The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutMINUTES - 09281993 - 1.58 J�`DNtUGH S�yDO` ,nivelt Wnion Aigh Sc6ol District 20 Oak Street Trentmod, CA 94513 ?6rw(510)634-2166 jax(510)634-1687 ��gBLISHED 1g� September 13, 1993 Mr. Phil Batchelor Contra Costa County Clerk of the Board 725 Court Street Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Mr. Batchelor: I would like to appear before the County Board of Supervisors at the next available date in order to present a status report on Liberty Union High School District's facilities funding and its implications on new development. My presentation would not take more than 10-15 minutes. Please let me know when time is available on the Board of Supervisors agenda. Sincerely, `1 Philip D. White, Ed.D. Superintendent �RooFSSA PDW:dd CO cc: Val Alexeeff �✓ C AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY AND AFFIRMATIVE ACTION EMPLOYER BOAI►D OF TRUSTEES RESOURCE DOCUMENT 1 LIBER 1 •, TY UNION.HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT 20 Oak Street Brentwood, California 94513 dated AUGUST; 1993 ' prepared by Land Planning Consultants, Inca The Cardinale Company 239 Main Street, Suite.'E 3240 Lone Tree Way, Suite.200 Pleasanton, CA.:94566 Antioch,. CA 94509' 1 (510).846-7007 (510)779-1924. TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION Overcrowding - Crises or Solutions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Developer Fee Cash Flow Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 Graphs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 Developer Fee Analysis Formula for Funding Solution aEnrollment Projections . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 Projected Enrollment Graph State Enrollment Projections O Support Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 O When Does The District Need Construction Funds Developer Fees State Funding DGeneral Obligation Bond/Developers Agreement Estimated Construction Costs: D Phase I only Complete School Existing Enrollments at the Elementary School Districts i 1 ■ OVERCROWDING - CRISIS OR SOLUTIONS ■ 1 1. EXISTING HIGH SCHOOL FACILITY - 850 SECOND STREET, BRENTWOOD • Grade Level Served = 9-12 Traditional Enrollment • 1992-93 Enrollment 1885 students • Existing Capacity . (1992/93) 2078 students ** • Expanded Capacity (1993/94) = 2305 students *** • Fully Impacted Capacity = 2532 Students **** 1 * Enrollment total does not include continuation or alternative education enrollments ** Total includes 32 portable classrooms 1 *** Total includes 9 portable classrooms for a total of 41 **** Total includes 9 additional portable classrooms for a total of 50 1 All capacities illustrate a 90% efficiently rate allowing for special program scheduling. 2. IMPACT OF ENROLLMENT GROWTH AND OVERCROWDING 1 A. ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS 1 ENROLLMENT FROM EXISTING HOUSING STOCK - NO SIGNIFICANT NEW HOUSING • Estimated 1993/94 Enrollment = 2065 students • Estimated 1994/95 Enrollment 2225 students • Estimated 1995/96 Enrollment 2367 students • Estimated 1996/97 Enrollment = 2480 students 1 • Estimated 1997/98 Enrollment = 2630 students • Estimated 1998/99 Enrollment 2786 students * Enrollment projections were established by State Office of Local Assistance and do not include continuation or alternative education enrollments. Projections are based on past enrollment growths and therefore, do not include significant new housing estimated to be ±100 units per year district wide. State projections assume a Cohort rate of students from a previous year migrating out of district as well as a rate migrating into district. ENROLLMENT INCLUDING AN ADDITIONAL 300 NEW UNITS PER YEAR ** • Estimated 1993/94 Enrollment = 2119 students 1 • Estimated 1994/95 Enrollment = 2338 students • Estimated 1995/96 Enrollment 2536 students • Estimated 1996/97 Enrollment = 2706 students 1 • Estimated 1997/98 Enrollment _ 2912 students • Estimated 1998/99 Enrollment 3124 students 1 ** The development community suggests that 300 new