City Council

Wed, July 8, 2026

Agenda PDF Minutes PDF Watch Video

Agenda items

Vote records

Discussion summary

Transcript

Meeting summaryAI-generated

Charlottesville City Council Special Meeting — July 8, 2026

This was a special joint work session with the Charlottesville City School Board focused entirely on the schools facilities construction program and the newly authorized local option sales tax referendum. No public comment period was held, and no binding votes were taken.

Sales Tax Referendum Process and Timeline

Deputy City Manager James Fries opened by explaining that Virginia's recently enacted state budget authorizes Charlottesville to hold a voter referendum on a local option sales tax of up to 1%, with proceeds restricted to school capital improvements (including financing costs for bonds). The tax cannot exceed a 20-year collection window, and that clock starts when Council passes the enabling resolution — not when the tax takes effect or when voters approve it.

Council asked a pointed question: if voters reject the referendum and the city tries again later, is the 20-year window already ticking? Staff confirmed that is their current understanding, though they indicated they would verify it. Councilor Snook also raised whether the expiration date in the draft resolution (June 30, 2046) should be extended to account for the time between resolution passage (projected July 20) and when tax collection actually begins; staff noted the June 30 date ties to the fiscal year for administrative simplicity.

Projected timeline:

July 20: Council considers the enabling resolution

August 14: Deadline for Circuit Court to order the referendum (81-day rule before the election)

November 3: Referendum election

Post-November 3: If approved, Council adopts an ordinance; tax takes effect 120 days later

School Facilities Needs Assessment

Deputy Director of Public Works Michael Gowder presented a facilities needs report developed by a working group of city and school staff. Key projects discussed:

Charlottesville Middle School (complete): The $94 million project now has a certificate of occupancy. Some sales tax proceeds could potentially cover the ~$30 million in bonds not yet issued for this project, though staff noted there is legislative uncertainty about using the tax for already-committed debt.

Charlottesville Early Learning Center (Walker Campus, in design): Estimated at approximately $55 million. Currently $34 million is appropriated ($4M in FY26, $10M in FY27, $20M in FY28), leaving roughly $21 million unfunded. The project uses the "Plan C" footprint — building on the lower part of the Walker site, demolishing the existing gym, and constructing a new gym — leaving the A building available for future use. A geothermal HVAC system is planned.

Charlottesville High School (proposed addition + phased renovation, ~$150 million): This emerged as the school staff's current top priority. The proposal is not a new school (estimated at ~$300M) but rather a new building addition to serve as swing space during a phased, occupied renovation of the existing building in three roughly equal sections. The addition would also support expanded career and technical education programming — introductory trades, medical, and technology programs that don't require students to commit half their school day to KTEC. School staff noted the stark contrast between the new middle school's collaborative learning spaces and the high school's outdated, low-light classrooms designed for traditional instruction. A potential ROTC program was also mentioned.

Jackson Via Elementary (proposed new construction, ~$60M): Built in 1968 with no cafeteria and no kitchen — the only school lacking both. The open-plan design has been wall-filled over the decades. Staff identified this as likely the school most in need of replacement, though Greenbriar is also a contender. Future enrollment projections near the South First Street affordable housing development are a factor.

Greenbriar Elementary (~$50M major renovation): Built in 1962, also originally open-plan, with classrooms accessible only by walking through other classrooms. A new secure entry vestibule and plumbing system overhaul (waste removal issues) are priorities.

Summit Elementary (~$25–35M interior renovation): Small site with limited expansion options. A 1950s addition with misaligned floor plates is a long-standing frustration; staff floated the idea of eventually replacing it but said that is not the current proposal.

Trailblazer Elementary (~$20M interior renovation): Oldest school in the system (1925). Generally good bones and natural light; needs more breakout instructional spaces.

Sunrise and Tall Oaks Elementary (~$25M each): 1958 and 1955 vintage, respectively; similar scope of interior renovations and reconfiguration.

KTEC (~$10M modernization): Staff described this as the least certain item — largely a placeholder for common area upgrades. Future programming decisions will clarify what's actually needed.

Overall cost picture: Already-committed projects total approximately $149 million. The new wish-list projects total approximately $395 million, for a combined need well exceeding $500 million. Councilor Payne noted that even the elementary portfolio alone, plus unfunded Walker costs, totals roughly $255 million — far exceeding what the sales tax can fund.

Staff flagged two major risks: construction cost escalation (competition with other localities and VDOT projects driving up contractor prices) and the city's own project management capacity.

Financial Assessment: What Can the Sales Tax Actually Fund?

Budget/Finance staff (Chrissy) presented revenue projections and debt capacity analysis.

The city currently collects about $14–16 million annually in its 1% local sales tax share. The new 1% levy excludes food for human consumption and essential hygiene products — staff estimate a roughly 20% haircut, yielding approximately $12 million per year in new school capital revenue. Over 20 years, that is roughly $240 million in gross collections.

Debt capacity scenarios presented:

$125M bond issuance (maximum): Annual debt service ~$12M, consuming virtually all sales tax revenue. Total 20-year project funding ~$180M after interest. This would push the city's debt service ratio to nearly 12% of general fund expenditures — exceeding both the city's 10% hard cap and its 9% target, putting the city's AAA credit rating at risk.

$35M bond issuance (policy-compliant): Much lower debt service, leaving ~$185M in pay-as-you-go cash over 20 years. Total 20-year program funding ~$220M. This maintains the city's credit rating and debt policy.

Staff noted the city already has $207M in outstanding debt, and baseline CIP debt service is projected to rise from $18.6M annually to over $26M within five years, already requiring increased general fund contributions of ~$2M/year. Adding large school bonds on top risks credit downgrade, which Councilor Payne noted could cost roughly $1.25M per percentage point on a $125M issuance.

Staff and the financial advisor emphasized that the right answer is likely some mix of bonds and pay-as-you-go, timed to project readiness. The IRS requires bond proceeds to be spent within 24 months of issuance, so bonds would only be sold when projects are shovel-ready. Staff cautioned against getting locked into a single financing scenario before the project plan is set.

Prioritization Discussion

The central unresolved question of the session was: given that the sales tax can fund roughly $180–220 million over 20 years against a $395M+ unfunded need, what gets built first?

School staff indicated CHS has "jumped to the top" of the working group's priority list, citing instructional environment concerns, the strategic plan's focus on life-ready graduates, and the symbolic importance of the high school to the community. They noted that students leaving the new middle school will encounter a dramatically inferior environment at the high school.

Councilor Payne pushed back gently, noting that from his recollection of prior discussions, the elementary school portfolio had been considered higher priority — both because of the critical K–3 window for closing the achievement gap and because of the more severe facility deficiencies (no cafeteria, no gathering space, significant HVAC issues). He acknowledged he had not yet heard the full case for the high school.

Councilor Fleisher asked for a clearer rubric: Is the goal closing the achievement gap, or producing work-ready graduates? Both were described as simultaneously valid by school staff.

Vice Mayor Oschrin asked for financial modeling at the August 12 joint meeting showing what different project sequences would look like under various debt/PAYG scenarios. Staff agreed to work toward that.

Director of Community Relations Amanda Smulczik (schools) raised the importance of a community engagement process around the referendum — noting that some portion of the tax is paid by visitors, not just residents, and that the public deserves to weigh in on project priorities, not just be sold on a pre-set plan. Councilor Payne raised the question of whether the city would reduce another tax lever to offset the new 1%, noting it is technically possible but not yet decided — something that will need to be addressed before the public campaign.

Councilor Reports from Boards and Committees

Each councilor briefly reported committee activity. Highlights included:

Fleisher: Sterling Avenue sidewalk project stakeholder engagement through the Planning and Development Work Group.

Oschrin: Habitat for Humanity home dedication, neighborhood walks, MPO Smart Scale updates, decarbonization study community meeting, meeting with Delegate Colson on state advocacy.

Snook: Albemarle Water and Sewer Authority check-in; Virginia Municipal League Legislative Committee Zoom focused on the state budget uncertainty.

Payne: CRHA moving toward an organizational assessment RFP; LEAP program navigating funding cuts from the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and IRA; Finance Committee discussion of collective bargaining cost impacts; Regional Housing Partnership meeting.

Wade: Meetings with Climate Collaborative, National League of Cities infrastructure committee, Chamber of Commerce policy group, CATCO (convention/tourism board), and successful hosting of a Guatemalan delegation. Noted monthly coordination meetings with Albemarle County Board of Supervisors Chair and Vice Chair (Ned and Fred).

Key Takeaways

The sales tax referendum is on track for the November 3 ballot, with Council set to pass the enabling resolution on July 20. The 20-year collection clock starts at that resolution — not when the tax takes effect.

Estimated new revenue is ~$12 million/year, supporting roughly $180–220 million in school capital over 20 years depending on the debt/pay-as-you-go mix — well short of the $395M+ in identified unfunded school needs.

The city's debt policy is a real constraint: issuing more than ~$35M in bonds backed by this revenue risks exceeding the city's 10% debt service cap and potentially jeopardizing its AAA credit rating.

The biggest unresolved question is prioritization: School staff are leaning toward Charlottesville High School first (~$150M), while prior Council discussions had favored the elementary school portfolio. A joint session on August 12 is expected to advance this debate with financial modeling.

Community engagement on the referendum will need to address public concern about tax burden, clarify whether any existing taxes will be reduced, and explain what projects voters are actually supporting — none of which is fully settled yet.

AI-generated summary from voice-to-text transcript. Not the official record. Verify important details with the source documents linked above.

What happened at this meeting

Charlottesville City Schools Facilities Construction Program

# Charlottesville City Schools Facilities Construction Program Summary

Deputy City Manager James Fries and Michael Gowder presented the Charlottesville City Schools Facilities Construction Program, which includes a recently passed local option sales tax referendum requiring voter approval via council resolution on July 20th, with a proposed tax expiration date of June 30th, 2046. The comprehensive modernization plan totals approximately $395 million beyond the $55 million Early Learning Center project already underway, encompassing major projects such as a $150 million phased renovation of Charlottesville High School (designed to provide swing space and Career and Technical Education programs while addressing deficiencies in lighting, restrooms, and classroom design), and renovations or replacements at multiple elementary schools with cost estimates ranging from $25-50 million per facility. Council members raised concerns about project prioritization (particularly whether high school or elementary school improvements should take precedence given the city's achievement gap), financing mechanisms (bonding versus pay-as-you-go funding), and the feasibility of the overall plan given potential construction cost escalation and the city's established 10% debt policy. Staff recommended that council and the school board first align priorities with actual financial constraints—which allow for either one to two large projects or multiple smaller ones—before finalizing the financing structure, and acknowledged that elementary school facility needs differ from high school concerns, with questions remaining about whether facility improvements would meaningfully impact student outcomes versus instructional approaches.

