assessment reaffirmed the general trend mapped by the 2007 study, with enrollment continuing to decline, then stabilize and show a slight rebound by 2020.

The district has been planning to build the new Wilkes elementary with enough open space to accommodate classrooms for more than 600 pupils, though current enrollment at Wilkes is less than 500. According to the district, this would allow the school to house more classes if enrollment outpaces projections or, in an opposite scenario, absorb classes if precipitously falling enrollment forced the consolidation of elementary schools.

The district’s final step in reassessing the bond request was to vet the $9.5 million set aside for “essential renovations” at various campuses. Projects on that list, which includes projects such as electrical upgrades, roof repairs and HVAC replacement, were culled from a list of “immediate needs” identified during the district’s capital planning efforts in 2005. The district brought back the company that had made that initial report, DLR Group, to reassess those immediate facility needs. After meeting with maintenance staff and visually inspecting the buildings again, the group largely reaffirmed its 2005 report. Projects included in the bond measure would address about 25 percent of the “immediate needs” identified.