residential units per year is a valid assumption over and above the ±100 units per year estimated in the State Office of Local Assistance projections. Consequently, this would represent a total new housing projection of 400 units per 1 year. B. INCREASED ENROLLMENT CAUSES 1. Reduction in the quality of the Educational Program 2. Limited Science and Specialty classroom space 3. Overcrowding and social tension 4. Parking, traffic and safety problems 5. Smaller campus in acreage than the State Department of Education recommends 6. Reduced Physical Education and Sports facilities 7. Overused facility 8. Increased maintenance concerns e 9. Increased demand on utility services, i.e. well water, electrical 10. Limited student identity 3. SHORT TERM SOLUTIONS TO OVERCROWDING 1. Expansion of Existing Facility The district is in the process of adding 18 portable classrooms to the Liberty campus,by eliminating outdoor physical education program areas, which will be utilized to accommodate 454 additional students. This increase in portable classrooms will bring the total number of portable classrooms on campus to 50. This increase in portable classrooms would enable the district to accommodate 2532 total students. The district is expected to exceed this total by enrollment year 1997/98 absent of an increase in a new housing market. With an increase in new housing market, the district is projected to exceed this capacity level by enrollment year 1995/96. This solution will overburden an already strained campus and is short term. 2. Multi-Track Year Round Enrollment If the district went to Multi-Track Year Round Enrollment schedules, the capacity levels for the district could be increased by 25%, for a total of 3165 students (2532 students X 1.25%). Multi- Track Year Round Enrollment does not come without costs associated with maintenance, conversion of the physical plant, administrative, and educational philosophy. Multi-Track Year Round Enrollment will have a detrimental affect on the Educational Program the district offers, the facilities, and the staff. These constraints outweigh the benefits the district would realize in increased capacity. Based on the projected enrollments, this solution is also short term. 4. LONG TERM SOLUTION O1. Construction of a new school The district purchased a future school site at the intersection of Neroly Road and O'Hara Avenue. • Size: 60 acres (10 acres for Flood Control District) • Grade Level: 9-12 Traditional enrollment • Capacity: 2,200 students • Budget: Phase 1 $26,630,198 1600 total student capacity Phase II 7,300,482 2200 total student capacity OTotal Cost 533.930,680 • Construction Time: Two and One Half Years 8 5. BARRIERS TO LONG TERM SOLUTION The barrier to the long term solution is the lack of a funding source to construct Phase I in a timely manner and ultimately construct Phase II when it is needed. No single funding source can stand alone to meet the district's need. It requires a combination of funding sources and a shared responsibility. The district can not construct a new school within a time frame to eliminate overcrowding at the existing campus. It is critical that a funding source is established soon. 6. SINGLE FUNDING SOURCES aA Local General Obligation Bonds - must pass by 2/3 voter approval B State Funding- 50/50 match, unlikely as to its availability in future, district has received $1,750,000 in State Funding as reimbursement for land purchased C Special Community Facility Districts (Mello-Roos) D Developer Fees/Developers Agreement - paid at issuance of building permit, will not provide funding in a timely manner E Combination of the above - shared responsibility 7. FUNDING SOLUTION FORMULAS A + B [money already received] + D = Solution [E] B + [A and D, as match] = Solution [E] B + D [as match] = Solution [E] 8. CONCLUSION A shared responsibility is needed to construct the new high school. There are three formulas for this solution. Two of these formulas involve State Funding which; 1) the district may not gain approval for; 2) State