School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee — Portland, ME
Date: 2017-01-19

1. 5:30 P.M. School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee Agenda

 Documents:

 1.19.17 SCHOOL FACILITIES AD HOC COMMITTEE AGENDA.PDF

2. School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee Minutes 12.22.16

 Documents:

 12.22.16 SCHOOL FACILITIES AD HOC COMMITTEE MINUTES.PDF

1. 5:30 P.M. School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee Agenda

 Documents:

 1.19.17 SCHOOL FACILITIES AD HOC COMMITTEE AGENDA.PDF

2. School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee Minutes 12.22.16

 Documents:

 12.22.16 SCHOOL FACILITIES AD HOC COMMITTEE MINUTES.PDF
 School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee
 Committee Co-Chairpersons
 Marnie Morrione, District 5, Portland Board of Education ∙ Ethan K. Strimling, Mayor
David Brenerman, District 5 City Councilor Nicholas M. Mavodones, At-Large City Councilor
Justin Costa, District 4 City Councilor Sarah J. Thompson, At-Large Board of Education
Stephanie Hatzenbuehler, District 4 Board of Education Anna Trevorrow, Chair, Board of Education



 Thursday, January 19, 2017
 5:30pm – 7:30pm
 City Hall – Council Chamber*

 Agenda
 1. Review and approval of 12/22/16 Committee meeting minutes

 2. Update on facilities assessment school scoring

 3. Committee Member presentations of proposals for public review

 4. Public Hearing on school facilities proposals

 5. Vote on Committee recommendation


*Childcare is available in Room 24 of City Hall




389 Congress Street/www.portlandmaiane.gov/tel.207-874-8941/tty.207-874-8936/fax.207-874-8669
 School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee
 Committee Co-Chairpersons
 Marnie Morrione, District 5, Portland Board of Education ∙ Ethan K. Strimling, Mayor
David Brenerman, District 5 City Councilor Nicholas M. Mavodones, At-Large City Councilor
Justin Costa, District 4 City Councilor Sarah J. Thompson, At-Large Board of Education
Stephanie Hatzenbuehler, District 4 Board of Education Anna Trevorrow, Chair, Board of Education



 Thursday, December 22, 2016
 5:00pm – 7:00pm
 City Hall – Council Chamber

 Meeting Minutes & Notes

The meeting began at 5:03pm.
Attendance:
Mayor Strimling, School Board Member Marnie Morrione (Committee Co-Chairs)
Superintendent Xavier Botana
Councilors: David Brenerman, Justin Costa, Nicholas Mavodones
School Board Members: Board Chair Anna Trevorrow, Stephanie Hatzenbuehler, Sarah Thompson
Superintendent Xavier Botana
Special Assistant to the Mayor Jason J. Shedlock
City Finance Director Brendan O’Connell

Mayor Strimling and Board Member Morrione began the meeting by welcoming the Committee
members and the public and letting the attendees know the purpose of the evening. This meeting would
consist of an update on the attempts to secure state funding to defray the costs of the Buildings for Our
Future plan as well as an overview of the recently-completed School Faculties Assessment. The
Committee would also discuss the timeline for the committee’s work and a possible referendum vote
The majority of the meeting would be reserved to hear proposals from members and deliberate on them.
The Committee was reminded that the master question and answer document, along with other
supporting documents and presentations, can be viewed in their entirety at
http://www.portlandmaine.gov/1803/School-Facilities-Ad-Hoc-Committee.

The minutes of the November 17th meeting of the School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee were approved
unanimously after suggested changes to the titles of committee members, consistency in names and
titles, and technical corrections.

Councilor Mavodones stated that a prior commitment would mean that he needed to leave the meeting
early. He also wished to put on the record his displeasure with a “backpack mailing” regarding the
school facilities deliberations. He felt it was a violation of the School Board policy on commercialism
and that he will be following up on those concerns with Superintendent Botana.

 1
Superintendent Botana explained to the Committee that he and others presented at the state Board of
Education’s Construction Committee on December 12th and the full State Board of Education on
December 14th. While the presentations were met by both bodies with appreciation for creativity and
an understanding of the difficult situation Portland is in with the two schools, both unanimously
dismissed Portland’s request for funding for Longfellow and Reiche schools. Mayor Strimling as well
as Councilor Mavodones thanked Superintendent Botana for his hard work at exploring all avenues at
state funding.

Superintendent Botana then discussed the facilities assessment that was been recently completed by
contractor Sebago Technics. He stressed that the findings of the study, over $300 million in facility
needs over the next 20 years (almost $40 million over the next 5 years), do not include addressing any
improvements needed to bring schools to 21st century learning expectations (unlike the Buildings for
Our Future proposals contemplated by the Committee). Superintendent Botana noted that there are
other non-Buildings for Our Future schools, particularly at the secondary level, with significant project
needs which may become better candidates for state major construction funding in the next project
round.

