February 19, 2025 — Meeting Transcript

Machine-generated transcript — may contain errors.

Okay. We're ready to go, Stacey. Also, we're not going to say the pledge. Okay.

Good evening, everyone. Thank you for joining us virtually. And I really appreciate anyone who's watching, whether live or later, I appreciate everyone's flexibility for letting us hold this meeting over Zoom for sure. And I also want to send a special get well to Kim Hurst and Leo Heumann, two of our board members who are sick and not able to join us over Zoom tonight.

So adequate notice has been given for this meeting. Chris, if you could please read the motion to approve the agenda. I move that we approve the agenda as posted. Second.

Okay. All those in favor? Aye. Aye.

Okay. Any opposed? All right. Motion passes.

Okay. We will move on to recognizing our own. And I believe that is Jim Brunel and John Brazil. And Lisa, you can go ahead and get going.

And Lisa, too. Go ahead, Jim. Hey, good evening. I am proud to honor two of our captain custodians that truly embody the meaning of the word hero.

One evening, they noticed a colleague in a situation that proved to be dire. They acted quickly and called both myself and 911 to help render aid to the individual and literally saved her life in the process. So I wanted to just honor them this evening. And I think they should be on Zoom with us watching.

You know, I don't know if they're picture or not, but I wanted to thank them both. Are they here, Lisa? Do they or do you want is there anything else you wanted to say? Well, I know that they indicated that they were going to be able to be on our Zoom tonight, so I'm hopeful that they are.

I just want to say that they are very, they did not even hesitate when their co-worker was having a medical emergency. And I truly agree with Jim without their heroism base right now. I really truly believe they saved her life. And the timing of this was really, really close to the time that they were getting off of work.

And that is late in the evening around 11 p.m. And I really think if this situation would have been five minutes later, it would not have had the happiest of all endings that it is now. I know that this individual has gone through a lot of medical treatments and is getting extremely healthy right now. And we're very excited about that.

And the captain staff have wrapped our love around her. And just know that we're just hoping that she gets gets well soon. But Jasmine and Demetrius both are individuals at our school that make such a significant difference every evening. And truly, Demetrius had really only been working, I think, Jim, about a month around the time that this happened.

So it was just amazing that their quick action and quick thinking just led to a successful ending, I guess you could say. Thankful that they're Clayton employees and Captain staff members. Thank you so much. And Demetrius and Jasmine, on behalf of the Board of Education, thank you so much.

And we are so proud of you. We are so proud to have you on our team and part of our school community. And I know, you know, you feel your roles are vital to our schools for many reasons, but this is just an incredible example of why we're so proud to have you as part of our community. So thank you so much.

And again on behalf of the board just so proud of you and the way you handled that situation So thank you very much Okay, thank you, Lisa. And thank you, Jim, too, for bringing them to our attention. And I'm just so happy we could recognize them in public. So thank you.

Okay, we will be moving on to public comment. And the way we handle public comment on a virtual board meeting is that our chief communications officer, Gina Tart, receives all of the public comments and she will read them out. It's just easier that way than getting everyone in on the Zoom. So I apologize for that.

But I will ask again, Gina Tart, our chief communications officer, to read any public comments we have tonight. Good evening. Thank you. We did receive one comment via email prior to the meeting today, so I will read it to you now.

That's from Nicholas Vivio. Says, Hi, Felicia. My wife and I would be interested to know what role the board plays in setting school cancellation policies regarding snow days. The reason we ask is that, in our opinion, the district has been far too conservative this year when canceling school.

Obviously, when we get eight to nine inches, a snow day or two is warranted, but not four. But schools should never be canceled in advance of incoming flurries, i.e. last week's snow day or a measly inch of snow like yesterday. Furthermore, what is the person that is making these decisions optimizing for?

Are they optimizing for de-risking litigation and being advised by an overly cautious attorney? Because it certainly seems that they are failing to take into account the off times and necessary disruptions to students and parents, especially those of us who have young children. Thank you for consideration and setting a more reasonable approach to snow days. One that pairs a snow boots and a $9.99 ice scraper can easily solve for.

Nick and Vivio and Kathy Bennett. And that was the only comment I received in advance. Thank you. OK, thank you so much, Gina.

Moving on now, Dr. Patel will give her superintendent communication. Great, thank you. I appreciate the patience that everyone has had because we do recognize this has been difficult.

And there are a few things that we absolutely consider when we're making these decisions. First, as we've said in our emails and our communications, student and staff safety is always our priority. I think a lot of people have to also recognize that over 90% of our staff live outside the district. So we also consider our student drivers.

Most of the time within Clayton community, the roads appear clean and it seems like we absolutely can get to school. But then we also get numerous reports from outside the area where roads have not been clear. So students, student and staff safety is always our priority. And then secondly, we also make our decision based on what we consider to be expert advice and guidance and coordination.

So preceding any kind of weather, you know, storm or winter storms or watches that are coming up, we get reports from the National Weather Service. And I actually get emails twice a day in the morning and in the evening reports, which we go through and assess the situations. We look at MoDOT to see what kind of guidance they're giving and the reports that they're sharing. We also have superintendents calls that we have in the evening.

And then sometimes we also have them at four o'clock in the morning. Where all of St. Louis County superintendents get together to discuss the situation and assess what the roads are like. We also have to consider transportation, not only within our district, but also for our students with special needs.

So our special school district has transportation that they provide for our students. We have our voluntary inter-district choice corporation who provides transportation for our students. And they also are considered as we make these decisions. So I understand and recognize that school closures disrupt work schedules, child care, and absolutely instructional time.

So I just want to assure everyone we don't make these decisions lightly. A lot of thought goes into it. And as always, I've gotten a lot of feedback on the decisions. So please know that we will continue to look at ways on how to improve when it comes to these type of decisions or the processes we have in place But again I just appreciate everyone understanding and patience And we hoping what we are past this and we can put winter behind us We're hoping for I know it's going to be cold tomorrow.

So bundle up. And I look forward to having everybody back in school tomorrow. So that's just a little bit of update on that. Shifting gears.

What's been happening in school when we have been in school? I think it was two weeks ago, I had the honor and privilege of watching Les Mis at Clayton High School's theater and the theater program. And it was simply outstanding. There were over 1500 tickets that were sold.

I believe there were 93 high school students that participated, three elementary students and three middle school students. And this was what I believe a full circle moment for our new drama teacher, Mallory Duncan's first winter production. Interesting fact, this is her first winter production, and she actually performed this very play 21 years ago as a Clayton High School student. Spervantage, Board of Education, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried.

Lots of different, you know, performances and activities that represented over 18 to 19 different countries. They had, I know, vibrant dances from the Philippine Art Foundation. They had energetic West African drumming by drum warriors, Brazilian soccer, henna tattoos, and so many more cultural events. So lots of planning and a sense of community was absolutely evident in this.

So again, thank you for the staff, students, and families that came out to support this. Wonderful job with that. Then we had another exciting event for the first time again ever at the high school. We had Steve Hudson, athletic director, worked diligently to make sure that he put together a first ever combined college signing day on actual National Signing Day.

We had over 14 students who have committed to playing collegiate level sports at esteemed schools across the nation, including institutions like Stanford, Emory, MIT, so many more. And the neat thing about it was there was it was a broad mix of sports. So you had baseball, basketball, rowing was represented, soccer, beach volleyball, cross country and so many other sports. But again, it was a privilege to see all the students and the entire half of the gymnasium was filled with parents who are very supportive and excited for their children as we are for our students.

And there'll be more student athletes that we're going to honor during the spring signing day in April. So looking forward to that as well. And then celebration for one of our staff members. I want to take a moment to recognize Adrian Kuhn.

He is a special education teacher at Clayton High School, and he is being recognized as one of 10 special education teachers honored with SSD's Annual Keys to the Classroom Award, which recognizes exceptional skill, commitment, and impact on student learning. Some of the examples that if you know Adrian, you know he goes above and beyond in everything and he's extremely student-centered. He actually manages Clayton High School snack cart and before and after school coffee shop as initiatives to provide students with actual, I would say, real-world opportunities to build problem-solving and vocational skills. So I just want to thank Adrian, who's a creative teacher leader, and for his commitment to inclusion.

He's truly, truly deserving of this recognition. So if you see him, please congratulate him or even send him an email. So thank you, Adrian, for all that you do. And then last Friday, when we were in school, we had our professional learning day.

And I'm pleased to share that our district has successfully achieved the goal of training all of our faculty and staff to recognize mental health signs and symptoms and really to ensure a common language between all of us. As you recall we introduced the mental health first aid course to all of our elementary staff and district employees at our January PD day And now with this Friday we completed all of our training with our secondary staff So very happy about this And I know this required a lot of coordination and a lot of planning by so many different individuals I don think I could sit here and name them all but just know that we appreciate all of you for your dedication to learning and growing as part of our goals for the strategic plan as well meeting those objectives in there So thank you for that And then finally, tonight, we have the Paragon team who's going to present the results of our long-range facilities master plan. If you recall, it's been, I would say, probably eight to nine-month process with so much stakeholder input. We've had a survey out there.

