Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1988-07-19 adjJuly 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting with the School Board) (Page 1) 447 An adjourned afternoon meeting of the Board of Supervisors of Albemarle County, Virginia, was held on July 19, 1988, at 3:30 P.M., Meeting Room 5, County Office Building, McIntire Road, Charlottesville, Virginia. This meeting was adjourned from July 13, 1988. PRESENT: Messrs. Edward H. Bain, Jr., F. R. Bowie, C. Timothy Lindstrom (arrived at 4:20 P.M.), Walter F. Perkins and Peter T. Way. ABSENT: Mrs. Patricia H. Cooke. OFFICERS PRESENT: County Executive, Guy B. Agnor, Jr.; Director of Facilities Planning, Dr. William Suggs; Superintendent of Schools, Mr. N. Andrew Overstreet; and Assistant Superintendent,Mr. David Papenfuse. SCHOOL BOARD MEMBERS PRESMNT: Messrs. William Finley, Clifford Haury, Forrest Marshall, Charles Martin and Charles Tolbert and Mrs. Sharon Wood. Agenda Item No. 1. The meeting was called to order at 4:03 P.M. by the Chairman, Mr. Way. Agenda Item No. 2a. Status Report on the Career Ladder Program. Mr. Way said he had requested this status report because the pilot program has been in effect for one year. Now is the time, he said, for both Boards to evaluate the program and suggest any changes, before the program begins on a County- wide basis. He asked Mr. Overstreet to present the status report. Mr. Overstreet said the School staff and School Board have learned much from testing the career ladder program in four County schools over the past year. He said the first part of the program~ starting teachers on the ladder, became so complicated that the second part of the program, assigning higher levels of responsibility to the master teach'rs, may have been somewhat neglected. Although the career ladder plan Will be County-wide next year, he said, the plan will still be in its experimental stages. Mr. Overstreet said one of the goals of the career ladder plan was to raise the entry level salary for teachers to!a competitive level. The plan has accomplished this goal: the salary for first-time teachers is now $20,000, which ranks twentieth in the State.· He said he thinks it is impor- tant to keep an eye on these salaries to make sure the County does not fall behind again. Another goal of the career ladder plan Was to give teachers an opportun- ity and the incentive to advance within the ~eaching profession. He said it is too early to tell whether the program will~ meet this goal, but he thinks the indications are good. Mr. Overstreet then described how teachers' salaries would be distributed in the career ladder plan during 1988-89. He said the base increase would be $300, which he thinks is low. He said he would prefer a base increase of around $500 to help maintain the competitive entry level salary. He said it may be necessary to increase the base salary next year to stay competitive with other localities. He said the $300 base increase insured that the County would meet the 7.3 percent increase necessary!in order to be eligible for State incentive funding. He said about 61 percent of the 666 teachers eligi- ble for the career ladder plan will receive b~tween $1300 and $8300 in salary increases. Mr. Overstreet said it has been rewardin after being planned for so long. He said he successful because the teachers have been inv implementation. Mr. Way asked if the teachers will parti g to see a program go into effect thinks the program will be ~lved in its planning and its ~ipate in evaluating the career ladder program. Mr. Overstreet said "yes", tile steering committee, which evaluates the program and any suggested changes, is largely composed of teachers. He said the steering committee will send a set of recommendations for the program to the School Board sometime this summer. Mr. Way asked if teachers on the career Sadder must work towards advanced degrees in order to move up the ladder. For ~ teacher to attain the highest 448 July 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting with the School Board (Page 2) level, Mr. Overstreet said, he or she must have a Master's degree. He said graduate work, experience in the classroom and proficiency in the classroom are the three factors that contribute to a teacher's progress along the career ladder. Mr. Way said he thinks the School Board and School staff should reevalu- ate the importance of the Master's degree to the career ladder plan. He said he is sure there are many good, dedicated teachers who do not want to spend their time earning an advanced degree. Mr. Way said he is also concerned that teachers who have chosen not to enter the career ladder program may be treated as second-class teachers by both the School administrators and the general