March 31, 2026 CBJ Joint Assembly/Juneau School District Facilities Committee

I call to order this meeting of the Joint Assembly Juno School District's Facility Committee. Um, Miss Joni Haywood, would you read the land acknowledgment? Sure. We would like to acknowledge that the City and Borough of Juneau is on Tlingit land and wish to honor the indigenous people of this land. For more than 10,000 years, Alaska Native people have been and continue to be integral to the well-being of our community.

We are grateful to be in this place, a part of this community, and to honor the culture, traditions, and resilience of the Tlingit people. Gunaashiiish. Um, Miss Evans, will you note the roll? You have quorum for the record. Uh, Mayor Weldon is online, and as is Elizabeth Sidden.

Thank you. All right, do we have any changes to the agenda from the— from staff or the committee? No. All right, so seeing none, the agenda is approved as written. Um, can I get a motion for approval of the minutes?

Mr. Kelly, I move that we approve the May 6th, 2025 regular meeting minutes and ask unanimous consent. Any objection? Seeing none, so approved. All right, we'll move on to our first agenda topic, an overview of Juneau School District maintenance funding. And will that be led by Superintendent Hauser or Miss Germain?

Miss Germain, thank you. Great, thank you. So what I've submitted is a memo with a little bit of background information and then also a document which has been used in our CIP planning, which is the deferred maintenance planning list. And that document was presented and approved by the school board prior to the submitting in December of our CIP, and it's also updated from last year. So just to speak in general about our procedures, the, the assembly has been generous through voter-approved money that we've gotten $1 million each year for a deferred maintenance account.

That is an account that is held by the city, and we work closely with our city architect, but also the engineering and public works department, and prioritize and plan out projects that are for deferred maintenance. So what you're seeing in the memo lists some of those items. Certainly chief among those is often emergent needs and projects that come up. I'm an example of that recently would have been the catastrophic failure of our boilers at JDHS, and then we've worked on that project, which will see Phase 2 completion this summer. And Typically, we're meeting monthly, and we also have our school board facilities committee that meets monthly and talking about those projects as they're coming up.

Other information that goes into our decision-making for that— we had our once every 5 years preventive maintenance review by the Department of Education, and specifically their facilities department, and they came in December, and we did pass that review. And some of the items that are included are just in our review in our system. Certainly we have a work order ticket system when maintenance items come up, and our facilities department and our maintenance crew within the district are prioritizing those and working to meet those items generally that are smaller in nature, and the larger projects are planned with these deferred maintenance funds. And then we also have— and what you'll see when it goes into the bond item— is the departmental CIP which comes to the city. There's also a Department of education CIP that goes annually to the Department of Education facilities.

And then additionally, I believe that the city on our behalf has supported a security project to the legislature. So that's where when you look at our bond, our— the bond lists where things have been asked for money, and our CIP also lists where things have been asked for money. And that's why it will either say the CBJ CIP or the DEED CIP or that legislative item. So We really are asking for money and planning projects, but the items that are on here have not been funded. I believe that had been a question.

So when we've requested a deed CIP, it hasn't been funded yet at this point. And those projects, there are specific rules, like we can ask for a project for up to 5 years. So the last thing that was funded was the roof at Syke Gastineau. And then most recently, what we've been asking for is repayment for the projects like the Zonta Kahini roof and the cocktegooheen roof, and those projects are complete, but we're asking for funding reimbursement through the CIP process with the state as an example. I don't know if there are specific questions for me or for us.

Um, oh, I'm not speaking well into the mic. I'm sorry. Do we have questions from the committee?

Mr. Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for being with us here today. Uh, I was just wondering, you know, for the, the handful of roofs that have been replaced over the last few years, is that just, you know, regular end of life, you know, and then reassessing, be like, okay, these are beyond that, and Or is there anything within, like, the deferred maintenance, or even the preventative maintenance walkthroughs that say, is like, hey, if you do something on this roof, you know, you might get another 5 or 10 years out of it, or do you just wait till it needs to be replaced completely?

Thank you for that question. Through the chair.

Is it okay? Thank you. Yes, and. Um, so for example, when Mr. Connect came on as the new city architect, he and I were able to walk through all the schools. He climbed up on the roof at JDHS, and he also saw some of the leak that's coming into the band room as an example.

So those walkthroughs have happened. We also, um, with the engineering department and a project manager, have looked through all of the warranties that we have on the roofs for the schools. We also have a renew and replace schedule that shows that. City Tashanaka Glacier Valley would be a full roof replacement as it's listed. Um, Saik Gastineau had the main wing of the classrooms replaced, but the part over the office and the gym would be the next area that needs to be replaced.

And then at Juneau Douglas High School, it is the section kind of between the auditorium, the auxiliary gym, and connecting to the atrium at the Commons. And that section that has primarily the most leaking. And what we have specifically data or metrics on that are the work orders that our maintenance department sees and their response time, the number of times they're moving a bucket and where we're seeing the evidence of that leaking. We also, through the deferred maintenance process, are looking to get a district-wide roof assessment, which we've explored having the company come up if they would evaluate and then extend the warranty or not. Um, and that's still in the works.

Uh, Mayor Weldon.

Uh, thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you, Miss Bain, for being here. Um, I thought we just replaced part of Siak Gaston School roof. Did we not replace all of it, or is this from the snow load?

And through the chair, We did not replace all of it. We replaced the main classroom wing, and we hadn't done the part, um, over the office and connecting to the gym.

