Welcome! Facilities Steering Committee Meeting 5 Agenda Review - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Facilities Steering Committee Meeting 5

Welcome!

Agenda Review

Agenda

• Survey Results
• Grade Realignment (Informational)
• Grade Realignment Impact on Facilities
• Cost & Options Discussion
• Meeting Wrap-Up

Survey Results

NACOGDOCHES ISD VOTER SURVEY

July 13 - 15, 2015 N = 301 respondents margin of error: + 5.7%

OBJECTIVES

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

To assess current levels of support and

• pposition to a (Version X: $60 / Version Y:

$30) million bond proposal. 2 To assess support for bond elements and potential support for the bond after learning more. 3 To measure the image of the Nacogdoches Independent School District. 1 To determine preference for repairing & expanding vs. demolishing & rebuilding. 4

DISTRIBUTION OF INTERVIEWS

Southeast n=71 24% Southwest n=82 27% Northeast n=148 49%

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

COMPARISON of SAMPLE FILE to RESPONDENTS

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

18-44 yrs 45-54 yrs 55-64 yrs 65+ yrs Registration

43% 15% 19% 23%

November 2012

33% 16% 22% 29%

November 2010

17% 17% 26% 40%

November 2011

7% 7% 20% 66%

November 2013

10% 10% 26% 54%

May 2014

18% 18% 26% 38%

Survey N=301

26% 18% 23% 33%

31%

All

VOTING BEHAVIOR

• QC. Thinking about local elections for a moment -- would you say that

you vote in all, most, only some, very few, or none of the local elections dealing with bond issues, taxes and local development projects?

15%

None

18%

Only some

27%

Most

0%

Unsure / refused

9%

Very few

All Most Only some Very few None Unsure / refused 18-44 19% 22% 14% 10% 35% 0% 45-54 40% 28% 17% 9% 6% 0% 55-64 32% 26% 23% 9% 11% 0% 65+ 35% 30% 18% 10% 6% 0%

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

NISD IMPRESSION

• Q1. Do you have a positive or negative impression
• f the Nacogdoches Independent School District?

28% 20%

49%

Strong Somewhat

Positive

20% 19%

39%

Strong Somewhat

Negative

12%

No opinion / Unsure

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

Positive Unsure / refused Negative Parent 67% 2% 24% Non-parent 41% 3% 45%

INITIAL BALLOT

• Q2. Although the projects for a possible bond proposal have not yet been set, if an

election on school bonds in the Nacogdoches Independent School District was held today, would you vote yes, in favor or no, against the issuance of (Version X: $60 / Version Y: $30) million in bonds for the construction and renovation of school buildings, and to make other improvements, with the levying of a property tax?

24% 27%

52%

Strongly Somewhat

Yes, in favor

11% 26%

36%

Strongly Somewhat

No, against

12%

Depends / Unsure

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

Yes, In Favor No, against 52% $60M 38% 52% $30M 35%

INITIAL BALLOT

• Q2. Although the projects for a possible bond proposal have not yet been set, if an

election on school bonds in the Nacogdoches Independent School District was held today, would you vote yes, in favor or no, against the issuance of (Version X: $60 / Version Y: $30) million in bonds for the construction and renovation of school buildings, and to make other improvements, with the levying of a property tax?

27%

Strongly

Yes, in favor

26%

Strongly

No, against

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

Adjusted based on 2014 May age scenario: 47.9% Yes Adjusted based on 2014 May age scenario: 52.1% No

extrapolated intensity: 50.9% Yes extrapolated intensity: 49.1% No

INITIAL BALLOT

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

Base Yes, in favor / Strongly No, against / Strongly TOTAL YES, IN FAVOR TOTAL NO, AGAINST DEPENDS / UNSURE NET YES, IN FAVOR Total 301 27% 26% 52% 36% 12% 15% SCPARENT - Parent of NISD Student Parent 89 52% 21% 71% 25% 4% 46% Non-Parent 212 17% 28% 44% 41% 15% 3% RR9655 - Age / Gender Male / 18-54 56 23% 30% 47% 45% 9% 2% Male / 55+ 73 19% 31% 48% 42% 10% 6% Female / 18-54 76 48% 17% 71% 20% 9% 50% Female / 55+ 95 21% 25% 43% 40% 17% 3% RQC - Vote local elections ALL - MOST 174 27% 31% 50% 41% 9% 10% SOME - NONE 127 28% 19% 54% 31% 15% 23% Q1 - NISD Image TOTAL POSITIVE 146 42% 7% 78% 13% 8% 65% TOTAL NEGATIVE 116 10% 51% 22% 67% 10%