public. He said some teachers have good reasons for not choosing the career ladder and he does not think they be considered inferior to their colleagues~ Mr. Overstreet said the teachers on the steering committee are sensitive to this problem. He said both teachers and administrators are promoting the voluntary aspect of the career ladder as one way of preventing a caste system from forming in the schools. Mr. Tolbert said this is one reason the School staff and School Board wished to have a higher base salary, high enough so teachers will feel they have a respectable salary and that they are expected to be excellent teachers. Since there were no more questions for Mr. 0verstreet on the career ladder program, the Board and the School Board moved on t~o the next agenda item. Agenda Item No. 2b. Discussion of Capital Improvem'~e~ats Program. Mr. Tolbert said he would like to explain the difference between the estimates for Meriwether Lewis Elementary School and the ~rozet Elementary replacement school. He said the architect for the Crozeti project estimates that the cost per square foot would be around $74. He s~iid the architect calculated this estimate by dividing the cost of the tota~ project, including bringing water to the site and land acquisition, by the ~iquare footage of the bu~ilding. He said the School Board had estimated that the cost of Meriwether Lewis Elementary School would be about $58 per square fooit. He said this estimate was based on the cost of the building only. He said the cost of the entire Meriwether Lewis project would equal about $65 per square foot. When the architects for the Crozet Elementary replacement school made calculations based on construction costs alone, they reached a figure bf $68 per square foot, which is close to the cost of the Meriwether Lewis iproject. He said the Board set a limit of $4,000,000 on the c~6st of the Crozet Elementary replacement school. He asked if the BOard in~Mnded to limit that figure to the costs of construction only, or the cost of '~he entire project. Mr. Perkins said the Crozet Elementary replacement s~¢hool began as a $3,000,000 project and now it is estimated to cost $5,200.~000. He said the $4,063,000 allocated to the Meriwether Lewis project was supposed to build the whole school, whether the construction costs $58 or $65 per square foot. The Crozet replacement school may be only three-quarters the size of the Meriwether Lewis School, yet it will cost $5,200,000 at $74 per square foot. He said he does not think the figures add up. ~ Mr. Tolbert said the Meriwether Lewis School actually cost more than $4,063,000. He said the School Board funded some of the f~urnishings, such as the cafeteria furniture, with money from the operations b{idget. If the Board wishes the School Board to use the operations budget to p~y for a larger percentage of a CIP project, it can be done, he said, buti~he does not think this is fair to the citizens of the County. ~i Mr. Lindstrom said Meriwether Lewis is bigger than t~e Crozet replacement school and he feels its elaborate design added to the cos~. He believes that the size and the design would offset inflation costs, all~wing a reasonable estimate for the Crozet project to be drawn from the actual costs of the Meriwether Lewis project.~ July 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting with the School Board) (Page 3) 449 Mr. Bowie said he does not understand why the SChool staff does not use old equipment from schools no longer in use. He said he sees no reason why a new school must have new furniture and new equipment. Mr. Tolbert said equipment ages sometimes faster than schools do. If the budget for the Crozet replacement school is limited to $4,000,000, he said, the architects will have to make some serious cuts to the cost of the school. In his opinion, he said, these cuts will make the school inadequate and a source of future regret to the County. Mr. Lindstrom asked what would have to be cut to reach the $4,000,000 budget. According to the plans presented by the architect to the School Board, Mr. Tolbert said, the cost for the necessary spaces in the building, including space for the administrative staff, the classrooms, cafeteria and the gymnasium, has been cut to the minimal level. Mr. Charles Martin said the architect convincingly argued that the building could not be designed any cheaper. Mr. Forrest Marshall said the architects did design a semicircle to be built on the back of the school, to save hall space and heating costs. He said the architects might be submitting a high cost per square foot to protect themselves when they bid on the project, because the School staff has switched architects after receiving bids higher than the original estimates. He said he