Superintendent Botana stated that Sebago Technics is in the process of scoring all schools using the
new state funding rubric. Preliminary findings indicate that the needs of Portland’s secondary schools
may stand a better chance at scoring higher on the state scale than others, including the schools
currently being discussed by the Committee.

Councilor Brenerman asked why the findings were different from the new assessment and those
explored in the Buildings for Our Future plan. He asked that if we fund these four schools locally,
would the School Department seek state funding for other schools? Councilor Brenerman also asked
what plans would be in place for the schools, once upgraded, to not degrade like the way they did to
leave us facing the current reality. Superintendent Botana stated that the facilities assessment only
focused on physical needs to upgrade physical plants, not ensuring 21st century learning environments.
He stated that the School Department would absolutely apply to the state for funding of additional
schools in need. Superintendent Botana also stated that it would be important to work with the School
Board and the City to make difficult budgeting decisions in the future to meet the needs of all school
buildings, including those what would be renovated.

Mayor Strimling stated that based on the Committee’s work, ensuring public voices as well as
incorporating the review time and votes from the School Board, the Council’s Finance Committee and
the full Council, the timeline of a public referendum would be Spring of 2017.

Mayor Strimling then presented a proposal from himself and Co-Chair Morrione for a four school,
$60.9 million plan to meet the needs of Reiche, Longfellow, Lyseth and Presumpscot by transforming
them into 21st century learning institutions. He noted that the plan included the Adjusted Project Scope
previously discussed by the committee, included a staff person to work – either for the school
department or the city – to coordinate the administrative aspects of the project, in addition to the
already-budgeted Clerk of the Works and added back the solar domestic hot water heater at Reiche. He
stated that he was confident that the plan addressed the critical needs of the schools and the students
(the Adjusted Project Scope plan was previously-vetted and agreed to by the principals) while
balancing the impact to taxpayers. Mayor Strimling also stated that the plan contemplates spreading
the borrowing over six years in order to lessen the yearly impact to taxpayers.



 2
School Board Member Morrione added her support for the proposal. She also passed along and idea
heard at a District 5 community meeting that the public might have the option to vote on two referenda,
one containing the $60.9 million figure, and one adding the additional $10 million for the full Buildings
for Our Future proposal. Bond Counsel would need to advise if and how that would be possible.

Superintendent Botana was supportive of the Co-Chairs’ $60.9 million proposal. He stated it was a
thoughtful proposal that took into account principals’ feedback. He is confident that School District
officials would be able to realize adequate savings by implementing repurposing and bulk purchasing
for equipment; and community and grant dollars for playground and outdoor learning items.

Councilor Mavodones asked about the new Project Coordinator position, and whether it would be a
Public Schools or a City position. Mayor Strimling stated that where the person sits could be decided,
but that he wanted to make sure the additional assistance was budgeted for. Councilor Mavodones
stated that it is important that the person have educational knowledge and experience.

Councilor Brenerman asked about the timeline and whether it was realistic. He wants to be sure we
have the personnel needed at the City to coordinate these projects. Deputy City Manager LaChance has
been shepherding the Hall School Committee, and each of these projects would need someone akin to
her to fill that role. He also asked about the CIP projects already in the pipeline or ones that are needed
before the Buildings for Our Future work would begin. These items would include the fieldwork at
Lyseth and Lyman Moore as well as brickwork at Longfellow.

Councilor Mavodones stated that the Co-Chairs’ proposal showed a lot of thought and he appreciated
the effort that went into it. He stated that he does not know where he will end up on the proposal. He
went on to say that it we are going to be investing $60 million, maybe we should just invest $70 million?
Councilor Mavodones then went on to say that he believes people will have issues with spending that
amount of money. He suggested perhaps there were other proposals to consider. Options might be
waiting for the state to fund two schools. A $35 million proposal that the school department could
recommend might also be an option. He asked what might a plan that addressed two schools and $35
million would look like?

He also registered concerns that borrowing $60 or $70 million would limit the city’s ability to
implement any other capital improvement projects for six years. He stated that when the middle schools
were completed in the 1990s, that municipal spending “came to a halt.” Mayor Strimling asked for
further clarification on that point, and an accounting of municipal spending in the 1990s. Councilor
Mavodones then stated that he wasn’t attempting to scare people, just understand the impact of a bond.

Board Member Thompson stated that the facilities assessment highlighting $300 million in needs over
the next 20 years was “sobering.” She stated that the community needs to know that the need is even
greater than once realized, and that $70 million is only a small portion of the real need. We can only
defer maintenance for so long and the schools are getting worse as we wait. Board Member Thompson
stated with we must “bite the bullet” and make this investment.

Councilor Costa also thanked the Co-Chairs for their proposal. He stated that he too feels people must
understand the order of the magnitude of the needs for the school system overall. He stated that the
school department must know that tough choices must be made, but that the co-chairs’ proposal is
moving us in the direction that we need to go. Councilor Costs stated that while he is open to some
negotiation, we are getting very close to what the schools need to move forward. He stated that he and
others have been working on this issue for years and that it’s time to move ahead. He went on to explain
that there is only so much uncertainty that we can avoid and that we will continue to incur deferred

 3
maintenance needs. He concluded by stating that while he is inclined to support the co-chairs’ proposal,
that any and all other viable options should also be made clear and laid out for public review.

