Looking ahead and future facilities planning

A big THANK YOU to each and every Oak Park and River Forest resident who voted on the referendum question. The referendum was defeated.

What's next? Trust must be built. Transparency must be apparent. True LONG TERM PLANNING must take place thats meet the needs of the many, not the wants of a few. 

At a special meeting held on Tuesday, December 13,  the BOE approved a Resolution for the school administrators to create a plan for a revised and improved stakeholder committee consisting of OPRFHS staff and administrators, community thought leaders, but NOT hired consultants, architects, etc. The discussion must revolve around Those Things That are Best (for the students). 

A non-partisan professional facilitator will be hired to create and guide the committee. The details are to be announced at an upcoming BOE meeting. 

The high school issued a statement on December 15 that was sent to families and the community via Huskie e-mail.  Read the full statement HERE.  It says, in part: 

What happens next? In the past five years, the district has led two long-term facilities planning committees and multiple pool committees, as well as a strategic planning process. With the community at an impasse regarding facilities issues, district administrators have recommended initiating a different process, one that includes pools, locker rooms, performing arts classrooms, etc., but goes even further to ask: What are the instructional needs of the next generation of learners, and how should the high school’s facilities be altered to meet those needs... .
..Administrators are planning to make recommendations to the Board in January regarding creating the committee.

(post updated December 17)

Next Steps - Stay Informed - D200 Board meeting Thursday, NOV 17

The OPRFHS School Board holds its next regularly scheduled meeting on THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 17 at 7:30 PM.  When available, the AGENDA will be posted HERE (scroll down the page to the Nov 17 meeting date and click on the "agenda" in the right column) 

The best way to follow this issue and know what the next steps will be is to attend these meetings. See our update from November 9 HERE for more information.

ABSENTEE BALLOTS - As these are counted, the vote totals are changing and the NO lead has narrowed.  NO now leads YES by 68 votes.  The final count may not be certified by the county clerk for another week or so.  This LINK has updated totals.

It Looks Like We Did It

From the high school's website (Link)

Community votes down bond referendum question by 0.34% margin

 ...With the failure of the referendum, the Board will begin new deliberations to determine next steps and will keep the community apprised of developments in the project.

Results are in - it looks like the NO vote prevailed in a close race. Results posted here:  LINK
Updated (11/17) totals here: LINK (the NO lead has narrowed as absentee ballots are counted)
Suburban Cook County unofficial results for this election are displayed below.    The tally (as of 11/9/16):
17,384 votes NO 
17,266 votes YES


Thanks to a community-wide, grassroots effort, the voters of Oak Park and River Forest defeated the District 200 pool referendum today. We appreciate the efforts of everyone who worked to make sure that the community understood the issue.

We encourage everyone to stay informed and stay involved on the pool and related issues at the high school and in the community.

*note: Certified results may not be available until 11/29.

GET OUT AND VOTE TODAY

THE REFERENDUM QUESTION IS THE VERY LAST ITEM ON THE BALLOT.  THE QUESTION IS MISLEADING AND VAGUE.  WE ARE VOTING ON WHETHER OR NOT TO SPEND $45MILLION TAXPAYER DOLLARS.  FOR A POOL.

BTW - THE VOTE YES COMMITTEE (many of whom have driven the mega-pool conversation for years) REALLY KNOWS HOW TO SPEND MONEY.  FOR A POOL.

Parking Issues, Tax Issues - More Reasons to VOTE NO!

The Referendum Question is the LAST item at the very end of the BALLOT.  Vote NO!
PARKING 
^ smaller replacement garage is inadequate for current & future needs 
^ high school already pays almost $60K/year to rent spaces in the Pilgrim Church lot (LINK) 
^ garage needs routine maintenance but is structurally sound 
^ see the parking study HERE 

 TAXES 
^ tax increase for new bond debt 
^ as property taxes go up, so do rents 
^ reserves of $100 million taxpayer dollars 
^ other tax increases are coming, including an 8.97% tax levy increase in Oak Park (LINK pg 3) 
   and D97 (Oak Park elementary schools) plans a referendum for April 2017

WASTE 
^ $12+ million to demolish and rebuild a parking garage 
^ environmental impact of demolition 
^ land & money are limited resources and must be allocated with care 

FACILITIES 
^ pool is larger than needed; this large pool dominated all decisions 
^ academic needs are secondary, classroom & performing arts expansion totals just $7.5 million

Look HERE for MORE INFORMATION on any of these points.