Financial Assessment

Staff presented a detailed financial assessment of the city's debt capacity and current debt obligations. The presentation covered debt service calculations, showing that with $12 million in annual tax revenue, the city could safely leverage between $65-125 million in debt depending on desired coverage ratios, with $125 million generating approximately $184 million in total debt service over 20 years. Staff explained that the city currently has $207 million in outstanding debt ($149 million general obligation and $58 million utility debt), with annual debt service payments budgeted at $18.6 million (6.7% of general fund budget), projected to increase to $26 million (8.4%) within five years, approaching the city's 9% target and 10% maximum debt service policy limits. Council members asked clarifying questions about coverage ratios, industry standards, and debt calculation assumptions, with staff committing to research industry standards for debt service coverage. The presentation illustrated that adding a proposed $125 million school bond would quickly exceed both the 9% target and 10% maximum thresholds, with staff recommending a maximum of $35 million in additional debt to maintain policy compliance.

Sales Tax Referendum Discussion *This work session will not include a public comment period. IV. Councilor Reports from Boards & Committees (time-permitting)

# Sales Tax Referendum Discussion Summary

Staff presented a financial analysis projecting that an additional 1% sales tax (excluding food and hygiene products) would generate approximately $12 million annually for the city, with current sales tax revenue averaging $14-16 million annually. A council member clarified that staff determined funds can only be used for new debt going forward, not to pay down existing debt, based on legislative history review. Council discussed multiple bond issuance scenarios totaling approximately $200 million over several years, noting that later-year debt would extend into the general fund period after dedicated tax revenue ends, limiting future fiscal flexibility for priorities like transit and affordable housing. Amanda Corman Smulczik and council members emphasized the need to develop clear talking points and project timelines (particularly a Gantt diagram showing school construction sequencing beginning with Walker) to explain to the public that this represents new funding with a concrete plan. A council member expressed support for the November referendum but raised concerns that elementary school projects alone total $255 million, exceeding projected sales tax revenue by $150-200 million, and questioned how this funding gap could be addressed given existing high taxes and unfunded costs.

Agenda items (4)

Procedural (4)

1ProceduralCharlottesville City Schools Facilities Construction Program

The city is reviewing its plan for building and improving Charlottesville City Schools facilities, including any new construction or major renovation projects in the school system.

What happened

2ProceduralFinancial Assessment

City officials will examine the city's current financial health and performance to assess budget status and fiscal challenges or opportunities.

What happened

3ProceduralPortfolio Assessment

The city will review its investment portfolio and overall asset management to evaluate performance and financial decisions.

4ProceduralSales Tax Referendum Discussion *This work session will not include a public comment period. IV. Councilor Reports from Boards & Committees (time-permitting)

City council will discuss whether to pursue a local sales tax increase, though residents will not be able to provide public comment during this work session.

What happened

Additional votes recorded in minutes

Adjourn the meeting

aye 5

Jen Fleisheraye

Juandiego Wadeaye

Lloyd Snookaye

Michael Payneaye

Natalie Oschrinaye

Verbatim transcript available

374 transcript segments indexed

We are. Okay. Al will join us. Yes, sir. I call the July 8th Charlottesville City Council special meeting to order. The purpose of this meeting is to discuss the Charlottesville City Schools Facilities Construction Program.

Madam Clerk, will you please call the roll? Councilor Fleischer? Here. Vice Mayor Oshrim? Here. Councilor Payne? Here. Councilor Snook? Here. Mayor Wade? Here. I'm going to turn this over now to Mr. Fries to get us going.

Absolutely. Well, good afternoon, Mayor Wade, members of council, members of the school board. My name is James Fries, deputy city manager. And as noted, this evening we're going to be talking about the school construction program, and in particular, talking about the recently passed local option sales tax.

So our intention this evening is to provide an overview of the sales tax referendum process and the structure related to that, provide you all with an update of that school construction program work. You'll recall last August during a joint meeting with the school board, we provided an overview of our school facilities and their needs.

We're going to update that information as work has been done on that. And then we're going to look at what the potential proceeds might look like from the sales tax revenue, and the implementations around that.

So three major topics to cover, then we'll go over next steps, and then we look forward to questions and your all's feedback. So, Christine, are you manning this for me? I thought I was. Let me stop sharing the tracking.

Okay. So yeah, those are our topics. So, as you all are aware, the recently enacted state budget includes authorization for the city to conduct a referendum that would impose a local general retail sales tax at a rate not to exceed 1%.

As you guys know, the revenue for that can only be used for school-related capital improvements, though it can be used to finance bonds or other loan financing costs for those projects. The work, so as you know, also it's not an action by council alone.

It requires a referendum approved by the city's voters. That referendum is initiated by council resolution. We have, at this point in time, scheduled consideration of that resolution for July 20th, your meeting on July 20th.

The resolution itself must identify the proposed tax, state the expiration date for the tax, and request that the circuit court order the referendum We're using, in that draft resolution that we are preparing, we're using an anticipated deadline of June 30th, 2046, based on the 20-year maximum that's built into the budget as it was passed by the General Assembly.

So the process as this moves forward, after the council adopts the resolution, we file a petition with the Charlottesville Circuit Court requesting entry of an order placing the referendum on the ballot.

That referendum must be ordered by the court at least 81 days before the date for which the referendum election is called. So November 3rd is the election date, and so we're looking at August 14th as the deadline by which the court must act.

And then if the majority of voters approve the referendum, council must then adopt an ordinance to actually impose the tax, and the tax goes into effect at least 120 days after the ordinance is adopted.

So that is our overall process from here to the tax being in place. And the clock ticking starts not when the ordinance is adopted or not when it goes into effect, but when it's- When you pass the resolution- When you pass ...

that's when that 20-year clock begins. Right. So that 20-year window in which to collect that sales tax revenue would actually begin at the point at which council passes the resolution. So just to clarify, if we pass the resolution and the referendum votes no, that clock is still ticking so that if we try again at a later date...

That's an interesting question that we should look into, but I would say that's our understanding right now, yeah. Mr. Vrees. Yeah. Commissioner. So my question along those lines was, referendum election day, and then you've got the 120 days before you can start to receive monies from that tax.

So why wouldn't we push that expiration date out to at least November? Not just based on the resolution, but when it passed and/or when we start to receive money. So the way that the state law is set up, as this was set up by the state, the resolution is what starts the clock.

So we didn't have a choice. Okay. It's set by the state. All right. Thank you. Yep. Any other questions on that? The draft resolution expiration date being June 30th, even though we wouldn't vote on it until July 20th, does that extra month...?

I can follow up. I think the way it's worded right now, we could keep it running until July 20th of 2046, but that's just hopelessly confusing for merchants, it seems to me. What do you mean? I'm sure that- Well- ...

the attorney probably is tying it to the- Oh ... to the fiscal year. Fiscal year. Yeah. And do they stop collecting the extra 1% midway through the month and midway through the reporting period and- Sure.

Sure. Sure. Yeah. All right. Go ahead. Good evening, Mayor Wade, members of council, members of school board. Michael Gowder, deputy director of public works. As James mentioned, I'm here to give you an update on some of our planning procedures since last time we updated you.

So in the interim, we've put together a school facilities working group, and produced this facility needs report, or at least an overview of the report. It'll come out in a little more detail in the future, but we needed to rush something to you so you'd have a sense of what we've been working on.

The working group was composed of staff representing public works, capital development division, budget office, the sustainability office, all city staff, and then city school staff as well. So, I want to give you a quick overview of what the big moving items could be and are in our CIP.

So the reason that we're talking about a project that's basically complete at this point is because it is part of that CIP picture. Because we could, if we wanted to, use some of these funds to pay down existing CIP costs that we've already incurred.

So Charlottesville Middle School, this project is finished. It's got a certificate of occupancy now, so it is substantially complete in our parlance. It was a $94 million commitment, more or less. And so that's one of the big items in our funding picturing.

We're also working on the Charlottesville Early Learning Center. So no pretty pictures of the design process for this slide, but we do have some of that well underway. We are working on the lower part of the Walker Campus for the project.

This is the Early Learning Center. Approximately $55 million is what we think this will cost by the time we get it through construction. And again, we're hard at work on getting these design documents together, but this is an expenditure that we already have incurred of.

Marco, go ahead. Would you remind us what is already appropriated for that building? Um- There was 4 million, I believe, in '26. There's 10 in '27 and 30 million in '28. So 46. Excuse me, 36. 34 I'll get in a second.

I don't do number four. Yeah. 10, 30. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And we- That's 44. That's- 44. Does that sound right? 44, yes. Okay. Thank you. So we don't know where this is going to land quite yet.

We're still pretty early in the design process. We just landed back at our original site. But we think ultimately somewhere south of 55 million is where we're gonna end up. And that's keeping in mind, your previous presentation to council with the proposed Plan C.

Is that right? Plan C. Yeah. That's correct. So building on the lower part of the site, demolishing the existing gym building, building a new early learning center in that location, and building a new gym to go along with that.

Thank you. And for clarity's sake, that leaves open the A building for future uses, which will play into our plan going forward. That was my question. So just to clarify, of that 55 million, 11 million is currently unfunded and not programmed in the budget in any way?

That's correct. Yep. Assuming the 11 million is the number, which I think it will be that or less. So I'm gonna run through some of the ideas that our working group came up with. This is more original information.

I've got these lay- Can I interrupt you a second? Sure, go right ahead. I was actually right. I said the wrong number. So let me clarify. 4 million was budgeted in '26, 10 million in '27, and 20 million in '28.

Oh. Not 30, as I just said. So it is, in fact, 34 million. Thank you. So 20 million unfunded. 20 million is budgeted in '28. Yeah. No, but- But 20 million unfunded. Yeah ... funded yeah, 55. Funding. So we'll have more information as we get a little further down the road.

We're trying to eliminate costs on that project as much as possible, but the construction market right now is working against us in a lot of ways, and you'll hear a little bit more about that coming up.

So, we set about putting together a list of the needs in the school system having to do with facilities. And we've got a rough idea of what those needs are now. There will be some conversation about scope and scale, which building.

There will be cases where if one building gets a big project, another one doesn't need it, and we could flip-flop those schools based on planning concerns that we don't fully understand at this point.

There's also the question of Charlottesville High School, is that the first thing we tackle, it being the biggest fish, or do we get to that at a later time? These projects are sequenced essentially based on their value, so most expensive to least expensive, but that also is more or less the sequence that we were working with in our working group.

So that's a conversation that can be had, and I think our friends from the school board have some thoughts on that as well. So I have a quick question on that. Do we have, and I've missed a couple meetings, plans for those additions and renovations to the high school?

No, there are no plans- No ... for any of what I'm gonna talk about from here on down- Okay ... at this time. Okay. That's why you're looking at that not so elegant picture of the front door- Okay ...

of Charlottesville High School. A next step is to flesh this stuff out, and I do think that that's something that's worth maybe exploring a little bit as we move into putting this to a public referendum but- Mm-hmm ...

as of present, no. These are ideas. They're big picture, very high level, and I'm just kind of- Yeah. Yeah ... throwing them to you. Yeah. Just to highlight two points that Michael's just made. One, these are cost projections.

