Executive Director Jason Watts provided background on the electrical work for the Upland site. The site was previously a fully operational non-public school and was expected to require minimal work. However, significant updates are needed for student occupancy and safety.

The proposed contract includes both necessary and future-upgrade work:

Immediate Needs:

• Installation of motion and wall sensors for lighting.
• Replacement of non-functioning or inadequate lighting, especially in hallways.
• Upgrading of exit signs to meet current fire code requirements.

Future/Optional Work:

• Replacement of incandescent bulbs with LED lighting for energy efficiency.
• Potential exterior lighting upgrades.

Jason stated that while the board is being asked to approve the full contract amount, only approximately one-third of the work is expected to be done immediately, with additional work phased in as needed. The work needed for school reopening will be completed before students return, and the remainder of the contract has no expiration and can be utilized as needs arise. Jason confirmed that the lighting upgrades will reduce electrical load and costs, not increase them.

Board President Charles Friedrichs asked if the we will be able to get city approval for this work, and Jason stated that city approval is not required for the interior lighting upgrades.

Charles also asked if there is any impact on the panel box or electrical system design. Jason explained that the upgrade to LED lighting will reduce the electrical load.

Board member Pete Watson asked since this is a phased project, is the total amount of $150,728.31 guaranteed for all phases? Are change orders possible? Jason explained that there are built-in contingencies in the contract to account for cost adjustments if necessary.

Jason Watts explained that the scope of this project includes patching, sanding, and painting every hallway, wall, and room on the second floor, addressing varying levels of damage. The quote also includes carpet repair in a few rooms and remediation of plywood-covered windows and other facility damage.

It was noted that this contract was awarded to Stains and Co. following a competitive bidding process. Although BDI (the contractor currently building the Riverside site) also submitted a bid, Stains and Co. submitted a significantly lower quote and was available to begin work immediately—key factors given the goal to complete interior work by August 1st.

The contract includes a $50,000 contingency fund to address any additional needs. Even with this contingency, the total remains under the competing bid. Exterior work will be limited to adding color accents in Scholarship Prep branding; the existing cream color will remain unless there are areas with severe discoloration.

Board Secretary Maribel Toan asked to clarify what is being painted. Jason answered that we are only adding the colored accent blocks, not repainting the entire exterior, unless there are areas with significant discoloration.

Pete Watson asked how close the total of these action items compare to our estimated budget. Jason explained that originally, the budget was much lower before we assessed the facility condition. Our current facilities improvement budget is $500,000. The projected cost for today’s presented items is around $400,000. We hope to remain under budget by deferring some non-essential work, such as electrical lighting changes.

The Board discussed entering into a contract with Bay Alarm to provide enhanced security services at the new campus site. Bay Alarm was the existing vendor through the previous property owner, and the organization has ongoing familiarity with them through other sites. The previous owner removed all existing security cameras (interior and exterior), requiring a full reassessment of camera placement and installation.

Security Enhancements include:

• Installation of interior and exterior turret cameras.
• Implementation of monitored dome cameras which include an AI-generated audio warning followed by a live verbal intervention and police notification if necessary.
• Four speaker-equipped cameras, two monitored domes, and two monitored dual sensors.
• Coverage will include the full play area and exterior grounds, allowing visibility from the front desk across the entire campus.

Additional Infrastructure:

• The facility currently lacks a functioning PA/intercom system.
• It is unknown whether existing wiring can support intercom functionality; further analysis will be required.
• Integration of PA and security systems may be pursued but would likely involve separate vendors.

Charles asked if the campus already have a PA system that these cameras could tie into, and Jason said that the PA system infrastructure was removed and a separate company would be required to install the necessary wiring and system.

The proposed contract is with Herrera Landscaping, who have maintained the site for years and originally installed the irrigation system. Due to neglect from a previous tenant, significant landscape issues arose. Herrera has proposed a comprehensive, 3-phase restoration plan. The scope includes irrigation repair, beautification, removal of debris, brush clearing, and re-establishing access paths.

A future fencing project was also discussed, with padding added to the quote to account for this potential addition, targeting unhoused access deterrence.

Pete Watson asked if there is a timeline through Phase 3 and if it is tied to the August 1st timeline? Jason said that completion is anticipated by August 11th, before school starts. Pete also asked if the fence should be included as a formal Phase 4 to hit the $100,000 total? Jason said that if the fence quote is substantial, it may become a separate project and return to the board as a distinct item (if exceeding $50K threshold).

Charles asked if we are obligated to back pay Herrera for work done during the prior tenant's time to which Jason said no. 
 

Budget & Financial Impact:

• Total cost is estimated under $100,000 padded to include a potential fencing solution.
• The overall landscaping and site improvement costs are part of a $500,000 capital project.
• Costs will be depreciated across 20–30 years, with examples including Site improvements and Electrical/plumbing
• This approach allows the budget impact to be spread out, easing annual budget pressure, although cashflow remains a separate challenge.