READ THIS BEFORE YOU VOTE!!!

Two things you need to kNOw regarding the referendum question come voting day:

1. It is the very last item on the ballot. Past all the judges, past the other referendum and advisory questions. Very last item. Be sure NOt to skip it.

2. The question is easily misinterpreted as it only states the $25Million requested amount in referendum bonds. It does NOt include the $20Million in taxpayer monies being used by the school out of cash on hand (taxpayer money). $45Million in taxpayer money would be spent if the referendum passes. 

Please spread the word to every voter in Oak Park and River Forest on these two very important points.

Here is the referendum question. Note it does not specify sizes of: the pool, the new parking garage, the classrooms etc. It is vague. Should we be voting on $45Million worth of vague "ideas"???

"Shall the Board of Education of Oak Park and River Forest Consolidated High School District Number 200, Cook County, Illinois, build and equip a swimming pool addition to replace the existing 88-year-old swimming pools at the Oak Park and River Forest High School Building; alter, repair and equip said School Building to improve the learning, performing arts and locker room spaces therein; improve the site thereof; build and equip a parking garage to replace the existing parking garage; and issue bonds of said School District in an amount not to exceed $25,000,000 for the purpose of paying costs thereof?"
#D200VoteNo

Does SIZE matter? The 25-yard standard

Early voting begins Monday, October 24. Election day is Tuesday, November 8. Where to vote? See links in box to the right. The D200 Referendum question appears LAST at the very END of the ballot. The question refers only to the $25 million bond issue, not the full cost of the project. VOTE NO.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Much has been made about the size of the pool, both in the original proposal for a 50-meter (Olympic-size) pool and the current 40-meter “stretch” pool. Some might suggest that OPRFHS aquatic teams lack competitiveness with other schools because our current pools are 25 yards long and schools like York and Lyons Twp. have “stretch” pools. So does it matter? Let’s take a look at the information posted on the the high school website FAQ page… 

First, note that 25 yards is the standard lap distance in high school aquatics. At the college level it is different, but we are a high school, not a college!  Also, Leyden (E/W) Morton (E/W) and LT have 2 campuses, so two pools is really just one pool per campus.

(source:www.oprfhs.org/facilities/Frequently-Asked-Questions.cfm -second question down in the right-hand column)
More data on pool comparisons is on p. 25 here: www.oprfhs.org/board-of-education/documents/NatatoriumProposal.pdf  

Perennial top program Hinsdale Central has a 25-yard, SIX lane pool.  Their boys' team won the state title in February 2015.

Chicago Tribune article

Another consistent top finisher at the state level is New Trier. The pool on their main campus is an 8-lane, 25-yard pool that is 80 years old!  It has an advantage over the OPRFHS pools in that it was built with extremely wide decks, and has been remodeled over the years to keep up with changing codes.

Return to TOP

Did You kNOw...

Late last year this Board approved a $37M dollar plan to build an Olympic Pool on the site of the parking garage without going to Referendum and allowing the voters the choice on how to spend their money? The Petition for Referendum halted that madness. Now we get to vote. Since the current Referendum question was approved on 8/16/16 we are hearing of plan changes, cost changes, cost attribution changes, incomplete designs and somehow after 60 days of consideration after the community meetings in April this is being billed as a Long Term Facilities Plan not just a pool plan. But the pool and related expenses make up 84% of the total dollar amount. How are the voters to TRUST this decision is the right choice for the community? #D200VoteNo

Two things you need to kNOw regarding the referendum question come voting day:

Don't be FOOLED by fancy rhetoric

DON'T BE FOOLED!  The pro-referendum side paints this as a "historic" opportunity to make an investment in academic excellence and the arts.  They say almost nothing about the enormous pool to be built, or the wasteful destruction of the parking garage. They do not mention the total cost of the plan - $44.5 million - of which almost $37 million are the costs directly related to building the new pool facility. 
Very little is left over for other improvements. (updated costs linked HERE).  
This is NOT a school plan, it's mostly just a pool plan!

