How Did the New 5th/6th Park City School Rise in Price from $14 million to $26 million?
Money. It’s a funny thing. It’s easy to spend it when it’s someone else’s … but a little bit harder when it’s your own.
That’s what I started thinking when I began to read meeting minutes from the Park City School District Master Planning Committee. As many of us know, this committee has been meeting for almost a year to determine whether to tear down Treasure Mountain Junior High (TMJH) and what renovations should be made to the Kearns Campus.
The last I had heard (from the committee) was that rebuilding the 5th/6th school would cost about $26.2 million. That seemed like a lot of money but I understand that construction is expensive. Yet, I came across Meeting Minutes from the same committee from April 29th, 2015. The minutes state that VCBO (the planning company hired for this process) employee, Breanna Bonsavage, “said that to build a new elementary, the timeline would be 13 or 14 months to completion. New construction building costs are $161 per square foot. The cost for a 5-6 building would be approximately $14M.” The minutes continue on to say, “Moe [Hickey] said that the Board could approve the building of a 5-6 now, because it would not have to be part of the bond.”
$14 million? The difference between $14 million (as stated at the end of April) and $26 million (as stated in middle June) is $12 million dollars. That’s 80% more cost in a month and a half. Will it be $38 million by the time they decide to go to bond?
So, what’s going on?
Perhaps the $14 million number didn’t include “accessories” like window shades and carpet. Yet, $12 million buys a lot of carpet. Perhaps they are planning on getting new desks, lockers, computers, etc. Maybe we should try to reuse some of those things? Perhaps, Ms. Bonsavage was quoting actual costs while our new estimates are based on … something else?
My concern stems back to a March 2015 meeting of the School’s Master Planning Committee where the School District’s Facilities Manager, Todd Hanson, asked VCBO about costs. The exchange went something like this:
Todd Hansen (to VCBO Planning Group): Hey guys, the cost for building right now is about…what… a hundred…?
VCBO: $160 to $180 [per square foot]
Todd Hansen: [So] $180 to $160 depending on how elaborate you get.
VCBO: It depends on the economy. We are not back up ’07. It might be by the time you all do this.
Todd Hansen: The Longer we wait the more expensive the money is.
VCBO: If I was going to do it we’d calculate for a bond election at $250.
So, is the real cost of construction in the $160 range but they’ve calculated it at $250? Or is something else going on?
It’s just another in a long line of questions about plans and process that need to be answered before public funds are used for the rebuilding of Treasure Mountain Junior High (or any other development on the school’s Kearns campus).
Growing Pains Are a Small Price to Pay For Better Park City Schools
It looks like Park City School District will be undergoing some pretty serious changes in the near future. Park City has grown over the years, and the larger class sizes, along with various other problems in the district, are prompting a grade realignment and construction. All-day kindergarten will be added to the elementary schools in the fall of 2016. The other changes being proposed include a new school for 5th and 6th graders on the Ecker Hill campus, tearing down Treasure Mountain Junior High, and adding a 9th grade wing onto the existing high school at Kearns, all by the fall of 2017. So far, I think the drafts for the realignment are looking good and will address the district’s current and future problems. However, all growth comes with a few growing pains, and Parkites may just have to deal with some temporary uncomfortableness to get the end result.
For those living in town, the new layout means that fifth graders will have to take a longer bus ride to get to the Ecker campus than they would to get to their local elementary school. At the master planning community meeting on July 6th, it was reported that some parents are concerned about their fifth graders riding the bus longer. I personally find this to be a small sacrifice to make. Students currently take the bus to Ecker starting in sixth grade, so they’ll just have to make the adjustment one year earlier. In a spread out town like Park City, you just can’t be close to everything. People living in Park Meadows and nearby neighborhoods may not be close to Ecker Hill, but they are close to plenty of other important locations. Students in Jeremy Ranch, Pinebrook, and Summit Park, who aren’t close to anything, know all about long bus rides.