Uh, Mr. Chair, can I have a follow-up? Follow-up. Um, so I'm trying to say this delicately, but we aren't happy to hear about the snow damage to the roofs. How are we going to prevent that in future?

Miss Germain or Mr. Nect? It can be to whomever. I'm not sure who's absolutely responsible for that. Uh, ma'am, can you clarify the question? Um, so there was snow damage to two roofs.

How can we prevent that from happening again other than not have as much snow next year? I assume you're talking about Glacier Valley and Menon Hall River Community School. Correct. Yeah, um, you know, if we can monitor and get up and clear roofs, um, understanding what the snow loads are for each of the roofs, that certainly will help, um, before we're over capacity. Um, now we're in the process of getting a contractor on board to make repairs to those two schools.

That wasn't quite my question. How are we going to prevent.

This from happening again?

Having a plan and implementing a plan to monitor snow loads on roofs and clearing the roofs, uh, before they reach, uh, 80% of capacity, 75% of capacity. I think that's what the structural engineer would recommend. Does that address your question? Yes, thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Whitney. Um, yeah, through the chair, And, um, and going back to Mr. Brooks' question, I think, um, in my experience, I mean, there is a life schedule, but in reality, since debt reimbursement has been reduced, an awful lot of how it's operated is when the leaks get too bad. So just when roofs start to fail. So I think it, it— Yadda Klay, Juno Douglas, that one's been leaking for quite a while. We've known it's been a squishy roof for a long time.

And so it's, it's like when we can actually— it's, it's beyond preventive maintenance. It's actually just when the leaks get too bad and it gets too soggy. So it's—. That's, that's kind of been the practice in my experience, just so the public understands that as well. Thank you.

Um, I guess I'll jump in with a question to clarify, um, to make sure I understood something that you said correctly. Uh, Mr. Maine, so the 2 projects that are on the deed major maintenance list right now, that from Juneau School District, did I hear correctly? Are those projects have been completed and we're requesting reimbursement from the state, or are those new roof projects?

Thank you. So like the departmental CIP for the city, for the state we submit a 6-year plan, and it's the current year that we're actually asking for funding for. And yes, they are. What we have asked in this most recent submission was 2 roofs that have already been completed, and then we have some later year projects that we're planning for that have not been completed. But the request for funding is specifically for those 2, the Zonta Kahini roof and the KAG roof.

Um, Mayor Weldon, you have your hand up. Is that another question?

Nope. Uh, Mr. Kylie, follow up. So if you're requesting funding for roofs that have been completed, just so I understand correctly, where did the funds come from for those repairs, and where would the reimbursement— what accounts would the reimbursement go towards?

Specifically with those projects, they were before my time, but I assume that they were paid. It was a CIP for roofs, and that account was with the engineering department. But I'm looking to you. That sounds about right, but I'd have to, I'd have to look at that.

So just confirm, we're not sure where that reimbursement will go, whether it would go into City and Borough of Juneau to reimburse City and Borough of Juneau, or to reimburse the school district for funding the projects.

I think we'll have to follow up with, with the committee for that.

And then I guess one other question that I had. I know that Department of Education allows for districts to, you know, move, move unspent funding into a facilities reserve. Can you tell me, I guess, I— my understanding is that balance for Juneau School District is $0 and has been for a couple of years. Can you tell me when the last time we were actually able to take excess funding from the operating side and shift into facilities reserve? If I'm sorry, I'm kind of ambushing you with that question because I didn't send you an email earlier today that I meant to.

Yeah, and I wish I could answer that question directly right now, but that will be something that we'll have to go back and look historically when in the past excess operational money was moved into a maintenance CIP account to deal with specific items for maintenance repairs. So I'll go back and do a little more research on that. I, if I were to put a guess, I would say it's been a while because definitely before the pandemic, um, so that probably would have been at least 6, 7 years ago. But I would want to go back and confirm that. So I guess it might be sufficient for kind of the purpose of my question is that it has been, you know, longer than kind of the living memory of current members of the school board and in Juneau School District leadership.

Yes, and then maybe kind of similar— oh, sorry, Mr. Brooks. Yeah, oh, I guess similar vein of question. You mentioned one previously funded project from DEED. Kind of, is that the only project we've seen funded in like the last, say, 5 years from the Department of Education or the major maintenance list? Is really trying to get the context of, you know, how frequently we actually see the state come in, step in, and provide money for maintenance.

I've been in this position, this is my second year, but certainly with the district and watching things, so I can't speak completely knowledgeably. But yes, the Sayik Gastono roof was the most recent, and what we've recently scored has been like number 70, number 80 on the list, and deed has only been funding the first few projects. If I may, well, Mr. Rain has only been in the position for a couple years. I've been a superintendent now in the state for 5 years, and in the last district that I was at, we saw the same thing.

There just has not been a lot of funding going to the CIP list, or will be in districts I've been at, have been at the 60, 65, 70, and what we usually see is that number stays, or we actually start doing worse as items that become more emergent, like we need to replace a school that has burned down or has been condemned gets shifted up to number 1 or 2, and other priorities every year get put above and get a higher score and drops down. One thing that has— I've been up at the Capitol the last couple days, and there have been some conversations about that CIP list and working with the Department of Education to find a more equitable way of scoring and ranking, because some districts just don't have the capacity to put together full report. And so they're looking at other ways because of what you see is that constant just It's really the priorities, and there just hasn't been the funding towards the CIP list from the state for many years. Thank you, Mr. Brooks. Thank you, Mr.