Use this LINK to request a sign.

WE ARE NOT ANTI-POOL. Most of us support improving the aquatics facilities at OPRF, but we favor a more pragmatic approach than the plan selected by the school board. VOTE NO on the bond issue that supports the more wasteful plan and send a message to the school board to follow through with a less costly and less wasteful plan such as the one referred to as Option A in earlier discussions.

Subscribe to our mailing list for occasional e-mails with updates on this issue, links to newspaper articles and other information, and to see HOW YOU CAN HELP with distributing flyers, displaying a yard sign and other ways! We promise not to deluge your inbox with frequent messages, so please sign up! Use this link: http://eepurl.com/cck3Yf

Return to TOP

HOW TO TELL YOUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS VOTING NO IS OK:

Looking for a way to tell your friends and neighbors its OK to vote NO on the pool referendum? Heres a letter a Vote NO supporter sent to her local contacts.  A great template to create your own personal letter. Do it this weekend!!! #D200VoteNO

"Dear friends:

As you know, our wild campaign season also includes a local referendum question that has become quite contested and controversial. I’m writing because I am concerned that one side of this question is not being portrayed correctly and to share information as you make a decision on November 8. The pool referendum in question would allocate funds for one pool option – one of the two most expensive options considered by the high school during many months of community meetings, surveys, committee meetings, etc. I am in firm agreement with Vote Yes proponents that our 88-year old pools need to be completely rebuilt. There are in very poor condition and have changed little since I went out of my way to get out of swim class more than 30 years ago! However, I am VOTING NO because there IS another viable option – one that would rebuild the existing pools, provide additional space for other activities and preserve a parking garage that has many years of life left - all for far less money, less disruption to campus, and less reliance on our ever-increasing property taxes. 

Did you kNOw...

We have a lot of information that you can share on our BASIC FACTS page!
Check it out.  

Check HERE for a recap of prior "Did you kNOw..." posts.

Did you kNOw...

Just over one year ago on October 14, 2015, this high school Board voted unanimously to demolish the parking garage and proceed with construction of an Olympic sized (50 meter) pool on the site. To fund that project’s $37.5 million price tag the Board would have taken $20 million from its fund balance and $17.5 million in non-referendum working cash bonds. This funding approach was chosen for the sole purpose of bypassing voters and avoiding a referendum.
#D200VoteNo

Two things you need to kNOw regarding the referendum question come voting day:

1. It is the very last item on the ballot. Past all the judges, past the other referendum and advisory questions. Very last item. Be sure NOt to skip it.

2. The question is easily misinterpreted as it only states the $25Million requested amount in referendum bonds. It does NOt include the $20Million in taxpayer monies being used by the school out of cash on hand (taxpayer money). $45Million in taxpayer money would be spent if the referendum passes. 

Please spread the word to every voter in Oak Park and River forest on these two very important points.

Here is the referendum question. Note it does not specify sizes of: the pool, the new parking garage, the classrooms etc. It is vague. Should we be voting on $45Million worth of vague???

"Shall the Board of Education of Oak Park and River Forest Consolidated High School District Number 200, Cook County, Illinois, build and equip a swimming pool addition to replace the existing 88-year-old swimming pools at the Oak Park and River Forest High School Building; alter, repair and equip said School Building to improve the learning, performing arts and locker room spaces therein; improve the site thereof; build and equip a parking garage to replace the existing parking garage; and issue bonds of said School District in an amount not to exceed $25,000,000 for the purpose of paying costs thereof?"
#D200VoteNo

DID YOU KNOW... a recap

*Just over one year ago on October 14, 2015, this high school Board voted unanimously to demolish the parking garage and proceed with construction of an Olympic sized (50 meter) pool on the site. To fund that project’s $37.5 million price tag the Board would have taken $20 million from its fund balance and $17.5 million in non-referendum working cash bonds. This funding approach was chosen for the sole purpose of bypassing voters and avoiding a referendum.
#D200VoteNo


*For $37.3 Million we could build one pool outside of the schools footprint, tear down a parking garage, build a smaller new parking garage after two years of no parking garage...

                                                                           OR

For $37.3 Million we could build two brand new pools within the schools footprint, keep the existing larger parking garage and have $15 Million to address the NEEDS of the educational and arts missions of the school?