Board Member Morrione began by stating that we must reframe the conversation about schools versus
city needs. They are shared needs. We must also look at the economic impact of not performing this
work. We must invest in families and invest so that families return to the city. We must prioritize the
investment in our next generation and if we do not, we are taking a step back as a city.

Board Chair Trevorrow stated that the Co-Chairs proposal should be presented to the public for their
review. She stated that it has been eye opening to see the vast amount of work that the schools need
that will have to be included in a Capital Improvement Plan, and that the Co-Chairs’ proposal would
put a dent in what is necessary to upgrade out schools. Board Chair Trevorrow stated that she supports
the Co-Chairs proposal to move forward for public review, and that the public should see any and all
proposals to have the most information as they make their decision.

Councilor Brenerman agreed with Board Chair Trevorrow that the public should have access to all of
the information they night need to make the best decision on how they want to move forward.

Board Member Hatzenbuehler stated that the needs identified in the facilities assessment were sobering
and reasonable. She said that she is very familiar with the capital needs and the budget process, and
she is concerned that there is a huge gap between needs and dollars available to address them. She is
very concerned about services declining and rising debt. Board Member Hatzenbuehler stated that the
choices must be made crystal clear for the public, and that we must balance the polies surrounding
steps towards universal Pre-K and universal breakfasts as well. She supports the public having a variety
of proposals to choose from, including the Co-Chairs’ as well as any others developed.

Mayor Strimling also stated that the public should have all the information they need. He stated that
over the course of the six months of committee work, and years of prior study, the situation is very
clear. The public is aware of the cost. They are even more aware of the cost of inaction. The schools
have been underfunded for decades and now we must act to right that wrong. Our kids deserve 21st
century learning institutions. Our excellent teachers and administrators deserve the tools they need to
make that environment work for our kids. Mayor Strimling stated that the Ad Hoc Committee, and the
full Council, should allow for the voters to decide. He stated that the Co-Chairs’ proposals are indeed
the same items that this Committee has been discussing for months. There is nothing new and that it’s
where this process led them.

Mayor Strimling announced that the tentative date for the next meeting is January 19th. It was noted
that Board Member Thompson does have a conflict on that date.

The meeting was adjourned at 6:43 pm.

Submitted by Jason J. Shedlock, Special Assistant to the Mayor




 4

School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee
 Committee Co-Chairpersons
 Marnie Morrione, District 5, Portland Board of Education ∙ Ethan K. Strimling, Mayor
David Brenerman, District 5 City Councilor Nicholas M. Mavodones, At-Large City Councilor
Justin Costa, District 4 City Councilor Sarah J. Thompson, At-Large Board of Education
Stephanie Hatzenbuehler, District 4 Board of Education Anna Trevorrow, Chair, Board of Education



 Thursday, January 19, 2017
 5:30pm – 7:30pm
 City Hall – Council Chamber

 DRAFT Meeting Minutes & Notes

The meeting began at 5:35pm.
Attendance:
Mayor Strimling, School Board Member Marnie Morrione (Committee Co-Chairs)
Councilors: David Brenerman, Justin Costa, Nicholas Mavodones
School Board Members: Board Chair Anna Trevorrow, Stephanie Hatzenbuehler, Sarah Thompson
Superintendent Xavier Botana
Deputy City Manager Anita LaChance
Special Assistant to the Mayor Jason J. Shedlock

Mayor Strimling and Board Member Morrione began the meeting by welcoming the Committee
members and the public and letting the attendees know the purpose of the evening. This meeting would
consist of brief updates on school scoring based on the recently-completed School Facilities
Assessment, a presentation of information provided by the State Department of Education, Committee
member proposal presentations, a public hearing on any Committee Member proposal(s), and a
Committee vote. Mayor Strimling also stated that courtesy of Portland Public Schools and
Superintendent Botana, the childcare would be available until 8pm in Room 24.

The minutes of the December 22, 2016 meeting of the School Facilities Ad Hoc Committee were
approved unanimously.

Superintendent Botana shared that according to the scoring based on the state rubric, performed by
Sebago Technics and based on facilities needs alone, the needs at PATHS/Casco Bay High School,
Reiche, Longfellow, Portland High School and Lyseth – in that order, scored the highest need. He
stated that typically the state does not fund more than one school – if any – in Portland, and he and the
School Board would determine which schools to apply for in the upcoming funding round. He noted
the needs at PATHS/Casco Bay High School, as well as Portland High School were significant and
very expensive.
 1
Mayor Strimling explained a memo that was sent to him as a response to questions related to Portland
schools’ chances based on previous years’ scores and rankings. The memo, from Scott Brown, Director
of School Construction Programs at the State Department of Education, stated that there has been
increased interest in funding for the upcoming round, that new schools with more need may apply, and
that previous scores do not dictate one’s placement on the new list.