Chair. Um, you're mentioning that there will be soon a district-wide roof assessment to see if warranties can be extended, and I, uh, I'm looking forward to seeing what comes with that, but I am just curious if there's already like a regular service interval? Like, how many times on a yearly basis does someone get up on the roofs of the schools just to see what kind of condition they are in after, you know, let's say a storm or after the winter melts and everything? Is that a practice that's already in place?

I believe it is a practice. I can't speak to what level of thoroughness of the evaluation of the roofs. Um, certainly because of the snow load, We've had a lot of recent evaluation of the design loads and the structures of our roofs with an engineer through the insurer. But specifically where we've seen, I think, Sítitashinok Glacier Valley is a great example because there are areas that as you stand there and look up are rotted and where there's water coming through around drain pipes, which then creates the safety concern of the ice. And specifically at JDHS where it's leaking through into the band room as examples.

Our maintenance staff aren't specifically roof engineers, so our assessment that we're looking at will be more thorough and comprehensive in that regard. And I just wanted to— one thing, if I can add through the chair, um, Mr. Brooks, um, and this goes a little bit to the mayor's question earlier, is even this year when we started noticing, uh, the snow getting ready to start really coming our way, uh, over December, uh, during the break. Um, Mr. Maine and I were in communication about we need to get up on the roofs and check the snow load levels and make sure that, um, we're monitoring that as we know the roof levels are— the snow load levels are getting higher and wanting to monitor and maintain and make sure that we're watching that. And so, um, that is part of, uh, as a superintendent, one of the things I know Christie's aware of, Mr. Maine, um, that we're also monitoring that when we have, um large weather storms, especially mid to the late of the winter season, and we know that there's snow on the roofs, we do have maintenance going up there and doing checks to, to monitor snow load capacity and make sure that we're checking that. And that, of course, goes to that kind of routine going up on the roofs, not only to make sure that from, if you will, the membrane in the roof itself is in good working order, but also maintaining that we're monitoring snow loads as well, especially when we get later on.

And we know those schools that have maybe a lower rating for those snow loads.

Do you still have follow-up, or— no. Um, any other questions from the committee? Mr. Kelly. Thank you. I appreciate, uh, Member Whitney.

Pointing out how we are currently getting leaks into the building at JDHS, uh, idaaakarle, and Mr. Maines mentioning that some of that leak is going directly into the band room. Have we seen any damage to the structure or to equipment in the band room as a result of those leaks as of yet.

Um, through the chair, our— in our walkthroughs and in speaking with the band teacher, he has made comments that he moves things from this side to that side when he knows that it's leaking. So I can't speak knowledgeably if there's been specific damage or, um, with the previous band teacher, but it has been visible sheetrock water damage, so you can see it. So it has been a known issue that we're addressing kind of in the stopgap way rather than— we haven't yet achieved the full repair.

Any other questions? I guess I'll kind of have one final question. Is it a fair characterization that the, the million dollars that, that you have each year from the 1% sales tax kind of really comprises the majority of your ability to address maintenance outside of, you know, because you are not able to get major maintenance funding from the state. The DECIP is not really funded, you know, aside from direct appropriations from the Assembly or, you know, the bond issue that we're discussing. That $1 million is really the money that you have available to make decisions, and that emergent needs consume that, leaving little or no money to make kind of longer-term investments in your assets.

Is that a fair characterization? Yes, I would say that is a fair characterization. Thank you. Anything else from the committee, or are we ready for item 2, um, the school bond project list? Um, I believe that's still you, Mr. Maine.

Thank you. And my understanding from the initial email planning this meeting and this agenda item was a general direction to look at where we had gotten last year in this process of looking at a bond and kind of start from there. And so I'm sharing that as my thinking and preparing documents for you. So the memo that was shared includes some background information about the conversations decisions that were made last year. And last year we started with the CIP that the school district had submitted as a departmental CIP and looked at potential $5 million, $10 million, and $15 million bond packages.

And ultimately, I think the committee and the school board decided to forward a $10 million option. And then from that, ultimately it was not submitted to the voters. So when we pick off pick up from where we left off last year. Primarily, I was looking at the $10 million with some updates to that. So additional historical information last year, there were kind of 3 main categories: roofs, as we've been talking about, but then also heating and ventilation, and then safety and security.

So what I've included in the packet included, um, the $10 million. Ultimately, this is from the April 2025 school board packet, which they approved. I did in bold add some additional information, and I think, Mr. Kelly, this goes to your question earlier. I didn't want to make a lot of changes because certainly this isn't my decision, it's yours, but to show where there have been some updates. So last year when the bond— we had gotten the cost estimates through the engineering department for these items, and then there was a total project cost escalation of 5% per year to the summer of 2026.

So I made a new column that gave a total project cost escalation of 5% as a general idea, recognizing that costs are going up. So certainly these aren't exact numbers. It's a 5% escalation and it's rounded. And then I also added some additional notes. Um, and I put those in bold so that it was able to be differentiated.

But specifically, if we were looking at the same projects that were discussed last year, That partial roof at JDHS, the City of Tashanak Glacier Valley full roof, and then the partial at Sayik Gastineau. Um, our district-wide security and safety upgrades. Um, I remember we had some conversation last year about not purchasing the software, the license, but it really is the hardware, the cameras themselves. Um, and we do not at this point have a new quote from the vendor, so I'm just doing that generic 5% escalation, but also the phones specifically. We were able to purchase at the end of last school year.