BTW - $15 Million is a greater allocation of funds for educational and arts programs than is built into the $44.5 Million referendum ballot "plan". Lets spend our money wisely and Vote NO. #D200VoteNo

*It's OK to vote no on the D200 referendum question. It does not indicate a lack of support for our local schools; it indicates we need to be smart in how we allocate our resources - our land and our money. Giving up so much of both for an unnecessarily large swimming pool is not a smart allocation. http://www.oakpark.com/…/It's-OK-to-vote-No-on-pool-referen…

It's time for ACTION

Subscribe to our mailing list for occasional e-mails with updates on this issue, links to newspaper articles and other information, and to see HOW YOU CAN HELP!  We promise not to deluge your inbox with frequent messages, so please sign up! 
Use this link: http://eepurl.com/cck3Yf

Stay tuned for opportunities to help get our message out at the

Oak Park Farmers Market at Pilgrim Church on Saturday mornings and at other local events.

Read the latest in the Wednesday Journal.  Here's a LINK to a recent One View opinion piece. The online version includes feedback from the community. 

 

Also, you can now use the link www.D200VoteNo.com to find us.  That link directs to this website - it's the same place.  And if you're looking for some special information, send an e-mail to us at D200VoteNo@gmail.com - - Note that capitalization does not matter, you can use d200voteno@gmail.com and your message will reach us.

UPDATE - August 19 - The Referendum Ballot Question

The following REFERENDUM QUESTION was approved by the OPRFHS D200 Board of Education at its meeting on August 16:

“Shall the Board of Education of Oak Park and River Forest Consolidated High School District Number 200, Cook County, Illinois, build and equip a swimming pool addition to replace the existing 88-year-old swimming pools at the Oak Park and River Forest High School Building; alter, repair and equip said School Building to improve the learning, performing arts and locker room spaces therein; improve the site thereof; build and equip a parking garage to replace the existing parking garage; and issue bonds of said School District in an amount not to exceed $25,000,000 for the purpose of paying costs thereof?”

NOTE: In addition to the to the bond issue, the high school will finance this $45,000,000 project with $20 Million from its reserves. These funds will be used to purchase the existing parking garage from the village, tear it down, and replace it with a smaller parking garage and an aquatics facility that includes a 40 meter by 25 yard swimming pool. In high school aquatics events, 25 yards is the standard lap distance. So depending how you look at it, that is either an 8-lane, 40 meter pool OR a 17-lane, 25 yard pool.


prior post: TUESDAY, AUGUST 16 at 6:30 PM is the next school board meeting.

The AGENDA includes:
*Review and Adopt the Pool and Facility Plans and
*Approve the Resolution providing for and requiring the submission of the proposition of issuing not to exceed $25,000,000 School Building Bonds to the voters of the District at the general election to be held on the 8th day of November 2016.

Here's a LINK to the Agenda for 8/16, where there are additional links to even more information. Among the additional information linked there is the NEW PLAN that trims costs from Plan B. You may recall that the cost of Plan B as announced last month was around $54 million, but the Board directed Legat Architects to come up with modifications to bring the total cost to $45 million.

Here is a LINK to the REVISED PLAN. The document shows 1) line-by- line changes to the accepted plan that bring costs under $45 million, and 2) conceptual drawings of the relevant sections of the building. The changes made to the previous plan include:
reducing support areas around the pool
removing one level to the proposed parking structure
deferring renovation of theater and choir spaces along the east side of the school building
leaving the weight room in its current location
and not planning an additional classroom in the weight room area

The revised plan linked above includes very specific information about the changes to the original proposal for Plan B, and shows line-by-line where the cuts are coming from. Please take a look at it for all the details.

Tax Levies and the burdens they create - Stay tuned!

Back in February, a very illuminating article by the OP Township Assessor Ali El-Saffar was published in the Wednesday Journal. It explained that the high school used a quirk in the law to increase its 2005 tax levy by 16.5% - on top of a voter-approved 2002 referendum increase. These increases resulted in $7.7 million of additional revenue to the high school in 2005 and subsequent years.  For the full article, see this LINK
 
Bear in mind that the high school is proposing to issue new bonds to fund a portion of the costs for the new pool/parking structure and other facility improvements.  This will create an additional tax burden.  That impact cannot be predicted until we know more about the financing specifics for this project.  However, remember that we are STILL PAYING TO SERVICE THE DEBT FOR THE PARKING GARAGE that was issued in 2003 when the garage was built. If it is taken down, we will still be paying for those bonds.  According to a 2013 WJ article, that debt service was costing the village close to $1 million per year, and will probably go higher.  Read the article HERE. (Note: Those bonds were issued by the village of Oak Park, the owner of the parking garage.)