We've had community forums. I believe we had over 110 committee members involved in this. The survey, I think, collected about 300 responses. We had over eight community engagement opportunities.

And again, our goal was really to make sure that our community is aware of the process, engaged, and has been giving us feedback and has been given an opportunity to be a part of this process. Last time we did this was in 2008, which was about 17 years ago. And as we know, education is ever evolving and it's our responsibility, I believe, to adapt to those needs and make sure that we continue to be a premier district, not only locally in the state, but nationally. And our facilities have to be in par to adapt to our ever-growing needs for our students.

So I look forward, I think we all look forward to the results that are going to be presented by Paragon. And I think at the same time, it's very important to know that this is just the first phase of the work. Our goal was for them to come in, assess all of our facilities, provide us with the results. And now we begin the process of where do we go next with all of the information we had and what's the conversations that will follow with that.

So please assure the community that we will keep you posted and all the information. There's going to be quite a bit shared tonight will be posted on our website. And we will also share that over email with everyone in the community. So thank you again for all of your engagement with that.

And then now I would like to hand it over to Lucia, our student board rep. Thank you. I would like to start off by sharing that at least from the student perspective, the unexpected extra long break this weekend has certainly been an amazing surprise. And so a bunch of students, friends and including my little brother would like me to say thank you.

Of course, I know that that's not a factor in deciding when snow days are, but it's still nice to be able to bundle up and catch up on extra homework and, of course, play and have fun in the snow. I would like to update with the National Honor Society as well. I remember earlier I talked about, I think in a past rep update, how they were planning on doing an advertisement in GNN, which is our intercom that like we watch a video and it's the announcements for the day. And there was a very successful video.

And they have started the tutoring process in algebra and physics. And I've been hearing it's going great. So this is just the beginning, but the tutoring and the mentoring and then the additional semester projects will be going very well. Very well.

I know we've also talked a lot about the Wellness Center in the past, and I would like to share that lately I have been hearing lots of positive feedback. I'm hoping to meet with the Student Committee for the Wellness Center soon, and so I'd like to look forward to sharing an update about that in one of my next updates. Yeah, update on update. But junior and senior prom preparations are upcoming as well.

And so I am looking forward to sharing that excitement in a future board meeting. I'd like to give a shout out to all of the winter sports, especially the girls swim team as they approach state. Today, they had a wacky Wednesday. I think it was swim practice.

I'm not sure if it was today or last Wednesday, but I saw some pictures on their Instagram. Superroportion O, levy, agenda, motion carried. Thank you, Lucia. Happy to see you back at the board meeting too.

So next we are going to have our presentation from Brad Irwin and the Paragon team. Before he starts, I just want to reiterate, I know Dr. Patel just said some of this, but I just wanted to remind the community, we hired Paragon to evaluate our facilities, all of our Facilities, buildings, athletic facilities, et cetera, to determine how well they're meeting our needs now and how well they will meet our needs in the future. We are not as a board taking any action tonight.

We're not making any decisions. This is just a presentation. It is the culmination of kind of the study portion of this process where, as I said, Paragon evaluated our facilities. You'll see they're going to provide some high-level concepts for us to consider.

They will also give us all the information from community feedback, etc. And the board has also had, we've had a couple of retreats recently with Paragon where we were able to ask them lots of questions, had very great informative discussions. So this is the culmination of Paragon's work and their study. And as Dr.

Patel said, I really just view this, we view this as a starting point. Right. So we are excited to have Brad Irwin here tonight to present to us and to the community the entire study that he's been working on for with his team for several months. So, Brad, thank you so much for being here.

We appreciate it. Yeah, thank you. Yeah, tonight is a big culmination of eight to nine months of hard work. If you remember, one of our first meetings was right before school let out back in May, where we were able to jump into all the different facilities before all the students were out.

And, you know, here we are in the middle of winter, back in Zoom land presenting tonight. So I'm going to try to recap eight to nine months worth of work in under an hour. Superintendent, Board of Education, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried. Yeah, there we go.

Great. So we'll go ahead and jump in. And, you know, as we've talked a lot of times is that, you know, this we filter everything through the district's strategic plan. And throughout the process, we had a lot of engagement and interaction with different levels within the Clayton community.

And these things kept popping up of learners feeling safe and valued, that our learners are having equitable and personalized individual learning experiences, and then the importance of the social, emotional, and physical well-being. So just to know that this is something that we look at, it's a filter through this master plan and popped up a lot. You know, tonight we wanted to kind of go back to the beginning, establish a foundation. But also, these are some of the things that popped up that are really important to have a good understanding is before we launch into the master plan.

So that understanding that our learners today, they learn differently, the teaching environment is differently, the curriculum is a lot different than when the buildings that they're in were built, especially the ones from the 1920s and the 1930s. You know, school districts are pure districts around Clayton have invested a lot of money in facilities and are set up to be future ready. So really, in order for Clayton to be and to continue to be that premier school district, not only locally but nationally, there must be that investment in the facilities to keep on that cutting edge of education. Through the demographics study, we've seen that the resident enrollment might be projected to slowly decline, but overall, enrollment is projected to be pretty stable over the next 10 to 15 years.

And one of the reasons for that is because the district typically sees an increase in the tuition-paying students, especially in that 6th through 9th grade when they enter into the district. When we went through the facilities, we realized that all of the buildings are compliant with the American with Disabilities Act. But there's some challenges within them that might not be ADA convenient, and we'll touch on that a little bit. You know, all spaces are learning spaces inside and outside the building.

So that also includes that athletic and activity spaces. And right now, some of those facility needs are not really being supported, especially at the high school level and at Gayfield. So as we move through this process, the city has been a good partner with the district in the past, and that relationship with the city is going to be crucial as we move forward, especially on a couple of things we're going to talk and show tonight. And then even though the district spends about million annually for that capital improvement and maintenance plans we know some of the things that we show tonight are going to go above and beyond that So just knowing that the current what that current debt levy is and what the district can borrow is basically up to about million without an increase in that debt levy So that just kind of helps set the stage and the foundation for some of the things we're going to talk about tonight.

Here's essentially a graph showing on the left where the district was back in 1990 with the enrollment and where we're at today. So overall, over the last 30 years, we're pretty steady with the enrollment. Part of the reason is, even though you see an increase and a little bit of a dip, about 10% of the K-12 enrollment is actually non-residents. Superroportionate, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried.

Actually, our demographers predicting in the next 10 to 15 years, there literally might be a handful of districts that see an actual increase in enrollment unless there's some big shift that comes to, you know, to our state. This was one of the graphs within our demographics that kind of shows that resident enrollment decline and how that looks across the different grade levels. But again, as we talked about, especially because of the Clayton's reputation and the ability to attract students from outside the district in, we think that the enrollment is actually going to be fairly stable. We also know that there's continuous conversation at the state level related to funding and potential open enrollment.

And if those things occur, we actually think that they're that actually solidifies that projection even further. Building on the capacity, right now, the things that we're talking about, any sort of facility improvements, large-scale facility improvements, take a little bit of time to implement. And so what you see here is not only our current enrollment for each building, but also a snapshot in time of five and ten years. Because even though Merrimack right now is busting at the seams, and we heard that and we've seen that within the data, but if we look five and ten years out, All of the buildings get within that sweet spot in that yellow and green area.

And what that allows us to do is it allows us to invest in those specialized, innovative learning environments, as well as some of those larger indoor spaces like cafeterias and gymnasiums for those school-wide and community events. And we don't just have to address just regular general education classrooms. We can invest in those innovative, specialized learning classrooms. That also allows within that sweet spot and that green and yellow zone, when you have those larger grade levels that kind of move through the building, it allows that larger second grade class to move all the way through the elementary school without displacing art or displacing Spanish or music, for example.

So it really helps from a facility planning standpoint to keep the students in the right environment when you're in that yellow and green area. And so it's really important that when we show that graph that we get a snapshot in time. So this right now is we're showing for every building, every floor, how that building is currently utilized so that when we look back at this three years, five years or 10 years down the road, we understand how these decisions were made. The rooms that we're talking about where, for example, at Captain, the sensory room was or the SSD was because we know down the line, those spaces may change.

So there's going to be an example within our master plan of every school and every floor plan. And that's really helpful for us as we went through this assessment process. So this summer, we went through every room in every building. So we not only assess the floors, walls and ceilings, we also looked at the heating, ventilation and air conditioning.