• 45%

REGN - Region Southw est 82 29% 32% 47% 45% 8% 1% Southeast 71 37% 19% 68% 23% 9% 44% Northeast 148 22% 26% 47% 38% 15% 9%

19%

Taxes

14%

Rather spend it on Teachers / Education

7%

Not needed

34%

District criticisms / Wasteful spending

5%

Too much

15%

Need more info.

WHY AGAINST / HESITANT

• Q3. And in your own words, please tell me why you

(would vote against / are hesitant to vote for) the bond.

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

(n=145)

CONSTRUCTION OF NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

• Q4. The district’s elementary schools are currently over capacity and

the bond could allow for construction of a new elementary school in the northeast portion of the district where the district is experiencing growth.

20% 46%

74%

Strongly Somewhat

Favor

7% 15%

22%

Strongly Somewhat

Oppose

4%

No difference / Unsure

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

ENERGY EFFICIENCY AND SECURITY

• Q5. This bond could allow for needed repair of heating and cooling systems in

schools that will make them more energy efficient and would allow for district- wide safety and security improvements such as security cameras in schools.

27% 56%

83%

Strongly Somewhat

Favor

6% 10%

16%

Strongly Somewhat

Oppose

1%

No difference / Unsure

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

PROPERTY TAX IMPACT

• Q6. This bond package could increase property taxes by approximately (Version

X: $8.18 / Version Y: $3.73) per month for every one hundred thousand dollars

• f taxable property value, except for seniors whose property taxes are frozen.

28% 31%

59%

Strongly Somewhat

Favor

12% 23%

35%

Strongly Somewhat

Oppose

6%

No difference / Unsure

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

DEMOLISHING & REBUILDING OLD ES / CARPENTER

• Q7. This bond could allow for demolishing and rebuilding (Version A: an older elementary school building that

is / Version B: Carpenter Elementary School which is) that is over 50 years old, lacks space and needs several millions of dollars in repairs. Rather than invest more money into repairing and expanding (Version A: an / Version B: this) old building, this bond could allow for demolishing (Version B: Carpenter) and rebuilding it.

25% 41%

66%

Strongly Somewhat

Favor

9% 17%

26%

Strongly Somewhat

Oppose

8%

No difference / Unsure

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

Favor No diff / Unsure Oppose

“Older elementary” 68% 8% 24% “Carpenter” 65% 7% 28%

INFORMED BALLOT

• Q8. Having heard more about possible projects, would you vote yes, in

favor or no, against the issuance of (Version X: $60 / Version Y: $30) million in bonds, for the construction and renovation of school buildings, and to make other improvements, with the levying of a property tax?

27% 38%

66%

Strongly Somewhat

Yes, in favor

9% 19%

28%

Strongly Somewhat

No, against

6%

Depends / Unsure

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

Yes, In Favor No, against 68% $60M 27% 64% $30M 29%

25% 17% 6% 4%

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

COMPARISON OF INITIAL & INFORMED BALLOT

Switched No, against Depends / Unsure

49%

Solidifiers & Switchers

Stayed Yes, in favor Stayed No, against Switched Yes, in favor

52% 12% 36%

Initial ballot (Q2)

Yes, in favor No, against

Unsure

Informed ballot (Q8)

66% 6% 28%

Yes, in favor No, against

Unsure

CARPENTER ELEMENTARY PREFERENCE

• Q9. Carpenter Elementary School is over 50 years old, lacks space,

and needs several millions of dollars in major repairs. Now, which

• ne of the following do you prefer to do with Carpenter Elementary?

