Nevada County Grand Jury
• 2004-2005
Lessons Learned Reason for Investigation Citizens have voiced concerns and newspaper articles have reported on
⚠️ Aviso de traducción: Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
⚠️ Este contenido ha sido traducido automáticamente. El texto original en inglés es la versión oficial. La traducción puede contener errores.
Findings and Recommendations 10 findings
F1
From September 2001 to March 2002, activities took place in the community to discuss the Bond election. The District Facility Improvement Plan and drawings were used to promote Measure A in many of these informational meetings.
No recommendations for this finding
F2
The District plan showed the placement of the competition pool and performing arts building located on the recently acquired ten-acre parcel fronting Magnolia Road. However, cost estimates were based on construction of the competition pool being on the existing campus adjacent to the gym.
Related Recommendations (1)
R4
The District should sponsor and conduct studies and public forums to plan any future expansion of needed facilities. Meetings pertaining to BRHS should address appropriate use of the ten-acre parcel on Magnolia Road.
F3
The ballot and proposition language of Measure A for improvements at BRHS stated, construct and furnish an addition to BRHS, including a new performing arts building and aquatic center. The budget in the District Facility Improvement Plan however, identified the improvements as pool facility, competition pool, community pool, aquatic center, performing arts auditorium and performing arts theater.
Related Recommendations (1)
R1
The Nevada Joint Union High School District (District) should ensure that future campaign information presented to the public is supported by accurate, comprehensive and complete data.
F4
Of the $15 million provided by Measure A, $7 million was allocated to construct and furnish an addition to Bear River High School, including a new performing arts building and aquatic center.
No recommendations for this finding
F5
After the voters approved Measure A, District officials learned that finishing the BRHS project on the ten-acre parcel could cost as much as $2 million more than budgeted. These costs were largely due to extensive grading and the compliance requirements in the Americans with Disabilities Act. The District made the decision to locate the competition pool and performing arts building to the rear of the existing campus. This action had been recommended by the design committee on October 21, 2002. Announcement of the relocation occurred at a public forum in February, 2003.
Related Recommendations (1)
R3
The District should heed the lessons learned in this episode, applicable to new construction on any campus and be more thorough in estimating construction costs, especially when the data are for use in supporting a bond election.
F6
The project design committee requested the District place a job sign on site to inform the community of the project s progress. This did not occur.
Related Recommendations (1)
R2
The District should alleviate misunderstandings with the community by making a greater effort for full, open and timely communications.
F7
The District was aware of previous lead deposits at the site found during the construction of the library prior to 2002. The levels were within the safety requirements set by the Department of Toxic Substances Control in effect at that time. New and more stringent standards resulted in the required removal of lead contaminated soil at the performing arts building site and arsenic contaminated soil found in test borings at the competition pool site.
No recommendations for this finding
F8
From the date of the Measure A Bond proposal to present, the District has experienced top level administrative turnover.
No recommendations for this finding
F9
Construction of the performing arts building was finally initiated in March 2005 with completion expected in 15 months. Construction of the competition pool is anticipated to begin in May 2005 with completion expected in 9 months. The facilities will be available to the public when not in use for school activities and outside of school hours.
No recommendations for this finding
F10
The Grand Jury was unable to locate the District s Bear River High School Master Plan. CONCLUSIONS
Related Recommendations (1)
R5
The District should ensure that there is a current Master Plan for Bear River High School that includes the ten acre parcel. RESPONSE REQUIRED Nevada Joint Union High School District Board of Trustees June 20, 2005
Conclusions 8
-
CL1 Page 3The architectural renderings used in the campaign to pass Measure A led members of the community to conclude that the new facilities were to be placed on the ten-acre property fronting Magnolia Road.
-
CL2 Page 3The budget estimate for the competition pool was displayed in the District Facility Improvement Plan with a budget notation school only, adjacent to existing gym . The notation was not obvious and was generally overlooked. No budget estimate for a pool located on the ten-acre parcel was presented. No plot map or drawing or discussion in the plan depicted a competition pool located on the main campus. This appears to have resulted in confusion and misinterpretation among the south county community.
-
CL3 Page 3The lack of consistent terminology, e.g. competition pool, community pool and pool facility in regards to facility improvement at BRHS also added to confusion and unclear community expectations.
-
CL4 Page 3The placement of the competition pool on the existing campus near the gymnasium will allow for use of present locker room facilities and eliminate the need for new team rooms and toilet facilities. Locating the performing arts facility adjacent to existing classrooms will provide additional waiting and changing space for performers.
-
CL5 Page 3The necessary removal of contaminated soil at the project site resulted in additional expenses and a delay in construction.
-
CL6 Page 3The communication between District and the community regarding the project s status was less than desirable. Lack of full, open and timely communication with the public regarding budgets and plan changes caused misunderstandings.
-
CL7 Page 3The turnover of top level administrators in the District contributed to less than full attention being given to public relations and communications.
-
CL8 Page 4The new performing arts and competition pool facilities will enhance the educational program at BRHS. The decisions made by the District administration and the Board in changing the locations of these facilities to the main campus save substantial money for the District with benefits to the students.
No Responses Found 1
Government entities assigned to respond to this report. No response documents have been linked in our database.
Nevada Joint Union High School District
School District