Funding may not be available in the future; 3) the district can not submit an application for funding until architectural documents have been drawn and approved by the Office of the State Architect; and 4) the district would be required to have matching funds "in the bank". All of these solutions will 0 take time to determine. The solution is to proceed with a formula that will not delay the construction of the school any further. That formula would be to pursue a local General Obligation Bond at an amount the local voters would approve and execute an Developers Agreement for the remaining funding 8 needs. This Developers Agreement would be contingent on the voters approval of the General Obligation Bond and the district pursuing State Funding if it becomes available. The district proceeded with voter surveys to determine the amount of a local General Obligation Bond. The survey illustrated that a bond in the amount of 14 Million Dollars was feasible. The district negotiated with the development community (BIA) for a Developers Agreement as outlined above. On June 9th, 1993 BIA represented they are no longer interested in pursuing a Developers Agreement. Without a Developers Agreement assuring the entire school would be built, the district decided to not 8 pursue a bond measure on the November 1993 ballot. Without a funding source solution, the district has had no choice other than request the City of Brentwood and Contra Costa County to not approve future applications for development pursuant to their governing codes. 8 The district has until December 8, 1993 to decide whether to pursue a bond measure on April 12, 1994. 2 a ..... ..... ......... ... . ......... ..... . ........ ..... ... ..: 8 ..... ...... .... .... cC � Zx. � � � � � � N N N (7a. ON N fV N N N M M M, AO Op O O O O `'ed:: O 1It N n 00 � l- O N r- b9 N::::: N N N N A =..;:. v� 00 O O O o bq a 00 00 N.... 69 e ..... r O o 0::: O O O O 00 O -. O O O O o O O O (� 0 C/) W _ O N `c* 00 N 00 ItN cz `. O\ 00 M U O 6R ?>bR` 69 6�4 64 69 69 y� 69 V .:.. . v o O o o Si; 0 0 00 -v 0o S o o ai c :: O ' .�:::<:: N � 00 y� w Olk ON C41, �; �, p. r s9 s s 3 W Fy A a c o O N N qt 't \O \.0 00 v' L A w 6R ..4. bs bs sA s9 c9 r .� U O T R C Q K O A � y o O O o C m c (i': 1-4 o v y c A rxx It It lzt VJ:i> C '� o S g o o It o g ..... :.......� ... •� %� �.:;::::;? O ti C 01 O� c ON C� ON Ol\ C Li, LL 0 0 ............. ........... ........... ........... ........ ........... H .......... ................. .... ..... ................ ........... ON 00 r C\ M N N N N::: N N M M M ep p .. Oe C4 O 'IT 'IT q1t 'IT CIA 'IT N 00 t/'1 [— N N M N N N N N M 59': 69 d4 64 69 bR 0 �p a\ N C/) ' 0 0 00 0 0 0 00 ^:::' N:::::: sq 0 N v1 ON N toN C14 U b4 69 69 bR a �' o O X 3 Q .-- �:: N M � M � U V 69 64 69 644 64 3 o p a Le U o o611)O N ::>:N" ct �O %C 00 n '' . J to W , �1> 6R f/) 69 69 69 69 69 �. L y C o Q _O x Y ❑ ..:.Q to tn w):: to v) �n to v� v ce Lti c� N y o Q) h O O O O p O O y �'�:.: ... O O �'::::: O O O O O .... a c o U x �;;:;; 'O ca cOc v) �p O N J 00 N 0 C U U p:... . a\ ON O*� ON ON 1-4 0 3 i i i �- Rv f _ ^: -T- Ll tLl � • • � � • I I � • I I i L IBERTY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT FORMULA FOR FUNDING SOLUTION - ■ G. • Bond. • Developer V State • • • G. 0. Bond is based on $30.00 per dwelling unit I Local Funding ME State Funding- 50/50 KAW I I • . `-f LIBERTY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT u PROJECTED HIGH SCHOOL ENROLLMENT 1 NUMBER OF STUDENTS 4 250 u 4,000 3,750 u 3,500 0 3,250 Emergency capacity of campus = 2,532 3,000 students 2,750 '�'.'""' _ --■ u..... u 2,500 21250 2,000 ` Existing capcity of u1 750 campus = 2,078 students 11500 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 YEAR u Projected enrollment generated by existing Projected enrollment generated by housing stock with no significant new ■ existing housing and new housing. housing (±100 units) assuming an additional 500 units ' per year Projected enrollment generated by ® Projected enrollment generated by existing