They are very rough estimates. Right. Yeah. And second, as we, and Chrissy will go into this next, as we get into a much clearer understanding of what the actual revenue stream looks like coming out of this- Mm ...

we're gonna have to match that to a project schedule as we're refining these costs. Yeah. There's still a fair amount of- Mm-hmm ... work to do. The revenue from the one cent. Yeah. May I ask another question- Sure ...

before we get too much further into this? For clarification, because I know it seems like it waffled a little bit. I've heard counsel and Councilor Snook even speaking to it a little bit. Just for clarifying purposes, so this sales tax, these funds can be used for already dedicated or bonds that have already been put out?

Or is this future stuff? Because I thought I heard somebody say we could take down- So we have looked at that. There is legislative history that says that is not allowed. There may be an argument to be made for that, but we feel the safest bet is to assume that it's only for new debt going forward.

So not the middle school debt that we have. Well, we haven't issued 30 million of that. Okay. Great. So, that could potentially be in the mix. Thank you. And I know we won't be able to answer it tonight, but I would be, in the future, just interested in having a joint conversation to really get into these high school plans.

Because I know as a council, as a whole, we've received the plans for the elementary school portfolio, but just haven't had that opportunity with the high school. So I really don't know anything about it, and I don't know, is it rooted in wanting to increase the student capacity programming?

I just don't know and would be curious to learn. I think that's a little bit- I do have a little bit of information on that that I can share. If you still have some questions after, then we can attack those.

So the scope and scale of what's being proposed here is not a new high school. I wanna make that very clear. A new high school, I think, off the top of my head, would be something like a $300 million project in the present market.

I know that sounds crazy, but I think that's right. $150 million, what we're proposing here, would be an addition to the high school. That addition is not really meant as a capacity-driven change. It's more programmatic in nature.

And Kim might be able to speak to this a little bit, but there have been some needs brought forward having to do with workplace education type programs that might fit into KTEC if a student wanted to spend the part of the day that it takes to go to KTEC.

But if you only want to take a bite-size piece, if you want to stay on your normal track, there are some educational programs that they could use some space for on the Charlottesville High School campus.

The other thing it does for us is it frees up each of the parts of the high school so that we can do an occupied renovation. So if we wanted to just go into Charlottesville High School as it sits today and renovate the entire school, we would have to break that project into so many tiny parts that it would take the rest of our lives.

A better way to do it would be to take a third of the school, for instance, and renovate that while school continues. You never have to empty out the school, because there's no place in the city that those students could all go to be educated.

So the new volume becomes a swing space. A lot like what we did at the middle school, actually. That was a test run for this type of project, and it actually worked. Well, depends on if you were a teacher in the school how well it worked.

You can ask them. But I think it worked reasonably well. And there was a lot of cooperation from the schools. But that's what we're proposing here, is we build a new volume that has a specific need and purpose, but also in the meantime can be used as a swing space.

So this becomes basically a four-phase project. It's phase one, new volume. Phase two, three, and four are going through the school in one-third chunks, kind of like what we did with the roof replacement, because the school is neatly carved into these three semi-equal parts.

So that's what we're proposing here. And what the interior looks like, so there's a new volume, and then what in the schools. Additional windows, interior natural lighting has always been a complaint for the high school.

We've done a few pilot projects to demonstrate how we could improve that situation in the science labs. I think that's very successful. Also, if you've walked around over there, the ceilings and lighting are poor.

So some finishes should be replaced. There will be other things we identify, and we'll have to do our best to sort of fit this to cost, but that's what we're proposing for Charlottesville High School.

The only things I would add to what Mike shared are when you talk about renovating the old spaces, beyond the lack of natural light, the restroom piece, we've made a big impact with the initial restroom renovation in what we call the B Commons.

But all the other restrooms really need to be addressed to get them to current standards, and the high school is the place. Of course, our restrooms could use a lift in all of our vintage buildings. We're tackling our first elementary project right now at Greenbriar, which is really exciting.

But operationally, the impact on safety and student health and wellbeing and their comfort using restrooms, getting all those restrooms converted is huge. As we look to prioritize our next set of restrooms we're going to go after, it's really challenging knowing what may lie ahead to pick what's the next area and how to do it.

Because you don't want to make these big investments and not have your full plan baked out, because you don't want to invest in something and then, "Oh, well, that's in the way for this bigger thing we need to do." But the restroom renovation has the biggest operational and safety and just student wellbeing impact at the high school.

The other thing I would add is when students leave the middle school where the classes are designed for collaborative learning and current instructional practices, when they go back to the high school, the classrooms are designed for traditional sit and get kind of learning.

They're not designed to accommodate breakout spaces and where students go into small groups and can go into different areas and learn because the teachers just don't have the visibility and the spaces to accommodate that.

So that's another just reality of what we've got. The middle school, Buford, was in no doubt our greatest need building. But that's just another feature. But beyond the CTE PC mentioned, which is the long-term vision for what that additional volume would allow.

It'll allow students to access workplace readiness learning and not invest a whole half of their day at KTEC. That's big, and that's the long term. And then it provides that swing space to address natural lighting, to address restrooms.

But then all those classrooms, in addition to the natural lighting, they just aren't configured to allow for the more collaborative instructional style that we now want to move more and more towards. Do you mind talking a little bit more about what kind of programs would be offered for the- So this is where-- So I'm the operations gal, and my counterpart, who is the chief academic officer, is at a conference right now.

And she sits in the same work group with me. I know there are things in the medical field, for example, and some of your just technology type jobs where it's not necessary to invest half your schedule for all the different programming that could be beneficial for those tracks.

But I better be careful. I know I won't do this answer justice. I'm sorry. And to follow up on that question, it sounds like maybe it's not fully fleshed out exactly how that would integrate with KTEC's programming?

I'm sure that if Dr. Helz or Dr. Isley were here, they could just give you all the information about the types of the classes that what makes sense at KTEC versus what type of classes would make sense on a more typical class block.

And what that would look like. I'm just so sorry I'm not the person to speak to that, but they can have that for you at a future competition. Thanks. So the next school we'll talk a little bit about is Jackson Via Elementary School.

It was built in 1968. This is the era we talked about in our last meeting, the sort of twins of schools that we built across the system. This is the era that I'm least fond of, I would say. 1968. It's an interesting time in America.

So what we're proposing here is a new school construction. Now, this is something that we could talk about and will talk about for sure. So this is a little bit of a placeholder, but this is the site that it would be most easy to build a new school on, assuming that there's going to be these sort of changes in cohort size that could be driven by things like low-income housing projects and things like that, that the city might take on.

And those are generators of large numbers of students. So, that's something that we would have to work with our friends in the planning department to sort of work through and make sure we're planning an appropriate size school for what's coming.

The other elements, though, that Jackson Via is not great about is natural light, again. If you've been inside of that school, all the windows are about this wide, and these floor-to-ceiling slits. So natural light is really nonexistent inside the school.

There are ways that we could work with that space if we needed to, but I think that given the fact that there probably will be a need in the not-distant future for additional space in our schools, this is a good opportunity.

And this is the school that I think, at least the folks from the school staff believe is most likely to want to be replaced. I would say that there is a contender for that title, though, and that's Greenbriar.

Yes, please go ahead. I also wanted to just confirm, that's also the school that does not have a cafeteria or a kitchen, correct? It's not the only one, but it is one of the ones that- Right. But it's the only one that lacks both.

Oh, yeah. That is true. It doesn't have either. It has neither a cafeteria, nor a-- It has no school-wide gathering space, really, at all. Right. What were they thinking about in 1968? What's that? Not eating, apparently.

What I will say is the design, if you're interested, the design was never to have walls at all for that school. The school was originally designed to just be an open plan. So the gathering space was everywhere.

You could gather everybody anywhere you wanted to because there were really no walls or doors. Or windows. That didn't last very long at all before they started calling what at the time was the maintenance folks to start building walls because the classroom noise was getting out of control.

But it was a common model during the period. And Greenbriar has the same problem. Built in 1962, it also was built with no walls. And the reason I say it challenges Jackson Via is because, one, it's a less flexible building type to work with, so it would be harder to sort of work with the shape of this building and the bones of it to make a new, better building.

And at present, there are a lot of classrooms in Greenbriar where you have to walk through one classroom to get to another. So that's a challenge. But I'll leave some of those concerns and arguments to the folks who know more about the program and who work in the schools.

But this is another school that needs significant improvement, I would say. We're proposing a $50 million project here. That's a major interior upgrade and construction of a new entry vestibule. If you've been following for a while, you'll know that we spent a lot of time and some capital to put better entry sequences into our schools for the sake of safety.

This is the one school that we have been really unable to come up with a good, easy solution for. Just because of the way the entry is designed, it's really challenging to build a place to sequester people before they have access to the school.

They work around it. It's safe for day-to-day operations, but it's not convenient at all. So, this plan would propose that we build something that's more of a permanent entry vestibule or entry sequence to the school, and then reconfigure some of those awkward classroom spaces.

There are also some finishes that desperately need to be replaced, and this school has a particular problem with its plumbing system. Specifically, its waste removal. And that sometimes it doesn't remove the way it ought to.

So that's something that we would like to address. And again, this is the era, all the houses in the neighborhood have the same issue, I can freaking say. This is, I think, a pretty high priority school as well.

$50 million is about what we think it'll cost to address those issues. And I don't think that that's a big, new volume or any real change to what the school looks like from the outside, besides maybe a few more windows.

But it would take care of some of those structural issues. Now we get into my favorite era of schools. Summit Elementary School, previously called Clark. This school is challenged because it's on a very small site.

It can't grow out really at all without impacting parking completely. There's very little parking already. The play space is already rather small for a school of its size. What we're proposing here are interior reconfiguration and interior upgrades.

The entry sequence here is also not great. We've worked with it, but it's not ideal. And we also have a lot of very old finishes. Now, I will say that this school doesn't have the natural light problems that some of our other schools have.

Schools built during this era didn't anticipate having air conditioning necessarily, so big windows were necessary. And consequently, we have high ceilings and good light in the classrooms. Now, that's not true of the entire school necessarily.

There was an addition put on in the 1950s, which I think is of much poorer quality. And I never get tired of complaining about the fact that the floor plates don't line up, which you'll know why. You've heard me say this before, but I think that there could be an argument made for while we're looking at all of this, for removing that addition and building a new addition that would be a little taller probably, that would have floor plates that align, that would be a little more programmatically appropriate for modern teaching.

But wouldn't necessarily impact the footprint of the school site. But that's something that we'll work through as we, again, as we talk to the folks who we know more about what's planned for future growth in the city.

It's certainly something we would want to do some growth projections and wouldn't want to do willy-nilly. But I do think that would be an option for this site. But as it is, that's not what we're proposing.

We're proposing an interior reconfiguration and some general upgrades. Wait, sorry. We're not proposing what part of that? An addition to replace the existing addition. Okay. This is not that. That would probably be more expensive.

Thanks. Trailblazer Elementary, also one of the best sets of bones in the city. 1925 construction. This is the oldest of our schools that are still in the system. We're proposing a general interior renovation, classroom finishes.

Again, it has good windows, good natural light already. There are some spaces that don't, and we would like to remedy that. But again, those are mostly addition spaces. We've done a small project that we're working on this summer to create some more breakout spaces in this school, and that's really highlighting the need for more of that kind of small instructional space.