And what the replacement costs would be and the timing of those would be because that can be a large expense back to the district. Also looked at the outside of the building, such as your building envelope, like your roofing, your brick, your masonry and your windows. And we also looked at the playgrounds, the playfields, the parking lots and driveways, as well as your exterior lighting. And then what's not included within our scope of work, but what's included within the kind of the big picture is the safety and security audit that Tier 1 did last year for the district.

That is a filter that runs throughout our project as well, our part of the project as well. So next, I'm just going to show just a couple of quick examples. You've seen these before, but we also know tonight's a good recap. Superroportion O levy agenda motion carried Similar where green is something that in good condition that might be 10 15 or 20 years out before it needs to be replaced or renovated If something is yellow that means it in fair condition that needs to be addressed maybe in that five to 10 year range And if you see any red, that's more in that immediate need where it needs to probably be addressed within the next two to five years.

So here's a great example of the high school condition assessment of the parking lots and drives. We go over to White Island Middle School where we're looking at that exterior lighting. So not only what type of lighting and where it's located, but where those dark spots are. And is it because a fixture is out or does a light fixture need to be added?

Or is it simply a tree was planted and now it's matured and now it's blocking that light? So it helps facility staff identify where those spaces are that need to be addressed because that safety and security, especially when we get into this time of year, we're out there in the dark a little bit more than than other times. Playgrounds and playfields are important as well, not only for physical education, but also obviously like recess and then the community use. And each one of your, especially your elementary sites, are very, very tight.

And because of that, those surfaces get a lot of use, a lot more use and abuse, so to speak, than if they were, you know, two or three times the size. So the constant need for replacement and repairs is very evident and is really needed because of the amount of use that your spaces get. We talked about the exterior. So this is just an example here of Merrimack, where we're looking at what type of roofing surfaces they are, when they need to be replaced and their current conditions so that when we look at the when the warranty runs up, we have a replacement plan or plan to address them to continue the life of that roof.

And then we also looked at the exterior of the building. Same thing, same level of grading between like yellow and red, maybe some walls or windows, for example, there at Merrimack. We jump into our heating, ventilation, and inventory. So right now what we're looking at is a couple different options at each one of those buildings for replacement.

And again, timing those based on that yellow, red, and green type schedule. So this is just an example of what's going to be included within the master plan as well. The costs associated for replacement at each one of those locations. And I talked about the assessments of your floors, walls, and ceilings.

And this is just a snapshot here of Glenridge, where you can see some of those areas, for example, the ceilings on the lower level at Glenridge, where a lot of that repair is needed. And then to help facility staff moving forward, it's really important that we identify the preferred products that they like to use and have seen success using. So whether it's a design team, an architecture team, or it's facility staff, making sure that we're specifying and using the right product. So we went through and looked at all the interior type building materials.

So you'll see like drinking fountains, for example, as well as the colors of the paint so that when, you know, when we talk about a Clayton white or Clayton gray or Clayton blue, we have that color identified. So it's consistent throughout the district and we have those colors called out. So we talked about those assessments. And here's just what we tried to do is identify for each one of those scope items on the left, such as your HVAC, your building envelope, your roofing, flooring, ceilings, walls, and then the condition that they're in and to try to assign a cost to them.

So, for example, on the HVAC line across the district, basically within the next five years, we think that there's just under $19 million worth of improvements or replacements. In that five to 10 year window, about 4.2 million for a total, and you can go across the top there, for a total of about $35 million of HVAC improvements and replacements over the next 10, 15, 20 years. And each one of those scopes line up and go left to right. So overall, when we're talking about those capital improvement type projects, about $94 million over the next 15 to 20 years of costs in both those long range deferred maintenance type things and system improvements, as well as just your regular replacement of your ceiling tile, refreshing the paint on the walls, etc.

But we also wanted to break it down a different way and to show it per location. So, for example, Clayton High School, it's one of your largest facilities, so not surprising it has a large amount of that of the overall costs. So within that 94 million, same 94 million dollars, the high school has about 36 and a half million dollars of facility improvements over the next 15 to 20 years. But you can see how that's broken down within the red, which is basically within five.

That yellow is about five to 10 and that green is about 10 to 20 years. So that again we can look at how to budget for these capital improvements not only by the different scope of work but also by each location to put a good plan in place for the district to go through that process And one additional level of assessment we did was called the Hawkins-Lilley School Appraisal. And the purpose of this was to really measure these older buildings against the really the 21st century learning and education environments that our students require today and their curriculum today. Because it really helps us determine if a building needs to be refreshed, renovated, adapted, or decommissioned.

And so again, I touched on this a lot, and it's going to be a common theme, is that our sites, they're so tight and limited. Just as an example, Y-Down, most of the physical structure, the vertical structure of Y-Down is almost property line to property line. And so if we just increased Y-Down's site by two acres, you would see Y-Down go from a green at 89 up into the low 90s automatically. So things like, you know, even though there's the parking garage, there's still really not enough parking.

There's really not enough spot for physical play area for physical education or just to have classroom activities outside. You know, at White On, you've got a lot of pick up and drop off occurring basically at the street. So those things negatively impact the scores and actually, you know, keep White On for being more blue, per se. But there's also some real big facility improvements that are especially needed related to the learning environments at the elementary schools.

And that's reflected there in the yellow. And so Dr. Patel talked about the level of engagement and it was pretty awesome. So we're going to dive into each one of these a little bit, but we had a lot of engagement at the building level, community level.

Obviously with you guys, I think now this is maybe like the eighth or ninth time we've been together, but also that community survey to make sure that we got that input from around the district. So here is just a calendar, a recap of what we did and when we did it. And to talk through these just a little bit more to remind everybody that that steering committee was like our guiding voice, our filter throughout the whole process, because we wanted to make sure whatever we produced really reflected the district's needs and the strategic objectives. So, here's just a list of all the volunteers that helped us through this process that we met with four or five, six times.

And then our building level subcommittees. So, we set these up at each one of the buildings to get that diverse group of stakeholders from each school to make sure that we get those deep insights of what it's like to live, learn, and play within these facilities on a daily basis. Because we really needed to identify and prioritize those needs within each building. So we're able to meet with these subcommittees twice at each building, plus a joint meeting at the end.

And again, here's a shout out to all the people that were part of those groups. And then as we went through this process, we identified just a couple of extra things that we needed to do. And so we had a special subcommittee that was made up of the coordinators of curriculum to really focus on that section, as well as safety and security and athletics and activities. Because these needed to have like a deeper special dive into these key areas that were more, I'll say, district holistic versus building specific.

So again, great interaction and engagement. As Dr. Patel mentioned, we were somewhere between 110, 125 different members of the community of these subcommittees that helped us out through this process. And without their support and without their guidance, we would not have been ready for the community forums.

So we had a building level community forum at each building. So that helped us be a little bit more focused on each one of those buildings. And then we had two community-wide forums in November and December. And all that data that we did through our assessments, through the walkthroughs with the principals, the heavy engagement with the steering committee and the subcommittees really provided us the information that we needed to go out to the community and have these forums.

Superroportionate, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried. So, you can see on the right, these are some of the questions we asked. We asked them to just identify themselves by that kind of that role within the community, but also which building they felt that strongest connection to. And you can see the results of that.

We asked them just a couple of questions. So, we know that if we were to ask the community what their number one priority is, Safety and security is always number one. So we kind of took that off the table and we just said, other than safety and security, what two priorities would you rank the highest? And you can see there the green bars on the left are basically, and the one on the left is improving your air quality and the conditions of the HVAC units, your systems and infrastructure.

And then the next one is that increased the specialized learning spaces for new and innovative curriculum. So those two really stood out from the rest. And again, we asked a little bit more specifically questions that were related to one or multiple buildings. So what we asked is select your top five school building priorities.

And the one on the left there was increased and update the specialized learning spaces and environments. So again, that one bubbled up to the top. But you can also see there in the orange where we talked about at the beginning that mental, physical, social wellness added space for green space for play at the elementary schools. And then expanding there at the last orange bar was expanding those indoor spaces for school and community-wide events at your elementary schools.

So those were stood out pretty well. And we know that that slide was pretty small. So we wanted to just show this in a different way. And one of the things that came up at the very beginning of the process, but is also filtered through each one of these, is what we call the district-wide common themes.

And so you'll see, and we'll talk through these a little bit more in detail here in a couple minutes. And then at the very end, we had what we have called the joint committee meeting, where we had every member of the subcommittee at each building, as well as the steering committee, get together there in January at the high school and the library. Because it was an important end to the project, an important end to that stakeholder engagement. Where we presented a lot of this information tonight to make sure that we had consensus that when basically when we left the room that we really captured, make sure that we capture that holistic view of all that data gathered through the process.

