52 $240, 523 $251, 528 $262, 822 $276, 116 $293, 100 $310, 500 $338, 000 $347,000 $367,000 $386,000 56, 256 60, 052 64,000 68,500 73,500 75,000 79,500 84,000 297,994 305, 993 320, 663 336, 428 358, 100 379,000 413, 500 423, 000 447,500 471,500 25,960 26,000 26,000 26,000 26, 200 26,400 27,700 27,000 APPENDIX 17 REPORT ON REQUEST FOR A CAPITAL OUTLAY GRANT BY THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 400, RICHLAND, WASH., UPON TERMINATION OF CONTRACT AT (45-1)-1415, AUGUST 16, 1966 LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL RICHLAND PUBLIC SCHOOLS, SCHOOL DISTRICT No. 400, Richland, Wash, August 16, 1966. Re Request by the Richland Public Schools for a Capital Outlay Grant from the Atomic Energy Commission Upon Termination of Richland District Contract AT (45-1)-1415. GENTLEMEN: After careful consideration of the facts pertaining to the projected growth of our community, the present condition of our school plant, and potential sources of revenue (both local and state) for renovating and providing new facilities, the Richland School District respectfully requests that the Atomic Energy Commission include in its budget the amount of $8,881,000 to be distributed to the Richland School District as follows between 1969 and 1972: 1969. 1970 1971. 1972__ $1,930, 000 3,500,000 1,840, 000 1, 611, 000 This request is a culmination of discussion started in a letter dated October 19, 1965 (Appendix A). A letter of December 20, 1965 from Mr. Chisholm outlines principles to be followed in developing the terms of a capital outlay grant (Appendix B). During the interim period following the conclusion of the existing contract with the Atomic Energy Commission, the only source for this district to provide adequate housing and to bring existing buildings up to acceptable standards would be the sizable terminal settlement we are requesting. Very truly yours, S. R. CLARK, Secretary, Chairman, Board of Directors. TABLE OF CONTENTS II. Present status of the Richland School District, III. Future needs for facilities. IV. Estimated costs of proposed construction program. V. Financing of proposed program. VI. Justification of the request. VII. Appendixes: Appendix A. Negotiation of agreement relating to termination of AEC assistance payments under Public Law 221. Appendix B. Proposed principles to govern development of specific terms of Appendix C. Educational adequacy report of certain school buildings by Appendix E. Renovation and modernization of school facilities. LIST OF TABLES Table 1. Comparison of enrollment and capacity. 2. Enrollment projection. 3. Estimated school construction costs per pupil. 4. Estimated costs for new and replacement facilities. 5. Table of construction and estimate costs. 6. Renovation and modernization costs. 7. Bonding capacity projected through 1978. S. Schedule of project completion and money need. I. INTRODUCTION Richland School District Number 400 as it now exists is largely due to the activity of the federal government through the Atomic Energy Commission. The major share of funds for operation during the initial period of growth was provided through the federal government. Capital outlay, i.e., buildings and equipment, was secured in the same manner. As this was considered to be a temporary operation, most of the original building done was planned for short-term use only. These original buildings are still in use. As a result, the maintenance cost has increased each year and the buildings are no longer considered educationally adequate to house the present-day educational program. Only by the closest attention of staff and maintenance department can some of these buildings continue to be used in safety by the students of this district. As initially this was a government-owned community, there was only nominal property tax base which, under the laws of the State of Washington, is the prime source of revenue for capital outlay for a local district. In recent years, as the government turned over property to private individuals, the local district has assumed increasing responsibility for the support of the educational program. The tax base, however, is still inadequate to support the maintenance and operation of the school system and is not sufficient to permit the local district to provide the needed funds for capital outlay necessary for replacement and additional buildings. While the present plan of diversification and segmentation of the industry in the area is being developed, the tax base for the support of service institutions in the community, such as the public schools, lags far behind the need for facilities. In addition, there is a slow but steady growth projected for the district. The tax base lags behind such growth. During the interim period and following the conclusion of the existing contract with the Atomic Energy Commission, the only hope for this district to provide adequate housing and to bring existing buildings up to acceptable standard is a sizable terminal settlement from the Atomic Energy Commission. This report is a statement in support of such concept. It has been organized into seven sections. The first section is the Introduction. The second section deals with the present status of the school district, the third with the future of the district, the fourth with the esimated cost covered in sections two and three, the fifth with the possibility and sources of financing such program, the sixth is a summary statement of justification of the request, and supporting material is provided in section seven, the Appendixes. II. PRESENT STATUS OF THE RICHLAND SCHOOL DISTRICT The Richland School District plant is already inadequate to meet current needs from the standpoint of size, condition, and educational adequacy. In the fall of 1966, enrollments are anticipated as follows: Elementary 3908, Junior High 1740, and Senior High 1730. This represents a slight increase over the last school year. Table 1 shows the anticipated enrollment for the fall of 1966 for each school and also the capacity of that building as determined by local administrators utilizing instructions for determining capacity as outlined in Application Procedure For Government Aid Under Public Law 815 (slightly modified on basis of local standards). This calculation of capacity (total 7153) corresponds closely with an estimated total capacity of 7204 prepared by the State Department of Public Instruction. It is recognized that previous records may show higher capacities. Changing educational programing, building usage and standard account for the difference. A study of Table 1 shows that the district is currently in a critical condition in regard to space for secondary school students. The figures show 46 elementary and 332 secondary students in excess of capacity for a total of 378. This, along with projected growth, is the key justification for the projection of a new secondary school building for the Richland Public Schools in the near future. In addition to the shortage at the secondary level, the table indicates that both Jason Lee and Jefferson Elementary Schools will be operating over capacity during the 1966-1967 school year. It is anticipated that this condition will be aggravated because housing development in the Richland area is concentrated in the north and west portions of the city. In addition to the shortage as shown by this table, much of our elementary school plant and part of our secondary school plant is considered to be educationally inadequate by the Washington State Department of Public Instruction (Appendix C). Replacement rather than renovation is recommended. This recommendation includes replacement of Marcus Whitman, Sacajawea, Jefferson, Lewis and Clark, the 200 Wing at Columbia High School, and the necessity for additional physical education facilities at Carmichael Junior High School. There are eleven rooms at Jefferson which would be worth salvaging, thus reducing the need for finances. Portions of the balance of the school plant are in need of major renovation and modernization. Local school district officials have prepared a listing of such needs with rough cost estimates. A more detailed listing of items and costs are shown in the section covering costs. A general listing is shown here for your information. Listing of maintenance and renovation 1. Columbia High School. Dressing rooms, laundry, air condition section used for summer operation, addition to art room, elevator, general reconditioning. 2. Carmichael Junior High School. Roof replacement, locker replacement, auditorium sound system, acoustical treatment of gymnasium, improved ventilation system. 3. Chief Joseph Junior High School. Remodel science suite, roof replacement, auditorium drape replacement, second floor tiling, grounds development. 4. Jason Lee Elementary School. Roof renewal. 5. Spalding Elementary School. Heating plant conversion, library relocation, roof renewal, and retiling. 6. Renovation and modernization of School Administration Building. 7. Maintenance and Warehouse. Roof renewal, busport. 8. Miscellaneous. Parking areas, grounds improvement, and equipment. In summary, the Richland School District's immediate facility needs are as follows: 1. An additonal secondary school. 2. An additional elementary school in the northern part of Richland. 3. Replacement of the following buildings: Marcus Whitman, Sacajawea, Lewis and Clark, all except eleven rooms at Jefferson, and replacement of |