Councilor Mavodones then presented his school facilities proposal, which entailed funding two schools
(Lyseth and Presumpscot) locally and recommending the School Board apply for Longfellow and
Reiche. His proposal would add back in the parking improvements for Lyseth/Lyman Moore $247,489
as well as an additional $1,450,000 for the Lyseth bus loop and field work. The total local funding for
this proposal would be $31,625,732. Councilor Mavodones stated that this proposal would save the
taxpayers money while waiting to see where Reiche and Longfellow score on the upcoming state
funding list. He stated that given the amount of time it would take to complete all four schools, that he
felt it prudent to ask the state one more time to fund two of the four schools. (See attachment for more
details)

Mayor Strimling then formally proposed the Committee Co-Chairs’ proposal. It mirrored the proposal
discussed at the last Committee meeting: a $60,958,164 plan, developed in concert with school
principals and officials, that would guarantee the rehabilitation of all four schools by funding them
locally, while contemplating the School Board would seek state funding for other schools identified
with the heaviest needs. The proposal would spread the borrowing over 6 years to minimize impact
and also restore the solar domestic hot water heater for the Reiche pool. (See attachment for more
details)

After the formal presentation of the proposals, a public hearing on the plans followed. Below is a
snapshot of each participant’s comments.

Sarah – Bowdoin College (in support of four school bond)
 • Adequate school facilities support better education
 • Issues like temperature, light, acoustics, air quality are proven to impact:
 o Illness and absenteeism
 o Morale and motivation
 o The perceived value of students and parents
 o Academic performance
 o Teacher retention

Steve – Resident & Former Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Also an architect
 • Frustrated by so many studies pointing to same conclusion
 • If Councilors had children in the system, it would have been completed already

John – Member, Board of Public Education (in support of four school bond)
 • We must not turn our back on public education
 • We are choosing not to deal with safety and learning issues
 • Support full measure of bond to protect our most vulnerable residents
Anetta – Former Reiche Parent & Current Ed Tech (in support of four school bond)


 2
 • While some problems have been fixed at these schools, more problems exist and will not go
 away
 • Action is overdue

Justin – Longfellow Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Also had a child in pre school
 • There is no good reason to delay
 • We’ve been prudent to the point of neglect for far too long

Ben – Longfellow Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • When he moved here years ago, the factor was the good schools
 • Not sure of parents would say the same thing now
 • Act to invest in community and attract parents like him from outside of the city

Peter – North Street (opposed to four school bond)
 • Had two children got o Reiche, two more step children
 • Offered a note of caution on the cost
 • Largest bond in history of Portland could tie up binding capacity
 • Take a hard look at closing and consolidating schools instead
 • Not a good time to borrow so much in the face of uncertainty at the federal level
 • This issue should be decided on during a general election or even waiting until 2018

Gene – Thomas Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Most jurisdictions fund school improvement locally
 • We have gotten our fair share of state money (Hall, Riverton)
 • Time for local taxpayers to step up and pitch in
 • Others around us fund their school needs locally and do not rely on the state
 o Westbrook, Kennebunk/Arundel, Wells, Durham/Pownal/Freeport, Gorham, Biddeford

Holly – Member, Board of Public Education (in support of four school bond)
 • This effort is long overdue
 • The voters deserve the chance to decide
 • It’s unfair to students who have to learn in such different environments (new schools vs old)
 • Mold and mildew in schools make people sick

Bill – Congress Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Must scuttle policy to let schools get worse in order to qualify for state funding
 • Tax base is increasing
 • Buildings have become a distraction
 • We fund gold courses, new field turf and pond renovations instead
 • Must make our kids a priority

Spencer – Portland City Councilor (in support of a four school bond)
 • Must fix all four schools
 • Work with community on cost and participatory budgeting. Maybe $40M?
 • Four schools should get what they deserve
 • Four school package should be send along to the full Council to debate
 3
Jessica – Berkley Street (in support of four school bond)
 • purchased in Portland 15 years ago
 • Has paid for Capisic Pond, the Civic Center, etc
 • Now finally ready for tax dollars to pay for our schools
 • We must help keep families in Portland
 • A look at news reports on our schools – 8 of 10 articles highlight dire need
 o Not a selling point for new families
 • It’s more than just parents who want this – it’s the community
 • The school board has not failed. They have applied to the state and tried for 20 years.
 • It’s the Council that needs to step up and let the voters decide

Mike – Beacon Street (opposed to four school bond)
 • If we funded only these, what would happen to other schools?
 • How are we going to manage $300M need across entire district?
 • Fears this bond would shortchange high schools
 • We must focus only on health and safety needs, learning achievement

John – Spring Street, King Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • First generation Reiche graduate
 • Alarmed at degradation of his former school and other schools
 • This bond isn’t about fancy frills for schools – it’s to meet the needs identified
 • People used to choose schools because of their quality – that no longer happens
 • Let voters decide – democracy is at stake