They have not been installed yet, but they will, and that as part of our overall safety and security achieves all of the district phones being on the same phone system, which is amazing once we get there, because then you can call and then you can do— also there's emergency calling with a code that can then use the phones as a PA system, as a backup redundant system. Which is important to safety and security, specifically the communication in an event. Um, and then other projects also include security as an entrance to Glacier Valley, and then a future project would include that at Mendenhall River Community School. Um, so really having that double set of doors so there's a public area and a private area of the school which is more secure during the school hours. But primarily the bulk of this money in that item would be for updating our camera system and getting security security cameras at the schools up to a standard level, which would be establish what areas of the school perimeter and interior, and then also to have a common platform for viewing, which we do not currently have.

We currently have 3 different companies or platforms that we're using to be able to, to view the security footage. And then specifically when we're looking at the HVAC or the heating and ventilation Um, there is a note, the JDHS boiler, as I mentioned earlier, is currently being funded out of the deferred maintenance. It's taken a large chunk of that because we will be in this Phase 2 replacing the 2 boilers in JDHS, and it includes some of the piping and electrical that goes with that. And then a Phase 3 would include the rest of that, including repair to the stack and things.

And then other boiler items are at other schools, and then the item that I added, so specifically, um, Cocteau-Gouhine, Siti Tashnuk, Glacier Valley, and Zonta Kehini. And then at the bottom, I added an item that wasn't specifically last, last year because it is HVAC related, and for the purpose of conversation, to make sure that you have this information. We have been awarded the Renew America Schools grant, which is for HVAC control upgrades in 5 of our schools. It is, I think, a 5-year grant that has multiple phases. The phases that we've already had were the first grant paperwork, and then we've just, at the end of February, achieved the audit, the energy audit that's required for the grant.

There are 2 other school districts that received this award, with us. It is federal funding, so there is that big question mark that hangs out there, um, if we will get funding, how much of it, what percentage of it will come to Juneau compared to the other districts. And I think in general we don't anticipate that it would cover the 5 schools that are included. Um, when we talk about upgrades to the HVAC controls and system, our current estimate is about $1 million per school, and I included information that I received from engineering related to recent project that happened at Floyd Dryden, and where the city had that project, and I think it had a total project cost of $1.1 million, and very similar in scope to what we would look— be looking at doing in our schools.

Right, for questions, any questions from the committee? Mr. Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. On that Renewing American Schools grant, it's for the HVAC control package.

If by going through the system implementing the new controls, you find that the controls are trying to request something that the old equipment can't perform on, is it a default to just replace the equipment as well and add that cost in?

That's a good question. It— I think that'd be— have to be a case-by-case basis, and I'd want to look at projects that we have going on now and recent projects that have been completed to see what, what the, um, the result of the initial scope and final scope was.

Mayor Weldon.

First of all, I want to know what the code is so I can do a PA to the whole school system. And, um, next, this is kind of a weird question. I'm sorry, uh, to ask it because it's kind of a weird question. Um, looking at your CIP project, you put, um, the district-wide security and safety upgrades before the roof. And then legislative is there.

What does the legislative mean? That, and like I said, it's a weird question. Why are you putting those before a roof?

Through the chair, I'm not going to say publicly what the code is for the phone, but if you want to get with me after, and specifically the legislative as that parenthetical reference is because The city has presented our security project to the legislature, so separately asking for funding. Yes, and I, if, if I could add, jump in there, I think that Ms. Germain is referring to the legislative capital priorities process where engineering and public works is somewhat of the steward of that, but we have different entities like the hospital or the school district identify to us what their priorities are, and then we collate all of those requests, and then we present them to the Assembly, and the Assembly ranks them. And then we use that list when we are asked by the Congressional delegation what, you know, they might have a particular funding source that might be a good fit for a particular need, like a school or a hospital or one of our facilities. And then on the state side, we take that listing in the order that the assembly has ranked them and enter that into the CAPSYS system at the state so they could see the, the ranking. But all those projects kind of go in the municipal wish list, if, if you will.

Excellent. Did you have a follow-up to that, Mayor Weldon?

No, I just keep forgetting to lower my hand. Okay.

Mr. Whitney, um, through the chair, thank you. First off, I want to say, unlike Mayor Weldon, I do not want the code. Um, but I have a question, and it's probably for, for staff, but also probably for the joint board and assembly as a whole. On some of these roofs, like, yeah, actually, JDHS, I mean, I, it's been, some of these have been leaking for a long time, and my understanding is that there's not really a crawl space underneath, so you can't really see what's underneath the roof. But I mean, when I was on the board from 2016 to '19, this report was, well, we know we can't see it, but we know it's squishy when we walk on it.

And so my question is, if you do replace the roof and it turns out there's structural damage underneath, then how do we address that and how do we pay for that? And that's for, for staff and also for the joint board assembly to think about too. And, and mine—. To know more than mine would be appreciated.

So as a part of the roof assessments, we would have ways of doing some limited destructive investigation of structure.

In areas where you don't have drop ceilings, you have, you know, a drywall that's attached or directly suspended somehow from the structure, you're typically going to see, you're going to see signs of deflection.

