EVERETT PUBLIC SCHOOLS
    EVERETT, WASHINGTON Regular Meeting
    		  
    The Board of Directors of Everett Public Schools, Snohomish County, Washington, held a regular Board meeting on Tuesday, June 6, 2006, beginning at 4:30 p.m., in Conference Rooms C1 & C2 of the Educational Service Center, 4730 Colby Avenue, Everett, Washington. Notices about the change of rooms were posted on the doors. Those in attendance were Sue Cooper, Kristie Dutton, Karen Madsen, Ed Petersen and Roy Yates. (Note: Board member Cooper was delayed in traffic and arrived at 4:35 p.m.)    

     

     

      

    ADOPTION OF AGENDA

    President Yates called for any recommended changes to the agenda. Superintendent Carol Whitehead reported that there would be a revised personnel report. As a means of accommodating the numerous retirees and their families/friends who were on hand tonight, President Yates recommended changing the order of the agenda so that Item 5—Recognition of Retirees, immediately followed Item 3—Approval of Minutes. With that, Karen Madsen moved to adopt the revised agenda. Kristie Dutton seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.

    		  ADOPTION OF AGENDA
    APPROVAL OF MINUTES

    Ed Petersen moved for approval of the minutes of the regular meeting of May 16, 2006. Kristie Dutton seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.

    		  APPROVAL OF MINUTES
    RECOGNITION OF RETIREES

    Director of Communications Mary Waggoner introduced six retirees.

    1)  Larry Galli —has 34 years in education, 27 of them in Everett Public Schools. Associate Superintendent for Instruction Karst Brandsma summarized Larry’s career, including references to Larry’s degrees, his work experience and his numerous awards, among them the Golden Acorn. Karst described Larry as a team player who enjoys large activities with large groups. Larry is a skilled grant writer who puts students first, has a positive attitude and loves his work.  

    		  RECOGNITION OF RETIREES
    (Board member Cooper arrived at this point in the meeting.)

    Larry introduced his wife Shawna and daughters Jodi and Erin. He thanked a number of his colleagues, past and present, and said it has been an honor to serve the students, parents and administrators of Everett Public Schools.

    		  
    2)  Karen Koester —has 28 years in education, 13 of them in Everett Public Schools. Executive Director for Area One Jim McNally reviewed Karen’s career which began in Pocatello, Idaho, and eventually brought her to Everett. He spoke of how much he has enjoyed working with Karen and then he shared comments from her colleagues. Karen sees the whole school as a team, and has high expectations for all children while putting children first. She has left a positive imprint. Karen commented and introduced her two daughters, Jamie and Kelli, and her husband, Jerry, who is also retiring and is being honored tonight. She said she has enjoyed her job and has been fortunate to get to work with outstanding administrators, teachers, superintendents and school boards. Parent support has been exceptional.   
    3)  Jerry Koester —has 37 years in education, 20 of them in Everett Public Schools.

    Cascade High School principal Jim Dean commented about Jerry’s enjoyment of working and playing. He has been a coach in several areas, including golf and football, and has been a sports official as well. In closing, Jim said that Jerry will be inducted into the Washington State Coaches Hall of Fame. Jerry commented and spoke of his love of education and coaching.

     

     

    		   
    4)  Nancy Strain —has 20 years in education, 15 of them in Everett Public Schools. Gateway Middle School principal Cathy Woods commented. She said Nancy is one who takes great pride in her family, which includes the staff at Gateway. She is a lifelong learner and a powerful person in students’ lives. Nancy thanked Everett Public Schools for hiring her and said she has enjoyed her career. She introduced her husband Ken, daughter Shelly, and friends Liz and Patricia.   RECOGNITION OF RETIREES (cont’d.)
    5)  Dan Scott —35 years in education, all of them in Everett Public Schools. James Monroe principal Gerard Holzman listed the District sites Dan has worked. He has taught 1st through 5th grades. Dan is a team player who consults and mentors and who has a unique skill of knowing when to step in and when to fade into the background. He is a kind, gentle and intentional educator who is a wonderful male model for youngsters. Dan was named the outstanding educator by Monroe’s PTA this year. Dan spoke of his love of education and said deciding to retire was a difficult decision.    
    6)  Twyla Lucas —29 years in education, 13 of them in Everett Public Schools. Everett High School principal Catherine Matthews spoke of Twyla’s extensive knowledge, her commitment to students and her love of teaching. She is an inspiration to watch. She helps youngsters become effective adults. Among her assignments has been to serve as advisor for the Torch Honor Society. Twyla introduced her husband Tom and said she sees her career as an amazing time. Her plans will include volunteering in her grandchildren’s schools.