personally thinks the cost for the Crozet school is as low as it can be without cutting into the cost of materials uSed to build the school and he does not know if these kind of cuts will result in a safe school. Mr. Bowie said the Crozet replacement s~hool was originally a parity project involving the expansion and upgrading of the Crozet Elementary School. A year ago, he continued, it was discovered ~hat there was only a $600,000 difference between expanding the old school and building a new school, so everybody though it would be a good idea to build a new school. According to !'difference between fixing up the the latest estimates from the architect, the~. old school and building a new school is much~greater, so a new school may not be such a good idea now. He said perhaps th~ School Board should reconsider the original issue of parity. Mr. Tolbert sa~d the cost of expandmng ~nd upgrading the old school has ~ab~er~e~~ ~lpro~c~l~r~h~t~Sb~!~ ~nC~~e~r~mt~ ~efour years ago, by an architect or consultant who'was not hired to build the project and, therefore, felt no responsibility for the accuracy of the estimate. Mr. Way said he supported limiting the ~udget for the Crozet replacement school to $4,000,000 based on the argument MrI. Lindstrom presented earlier: Meriwether Lewis School was built for 600 students at a cost of $4,000,000; a school built for 450 students a year and one-half later should not cost more. If it turns out that $4,000,000 is inadequat~~ to build the school needed for this area, he said, his decision is not set in stone, but he thinks there is a rational basis for the limit of $4,000,000. Mr. Overstreet said there are differences, particularly in the areas of site acquisition and preparation, between the Meriwether Lewis and Crozet replacement schools which invalidate such a comparison. Mr. Marshall said he thinks that the completion of ~be ~R~ University hospital will make bidding more competitive and allow School projects to be built for less. Mr. Martin said it makes sense to him to announce that there is a limit of $4,000,000 on the Crozet replacement school. He said this practice may help keep prices down. He said the architect:convinced him that the school will cost $4,700,000, but setting the lower limit may make the bidding more competitive. Mr. Bowie suggested that the School Board find out how much it would cost for the expansion of the existing Crozet Elementary School. Although he would prefer to have a new school, he said, perhaps'the County should return to the original parity plan, if it cannot afford a new school. Mr. Tolbert pointed out that renovating ~he school would entail vacating it for 18 months, which would be costly. 450 July 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting with the School Boar~ (Page 4) Mr. Perkins said it would be difficult to renovate the Crozet Elementary School due to the way it was built. He added that the school sits on only nine acres, which may not be enough land for a 450-student school. He said the County should have a school designed that will meet its needs for years tc come, but paying for this design is a lot like buying a car: the car salesman asks you how much money you have to spend and then finds a car that takes all that money. He said he thinks the budget should be flexible enough to cover additional costs if necessary, and the budget has been this flexible in the past, in the cases of Burley Middle School and Stone Robinson Elementary School. Mr. Overstreet said he agreed with Mr. Perkins and pointed out that a new building would last twice as long as a 60 year old, renovated and expanded building. Mr. Martin said the cost renovating Crozet Elementary School must also include the expense of housing the students somewhere else for eighteen months and the cost of hiring the architect to design a new school, even if the County never builds the school. He said he thinks it is foolish to spend time and money making a decision, such as building a new school, and then decide to do something else. Mr. Bain said he is concerned architects and builders may be selling the County more expensive materials than necessary for a safe school. If there is a limit placed on the project, he said, he thinks it is likely that builders will find less expensive materials that are just as safe to use. Mr. Lindstrom said he has complained about architects for the ten years he has been on the Board and he has learned one thing: set a low limit on spending for a project, because the actual cost will always be higher than the limit. He said his skepticism is not intended as criticism of the School Board. He said he thinks the cost of $4,000,000 for Meriwether Lewis Elemen- tary School was high and it would have been