SE NE SW 18% 21% 18% 3% 1% 4% 26% 24% 31% 18% 23% 20% 35% 31% 28%

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

Unsure / refused

19%

Depends 2% Demolish Carpenter and rebuild a replacement school on the existing location

26%

Re-purpose it for something else, like Pre-K, and build a new elementary school in a different location

Most Prefer

31%

Demolish Carpenter and build a new elementary school in a different location

21%

NP 26% 3% 25% 20% 27% P 4% 1% 29% 24% 42%

42% 51% 30% 3% 53%

Next Most Prefer

10% 1% 26% 20% 21%

CARPENTER ELEMENTARY PREFERENCE

• Q9. Carpenter Elementary School is over 50 years old, lacks space,

and needs several millions of dollars in major repairs. Now, which

• ne of the following do you prefer to do with Carpenter Elementary?

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

Unsure / refused

19%

Depends 2% Demolish Carpenter and rebuild a replacement school on the existing location

26%

Re-purpose it for something else, like Pre-K, and build a new elementary school in a different location

Most Prefer

31%

Demolish Carpenter and build a new elementary school in a different location

21%

• Q10. A few of the district’s elementary schools are nearly 50 years old, lack

space, and need several millions of dollars in repairs. Please listen to the following statements and tell me which one comes closest to your own opinion.

REPAIR & EXPAND vs. DEMOLISH & REBUILD

33%

Other people say we should repair and expand these existing buildings, including adding portables if necessary, in order to keep today’s costs as low as possible.

9%

Unsure / refused

57%

Some people say we should demolish and rebuild these buildings, even if it costs a little more money today because it no longer makes sense to continue invest millions of dollars into these older buildings.

1%

Depends

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

NP 11% 2% 35% 52% P 2% <.5% 28% 69%

CONCLUSIONS

2

While the total “yes” and total “no” responses on the initial ballot (52% and 36%, respectively) may suggest passage of a bond if the election were held today, intensity figures actually point to a toss-up (27% strong yes versus 26% strong no). Moreover, voters

• ver 45 years of age have higher intense opposition than intense
• support. This underscores the importance of a strong parent

turnout. After voters hear more about the bond elements, total support increases to 66% while total opposition decreases to 28%. And intensity figures favor the bond on the informed position. This shows the value of an effective communications strategy.

3

Nearly five out of ten respondents (49%) have a positive impression of NISD while nearly four out of ten (39%) have a negative impression. Strong positive views (20%) are equal to strong negative views (19%). Negative impressions are led by non parents (who are older and typically turnout at higher rates than younger voters.)

1

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

CONCLUSIONS, cont.

6

Voters are split in their preference for what to do with Carpenter. Three out of ten respondents (31%) prefer re-purposing the school while 26% prefer rebuilding on site and 21% prefer demolishing and building a new school elsewhere, while 19% were unsure. (47% prefer an option pertaining to demolishing). After arguments provided in Q10, a majority of respondents prefer demolishing and rebuilding (57%) over repairing and expanding (33%).

7

There is no statistical difference in support/opposition to a $30 million bond versus a $60 million bond. (Of course, this split sample is different than asking which amount voters prefer.)

4

Baselice & Associates, Inc. Project# 15179

5

A majority of voters support demolishing and rebuilding an older elementary school (66%) as it was explained in Q7. There was no statistical difference between use of the words “older elementary school” versus “Carpenter Elementary School”.

Questions ?

Grade Alignment Committee (Informational)

• Teachers from all grade levels
• Met multiple times
• Research based
• Community input
• Additional Nacogdoches ISD Educator input

Committee Background

• Our grade alignment is based on what would be

best for our kids:

• PK K-3 4-6 7-8 9-12

Recommendation

• Safety

– Age appropriate space – Discipline

• Instruction

– Vertical/ Horizontal collaboration – More focused quality instruction

• Campus Climate

– Educational programs appropriately focused – Kids feel more apart of the campus

Strengths

} Thank you to:

• All members of the Grade Alignment

Committee

• Dr. Hayes and Mrs. DuChane
• Mrs. Holly Anderson

All of our suggestions are based on what is best for our students.