According to documents presented at the July 6th meeting, it looks like all-day kindergarten will be implemented before the 5th/6th school is completed. So where would the fifth graders go? Mostly likely, portable classrooms will be needed. It’s unclear to me whether portables will be used at the high school while the ninth grade wing is being added, but it may be a possibility as well. Obviously, no one wants to be in portables, but it’s something that just has to be dealt with. A year or so of portable classrooms is worth it if you can attend a brand new school the year after. Besides, many other schools around the country use portables on a more long-term basis. If they can do it long term, we can stick it out short term.
Unfortunately, the class of 2017, myself included, will be stuck with the short straw. We’ll be around for the construction, but we’ll have graduated by the time the new facilities are completed. And where exactly will we graduate? The new ninth grade wing will most likely be located where Dozier Field currently is, and the new field may not be completed in time for our graduation. It means a lot to us to be able to graduate somewhere that holds high school memories, and it’s disappointing that we’ll never see any benefits from the renovations. We may not like it, but as long as graduation isn’t held in Salt Lake City, I think we’ll be okay.
I really think the plans for the district-wide renovations look great. We’ll all just have to make a few small sacrifices to get to the final result. You have to give a little, to gain a lot. (Sorry class of 2017.)
Another Reason Why Making Plans for 2040 Just Doesn’t Make Sense
Scientists in the UK have just published research that seems to validate that in about 15 years the world will experience a “mini ice age.” It seems the authors of the study have studied solar activity and have developed an ability to predict changes. These changes in solar activity seem to highly correlate (perhaps even cause) dramatic weather events on Earth.
Their predictions show that solar activity in 2030’s will start to drop off and the earth’s climate could resemble the last mini ice age, from 1645 to 1715. In this period, temperatures were markedly lower than normal. The authors of the study are quick to point out that they don’t know what the climate will be like at that time for sure, due to global warming.
Yet, it’s another example of all the variables that should go into proper predictions — and the fact that no one really knows what 2040 looks like.
The next time someone says our population will double by 2040, ask if their analysis takes into account the impact of lower solar activity in 2030’s. They will like say “what the *^&* are you talking about?” You can ask them the same question.
What Does the Park City School System Want to Hide from the Public?
Last week I tried to attend the Park City School Board’s Master Planning Committee meeting. This committee is addressing the issue of moving the 5th/6th grade school to Ecker Hill and redesigning the Kearns Campus. Much to my surprise I was told “there is no meeting.” The receptionist then called someone who asked “who wanted to know?”… and when I told her, she repeated the fact that there was no meeting. Later I found out that they switched the meeting to an “Executive Meeting” and it was closed to the public. Funny. I have attended meetings since January and I can’t recall a closed meeting.
This morning, on KPCW, School Superintendent Dr Ember Conley said there was another “closed” Executive Meeting tonight.
My question is, what’s with all the secrecy? The problem is, we are about a month from the School Board decision to vote for a bond to build a new school and redesign a campus. The public has a fundamental right to know how our local government makes their decisions. This is a topic that will impact our entire community and to have to two closed door meetings in a week right before they make a recommendation to the school board, at best does us a disservice and at worst makes citizens wonder what is really going on.
You may say, “many of our government’s entities have non-public meetings.” That is true, but they are only allowed by Utah State Law for very specific reasons like personnel, litigation, and buying property. In fact the Open Meetings Act states:
The point is that our School Board and its committees exist to conduct the public’s business. They serve us, the citizens. There are only a few legitimate reasons why a meeting should be closed and one of them isn’t to try to decide how to clean up the mess they have made with regard to this process.
It’s true that this committee’s LEGAL requirement to follow the Open Meetings act is in a little bit of a grey area, since it is a committee with less than a quorum of School Board members on it. That said, the SPIRIT of the law would dictate that this group should discuss OPENLY all decisions that it will ultimately recommend to the School Board.
If the committee doesn’t discuss these matters openly, it makes me wonder what they don’t want the public to know.
Live Blogging Wednesday’s School Board Master Planning Committee Meeting
I’ll be live blogging Wednesday’s Master Planning Committee meeting, starting at 4PM (unless they decide to “close” the meeting like last week). This is an important meeting because this is the first chance to see if the committee has decided to alter course on building plans on the Kearns campus, due to neighborhood pushback.