housing and new housing existing housing and new housing assuming an additional 300 units assuming an additional1000 units per year per year ' kaw 7/26/93 u STATE ENROLLMENT PROJECTIONS ............................................................................................................................... Stato of G1lfornta OFFICE OF LOCAL ASSISTANCE APPLICATION NUMBER: 22/61121-00-00 SAB 411 (Updated 10/89) Estlxated Average Daily Attendance Ftsccl Year 92/93 REPORT DATE: 11-20-92 abk DISTRICT: liberty Union High COUNTY: Contra Costa ENRLMNT: 1st month GRADE SPAN: 9-12 a..ii..i.................. ....... ......Y................■.i.................... ....... .............. ............... ........... QYEAR 89/90 90/91 91/92 92/93 AVG CHG 93/94 94/95 95/96 96/97 97/98 9B/99 K 721 731 737 798 34 832 866 900 934 968 1002 1 652 748 782 717 12 BID 844 878 912 946 980 2 609 665 756 760 .3 714 807 841 875 9D9 943 3 585 665 730 753 23 783 737 830 864 89B 932 4 546 633 696 737 22 115 805 759 852 886 920 S 542 588 668 661 1 738 776 806 760 8S3 887 E 6:' Z 3 E3" 6r: 1G 5:7 754 752 azz 7-6 i6s 7 484 569 608 627 8 657 685 762 800 830 784 e 437 545 574 614 15 642 672 7DO 777 815 845 9 434 512 .578 626 50. 664 692 722 750 827 865 10 424 435 531 568 2 628 666 694 724 152 829 11 375 390 411 478 -40 528 588 626 654 684 112 12 215 317 365 389 -29 449 499 559 597 625 655 ------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K-6 4172 4643 5008 5075 5329 SS89 S8D6 6019 6236 6533 7-8 921 1114 1162 1241 1299 1357 1462 1577 1645 1629 9-12 1448 1654 1885 2061 2269 244S 2601 2725 2888 3061 TOTAL 6541 7411 8075 8377 8897 9391 9869 10321 10769 11223 Annual Change 870 664 302 520 494 478 452 448 454 ...........iii.i........■ii..i.i..i........i■■.......i.........i.......i.... .......i.....i..Y............ii.i.Y.i Y ii.aY.a. Muiaber of students living in district attending out of district: 22 Number of students living out of district attending to district: 33 a .......................i..................ai..i.................i........■....................r....... sao.sasiii.iia..u.. CONTINUATION HIGH SCHOOL "•f' ESTIMATED AVERAGE DAILY ATTENDANCE ------------------------ ------��---------_-_---------- •fff. _ DATE HOURS DAYS HRS/DAYS •fff' ONE YEAR , 3/4 YEARS , 5/6 YEARS -------------------------------------------------------- •ff.. ---------------------------,-----------------I--------------- 03/92 6676 20 331 •'"* GRADE ENROLL. EST. ADA ENROLL. EST. ADA, ENROLL. EST. A 10/92 6468 20 323 ----- ------------------------------------------------------------- 01/92 6071 19 320 "'f' K 832 807 900 873 968 93 TOTAL 977 ""' 1-3 2307 2238 2519 2473 2753 267 .fff. AVERAGE ATTENDANCE 1-6 2190 2124 2357 2286 1515 244 ....ii............................... .....n....-i.. ""' 7-6 i299 1260 1577 1530 1629 158 SPECIAL EDUCATION STUDENTS •"" 9-12 2269 2201 272S 2643 - 3061 296 -------------------------------------------------------- --f.. [LEN SPEC 0 0 0 0 0 ' CLASS ELEN SEC [LEN. SEC •"" SEC. SPEC 57 55 68 66 75 7. -------------------------------------------------------- ....f CONT. HI. 57 57 65 65 70 7. SLD 0 46 , AUT 0 0 "'f' TOTAL 9011 8742 10241 9936 11071 1074 ' •ff.f Dl S 76 16 0 O , SHR 0 O a..............7...... .76....... .................76 '` ..... . DHH 0 0 , DH 0 0 „••• Verified by 4+drng Date , Approved. Executive Officer De ON 0 0 ,________________________ •f•.. .JL J\ TOTAL 0 SI 8 / / •ffff V60 ...............iiti.tiii.Y l.li.l.i...iii....k..l............... .i......l.f{ii..ti..tiY.iil.l.i..i. 5 WHEN DOES THE DISTRICT NEED CONSTRUCTION FUNDS The district by law is required to have funds available for the new school prior to awarding a contract for construction. Based on the earliest time frame for construction, allowing nearly a year for plan approval by the Office of State Architect, the district would need construction funds in place, no later than early 1995 for the construction of Phase I, or $26,630,198. Should new development occur sooner than projected, the need for the high school will be