     

    Following each tribute, President Yates presented the retiree with a crystal memento apple and thanked them individually for their commitment to the students, staff, parents and community of Everett Public Schools.

    		  
    Prior to Dr. Whitehead’s comments, President Yates called on Ms. Jay-Marie Richie, representing the Washington School Public Relations Association (WSPRA), which is an association for school communicators throughout the state. Each year, the organization presents an award to a person in a non-communications role for their support of communications. This year’s recipient is Dr. Carol Whitehead. Ms. Richie described Dr. Whitehead as someone who talks and listens to her community. She is a thoughtful educator who supports communications statewide. Ms. Richie presented Dr. Whitehead with the award and a dozen roses. Dr. Whitehead said she is honored to accept the award and thanked WSPRA for recognizing her in this way. President Yates said the Board of Directors values Dr. Whitehead’s communication skills and recognizes that hers is a time-consuming commitment. Nevertheless, she is willing to take the time to talk and listen to people in the District and throughout the community. This is a well-deserved award. Board member Madsen said Dr. Whitehead does so many things so well and she admires her greatly. Board member Dutton echoed previous comments and said that she often hears statements in the community that Ms. Dutton is certain were initially made by Dr. Whitehead, a clear example of Dr. Whitehead’s impact. Board member Cooper said many of the people in the community feel they know Dr. Whitehead and it is because of the time she takes to communicate and listen.  SPECIAL RECOGNITION
    SUPERINTENDENT’S COMMENTS

    Moving to superintendent’s comments, Dr. Whitehead opened by announcing this year’s graduation dates and times. Sequoia High School will graduate 28 students on Thursday, June 15. Everett, Cascade and Jackson High Schools will hold their ceremonies on Saturday, June 17. It is estimated that 257 will graduate from Everett, 339 from Cascade and 325 from Jackson.

     

    Next, Dr. Whitehead called on Executive Director of Curriculum Alignment and Implementation Terry Edwards to outline the plan for communicating with parents regarding WASL results and next steps for students. Terry reminded the group that a few years ago the state legislature began the process of implementing the requirement of individual learning plans (ILPs) for students as they move toward meeting standard at 10th grade. This year, the District has begun providing ILPs to all 5th , 8th, 9th and 10th grade families. Part of the 10th grade ILP has included a WASL letter explaining WASL as a graduation requirement and how the WASL results will be communicated to families. Currently, staff members are reviewing data files to clear up irregularities. Hard-copy versions of the individual student reports will be received at the end of this week and will be mailed to parents along with letters customized to each family. To those students who did not meet all of the standards, information will be included about how the District will help them. For example, the State legislature approved PASS dollars to help 10th graders who did not meet standard on some sections of the WASL as a graduation requirement. As such, free summer school and free WASL preparation classes will be offered to them. They will be scheduled for a WASL make-up test in early August. Summer school will begin on June 26. The rest of the results are due in August for all other grades tested as well as 10th grade science scores. Ninth graders were offered the opportunity to take the 10th grade WASL and those results will also arrive in August.

     

    When asked whether there will be difficulty in getting enough teachers for the summer classes, Terry said it is a challenge across the state, but Everett thinks it has enough teachers to operate summer school. If the District is inundated with those wanting to take advantage of the free re-take pieces, then that could pose a problem. Class sizes will be approximately 22-30 for the regular summer school classes. “Near-miss” students (who scored between 390 and 399 on the WASL) and “far-miss” students (scoring less than 390) will be offered accelerated learning support classes—class sizes will be approximately 20-22. WASL preparatory classes for “ near-miss” students will be offered as four-week classes, both online and face-to-face—class sizes will be in the mid-20s.

     

    When asked whether District curriculum will be taught, Terry said the curriculum consists of parts of the modules from the state, some of the regular curriculum and some of the WASL release items. When asked whether students earn credit for the WASL re-take classes, Terry said students taking the regular summer school classes will earn math credit, for example, while those taking the skill-building class will receive math credit, for example, and those taking the WASL preparatory class will be for elective credit rather than for credit in the subject matter area. Dr. Whitehead said OSPI Superintendent Bergeson will be doing a press release on Thursday. 