And you'd also see water coming through, you know, insulation and the, the roof insulation, the board, the sheathing that can all hold moisture, of course, but you're eventually going to see water infiltrating the building, the building envelope. It's going to show up somewhere, and those materials can hold a certain amount of moisture. Sometimes it's a lot. Um, once we get into a construction project, if there are areas where we didn't investigate, um, there's just a latent condition that's discovered in demolition, uh, we have ways in the contract of accounting for that with unit pricing and saying, um, if a latent condition is, um, is found, we would anticipate it would be sheathing replacement, um, structural replacement, and we could try to quantify that and put a cost estimate to it, and the contractor would, you know, report that during construction, during demo. Mr. Kelly first and then Mr. Brooks.

Thank you. As something of a follow-up to that, I guess I would want to know the final, like the maximum amount that we would be paying before we put a bond to voters. So is that something that we would be able to, to know beforehand? Would we be able to do some, some of this work, some of this assessment work, and kind of anticipate a maximum, assuming that we do find some structural damage, so that way we're not mid-project and like, oh my gosh, this is going to cost a bit more and we need to really take this back to voters and get more money. But of course, like, if we're mid-project, that's not very practical.

So, I think you might have touched a little bit on that. You would have some sort of contingency with the contractor. I guess, would that be something that would be within the parameters beforehand? Or yeah, I guess, how much can we anticipate before we put this out to voters?

That's a great question. It's very hard to, um, it's very hard to quantify that risk entirely, and especially in our economic environment. Prices are going up, um, and, um, transporting materials, um, all of those things, um, are, are unknowns fully. Um, when we estimate for a project, we will have an estimated cost of construction, and we will account for, um, certain overhead and contingency in that total project cost. So we do capture some project contingency as well as construction cost contingency.

That's anywhere between 15 and 20%. So we do have that to work with when we're budgeting. Anything over that would be just something that was buried that we couldn't have anticipated or known ahead of construction beginning. So there is that risk, that, that risk does exist, and we do our best with professional cost estimators to identify the scope, identify those risks, and try to quantify that and capture that in our estimated cost of construction and in our total project cost.

Mr. Brooks. Thank you, Mr. Chair. The— and to, uh, Assemblymember Kelly and Board Member Whitney's comments regarding, like, the structural damage that can result from, um, these kind of leaks and things. I'm, you know, a lot of the buildings, even really old buildings, um, around here that are on the larger commercial side usually have slab reborn reinforced roofs.

So to actually, like, get to a point where it's doing major structural damage can take a lot— it can take a long time. But the translation into the finished surfaces and the way that water travels along surfaces means that the damage can go to areas of the building where they're, you know, there is no leak in the roof. So it, it's, uh, it definitely translates in, um, interesting ways. But segueing to the question, uh, you said that there's an energy audit done that was part of, uh, applying for the Renew American Schools grant. And, um, I was wondering if that— the results of that energy audit have been shared with us in some form or another, or if they can be.

Because I know, uh, go ahead and—. Through the chair, I have not received the formal answer. Um, anecdotally, in speaking with the auditor, he said he was seeing very much a need for HVAC controls and then also LED lighting, but specific to this project is related to the HVAC controls. All right. Yeah, I, I thank you for that.

It—. I've had done a little delving into energy audits back in my HVAC days, and Uh, it's not only, uh, energy cost, but if people don't get the right amount of oxygen in a building, it's hard to retain them.

Information. So thank you. Thank you. I'm going to jump in with a question here before we go to the mayor. On the boiler room project, we have on the bond list there's a $1.1 million project, and on the CIP list there's a Phase 3 for $1.75 million.

Are those kind of mutually exclusive? Should I be thinking of this as a, you know, $2.9-ish million total boiler room project, or is one inclusive of the other?

Are you asking specifically on the JDHS boiler? Yeah, the JDHS boilers. Yes, thank you.

I'm sorry, can you restate your question? Um, sure. So on the memo that we have on page 2, under the $10 million bond list, there's JDHS boiler room renovation, dual source upgrade. For $1.1 million with, you know, new estimated cost. Then on your Department Capital Improvement Plan in FY '28, it's item 5, JDHS Boiler Room Renovation Phase 3, so I'm at for $1.75 million.

So I'm just wondering if those are totally separate projects or the same project.

The total for JDHS boiler replacement Phase 2 and 3 will be $2.8 million. Right now we're estimating $2.8 million. So that $1.1 million is an adjustment to the $1.7 million, the $1.75 million that's in the CIP, and that's recent. That's a recent update since that was published. All right, and, and so that $1.1 million, that is what is going to happen this summer?

Please, or ideally will happen this summer regardless of what we do here with Sabon package. The total project cost estimate for the Phase 2 is about $1.75 million, and that's what's occurring this summer. The Phase 3, we're estimating total project cost to be $1.1 million, and that's updated and based on where we are now in Phase 2 and what we're anticipating being a part of Phase 3. Which is going into design now. Okay, so to complete all the boiler room projects, you need an additional $1.1 million from where you're at now.

Is that—. We have allocated $2.8 million out of deferred maintenance, SO2-105, for Phase 2 and 3.

I guess, um, through the chair, if it were to be something where that project were included in the bond, I don't know how it works on your system if money would come back to deferred maintenance because it's being fronted from deferred maintenance or not. That's a question. But specifically for these documents, I was including what had been approved. So this was included and approved by the board last April, with the bold additions being new, and then the departmental CIP was from this December. Between last April and this December, um, the project did get more expensive, and what was specifically in the Phase 2 scope, and then adding this, the Phase 3.

Okay, um, Mayor Weldon.