For those of you who are newer visitors to this website, please scroll down and review some of the earlier posts.  In particular, THIS POST reviews PLAN A (which we are calling the pragmatic plan) and PLAN B (the approved plan, which is subject to further revision).  This CHART compares Plan A and Plan B in an easy to read format. (It also includes Plan C, the underground pool plan, though that plan seemed to have little support)

The next meeting of the BOE is Tuesday, August 16.  We will post the agenda and any additional details once they are on the high school's website HERE.  At this meeting, the school board will present its final plan with modifications to lower the cost, possibly to under $50 million.  They will also discuss, and possibly finalize, the funding parameters and referendum ballot question.

Thanks to all your efforts over the last nine months, it appears likely that the question of what to do about the high school's pools WILL BE PUT TO A VOTE in a referendum this fall! It seems the school board also realizes the importance of on-campus, off-street parking; the plan includes a new parking garage with the aquatics facility. WE MUST STAY ON TOP OF THIS ISSUE.

 

The next step is for D200 to finalize the facility plans for Option B, the cost and its funding mechanism (by Aug 16) Send your thoughts via e-mail to BOE@oprfhs.org. We will continue to advocate for the PRAGMATIC POOL SOLUTION. While we are disappointed that a more expensive option was chosen that takes down the existing garage, it is encouraging that the majority of the community agrees with our position, according to the public opinion phone survey (LINK) conducted by a professional research company commissioned by the high school. PLEASE STAY INVOLVED.

 

NOTE: At the D200 School Board meeting on MONDAY, AUG 1 the board announced it has chosen Option B. This option tears down the current parking garage and replaces it with a smaller garage and an 8-lane, 40-meter pool. See this LINK to the agenda for that meeting - it contains further links to specific documents with lots of additional details on the three options: https://intranet.oprfhs.org/board-of-education/board_meetings/Special_Meetings/Agendas/2016-17%20Special/20160801%20SPEC%20Agenda.pdf

FINAL DECISION Might Be Announced MONDAY, AUG 1

There is an important school board meeting on MONDAY, AUGUST 1 beginning approximately 6:15 PM (after closed session that starts at 6 PM) - See agenda below. Those not attending can email their comments and concerns to boe@oprfhs.org - Also, here is a LINK to the agenda. It contains further links to specific documents and reports mentioned in the agenda which give lots of additional information. 

 UPDATE - SPECIAL BOARD MEETING THURSDAY, JULY 28 TO REVIEW POOL OPTIONS

Thursday, July 28 at 6:00 PM at the High School is a Special Meeting of the D200 School Board - the primary issue on the agenda is the swimming pool. Public comment is welcome. If you are unable to attend this meeting, you may send your comments to BOE@oprfhs.org. Here's the AGENDA:

For a complete history of this issue since the petition for referendum forced the high school to reevaluate its options, follow this LINK to our facebook page with a summary of events since last December. 

 -----------------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMUNITY MEETINGS SOLICITED FEEDBACK ON THREE POOL OPTIONS

Once again, the D200 School Board is hosting community meetings to present the three options under consideration for pool and facility improvements.  These are:

• $22 million to REBUILD the two current pools, while maintaining the existing parking garage

• $42 million to BUILD a NEW parking garage structure that will include a new pool

• $50 million to BUILD a new UNDERGROUND structure for a new pool, maintaining the existing parking garage

• ALL options include a competition-sized pool plus additional improvements and/or expansion of existing instructional spaces, most notably for the performing arts (music and theater) with total costs (for the pool and facilities upgrades) estimated to range from  $39 million to $64 million. For DETAILS of the pool & facilities options, see the chart at this LINK

The meetings are scheduled for TUESDAY, JULY 19 at 7:00 PM at OPRFHS and WEDNESDAY, JULY 20 at the PRIORY Campus of Dominican University - Aula Auditorium (here's a LINK with a map) The meetings are expected to last about 2 hours, with the same format followed each night.  Please attend and share your thoughts if possible.  If you are not able to attend, please let the School Board know your concerns by sending an e-mail to: BOE@oprfhs.org.  The board has also contracted with a market research company to do a telephone survey during that same week in an effort to reach additional community members.