And that when we walked out, we didn't have just a list of priorities per building, that we truly had what was the district wide priorities to help us set forth on this master plan together. So, any quick questions on that before I continue on to a couple other things? Okay, I'll jump in. So, you've seen this slide before, but just it's important to remember that, you know, as we talked about what the profile of a Clayton graduate looks like today, you know, it's a shift in that learning environment to more empowered learning, those opportunities for innovation, getting that global experience and real world hands-on experience.

Superroportionate, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried. As well as learning studios and areas for performing and visual arts. That recognition like your library at the high school is not just an area for books to store books and to read books. You know it's that learning commons and that area for advanced learning and project based learning.

And again, we talked about the wellness spaces and that opportunity to have community and partnerships and that integration space. This was a slide Dr. Patel shared in one of her presentations, but it really came out a lot in our building subcommittees where especially the teachers and the staff talked about creating spaces that lowered anxiety and lowered the stress of the students. And a couple of ways to do that is having proper acoustics within the space.

So both from noise from outside, the noise from mechanical HVAC units, but also just the proper acoustics of the space. Also talking about just the overall quality, air quality, indoor air environment, as well as access to natural light, daylight, and views. So those were really good that, I mean, Dr. Patel captured it well in her slide, but these are things that came up repeatedly in our conversations at each building.

And here's a little bit of a deeper dive into those common themes that kept coming up related to safety and security, maintenance and HVAC, the accessibility and inclusivity within those spaces, and then focusing on those special spaces for curriculum and programming. And some examples of what each one of those means and how it basically impacts every building we talking about This is district Every building has these types of needs throughout the district And this is small intentionally but then this is just part of the data But as we went through these exercises, we wanted to make sure that we captured everything. But we really wanted to highlight those areas that the building level subcommittees talked about as their highest priority. So we did, through our interaction with them, we put a lot of information out in front of them and then basically asked them to identify their top three priorities.

And here are just some of those examples, and they'll be more easily read within the document. But those really helped lay the foundation for what we're calling then the next step is this long range kind of future design options and improvements. Because what we tried to do is translate all the input that we received at the building level, as well as district administration level and the community input into an actionable long range facility plan for each site. So we had a lot of, like I mentioned, a lot of engagement.

So these solutions, these proposed designs are really rooted within all that feedback that we received. So what we did is we took two or three different options to each one of the schools, walked through those design options with them so that we looked at different ways to improve those facilities based on that feedback. We got some feedback. And then what you're seeing tonight is the basis of those revisions and that feedback that really made sure that we captured that feedback from each one of the buildings and carried that forward.

So what we're showing tonight, each site is basically a long range, potentially multi-phase improvement step for each facility. So I'm going to start and go just a little bit more in detail on the family center because a lot of what I'm talking about on this will be applied to the other sites. So what you see in red on the right, or sorry, on the right-hand side is the site plan for the family center. And what you see in red is interior renovations inside the space.

If you see a blue box, that is a new addition, new construction outside the existing footprint. If it's gray, that means it's something to do with asphalt, parking lots, driveways. And then if it's green, it's usually a playground or play space. Superroportionate, Proprietary, and Proprietary.

Superroportion O, levy, agenda, motion carried. Superroportionate projects in the St. Louis metro area. But this is an order of magnitude only.

It's really based on dollars per square foot and not specific designs. So it allows us to get some costs on a page to be able to make, to have good conversations and to be able to base future decisions on. But it doesn't include what we call FF&E, which is those fixtures, furnishings, equipment. Doesn't include any professional fees or permitting.

And it doesn't, and you'll hear us maybe talk about property acquisition or swing space. And it doesn't include those two things. And I'll touch on the swing space here in a minute. So you also see a line for contingency.

And based on the level of complexity or the size of the building, that contingency might range from 20 to 35 percent. So we'll talk about that, too. But that'll be pretty consistent through everything that we show tonight. So on the family center, you'll see on the left hand side the different types of improvements.

So renovation, new addition, parking lots and drives. Then you'll see there that quantity. So, for example, I think it's about 10,700 square feet of renovation at the family center at about $100 a square foot gets us to, you know, just over a million, just under $1.1 million worth of costs long term for renovation at the family center. You can see down at the bottom at the subtotal gets us to about $5.9 million.

And then you can see that 30% takes care of some of that contingency, some of the GC's general conditions and some markup to get us overall big picture of these types of improvements at the family center about million When we go over to Captain CAPTN the building is a poured concrete structure so it really hard to make major modifications to that structure based on how it is So you can see on the left the priorities in black that we were able to make some significant improvements on, but something like the accessibility, I can mention the structure is difficult to alter. So we still have four, five level changes within this building. We talked about the site circulation being really tight. We're not able to, you know, have a new drive lane or driveway or parking lot on the site.

So we really weren't able to address the site circulation. So that's why it's in red and crossed off. You can see some of those other improvements on the site that we've reviewed before, and then the costs associated with that. So to do that level two type improvement at Captain would be about $18.8 million.

Now, I mentioned because Captain, that tight site, we really don't have a level three for that. A level three would be a new building. So we haven't shown that yet here for Captain. But when we talk about Glenridge and Merrimack, we'll have a level two and a level three.

So, for example, at Glenridge, you can see there the amount of renovation, some demolition and new construction. And really what we're showing here, it's going to fully maximize each one of those sites. But it's also going to allow for limited opportunity for future growth, both inside and outside the building. A little opportunity and flexibility for adaptation.

And most of the interior spaces in a level two would kind of remain as they are, just being refreshed. So because of that, we'd really have to look at the long-term viability of this building at Glenridge and Merrimack in about 10 or 12 years from now if this approach is taken because we're not making a, it's only a level two impact and not a level three. So when we show level two at Glenridge, our total costs are just under $27 million for that level two at Glenridge. When we go and show a level three, you can see it looks a little different.

So this is like a complete overhaul of the interior of the building. A lot more demolition and new construction on the backside of the building. Superroportion, Glenridge would still look like Glenridge on at least three sides of the building, but that back, because we're doing such a significant addition and we're doing such a significant renovation on the inside, we're able to kind of reset the life of the building a little bit more. We don't have to come back to Glenridge or Merrimack as soon to reevaluate it.

It's going to, even though we're fully maximizing the site, it's going to allow for better future growth and adaptation inside the building because of how it's constructed. And so, you know, it's kind of hard to show a lot of examples of this at elementary level because all of our first generation big elementary schools are about this age. But we typically would see this in higher education where the outside of the building looks really similar. But when you walk in, it looks like a new building that might be five, 10 years old.

So, for example, so this is a level three at Glenridge. And so, again, level two is about twenty seven million and eleven level three. It's about forty four million dollars at Glenridge. When we talk about Merrimack, a lot of similarities because those buildings are laid out pretty similarly.

So a lot of adding on little chunks of building here, some renovation throughout on this level two. Again, it's going to fully maximize the site, but we'd have to come back and really evaluate the long-term viability of this in about 10 years. So about a level two at Merrimack is, again, pretty darn close at about $27 million because they're about the same size. They're requiring about the same level of renovation and new additions, just maybe in a little bit different way.

One of the things with each one of these is that if we add a gymnasium, it would also be a tornado safe room. So that's why when you see a gymnasium, it's $700 a square foot, for example. That's code, but it's also a great amenity, needed amenity for the district. So again, a level two for Merrimack would be just under $27 million.

We go to what a level three at Merrimack would look like. Again, very similar. Just one thing we're showing, we haven't had conversations with the city, but we think there might be an opportunity to expand parking up there in the easement along the downside of Forest Park Parkway. But a lot of similarities, as I mentioned, with Glenridge here at Merrimack.

And then when we get to level three at Merrimack again, we're just we're, you know, we're forty four and a half million dollars for those for those level three improvements. When we jump over to Y-Down, even though Y-Down's 12 years old, there's still some changes from a curriculum and from a use of a building that need to take place. So that why you see some of those red boxes within that building You see a blue box down at the bottom That what we talking about is enclosing putting you know making the roof Superroportion O levy agenda motion carried And weather like this, for example, really limits the use of that. So we think that if we can get artificial turf on there, not only is it more conducive for PE, it's more conducive for just general classroom activities, time during lunch to be able to go out there, but also a better surface for the community on nights and weekends.

So here, again, we kind of consider that more like a level two at YDOM, but there's a lot of level one type impacts there. And so at YDOM, we think it's about four point two, four point three million dollars worth of improvements that are needed there. And when we get to the high school. You're seeing some new additions on both sides of the of the campus, as well as a lot of interior renovations.

So, again, the items in black were those highest priorities that we were able to address, and the ones in orange were ones that we were kind of sort of to be addressed. So there's some things there with the Performing Arts Center that the way it's constructed, a complete renovation of that or overhaul of that's really difficult without essentially just building it new. So there we're talking about more of a light renovation versus a complete retrofit or complete overhaul. So for a level two type of improvement at high school, we're at about $29 million of all those projects stacked up there from top to bottom.

