HomeMy Public PortalAbout02) TCUSD Joint Meeting Presentation July12
Maintaining Temple City’s Excellent,
Award-Winning Schools
1
2
Current Environment
Across the State we are seeing unprecedented concern for protecting and maintaining educational quality and needs at the local level.
There were 34 separate K-12 school district and
community college bond measures requiring a 55% passage rate on the June 2012 ballot.
23 of the measures, or 67%, were successful.
The Governor’s tax measure is also viable, according to recent polling.
2
3
Why November 2012 is the Best Time to Consider a Bond
Many districts are proceeding to the ballot with bonds ranging from $6 million - $900 million.
A Presidential Election, featuring large numbers of parents, young people, women, and
Democrats – are excellent demographics for this type of measure.
3
4
Constituents’ Highest Priorities as shown in a poll conducted May 12th – 14th
Provide Temple City students access to modern technology (90%)
Update emergency communications systems, heating, ventilation and cooling systems, alarms, security cameras and fencing
to ensure student safety (86%)
Improve capacity and facilities for vocational education, art, and performing arts (65%-81%)
Provide up-to-date hands-on opportunities for elementary
students’ science labs (64%)
4
Voter support for Bond Measure after receiving information.
Definitely/ Probably Yes 65%
.
Definitely/ Probably No 28%
Now that you have heard more, if a bond election were held today, would you vote yes in favor or no to oppose a bond issue to upgrade and construct school facilities and classroom technology
within the Temple City Unified School District? Is that definitely, or probably?
5
Generally speaking, do you think the State of California/TCUSD is moving in the right direction or do you feel things are on the wrong track?
By a 2 – 1 Margin, voters view Temple City Unified School District as Moving in the Right Direction, unlike their views towards the State.
6
6
90% of voters place a high or medium priority upon equipping schools with current technology.
High/ medium priority 90%
.
Low/Not a Priority 8%
In your opinion, should equipping schools with current technology infrastructure and equipment to increase student learning be given a high, medium, or low priority by TCUSD, or should
it not be a priority at all?
7
86% of voters Place a high or medium priority upon upgrading facilities to improve student safety.
High/ medium priority 86%
.
Low/ Not a priority 12%
In your opinion, should further upgrading and repairing school facilities to improve the safety of students be given a high, medium, or low priority by TCUSD, or should it not be a priority
at all?
8
Top Reasons Temple City residents would support a bond issue.
I am going to read you some of the reasons Temple City residents might support a bond issue. As I read each statement, please tell me if it would make you more likely or les likely to
vote for a bond issue, or if it makes no difference one way or another.
(Top Responses Shown; Ranked by % Likely Support
9
10
Voting Demographics of the Temple City USD
Total Voter Registration: 16,336
Permanent Absentees: 3,918 (24%)
Asian Voter Registration: 6,210 (38%)
Latino Voter Registration: 2,237(13.7%)
The Latino/Asian slice of the likely November 2012 electorate will be virtually half of the voting population, which bodes well for a potential measure.
10
10
Temple City USD Age of Likely November Voters
The District has excellent age diversity for November 2012 voters.
11
12
Temple City District Gender of Likely November Voters
Women are more likely to support these types of measures, so your gender gap is extremely helpful.
12
12
65% of likely voters currently support a bond measure to fund projects described in the Facilities Improvement Plan.
Definitely/ Probably Yes
.
Definitely/ Probably No
13
Key Bond Project Components
14
14
(2) District Leadership Meetings
(Establish FNAIP Process)
FNAIPC Process
Over 100 Stakeholders Engaged to Date:
(3) Board Presentations
(Process Overview, Proposed Master Plan Scopes & Prioritized Project List)
(7) Existing School Site Surveys
& Site Principal Meetings
(2) Meetings w/ each School Site Committee
1 – “If You Could Dream”
2 – Proposed Site Master Plan Review
15
15
FNAIPC Process to Date:
(5) Focus Group Meetings
1 – Special Education
2 – Technology
3 – Maintenance & Operations
4 – Food Service
5 – Quality Care
(2) Chevron Scope Coordination Meetings
(6) FNAIPC Committee Meetings
1 – Process Overview / Master Plan Themes
2 – Guiding Principles / Site Surveys
3 – Visioning Future of TCHS
4 – Elementary School Master Plans
5 –
MS & HS Master Plans
6 – Program Costs / Scope Prioritization
16
16
Project Cost Summary (2012$)
1. Cloverly Elementary School
2. Emperor Elementary School
3. La Rosa Elementary School
4. Longden Elementary School
5. Oak Avenue Intermediate School
6. Temple City High School
7. Doug Sears Learning Center
Campus
$7,977,000
$7,787,000
$8,659,000
$14,401,000
$20,667,000
$59,575,000
$119,744,000
Construction Cost
$10,611,000
$10,356,000
$11,518,000
$19,154,000
$27,486,000
$79,234,000
$902,000
Total Project Cost
$678,000
$159,261,000
Total Project Cost (2012 $)
17
17
Prioritization Process
18
18
Prioritization Results
19
19
PRIORITIES SUMMARY
20
20
Prioritized Program Cost (2012$)
1. Cloverly Elementary School
2. Emperor Elementary School
3. La Rosa Elementary School
4. Longden Elementary School
5. Oak Avenue Intermediate School
6. Temple City High School
7. Doug Sears Learning Center
Campus
$5,567,250
$5,397,915
$5,809,530
$9,781,125
$16,725,000
$52,855,730
$96,630,430
Construction Cost
$7,423,000
$7,197,220
$7,746,040
$13,041,500
$22,300,000
$70,474,310
$658,500
Total Project Cost
$493,875
$128,840,570
Total Project Cost (2012 $)
21
21
Program Scope Totals ($2012)
1. Modernization
2. Reconfiguration
3. NC Kindergarten
4. NC Classrooms
5. NC Electives Labs
6. NC PA/Theater
7. NC Physical Education
Category
$29,888,060
$10,618,780
$1,404,000
$39,030,000
$782,250
$13,727,000
$128,840,570
Total Project Cost
103%
74%
100%
92%
35%
100%
100%
% of FNAIP
$8,624,000
Total Project Cost (2012 $)
8. NC Admin/Staff Support/Library
9. NC Multipurpose/Music
10. NC Food Service/Lunch Shelter
11. NC Shade Structures (@50%)
12. New Quads/Learning Courts
13. Improve Safety/Security
14. Upgrade Play Apparatus
$4,996,000
$6,810,000
$2,176,940
$436,040
$370,000
$931,000
100%
100%
47%
39%
8%
15%
0%
$0
15. Playfields/Hardcourts
16. Stadium/Track & Field
17. Classroom Technology
$21,000
$6,671,000
0.03%
100%
50%
$2,354,500
22
22
23
QUESTIONS/DISCUSSION
23