Chris – Spring Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Substandard facilities at Reiche (roof, noise, temperature)
 • Hoping for state funding – again – is a long shot and a gamble
 • Should not gamble with the safety of our schools
 • There’s a sense of pride when a community steps up and funds its own schools
 • Let voters decide

Katrina – Congress Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Has worked in a lot of classrooms across the area
 • These four schools need it most
 • Would not send her kids to any of them

Laura – Bayview Drive (in support of four school bond)
 • There is a link between education and architecture
 • Serves on Hall School Building Committee
 • Environment is the third teacher, behind the classroom teacher and one’s peers
 • Must think of equity across the city
 • Staff must also be thought of – they need to work in substandard conditions

Anna – Salem Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Recently a partition wall fell over at Reiche, kids could have gotten hurt
 • We must not wait for an injury or worse
 4
Joanne – Grant Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Loves her neighborhood and says it’s important to invest in ourselves
 • Cultural diversity must be protected and invested in
 • Crime increases if we don’t invest in early childhood education

Seth – Roberts Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Elementary schools are important part of our community
 • You need to reach kids early or attrition sets in without investment
 • Businesses need educated workforce
 • We will see the impacts of shortchanging our schools in the deterioration of our communities

Sue – President, Portland Education Association (in support of four school bond)
 • Three sons who went to Portland public schools, two grandchildren at Lyseth
 • We must address critical infrastructure needs and safe schools with a focus on learning
 environments
 • PEA supports the full four school bond – must put it to voters and act now

Richard – State Representative (in support of four school bond)
 • Serves on Education Committee
 • Been to meetings around state and knows the key to business development is workforce
 development
 • Need for modern facilities to prepare workforce is critical
 • We cannot wait any longer – we have waited 20 years
 • Not only supports these four schools, but also more investment going forward to meet needs

Benny – Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • 6-foot-tall, 25-foot-long wall fell at Reiche
 • Kids do well in school despite of unacceptable environment
 • They should not have to worry about their surroundings
 • We must think of the next generation of kids

Peter – Francis Street, Former School Board Chair (in favor of action to repair schools)
 • Presided over many moves and relocations of kids, difficult decisions
 • In the face of $320M need, decisive action is needed
 • The need was $110M 10 years ago, cost is not going down
 • Most unacceptable would be no action at all

Katherine – Greystone Street, Former Presumpscot Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Considered leaving Portland but decided to stay – would not make same decision now
 • Skunks living under Presumpscot trailers
 • Buildings make a difference and welcome families
 • We must have a sense of urgency for all four schools, not a halfway attempt at just two
 • Perhaps we need less schools, but if we are committed to the number, we should do it right
 • Equity is important – we must make the investment now

Lily – Turner Street (in support of four school bond)
 5
 • Cares because it impacts democracy
 • Cost is less than $9/month
 • New Mainers cannot focus in substandard environments
 • We already have food insecurity and now the schools are more distractions
 • People will just leave to go to less diverse schools
 • Public schools need to be a priority and we must take our responsibility seriously

Aura – Arcadia Street, Presumpscot Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Daughter is in a modular classroom
 • Must go outside in the cold to access a bathroom in main building
 • Expeditionary learning needs adequate space
 • Neighborhood schools are the centers of the community
 • We must show our values and that we value our kids

Amy – Winters Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
  • Moved here 11 years ago and nothing has changed
  • Rebuilding is an economic issue, it attracts new families and new investment
  • Right now, we attract young people and when it’s time for them to send their kids to school,
 they leave

Emily – Cushman Street (in support of four school bond)
  • Not only should we support all four schools, but we should fund the original $70M
  • We should not have to cut corners and use old equipment when other schools (East End, Ocean
 Avenue) have new equipment
  • Reductions perpetuate inequity
  • Teachers will be forced to spend their own money and work hard to find funding rather than
 focusing on educating kids

Ginny – Emery Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Would rather pay more taxes than pay for noise cancelling headphones
 • This responsible investment would ensure adequate long term environments
 • Generations of parents have been fighting for this
 • We must also plan for the future so that we’re not in this place again

Heather – State Representative, Lyman Moore Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Worked at a substitute teacher – teachers know tricks to keep kids comfortable and focused –
 but shouldn’t need to use them
 • Small business owner – we must attract businesses and families
 • Sister went to Lyseth 30 years ago and the building is the same
 • Cannot take a chance on state funding
 • Must act now for the sake of these and future kids

Jessica – Kenilworth Street, Longfellow & Lincoln Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • We should be asking for even more money than the current bond
 • Putting off a decision is unacceptable
 • If we wait for the state, perhaps they will tell us to close a school or redistrict
 • Investment bring a pride of ownership – we must act now
 6
Adam – Edgeworth Avenue, Longfellow & Deering Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Kids with crutches at Longfellow are falling down starts because there is no elevator for them
 • Infrastructure is subpar
 • This wouldn’t impact his kids, but he supports it because it’s an investment that he wishes those
 before him made
 • The state has not helped these schools – the federal government is even worse
 • He’s worried that teachers will continue to leave with the new schools being built surrounding
 Portland

Jennifer – Edgeworth Avenue, Longfellow Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Rebuilding is an economic development issue
 • New parents are watching to see what is done
 • We must also think about the teachers who have to work in these schools for years without
 these needed fixes – we must keep and recruit good teachers

Joey – Kellogg Street (in support of four school bond)
 • We are doing a disservice to our kids
 • Young families keep communities alive
 • 20 years, 7 studies, no action must change
 • A two school proposal means we are committing to ensuring two failing schools and gambling
 on funding them
 • In speaking about a “back to basics” budget approach, what is more basic than the needs of our
 kids?

