If the Jefferson City Board of Education wants to ask voters in April if they are willing to build more facilities in the district, members have two weeks left to act.
The final date for certification of ballot language is Jan. 27, according to the Secretary of State's office.
On Monday, Brian Mitchell, superintendent, and Ken DeSieghardt, CEO of the consulting firm, Patron Insight, are expected to present their ideas at the board's regularly scheduled monthly meeting. Mitchell is slated to give a presentation on bond and levy-related topics. DeSieghardt was commissioned by the district to conduct a survey of school patrons' opinions, in an effort to assess if a tax increase might be viable with voters.
Board President Dennis Nickelson said nothing has been pre-determined and the board could still act.
"In my mind, it's all open," Nickelson said. "Dr. Mitchell and Ken DeSieghardt will have their recommendations. All seven of us will be together to discuss it for the first time."
Nickelson noted if the board chooses not to move forward with a request to raise the district's tax levy in order to approve the sale of bonds to finance capital improvements, they could again do so in April 2016 or August 2016, elections where passage is permitted with four-sevenths of the vote.
State law limits how often municipalities and school boards can approach voters with tax requests. An odd-number year, like 2015, offers fewer opportunities for governing entities to pass their requests with four-sevenths (57 percent) of the votes cast, an easier bar to reach, compared with two-thirds (66 percent).
Nickelson noted if the board decides to approach voters, the question then becomes what to build. The Long Range Facilities Planning Committee, which concluded its work last fall, issued a report suggesting elementary and high school students need more space right now.
"A lot depends on what Mitchell and DeSieghardt propose," Nickelson said.
Members of the LRFP committee are not of one mind when it comes to offering opinions about what the board should or should not do.
Brad Bates, who has advocated for improvements at East Elementary School, wants to see the board move forward with a recommendation to build.
"The elementary committee realizes the final decision rests with the school board. ... That being said, our group was passionate and unanimous in our recommendations," he wrote in an email. "We have one elementary school (East) that is having to utilize trailers and still has some classrooms with 28 students, and another elementary school (Callaway Hills) that is going to see a lot of growth due to the community expanding.
"These children need our attention now."
Bates continued: "Isn't it always the right time to do the right thing? The committee knows the school board has a lot of factors to consider in making their decision," he wrote. "The elementary issue is now. It is upon us. I think that is why our committee was unanimous, because you can drive over today and see the need. I believe our community always rises up to meet the need."
Other LRFP committee members say the public is not primed to view board requests positively.
Pam Murray, who served on the committee and is campaigning to serve on the board, suggested members should delay action until the new superintendent, Larry Linthacum, arrives and the district's "house is in order."
"I do want to stress the need is there now. And the need is long overdue," Murray said.
Murray noted even if voters approve more money this spring, it will still be two years before an elementary building or high school is constructed.
"We have serious, serious overcrowding in the elementaries now," she said.
She suggested the district ought to move forward now with on-site trailers to alleviate overcrowding at buildings like East Elementary School.
"To delay (trailers) is unconscionable," she said.
Murray has been a critic of the current board. She noted the LRFP committee shared its recommendations with the board in November, but members have yet to discuss them publicly.
Dan Ortmeyer agrees with Murray.
"I think they should wait. As many people have said, their house is not in order. We're between superintendents. I fully expect to see two new school board members in April. People have to know who is in charge with their money. You have to be able to trust the people in charge," he said. "It's a waste of taxpayers' resources to put it on the ballot now."
Ortmeyer said another failed bond issue will only make the following one harder to pass.
Ortmeyer said the need for better facilities is critical. On a visit to East School last week, Ortmeyer - now 55, but a former student there - said the building has hardly changed since he was a child.
"The furnace doesn't work in one of the classrooms, and the teacher brought a space heater in. A couple of teachers are working out of closets. One of the (educators) has her desk in the electrical circuit-breaker room. There are freezers in the middle of the cafeteria," he said. "It's unacceptable."
Ortmeyer wants to see a new school built on the city's east side, but not one as large as Pioneer Trail Elementary.
But as much as he'd like to see those facilities built, Ortmeyer says now is not the time to approach voters.
"The trust has to be rebuilt, and that's not going to happen overnight," he said. "It's not that people in Jefferson City won't pay for construction. But they want to know their leaders are truthful and the costs are not exorbitant."
No new bell schedule
In other business on Monday, the board will not be taking up a proposal to change the start and end times at the district's 16 school facilities.
Under a plan introduced to the board in October, elementary school students would report to school at 7:40 a.m. and middle school students wouldn't leave school until 4 p.m.
Chief Financial Officer Jason Hoffman told the board the changes were a way to make the district's bus transportation system more efficient and cost-effective, ensure that all students have time to eat breakfast and prevent some children from having to wait 15 minutes at the end of the day for their buses to arrive.
The plan was also designed to make it easier for faculty members in different buildings to collaborate more.
However, some parents and teachers in the community have raised concerns about the proposed changes. They noted young students would have to catch pre-dawn buses and practices for high school athletes would be pushed into the early evening hours.
Nickelson said, in light of the concerns raised, the proposal has been rescinded and will not be voted upon at Monday's meeting. He said Hoffman called him Friday morning.
"It's no longer a recommendation," Nickelson said, noting that administrative staff now feel the issue needs more conversation in the community first. "They decided they need to study it a little more. They decided to pull it off Monday's agenda. It's probably the right thing to do."
The changes in the bell schedule at the building were tied to an internal proposal to rework the high school's block schedule. That committee's work has also been put on hold for the time being, said Amy Berendzen, district spokeswoman.
East Elementary School
Also on Monday, the Board of Education is slated to approve a contract with The Architects Alliance Inc. for a professional services proposal for East Elementary School renovations, as soon as school ends in May.
For several years now, the district has made an effort to renovate one facility - in recent years it has been a string of elementary schools - each summer. The construction projects usually range from $1.6 to $2 million.
This summer is East's turn, Nickelson said.
It's possible the decision item - which sits on the consent agenda - will offer an opportunity for people concerned about overcrowding in the building to speak to that topic Monday.
The board holds an open forum at each regularly scheduled meeting to hear community concerns.
Recently at least one teacher at East has raised concerns about overcrowding in the building.
Nickelson said the school does have 59 students enrolled in two sections at the school. (Twenty students per class is more typical district-wide.)
"It's not an anomaly. Sometimes there's a bubble" in class size, he said.