You'll see that throughout the system that that's something we don't have and would love to have. Obviously, the ideal would be to have all new schools that are all modern and appropriate, but when you see the total number on this packet they're talking about, you'll see that we're- Yeah ...

not even. We're not going to be silly and bring that to you. So with this, I know that the auditorium needed to be improved, but I can't remember if that's already been done. We did replace the seats in- The seats, okay.

That I was- Yeah. The only auditorium, I think, the only auditoria that have not had their seats replaced, Greenbrier is one, and it's still got the old wooden fold-down seats that are very quaint. And then Charlottesville High School, which we have coming up as part of our project plan already.

And then we get to Sunrise Elementary, 1958. Not ideal, but not the worst. Our classroom general interior renovations are what we're proposing here. Generally, I think natural light is not ideal, but it's not terrible either.

This school could use some general interior renovations, some reconfiguration of space inside. The front office sequence is not ideal. It's workable, but it's not the best. So we're proposing a general, a little bit lighter lift than some of the other schools, but a general uplift on this school, and we think that'll cost around $25 million.

And you'll see these numbers are essentially rounded to the nearest $5 million. Just to be honest. At this level, at this point in time, we just don't have enough information to get too specific. Tall Oaks Elementary, 1955.

Very similar. This is a twin to- Sunrise ... Sunrise, sorry. The name changes are- Yeah. And it's a similar scale, similar scope. Classrooms need to be adjusted a little bit. Finishes need to be redone.

All the schools need better ceiling treatments and things like that. And of course, with all these projects, there's an HVAC element. We'll have to look at the systems for all of the schools that we look at, make sure that they're up to the current SNHP.

And there will probably be things that need to be adjusted and fixed and replaced. But we are at a place where we're only a few schools away from having good roofs on all the schools. We've just gone through the three-year program for CHS.

That roof is all new. Obviously, CMS has a new roof. The new school, the new pre-K center will have a new roof. So a lot of the exteriors and we keep up with the exterior maintenance of the buildings, so it's not like we need to do a whole lot to the outside of most of these buildings besides, in some cases, cubbiles for windows.

Speaking of roofs, with the new roofs going in everywhere, is there the opportunity to expand our solar PPA across to the other buildings? There is, yeah, and we're currently working on that. So both CHS and CMS are the first step for us.

We are looking and- Should invite Crystal to one of these meetings so we can talk a little bit about the plans. But, yeah, we are looking at all the new schools. We plan to put solar on all the new roofs, it's just how do we do it?

With PPAs, they have certain needs to be able to make it pay off for them, in terms of the size and the generation. So, in some cases, it's going to make sense to do a self-funded model. In some cases, it'll make more sense to do a PPA.

But we are seeing a very successful collaboration with the provider for our PPA at the high school and the middle school. So, I think that is really opening the door and allowing this to become more of an easy route for us to take to solve these problems.

So the answer, in short, is yes. Okay. Great. Thank you. Do we already know what the HVAC situation is, though, or you're saying it needs to be audited, or? We do know what the HVAC situation is. I don't know school by school off the top of my head because we do keep up with all of them.

You all did just provide additional funding for us to upgrade that. So that has been a problem in the past where our HVAC systems were being held together by duct tape and bailing wire. But, you all just approved some additional funding for our FM staff to look at new projects that'll help to, over time, get those things renovated and up to speed.

So they're not in dire condition. I think they're workable for now. But a catastrophic failure of a school HVAC system is a lot more impactful than it used to be because of the warmer weather generally and the increased summer programming in the schools and all that sort of thing.

So having it just not work is not really acceptable. So, yeah, in general, I think we're in okay shape. I think we're going to be in a lot better shape once we start to spend through some of those funds over the next five years or so and get everything up to speed.

So when-- Sorry, go ahead. No. Go ahead. So, a long time ago, when we had the last work session about the elementary school portfolio, we were presented that a lot of the elementary schools would need full HVAC replacement because those over the summer repairs weren't working anymore, or weren't really sustainable.

Is this additional money, is that no longer the case? I would say that it is less the case. So it's the case today because we haven't started spending the money that has been approved for this fiscal budget, that just started.

But I think, I guess my takeaway message would be I think we're appropriately funded to get those systems up and up to modern spec. There may be cases, and I guess this was my point, is that there may be cases where we get into a school and it's like, oh, there's just an overwhelming challenge in this school that we're going to have to put some real capital funding into as part of a bigger project.

Or we do tend to like to-- If we do a large-scale project, for instance, the middle school pre-K center, we're planning on a geothermal system. We're going lead with those projects. So that's a horse of a different color.

And I think when you start to get into that, for the most part, you don't want to just stick that onto an existing system. You want to kind of refresh the whole system as a whole, so that you've got a one other piece system that runs off the same geothermal wells, for instance, and all that sort of thing.

So, it's a complicated answer to a simple question, but it just depends, I guess, is the simple way to put it. We don't think we're in dire straits. But I would say that we may see situations where a more holistic approach to heating and cooling is appropriate.

So the last item I've got on my list of to-dos is KTEC, and this is more of an interior modernization. We're thinking this is something like a $10 million project. This is the one that I can tell you the least about today.

I would say that, this is more of a general, common areas upfit is what I would be envisioning here. A lot of the learning spaces in KTEC turn over kind of regularly, and there's a lot of shifting and moving of those.

So really, I think more of the commons is what I would be thinking with this $10 million modernization project. And this one, if I'm being honest, I think this is the one that I'm least sure is necessary.

It's kind of why it's at the end, not only in terms of dollars, but in terms of timing. I think by the time we get here, KTEC will answer a lot of the questions for us in terms of how it lives as a building, what is it doing for us as a system?

It's almost just a placeholder for the space because I think there will be needs at some point, but we don't really have a way of saying what those are right now. I was reminded by Dr Berling, actually, on sex when I was fumbling my way through trying to explain the programming, where we see holes in our current CTE programming, and one that's sort of glaring, especially on by what Michael's talking about.

So we have electrical and we have HVAC, but we do not have, and we don't have really space or capacity at KTEC for building trades and at least introduction to building trades, meaning the actual, beyond the electrical and HVAC, but all the other components of building trades.

And that's a really hot area with just the actual construction and things like that. So again, even in smaller spaces, those type of introductory programs that we just don't have at all could be planned for in that additional space at the high school.

And again, you're not committing half your schedule, half your day to getting that introduction. Is- The renovation at KTEC, something KTEC students could participate in? Oh, sure. I think at the middle school, they did a great job of getting students involved.

That was a really fun part of the process. We've even seen it with our elementary. The original renovations that we went through, we did this thing called FIPSIT. It started back in 2017, 2018, where we wanted to just give the community-- If you sort of want to be away, you all remember this.

We wanted to give the community a taste for what it would look like to start lifting our vintage schools with these, like, they start out at a million dollars in the summer. And I'll never forget the kids at what was then Clark.

They were involved with designing what the improvements would be to their classrooms. And so we just worked with architect partners who would really bring that. And then at the solar project at KTEC, the students had different levels of involvement with that, and that's a much more recent one.

So certainly lots of opportunities for that. Yeah. I mean, like actually physically participating. Oh, to do the work? Yeah. As a hands-on- Hands-on learning ... project sort of learning situation. That can get interesting because of the- Sure ...

you're dealing with the contractors. Yeah, exactly. But, certainly with design and learning from it, short of actually doing the work, I mean, we've certainly seen that in our work today. Yeah. Michael might want to add to that.

There are certainly spinoff projects that we could make. Every project spins off. It's like a hurricane, it makes a little bunch of tornadoes. Well, here's a great one. The middle school, we have to reinstall the garden for the garden program there, which we're super excited about.

The students have been so active in designing that, and the build-out on the new garden space at the middle school's going to be exactly what you're asking, literally, for everything from the garden areas, fencing, different things like that.

So that's an area that you'll see that type of learning and development happening in the new green area at the middle school. So, to put a ribbon on all of this, the program costs that we see overall for the system, with what I've just explained, we've already committed about $149,000, assuming that $55 million is the number for the pre-K center.

All of the other things I talked about amount to $395 million. So that'll become a more-- keep that number in your head, because what Christy's going to talk about will put that in a little closer focus.

And that includes the 149? No. It's 395- ... additional. Additional. Yeah. That's right. So just to throw out some risks that we see with this program. So we're not the only people who now can do what we're trying to do with taxes.

What I see as a person in the construction industry is a danger of escalating costs. And we see this with VDOT pouring money into our transportation program. We've gotten to the point where it's very challenging for us to deliver that program because we put a price on something, but everybody else is trying to get the same contractors at the same time, so their profit margin goes way up and the cost of the pay for contractors goes way up.

And all of these things just-- We're fighting with everybody else in the state at a certain point. I don't see an option for anything we can do about that, but it's just something to keep an eye on because you're going to come back to me and say, "You said this number, now it's this number," and I'm going to say, "I'm sorry." Also, city project delivery, I mean, we are what we are as a city.

We have the project management resources that we have. I think they're adequate for what we're trying to do right at the moment. But I do watch city council meetings. I see that this isn't the only thing that city council gets the pleasure of deciding to try and spend money on and solve problems.

I'm sure that there are going to be other things. If all of those things also come to our project management team, that's a challenge for us. So there are reasons why we might want to think about that on the front end and come up with a project pace that takes that as well as our financial income from the tax into consideration.

And hopefully that was some kind of segue for you, Christy. Thank you . So how much revenue would the additional 1% generate? I think just as a quick review, the current statewide sales tax rate is 5.3%.

1% of that is currently located to the localities, and 4.3 goes to the Commonwealth. Over the last decade, if you average out the city sales tax revenue, we've averaged an annual growth of about 2, just under 3%.

In FY 25, we collected a little over 14 million. FY 26, our last projection was 15.6 million, and our budget for 27 is projecting $16 million. So per the legislation, as we've talked about, the additional 1% does not apply to food purchased for human consumption or essential personal hygiene products.

Our commissioner has reached out to the state. This is not something that they routinely collect in terms of data. So they are working through this process as well to change their forms. They'll start collecting the data.

But based on what we know from localities that already have this permission to assess this additional tax, and just from looking at some of our data, we're currently estimating that this would require about a 20% haircut off of our total tax collection.

So for purposes of this conversation, we landed on about $12 million a year is what we're thinking would approximately be available as a result of this additional 1%. So if you look at that, this slide sort of gives you a range.

If we were at $10 million, $12 million, or $14 million, if you were to assess all of that, keeping in mind that sales tax is very dependent on the economy and human behavior, as we saw from COVID. It has the ability to go up as well as down.

If we were to look at a annual tax revenue of about $12 million, that would, at max, with spending every dollar, leverage about $125 million worth of debt. And if you wanted to give yourself, depending on how much coverage you want to give yourself, you could go down to about $65 million safely.

By coverage, what do you mean? That that revenue would actually cover your annual debt service payment. So, on $125 million, that annual debt service payment is about $12 million a year. So if you issued $65 million worth of debt, that payment is roughly half of that.

So you would have two times that amount of revenue to cover your debt payment. Is there some sort of industry standard that one should be looking to as a rule? It's a good question. Definitely, at least one.