Discussion of Grade Realignment Impact on Facilities

Cost & Options Discussion

Tax Impact Scenarios

Bond Amount M&O Tax Rate I&S Tax Rate Total Tax Rate Tax Increase Projected Monthly Tax Increase Projected Annual Tax Increase Current $1.17 $0.1875 $1.3575 – – – $20 million $1.17 $0.24 $1.41 +$0.05 $2.57 $30.84 $25 million $1.17 $0.25 $1.42 +$0.06 $3.17 $38.04 $30 million $1.17 $0.26 $1.43 +$0.07 $3.73 $44.76 $40 million $1.17 $0.28 $1.45 +$0.09 $4.96 $59.52 $50 million $1.17 $0.30 $1.47 +$0.11 $6.15 $73.80 $60 million $1.17 $0.34 $1.51 +$0.15 $8.18 $98.16

* ¡Based ¡on ¡a ¡home ¡value ¡of ¡$100,000. ¡

Cost Analysis

Type

Primary Scope

1 Project (New Construction) 1.1 New Elementary 600 Student Capacity $ 14,195,375 $19,146,137 1.2 New Elementary 700 Student Capacity $ 16,544,250 $22,314,203 1.2 New Elementary 800 Student Capacity $ 18,791,000 $25,344,527 1.3 New High School ** 1600 Student Capacity $ 73,186,000 $102,622,894 1.4 New High School ** 1800 Student Capacity $ 82,334,250 $115,450,755 1.5 New High School ** 2000 Student Capacity $ 91,482,500 $128,278,617 1.6 New High School ** 2200 Student Capacity $ 100,630,750 $141,106,479 1.7 New High School ** 2500 Student Capacity $ 111,262,500 $156,014,534 ID # Site PROJECT TOTALS Current Opinion

• f Probable

Construction Cost

Cost Analysis

Type

Primary Scope

2 Project (Additions)* 2.1 Addition * 4 Classroom + (Caf. 300 + Lib. Expansion 1600) $ 1,225,160 $1,652,446 2.2 Addition * 6 Classroom + (Caf. 300 + Lib. Expansion 1600) $ 1,637,199 $2,208,187 2.3 Addition * 8 Classroom + (Caf. 300 + Lib. Expansion 1600) $ 2,049,238 $2,763,928 2.4 Addition * 12 Classroom + (Caf. 300 + Lib. Expansion 1600) $ 2,873,316 $3,875,410 3 Project ( Renovations & Capital Improvements) 3.1 Renovation Capital Maintenance Projects 5,000,000 $ $6,743,794 3.2 Renovation Capital Maintenance Projects 10,000,000 $ $13,487,588 3.3 Renovation Capital Maintenance Projects 15,000,000 $ $20,231,382 3.4 Renovation Capital Maintenance Projects 20,000,000 $ $26,975,176 Footnotes: * Includes common area for the classrooms, main corridor, restrooms, mechanical room, IDF, & janitors closet) ** Includes main building and supporting structures (incl. athletics) ID # Site PROJECT TOTALS Current Opinion

• f Probable

Construction Cost

Option 1

Type

Primary Scope

1 Project (Additions + Capital Improvements) (298) $ 33,976,697 44,769,738 $ 1.1 Remove Overcrowding & Portables (650) 1.1 Addition @ Fredonia 12 Classroom Addition 264 $ 2,873,316 3,875,410 $ 1.2 Addition @ Raguet 4 Classroom Addition (above proposed 8 classrooms) 88 $ 1,225,160 1,652,446 $ 1.3 Renovations Capital Improvements 1.4 Renovation Fredonia Capital Improvements 83% $ 7,729,599 10,425,365 $ 1.5 Renovation Raguet Capital Improvements 52% $ 4,559,672 6,149,898 $ 1.6 Renovation Carpenter Capital Improvements 86% $ 7,588,950 10,235,663 $ 1.7 Other Renovations Capital Improvements $ 10,000,000 12,430,957 $ Cost Index ID # Site Additional Capacity PROJECT TOTALS Current Opinion of Probable Construction Cost