The goal is for the board to have the information it needs to make a decision on a final option at its meeting on Monday, August 1.  At that time it will also determine how to finance the project  and what portion will be bonded and what will come from reserves.  On August 16 they will discuss the wording of the referendum question.  The final DEADLINE by which the referendum question must be submitted in order to appear on the ballot in November is Monday, August 22.

June 30 BoE meeting continues the discussion from 6/23

            The D200 Board of Ed has added a special meeting for THURSDAY, JUNE 30 with public comment beginning at 6:30 PM - in part this continues some of the discussion from the June 23rd meeting.  The full agenda for 6/30 has been posted at this LINK and includes an updated Decision Timeline (LINK) as well as the Program Verification document referenced in the images below.  
                Here are the primary topics listed on the agenda: *Decision Timeline (see below)  *Present Pool Verification Program   *Discuss Facilities Plan Comparison Chart   *Motion to Move Facilities Plan to Community Meetings   *Additional Information Requests
               At the June 23rd meeting, board members had questions for Legat about the various plans, now known as A, B & C, and how they each integrate with the Long Term Facilities Plan as well as how they fit into the Pool Program Verification document prepared by Legat in September 2015 for the original natatorium proposal on the site of the parking garage.   
            Plan A is the pragmatic plan.  It is the least expensive, leaves the existing parking garage and rebuilds two pools inside the Field House.  Plan B calls for removing the existing parking garage and rebuilding a new pool building and parking structure.  Plan C also leaves the existing parking garage and places the pool building underground.  Here's a LINK to an abridged 18 page version of the full 40+ page document.
             Here are a few images taken from the Pool Program Verification document - keep in mind it was prepared for the original plan to build a 50 meter pool.  Please also see the POST from 6/23 for links to important information presented at that meeting (LINK).  The final image shows the Decision-making Tmeline.

Pool and Facilities Options and Referendum Ballot Questions

The D200 Board of Education is meeting Thursday evening, June 23.  The agenda, linked HERE, includes further discussion of the UNDERGROUND pool option and how to incorporate that plan into the COMMUNITY DISCUSSIONS that will be taking place within the next few weeks.  Public comment is set to be heard beginning at 7:50 PM, after the board completes some necessary business matters.  Following the public comments, the board will again take care of some routine matters, and discussion on the ACTION ITEMS is set to begin at 8:30 PM.  The POOL OPTION 5B (the proposed underground option - LINK) is the third action item to be considered.

Discussion of POOL FUNDING OPTIONS is set to begin at 8:55 PM with a presentation by William A. Blair, the district's investment banking company who is advising on the bond issue.  Here is a LINK to their presentation.  It is about 18 pages and filled with a lot of technical bond and finance information, along with other less technical information.  It includes various scenarios for the different pool options and possible wording for a referendum ballot question.  There are several options as to how the referendum can be worded and it does not necessarily have to be specific as to the purpose of the bond issue.  
Some highlights include (images taken from the presentation linked above): 

Note that this labels as "Option A" the plan to renovate and rebuild the existing pools, and keeping the current parking garage.  The plan labeled "Option B" includes building a new structure to include both a parking garage and a swimming facility.  The third, "Option C" includes the underground pool, the cost of which is yet to be determined.

Below is a chart summarizing the effects of a $20 milliion bond issue vs. a $35 million bond issue on a typical taxpayer.

Below we see how the wording of the referendum question will effect how the high school uses the funds if the referendum is approved.  In the actual report, this page is followed by three examples of actual questions that may appear on the ballot.

For a more complete idea of how the referendum question might be worded, please see the last few pages of the report (LINK).

June Pool and Garage discussions - D200 Board meeting on Tuesday, June 14

There is a special D200 Board of Ed meeting on TUESDAY, June 14 at 7:30 PM in the Board Room (2nd floor) Agenda (linked below) focuses on the Pool and Facilities Planning Process.  Public comment is taken at the beginning of the meeting.