But I don't know that there is. I don't know. I could find out if there's an industry standard for you. So is this assuming $12 million times 20 years? Correct. Yields $125 million worth of bondable capacity.

Correct. Thanks. So, to answer that question, if we were to look at this, $12 million over 20 years is roughly $240 million. If we were to sell $125 million worth of bonds, with interest and everything, you're looking at about $184 million of total debt service.

So as the graph illustrates, the tan or gray, however this looks to you, is just like your mortgage. When you start out in the beginning, you're paying-- Generally our debt is equal annual principal amounts.

And so you're paying more principal, less interest. And then as you go along, our debt payment will decrease, and our cash or PAYG increases over time. So what happens is over the 20 years, we would end up with about $55 million of cash that we would also be putting back into the program.

So over the 20 years, by the time you factor in the interest, you end up with about $180 million that's available for projects. So, one of the things that we have been looking at with our financial advisor is what does this look like?

What we do know is that the rating agencies does not look at this as a separate piece of our debt. It is considered part of our total debt. Obviously, it has a dedicated funding source, but it does become part of our total profile.

So just right now, without any of the extra things we've talked about today, as of June 30th, the city has $207 million of outstanding debt, $149-ish of that is general obligation debt, which are all the things that are funded through the CIP.

And just over $58 million of that is what we know are called the self-supporting utility debt from our utilities. Annually, our debt service payment, while budgeted for 27, will be $18.6 million or 6.7% of the general fund budget.

And we'll look at this in just a minute, but based on the current five-year plan that you have, that is projected to increase to over $26 million or 8.4% of the-- and I have the wrong date there, I apologize, over the next five years.

So, to recap your current CIP plan, we have $147 million worth of bondable projects. Of that, $54.25 million of that was for school-related projects, keeping in mind that $30 million of that is for the pre-K center that's currently in the plan.

Chrissy, can I ask you, you'd mentioned there was a number there that was wrong. What's the number that's wrong? The FY28. Okay. It should've been 31. Okay. I was guessing that, but yes, thank you. Yeah.

Chrissy, did you have a- No, that was my same question. Oh. Yeah. Yeah, I'm sorry. Keeping in mind, we do have a debt policy that the debt service cannot exceed 10% of the general fund's total expenditure budget, and council, as part of that policy, imposed a target of 9%.

So this chart is one that we look at and that we use. We also present to the rating agencies. It is the way that we sort of manage all these pieces and parts of our debt program. We do manage the debt, meaning that while we have a CIP plan, as things fluctuate, i.e.

interest rates, the economy, the general fund, there- We are issuing the debt based on what we can afford and how it applies to our policy. As we've been talking about for many years now, we're not reaching our target at 9% because our general fund continues to grow.

One of the issues that we have been speaking about on a regular basis is the affordability of our current plan. As I mentioned, the annual debt service, as you see from the third column over on the planning side, we're going from 18 to 26 million within the next five years, which means that those dollars are additional dollars that have to come from the general fund.

We have been allocating 1% of, or the equivalent of 1% of meals tax, for many years now has been going into the debt service fund to build up a debt service fund balance. So, these increased debt service needs we've been covering sort of on an ad hoc basis annually, either with debt service fund balance.

The 1.4 million that you see there in FY26, the second column over from the right, that was actually the gain sharing that was returned from the schools that was put in to help offset some debt service.

But as you'll notice for '28 and on, we're looking at an increased contribution from the general fund of just over $2 million a year to keep up with the increased debt service needs of what we're going to call the baseline CIP, which is the current plan that was adopted with the '27 budget.

So when you layer all this in, as I said, the rating agencies will look at all of this debt combined. If we have the school piece, if we were to issue $125 million, that's the blue line there on top of the baseline, which are the numbers that you see in that box along the bottom, we quickly exceed the target as well as our 10% not to exceed number in every year for quite some time.

The yellow line I'm going to show you in just a second, which is the max number, which right now, based on just these projected numbers, 35 million would be about the number that we would want to leverage for debt to keep at our target.

And that would help us maintain our policy as well as our credit. Just to clarify, because you're getting lingo-y. It's okay. That's your job. So I just want to make sure that I'm keeping up. So if the max issuance is 35 million, that's annually, that means we're using some amount of the 12 million in revenue to increase our debt capacity by 35 million.

But we don't need all of that 12 million in order to do that. So the remaining 12 million we would use towards- You stealing my slide. Towards paying down debt service? No, because the 12 million can only be used for school construction or projects- Right ...

and new debt. New debt. So it could not pay down existing debt. Okay. So what- Except for maybe the 30, what hasn't been issued yet? That's correct. That's new debt. But it's already in our plan. The CIP.

Okay. Yep. So, I'm going to get to that in one second. I'm just really glad I'm following along. No. So, again, if you look at this the same way, again, 12 million a year gives you $240 million worth of cash.

If we were to bond $35 million, you can see that these gray lines or tan lines continue to decrease, but the amount of cash that you have each year is increasing. Your debt service is a lot smaller. It's 52 million.

That gives you 185 million for PAYG. So it gives you a total cash flow over the 20 years of $220 million that you can use for school projects. Be it, yeah, for school projects. Let me- Can you go back to the previous slide?

The next one, I mean that one. Mm-hmm. So I understand our policy. So what happens if we do... It's 11, 12%, and then it goes down to 11%, the blue line essentially. So if we do go by policy, what that means is that will impact our credit rating, and when we do borrow money for schools, then it'll be, well, not just schools, but just projects in general.

The cost will be higher? Are they saying it's going to affect, you know- It puts the city's credit at risk. We have been talking to the rating agencies for the last few years that our current existing CIP is rather aggressive.

It builds on issuing more debt than we've ever issued in the past. And so when you look at our debt per capita, it's getting up there, and we score lower in those areas because of that. So one of the things that this exercise sort of proved to us, and with PFM's help in looking at this, is that it does sort of confirm that our policy is sort of where it needs to be given our size, the 10%.

And so, I think if you intentionally exceed your policy, number one, that speaks to management, which is a ding from a rating agency standpoint. It also, as I mentioned, does put the city's credit at risk.

And so, to summarize this, so two things to summarize. At some point, once you make a decision on what the overall plan is, we will come to you with a recommendation of some mix of debt versus some mix of cash.

On the top graph, if we were to issue $125 million worth of debt, then the little teeny blue lines are sort of the available cash that you have. Your debt ratio gets you almost to 12%. You have a cash flow over those 20 years of $180 million to invest in your program.

In this scenario, if we were to issue a $35 million bond, you have about $185 million worth of PAYG, so a total 20-year cash flow of 220 million. Again, more money because you're paying less interest, and it does maintain the city's credit, and it does keep our ratio within the target that has been established.

That seems better. Mm-hmm. Still, 220 is pretty shy of the number Mike just gave us, so Yes. Chrissy, how much of a change though... I mean, the city's had a AAA credit rating since like the '70s. Mm-hmm.

And has a very strong, stable University of Virginia employer base. I mean, what is the likelihood of a drop, and what would be the percentage point difference between the two? So, I can't speak for the rating agencies.

There is a rather lengthy scorecard process that they go through. They typically look at your financials, your management, your economy, and all of those factors weigh in. Some of it is a mathematical equation.

To have a policy and not follow it is a fairly serious ding on management. Also, to exceed sort of financial matrix that are outside the norm of your AAA peers, it is a pretty strong belief of our financial advisor that we would be putting our credit at risk.

In terms of what is the difference on percentage, quite frankly, it depends. In a high interest environment, that could be significant dollars. In a low interest environment, it's maybe not so much, but it is definitely more of a status and a black eye.

To lose a AAA indicates something's not going correct. And so, financially, sure, it's part of the puzzle, but it also speaks to your credit worthiness and whether investors want to invest in your bonds or not.

Yeah. I've only ever seen that change like a half to one percentage point. So I'm wondering, we're not talking about 5% difference. We're talking about a half to a one. What percentage point are you talking about?

Like from a AAA to a AA, if that changed from hearing what you're saying. Like what would our interest rate change? Right. Yeah. But I hear what you're saying. The black eye potentially, but certainly 1% on $125 million- Oh, sure ...

is $12 million. That's right. So- Per project ... per project. 12.5. Yeah. Project. Drop five figures. I did the math wrong again. How can you do that? I can't. I feel so much pressure. That's why God made Excel, isn't it?

It is. It is. It is. Michael, did you have something? Not to minimize the importance of the bond rating piece, because that is very important. I think the other thing that worries me even more, not with this, but just overall in planning, is the affordability piece.

When we factor in our collective bargaining units, both on schools end, but also our city end, what's the point at which we have the cash flow to afford everything beyond even the rating? Yeah. Which it sounded like, I don't know, you talked about one of those pressures is even if we're below the 10% threshold, how affordable is it through the general fund?

Well, and it also speaks to your ability to do other things in the future. Because this is just based on the current plan that's in front of you, the things that you know about. We've talked about a lot of other things related to CAD and transit and affordable housing, all those things.

Those are big numbers, too. And so, when all of that's got to sort of fit in here. And so, that's sort of the slide about do you leverage it all for debt service? Do you leverage, do some combination of the two?

It does limit your flexibility to address other issues that you may have on the horizon, too. Chrissy, as I'm trying to understand this graph, does this mean that if we were in the, for the example at the bottom- If we were to issue $35 million worth of bonds in year one, what exactly are the blue lines that follow?

That's the cash. So it's this screen here. Your actual debt service payment goes down a little bit each year. Let's say for sake of example, your $12 million stays static, then as your debt service payment declines, then you have the additional cash to use for the projects.

I guess what I was conceiving of was the thought that we would issue certain number of, say, picking up $10 million worth of bonds in year one, $10 million worth of bonds in year two, and always have more revenue coming in each year so that we end up issuing bonds of, under that scenario, $200 million.

And that probably is the more realistic scenario because this is a state- We can't spend all $125 million in one year anyway. Correct. And we still have to comply with IRS regulations, which we have to spend the money in two years.

Okay. And so we would be issuing... There's a lot of what-ifs in this scenario. First of all, $12 million is not going to stay static. There's going to be some growth there. And so interest rates are going to fluctuate.

So there is some timing aspect of it. But whatever debt you issue, just keep in mind it lasts 20 years. Yeah. And so if we issue the debt in year 10, then when this revenue falls off, we've got 10 more years we've got to make up from the general fund.

Can you mention the you have to spend it within two years rule again, please? Yeah. So, if you sell tax-exempt bonds, there is an IRS regulation. Essentially, they don't want you to go sell bonds, put it in an account, and draw interest off of it.

And so there is a requirement that you must spend all of those proceeds within 24 months. And if you don't, then you have to remit what they call arbitrage or interest earnings back to the IRS. Mm. And have to be spent all the way, not like allocated to a project- Correct ...

that hasn't been paid out yet. Okay. So now, most of the time, that's why if you go back to this chart here, these numbers don't actually mat. If you were to go to the five-year CIP, like this year, I think the CIP has that our bonds will be $27 million.