If you can’t attend the meeting in person, I hope you’ll bookmark this page and come back Wednesday afternoon.
How Much Do You Think Park City Substitute Teachers Are Paid?
I was listening to KPCW this morning and a Park City Municipal representative was talking about a group they are putting together to provide feedback on how to best use public property near Lower Park Avenue. KPCW’s Leslie Thatcher asked about how much participants are being paid. The answer, for 3 days work, was $1500. That would be $500 a day. Not bad work, if you can get.
That reminded me of an email I received a few weeks back from a substitute teacher. I had been writing about teacher contracts and this teacher chimed in to ask if I knew how much substitutes got paid. I know that Park City’s teachers are the highest paid in the state (on average), so I assumed they must be doing OK. What I found was shocking. You make more as an entry level worker at Five Guys Burgers than you do as a substitute teacher. What does a Park City substitute get per day? $85. That’s $10.62 an hour.
Let’s contrast that with one of the highest paid Park City teachers who annual compensation is $125,000 per year (per the Transparent website). There are approximately 180 school days in the year. That works out to about $85 per hour. So, is the most well paid teacher worth 8 times what a substitute is? From a citizen perspective, I would think that a substitute teacher has a pretty tough job. They have to come into an environment that is unknown, teach someone else’s material, and keep things under control. Do some substitutes view it as glorified babysitting? I’m sure some do, especially when they are being paid like it.
The argument could be made that a regular teacher has a long-term impact on each of their students, so they should be paid more. That makes sense. You could also argue that I shouldn’t base an estimate on the highest paid teachers. Well, if we take a starting teacher at $40,000 per year, they are still paid almost $30 an hour (3 time the substitute). You could also argue that perhaps the educational requirements of a substitute aren’t as rigorous as a full-time teacher. That’s true too, per Utah State law.
I’m sure there are countless other arguments that could be made.
Still, as I come back to it, $10 an hour just seems low in comparison to full-time teacher salaries. I’ve heard School Superintendent Dr Ember Conley talk about shortages of substitute teacher. Now I see that that’s not so surprising.
What Do You want to See from the New Whole Foods Grocery Store?
After writing a few posts about the new Whole Foods (across from the outlet mall) … making sure it is paying its fair share for impacts from the new development, it seems I have been invited to an envisioning session about what should be offered at the new grocery store. I already said that I would like Rogue Dead Guy beer on tap at their “tap room” but that seems legally impossible due to state liquor laws, so I won’t hold out hope for that one.
That said, I have all sorts of crazy ideas including:
- How do we ensure the affordable housing planned as part of this development is used by Whole Foods employees?
- If Kamas and the Canyons can have a privately run liquor stores, why can’t Whole Foods house/take-over the Kimball Junction liquor store?
- Do they have plans to include solar power for their store in Park City?
- The Cottonwood Heights Whole Foods displays local artwork. Could the Park City Whole Foods work in conjunction with the Kimball Arts Center to display art?
If there is something you’d like included in the development or you have ideas that you think Whole Foods should consider, email and I’ll be sure to mention it next Friday.
What to Do After a Dog Attacks
I was walking with my 15 year old dog, 3 year old boy (dressed as a dragon), and toddler this morning when I witnessed an australian shepherd dog grab another dog by the scruff of its neck and started yanking the other dog back and forth by its neck. Fortunately the victim (dog) escaped into a pond, albeit yelping the whole time.
This happened to my dog years ago at Tanner Park. A bichon lunged at my 45 pound dog’s neck and wouldn’t let go. $400 dollars later, with drainage tubes coming out of her neck, and stitches, my dog survived. In my case, the dog’s owner just walked off. While you might think I should have done something to stop the woman who owned the dog, the fact is that when it happens to your dog, you are in shock. In the case of this morning, I was in shock (and I was just a bystander). It is violent act and I think it is hard to come to terms with.
If you own a dog, you may want to consider what you would do in that situation, ahead of time. I’ve been thinking about the incident since it happened and my best suggestion is to treat it like a car accident. When you are in an accident, what do you ask the other person for? You ask for their name and insurance information.
