Carbondale Reporter

Galena Unit School District #120 Board of Education met Nov. 5.

Here is the minutes provided by the board:

1. Welcome

1.1 Call to Order – The Board of Education of Galena Unit School District #120 held their Virtual Business Meeting via Google Meet on November 5, 2020. The meeting was called to order at 6:00 p.m.

1.2 Roll Call – Roll call was taken, and a quorum was established. The following members were present: Member Einsweiler, Member Frank, Member Hyland, President Long, Member McIntyre (attended via Google Meet); Member Rosenthal, and Member Stodden.

1.3 Approval of Agenda – Member Rosenthal moved, and Member Einsweiler seconded the motion to approve the Agenda, as presented. Voice vote, all present voted aye. Motion carried 7-0.

1.4 Public Comments – None.

2. Personnel

2.1 Personnel – Superintendent Vincent stated normally personnel matters would be approved at the regular monthly meeting, however, due to team practices prior to the November 17th meeting, he recommended the Board approve the personnel items as presented. To this end the following motion was made:

Member Rosenthal moved and Member Einsweiler seconded the motion approving Kailyn Stumpf as 8th Grade Volleyball Coach for the 2020-2021 School Year; approving Brandon Behlke as Volunteer for 7th-8th Boys’ Basketball and 7th-8th Boys’ Football for the 2020-2021 school year; approving William Northrup, Martin Petitgout, Richard Randecker, Tom Blatner, John (Sonny) Basten and Eric Siese as Volunteers for Bass Fishing for the 2020-2021 School Year, as presented. Roll call vote, all present voted aye. Motion carried 7-0

3. Old Business

3.1 Recommendation to Approve Snow Removal Agreement – Superintendent Vincent stated this item was tabled from the October 20th Regular Meeting for clarification on the bids. Previously, pursuant to Board Policy, a notice for snow removal/salt application bids was published in the Galena Gazette on September 23, 2020. Bids were opened October 13th at 10 a.m. Only two bids were received, one from Dan & Son's Snowplowing and the other from H & H Services Inc. The Board wanted clarification as to why the bid from H & H was higher on one of the lots bid and a lower price on the other two. Superintendent Vincent followed up with H & H and they stated when they took over for Mike Simmons six years ago, Simmons had bid a different hourly rate for the Middle and Upper High School lot, so H & H just replicated it; there was no rationale or any specific reason. Superintendent Vincent stated he will make sure this is corrected so it's a flat rate next year, with an alternative to bid everything. Also, the per hour/per truck is very standard for other businesses and organizations as a way to standardize it no matter how many trucks they have. If they plowed with 2 trucks for 1.5 hours, we would be charged 3 hours. If they plowed with 3 trucks for 1 hour we would be charged for 3 hours. Therefore, it was his recommendation the Board award the snow removal/salt application contract to the lowest bidder, H & H Services Inc. To this end the following motion was made:

Member Rosenthal moved and Member Stodden seconded the motion to approve the 2020-2021 snow removal/salt application bid from H & H Services, as presented, for snow removal and salt application for all lots at the Primary School, Middle School, High School and Transportation lot. Roll Call vote, all present voted aye. Motion carried 7-0.

4. Business

4.1 Discussion of Facility Concepts with District Architect - Marty Johnson from Straka Johnson Architects was present to discuss facility concept scenarios 1a and 1b, 4a and 4b, and 5a and 5b with respect to the long-term facility project. Superintendent Vincent reminded the Board when going through the concepts the goal for this meeting was to hopefully narrow it down to one or two concepts by the end of December for a long-range scenario. Future discussions could then take place to decide which one to do first.

Marty Johnson then went through in detail the timelines/costs for each scenario with respect to phasing, stating scenarios 1 and 4 would get you to two-buildings; whereas scenario 5 remains a three-building scenario. He said the scenarios labeled as “b” took the three core idea options but flipped the order. The scenarios are outlined below:

∙ Scenarios 1a and 1B – Phase One would be a PreK-8; Phase Two would be the renovation of the High School for Grades 9-12. ∙ Scenarios 4a and 4b – Phase One would be the Middle School as a PreK-6 building and Phase Two would be renovation of the High School to incorporate the Grades 7-12 format.

∙ Scenarios 5a and 5b – This would remain a three-building scenario which academically stays the same with the Primary School Grades PreK-4; the Middle School Grades 5-8 and the High School Grades 9-12.

He then went deeper into the timeline and the process. He said if the Board would decide to move forward with Scenario 1a, which is the PreK-8 Middle School project, the cost would be approximately $13.7 million. After the spring election they would start with more formal design work, which would take approximately eight months. The goal would be to bid the project in March of 2022 and start construction around April of 2022 with completion by the summer of 2023. The pros of this scenario is you would have a completed project, with PK – 8 all in one building, however, the downside is you would not have enough funds to work on the High School. On the other hand, if the Board wished to do Scenario 4 with respect to renovating the High School there would be issues due to the fact that there wouldn’t be swing space to allow students to be moved around during the remodeling process. It would also end up costing more money in the long run, as there would be eight construction stages which would then lengthen the project. With Scenario 5 you would still be with three buildings. Board members questioned why they would wait for the spring election as they would like to get this moving. Superintendent Vincent stated the Board calls the shots. It’s more about the time it takes once the Board decides on a particular scenario, as it then takes approximately eight months of architectural design and then the project gets bid out. The best time to bid a project like this is from January to March for construction.

Members then expressed their views on the scenarios presented and which scenario they felt would be the best for the district moving forward. Six out of the seven members were in favor of Phase One of Scenario 1a due to the fact that the Middle School would be complete with grades PreK – 8 and hopefully, as time went on, they could plug away at the High School. They felt it checked all the boxes and was the best use of space and funds available. It would put the youngest kids in the best facilities; 75% of the kids would be in a newer building; it would increase excitement in the community to see a project finished; also the Primary School would be removed as an educational building.

Member Long still had a hard time with not putting money into the High School. While he felt scenario 1a was terrific he still felt strongly that the Board should address the issues in the High School. He said they can’t bank on a referendum to pass for Phase Two on any project. However, he said if the majority of the Board wished to go with Scenario 1a he would stand behind it, as he’s not saying it’s not a good plan, he just wanted to see something done with the High School.

The next step will be for the Board to formally vote on an option at their November 17th meeting and proceed with a resolution to sell bonds.

The facility committee will then start to meet with stakeholder groups to fine-tune the plan while starting a parallel process to continue to evaluate the high school renovation.

5. Adjournment

5.1 Adjourn Meeting – Member Rosenthal moved and Member Einsweiler seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting at 7:27 p.m. Voice vote, all present voted aye. Motion carried 7-0.

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1NVSPR-y2OpWYQQt3bkjj8z6PolE2QOJM/preview?rm=minimal