I had a different question, but now I'm a little confused. Um, so the department capital improvement plan, 6-year priorities You're already planning and fund those, and if we did a bond, then we wouldn't have to fund them, or we would backpay the deferred maintenance. I'm, I'm confused between the comparison of the two lists, I guess.

Um, and through the chair, thank you for that question. Um, so what, because of the catastrophic failure of the boiler, That is not a project they would have normally done with deferred maintenance funding because it is such a large project, but we really were left with no choice. And so separating it into phases for the management and completion of it has been helpful on the project management side. But I think the separation of phases and just the change from last April and this December is where the difference in the cost is. And I can't speak to— my comment was just, it's still included because I wasn't deleting anything and I was putting bold notes.

But I don't know if a bond would reimburse this project if it would have otherwise been a bond. That's not something I can speak to. Mr. Chair, can I have a follow-up, please? Follow-up, sure.

So I'm not just talking about the boiler because, like, on item number 2, you have the security and safety upgrades for $2 million. Are you already planning that for FY '27? And then if, if there is a bond, that would replace that cost. I, I don't know the comparison between the two lists. Is your CIP plan your list?

If there's no bond, this is how you're going to take care of it. But you're hoping that we pass a bond and then you could do other projects, I guess, is my question.

Through the chair, thank you for that question. Um, I continue to wonder where money comes from, and, um, honestly, and I think we are asking in multiple places for that. As an example, um, specifically on the departmental CIP, I put in parentheses where we had also asked for money. Um, so specifically where it was legislative or the deed CIP, we don't, um, specifically have additional funding to pay for the security and safety upgrades. It may be that, you know, as a camera here or a camera there goes out, we have funding to replace them.

But overall, to have a security upgrade would need additional funding, whether it's the bond or grant funding. Um, and I think it is a larger project than what we have available in our deferred maintenance. Does that answer your question? Would you indulge me in follow-up 3? Go for it.

Director Koch, is this in our CIP program now with funding, some of these items, or not? Uh, some of those items are not in our FY— uh, oh, in the '27 is the— I'm gonna have to pull out our CIP book here. Hold on.

And I apologize, I haven't read through mine yet and I don't have it here.

Deferred maintenance. Sorry.

Oh, that's the pace. Okay. JCIP is page 26.

Flying through it. Yeah, let's see. So for— but this is the 26th book, right? Yeah, this is the '26 book, and I think Madam Mayor is asking about the proposed CIP for FY '27. Is that your question, Madam Mayor?

Correct. Okay, so I have the— see, I have the '26 CIP book. I don't have the '27 in front of me, but I could— we could pull that up while people are asking other questions. Okay, thank you.

And did you have another question, Mayor Weldon?

I have more questions, but someone else can take a turn. All right, we'll go, uh, Mr. Brooks and Mr. Whitney. Thank you, Mr. Chair. On the, uh, new boilers that are going into JDHS, do we have, uh, a rough idea or can get us the information on the efficiencies of those?

Because I'm reading the 55 gallons an hour on the old boilers, and if that's running all day, that's $5,000 a day. So hopefully we found something a little more efficient. I'll have to get with our project manager and get some information for you and get back to you. Mr. Whitney. And just to refresh my memory, this is probably for Director Germain and maybe Superintendent Hauser.

Um, so we're required to come up with a deed CIP list, and that's state regulation, and we compiled it every year knowing that only a tiny fraction, if anything, is actually going to get funded from it. So we create this big list knowing that we're never going to get money for this big list that we're required to create. And correct me if I'm wrong or if there's more to it than that.

Based on the needs that we have compared to other needs across other districts in the state of Alaska, I think that's a fair assessment.

Mr. Keiley. Thank you. This question is actually directed at you, Mr. Chair. I noticed that we are coming up at about 10 minutes to 1 o'clock.

Um, I think in, in a future item on this agenda, there was a little bit of discussion about possibly having another meeting meeting in April. I am wondering if maybe we want to set a date for that meeting, and maybe a motion might be in order to bring some information back to that meeting. Uh, Mr. Kelly, yes, that, uh, was kind of my plan here initially. We had.

Been given instruction from our CBJ Finance Chair that we needed to get a bond list to her sooner rather than later for consideration in our budget process. I spoke to her today. She said it— we can get it by the end of next month. That'll be okay, just based on the way that schedule has shaken out. So we do have the opportunity to push this forward.

I think based on all these questions, that's probably the right way to go. I believe staff We'll be soon sending a survey out to members. Yep, I'm getting a nod. Survey out to members on availability for that date where we can, you know, both take action on a bond list, on whether or not we want to forward a bond list for recommendation, and then a couple other items that we were assigned by our joint bodies when they met a couple of weeks ago. So definitely, yeah, in the interest of time, if you'd like to make a motion, unless there's other questions.

Uh, oh, Miss Sinan, you haven't, uh, haven't had an opportunity to ask a question yet, so I think we'll let her do that before we take a motion for Mr. Kelly. Thanks. I, um, I just wanted— I want to check from the school board side procedurally if we are involved in whatever that bond list is that's being put together, and whether that also has to go through our process of 2 readings. Just if we're talking about timing, aligning timing, I'm unclear what our role is from here.

So I can take an attempt at answering that question, at least from the perspective of, um, CBJ and, and the assembly. So the bond, a bond that goes on the ballot comes through an ordinance that's passed by the City Assembly. So that ordinance— what we're doing here as a body is putting together a recommendation to the Assembly. The Assembly could take action last year. So for example, last year, that $10 million bond package was recommended to the Assembly.

