Appendix B
A summary of additional required elements per Proposition 2, from the Guide to Long- Range Facilities Master Plans.LRFMP Home | Introduction | FMP Process | FMP Key Components | Specialized Facility Needs
Additional Considerations | Conclusion | Appendix A | Appendix B | FMP Resources
Additional Required Elements per Proposition 2
Proposition 2 established that local educational agencies (LEAs) must prepare and submit a facilities master plan (FMP) as a condition of eligibility for School Facility Program (SFP) funding. The statute outlines several required components, including two elements that are not typically part of most FMPs: verification of the LEA’s current assessed valuation and a deferred maintenance plan.
As the California Department of Education (CDE) is not the approving authority for these components, LEAs should consult the Office of Public School Construction (OPSC) for specific requirements and submission procedures. Please see OPSC’s School Facility Program Guidelines for the Five-Year School Facilities Master Plan 
(PDF).
The following information is provided for general reference only.
Verification of Current Assessed Value
Required under Proposition 2:
“Verification of the applicable school district’s current assessed value from the appropriate local government entity that collects and maintains this information.”
(Education Code Section 17070.54(c)(6))
The total assessed value of taxable property within an LEA’s boundaries reflects its potential to generate local funding for facilities. This figure, obtained from the county assessor’s office, is used by OPSC to determine funding eligibility and match ratios under the SFP.
Although this data is required under Proposition 2, it is not typically included in an FMP. Some LEAs, however, may choose to reference it to help describe their community’s economic context or overall funding capacity.
The California Department of Education (CDE) does not collect or verify this information. LEAs should contact OPSC or their county assessor for the most current requirements and data sources.
Note for Small School Districts:
Smaller or rural LEAs can usually obtain assessed valuation information by contacting the county assessor’s office directly. Most counties publish annual valuation summaries or will provide the total assessed value upon request. Including the figure, fiscal year, and source agency creates a clear record for future reference.
Deferred Maintenance Plan
Required under Proposition 2:
“The school district’s deferred maintenance plan certified pursuant to Section 17070.75.”
(Education Code Section 17070.54(c)(7))
Deferred maintenance refers to the repair or replacement of building components and systems that have been postponed due to funding limitations or competing priorities. These may include roofs, HVAC systems, plumbing, electrical, flooring, exterior finishes, or paving. Under Proposition 2, LEAs must maintain a certified deferred maintenance plan as part of their overall facilities planning framework.
The process of preparing or updating a deferred maintenance plan offers an opportunity to better understand the condition of facilities and to coordinate short-term repairs with long-term capital improvements. An effective plan typically identifies needed work, estimated costs, and proposed timelines for addressing each item.
A well-developed deferred maintenance plan can help LEAs to:
- Prioritize critical repairs before they become emergencies.
- Integrate facility upkeep with modernization and replacement cycles.
- Extend the usable life of existing facilities and reduce life-cycle costs.
- Demonstrate fiscal responsibility and stewardship of public assets.
LEAs may use a variety of data sources to inform their plan, such as:
- Facility Inspection Tool (FIT) results
- Maintenance logs and work order systems
- On-site evaluations by maintenance and custodial staff
- Consultant or contractor reports on specific systems (roofing, mechanical, electrical, etc.)
- Historical records of prior modernization and renovation work
When combined with broader facility condition assessments (FCAs), the deferred maintenance plan provides valuable insight into the overall health of the LEA’s facilities portfolio and can serve as a bridge between day-to-day maintenance and long-range capital planning.
The CDE does not certify or review deferred maintenance plans. For detailed requirements to ensure eligibility for SFP funding, LEAs should refer to current OPSC guidance.
Note for Small School Districts:
Smaller LEAs can develop a simple but effective deferred maintenance plan using information already available locally. Maintenance staff can identify issues through regular inspections, document them in a spreadsheet or table, and estimate repair costs over a multi-year period. Photos, brief descriptions, and priority rankings can help create a clear, practical roadmap for addressing facility needs.
Conclusion
These supplemental elements, while required under Proposition 2 for SFP funding, are not standard components of most facilities master plans. CDE provides this overview as a courtesy to help LEAs understand their broader facilities planning responsibilities. LEAs should always consult OPSC for authoritative information, timelines, and instructions regarding Proposition 2 compliance.
Incorporating accurate maintenance and fiscal data into the overall planning process remains a best practice for all LEAs. Doing so supports long-term sustainability, transparency, and informed decision-making about the stewardship of school facilities.