    		  SUPT’S COMMENTS

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    SUPT’S COMMENTS

    (cont’d.)

    PUBLIC COMMENT

    None.

     

    		  PUBLIC COMMENT
    ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

    The attached materials concerning the proposed adoption of supplementary non-fiction reading materials for use in general education reading classes at North Middle School were provided for first reading with adoption to be recommended at a future Board meeting (E:164/06). The titles are as follows: ‘The Outer Edge’ series (McGraw Hill, Jameston); ‘The Wild Side’ series (McGraw Hill, Jameston); ‘Critical Reading’ series (McGraw Hill, Jameston); and ‘Kids Discover Magazines’ (Kids Discover).

     

    Terry Edwards outlined the review process and said these materials have been reviewed

    		  PROPOSED ADOPTION OF SUPPLEMENTARY NON-FICTION READING MATERIALS FOR USE IN GENERAL EDUCATION READING CLASSES AT NORTH MIDDLE SCHOOL— 1st reading
    by middle school reading teachers and considered in light of the middle school literacy maps and integration with content area classes. The materials have been tested with children, who have found them to be very interesting and engaging. The materials have been available for parent comment at a community event. Terry showed samples of the materials, which can be used individually or in a whole group setting.   
    The attached information concerning the proposed adoption of instructional materials for middle school Washington State History was provided for first reading with adoption to be recommended at a future Board meeting (E:165/06).

     

    Terry said this represents the first stage in implementing the new social studies curriculum. Earlier this year, the Board approved a change in graduation requirements for entering ninth graders next year which includes moving Washington State History from the high school into the middle school (seventh grade). The teachers have reviewed and recommended materials for use by seventh graders. The materials have gone through the review process and have been used on a limited sample basis among teachers. The materials will continue to be available for public comment. The plan is to have the materials ready for implementation by second trimester of next year.

     

    Currently, there is a Washington State History text at high school. As the class is moved to middle school, there will be several years when instruction at high school for Washington State History will be necessary for students older than seventh grade who “age” through the system—they will still need Washington State History as a graduation requirement. Therefore, it is planned to implement the new edition of the currently-approved textbook at the high school. It will not be a new adoption; rather, it will be an upgrade of the current edition that will augment the middle school materials presented for proposed adoption this evening.

    		  PROPOSED ADOPTION OF INSTRUCTIONAL MATERIALS FOR M.S. WASH. STATE HISTORY — ;1st reading
    The attached information concerning the proposed adoption of high school Advanced Algebra Cognitive Tutor by Carnegie Learning is provided at this time for first reading with adoption to be recommended at a future Board meeting (E:166/06). The District has adopted Bridges to Algebra, Algebra and Geometry by Carnegie Learning. The Advanced Algebra Cognitive Tutor for high school will be an additional course to add to previously-adopted curriculum items.

     

    Terry reported that this represents part of the continuing rollout of math materials for the high schools. Cognitive Tutor was developed at Carnegie Mellon University and is used at all District middle and high schools. It will provide an alternative means of teaching advanced algebra to students, both for those who have gone through a traditional learning process, but have struggled and are seeking a different learning style, and for those who have been very successful with Cognitive Tutor, algebra and geometry and want to continue in that style. As with other implementations, two sections will be implemented at each high school, teachers will be trained and, once demand builds, programs added.

    		  PROPOSED ADOPTION OF HIGH SCHOOL ADVANCED ALGEBRA COGNITIVE TUTOR BY CARNEGIE LEARNING—1st reading
    The attached Washington State Auditor’s Report, for the audit period September 1, 2004 through August 31, 2005, was presented for the Board of Directors’ review (E:167/06). Associate Superintendent of Finance and Operations Bob Collard introduced Director of Finance Jeff Moore and thanked Jeff and his team for their fine work on the audit and in financial matters in general. Jeff described the two attachments and said that for the third year straight, the District has a “clean” audit with no management letters and no findings. He thanked everyone who had a part in making the audit a success. In particular, he complimented Darla VanDuren, District accountant, for her work in coordinating and organizing the audit as well as filling in for Gina Zeutenhorst in her absence. President Yates noted that he attended the exit conference and was impressed with the air of mutual respect. The auditors were very complimentary of District staff. It was clear there was a good relationship between the District and the auditors.