We're actually only probably selling 20-ish because most of the time we're reimbursing ourselves for some expenses that have already happened. But we're also not going to sell bonds if the project hasn't started and we know we haven't spent those dollars, or won't spend those dollars within the two-year time frame.

Can I ask you an ignorant question? So I think you've answered this before, but I just want to double-check. So that assignment to capital does not include anything like bus fleets. That's not considered.

It's got to be building, right? So the only thing that's in the CIP that would be included here related to buses would be school buses. Yeah. And that's our match. Or no, I'm sorry. I have that backwards.

The only thing that's in the CIP here is related to CAT buses, but it is our match to the federal and state dollars. Okay. But the 1% cannot be, it can only be used for buildings, not bus fleets. That's not understanding.

Okay. Construction or major renovations. Okay. And then the earnings from the 1% cannot be invested. They can be invested. And actually, practically speaking, let's say we move forward, the referendum passes, council passes the ordinance.

We're probably looking at a year or two before we're even going to sell bonds related to that. So there is nothing that prevents us from investing those funds. And none of those numbers are factored in here for just these- Sure.

... looking at that. But yes. Okay. Any other questions? I think that's all I had. Okay. Just looking ahead at your immediate calendar, as we've referenced, July 20th is when we've proposed to put the resolution in front of council.

August 12th is an already scheduled joint city council and school board meeting for the purposes of talking about the school budget and as it relates to the city's overall budget. August 14th is the last day to receive the order from the circuit court to place the referendum on the ballot.

Again, that's that 81-day rule we talked about earlier. And then November 3rd is, of course, the general election. Sometime following November 3rd, the council would adopt an ordinance to actually adopt the tax, and then 120 days after that, the tax would go into effect.

So that's our chronology, that's our timeline from here going forward. So, for today's purposes, we're going to go to about 5:45 to kind of Flesh out questions and things like that. So I know we've been asking questions as we've kind of been presenting, but now we just kind of open it up to discussion and questions.

Because you all finished your formal presentation, so... I guess I'll-- First off, thanks for the invitation- Mm ... honored to be here. Appreciate that. But in preparation for the August 12th meeting, and if we're going to talk about this, I'm curious as to at what point council makes a decision, or what that looks like as far as which option you're going to go with, as far as the debt metrics, the debt service, how much.

Is that something you all have to vote on and decide? Or... Where is the final decision on that, Larry? This is part of the budget process. Yeah. That's where I was... Yeah. That's what I thought. Because it seems to me that, and correct me if I'm wrong, Mike, please, that that might impact what is being projected as far as projects- What- ...

and what those projects might look like, and so I don't know if that's going to go back to the working committee- Yeah ... to kind of flesh that out. Yeah. Let me put that in the other direction. Which way we go in terms of how that structure goes in terms of bonding versus cash, depends on-- As you say, it significantly influences how we structure the projects going forward, right?

Mm-hmm. If we rely more on the pay-as-you-go approach, if we're using more cash to pay for projects, that also says that we're going to-- implies that we're going to focus more on kind of the annualized set of funds and kind of multiple projects over time, as opposed to one or two larger projects, right?

Mm-hmm. If we're bonding more, that means we're probably going to go towards an approach of a fewer number of larger projects. Whereas, that program of smaller projects might be ones that we can actually pay for, mostly out of cash over time going forward.

That make sense? It does make sense, and I guess I lean in to you all- Yeah ... you know, to kind of present the options to the school board and to council- Right ... so that we can see what that looks like, and then weighing the needs of the schools- Right ...

you know, and what those projects are. And the financial constraints presented by the city- Right ... and trying to match those two things up into a funded school capital program. Mm-hmm. So the CIP that we have now, that I'm on the committee and we meet periodically, at public works, does that reflect the school's priority for school projects?

Or there may be... So, the committee itself, we did talk and introduced this wish list, or this new prioritization list, the last time we met. So I think some of those things are, but aren't necessarily showing up on the spreadsheet yet.

Right. Does that answer your question? It- I think that the work that was presented today is the staff working group that was composed of staff from both city's capital development side as well as school staff.

Sustainability and budget have also been involved in that. And that working group would likely continue their work using this information with feedback from council and the school board to kind of work towards what a work program that would look like that we can then bring into the CIP.

Right. So maybe Chris, if you can help me. If we're collecting, let's say, $10 million a year in additional taxes to fund projects and let's say we choose one of the projects that's $50 million, and we have to use it within two years.

So how are we-- Because I'm picturing myself now trying to explain this to someone like in the grocery store, in the street, you know, to be able to do it, because we're already starting to get, you or me as well, emails like, "I'm already taxed." Right.

You know? Enough. So I'm just trying to understand the two year rule and then saving up for these big projects that very few of them- Would it be helpful to use, as an example, the middle school project, which was just over a $90 million project?

Yeah. Like, how many bond insurances did we do for that? I think we did two, but we only ended up issuing about something million on the middle school because we got the state grant. Mm-hmm. Schools also contributed some of their gain sharing to that project.

Mm-hmm. But to answer your question, we would time the bond sale for when the project was ready or shovel ready. So I would offer that rather than trying to back into the numbers, that you talk about the plan and what you want the construction plan to be.

If looking at a $150 million high school renovation is where you want to be, then that would be where we would start. And then we know that we have some options for affordability. We could come back to you with other plans.

Obviously, this 1% is not-Not going to afford you that whole project either way. Mm-hmm. But I think it's better to talk about what you want that plan to be, and then we can make the financing work. I don't want you to get hung up on, we can only issue $35 million worth of bonds.

That's not what I'm saying. This is based on details that we know today. It's making a lot of assumptions about things that will or won't change. And so I think that what is a good takeaway is that probably it's most effective to do some mix between bonds and PAYG.

But I think that depends on which projects you pick. Because if you're talking about a $150 million project, that's probably it. If you're talking about a $30 million project, or even a $60 million project, you probably got multiples of those that you can do.

Mm-hmm. So I think I would suggest that that's probably a better discussion at this point. Mm-hmm. And so it's not that we have to spend the money within two years of collecting the tax, it's within two years of issuing the bond.

We-- Correct. Those are two separate- We have to spend the bond proceeds. Yeah. Yeah. I would add too, with the conversation about the timing and all those nuances, when you do a larger project like the high school, and we experienced this with the middle school, and you especially will experience this in a highly competitive construction bid environment.

But we've even experienced this with our small summer renovations. We are very good, and I should say we really need to give credit to public works and Mike's team, at designing projects that have add alternates, bid adds, and doing it in phases.

Because the fact is, you have to prepare that on bid day you may be looking at bids that aren't in alignment with what your financial plans are. And so with something like the middle school, to make it really concrete, I mean, that whole fine arts piece was up in the air until what felt like the 12th hour, whether or not we were going to be able to do it.

But we knew that we had a plan where we could proceed with everything else, whether that got to go or not. And when you're looking at a very, what will likely be a very similar process for the high school, where you're going to have to build a wing that you can move and use as swing space, and then you're chunking that large project into phases that allow you to not only deal with the nuances of how the financing works and the timing requirements and all that fun stuff that Chrissy gets to deal with, but also it allows you to be responsive to whatever the realities are in the market when you're actually going out there.

Mike, you could say more about that. Yeah, I think that's mostly accurate. I think, in the office I like to call them valves. Yeah. And you, some of you will remember that we came to you when we got bids in for the middle school, and the question that we brought to council was: Do we open or close this valve?

Meaning, do we do this additive bid item that we've got pricing for, or do we trim the project down? In that case, we chose to accept all the add bids and do all the things that we had designed. That was maybe a different fiscal situation than we're going to be in when we do some of these projects.

But, that is the flexibility we can add to the project. And I do really like phasing large projects, because it gives you flexibility going forward. There are unknowns that you might not see coming. And it's also good to have discrete project beginnings and endings, so that you can mark the milestone and say, "Okay, this much at least is done." And then we can go at it again.

But we don't ever do anything like, we'll commit to half of the CHS project and two other elementary school projects, like we'd like them to be full packages? I know that's different than phasing, but...

I mean, we've never done that in the past, doesn't mean we couldn't. I think it's really a question of if there was something at CHS that was just hypothetically you love the new learning space idea, but the rest of the school seems fine.

So you would say, "Okay, we'll do the new learning space. We won't do the rest of the school interior upgrades and all that stuff." Trick is to find a discrete project that you could end and be done with, right?

Right. So in addition. Don't tell my high school junior that I just said that. Okay, well, just take that off the record. Well, it's a completely hypothetical point. But, yeah, you try and leave as many options available.

Things change quickly, both in the world of finance and in the world of running cities, so. So I had one more question of clarification. Lisa had-- I asked a question, Lisa was like, "Well, it depends on what..." As I understood you, Lisa, it's like your all's priority may determine which one of these options we choose to follow as far as funding when we do our budget?

So I think we have prioritized them. Mm-hmm. And there's a spreadsheet, and I'm sure- Right ... Lisa, you presented it to them. But I think we can maybe bring that back in August, would be helpful. Well- Based on the committee, and based on what that list looks like right now, CHS has kind of jumped to the top of that list.

And there's some very important reasons, and I think hearing again from Dr. Gurley and Dr. Isley as far as the instructional piece. I think for those of you who have had the opportunity to walk through the middle school, incredible, right?

State of the art. Mm-hmm. And if you haven't, we will set up an opportunity for you to do that. But then if you go and walk to the high school, walk through the high school. So, that's kind of the why.

Mm-hmm. And there's more to it as far as why that has jumped. Right. And what we might be recommending. But again, we are at kind of the mercy of the funding. And so having this conversation, and I think- Putting it back to the committee to let them work through this with the funding options and what-- I mean, to- The reason that I ask that is because we probably won't get into this until January, February, March, and really, is it April?

Or March is when we have those weekly meetings. I just wasn't sure if that's when you were talking about when council is going to talk about that. Is that too late or for the timing of everything? I'm maybe going out on a limb a little bit, but I think we'll need to carry some of this conversation forward at your next meeting, the next joint meeting with council.

On the 12th. I think, yeah, the charge of that working group was to put together a financially unconstrained plan for the modernization of our school facilities. Kind of reasonable. You heard the choices that Mike described where we didn't go crazy.

It was reasonable, but it was still financially unconstrained. And now the question is, now that we understand the financial constraints, where do the priorities lie? And that's a discussion that I think has to happen with both the school board and the city council, because those financial constraints as presented, as we understand them, say you can do one, maybe two big projects, or you can do a multitude of smaller projects, and smaller being relative because we're still talking 25, 30 million for most of those smaller projects.

But that's a prioritization exercise. Which way do we want to go? Where's the priority? I do wonder, could there be some modeling in that August meeting with the preliminary draft plan to see if we do these smaller, then this is what financial impact and bond impact looks like, or if we go in the other direction, could we see some financial modeling with those so that there's more of a conversation to see what the impact really is?

I'd also like to say, I don't have a card, but I'm Amanda Corman Smulczik. I'm the Director of Community Relations for the schools. And I know that for us, it's also important, obviously, in passing a referendum, this is about engaging our voters to understand why this is such a good tool and what the significant needs are.