Now we separated athletics and activities from the high school campus. So what you see here is the level two. So this is essentially, we're keeping everything where it is at Gayfield, but we're just, you know, replacing the turf and the track when it needs to. We're replacing the buildings that really need to be replaced, expanding the parking lot.

But then we're also looking at the city-owned athletic field down there behind the admin building and potentially renovating that and improving that so girls softball can use that better. And then not to leave out Adzik Field. So Adzik Field there, you see some blue boxes kind of faintly. That's to construct the press box, the restrooms and the dugouts.

So we're calling this a level two because things are pretty much staying where they're at. And so level two is about $23 million. But we wanted to ask the question, before we invest $23 million in those facilities, are those facilities located in the right spot? We know that there's some disadvantages of having gay field located away from the high school.

It could be a safety and security thing. Is it limiting access to students because they have to travel over there, walk over there, drive over there themselves? We also know that it kind of is a little bit more difficult maybe to get people over there from the high school versus if it was, you know, on the same campus. So we asked the question before we invested that $23 million in Gay Field and the athletic facility behind the admin building, is there potential to partner with the city on what we're calling a land swap?

And is it even possible to fit the activities that are currently occurring at Gay Field to put those over top of the athletic fields that the city owns behind the admin building and vice versa? And so here's a diagram that shows we think it can work. So on the upper left, you'll see the footprint of the existing multipurpose field that the city owns and the footprint of the existing softball field, if that were to be overlaid over at Gay Field, and then vice versa. If we were to take the existing fields behind, the athletic fields behind the high school, could the football and track field fit on top of that area?

And we think it can, as well as the other improvements that are needed for locker rooms, training rooms, the press box, the grandstands, the field events, for example. So this would essentially be, we'd locate the high school athletics, then back on the high school main campus and relocate the city-owned athletic fields over to Gay Field, in addition to all the improvements for Adzick Field. So we think there's some really good opportunities for both the city and the school district to continue to investigate this. And to do that, it would be about $30 million, we think, to do all of that.

And so that's going to be one of our recommendations coming out of this is to take this to the next step of development and investigation and feasibility. We also look like, again, when we're in a tight urban environment like Clayton is, if there's adjacent property to any of your buildings, like, is there an opportunity? There for a future use. And we know that Calaris has been talked about in the past.

But when we wanted to look at it is, well, first of all, an option number two, if something didn't work with the city on property, could the football field and track fit over top of Calaris, for example? And it could. But we also looked at, you know, is that another opportunity for expansion of athletics activities? Is that an opportunity for a new performing arts center?

And again, we think it could be. So up there on the top, you'll see if we kept the existing Calaris building and use that for swing space for those elementary schools, for example. We don't know if WashU is going to continue to expand. Could they want White Island's campus?

Could that be a future middle school? Is that an opportunity for expansion of the high school for different innovative type learning environments? Can we keep the garage in place and do something similar that we're doing at White Island and put a turf field on top of it for PE or for field hockey? Could a new, larger performing arts center be placed adjacent to the garage on the east side there over the parking lot?

We think it can. The other thing we wanted to show is, you know, there's only about one other good spot that if you ever wanted to expand, you know, the athletic side, what we did is we copied your existing gym just east of that, that footprint to show, you know, before any other improvements were to happen on that side of the campus. And we want to make sure that, you know, future expansion of athletics and activities is taken into account. So we didn't put any cost estimates to this because this was just purely high level feasibility.

But we wanted to be able to diagram some of the conversations that we've had and some ideas that we had through this process. So similar to what I mentioned with Gayfield and the city owned athletic facilities, we wanted to have a conversation related to the elementary school. So as I mentioned, each site, each elementary site is five acres or less, when really that minimum for an elementary school is really closer to eight to 10 for the minimum. It also showed that there's a high cost of renovation of those existing facilities.

And there's a lot of disruption that would be caused by those construction activities occurring while school is in session. So what we talked about is, like, can we identify some swing space to be able to move faculty and students and staff out of their home school and into the swing space for one or two years? Well, there's a challenge of finding those spaces, but then also the cost of relocating students and the cost of renovating those spaces so that they could be elementary schools. So, you know, there's some challenges there.

Also, if we were to take and rebuild new schools on those existing sites, it's almost impossible without relocating students as well. So what you see up there at the top is the existing size of each of the elementary schools. And with the improvements and the needs that we've identified for what each elementary school needs moving forward, we think that if you were to rebuild three elementary schools, they would each be about 80,000 square feet at about $450 a square foot with the contingency at about $43 million for that construction. So it doesn't include all the things that we talked about earlier.

But again, before we invested, you know, $27 million or less into a level two or $44 million into a level three, should we look at what new construction would be? And so that's the question we're kind of proposing back and our recommendation back to the district is that we think it's worth taking this one step further to see what it would take to rebuild the three elementary schools on different sites. And before we make that decision, also have that conversation because of the size of the elementary population, two elementary schools is technically feasible. So, again, just to ask that question, before we rebuild three, would we look at rebuilding two, obviously larger than 80,000 square feet?

So, again, that's going to be one of our major recommendations coming out of this process is that further exploration of feasibility study needed on, you know, both the elementary school of what the renovation would be at each site or property acquisition and new construction. So kind of parallel paths to investigate both to be able to provide the Board of Education, the community with all the information that's needed to evaluate that moving forward. Again just a reminder as we talk through this level two and level three type improvements the current debt from the district is just under million you know fully paid off in just about four years from now And that if the district were to put something on the ballot next April it would support about million of bond funds of capital improvement projects without a tax increase And then just to kind of recap everything on one page, if we were to look at those elementary schools, what would that cost be for a new elementary school just for those construction, you know, vertical construction? So again, there's some disclaimers there of what's included.

Again, that's that order of magnitude to help us have good conversations and make decisions to move forward into a design process. And then you see there on the right-hand side, those level two and level three type costs where if you were to go that route, we think it's anywhere from $137 to about $178 million worth of those long-range, potential future long-range projects at each site. And then to kind of wrap it all up, you know, I think hopefully tonight we've shown how the plan and the comments and the feedbacks are all real, really aligned with the strategic plan. You know, recognizing that learners today are, it's just different than when our schools were originally built, especially the ones in the 20s and 30s.

You know, for Clayton to continue to be that premier district, not only locally, but nationally, that continued investment in state-of-the-art facilities is needed. The demographic studies support just basically a stable enrollment for Clayton that allows us to invest in those innovative and specialized learning environments. A lot of the improvements within the assessments can be handled within that $4 million capital improvement budget. But when we start talking especially about those level two and level three type of improvements, we're going to need some participation and partnership with the community through bond issue elections.

So our recommendation, like I mentioned tonight, the next step, Dr. Patel mentioned earlier, this is kind of the first phase. That phase two really needs to be additional exploration of renovation of the elementary schools and the feasibility of new elementary schools. And to have that go on a parallel path with additional development and study of those facilities improvements that we diagrammed at the high school, middle school, family center.

And then a lot of good collaboration and communication with the city is going to be really important as we investigate the athletics and activities between the city owned athletic fields and gay field. But hopefully you've seen that we've had a lot of engagement, you know, the long range master plan through the involvement of all the building subcommittees, all the different stakeholders, that extensive community engagement that we had, you know, provides you, the Board of Education and Dr. Patel, all the information needed to evaluate the next steps moving forward. But I just can't end just there just yet.

This has been a great process and project for Paragon. Obviously, getting to work with the board, Dr. Patel, Mr. Brazil, you guys have been with us every step of the way, every meeting.

It's been nine months of really, really great work. The Board of Education, you guys have been right there with us along the way. Like I said, this is probably our seventh, eighth or ninth time meeting. But really, that engagement at the building level, the steering committee and the community forums, that was just absolutely critical.

And without you guys really pushing us and allowing us to get that deep within the community, we wouldn't have been able to get the data that we had. So, you know, thank you for allowing us to do that. Thank you for allowing us to be part of this journey with you. And then just, yeah, opening up for all the questions.

Wow. Okay, Brad, you can take a deep breath. Before we ask questions and comments, because I know we probably all have a lot of them. I know I do.

I just want to start by thanking you so much, you and your team. There's like many of you who are not on the screen tonight that worked with Brad at Paragon for all of your hard work throughout this process. Not only did you in detail evaluate all of our current facilities, but you facilitated the community forums, the surveys, the demographic studies, everything that you've presented tonight. And it's certainly providing us with all the information we now need to move to the next step, which is making some decisions about what's best for our district.