Jake – Fall Lane, Lyseth Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Schools serve as community centers
 • Current state of our facilities is embarrassing
 • He knows of three families in his neighborhood alone who left because of the conditions of the
 schools

George – Hanover Street (in support of four school bond)
 • The City Council should have done its job when this issue was before the finance committee
 years ago
 • Our schools are disappointing to new arrivals to our city and we’re losing the competition with
 localities surrounding Portland
 • Conversations about economic development should include schools
 • We’re a city in crisis is we cannot adequately fund our schools

Robert – Maine Building Trades (in support of four school bond)
 • We need skilled workers and a trained workforce
 • During this construction boom, are we building Portland’s middle class?
 • Our local schools should be funded – and built – locally with fair wages and responsible
 contractors

Matt – Veranda Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Workforce development begins at our public schools
 7
 • Prioritization of our tax dollars for schools should reflect our values
 • We’ve put this issue off for far too long

Lewis – Laborers International Union (in support of four school bond)
 • Must make this happen for our kids and our local workers

Bobbi – Concord Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Our tax base is expanding and we can afford $150/year
 • The tragedy of the closing of Nathan Clifford is one that we must never forget and repeat – and
 it could happen to Longfellow if we don’t act

Chris – Hartley Street, Longfellow Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Supports fuller $70M bond – it’s not asking too much of taxpayers
 • We must give to get and it is worth it
 • We are watching our local schools slowly deteriorate
 • A social worker should not have to work with vulnerable kids in a broom closet
 • A nurse should not help kids feel better in a mechanical closet
 • The buildings impact teachers too – working there for 20 and 30 years in those conditions

Emily – Art Teacher at Longfellow (in support of four school bond)
  • Neighborhood schools mean something to the community
  • It is our responsibility to act

Ben – State Representative (in support of four school bond)
 • While Augusta should act, they are not so we must locally
 • We need great schools and the voters must have a say

Will – Burnham Place, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Equity is imperative, among:
 o Kids
 o Schools
 o Communities
 • Why do some kids need headphones to cancel noise and others don’t?
 • Friends have left because of the schools and we’re losing our economic diversity
 • The voters should be allowed to decide

Tim – Hartley Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Future Longfellow parent
 • Kids will be directly impacted by this decision, they need to be kept in mind, not politics
 • What does it say to them if they are not made a priority?

Bree – Spring Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Urges the Council to raise her taxes - $150 a year is worth it
 • We’ve been talking about this issue since she went to Reiche
 • We have not made a meaningful local investment in our schools in 25 years
 • A two school proposal sends the wrong message that some kids matter and some do not
 • We are finally close to letting the people decide – let them vote
 8
Heather – Winter Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Former Reiche student
 • It’s worse there than you think
 • A ramp had to crumble for the city to fix it
 • Kids need to learn with an open doorway to the special education area, which is loud and
 disruptive
 • Economic development doesn’t seem to focus on education
 • How much money in TIFs have we given away rather than spend it on schools?

Molly – Amherst Street, Longfellow Parent (in support of four school bond)
  • Walking your kids to school is a major value of a neighborhood school
  • Scared the state will try to consolidate or close schools and endanger the Deering Center
 community
  • A two school proposal would allow schools to languish
  • Closing schools would also impact local businesses

Lisa – Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • These buildings put our teachers in a difficult situation
 • Has a child with hearing loss could not go to Reiche because of the noise
 • Went to Hall, then that caught on fire, water destroyed her FM hearing system
 • Had to finally send her child to a private school to meet her needs
 o Most parents are not fortunate enough to be able to do that
 • We must remember that this is an economic development and marketing opportunity. Pictures
 of trailers and buckets catching water are not selling points.
 • Parents with the means will leave the system
 • Elementary schools are the entry points for parents in our school system and our city

Carrie – Concord Street, Longfellow Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • Investment is about community interaction
 • There is a reason why community centers are at elementary schools
 • Letting them fall into disrepair is unacceptable

Otis – Westminster Street, Longfellow Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • His child had a death in the family and had to receive therapy in a broom closet
 • There is asbestos in the school

John – Clinton Street (in support of four school bond)
 • If we split the two schools, kids will get left behind
 • With Nathan Clifford, we found out when the state does not value neighborhood schools
 • To wait three years for two schools to try to get funding when they’ve already been rejected
 multiple times does not make sense

