Board members will continue looking at facilities issues at all board meetings thru the end of May. Some initial ideas discussed so far include:

Replace Marcus Whitman, Sacajawea and Lewis & Clark Elementary Schools;

Build two new elementary schools and a middle school out in the south and west areas of the District where continued population growth is expected;

Replace the inefficient HVAC system at Chief Joseph Middle School;

Repurpose Jefferson Elementary School as a possible home for the Three Rivers HomeLink program and shift Jefferson students to other attendance zones in central Richland;

Purchase land parcels in the south and west areas of the District for future schools.

All parents, staff, community members and students who have an interest in facilities issues are encouraged to attend and give their input. The next board meeting is this Tuesday the 24th, 6:30 pm, at the District Administration Building.

• Tri-City Herald article - April 15, 2012
• Tri-City Herald article - March 16, 2012

Meeting Minutes

Facility Bond Planning Committee

Attendees:  John Steach, Dr. Jim Busey, Dannielle Clark, John Deichman, Rich Buel, Kim Guyette, Lynne McAdoo, Heidi Weisert-Peatow, Britt Creer, Todd Baddley, Mary Guay, Rich Puryear, Mike Hansen.

The meeting started at 7:00 with introductions follow by John Steach presenting a summary of the following past work by the district:  

• 2009 Long Range Facilities Planning Options Report
• 2011 30-Year Planning Report Debt Service and Community Tax Rate Impact for Facilities, Technology, Maintenance and Operations.

A discussion of committee timeline centered on preparation for a possible Spring 2013 Bond Measure.  A timeline will be needed to support having information to the board for review near the start of school in the fall of 2012.

The committee then had an open discussion on the process and deliverables which included:

• The need to involve the public along the way,
• Identification of housing sale trends by location,
• Projections on possible changes to matching funding in the state,
• What order of priority should projects be considered,
• Whether to renovate or replace specific current facilities,
• Growth need trigger points for additional schools, and
• Possible thresholds for project inclusion into the bond.

As an immediate path forward, a subcommittee will meet to develop a draft rubric to evaluate buildings along with a draft timeline for the committee work.  Volunteers for the subgroup are John Steach, Mark Panther, John Deichman and Britt Creer.  Anyone else wishing to participate in this work should contact John Steach for the date and time of the meeting.  This will be done in time for the products to be distributed for review of the committee prior to the next meeting on June 13^th, 7:00 PM in the Board Room.

April 2011

Click on the link below to read the Final Report of the Levy/Bond Planning Committee.  This is a detailed 30-year planning report which addresses Debt Service and Community Tax Rate Impact for Facilities, Technology, Maintenance and Operations.

• Final Report - Levy/Bond Planning Committee

February 22, 2011

The Ad Hoc Long Range Levy/Bond Planning committee has reviewed information collected on enrollment growth projections and funding options for construction. The committee has settled on four combinations of student enrollment growth and facility renovation cycles that they feel provide guidelines for future bond package options. These options are being presented to the board for feedback prior to preparation of the final report on financing the long range operational and facility needs of the district.

• Four Options for Renovation/Replacement of Facilities - 2/22/11

February 11, 2011

The Richland School District is starting to plan for the next round of major construction/renovation projects. Because of expected enrollment growth, the District will likely need an additional elementary school, middle school and high school in the coming decade. In addition to the need for additional schools, there are some pressing needs for renovation of existing schools. Sacajawea, Lewis & Clark, and Marcus Whitman Elementary Schools were built in 1970 while Jefferson’s primary wing was originally built in 1953 (some updating has been done to this wing).

“A citizens committee will be forming this spring to look specifically at when and how to fund these critical projects,” stated Superintendent Jim Busey. “I encourage staff and community members who are interested in facilities issues to contact me directly.”

Superintendent Busey can be reached at: jim.busey@rsd.edu or at 967-6001.

On January 11, 2011, the District received the summary report from Hovee Company relative to future enrollment projections and district growth. This report covered the basis for the determinations along with detailed projections for both base case and high growth scenarios. These two scenarios are being used to develop facility need schedules for new/renovated facilities to house the additional students. Click on the link below to read a detailed analysis of the summary report.

• January 2011 Enrollment & Facilities Report
• Student Enrollment Forecast - Hovee & Company, January 2011

Q. What is the current status of Richland School District Technology?

A. Since technology became an integral part of public education, the Richland School District has continually dedicated a portion of the annual operating budget to purchase new and replacement equipment. As state funding has fallen short of providing enough resources to meet our local community expectations in the area of technology, a portion of the regularly approved Maintenance and Operations Levy has supported technology. During the past three years, nearly $500,000 per year has supported a continuous five year refresh cycle for the district’s 4,000 computers, document cameras and projectors for every classroom and district wide infrastructure improvements. The recent construction bonds used for new and remodeled schools have not been funding sources for technology based on the philosophy of not wanting to create 20 year financing for equipment that may be obsolete in as little as five years.

Q. What is a Technology Levy?

A. Many other districts across the state have approached the challenge of providing adequate funding for technology through the passage of technology levies. These levies are similar to Maintenance and Operations Levies. However, the funds generated from a Technology Levy must be spent specifically on technology related equipment and professional development for staff. Additionally these levies have the flexibility of being approved for a duration ranging from one year to six years (M&O Levies are limited to a maximum of 4 years – currently the Richland School District has selected a 2 year cycle in order to keep funding requests close to operating periods).

Q. What would a Technology Levy fund?

A. In defining a potential Technology Levy, the Richland School District Technology Department recommends the following types of items could logically be grouped and funded separately through a technology levy:

 Desktop and laptop computers for labs, libraries, students, teachers and administration. To fully support the existing software required by the district, the current minimum hardware specifications are : 1GB RAM ,2.4 GHz processor speed, 2.0 GHz for laptops, Windows XP Pro, 40 GB Hard Drive, 10/100 Ethernet card, CD/DVD ROM drive. These specifications are in alignment with state standards and limit the viability of donated computers due to the cost of upgrading them to meet these standards.

 LCD projectors and replacement bulbs,

 Document cameras,

 Interactive white boards (IWB)

 Student response systems or “clickers” for immediate classroom feedback

 “Core network equipment” such as servers, data storage, switches/routers and wireless infrastructure.

 Staff training or professional development to prepare teachers in using technology to access and better utilize digital curriculum and resources.

Q. Why is additional technology needed in schools?

A. The heart of academic achievement is student engagement in current high quality learning opportunities. As classroom instruction methodology evolves, savvy school districts have embraced the technology necessary to meet these new requirements. LCD projectors, document cameras, IWBs, wireless devices, student response systems, etc. are examples of technology that Richland School District staff members currently depend on to directly impact student learning.

Digital curricula are quickly becoming an alternative to traditional textbooks. Supplemental material is often available via online resources and updated content is quickly available and less costly than replacing a textbook. However, adequate district resources are necessary in order to consider this as a consistently viable alternative.

Traditional paper and pencil state standardized student assessments have been phased out. Nearly all of the district assessments are via computer and are either hosted by the district or provided online. This dictates that hardware meeting minimum specifications for each assessment is absolutely mandatory in order for these student assessments to be effective.

In 2009 the district began assigning all secondary students with network and e-mail accounts as a way of fostering better communications between staff and students. Secondary students also receive individual accounts to the district’s student information system (PowerSchool) web portal. This online resource is provided to parents and students for the purpose of keeping them up to date with grades, attendance, classroom assignments, school notifications, etc. among other features.