So really bringing everybody on board to the needs portion. And then we're talking about solutions, but I think that we're interested in a community engagement process that would include involving citizens in what are the solutions that are most meaningful to you, and what do you want to see, while also sharing that this tool enables us to ask a lot less of citizens in the long term, financially.

I know there's a piece of this referendum that we talk about sales taxes. Some percentage of it is funded not by residents at all, but by visitors to the city. And I do thank you for bringing that up.

I wanted us to take a step back because we're talking, and hopefully this does pass. But to your point, Mayor Wade, that you guys are getting emails already, and people sharing concerns, asking questions, and I think it is important that we as a school division and as the city are sensitive to the fact of what people are asking in just the times and the financial impacts or their worries or fears, but to understand, again, the needs of the schools, and why this is important.

And to Ms. Smulczik's point, just how having this tool, which we've been asking for and fighting for at the General Assembly for years and years and years, now we have the opportunity to do it, and how does this benefit the community?

So, council, do you think it would be beneficial for Amanda to work with Afton to put together some talking points, or everyone's feel comfortable with where we are? As far as explaining it to the public, if we- I think we're not quite ready for the talking points yet.

Yeah. Because I don't know what they would be. I would like to have policy drive the talking points and not the other way around. I think we could have-- I know Ms. Smulczik's developing a fact sheet for us, just generally, like how did we get here?

What was the process? And again, what are the needs? What are the school facility needs that we know about? Without presenting a plan for solving them that is fully baked, although we want to get to that point, that's certainly something that we have.

And just even bringing the resolution on July 20th, perhaps you'd like something to just have talking points about that. And I have already had a conversation with Afton, so we're in the next few months.

Well, I think one of the things we have to determine, and there's already kind of a inertia towards one of these options, which is, is this replacing anything or is it new funding? It's a new funding.

But that's- Well, that's a decision we have to make, is do we lower something else to accommodate the fiscal stress on our community? Oh, I see. Technically, that is something that we have to determine in the next budget cycle is, do we reduce something else in order to accommodate this?

But then it's directed towards school funding especially. So the inertia is that it's for new, but that's something that we're going to have to confirm and that's a question that the public is going to ask and has been asking already is, we're already spending this much.

It costs me this much to go out to eat, and now we have to add more. When we do have the capacity, technically, we have the ability to reduce a lever somewhere else. So that's something we're going to need to make sure we're all on the same page about going forward.

I'm just bringing that up to clarify. I don't want that to be a question that someone asks later, "Well, why didn't you guys talk about that?" Just kind of- Mm-hmm ... broaching that. I would think that it would be useful, and it doesn't need to happen before August 12th, but perhaps if it could be developed before then, it might be good, is to have a sense of, okay, the next project is Walker.

When is it going to start? When is it going to be finished? Just sort of the Gantt diagram of, okay, now we're doing this one, and then we're doing this one, and then we're doing this one. Even if we don't necessarily know what all of those are going to be, at least to be able to say, "Folks, we can tell you we've got a plan.

Walker is the first step," and after that, for example, I had always assumed that the logical next step was to start working on elementary schools that have been revised because of what has happened with Walker and Charlottesville Middle School and so on.

It would be nice if we could- Have a menu. So let them know- Have a menu, or to give a sense that we actually know what we're doing, and we're not just going to make it up three years from now. Yes. We have that over here.

Yeah, I think what, it's very colorful. Yes. We've seen that. I think the difference is that that is TBD. The order of things is TBD. The things are all concrete items we would like to see. I don't remember having seen- It's in the packet Packet ...

for today. Sure. I think it was the one online. But that is selling people on the timeline instead of selling people on, these are the things we could do, and we haven't determined the timeline yet. So first one- I think some of that, yeah.

Yeah, I think that- My daughter, you know, has- Yeah ... and can get for you all. Want to get that? Definitely to bring it. I guess to me, the big question is, I'm fully in support moving forward with the sales tax referendum this November.

It's been a long journey to get here. And no matter what, we know even with the sales tax, there's going to be more needs than there exists capacity to meet those needs. So we might as well move forward with it.

But I guess the big question is just adding up the school projects, or the elementary school projects without KTEC and including the unfunded part of Walker, that's 255 million without cost escalations that may occur.

So if we're talking about 150, and that's already above the sales tax revenue, so if we're talking about 150 to 200 million above this new sales tax revenue, I just don't know if we're literally going to be able to afford that.

We've increased taxes multiple times. We have among the highest meals tax and lodging tax rates in the state. We have room to not-- We're still not among the highest on real estate tax, but that comes with legitimate trade-offs.

We still haven't incorporated the full cost of collective bargaining on the city or schools in into our budget. As you all very well know, you have very legitimate needs for unfunded positions that are also not incorporated into our budget.

We have staffing positions on our end we need. So again, I just literally don't know if 150 to 200 million above the sales tax is possible. So it may be a choice between, is it the elementary school portfolio, or is it the high school in this 20-year period?

And just from our last discussion among all of council, my understanding was that the elementary portfolio made more sense as a higher priority, just because at least at that time, it sounded like a lot of the HVAC systems likely needed a full replacement, or it may be just a good idea to do a full replacement.

As well as the fact it seemed like those were the schools that had the biggest deficiencies in terms of like, no cafeteria, no school-wide meeting space. They're the oldest. Right, and they're the oldest.

And those are the ages which are most critical for the achievement gap. But that was the conversation at that time. Admittedly, I haven't been part of any conversations about the high school, so honestly, that's just my perspective from having heard the past conversation and nothing about the high school.

But again, that to me is the biggest outstanding question. If we can't do it all, what do we do? Okay. I have a couple other questions that are a little potpourri style from random parts of the different packets we have.

One of the things listed on the packet was the Rose Hill entrance concept. What's that? The CELC move back to the- That was version B of the Charlottesville Early Learning Center concept. So, that was the terraced scheme.

Ah. Sorry. The Rose Hill is the new scheme. That was the Gentry Lane scheme. So that's version C. Version A. Okay. Rose Hill is their front entrance as opposed to Gentry. Okay. Got it. Thank you. And the renovation of the Performing Arts Center at the high school, what is the need for that, and what does that look like?

Just separately from the rest of it. Mostly, it's carpet and seats. There's also some lighting upgrades. Some of the technical lighting stuff, it doesn't work right. Mm-hmm. So replacing that. But the big cost item, the cost driver there, is new seats.

Those seats are loud. They're old. Yeah. And carpeting. It's a lot of- Yeah, yeah. It is a lot of carpet there. And then, this is separate from what we're talking about, but related, do we have any more idea of what the $43 million UVA has for early learning centers going towards?

What does that look like? Are we factoring- Yes ... do we have anyone we're talking to about that? That has nothing to do with us. That money is not allocated to- I know it's not going to us, but how is that going to affect what we're providing, what our needs, and- Mm ...

is that going to pull certain kids out of our learning center? Is that for just staff, and it could be from anywhere? Do we know how that's going to affect what we need to provide? I know it's not going towards us believe me, but um- I believe it's zero to five, and it's 100 students total.

Yeah. Yep. Yeah. So just- We don't know ... how does that affect our landscape is really the question. Okay. And then, just because it feels like the conversation about the high school is kind of fresher to us than the rest of the things that we've been talking about, can we get a little more background on who's asking for it, where did the ideas come from?

What's the plan? The students are coming out of the middle school for the first time, the completed middle school for the first time, next year. So, are we planning on collecting data for performance once they're in the...

Does it change from the shiny new school to the as is high school? Is that actually going to make a difference or not? I think that's stuff we need to consider before spending a lot of money on this. So just a little more background about the genesis of this project I think would be helpful- Sure ...

if you don't mind. I can say that- Oh, was that a question? I'm handwriting the questions. Yeah. I'm going to say a brief thing now if you want to do a more extensive one later. So when you-- The people who lead instruction for our school division- Mm-hmm ...

as they've spent more and more time, and we've now lived with the new middle school for a year, um, and just, I know this is going to sound like a fuzzy answer, but the feeling that you get and understanding what they see with how instruction works in those spaces versus seeing and experiencing and living what is at the high school right now, it's just a very stark difference in reality that folks who actually lead instruction should speak to, and they will, I'm sure.

So to your point, that's a question that Michael told us was sort of brewing around. I would also say, though, back to the old tipsy thing when we were just starting to try to get momentum with lifting our old facilities.

When we started and we were like, "Okay, go into Summit," which was Clark back then, "What would a current educational space look like?" Right? We always had the guiding principle that if the project in a school was going to be to lift a grade level, because we knew we didn't have enough money or enough time to do more than one grade level in a summer, it had to be the fourth grade.

It had to be the highest grade level in that building, which was fourth at the time. Because you didn't want kiddos going from a really great, or a lot more light or different features in second or third grade or kinder, and then going like the next year, "Wait a minute, this room isn't as nice as the one I was in before." And so that's just this fundamental guiding principle that we had all the way back into the 2017, 2018 timeframe when we started trying to do these little million-dollar summer lifts.

There was just this idea that you don't want, as people, and even for kids, it's just that feeling of like, "Oh, I'm stepping down because I was in this really great space and now I'm stepping back." But much more important than that is the instructional piece and the talking about collaborative learning versus what I'll call traditional sit and get classrooms, which is what our, the time period our high school was designed in.

There are some great spaces in our high school, but they're or the atriums and the common areas. That's where all the big windows are. The classrooms are just a totally different story for the most part.

I was a CHS grad- Oh, you guys- ... so I know. Yeah ... they have the cavernous, feel like when you go into some of those rooms off the media center where there's just low light and you're just... And so the block walls.

Mm-hmm. I'd like to just add to that, that the pivot to thinking about CHS first also, or it comes from the current Charlottesville City Schools strategic plan. One of the main pillars is about creating life-ready graduates.

And I think that you see a lot of shifting focus from just thinking about helping kids get to college, to the acknowledgement that not all kids want to go to college, and ensuring that we're strengthening the pathways for other routes.

And so that's, so Kim is referencing the interior upgrades of the rest of the building, and then in terms of talking about the new addition that would support career and technical education. Another piece that we just haven't mentioned is that Dr.

Girley is interested in the creation of an ROTC program. She's going to stay there. Yeah. And so those are two examples that really reflect how wanting to ensure that those students who aren't headed to a four-year college feel supported starting from ninth grade through 12th grade.

And the acquisition of K Tech and ensuring the success of K Tech for the future was a significant part of that, ensuring our students would continue to have access to that. But as folks are saying, it's about 11 different trades that are served there, and it requires students to be there for half of their school day.

And it requires them to want to choose to invest in one of those 11 pieces, whereas we know there's a huge, much larger piece ... future focus of students that isn't served by those needs, and that that's what we envision for CHS.

And then I'll also, because I'm a PR person, I also just have to say that we know that CHS is a symbol of the city, right? I think that it's the pride of the city, I think in many ways, right? That being a Black Knight is a pride of the city.

And I think that now that we see what's possible at CMS, we know we want that for the city. So it's all legitimately and genuinely very important. This is a little bit of a rabbit hole, but obviously literacy and numeracy is critical, not just for those who are going to college, but to be successful in the workforce, even if you don't go to a four-year college or even associate's degree.