     

    		   WASH. STATE AUDITOR’S AUDIT REPORT—9/1/04 – 8/31/05
    Financial reports as of April 30, 2006, were provided for the Board of Directors’ review (E:168/06). The reports include year-to-date information on revenues and expenditures, General Fund projections, a cash report and an investment summary. Jeff Moore said the District has a fund balance projection of a little more than $7.6 million which is slightly higher than the prior month’s report.  FINANCIAL REPORTS AS OF APRIL 30, 2006
    ACTION ITEMS

    Kristie Dutton moved for approval of the revised Consent Agenda items. Sue Cooper seconded the motion.

    1)   Personnel Report (revised) (E:169/06);

    2)   Voucher Lists (E:170/06);

    3)   Proposed School Board Meetings Schedule for 2006-2007 (E:171/06);

    4)   Proposed Adoption of K-12 Health & Fitness Curriculum Textbooks (E:172/06);

    5)   Proposed Adoption of Instructional Materials for High School Physics & Advanced  Placement Biology (E:173/06);

    6)   Res. 849: Washington Interscholastic Activities Association (WIAA) District   Enrollment Form for Middle Level & Senior High Schools (Res. 13/06);

    7)   Contract Revision—Early Childhood Education & Assistance Program (ECEAP)  (E:174/06);

    8)   Monetary Gift of $6,120.10 from Jackson H.S. Band Boosters to Jackson H.S. for  the Purpose of Providing Funds for Spring 2006 Band Trip (E:175/06);

    9)   Resolution 851: Authorization to Issue Contracts to Administrative Supervisory  Staff (Res. 14/06);

    10)   Classified Non-Represented Non-Exempt 2006-2007 Salary Schedule; Classified  Non-Represented Non-Exempt Maintenance/Operations and Paraprofessional   Employees Only 2006-2007 Vacation Schedule; and Classified Non-Represented  Non-Exempt Technical Employees 2006-2007 Vacation Schedule (E:176/06);

    11)   Professional & Technical 2006-2007 Salary Schedule; Positions on Professional &   Technical Salary Schedule; and Professional & Technical Employees 2006-2007  Vacation Schedule (E:177/06);

    12)   Collective Bargaining Agreement Between Everett School District and Service  Employees International Union (SEIU) Local 295 (E:178/06);

    13)   2006-2007 School Meal Price Increase (E:179/06);

    14)   Resolution 852: Interlocal Cooperative Agreement Between Everett   School   District and the Puget Sound Joint Purchasing Cooperative (Res. 15/06);

    15)   Architect Selection for Five Construction Projects (E:180/06);

    16)   Authorize Call for Bids: Longfellow Bldg. Data Center Modernization (E:181/06).

     

    The motion carried unanimously.

    		   

    CONSENT AGENDA

    The Administration recommended adoption of the attached proposed revised Policy 3240—Student Conduct, in which language has been added prohibiting student use of laser pens (E:182/06). In accordance with Board Policy 1310 concerning adoption and amendment of Board policies and bylaws, the proposed revised Policy 3240 was recommended for immediate adoption because it is in the best interests of the District—the revised language in Policy 3240 needs to be incorporated into next year’s student handbooks which will be printed over the summer for distribution at the beginning of the school year. Karst Brandsma said the revised policy includes language prohibiting the student use of laser pens. District practice has been to deny students bringing these pens to school, but the proposed revision to the policy allows actual incorporation of language into the handbooks, thus informing students ahead of time of the violation and its consequences. There being no questions from the Board, Sue Cooper moved to adopt the aforementioned proposed revised Policy 3240—Student Conduct. Karen Madsen seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.  PROPOSED REVISED POLICY 3240—STUDENT CONDUCT (adding language prohibiting student use of laser pens)  
    The Administration recommended adoption of the attached proposed revised Policy 3331—Students (Emergency Expulsion) in which language has been added regarding the appeal process for emergency expulsions that are converted to short-term suspensions (E:183/06). In accordance with Board Policy 1310 concerning adoption and amendment of Board policies and bylaws, the proposed revised Policy 3331 is recommended for immediate adoption because it is in the best interests of the District—the revised language in Policy 3331 needs to be incorporated into next year’s student handbooks which will be printed over the summer for distribution at the beginning of the school year. Karst Brandsma said the revised language clarifies student rights to an appeal. Legal counsel has reviewed the process and provided the suggested revised language to help simplify the process. When asked whether the change will align policy with practice, Karst said yes.