In the case of my dog being attacked, I have decided what I would say is this:
“My dog may be hurt but I’m not sure. Can I get your contact information including your name, address, and phone number in case I need to contact you about medical expenses?”
You may think this is forward or are embarrassed to say something like this, but puncture wounds from a dog bite are serious for you OR or your dog. Treating them will not be cheap. It’s imperative the owner of an offending dog take responsibility. They will likely be in shock too… but you shouldn’t just let them walk off.
Having a pet as a companion is a rewarding experience; however, it comes with responsibility. The event I witnessed this morning reminds me that I should be mentally prepared, just in case.
Thanks to Dick Peek, Roger Armstrong, and Dave Ure
We have an abundance of things in Park City. Great mountains. Wonderful trails. World class skiing…
One thing that is often missing, though, is DISSENT.
Take, as a prime example, that nobody has voted NO on the school board for over a year. They aren’t alone in local government. I haven’t specifically calculated the other groups’ voting records but from my experience many votes, if not most, are unanimous.
This is unfortunate because that’s not representative of our populace. You can take almost any topic and I guarantee there are sizable number of citizens on both sides of issues. For example, consider affordable housing. If you listen to our government leaders, the talk is almost all for affordable housing. If you listen to other circles, there is a strong contingent that thinks affordable housing has very negative impacts like decreasing property values. These same sorts of arguments exist for trails, open space, schools, etc. I’m not saying they are the majority opinion but you’d think they’d be represented in some way during local government voting.
This isn’t to say that there aren’t differing opinions among our elected officials. Often times these differences are hashed out in exchanges that lead to consensus. That can be a good thing. Yet, it seems incomprehensible that consensus can be found on every issue.
With that in mind, I want to thank City Council Member Dick Peek, County Council Member Roger Armstrong, and County Council Member Dave Ure. On the topic of their respective local governments sticking with the Mountain Accord, they dissented. They each voted against the interlocal agreement tying our governments to the Accord process. I don’t say that because of the specific subject matter, but I say it because it shows a willingness to stand against the herd. It shows confidence and determination to chart their own course, when it would likely be easier to just agree with everyone else.
I as a citizen appreciate that.
I know Mr. Peek is not running for reelection, but I hope, until his last vote, he maintains the confidence he showed here and that his successor is willing to stand with his or her convictions, even when it is diametrically opposed to the majority. Likewise, I hope Mr. Armstrong and Mr. Ure keep doing what they’re doing. Finally, I hope our other leaders may look at these examples and become a little more of a brumby themselves.
Our Government Leaders Are Now Responsible for the Outcome of Mountain Accord
Last night the Summit County Council, like the Park City City Council before them, approved an agreement that keeps our community in the Mountain Accord process for the next three years. The decision will likely prove to be very courageous, very stupid, or perhaps both. No matter the outcome, one thing is clear, our governments have signed themselves up for the responsibility of ensuring a positive outcome for the people of the greater Park City area.
During last night’s meeting, council members Chris Robinson, Claudia McMullin, and Kim Carson voted in favor of signing onto a Mountain Accord interlocal agreement that will continue the study (and likely begin implementation) of plans to help mitigate transportation issues and environmental impact related to recreation and tourism in the central Wasatch. This will cost Summit county $150,000 in hard costs over three years. When accounting for soft costs, such as time from legal, planning, engineering, sustainability, and council personnel, that number probably doubles or triples.
The reasoning behind the “yes-votes” can be summed up as:
- We need to stay at the Mountain Accord table in order to have a say in what goes on.
- Staying in the Accord allows us to learn about alternatives that may be useful in the next 30 years.
- By working with partners across the region we form better relationships in order to solve mutual problems that may or may not be part of the Mountain Accord.
- Our own transportation needs are going to be so costly, that we don’t want to upset those people who have the money to pay for it — Utah Department of Transportation (UDOT).