Steven – Cushman Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Read a list of individuals and groups in support of four school bond ranging from activists to
 architects, retirees and a number of other groups

 9
Matthew – Edgewood Street, Lyseth Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • We must meet the needs of our next generation and strengthen neighborhood schools
 • Scarborough is acting to meet their needs and so should Portland
 • The kids are our future and we cannot think that education has not changed – our buildings
 much change with it
 • There is no guarantee for state funding
 • We have $350M worth of needs and we must start somewhere
 • The Finance Committee killed a $45M proposal in 2013
 • It will not get any less expensive
 • We should forward the $60M option along with an escalated additional $10M option, to voters

Stephanie – Garrison Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Future Hall parent
 • We must prevent what happened at Hall to happen at any of our other schools
 • We must not wait for state funding when we repeatedly get turned down
 • The taxpayers will support the full bond

Janine – Spring Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • The noise at Reiche makes it really hard to concentrate and learn
 • Youngsters need to focus
 • Let the voters decide

Ethan – Brentwood Street (in support of four school bond)
 • Our tax impact will be helped with the recent passage of Question 2 (school funding)
 • We will be retiring pension debt in 10 years further easing the burden
 • State funding is not predictable and it is common for schools to get passed over and not move
 up on the list
 • There should be no expectation that if we wait, again, we’ll get funding
 • We’ve been patient – it’s unfair to ask us to be again

Mary Ann – Bedell Street (in support of four school bond)
  • Why would the Ad Hoc Committee spend all this time studying these four schools to then at
 the last minute just move to fund two?
  • Where is the other opposition?
  • The voters must be allowed to speak

Joanna – Brackett Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
 • 15-year veteran elementary school teacher
 • Staff at Reiche is special
 • Her child will not be impacted, but future kids will
 • Think of the ethics of sending our kids to unsafe and crumbling schools
 • We cannot keep pushing this decision off

Steven – Salem Street (opposed to any school bond)
 • Opposed to any bond
 • But if any of them, the $35M proposal would be better
 • Add back in items taken out and moved to CIP if you are going to put out a bond
 10
 • A project Manager is a waste of money
 • Financial assumptions do not make sense

Emily – Cushman Street, Reiche Parent (in support of four school bond)
  • School capital costs are a local responsibility and the city shirked that responsibility
  • 1993 was the last time we stepped up
  • The strategy of using the yearly CIP to meet needs has failed
  • Allow residents to pay $150/year, or $.48/day
  • We can apply to the state for other schools in need, so we are not turning away state money
  • Parents must fundraise to purchase headsets for Reiche – unacceptable

Brad – Washington Avenue (in support of four school bond)
 • Daughter was a special needs student at Presumpscot
 • Teaching and therapy in hallways and closets is not acceptable
 • Lots of special needs kids are struggling and need adequate facilities
 • Early education determines the rest of someone’s life and we must show we care

The public comment section of the hearing was then closed

Councilor Brenerman then moved for adoption of the Co-Chairs’ $60.9M proposal. Board of Education
Chair Trevorrow seconded the motion

Councilor Brenerman stated that he grew up in Portland and has witnessed the slow deterioration of
these schools. He felt like the Co-Chair’ proposal is a thoughtful and balanced approach after tours,
testimony, hearings and meetings with stakeholders, parents and experts. He stated he’d love to have a
“free” school that the state would pay for, but every time these schools have been in front of the state
they have not made the grade for funding. Casco Bay/PATHS and Portland High School stand a good
chance at funding and we should apply to the state for them. The Ad Hoc Committee did their work
and reduced the original amount based on research and need. We must also keep and attract young
families as this is also an economic development issue. Good schools draw in people and business. We
have wonderful teachers but the schools are not equal to the staff, and they must be.

Board Chair Trevorrow added that the concerns she has heard over the last year at the Committee have
been very real, but what resonates most is the deferred maintenance needed. We need to make an
investment and a commitment locally. State funding is subjected to a very difficult political scenario.
We must meet 21st century learning standards, but teachers are educating in schools that meet the
standards of the 1960s. Teachers should be given the opportunity to be creative and to teach. The public
has demonstrated their willingness to make the commitment.

Councilor Costa stated that this issue is personal and important to him. He has spent time on the School
Board and there have been a lot of people who have worked long and hard on this issue. Everyone
supports the academic needs of our students. Capital needs issues are not unique to Portland or even to
Maine – it’s an issue the jurisdictions around the country are grappling with. He stated we are at this
point because we did not have the structures in place to plan for and implement projects when they
were needed. We have the structures and personnel in place to make informed decisions. We have tried
– and failed multiple times – for state funding for these schools. There has been no consistence in the
states ranking of our schools, so it is difficult to hold out any school in the hope of state funding. If we
apply to the state for one or two of these schools, he is not confident that we will revisit this and solve
 11
the problem in any kind of a timely manner. We can apply for the high schools that are well positioned
for state funding and begin that work. We must pass this bond to give assurances to the community
that equity is important. The School Department must also know that we will be putting pressure on
their operating budget. We must also establish a dedicated capital account for schools in the CIP and
perhaps explore transferring any operating surplus into that capital account. We must put into place
long term policies to ensure adequate capital planning. In a decade when our pension obligation comes
off the books, we must be ready to invest immediately in our identified needs. Councilor Costa stated
that he is happy to support the Co-Chairs’ proposal and let the voters have their say.