Thank you so much for that I do appreciate it I going to save my questions and comments for the end And I think because we on Zoom it'll be easiest if I call on board members to ask theirs. I do want to, before I do that, just clarify, this presentation will live on our website. Is that correct, Dr. Patel?

That is correct. Okay. I just wanted to confirm that for the community watching, because a lot of these Slides had a lot of information. And people watching might thinking like you went too fast and they wanted to see it again or whatever.

So this will be on our district website. So anyone at any time can refer back to this and certainly reach out to us with questions about it at any time. And we have multiple volumes of PDF documents and books that have everything you've seen Tonight from really detailed cost estimates to the demographic study to those floor plan. So the site plan diagrams that we showed, as well as floor plan diagrams, the survey results.

I don't it's it's literally four books. I don't know how many pages. OK, thank you. I just wanted the community to be sure that, you know, there is a place they can go to to walk to look at this information again for the future.

So, okay. Is there anyone in particular that wants to go first? Otherwise, I will just call on people. Okay, Ben, you just unmuted yourself.

So why don't you go first with any questions or comments you have for Brad or anyone else? Sure, sure. Yeah, thank you, Brad, for the presentation and for your team's hard work and for everyone who's contributed to this. It's really been a fascinating thing to observe.

Actually, I had a lot of questions, but you answered quite a few through the course of that presentation, so thank you for that. I guess one of the things is, so this is an assessment. So your facilities assessment, obviously, is kind of summarized in the presentation that you provided. In terms of the data that we'll have from you, is that really, describe the depth of that assessment?

I know you talked a lot about like there's lots of different factors, things that are needed. But how would you characterize the depth of that? I think they call it FCA document. So just as an example, you'll see the amount.

I'll just pick on the flooring at the high school. You'll see the amount of flooring that needs to be replaced within the next two to five years, what type of flooring it is and how much it costs and where it's located within the building. For the two to five year frame, timeframe, the five to 10, and then the 10 years and beyond. So it really will help facility staff to be able to see what, hey, as of today, how we need to plan our future improvements and to be able to budget, but also just to scope out that work and start to see where some of those projects, you can get some economies of scale to do some good overlap.

So if you're going to do a lot of work over in this side of the building, you know, just for example, the art room, you know, can we take care of the flooring and the ceiling and the paint all in one shot? Is everything really needed to be done over there at one time? So without them needing to go through and do their own assessments, we've captured all of that for every building. Awesome.

Very good. Thank you. Okay, I had a couple of specific questions on some of the slides. So, one question I had I thought maybe would be helpful is for, what do you mean by envelope when you have that?

I kind of think I know what it means, but I'd love for you to. Yeah, your building envelope is typically like your roofing. We call that building, that's part of your building envelope, but we outlined roofing separate. So your building envelope is mostly your walls.

So your brick and your masonry, your windows and your doors. So you will see like tuck pointing, so that's your joints of your masonry, your sealant around the windows, maybe some window or door replacements as a whole. So the other part of that is we captured the number of windows and the square footage of windows at those buildings. So again, when we look at doing a window replacement project, potentially, we can see really quickly what that would be without needing to do that in the future as a separate step.

So your facility team, for example, could go out and get a quote from three different manufacturers on what this would cost to replace these, the size of window, these number of windows of the same size on the west wall of this building, as an example. Gotcha. Okay, perfect. And we have all that pretty well detailed out, it sounds like.

Yes. Awesome. Awesome. And so also so the slides 16 and 17 which are the long improvement cost by scope would you consider that like the level one stuff that needs to get done Pretty much yes So that a lot of those things that came up during the facility assessments but also those long those like new roofing new HVAC systems for example Those are those larger costs that have a big impact on the learning environment that some people just don't realize how much it costs and what condition they're in.

So we wanted to be able to capture what the replacement costs would be and about when that should be budgeted for. Gotcha. Great. I guess I want to ask your opinion in terms of the cost.

So it's $94 million, right? And I guess that extends out a little ways, right? Maybe 15 years. Would you consider that like the kind of, these are kind of some mounting needs for all of our buildings like that have kind of been adding up a bit over, or is this a fairly normal schedule of cost given age of buildings, things like that?

Yeah, so I think one of the things that our teams saw was that the buildings are well maintained. They're well taken care of. They're clean. A lot of those big costs are just the typical replacement of replacing roofing and HVAC units and the typical wear and tear that occurs onto a building.

So actually, I think overall, the facilities are in good shape. I think the challenge becomes is like, are they really suited for the educational environment? Are they well designed and set up for today? And then are some of those replacement costs over time?

Is it also looking at your elementary schools, just as a great example, the amount of improvements that are needed to bring that facility really up to par for 21st century learning environments? Is that what does that look like compared to new? And so that's why we looked at that diagram and helped scoping that out. OK, excellent.

Thank you. One question I had, maybe if you could help me help clarify. So between the level two and level three investments, in particular, I'm looking at the elementary schools. One of the statements in here is new school with an existing shell to extend the life for decades versus a level two, which I believe it says, let's see here, life of building resets on new addition, but not entire structure.

Can you tell us a little more about that? I'm just curious. Gymnasium and hollowing out that core to kind of build back within it. But there's a lot of constraints with that versus the level three has a lot more demolition on the back that allows us to have more purposeful space that's truly in size and design for future needs.

But also the construction will allow us that flexibility as well moving forward. So it's more of a gut and overhaul in a level three versus the level two is when you walk into that space, it's going to smell new. It's going to have new finishes, so to speak, but a lot of the bones and guts are still going to be the same. So at a level three, so there, when you say gut, it's really, you really would be a structural, some structural factors as part of that.

Yeah, there will be some structural improvements. We'd have to look at the elevator placement. We talked about the accessibility piece that's built into each one of those. But yeah, there's more of a complete overhaul of your mechanical electrical plumbing systems than retrofitting and piecemealing approach.

Okay, gotcha. I think maybe one way to describe it is it's more of a piecemeal of renovations and additions kind of cobbled together within a level two versus a level three is more of a holistic overhaul because you've got full access to the building. You can kind of go in there and make it right for the long term. Gotcha.

Gotcha. And so that you would maintain the old elements of the old school. There's still value in the older structure from a cost perspective, or is it more of an aesthetic? It's a little bit of both.

So we think that from the importance of the outside of those buildings to the neighborhood in Canada. Community is a strong factor. What we actually find is the buildings from the 20s and 30s are better structurally than our buildings that we are retrofitting from the 50s and 60s. And so, yeah, so I think that's one of the challenges, frankly, when we talk about Captain is that the way that Captain was constructed is a challenge.

It's harder to take that poured-in-place concrete structure and make major modifications to it. Plus, it's built on five different levels within that building that you can't really over... You guys have done the best that you can with the lifts to make it the way it is, but it's still not awesome. It's still not great.

I mean, today we would never design a facility with that many level changes, for example. And there's just not a good way, the way it's constructed, to really improve on it other than just to kind of live with it. Excellent. I think I just have one last question.

One of the like the summary findings has to do with athletic and activity facility needs. And I think it's especially at the high school. I wonder if you could just talk a little bit about that. Maybe just where our facilities are, in your opinion, because you obviously work with lots of different schools.

So I'm just curious, how would you characterize where we are right now? I mean, realistically, everything at Gayfield needs to be completely replaced from your vertical construction. The press box is in really poor condition. That impacts the way your students can utilize that space on game days, the protection of equipment, so forth.

You know, the locker rooms, your training areas, your spaces for your students, they're just, they're not set up the way that they could be and should be for multiple sports moving forward. But also, if we want to look at how you compare to peer and surrounding communities, a lot of the other communities have put a lot of investment in those spaces as well. And it's just not, Clayton is not at the same level as those other communities. Excellent.

Okay. That's it for me, Stace. Thank you. Thanks, Ben.

You asked some of my questions as well. So, okay. How about Chris? Would you like to go next with your questions?

Okay, yes, thank you. Thanks to Brad again. This has been, and thanks to our entire community for their involvement. Between the experts that Brad has brought in and the input that we've gotten, I'm just extremely impressed with where we are today versus what we knew a year ago.

It's just a world of difference for our district, and we have a lot of great things to look forward to because we've started this process. So I just want to start out by saying how exciting it is. Okay, so one of my questions was surrounding the Hawkins-Lilley school appraisal. We've talked about, and you've said this catchphrase, you're measuring the older buildings against the 21st century educational requirements.

I wonder if you could be a little, give some examples, more specific on what that 21st century educational requirements are. Sure. So I think if you look at just one easy one is the gymnasium space at Glenridge and Merrimack. It was designed for activities that were quite a bit different in the 20s and 30s than they are today.

Okay. There's not enough storage. Just that's a great, and we hear that a lot from districts that we work with. You guys truly don't have enough storage space.

