This is an Accessible Alternative Version of the Power Point Presentation Ensuring High Quality School Environments, A Policy Overview (PPT, 2MB). The Power Point Presentation should be the preferred version for downloading.
Ensuring High Quality School environments, A Policy Overview
Kathleen Moore, Director - School Facilities Planning Division
California Department of Education
August 31, 2010
1. California Perspective
- >1,000 School Districts and County Offices of Education, Charter School Entities
- 10,000 existing public K-12 schools
- 100 new traditional K-12 schools/year
- 100 traditional K-12 schools were closed in 2009-2010 school year
2. More California Perspective
- Since 1998
- State K-12 bonds - $35.4 billion
- Local bonds - $63.8 billion
- Other capital funding sources
- Developer fees
- Redevelopment
- Foundation grants
- Federal funds and tax credits (Qualified Zone Academy Bonds and Qualified School Construction Bonds)
3. Local Educational Agencies (LEA)
- Select school sites and design schools
- Are "lead agency" implementing California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
- May override local zoning for classroom facilities*
- May use eminent domain*
- May enter into joint-use agreements/projects such as parks, libraries, performing arts, sports fields, etc.
- Have local bonding authority*
*Not available to charter schools
4. Facility Responses to Educational and Community Trends
- Community services on campus and 24/7 community use
- High performance/sustainable features
- Choice - alternative/magnet/charter schools, career technical education, open enrollment, on-line/virtual schools
- School closure and larger schools
- Equity issues
5. Local Educational Agency Tensions and Issues
- Governance: Meeting state requirements while maintaining local control
- Financial: State and LEA fiscal constraints at both capital and operational levels
- Educational: Providing 21st century learning environments in outdated facilities
- Siting: Identifying new sites in developed/developing areas
- Zoning: Protecting existing schools from encroaching incompatible uses
- Community: Role in "Smart Growth" efforts
6. State Agency Roles
School Facilities Planning Division (SFPD)
Establishes regulatory standards to ensure safe and educationally appropriate schools, provides best practices
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)
Provides hazardous material assessment and cleanup oversight for state funded non-exempt school construction
Division of State Architect (DSA)
Approves all school construction for structural, fire/life safety, access standards (Title 24 and Field Act - Seismic standards)
Office of Public School Construction (OPSC)
Administers State bond funding programs, supports and implements State Allocation Board (SAB) regulations/policies
7. Role of CDE/SFPD
- Establish school siting and plan standards
- Pursuant to authority in Education Code Section 17251
- Within California Code of Regulations, Title 5, Section 14001 et seq.
- Review and approve projects (site and plans) for consistency with Title 5 (required if state bond funds are requested)
- Provide best practices, advice and assistance to LEAs
- Provide leadership via a variety of educational policy venues
- Represent the Superintendent of Public Instruction on the SAB
8. Title 5 Regulations
- Educational and safety standards
- Performance standards
- Quantifiable standards
- Required processes
- Are flexible and adaptable via exemption process
- Document alternative way of meeting standards
- Most projects have one or more exemptions granted
9. CDE Site Selection - Weighted Ranking Criteria
- Safety #1
- Location
- Environment
- Soils
- Topography
- Size and Shape
- Accessibility
- Public Services
- utilities
- costs
- Availability
- Public Acceptance
10. 2008 CDE Roundtable Recommendations
- Vision and Guiding Principles
- Review and update Title 5
- Increase collaboration
- Increase focus on modernization
- Review and restructure the linkage between school facility finance and design
11. CDE Vision for School Facilities
CDE envisions school facilities that enhance the achievement of all students and are learner-centered, safe, sustainable, and centers of community
12. Key Guiding Principles that Support Smart Growth
Siting and Design of educational facilities will:
- Reflect the LEA Board adopted facility master plan and education specifications
- Result from an open, community-based, and comprehensive planning process including all stakeholders and early dialogue with all involved planning agencies
- Promote sustainable practices that conserve natural resources, limit greenhouse gas emissions, optimize construction and life cycle costs, and encourage walking and bicycling
- Consider the full spectrum of community facilities and support opportunities for joint-use and educational partnerships
- Accommodate a complete facility adaptable to future demographic, educational, and community needs
13. Key Points
- LEAs identify sites, design schools, and are lead agency
- Title 5 is flexible, adaptable, and consistent with "smart growth" concepts
- Multiple avenues for public and city/county input
14. Senate Bill (SB) 50 Reverses Mira/Hart/Murietta
- In 1998 SB 50 created a new school facility funding program
- Eliminated the power of cities/counties to deny approvals, or require school mitigations in excess of statutory LEA fees for impacts of legislative or adjudicative approvals, based upon inadequacy of school facilities
15. Collaboration Opportunities
- School Facilities Master Plan
- Educational Specifications
- General Plans, Specific Plans
- CEQA project alternatives analysis
- Closing school sites
- Selling surplus sites
16. Photograph of children playing hopscotch
17. Photograph of school campus
18. Design of school campus
19. Artist rendering of a school campus
21. Aerial view of a school campus
22. Resources and contacts
School Facilities Planning Division Web site
- Forms
- Best practices
- Exemption protocols
Kathleen J. Moore, Director
916-445-2144
kmoore@cde.ca.gov
