Critical ConditionTriaging School Enrollment Growth

School Board Work StudyNovember 13, 2013

• 234 more elementary students than our schools are built to house• Eight new elementary schools built for 550 have enrollment between

611 and 703• Class sizes as high as 28 – 33 Significant impact on infrastructure

• Long lunch lines impacting instructional time• Large recess populations• Student supervision• Moving whole classrooms of students out of neighborhood schools• Adding of portable classrooms

The Patient’s Chart

What we need from you tonight…• To provide direction on the short term (2014-15) solution preferred

by the school board• To begin a dialog on potential long term (2015-16 and beyond)

solutions to house new students• Be informed of next steps

Elementary School Capacity: -234

2011/2012 Oct 1st

2013/2014 Oct 1st Total

Excess Capacity

K-6 TotalBeverly Park 530 477 480 504 26Cedarhurst 625 637 675 703 -78Gregory Heights 625 518 553 638 -13Hazel Valley 625 578 556 611 14Hilltop 525 580 638 635 -110Mount View 675 610 599 660 15Seahurst 600 557 554 568 32Shorewood 475 452 445 477 -2Southern Heights 310 278 274 325 -15White Center Heights 575 571 603 574 1North Totals 5,565 5,258 5,377 5695 -130Bow Lake 675 618 606 658 17Des Moines 370 392 395 414 -44Madrona 575 587 588 649 -74Marvista 575 545 563 590 -15McMicken 575 409 408 537 38Midway 575 564 580 627 -52North Hill 575 515 520 566 9Parkside 575 488 483 558 17South Totals 4,495 4,116 4,143 4599 -104

includes new portable classrooms at Cedarhurst, Gregory Heights, Hazel Valley, Mount View, Seahurst

School Building Capacity 2012/2013 Oct 1st Total

Schools over capacity

Conditions• Reasons for current condition –

• New housing from the King County Housing Authority• New state funding for full day kindergarten• Implementation of district-wide full day kindergarten• Growth in special education classrooms – 8 added in 2013-14• General population demographics change and growth

• Potential future impacts –• In 2014-15 the State provides funding to lower K-1 class size to 20 – space we don’t

have• In future years, Legislature plans to fund reduced class size for grades 2 and 3 as

well• Significant planned growth for south end of district

The Future

Enrollment Growth over the next 10 years

Enrollment vs Capacity for Elementary Schools

Short Term Solutions

For the 2014-15 School Year

Short Term Capacity Scenario – Option 1

Reopen Beverly Park – Enrollment 450-475 - Open 2014-15

Staff Recommendation

•Re-boundary (limited to Cedarhurst, Southern Heights, Beverly Park at Glendale

White Center Heights, Mount View)•Rehab in (2) Phases

• Phase 1 – opening with portables 14-15• Phase 2 – modular wing with additional system upgrades and new windows 15-16

•Cost estimate $7 million (+ sewer connection or new on-site system)

PROS:•Restores neighborhood school•Provides 19 classrooms for growth•Provides opportunity to lower class size in K-1 in north end of district•Available for 14-15•Less expensive to open than building new school

CONS:

•Doesn’t fully address long term space needs for the north end of our district•Requires some students to change schools•Costs $7+ million from limited resources•Located on small site by present standards (3.8 acres)

Short Term Capacity Scenario – Option 2

Purchase Portables as Interim Solution

•Purchase 10-14 portable classrooms for growth in elementary schools until after we pass the bond

PROS:•Available in short time frame•Less expensive than to open Beverly Park•Less controversial than boundaries

CONS:•Will not allow us to collection $1.2 million in state revenue for lower K-1 class size•Costs up to $3+ million from limited resources•Does not achieve any long term solution

Long Term Solutions

Long Term Capacity Scenario – Option 1

Build New School at Salmon Creek* – Enrollment 650 – Open as early as 2014-15

•Create new boundary for Salmon Creek for 2014-15•Will require a limited re-boundary of entire north end of school district•Requires opening of Beverly Park and moving Beverly Park @ Glendale back to Beverly Park•Salmon Creek students would go to Glendale as interim•Upon opening Salmon Creek in 2017 or 2018, Glendale could become a 600 student middle school

PROS:•Provides 26 classrooms for growth in new school•Located in a high density area where schools have very large enrollment•Provides opportunity to lower class size in K-3 in north end of district•Creates middle school capacity for growing population without building a new middle school

CONS:•Requires significant number of students to change schools•Located on slightly smaller sight by present standards (6.7 acres)•Does not alleviate elementary capacity needs in other areas of the district

*Would need to be included in the 2014 Bond Proposition

Long Term Capacity Scenario – Option 2Change Grade Level Configuration

•Move to grade configuration of:

• K-5 for elementary schools

• 6-8 for middle schools*

•Requires limited re-boundary of some north end elementary school•Could open Glendale middle school for 6-8 in as early as 2014-15•Requires re-boundary of entire district for middle schools

PROS:•Provides 55 classrooms for elementary growth and K-3 class size•Creates a 3 grade middle school for a more stable middle school experience•Supports district interest in expanding pre-kindergarten options

CONS:•Impacts middle school capacity (may require we build a 6th middle school)•May require a significant number of middle school students to change schools•Would disrupt the high school feeder pattern•Will require moving of portables from elementary schools to middle schools and add some additional portables if no new middle school built•May require a significant community input process

*May need to include a new middle school in the 2014 Bond Proposition

Enrollment vs Capacity for Elementary Schools

Comparison – K-5 to K-6

Next Steps:

Timeline Activity

January Survey of community

January 14, 16 and 23 Community Meetings on Bond

February 26 Work study on options to address capacity needs

April Select bond and levy election dates

April 23 Work study on bond project scenarios

May 14 Work study on final bond project recommendations

June 11 Board introduction of bond resolution

June 26 Board action on bond resolution