During our process, we amended it to add an additional project. Ultimately, we didn't pass a bond package as it was, but The, the final decision on what projects go into that bond package rests with the Assembly. So there's— this is kind of an advisory committee providing that advice to the City Assembly, who then ultimately will define what projects go on the list. Do you have a follow-up, Miss? Yes, thank you.

That, that initial recommendation from the board for the $5, $10, and $15 million list, though, did come resulted from action by the full board. So we may not be the final decision maker, I respect that, but the recommendation from the board did have to go through full board action, and I believe it was two readings.

I guess I'll leave that at, uh, President Chuney-Haywood if you want to give any comment from the school board perspective. Yeah, I— so I do believe we did do two readings last year, and I can look at adding it to one of our meetings. I—. There might be some hands going up from staff. Um, we can have that conversation about what we need to do as far as the procedure.

Superintendent, did you have something? Yeah, thanks, Chairperson Joni Haywood. Um, yeah, I think as we were actually just having a conversation of, uh, bringing the list that was approved last year to the board at an upcoming meeting to be able to review that and make a recommendation. I believe we only went through one reading because while there's numbers and funding attached to it, it actually doesn't have a cost to the board. Um, it's just that recommendation to the, uh, assembly for the, um, uh, bond to go out.

And so that is something we can look to put on the April 14th regular meeting to discuss if there's any changes to that, or if the list from last year— obviously making some changes to have a formal list— it could be something that we'd bring before the board and have before the end of the month to the assembly. But I think that's how we did it last year.

Excellent. All right, any other— oh, Director Koch. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Uh, just taking a look at the proposed CIP for FY27, uh, for the school district, there is $2 million allocated for safety and security updates for FY27 in the proposed budget.

Thank you.

Mr. Kelly, would you like to make a motion?

I'm wondering if a motion is the right thing, or maybe if instead we might kind of each mention things that we want to— information that we want to see brought back to, to a future meeting. That's a great suggestion. Why don't you kick us off and we'll work down the line? Thank you. Um, I think I— before we put something to voters, I would like a little more information on what the maximum cost might be.

So if it's possible that we could get more information on what the maximum— maybe through structural examination or whatever— on what the maximum cost might be for once we get into the roof replacement, especially at JDHS.

I would be interested in, in updated numbers. I think this would probably come from not only a staff discussion on the school district level, but also a board discussion, especially since some of this work has already been completed, such as purchasing the phones. So I would be interested in seeing an updated request coming from the, the school board and from district staff. Um, and I think something that also came out of this meeting was that I, um, that we're not clear on some of the, the fund sources on what would be reimbursed if we were to, to authorize a bond, what has been spent already. So I think some, I, a clearer picture of funding sources would be very helpful in, in discussion at a future meeting.

Miss Jenny Haywood, thank you. Um, I think Mr. Kelly touched on it a bit, but I think I really need some clarity around, yeah, those projects that might be funded somewhere else. My understanding is if we do a bond package, depending on the wording, we could have our hands fairly well tied. And so having clarity on what might already be there and what else we might need. I know the need is great.

So, Mr. Whitney, thank you. Um, so I guess echoing, um, Tony Haywood's comment that it's probably good to make sure we don't tie our hands on this, and to the extent possible, it'd be good to echoing, aligning with that previous comments that we should have as much as possible an understanding of our funding sources and what's been paid. But I guess also my sense is that pretty much everything that's on this list is maintenance that should have happened. And, and I agree with Mr. Brooks' earlier comment that we're probably not going to have collapse on these large steel buildings, steel frame buildings due to rain.

But, but the reason I brought that up is because there we are likely to have surprises, and there are costs to not doing maintenance that add up. And I'm pretty sure the total maintenance on the— that the district needs probably exceeds $50 million and is beyond the scope of any— I mean, some of our schools haven't been updated, like the Zong Tahini and Menlo River, since the 1980s, and And there's, there's a pretty big need out there, and we're just putting Band-Aids on what has to get done, is my sense. So I guess, is there flexibility? And then potentially a list of the longer needs that we're not going to cover on this that I'm sure far exceed $10 million that are out there? So just to give a sense that we're not asking the public for money that doesn't— isn't really needed, that We're just doing what's essential.

That's, that's my request. Mr. Brooks.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for mentioning that, Board Member Whitney.

Uh, yeah, I think I'd already made some requests of some of the things I'd like to see, just as far as like technical aspects and, um, you know, the, the energy audit results, things like that, that can give us a little clearer insight into the internal and external condition of the buildings, but also more so just on the procedural of maintenance, you know, making, you know, how things are necessarily addressed before it becomes deferred, or what class of, you know, how does it fall into classification of preventative, and then how much is getting invested into all those areas. I think will give us a better idea of the, you know, the big picture that gets us.

These, um, circumstances where we're having to do large repair and replacements as opposed to just trying to do as much preventative maintenance and prolong the life of it and get the most bang for our buck, as you'd say.

Going online, uh, Miss Siddon. Nothing additional for me that wasn't already covered. Mayor Weldon.

Oh, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I think it's all been said. Just a bond package that tells us exactly what we're going to vote on as the assembly and what the public's going to vote on. I would like to know, um, they don't have to answer it.