     

    With no further discussion, Ed Petersen moved to adopt the aforementioned proposed revised Policy 3331—Students (Emergency Expulsions). Sue Cooper seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.

    		  PROPOSED REVISED POLICY 3331—STUDENTS (EMERGENCY EXPULSION) (adding language regarding appeal process for emergency expulsions that are converted to short-term suspensions) 
    The Administration recommended the Board of Directors approve the bid for the New Elementary School No. 17 to Spee West Construction Company for the base bid of $22,560,842 plus Washington State sales tax (E:184/06). This project was bid on May 23, 2006. One bid was received and it was from Spee West Construction Company for the aforementioned base bid plus two alternate bids and six unit prices. A summary of these prices, a letter from District staff and a letter from Dykeman Architects recommending the award of the bid are attached. This project is funded by the 2006 bond issue.

     

    Bob Collard introduced the Director of Facilities and Planning Mike Gunn who outlined the steps taken in the bid process. Mike also introduced Hal Beumel, the District’s Construction Coordinator; Tim Tweedmeyer and Zack Hamm, of Dykeman Architects; and Dan Chandler, of Olympic Associates (a construction management firm). Mike said the District and project architects are pleased with the contractor who is also the contractor for the Eisenhower Middle School project; they are doing a good job. However, said Mike, it was very disappointing to only get one bid. The District went beyond the state statute for competitive bidding requirements. Repeated calls were made to reputable contractors in the area and ads were placed in newspapers. Six general contractors attended the pre-bid meeting. It was also disappointing that the bid was over what was estimated by the amount it was. However, it is the Administration’s belief that the District has the financial resources to proceed with the project as it was bid and that it is in the best interests of the District to do so. Upon analyzing the bid, it was found that a number of factors in the current marketplace make it challenging for public owners to do their work at a reasonable cost. For example, Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, major construction in China and building for the 2010 Olympic Games in Canada have all contributed to the current state of the marketplace and drawing from the labor and materials pools in the area and driving up costs. Privately, there is an amazing amount of work going on, including projects in higher education in the state in the amount of $800 million of capital improvements in the 2005-2007 timeframe; $2 billion worth of statewide school bonds and capital levies in Washington; capital projects in the Ports of Everett and Tacoma; the active commercial retail and residential market in the area; as well as the shortage of materials. Two of the six potential bidders eventually dropped out. One week before bid time, three serious bidders remained and then two of the three dropped out. They withdrew because they were the low bidders on elementary school projects in the area, each in the amount of $15+ million. Both of those projects were over the estimate—in Burien, $2.7 million over; in Bellevue, $1.8 million over. Within a couple of days of bid opening, Spee West knew they were the only general contractor bidder.

    Dykeman, Olympic and Dykeman’s cost estimating consultant reviewed with Spee West their bid and their financial books. They also discussed with Spee West why the bid was over the estimate. It was found that the District estimate was over in the site work components. The building cost was really where it should have been in comparison to the costs that other districts are paying. It was also found that the overhead percentage of the total work that the contractor included was reasonable and the percent added for their profit was slightly lower than the District had anticipated. Therefore, it did not appear that the contractor inflated their profit or overhead numbers. Where they were over was in the site work.

     

    The team closely examined the earthwork quantities that the District estimated versus Spee West’s estimate. A computer-generated calculation of the earthwork quantities and unit prices was done and compared to that of the architect’s estimates. In so doing, it was calculated by the cost estimating consultant that the range between the estimates and the number that should have been used in the bid documents was between approximately $400,000 and approximately $1.4 million. Therefore, of the approximate $3.4 million that the bid was over on the total estimate, between $400,000 and $1.4 million of that was an understatement of the costs by the architects and the design team going into the bid. In addition, the landscaping and the moisture and thermal protection was under the estimate.

     

    The District considered three options before preparing a recommendation to the Board:

    --Proceed with the project, award the bid now and stay on track for opening in fall 2007.

    --Split the job into two components—the site and the building. Re-bid the site work right away and re-bid the building component in the springtime. Delay opening to fall 2008.

    --Keep the project as one contract and re-bid in the spring. Delay opening to fall 2008.