interesting Go see what kind of school could have been built for $3,500,000. Mr. Agnor said there are two professions whose membe~rs oversee the work of architects. In the first, someone with training as a~ architect checks the architects' work from the very beginning, the design phaS~. The second profession is that of the cost-estimator, who studies the'i estimate for a particular project and develops his or her own estimate from the architects' design plans. Mr. Marshall said he thought Mr. William Sugg was h~red to oversee the architect. Mr. Overstreet sa~d Mr. Sugg manages the projiects internally. He said Mr. Sugg checks some of the costs for a project, comparing them with costs in other areas, but he is not considered a staff arlehitect. Mr. Way said he would like to make a general comment~, about the school projects in the CIP. He said he is sure some of the items the Board has cut from this year's CIP requests will show up in later yearsi such as the Albemarle High School and Henley and Jouett Middle School~ projects. Mr. Bowie said he felt there was not enough information on so~e of the projects for him to support funding them at the requested levels. Mr. Tolbert referred to a memorandum to Mr. Overstre~t from. Mr. Sugg, dated July 14, 1988, and entitled "Response to CIP ProposAls Submitted by the Board of Supervisors". He asked if members of the Board have any questions about the information presented in the memorandum. Mr. Bain referred to a letter to Mr. David Papenfuse~from Mr. Harold Grimes, Jr., Director of Transportation, dated July 6, 1948,' and concerning a request for $160,000 to move the parts room of the bus sh~p~from the second floor to the first floor and to relocate the AdministratiVe Office to the second floor. According to the memorandum the remodelin~ would save 18.7 man hours a day, or $196.16 per day, $69,506.5~ per year. Mr.it Bain said he thinks the Board should place this project back in the CIP and f~nd it as quickly as possible. If the remodeling saves $69.506.52 per year, Mr. Bowfe said, then it will pay for itself in three years. But, he added, he does no% understand how this can be true, because the mechanics will have the same number of buses to July 19, 1988 (Afternoon Adjourned Meeting with the School Board) (Page 5) 451 repair as they did before. Mr. Bain said new buses will be needed to handle all the new routes. Mr. Lindstrom said he agrees with Mr. Bowie. that time and money will be saved, but it is impossible to tell whether the savings actually take place. Instead of spending five minutes to go upstairs for a part, he said, a mechanic may spend five minutes standing around. He said he would like to know what it costs to operate the bus shop now and exactly how the amount requested for the remodeling will come out of the operating costs. He said this is an exchange of a capital improvements project for an operations project; therefore, there should be an honest reduction in the operations budget if this project is financed through the CIP. He said it is easy to claim Mr. Grimes addressed the Board and said. every time a mechanic needs a part he or she has to climb fifteen steps to get that part. He said the shop repairs other County vehicles besides buses and there is more work to do than time to do it in. He said keeping the mechanics on the first floor would make them more efficient and more productive. He. said it does not mean he can cut a mechanic and still work on the same number of vehicles. Mr. Lindstrom asked if staff would investigate the possibility of hiring someone to check over the architects' work in the design phase of the Southside Elementary School. He also asked if the School Board planned to hire a cost estimator for the Crozet Elementary replacement school project. Mr. Tolbert said "probably", but the School ~$oard has not discussed this yet. Agenda Item No. 2c. Future Agenda Item~. Because of the lateness of the hour, this item was not discussed. Agenda Item No. 2d. Set Next Meeting D~te. Mr. Agnor said Mrs. Cooke, who is not p~esent today, had suggested that the Boards meet together early in the day fo~ a breakfast meeting. He said he and Mr. Overstreet also discussed setting a ~egular monthly meeting. After some discussion, both Boards decided to meeti~at 8:00 A.M. on Monday, August 22, 1988, and to consider making the fourth Monday in every month a regular meeting date for the two Boards. i Mr. Lindstrom said he cannot attend, but he does want to be present during a discussion of the Whitewood Road property. Agenda Item No. 2e. Other Matters Not Listed on the Agenda. matters were brought forth. No other Agenda Item No. 3. Adjourn. With no business to come before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 5:21 P.M.