Board Member Thompson stated she is currently serving her fourth term on the Board. There has been
so must talking about this issue. She is tired of talking. She expressed thanks to Superintendent Botana
for his leadership and working with the Board and the Committee on this to help bring it this far. Board
Member Thompson grew up in Portland. Lyseth doesn’t look any different than it did in 1980. We have
a plan. We’ve engaged hundreds of people. Millions of dollars in studies have pointed to the same
conclusion. We must invest and cannot cut our way to prosperity. Schools are the hubs of our
communities and our job is to stop wringing our hands and frame this question for the voters. She stated
her priority is school students and staff. The last facility report highlighted a $100M need. Now we’re
over $300M. CIP requests have not been fulfilled. We must let the public decide.

Councilor Mavodones stated that there is no doubt of the needs of the schools, but also the tremendous
capital needs of the city. He stated he has voted for a lot of projects and tax increases in his time as a
public servant. We also have a fiduciary responsibility to taxpayers and there is a cost to what we’re
about to do. He stated that if the debt is not reimbursed by the state, we may be forced to cut expenses
and cut staff. The city has one capital improvement budget and needs to balance all needs with the cost
of those needs. He stated that he has had to cut staff and positions in the past because of budget concerns
and that those are the hardest decisions an elected official can make.

Councilor Mavodones also expressed concern for the timeline proposed. It is his position that if the
state says they will not find these two schools that are not part of his proposal, then he’d be willing to
revisit local funding. The issue is not need or politics, it’s financial impact. A $150 tax increase might
be easily absorbed by some people, but for others, it will be a real hardship. We must look at the large
universe of needs and the impact to residents. As far as applying for the Casco Bay/PATHS and
Portland High School, there is no guarantee for state funding for them either. He stated that if the
Committee and the full Council is contemplating $60M, they night as well consider the full $70M. He
closed by stating that he understands that schools and kids are a visceral issue, and they should be.

A motion was made by Councilor Mavodones to amend the current motion on the floor (Co-Chairs’
$60.1M proposal) to reduce it to $31.6M in local funds for Presumpscot and Lyseth schools. Mayor
Strimling seconded the motion for the sake of discussion.

Mayor Strimling spoke in opposition to the amendment made by Councilor Mavodones. He stated that
his respect for Councilor Mavodones is well documented, but he cannot support the motion. He cited
the Facilities Needs Assessment that outlined Casco Bay/PATHS and Portland High as good candidates
for state funding, where we have not applied and gotten turned down for them before as we have for
the four elementary schools in question. He agreed with Councilor Costa’s assessment that revisiting
this issue after being rejected for state funding would be difficult and time consuming. He also stated
that the most that Portland has even received funding for is one school per cycle, so to think that the
state would fund two is unrealistic. He also said that the added cost of about $5/month for Portland
residents is worth ensuring all four schools meet 21st century learning standards.
 12
Board Member Hatzenbuehler stated that this was a difficult decision for her. She is concerned about
the cost and impact on budgets in light of the other policy decisions such as the push for universal Pre-
K and hiring teachers. She also expressed concern about debt services on a large bond. She hopes we
can find a way to talk about the scope of these projects, but will be supporting the 4 school option that’s
currently in front of the Committee.

A vote was called on the Mavodones amendment. The motion failed 7-1 (Mavodones in support).

Board Member Morrione offered her thank you to everyone for their hard work on the issue. She stated
she knows how hard it is to make cuts. But she stated that Portland is growing. Businesses are hiring.
We’ve spend $7M on research firms and consultants on this issue. What do we want our city to stand
for? Education should be a selling point for Portland. We must put our money and our actions where
our mouth is. She stated that it is time to send this issue to the voters and give them a choice. The cost
of dithering is real and increasing each year. We have been meeting for years on this issue, have come
to the same conclusions and will lose all credibility if we do not act.

A vote was called on the underlying motion (Co-Chairs’ 60.9M, four school proposal). The motion
passed 7-1 (Mavodones opposed).

The proposal will not be forwarded to the Board of Education for their review. If no changes are made,
it will be transmitted to the Council’s Finance Committee for their review and recommendation to the
full Council. The timing is currently on track for a June ballot if that is the Council’s will.

Mayor Strimling also thanked Deputy City Manager LaChance, Tyler Barter and his colleagues at Oak
Point Associates, Superintendent Botana and his staff as well as Special Assistant to the Mayor Jason
Shedlock for their hard work.

After a motion by Board Member Hatzenbuehler and a second by Board Chair Trevorrow, the meeting
adjourned at 9:43pm.


Submitted by Jason J. Shedlock, Special Assistant to the Mayor




 13