     

    In a re-bid situation, the District still would not know who would bid on the project, if any, nor would the District know the quality of the bidder. With the public works bid law, districts are required to award bids to the lowest responsible responsive bidder. Inflation costs are expected to increase by approximately eight to ten percent per year (roughly equal to $1.5 million to $2 million). A year’s delay in the school opening would necessitate re-evaluating the student enrollment and re-arranging portables at a cost of approximately $300,000 to $350,000 to move five portables. It would be necessary for students and staff to endure crowded conditions for another year. Lastly, there would be a cumulative impact on the schedule for the rest of the District bond projects, including staffing and workflow.

     

    Regardless of the option chosen, the District would work hard to incorporate some changes into the bid document and the contract assumptions. For example, a value engineering study would be conducted. Re-use of the on-site soil could be allowed which could save approximately $1.5 million, but the condition of the glacial till on the site, when wet, would necessitate drying it out or hauling it off and bringing it back, thus negating the savings.

     

    In summary, savings which might be in the range of $1.5 million to $2 million by doing a re-bid would be “eaten up” by the factors mentioned above such as inflation and costs of portable relocations. There would also be the uncertainties regarding the quality and number of bidders as well as hardships for the students and staff. The District can afford this project for the higher-than-anticipated amount because of funding in the bond issue, state match funds and interest earnings on the bond. Mike assured the Board that the District will be able to do all of the projects promised in the bond and still move forward with tonight’s bid, thanks to a wise structuring of resources and good management of the capital projects program.

    Dan Chandler said other school districts are having bid experiences similar to Everett’s and are very concerned about getting enough bidders.

     

    Board member Cooper said it is important to have heard that all of the projects promised in the bond will happen. It is unfortunate this bid is higher, but she is comfortable with the Administration’s recommendation and appreciates the thorough explanation of the reasons.

     

    Board member Petersen asked for the total development cost of the project. Mike said the $3.5 million overage will ultimately increase the cost by approximately $4 million with tax. Mr. Petersen asked about Spee West’s profit percentage and Mike said it is approximately 6.5 percent. Board member Petersen asked for an assessment of Spee West’s performance on the Eisenhower project, to which Mike said they have been very good to work with. On the Eisenhower project, Everett was faced with a higher bid, but sat down with Spee West and negotiated some immediate value engineering deductive change orders into the project. Mike noted that in his role it has hardly been necessary for him to be involved in the process at all and that is a good sign. They have a two percent change order percentage and are within two months of completion—this is an extremely low percentage for a modernization project. The Spee West team has had a tough, ambitious schedule, but has been able to maintain it. They further indicate they can stay on schedule for elementary #17 and the rigorous, shortened schedule did not add to the bid price.

     

    Board member Petersen commented that this is the right time of year to be doing this project—it is the dry season and will save money in the long run. Accepting tonight’s recommendation will not jeopardize other projects in the pipeline. Value engineering opportunities may reduce the end cost. Overall, he sees many good reasons to support this bid.

     

    With no further discussion, Ed Petersen moved to approve the aforementioned bid for the new elementary school #17 to Spee West Construction. Karen Madsen seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.

    		  BID AWARD FOR NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NO. 17

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    BID AWARD FOR NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NO. 17

    (cont’d.)

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    BID AWARD FOR NEW ELEMENTARY SCHOOL NO. 17

    (cont’d.)

    The Administration recommended the Board of Directors award a contract for pupil transportation services to Durham School Services, LP (E:185/06). On April 20, 2006, one proposal was received in response to the RFP (request for proposal) for pupil transportation services for a contract to commence in August 2007. The District issued the RFP this spring to allow adequate time to review proposals and to allow the awarded contractor adequate time to outfit the new transportation facility, hire any needed staff and procure any needed equipment. The response received from Durham School Services has been thoroughly evaluated and deemed to be responsive to all District requirements as defined in the RFP. Following Board authorization, District staff will negotiate and define the actual cost structure of the contract based upon the unit prices defined in the attached fee schedule. This is a five-year contract, commencing August 2007 and expiring July 2012.

     

    Bob Collard commented, saying that two companies attended the mandatory pre-bid meeting—Durham and Laidlaw. Laidlaw requested, and received, an extension for submittal of their proposal, but ultimately did not submit a proposal. Durham did.

    Their proposal represents 4.14 percent higher costs in the 2007-2008 school year than those paid in the 2005-2006 school year. In comparison, the state cost-of-living adjustment (COLA) is 4.5 percent plus the .5 percent catch-up authorized by the legislature. It was further noted that higher gas and diesel prices have also increased significantly in the past six months. Based on the COLA and the impact of higher fuel prices, it is believed Durham has submitted a fair and reasonable proposal.

