The Experience of a PCSD Facilities Advisory Committee Member

Provo School District formed a Facilities Advisory Committee of Provo residents they picked who would give the district a recommendation on what plan of action to take on its schools. In her essay, this FAC member talks about how the district seemed to have already made up its mind and presented the committee with information that would persuade them to recommend the same plan the district had in mind.

---

"I have heard at bond meetings, on social media, and on The Safe Kids website that “The FAC recommended unanimously that the district rebuild Timpview, Dixon, and Wasatch, and build an addition to Westridge.” As a member of the Provo School District’s 2018 Facility Advisory Committee (FAC) I did not recommend that the board rebuild those schools for $245 million as proposed in the bond. I felt the district’s presentations to the FAC were biased, and chose to research for myself. 

As an advisory committee of 31 individuals from throughout the school district boundaries, we met each week, March through May for an hour or two visiting schools and  discussing their needs. Nine meetings for a total of 18 hours was not even close to enough time to digest and come to an understanding of what needed to happen with all that is proposed in this $245 million bond. 

The members of the FAC ultimately split into a majority group (22) recommending to the board that Timpview, Dixon, Wasatch, and Westridge needed to be addressed in a bond. The minority group (nine of us) were undecided. At the same time most of us felt something should be done to address the needs of the schools, but we didn’t agree with the majority view.

We as an advisory committee recommended that something should be done regarding the above mentioned schools. However, we did not unanimously recommend what the school board and its Safe Kids supporters have claimed. 

The committee was undecided for differing reasons. Some felt the overall cost, estimated at that time at $192 million was too much to ask of taxpayers. Others were uncertain about Timpview if the needs were really that critical. Dixon was one of the most complicated issues especially since the information from a feasibility study on the school wouldn’t be known until several months after the conclusion of our meetings.

The widely promulgated claim of, unanimous support from the FAC, the school district is using in support of their arguments for having done due diligence in researching this bond, is disingenuous. I felt we were given information by district administration to sway us into a decision to rebuild all the schools proposed. From the beginning of the meetings it felt like an agenda had already been decided upon and they just needed to convince the FAC to achieve their desires. 

To make it a more credible part of the process next time around, we need to add a wider variety of people to the group: city council members, the mayor, city planners, city engineers, architects, lawyers, structural engineers, neighborhood chairs, and teachers from within the district. The FAC needs professionals who are working toward Provo’s future and can help the school district fit into that goal; not just school administration and people who they pick.

When the bond doesn't pass, I propose the FAC reconvenes to plan for a better bond.

Join me in voting no on this school bond."

Shannon Bingham, FAC Member