And when we look at the gymnasiums, that's one of those areas that is being used for storage and it's negatively impacting student activities within that space. Also, the inability to be able to get multiple grade levels and multiple sets of parents and family members into that space, I would say somewhat comfortably. That's a big deal. But even though those spaces kind of look cool and they're nice and they're well taken care of, they're just not set up well.

And the number of students that that was initially designed for is quite a bit different than what's been added to that building over time. So also if we look at the classrooms you know the classrooms were not designed they were designed for chairs and desks and in rows only Teacher at the front one white one blackboard not the project learning that occurs not the collaborative learning spaces that occurs I mean even if we just look at what are the power requirements the electrical requirements that are needed today versus anything that been done So those types of things actually all play into it. And as I mentioned, especially like at Y-Down, you know, pick up and drop off on the street is not best practice. Superroportionate, being able to have space to just live and breathe outside is needed.

And when your buildings go basically property line to property line, Y-Down is a great example, that has a negative score on that as well. I mean, everything that you guys are and do shows up really well within those scores. It's just those barriers that exist because of the infrastructure that's there. Superintendent, Board of Education, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried.

And that's one of the things, especially at those elementary schools that we're really looking at is like, yes, you can make those temporary improvements on a level two at the elementary school. And everybody walks in there and it'll feel good. It'll be exciting. But does it really set you up for success down the road?

And we don't think so. And that's why we came up with and wanted to look deeper and came up with those level threes. But then when we started looking at that cost of what that level three is and looking at it, it's like, wow, what would a new school be? And obviously, there's all sorts of challenges with that.

But just from a construction perspective, we wanted to put that out there because once you go to make $27, $20, $30, $40 million investment in one of those schools, you've now committed to continue to make investment in that school for a long period of time. And before you do that, we want to make sure that you have the data that shows if you were to do new, what would that cost? And then different communities have made different decisions based on that same data. But at least you have the data to evaluate it.

And that was really the goal of us going through that exercise. And I think that the other part of this is if we would have came back in the beginning and said, hey, three new schools are what you need. I don't think there had been any sort of acceptance of that. We really had to go through the process and it was all brought to us through going through this process of all the challenges that we have at these buildings, at these sites that really led us to be able to have that as a recommendation to say this is something that we need to look at a little bit further.

Great. Okay. Thank you for that. It helps us give us a focus on ensuring that those three buildings are really appropriately looked at long term rather than, like you said, thinking about those piecemeal, give us five to 10 years here and there versus an entire new structure would give us 20 to 30.

You know, it could give us 100 years, you know, depending on how we build it, like like like these buildings have for us so far. But it does feel to me like this is a really clear sign of, you know, making that once a century, you know, decision to make sure that these facilities are up to pace with, like you said, 21st century requirements, knowing especially that those requirements will change rapidly, probably more rapidly than they ever have in the past 100 years. So I really appreciate that part of our analysis and the way you've described it is really helpful. I also want to say that this survey is so, so important to me and I think to the whole board to really understand and recognize what our families are looking for in these schools.

And I love that it really, you know, we're taking out the HVAC and the safety and security really because we know that those are, you know, clearly the priorities and what has to be done on a regular basis. Superintendent Board of Education Proposition O levy agenda motion carried The other one was like you said that common space area that could fit you know multiple PE classes at the same time or the entire student body plus parents you know to watch a performance of some kind And it does occur to me that very clearly those level three changes at the academic or at the elementary level would address all of those things that the survey and that our stakeholders are saying they really want in terms of those three things I just mentioned, as well as the big, big draw of having innovative and flexible spaces for continued innovation. As we move forward in time with the way we do education. So I'm very excited about this idea of brand new facilities and would feel very, given what we know and the way you've presented it, it would feel like a much more long term, efficient plan to go that level.

And so I was glad also for you to give us this concept of doing two elementary schools instead of three. You know, your outside perspective has helped me see how where our elementary schools are located is is so incredibly, you know, restrictive. And really now it's time, like I said, it's a once in a century time to think about what elementary schools should look like in terms of how many acres they are and how we can get all the things that our survey has, you know, and that our teachers have said that they really need out of their learning spaces. So I'm really glad it's not something I had considered is, you know, to go from three buildings to two and to make those two buildings in set places other than where they currently exist.

Because I think that's, you know, as a as a community and it's hard for us to imagine that we this community is we love our, you know, the way that our elementary schools are surrounded by, you know, our our neighborhoods. And it feels, you know, it's such a warm environment because of that. It's unique to our school system to be in that. That's that just kind of like you said, it feels like they really are part of the community because of the way they're they're located.

But I think we have to go bold and realize that, you know, our education facilities, even if they're moved, are really the most important thing for our district to continue to maintain. So we've got to look at moving, you know, some of these locations and that's going to be hard. But I think with your guidance, it makes me much more excited about that rather than looking at the challenges. We really want to look at that as just a gigantic opportunity that you've helped us see.

So I just want to make that comment. Let me look. What else? Yeah.

OK. OK. I did want to point out that I've said almost everything except for I'll say it again, maybe if I haven't said it already. But or if I've said it already, I might be repeating myself, but it's worth repeating that this idea of us going for something that is a five to 10 year fix, Superintendent, Board of Education, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried.

I don't think that short-term look is what's best for the district. And then my final question is, can you help me understand if we were to move Shaw Park, sorry, if we were to swap Gay Field into Shaw Park, I did not see in that slide, so help me understand, if any parking would be added. Because I know that if you know every game and all the things that happen at a gay field and all the you know it not just for practice time obviously we want that to be a space where all you know at every game and every event that we have as many people from the community can come and attend in a you know in a way that is feasible So parking is not something I saw on that slide and I wondered what your thoughts were on that So if we look so Shaw Park itself would stay as is Okay. Take those, just where those two athletic fields are.

Yes. The multipurpose and softball field. Yep. We actually would not be negatively impacting the existing parking lot, parking lots that exist around the administration building and around the high school.

So all that parking would stay as is. Okay. I don't have the counts, but I'm going to guess it's double the amount of parking that's located close to there versus what's at Gayfield without adding more parking. Okay.

I hear what you're saying, Brad. So you're saying, because I'm thinking about that parking that's right behind, it's very limited parking behind that multipurpose field where it is now. You're saying that we would also have that additional parking on the other side of the center and the high school parking lot and that that would not be a decrease. The high school piece, right?

So if you have kids driving from the high school to Gayfield, they're already parked. They're walking from the locker room or band and they're walking over. If they're already at school, they're staying for the freshman or JV game or they're staying for practice, whatever it is. So your transportation between sites becomes non-existent.

And then you get the benefit of all those spots that are needed on a daily basis for the high school and for the center to be available then for the athletics and activities fields, which I think it's got to be at least double of what's over at Gayfield in close proximity. Like, I'm not talking about the stuff that's on the other side of the gym, even just the things that are in really close proximity to where the new fields would be. Okay. So you don't foresee that parking being a problem.

Clearly, it's not going to be right at Gayfield. It'll be, you know, there'll have to be some walking done. It's not like you're going to get out of your car and walk, you know, but you're saying you don't foresee that being an issue capacity wise. No, no.

Well, I think that's all I have. Thank you so much, Brad. Thanks, Chris. Okay, how about Jason?

Any questions or comments? There you go. Okay. I'll add my thanks as well, Brad.

I think you've demonstrated, you and your firm have demonstrated a tremendous amount of patience with us and guiding us through this process. And it's much appreciated. And it's all reflected in the work product here that you demonstrated tonight. I'm just sort of curious.

I want to take us in a different path. You spoke at the beginning about all the community input that went into this. And I think we all recognize and applaud that and appreciate both your guys, you know, willing to dig in, lean in on that and the community for showing up for that. And are there one, maybe two places in the plan and what you presented where you just sort of reflecting back, you guys sort of had to pivot because the community told you one thing.

Superintendent, Board of Education, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried. To start going on a tangent and drawing. So, you know, so, so we were talking about some of the things that Y down and some of the improvements that Y down, you know, we, as we lock work through it and got the feedback at the community forum about really, you know, that feasibility of it's, it's kind of not even on there anymore of building a new footprint between the parking garage and the existing building. Like, that's literally the only footprint that's there.

But just that feedback that, you know, it's not really going to be feasible. It's going to be difficult. Like, do we really want to show that? And no, it's probably just more confusing than not.

I'm trying to think, you know, actually some of the conversation that actually we did get some good feedback during the community forums about the Calaris property. And we actually some of the feedback that we got made us look at that potential for relocating the Performing Arts Center over that. Superintendent, Board of Education, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried. Just as an example that, you know, one way is, yeah, you could clear that out and do something else.

But, you know, there's we didn't do the full investigation, a full investigation into it. But, you know, I think the feasibility is, does that top part of the garage become activity space and be able to use the parking under it? Similar to what we're doing at Y-Down. You know, how can we use that investment there at the corner?