accelerated. Projecting enrollments in the future, allowing aa year and a half for construction, the district would need Phase II funding by enrollment year 2000/01, or $7,300,482. DEVELOPER FEES The district currently collects 30% of the allowable $1.65 per square foot fee on new residential construction, sharing the 70% balance with the four elementary feeder districts. The district also collects a SB 1287 fee in the amount of$1.00 per square foot on new residential construction, for a total fee of $1.50 per square foot. Both fees are collected at time of the issuance of a building permit. The SB 1287 fee may not be available to the district in the future based on whether ACA 6 passes or fails and precluding any changes in legal interpretation. This bill would allow school districts to pass General Obligation Bonds for new school facilities on a majority vote rather than the current two-thirds voter approval. If ACA 6, passes the extra $1.00 fee remains. If it fails, the extra $1.00 fee is suspended. Collecting a Developer Fee in the amount of$1.50 per square foot.on new residential construction over time would not be sufficient to fund, even if all fees were collected at the time school construction 8 commences,the school costs identified by the district assuming ACA 6 passes (11,500 units X 1,500 square feet X $1.50 per square foot = $25,875,000). What this analysis does not take into account is the time frame of collecting Developer Fees at issuance of building permits. A Developer Fee does not compensate for that enrollment growth associated with the existing housing stock. Without any new residential construction the district is anticipated to he severely overcrowded and need the second high school campus by enrollment year 1995/96. Developer Fees will not meet the funding requirements in a timely manner to meet the needs of the district. A local General Obligation Bond, State Funding, or a Developers Agreement is needed. ' STATE FUNDING California voters have passed State-wide General Obligation Bonds in the past for school construction ' funding for the State Funding program. The State may propose a future bond measure for additional construction funding, however, the district would be required to gain approval for a portion of these potential funds. Prior to applying for any State funding if it becomes available, the district is required to have all architectural documents approved by the Office of the State Architect. It is estimated that it will take nearly a year for the documents to be completed and approved. Any State funding is based on a 50% match. The district would be required to have its 50% match available at the time of State approval. To meet this obligation, a General Obligation Bond is required if a Developers Agreement is not in place. Absent its 50% matching fund, the District would not be illegible to receive State funding for the construction of the new high school. ' If ACA 6 passes, the burden of school construction funding will shift from the State level to a local responsibility. GENERAL OBLIGATION BOND/DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT Since enrollment growth is attributed both by the existing housing stock and new residential construction, a General Obligation Bond and a Developers Agreement would provide a shared responsibility. A survey of registered voters within the district concluded existing home owners would be willing to provide up to 41% of the cost of the new high school. Development Impact Fees are anticipated to provide 8% of the funding needed for Phase I and 21% of the funding when Phase II is projected. A Developers Agreement, without State funding, would require financing the shortfall. The district had requested a Developers Agreement to fund and finance the shortfall contingent on the voter approval of a General Obligation Bond on the 1993 November ballot. State funding would be pursued when the district was in position to do so. If State funding became available, local funding 0 participation could be reduced. PHASE I ONLY 3!414 d Cs5lon�ia-S!s Ababort Bosad Lroy F.Gmw Std.Sdrod Bu03np LwrPu how Law d 1974 E8TIMATm MQJECT 0067 OF-TAIL aa■a `pp■��•^o^�m.raw■.a ria �aro aava■r■u■■■r w■■■a■ ■■o■ ...Courtya.