 

A. Review Project Timeline (LINK to more info )

B. Present Revised Long-Term Facilities Plan

C. Proposed Pool Option 5B Update

• 1. Legat Architects Peer Review of Option 5B
• 2. Construction Cost Systems estimate of Option 5B
• 3. Building Program Comparison Chart

D. Approve Proposal for Further Structural Study of the Garage  ( LINK to more info )

E. Approve Pool and Facilities Options to Include for Phase II of the Community Engagement Process 

Link to the full agenda:  https://intranet.oprfhs.org/board-of-education/board_meetings/Special_Meetings/Agendas/2015-16/20160614%20SPEC%20Agenda.pdf

 

The DECISION-MAKING TIMELINE for Pool is summarized at this time as follows:
● Thurs., June 23 Board meeting:
    ○ Report on format of July community engagement.
    ○ Presentation by Liz Hennessey on funding options.
●Week of July 11-15: Phone survey conducted.
● Wed., July 13: Community engagement meeting (tentative).
● Wed., July 20: Community engagement (tentative).
● Date TBD but before July 28, Special Board meeting (?): Report from phone-survey consultant.
● Thurs., July 28, Special Board meeting:  Approve final pool project as well as type and amount of bond.
● Tues., Aug. 16, Special Board meeting: Approve referendum question.
● Mon., Aug. 22, 2016: Deadline for submitting referendum question for November ballot.

SUMMARY NOTES AND LINKS FROM THE MAY 17 SPECIAL MEETING

The meeting began with public comment. Because it was known that Option 5 would be reconsidered, a number of representatives from other sports (mainly track, baseball, softball, football) and marching band spoke in opposition to Option 5 or other options that might impact their programs. Other speakers commented both pro and con on various aspects of the proposals. The board then considered other business before getting down to the agenda related to the pool process.

That portion of the meeting agenda includes:
POOL AND FACILITIES

A. Pool Project Community Engagement Report on plans for four options. (DETAILED BELOW)
B. Acceptance of Long Term Facilities Plan (SEE LINKS BELOW)

• LTFP Plans with Costs - LINK to site plans, 4 pages
• LTFP Book - LINK to 106 page report

C. Engineering Report on the Garage
D. Authorize Costing of Proposed West Field Option with All Sports on Campus

• Background and proposed motion 
• Designs 

OUR OBSERVATIONS

* Legat's proposals for the LTFP were essentially deemed unintelligible by the board. For starters the report was formatted for large stand-alone computer screens and not suitable for viewing on laptops or tablets. Also, it was confusing that the pool options and the facilities options used the same numbering system.

* In LTFP Option #1, the idea to remove track from the campus came out of comments made by students at the facility visioning sessions held earlier in the school year.  Students mentioned various track improvements, including the possibility of a  200 meter track. So an option to put track off-campus was included in one of the LTFP designs. Board members were not happy that this occurred without their consent.

* Legat acknowledged that a complete loss of electrical power throughout the entire campus for six weeks was not the case. Any power loss would involve primarily just the south end of the building (the Field House) and for any lengthy outage (more than a couple days) a substitute source of power would be utilized.

* Legat's report and presentation were poorly received in both public comments and by the Board. Most assumed that since each facility plan was designed around a specific pool option, that the pool options were "married" to their corresponding facilities options. This was not actually the case but it was very confusing to both board members, administrators and the audience. The Board characterized it as a preliminary work which would need substantial rework before being anything close to usable.

* Garage Report - Agenda Item C - The garage needs about $271,000 in repairs for areas of cracked and spalled concrete and damaged sealant. If these repairs are done, the garage should last at least 10 more years. If routine annual maintenance is performed as well as those repairs, then the garage should last about 25 more years. This is based upon a visual inspection by Larson Engineering (118 S. Clinton, Chicago).  Here is a LINK to the full garage report (17 pages)

* West Field Option - Agenda Item D - Dr. Gevinson resurrected Option 5 (LINK) which was resoundingly put down in the last Board meeting, into the improved Option 5A and an entirely new Option 5B. These new options were different than what was available prior to the meeting. LINK to designs for 5A & 5B.