I’ve been a fairly harsh critic of the Mountain Accord, but the logic Ms. Carson, Ms. Mc Mullin, and Mr. Robinson provided is sound. Mountain Accord showed people just what it is willing to do when it attempted to include a land swap in Utah county, when Utah County wasn’t even involved in the Mountain Accord. By having a part in the Accord, we get to watch the project like a hawk. While the “learning” and “friendship” arguments seem a little soft to me, the argument over needing funding from UDOT isn’t. Summit County effectively wasted spent over a $100,000 on a transportation study that said “use buses.” What do we think a solution to transportation on 224 and 248 is going to cost over the next 20 years? I have no idea, but lets say at least of tens of millions of dollars (Maybe a $100 million? Maybe more?). We don’t have that type of money. Who does? UDOT. When you’re hungry it’s not wise to spit in the face of man who has the loaf of bread.
Yet, the opposing views of Council Members Dave Ure and Roger Armstrong are solid too. They can be summarized as:
- Mountain Accord takes away focus from our other issues and just confuses us.
- The wrong organization (UTA) is managing the process, if the Mountain Accord is really about the environment.
- $150,000 could better be spent on solving our own problems.
- The studies that will be implemented from Mountain Accord will likely make development happen faster.
- Wasatch front issues will be the focus of the Accord.
When you look at the two opposing viewpoints one really represents HOPE that we can all work together to solve problems and that our (hopefully) benevolent benefactor (UDOT) will kindly look down on us in a god-like-fashion and shower us with a solution to our car-mageddon problems. The other viewpoint is the FEAR that we will lose control of a process that will ultimately waste money and more importantly impact our community’s quality of life.
So which is the stronger in the battle of HOPE versus FEAR? As they say, the outcome is all in the execution. Our leaders have chosen the path of engagement. Given that path, we as a community should expect the following things:
- There will be no tunnel between Big Cottonwood Canyon and Park City planned or conceived of in the next 10 to 20 years. If in 20 years, things change, then great. The people will have to decide at that point. But for the foreseeable future, there can be no tunnel.
- A detailed transportation plan that encompasses I-80 and Highways 224, 40, and 248 with practical, but out of the box solutions, will be developed in conjunction with us. If we get another plan that says increase busing, and adds three more daily runs to the Park City SLC Connect bus schedule, it will be a failure.
- Tens to hundreds of millions of dollars should be invested by the Utah Department of Transportation, during the next 10 years, with the goal of easing traffic problems around Park City
- Water quality and levels in Salt Lake City must be preserved at today’s levels indefinitely. If I recall, one of initial environmental issues in the Accord was the watershed serving Salt Lake. This always seemed like little impact in the short term to Park City, but we do care about the entire Wasatch and California has shown us that water troubles in one spot, impact everyone. Therefore, we need to measurable improvements in water coming from the Wasatch to Salt Lake.
- Nothing should be put in place that inhibits wildlife crossing freely into Summit County. One of environmental arguments of Mountain Accord was that it would ensure that wildlife could move freely across the boundaries of Salt Lake and Summit Counties. While this may seem minor, it is one of the few environmental impacts that seem to directly impact Summit County.
I’m sure there are a plethora of other “promises” that have been made that different interest groups desire, from protecting back country skiing to reducing pollution and I’ll be glad to add those to the list if people let me know.
The point is that our leaders have chosen to go along for the ride because they think it will make things better. This is courageous. Sticking your neck on the line is hard. Yet, that’s what they’ve signed up to do. So, we as citizens need to hold them to fighting for the above items every day. Every Mountain Accord Executive Committee meeting that one of our representatives attends should be focused on ensuring our interests are protected. Every planning document created by the Accord process needs to show that the other Accord participants are still willing to help us solve our problems (while we help them solve theirs).
If at the end of three years we look at the situation and it looks promising, we owe a debt of gratitude to the people who took on this task and managed it to fruition.
However, if we look back and don’t see measurable learning, broad based relationships, transportation solutions for our area, earmarked dollars for Summit County, and concrete environmental-saving impacts, this whole affair and those who pushed it will seem pretty foolish.
Worse yet, if a tunnel to Park City starts to be dug, as many people still fear it will be, then WE’LL ALL look pretty stupid. Yet even more, we all know who took on the burden of protecting our interests, and therefore, who let it happen.