■wcs■aaa a■a es=sar��■ USER TY INION HIGH SCHOOL • x Prdinirry Eatlmrs BASE BIO Type aF, Eatfrr+sls-- It New .._..AdAm .—.Rsow%*umon A Sb O 1.PurchadsPn=ofPropaty ------- ------- -- ------- i 2-AppVA,4 ------- ------- -- ------- i 3.CArts Inairrad EaOrvw - -- ------- ------- ------ 4.Suwr _ _ __ _ ___ _ i SAW , slow a Q TOW-AA"kkri d� ------- ------- -- ------- : - ----- Oq --- i 20,000 8 Pwra 1.Atdiboi's Fee ler Pfrts $ 1X28147 2.OAC PW*Oh dcFas _ _ i 117,210 S.SdwreticPknriro PVeChu*Fss ------- ------- -- ------- i 11,406 ' mb ------- ------- -- ------- 3.000 cro a � at,.► - ---- ----- -- ------- ----- . Q TOW i 1,491, 69 C. COI&Wcbm t.laltySwvbss�ei -_------- ------------ -_-_ -_---_ 4 --_ i 1!1,40 2 0s nerviws i 1,761,964 envio. 3 O"m DonbprL s« i 929.090 4.O"WOsysbprrwAGwwd ---- ------ -- ------- i 1,7D9,@27 OL NovCohstn+otion ------ ------- -- ------- i 17,600.099 7.Othsr -___--- i 493.779 s TOW.danatn ckns 22,812,903 ------ ------- -- ------- -- --------- 8 D. Teats(CortmWlon) ------- ------- -- ------- -- --------- i s12.100 E MapKtkx i 132,WD ------- ------- -- ------- -- --------- A F. FunM6'Mw"E*dptwtti 1r4J6,16tf ------- ------- -- ------- -- --------- TOW-Herta A though F _- -- ------- -- ------- i 1'6,234,670 Q Co*v-dw P" plus ts%d WW,its, oA-F.when lord acwsdt 824.000;On undir pr *ms ttss 1016 dWW key*A-F) ------- ---- -- ------- -- ---- -- i 306.520 K TOW EstmavdCos OWnAlrouphC)s ------- ------- -- ------- -- --------- i 26630196 afr��■ as■Y-■fAa ave ■sAaasara-■r■■ao■a■■ Qiaa■aon* � aaaas■aai■.aaa sa■:Aa■raaav.r .vvaiaKa■r Form SAB 5068r.07.et) ' ESTIWTED PROJECT COST DETAIL aar vmr■as■ raw■aaaa■ a■a fa■a■Aaaraaa AAaa■gr ASiaaaya■1■ i ---r a■; �aaa�a■av.r w:�-�u.va■a■ ' x Prdmeery Ea*nW App oMm No. JSdtool DOW ♦I E-KIJOBS'3l W0D=\l66001 B.W 0 11 i COMPLETE SCHOOL Croy F.Qreen 9tsle Sdnd BuitlFrrO law�udnee law of 1076 ESTIMATED Pgp,16f,"T C()6T DETAIL s.• 14.Y.YV s�aas s wa++o.mu ssrrsso srrssssr s .apmr.�.oycar,...r.r..oe wm+:.aa... Ap9icetion tab. sdwd D+ft-d Y `r 11�T�IR�ION HK3N 6�i.1100l. x Prakr**-y Fstirnute MSE BID WTH OPTION 2 Type Pnw mod. x New Addkiom Reooratru�on 0 Asla 1.Pulcp~'orioe at Peopwty ------- ------- -- ------- i 2.AWaWm ------- ------- -- ------- i 0 4. late t+ianad e+Esovrr __--_-_-_ -------- __--__- ---_-_ _--_-_--__ Sti .. umry. a S,oDD a dlhw Coos i ts,om ------- ------- 6Tote1•Acquk+llonofSee -- ------- �aow ------- ------- -- ------- -- ---------- i 0 a p*m I.Am losers Fee 1a Plr» --___-- - -- -- -____-- i 1,679.101 2.QAC Ph"Check Fie --___-_ -- _- -___-_- i 140.161 16 4.$drrPtemi PrrsG+drFM __-_--_-__ -_-___-_- -- --------_-__-__-_ i 14 1.Prai�rr,erwmr 4000000y Tem i � 6 Other Cab ------- ------- -- ------- 29'626 1 704 . G CanstudSon 1.Utsty Slw.ow -------- i 115.400 a0&1"Sprues ------- ------- -- ------- = 1'761'061 3.Or"eie Dwrobpmw#. ------- ------- -- ------- 2,029.70 l or"eh.oewbprwtt;Cenral _ _ i 006'771 n p� . ,o , i a New Ccrw m, i 27,726.077 ------- ------- -- ------- 7.Mew•Canwus ---- 49--- a Tata1 dlon i X072,024 QTett pvatvdicn) ------- ------- -- ------- -- --------- - iJ5,460 E krQ`ctbm ------- ------- -- ------- ------ i 13Z.00D F. FunLn a*mjAs Eq*rnw t ------- ------- -- ------- -- --------- a 1'071'06! Taed•henrr�tMaiy+F ------ ------- -- ------- S 37.177271 G Carl Vwxioe(Uw 02000 pLa 1.516 d toes►,tto A'F' " aa.I srrawds 524,000,on emabr p voam�.taa 10% la _ d *herrbA-F) --__-_- - $ 6A0,17 ------- ------- -- H. TOW Edmm dC0Q4arnsAf ou0htlh ------- ------- -- ------- -- --------- i 3707Q660 P VW*d bt sws s.Y.s-o-- Y.savass sw ®mss..wssrrrs ss.srsss s_ ssrrrr s.s wsrssssss sss war ' Farm LkS SMS FW.0741) 1 F"-14%C 1SDt ftw%wJ 8m m m B VM(1 31 ' Existing Enrollments at the Elementary School Districts Grade Students SB411 Projection K 811 798 1 726 717 2 782 760 0 3 788 753 a 4 746 737 5 683 661 6 651 640 7 632 627 a 8 601 614 a 0 s s v