Option 5A brought the tennis courts of his original Option 5 back to the HS west fields, but Gevinson learned from talking to coaches in the past few days that it was still unacceptable, so Gevinson tabled 5A by the end of the night.

* Gevinson introduced Option 5B along with the pro-bono architects of impeccable credentials that created it, local residents Frank Heitzman and Garret Eakin. They proceeded to give a concise and masterfully detailed presentation of a proposed swimming pool to be situated UNDERGROUND at the West fields. It was obvious to all in the room that this proposal elegantly solves the myriad headaches of years of designs that could not implement a pool solution.

* In response to the proposal, member Spivy then made a very strong assertion that the Board should replace Legat with new architects due to Legat's ineffectiveness in bringing clarity to the project to date, as everyone has spent so much time only to result in a muddled and incomplete solution.

* The Board voted to authorize Legat to flush out the 5B proposal and provide a formal cost estimate, with 5 in favor, Arkin opposed and Weissglass abstaining.


POOL PROJECT COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT REPORT

The consultant presented the following summary:
More than 350 residents attended the three meetings in April, which included presentations with information about the project and the process, the role of water sports in curricular and extracurricular programs, the current condition of the two pools, and four options to replace the current pools. Participants sat in small groups at tables with a note-taker who recorded their comments. Additional comments were also submitted online via e-mail and surveys. More than 1000 individual comments were gathered. It should be noted that these responses are qualitative - not quantitative. No numerical or statistical data was presented, though the comments were categorized. (summarized at this LINK for Frequently Asked Questions)

FINDINGS OVERVIEW (42 page report, linked HERE)
The analysis included meeting notes, thoughts and questions submitted at the meeting and via email, and the survey results. Approximately 1,000 comments and questions were reviewed, coded, grouped, and prioritized. The following topics were raised most frequently:

• The long-term facilities plan (LTFP) 
• The existing garage and parking 
• Funding and impact on tax bills 
• Timing and impact on school activities 
• Possibilities for creating a multi-story building that would include some combination of pool(s), tennis courts, and parking 

Other areas of high interest included:

• Academic and competitive advantages of the pool options and various lengths 
• School finance and budgets —types of funds and ending fund balances (reserves) 
• Intergovernmental cooperation —Village of Oak Park, both park districts, and other local entities were all mentioned 
• Comparative information about other high schools —swimming requirements, pool sizes, building costs for new pools, etc. 
• OPRFHS enrollment—current, projected, and percentage of students involved in water sport 
• OPRFHS swimming requirement —attendees both questioned and promoted the requirement

Important Meeting at OPRFHS on Tuesday, May 17 at 7 PM to review pool proposals

BOE SPECIAL MEETING TUESDAY, MAY 17 at 7:00 PM OPRFHS Board Room D200 BOE- Special meeting. The agenda (linked below) includes a summary and review of feedback from the Community Forums on the Pool proposals, as well as a review of long-term facilities planning as impacted by the three pool proposals currently consideration.
AGENDA (link below)
https://intranet.oprfhs.org/board-of-education/board_meetings/Special_Meetings/Agendas/2015-16/20160517%20SPEC%20Agenda.pdf

Also on the agenda is a motion to revisit Option 5, a more recent option that would reorient the ball fields and tennis courts to make space for a new Natatorium with a 40 m pool.   LINK below:

https://intranet.oprfhs.org/board-of-education/board_meetings/Special_Meetings/Packets/2015-16/20160517%20SPEC%20Packet/20160517%20SPEC%20Packet%20West%20Field.pdf

Three proposals for Long Term Facilities Planning will be presented at the meeting. These three proposals are tied to the three new pool proposals. A LINK to the LTFP summary is below. On the LTFP proposals, Option 1 corresponds to Pool Proposal Option 2; LTFP Option 2 corresponds to Pool Proposal Option 3; LTFP Option 3 corresponds to Pool Proposal Option 4. A little confusing… AND, if the Board decides to pursue the revised Pool Proposal Option 5, it may get even more confusing.

Here is a LINK to a recap and cost estimates for the LTFP proposals:
Link to LTFP Propsals and Cost Estimates
Of particular note are pages 2, 7 and 12 where there are tables outlining the proposed building changes and cost estimates.