    Jennifer Farmer commented, saying the RFP document was largely unchanged from the past. Information about the new facility was added as well as clarifications about how utilities might be handled and the handling of hazardous wastes, for example. It was asked that proposals be provided, both with fuel costs and without. The District anticipated receiving two bids. Indeed, Durham thought they were in a competitive environment up until the closing of the bids.

     

    In scoring the bid document, 35 percent of the score was based on the written submission; 25 percent dealt with interviewing the general manager for the Everett terminal—much more time would have been devoted to this component had there been more bidders than Durham, who is a known quantity in Everett; 20 percent was for the cost proposal—costs submitted tonight are not final and are subject to negotiation; 20 percent pertains to site evaluations— had there been more bidders than Durham, a team would have traveled to sites the company maintains and operates to evaluate the contents of their written proposal relative to what is really happening. Since Durham was the only bidder, and is the current contractor, and based on information from legal counsel, the District chose not to make costly trips to see Durham’s work.

     

    Terrie DeBolt reported that she made telephone contacts with contractors who use Durham outside of this community; her questions focused on operations, safety and training, and maintenance. Feedback indicated that Durham quickly responds to issues, has good maintenance programs, positive safety inspections and is a great community sponsor. In Everett alone, they donate approximately $8,000 to $10,000 per year in transportation service for homeless and low-income students and for Operation SchoolBell.

     

    Board member Petersen asked about the source of revenue to pay for the contract, to which Terrie said part comes from the state allocation and the rest from the General Fund. He sought clarification about the cost of the contract. Jennifer noted that this is a

    zero-based inflator contract so there is no supposition of an increase annually, it is negotiated from zero each year. Conversations take place each year. Bob said, in past years, Durham’s proposals have been less than what they could have proposed.

     

    Board member Dutton asked whether it is anticipated Everett will go with a fuel or no-fuel contract, to which Terrie said it is too soon to tell. Jennifer said it is possible the Administration will present to the Board a separate fuel bid.

     

    President Yates asked how it is anticipated the centralized location will help with costs, and Terrie said it will be easier to have 90 percent of the buses at one location and have more than one source for entering and exiting the facility. Currently, the District saves over $400,000 per year by parking vehicles in satellite sites.

     

    With no further discussion, Sue Cooper moved to award a contract for pupil transportation services to Durham School Services, LP. Kristie Dutton seconded the motion and the motion carried unanimously.

    		   AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR PUPIL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    AWARD OF CONTRACT FOR PUPIL TRANSPORTATION SERVICES (cont’d.)

    BOARD COMMENTS

    President Yates said the Walsh-Platt Banquet was very enjoyable. The students were outstanding. Dr. Whitehead noted that Travis Snider, one of the winners, was drafted #12 in the first round of the professional baseball draft.

     

    Board member Petersen said he enjoyed attending the recent championship baseball game at Safeco Field where the Jackson High School boys’ team won State. Mr. Petersen also commented about the excellent Superintendent’s Scholar awards program.

     

    Board member Cooper reported that she attended the Homeschool open house at Sequoia. She heard from a lot of parents who are very happy with the program. Displays of student work and art was terrific. President Yates said he also attended and was very impressed with how appreciative the parents and staff are.

     

    With no further comments, President Yates called for a brief rest break at 6:50 p.m.

    		  BOARD COMMENTS

     

     

     

     

     

     

     

    BOARD COMMENTS

    (cont’d.)

    BOARD ACTION AND/OR BOARD DISCUSSION   
    At 7:20 p.m., President Yates re-convened the Board meeting and moved into a study session about Board member responsibilities. On hand to lead the discussion was Buzz Porter, attorney for the firm of Dionne and Rorick. Following the attached handout, Mr. Porter outlined the authority and responsibility of a Board member, the liability of a Board member, Board member conflicts of interest, information about the Open Public Meetings Act, and information about student discipline appeals (E:186/06). In addition, Dr. Whitehead distributed copies of the Board’s recently-revised Policy 1712—Conflicts of Interest.

     

    Following a brief discussion, President Yates adjourned the regular meeting at 9 p.m.

     

    		  STUDY SESSION—BOARD MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES
    _____________________________ ________________________________

    Carol Whitehead, Secretary   Roy Yates, President

    		  

     

     

    Back to top