Option 2

Type

Primary Scope

2 Project (Elem. + Addition + Capital Improvements)* 5 $ 41,706,837 55,195,832 $ 2.1 Remove Overcrowding & Portables (542) 2.2 Addition @ Fredonia 12 Classroom Addition 264 $ 2,873,316 3,875,410 $ 2.3 Addition @ Raguet Proceed with Existing funded addition for 8 classroom $ -

• $

2.4 New Elementary Replacement School 700 $ 16,544,250 22,314,203 $ 2.5 Re-purpose /Close Existing Carpenter Re-Purpose ? (417) 2.6 Renovations Capital Improvements 2.7 Renovation Fredonia Capital Improvements 83% $ 7,729,599 10,425,365 $ 2.8 Renovation Raguet Capital Improvements 52% $ 4,559,672 6,149,898 $ 2.9 Renovation Carpenter Capital Improvements (none unless re-purposed) 0% $ -

• $

2.10 Other Renovations Capital Improvements $ 10,000,000 12,430,957 $ Cost Index ID # Site Additional Capacity PROJECT TOTALS Current Opinion of Probable Construction Cost

Option 3

Type

Primary Scope

3 Project ( 2 Elem. + Addition + Capital Improvements) (71) 43,130,686 $ 57,059,362 $ 3.1 Remove Overcrowding & Portables (196) 3.2 New Elementary Replacement School 700 $ 16,544,250 22,314,203 $ 3.3 New Elementary Replacement School 700 $ 16,544,250 22,314,203 $ 3.4 Re-purpose /Close Existing Fredonia Re-Purpose ? (520) 3.5 Re-purpose /Close Existing Carpenter Re-Purpose ? (417) 3.6 Re-purpose /Close Existing Nettie Re-Purpose ? (338) 3.7 Renovations Capital Improvements 3.8 Renovation Fredonia Capital Improvements (none unless re-purposed) 83% $ -

• $

3.9 Renovation Raguet Capital Improvements (none unless re-purposed) 52% $ -

• $

3.10 Renovation Carpenter Capital Improvements (none unless re-purposed) 0% $ -

• $

3.11 Other Renovations Capital Improvements $ 10,000,000 12,430,957 $ Cost Index ID # Site Additional Capacity PROJECT TOTALS Current Opinion of Probable Construction Cost

Option 4

Type

Primary Scope

4 Project (New High +Reconfigurations + Capital Improvements) 7,399 106,524,686 $ 146,766,205 $

4.1 New Construction 4.2 New High School 2000 Student Replacement School 2,000 $ 91,482,500 128,278,617 $ 4.3 New High School Site (If required) 100 acres $ 5,000,000 5,000,000 $ 4.4 Reconfigurations 4.5 Re-Purpose Old High to Middle Grades 6-7-8 (Current Enrollment =1360 students) 1,800 4.5 Elementary Level (Total Current Enrollment = 3384) 3,599 4.6 Re-purpose Moses & McMichael to Elem Re-Purpose 4.7 Moses Elem Re-Purpose 750 4.8 McMichael Elem Re-Purpose 750 4.9 Brooks Quinn Jones Minimal Renovation 788 4.10 Raguet Includes Current Proposed Addition 633 4.11 Thomas Rusk 678 4.12 Carpenter, Nettie, Fredonia Re-purpose or close 4.14 Renovations Capital Improvements 4.15 Renovation Fredonia Capital Improvements (none unless re-purposed) 83% $ -

• $

4.16 Renovation Nettie Capital Improvements (none unless re-purposed) 52% $ -

• $

4.17 Renovation Carpenter Capital Improvements (none unless re-purposed) 0% $ -

• $

4.18 Other Renovations Capital Improvements (incl Moses & McMichael conversion & Raguet Renovation) $ 10,000,000 13,487,588 $

Cost Index ID # Site Additional Capacity PROJECT TOTALS Current Opinion of Probable Construction Cost

Large Group Discussion

Meeting Wrap-Up

Final Committee Meeting

Tuesday, July 28, 2015 6:00 p.m. McMichael Middle School