Yes, if we bumped it up to $50 million, do those HVAC controls have any kind of, um, Does it help with efficiency at all, I guess, is my question there. And then I would like to see— let's pretend a bond package passes, and I would like to see the department capital improvement plan, 6-year priorities, without— so it's not a duplicate package. Does that make sense? So you have a 6-year priority list, pull everything out that might be covered in a bond. And replace it with other things that you would be doing if it wasn't— if the bond passed.

Thank you, Mayor. And I'm seeing nods that that's something that's achievable. And the one thing I'll add, you know, I agree with all the comments that have been made so far, is, you know, if we're putting something to the people to vote on, I think it's probably strategically better to put forward items that haven't already been funded. So rather than asking to issue bonds to reimburse. And I'm thinking about, you know, the boiler project, if we're already funding it, to put forward new projects that do things that we cannot do without that consent of the people.

So that would be kind of what I'm thinking about when we look at a final list at our next meeting. Right. Thank you. Anything else on that topic? Everybody had their opportunity.

All right. We have one more item that hopefully is quick. I know we're 2 minutes over because it's just item to provide some direction, is discussion on the Juneau School District facilities assessment. Um, everybody has a memo in their packet, um, that just is real quick memo that is basically we're looking for a motion to direct staff to come back with a timeline and cost estimate to update the large 230-250 page document that you have in your packet. So if we have any— before I look for a motion, I guess, are there any questions on that concept from the committee?

Or any notes from staff that need to be said? Director Koch, I just— I had asked Architect Connect to look at the last— the cost of the last assessment. That's, I think, almost 10 years old. But just to give you a sense, it's going to be expensive. So I just wanted to frame that.

Is that— I think it was $300,000. What was the cost? Uh, thank you, ma'am. Um, 10 years ago, the professional services contract was valued at $100,000, and I think they spent all of that. Um, it—.

There, because it's 10 years old, that could easily double. That estimate could easily double, and there's probably not going to be any efficiencies in just reusing the previous data. It's been too long. There's no guarantee that the previous firm that worked on it would be the firm working on it this time, and, and that professional should do their due diligence to collect data and prepare a new report.

It, it could be in the $200,000 to $300,000 range. That report from the date of contract award to the final date of period performance was about a year.

Thank you. Any questions from the committee?

All right, I'll open it up if— oh, Mayor Weldon.

We're not quite catching you.

So we don't have firm price on what this assessment will cost.

I think you asked if we have a firm price on what the assessment will cost, and I don't believe we do. Um, what we're looking for here, I think, is a motion to have staff get a cost estimate. Is that accurate? Yes. No, my apologies.

I thought it was just to get the assessment, and it's like, wow, okay, thank you.

Um, Mr. Kelly, would you entertain a motion? I will. I move that we direct staff to bring back to this committee a cost estimate on producing an updated assessment that we can review at our next meeting and ask for unanimous consent.

Any objection?

Seeing none, so moved. Um, next meeting date is to be determined. Sorry, Mr. Uh, Miss Sitton? Yes.

Yeah, thank you. I'm unfamiliar with your processes. What— so that motion just directed staff to bring back information? It didn't commit us to doing it? Yes, that's correct.

So we'll—. Once we have that full information of a cost estimate, a timeline estimate in a more formal way, then, you know, we'll still need to determine if we want to go forward with it. Where does that money even come from? That's probably the biggest piece of that question. And so that'll be a topic of discussion, hopefully at our next meeting.

I know we have a couple other agenda items that were assigned to us, so whether it's the next meeting or a third meeting, uh, it, it'll be a topic at a future meeting.

Does that answer your question? Yeah, I guess so. I mean, I guess this is where my concern comes back of, you know, cart before the horse on some of these projects. And I'm not sure we, you know, we have not had the conversation of like what the school board's intention of that study is, and it could be wildly different from what the assembly's is. And I just don't want us to get down, down a path, you know, of building a playground when we aren't even clear on why we're doing the study.

I definitely appreciate that, that comment. I think maybe since it did end up at the very end of our agenda, we didn't have quite as much time to have that conversation. And I think maybe we'll just try to make sure we allot more time in the next meeting to have a broader conversation about why, you know, especially with a, with a cost estimate, it'll be a little bit easier to have a conversation about whether or not moving forward with this assessment is, you know, worth the amount of money, if it's an actual good use of funds and, and what those funds are. So I'll definitely make sure when we work on the agenda where that will come up to make sure that it has, you ample time to have that full conversation. Ms. Siddon?

Yeah, one other question when I was reviewing the packet, and maybe it is on the— in the parking lot of topics for our future meeting, but it had come up at our previous joint meeting about the riverbank mitigations from the Glacial Outburst Flood at Mundenhall River, and I just there was the question of why that was coming out of, you know, school district deferred maintenance costs and not included as other parts of the city's flood response. And I just don't want to lose track of that topic as well for this group. Yes, Ms. Sibben, that, um, I believe at that other meeting we directed staff to come back with some memo regarding responsibilities for, um, riverbank stabilization and those different flood mitigation associated items. Um, we don't have have that memo yet. Staff is still working on that topic, and when we do get that memo, that will be one of the agenda items at a future meeting of this committee.

And, and, uh, Mr. Brooks just answered that. Same for the playground. And yes, we had another action item related to just how we, how we work through some of these joint facilities items. Um, those just weren't ready for this meeting, and we had a fairly large agenda topic here with the bond list that we knew we had to get through. So look forward to those on a future agenda.

And I'll just note for, you know, to be determined next meeting date, please make sure to reply when you get the survey fairly quickly so that staff can organize our next meeting. With nothing else before the committee, we are adjourned.