As we all know, I think about 40% of Black students pass statewide reading standards, about 90% for white students. The achievement gap is massive, and those critical years are K through 3, and after the third grade, it really starts to compound and become harder to solve.

All of which is to say, do the existing elementary school facilities for those K through 5 grades, are they sufficient in terms of the ability to have programming that's best serving that kind of need?

Because I know that legitimate need exists at the high school, but is it also met at the elementary schools? So when we have the conversations in our work group about the programming piece, which again, my colleague, Dr.

Isley, leads a lot of that conversation. When you hear us talk about the elementary schools, it's more about, yes, we want to lift all those restrooms, although we definitely need to prioritize all of the CHS restrooms over the remaining elementary restrooms.

It's about the lack of a security visitor vestibule, lack of natural light, all those things. I can honestly say that in those conversations, you don't hear the same level of concern or any level of concern necessarily about how our elementary instruction works in concert with the buildings.

It's not to say that there aren't areas for improvement. Lack of natural light in some of the buildings, those '60s, '70s era thing, that's a real thing. But it is definitely, as I listen to my colleagues who lead instruction, it's nowhere near.

It's just not the same level of concern, if any concern about the instructional piece. It's more about those specific things that we've listed on those two buildings, and that's where those conversations have been.

And we've talked deeply about all these aspects of every building. How is that going to change with fifth grade moving? So you make a good point because that collaborative instruction breakouts does play more of a factor with the older students, and correctly, we're moving the fifth graders in.

So again, I feel like- The school in elementary school- Our own school's going to get a little older, right? So I would think yes, with the fifth graders- And more crowded, I would think, right? Well, no.

What we did, we're living this right now, so we took preschool out and put fifth grade in, and we've moved the grade levels around within the buildings. This is the summer of reconfiguration. A lot of moving parts.

But we basically swapped preschool classrooms for fifth grade classrooms, although we had to reconfigure within the building and bump grades around, but it wasn't a space issue. How do the numbers work out?

How many fifth graders versus how many pre-K, as we're swapping? So when we did the elementary rezoning that we did a little while back, we factored in reconfiguration, and we ensured that we have adequate space in all of our elementaries, and all public schools right now are being helped by the declining birth rate, which is across the nation.

So, we don't have capacity concerns this time. The only one that I'm still keeping a close eye on is honestly Jackson Via with the South First Street opening. Mm-hmm. I was surprised the consultant's work didn't reflect a need to do more moving there.

But we also have some special needs programs there, the LEAP program, which we had some flexibility to move classrooms to other elementary schools to balance out capacity. In all honesty, managing capacity across six elementary schools in 10 square miles is not for the faint of heart because there's a lot of movement going on in a small area, and getting it to land right and maintain our neighborhood elementary schools is challenging, but so far, we're okay.

And capacity's not really a feature of these conversations we're having either with this. We clearly have to be mindful of it. And if you followed our redistricting work from a year or so ago, really a lot of that's about the intensity of high-density development around Summit, our school on a postage stamp, and then the domino effect that that sets into play across the city, because Summit simply cannot hold what is happening in relation to the affordable housing developments and other just housing developments, higher density developments that are going on in that particular zone.

And so that caused us to happen. So we just got a few more minutes. Jen, did you have any comments? We're going to have another opportunity. This was- A good- A good starting off point to get some idea of what we're doing.

I know we have a timeline, but we just have a few more minutes for today. And then we're going to talk about, I don't think you heard this, Michael and Lloyd, maybe you did, but we're going to spend just a few minutes to talk about different projects.

I mean, our committees that we're on. We have two minutes per- Yeah. Yeah, so. Well, I don't have anything else, except... Oh, sorry, go ahead. Oh, the questions I have are really about can we get more visibility on the rubric of the prioritization for schools?

Because I'm not sure I know what our goal is Is the goal to close an achievement gap or is it to get more work-ready students in the next 20 years? Because we're thinking of this in a vacuum, we don't have any idea what AI impacts any of this algorithm.

We don't have a sense of what an environmental diaspora will look like. There's so many unknowns at the moment. Mm-hmm. So if we could get a sense of what are we aiming for with the redesign or with the priority list and what the rubric is for how things pop to the top, it would help us.

I think it would help us understand what we're really aiming for. Because I think on a base level, investing full stop in elementary, as Michael's saying, is statistically your better achievement gap priority.

But if we're saying that's not the goal of redoing these schools, it's a different goal, then it's easier to frame it that way. And so I just need some guidance there. I think both can be true. One is about instruction, one is about facilities.

And so can we continue to work on robust instructional goals and continue Dr. Gurley and his team to do that work? Yes. And we can also build state-of-the-art facilities that reflect where we see a trend in better outcomes.

We are seeing a trend in better outcomes, if we go back and look at some of that data from last year in our younger grades. So we are seeing the achievement gap, some changes in those K through three spaces, even up through fifth grade right now.

And so I think both can run true and both are for the strategic plan. Yeah. And that's reassuring that it's a win-win when you're investing like this, right? I think we're going to have to decide, but who goes first?

Right. And so that piece of the rubric would be helpful to know. So- Don't ask Theo Fisk. He's going to tell you the high school because the floor drives him crazy. But for real, it is hard to know. We're going to have to make a really tight decision based on the lack of cash.

And so anything that can help make an informed decision that way would be helpful, knowing that we're going to win no matter what we invest in, because it will create those benefits. Yeah. Yeah. And I've been trying to, and I wasn't ignoring you, Natalie, when you were talking.

I was writing your question down. That's fine. To try and prepare us so that we can- Yeah ... bring some of this back to our next meeting together, so. So just any last question here before we go into our recap of different committees and things that we sit at?

So, I think we got some good questions, started this dialogue, I think we'll be prepared. The joint meeting on August the 12th will be fruitful, so. James, before we go, did any other questions y'all have to wrap this up before we- I think we're good.

Okay. You're welcome to stick around and hear our recap though. Jen, I think that you said you didn't have any meetings. Yeah. Natalie reminded me I did have one- Okay ... that was not with one of the other of you.

So most of my commissions took a summer recess for June or July, and the one we did work on was the planning and development work group, worked with the Sterling Avenue neighbors on their sidewalk project.

So we're working together to determine how to best meet their needs, for safer streets and, for all users and within the constraints of funding and- Limited resources there as well ... limited resources.

So that's an ongoing conversation that we're working on with public works and the neighbors themselves, and has been pretty productive so far. Natalie? Sure. I had the pleasure of joining Michael at the Faithville Habitat for Humanity dedication.

Mm-hmm. Three families got homes in the neighborhood, and they had a lovely ceremony at Faithville Park. I went on the neighborhood walk. It was Locust Grove last month. This weekend it's going to be a meeting over at UVA, and we're doing Lewis Mountain neighborhood.

I met with Delegate Colson. We talked about some state advocacy opportunities. Went to the planning development meeting with Councilor Fleischer to work on the Sterling project with those neighbors. It's been a great partnership so far.

I attended the decarbonization study webinar, and the meeting last night that C3 hosted in this room, with the consultant to provide opportunity for community feedback and updates on how that's going.

And then at MPO, we got Smart Scale and Stars project pipeline updates, as well as updates from both city and county staff on what's going on in our region. And then had the pleasure of joining our mayor and some other folks at the Way Way Tenango events last week, the 50th Downtown Mall birthday party in the heat.

And then, it was great to see the single spectacular fireworks. That's my- Oh, that's busy ... end on a high note. Yeah. Roy? Well, the only meeting that of a regular board commission I've attended in the last few weeks was Albemarle Water and Sewer Authority, where it was largely just sort of a check-in on On the kinds of things that they're doing, and I'm not sure there's any great news that hasn't been out public in the world about the construction projects that are going on.

Another meeting that I was involved with, I'm on the Virginia Municipal League Legislative Committee, and we had a statewide Zoom meeting on June 24th. Unfortunately, it was almost entirely devoted to what the heck's the budget going to be?

We were, at that point, still a day or two away from knowing whether there was even going to be a budget. And so I was trying to rack my brain to think, was there anything that we actually talked about that's still a live issue today to report back on, and not really.

I also enjoyed the 50th birthday party and the snaky thing that was going down the mall. That was kind of cool. I'm not quite sure I understood the light show at the end. I thought it was more an homage to the vape shops on the mall these days than anything else, but it was fun.

That's good. Yeah. Wonderful. For boards and commissions, CRHA has obviously had very fun events recently. But the CRHA board is interested in moving forward with creating a subcommittee to put out an RFP for an organizational assessment of CRHA, looking at other housing agencies, other housing authorities, what can they do to improve?

Where is customer service and administrative capacity lacking? So hopefully, that will be good. Local Energy Alliance Program, LEAP, have also, in fun times, having new programs at the state level will be coming on later this year.

But funding through the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law and Inflation Reduction Act programs have been cut, so they're still really trying to figure out basically how to get bridge capital between now and when those new programs will begin.

Finance committee met in addition to the recent meeting we had about the inclusionary zoning tax revenue that will be coming in and possibly suspend it. Our most recent one was about potential financial impacts of collective bargaining on the city end, not all of which we've budgeted for yet, and are going to be substantial going forward.

And there's a regional housing partnership meeting. Nothing too substantive or new was discussed there, honestly. That's about it. Yeah, so it's a lot as well. Israel, we were talking, I was remembering just different things just over the last few weeks.

Had a meeting with the executive director of the center after Tai Chi. One of my Tai Chi classes helped me. And had a meeting this week with the Climate Collaborative. And you went to the dinner last night?

Or yeah. Had meetings, I'm on a committee with the National League of Cities. And also next week, meeting with the Virginia Municipal League. I'm on an infrastructure committee with them, and we're meeting next week.

Of course, I met with Katrina. Today, I had a meeting with the Chamber Policy Meeting, where we got an update from Katrina and Creed. Had the Java meeting. A big convention, Charlottesville Albemarle convention and tourism board meeting, and had a great time with our friends from Guatemala.

They safely got back on Monday. They came here during the hottest spell that we've had- It was a hot summer ... but they still were smiling. Absolutely. Yeah. But we-- Which changed some things so that he can go back and cool off and rest.

And he liked the fact that they were at Hampton Inn, that everything was pretty close, whether it was Carlton Hall, Downtown Mall, or everything was close. Except for when we went down to Scottsville on the- The fourth ...

the fourth, yeah. So they got full Americana. And- Did I say that loud? No. Sorry. So- You take them to the Buena Vista. Yeah. Had a city county meeting where we talked about the follow-up for the chamber and chamber and chamber visit that we had to Chapel Hill, where we're looking at how we're going to follow up on those things.

And I think the public should know that Natalie and I meet with the chair and the vice chair of the Albemarle County Board to supervisors, Ned and Fred, on a monthly basis, where we talk about issues.

And so that we did that. That's great. Yes. And I did a lot of other, but met with countless constituents. Mm-hmm. But I think it's healthy that we do this so the people know that in addition to the two meetings that we have on Mondays, and now this meeting, that it's tons of other things that we do where we really are getting down to the granular level.