So for future use for the district. So a lot of that conversation came out of some of those questions that we got. I'll say formally during the community forum, but also the conversations that occur after those meetings with the community members that are there help generate some of those ideas and concepts that clarifies just as an example. Yeah, that's great.

Thanks. That was my only real question. Everything else has been asked. So, again, appreciate the work.

Thanks, Jason. OK, that was a great question. Pam. Thank you.

Like everyone, thank you so much. I also wanted to call out our building principals and John Brazeal and Dr. Patel, who were at every single one of these meetings and put in so much extra time. So I just want to give a heartfelt thank you to all of you.

I don't even know if the principals are here. But so to frame, I think, just really my two questions is to say that Clayton is a community that values tradition and education. And I know that you saw that in your work. It is our task as the board to honor Clayton's values and balance it with a great deal of fiscal responsibility.

In light of this, that's going to be, that will keep us on task. The way you presented like the last third of your presentation as you were talking about the elementary schools and proposing this idea of two elementary schools. Initially, as a Clayton person who values that tradition, that seems very scary. But the way you laid it out was incredibly beautiful.

And I just, it allowed me to think about it, that the values from the survey from the community were to expand our indoor spaces for, you know, innovative learning, new kinds of learning, counseling centers and community gathering areas, expand inside space. It was also to expand outdoor space. And because, as you have said, our buildings don't have the ability to expand both indoor and outdoor spaces, it really allowed me to see the beauty of the proposal for new buildings or two new, the idea of two rather than three elementary schools. Because there isn't a way to do all of what those buildings need.

All of my other questions were answered. There's one thing about the Hawkins Lily on page 18 of their slides. So I understand all these colors, but I'm not sure if I understand the details inside of them. So if we're just to like look at Glenridge, like 38.5%, I would like to understand this so that if someone in the community asks me what this means, I could explain it.

So 38.5% is red. Is that like 38.5% of the square footage needs that kind, is it poor condition? Yeah so no that a good question So previously we had just kind of shown that chart up at the top right was just the overall score And actually back to Jason comment like one of the questions that came up during some of these interactions at the community forum was just it was hard to understand some of the details of that building by just that top score So that's why we showed it this other way to show like, for example, like out of the, what that represents, I can't read the numbers, but if it's 83%, 83% of the scoring was red. You know, 17% of the scoring was yellow.

And then you can see the key to the right of it of what that looks like between, you know, deficient, borderline, satisfactory, or excellent. Because, and that's what it's a challenge, because I think if you just looked at the upper chart, it kind of paints a different picture to see really how potentially, I'll say deficient, Glenridge and Merrimack are compared to really how excellent Merrimack and the high school and family center are, right? There's a lot of blue within those scores, and it's reflective of the quality of those spaces, but they still need help. They still need that additional space or different types of spaces or quality spaces to launch forward for the next 20 or 30 years.

Thank you for that explanation, and thank you for everything. We'll miss you. Hopefully you keep me around for a little bit longer and my team. Thanks, Pam.

Superroportion O, levy, agenda, motion carried. Basically, one municipality, one school district. And so that partnership together is critical to our success and frankly, to the city's success. Right.

If we want the school district to be the best it can be, which it has been, it helps the city and the strength of the city helps us. And just so everyone knows, David Gibson, the city manager, as well as a few of the aldermen were on our steering committee and some of the building level committees. So they have been part of the process so far, but I just know it's critical to continue to include them moving forward. The second, you know, kind of observation I have through all of this is that it seems our elementary schools have both the biggest, the greatest needs, but also present the greatest challenges to fix.

And I was kind of like focused on one of your last slides where you said, you know, ideally, the space needed for an elementary school is recommended is eight to 10 acres and ours are on much less than that. So, clearly, you know, like Chris and Pam touched on your suggestion of possibly, you know, finding land to build two new elementary schools instead. I think we just need to remind, remain open-minded to what we can do if we really want to commit ourselves to improving the elementary school facilities as best we can, because those spaces are so constrained. Superintendent Board of Education Proposition O levy agenda motion carried Only is there not a lot of room to expand or rebuild There not even a lot of room for construction equipment to get in there So I think that that being said whatever we decide to do moving forward that you know the community the board everyone needs to just remain open minded you know be supportive of us thinking outside the box because we really do have a lot of constraints both on our current facility properties But also there is not much other land within our district boundaries to even acquire to do new construction.

So we are going to have to really be creative and think outside the box. And I'm really hoping and hoping that the community will support, you know, whatever we come up with because of we have so many constraints there too. So I think another important piece there obviously is, is there property to acquire if we need it? Is there property to lease if we need swing space?

Because we're using, you know, we're renovating the current property. So it's a lot to think about, certainly. I wanted to also point out one more thing, and that is that the survey results showed from the community that in addition to safety and security, that they their priority was increasing, you know, innovative learning opportunities with real world experiences for our students. And I think when I think about that and then think about the numbers, the data you gave us for capacity in our buildings, you know, it doesn't necessarily look like all of our buildings are over capacity or anything.

I think the capacity in a lot of them is fine. I think we just need to, all of us, including the community, rethink how the spaces in our buildings are used currently and how they will lend themselves to that top priority of innovative real world learning opportunities. So although we may have capacity for all of our students at this point, it's become very apparent that we don't have the right space for the learning that is also a priority for everyone. So, I think, one, oh, sorry, I forgot one more thing I wanted to point out.

And I think you mentioned briefly is that a lot of our neighboring districts have invested in their facilities lately. LeDoux built, you know, renovated or built all the elementary schools and a new football stadium and redid their high school. I believe Webster Groves did a lot of construction, Lindbergh. And so if if our priority and the community's priority is for us to remain a leading district in the region and the country, our facilities have to reflect that.

And if we are being stifled now by not being able to offer some of the programs that these other districts can now offer, we really need to take that to heart. And think about that for sure. So I think for me, and I probably speak for the whole board, at the end of the day, what I think needs to guide us is what is best for our students into the future. That's it.

We have to, we always make all of our decisions with students at the center of them. And I think we need to continually remind ourselves of that through this process. It's not even it's not our students today, but it's students like Chris said, generationally, you know, for the next several decades. So what is education going to look like and what will our facilities, what is best for them as far as our facilities go?

So in closing, again, thank you, Brad. And the community probably doesn't realize this, but Brad and his team travel here from Springfield, Missouri, every time they meet with us, which is an amazing reason. That's just me. Oh, it's just you.

Okay, sorry. Brad travels from Springfield Missouri which is another reason why we virtual tonight So thank you for that additional effort to just get here and meet with us And I just wanted to also publicly thank everyone who served I think you said it was 117 people on all of our building level and steering committees and everyone in the community who participated in the surveys and came to the forums because this is truly a community effort and we need everyone input So thank you so much. I think we have obviously a lot to think about, but you've given us everything we need to do so, you know, as a great starting point. So we appreciate it, Brad.

I'm sure we will be in touch as we move forward. But thank you for all your hard work again. We appreciate it. No worries.

We're here. Thank you so much. OK. That was great.

All right. Okay, moving along. That was our only presentation of the night. We are moving to the consent agenda items.

Chris, I will call on you to read a motion for those, please. I move that we approve the consent agenda items 7.1 through 7.7. Second. Okay.

It's been moved and seconded. All those in favor? Aye. Aye.

Any opposed? Opposed? Okay, none opposed, so the consent agenda passes. And I will move on to any board committee or community updates.

Does anyone have any? Raise your hand. I don't have a list in front of me. Did anyone have any committee meetings?

Okay, I had a teaching and learning committee meeting, and this time we reviewed the literacy curriculum. So we started off by kind of getting an overview of recent legislation that's impacted literacy in recent years, like when the dyslexia screening became mandated, and we talked a little bit about the banned books, and now new state-approved assessments, reading success plans. That was like a great way to kind of ground us in the discussion. We learned about what's changed in the K through five literacy curriculum and what hasn't changed.

For example, the foundational skills transfer of information in the scope has kind of all been revised. But what has not changed is the choice in their learning, their independent time, workshops. Superroportionate, Proposition O, levy, agenda, motion carried. The instruction, assessments and intervention, and student growth.

And it was great because this committee, as all of our committees, are filled with different types of stakeholders. There were teachers, there were students, there were parents. And just to hear everyone's different perspectives in those areas was really great. And also, lastly, I'll just add that we learned all of our staff the last few years have had a lot of professional development on literacy interventions.

So I think it's important to note that a lot of time has been dedicated to that for our staff as well. And, OK, if there's no other reports from any committees, we can motion to adjourn, Chris. I move that the Board of Education adjourn. Second.

Okay, it's been moved and seconded. All those in favor? Aye. Aye.

Any opposed?