Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 09191995 - D9 D.9 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on September 19, 1995, by the following vote: AYES: See votes below NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: ----------------------------------------------------------------- ----------------------------------------------------------------- SUBJECT: Response to Letter From The Chair, Board of Directors of Los Medanos Hospital District, President and CEO of Mt. Diablo Medical Center and the Vice Mayor of the City of Pittsburg Relative to a Meeting on Los Medanos Community Hospital. On this date, the Board of Supervisors considered a response to a letter from the Chair, Board of Directors of Los Medanos Hospital District, President and CEO of Mt. Diablo Medical Center and the Vice Mayor of the City of Pittsburg requesting a meeting of all parties to discuss the County' s interest in the Los Medanos Community Hospital. Supervisor Torlakson spoke on the offer requesting clarification on when the offer would expire. Victor Westman, County Counsel, responded to Mr. Torlakson's request. The following persons presented testimony: Mary Ellen Doyle, 560 20th Street, Oakland, representing Local 250; Donna Gerber, no address given, representing the California Nurses Association. The matter was before the Board for discussion and Supervisor Torlakson moved to direct staff to find a legal way for all parties to convene. at a public session or forum. Victor Westman, County Counsel, suggested also inviting the Trustee in Bankruptcy. Supervisor Torlakson concurred. Supervisor Smith seconded the motion. Supervisor Rogers clarified that the intent of the motion would be that the meeting would be to work out a mutually agreeable place which might be here or Pittsburg to convene all the parties. Supervisor Torlakson concurred. The vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson and Bishop NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Supervisor Torlakson moved to direct staff to extend the deadline. Supervisor Smith seconded the motion. Supervisor Bishop advised that she would not be supporting the motion. Supervisor Torlakson requested that the motion be tabled until next week. Supervisor smith recommended declaring the Board's intent to reschedule the issue of the extension of the deadline on the next open agenda. Supervisor Torlakson concurred that as a clarification to the motion. The vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Smith, DeSaulnier and Torlakson NOES: Supervisor Bishop ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None IT IS BY ,THE BOARD ORDERED that staff is DIRECTED to address the issue of an appropriate public forum for all parties to discuss the County's interest in the Los Medanos Community Hospital; and INTENT IS DECLARED to agenda on September 26, 1995, a discussion of the status of the County's offer relative to Los Medanos Community Hospital. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN . ATTESTED: A, Phil Batc lor,Clerkof the Board of Supe 'sors andCo Administrator 0 By Deputy cc: County Administrator County Counsel On this date,the Board of Supervisors considered a response to a letter from the Chair, Board of Directors of Los Medanos Hospital District, President and CEO of Mt. Diablo Medical Center and the Vice Mayor of the City of Pittsburg requesting a meeting of all parties to discuss the County's interest in the Los Medanos Community Hospital. Supervisor Torlakson spoke on the offer requesting clarification on when the offer would expire. Victor Westman, County Counsel, responded to Mr. Torlakson's request. The following persons presented testimony: Mary Ellen Doyle, 560 20th Street, Oakland, representing Local 250,- Donna 50;Donna Gerber, no address given, representing the California Nurses Association. The matter was before the Board for discussion and Supervisor Torlakson moved to direct staff to find a legal way for all parties to convene at a public session or forum. Victor Westman, County Counsel, suggested also inviting the Trustee in Bankruptcy. Supervisor Torlakson concurred. Supervisor Smith seconded the motion. Supervisor Rogers clarified that the intent of the motion would be that the meeting would be to work out a mutually agreeable place which might be here or Pittsburg to convene all the parties. Supervisor Torlakson concurred. The vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Smith, DeSaulnier, Torlakson and Bishop NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None Supervisor Torlakson moved to direct staff to extend the deadline. Supervisor Smith seconded the motion. Supervisor Bishop advised that she would not be supporting the motion. Supervisor Torlakson requested that the motion be tabled until next week. Supervisor smith recommended declaring the Board's intent to reschedule the issue of the extension of the deadline on the next open agenda. Supervisor Torlakson concurred that as a clarification to the motion. The vote on the motion was as follows: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, Smith, DeSaulnier and Torlakson NOES: Supervisor Bishop ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that staff is DIRECTED to address the issue of an appropriate public forum for all parties to discuss the County's jpterest in the Los Medanos Community Hospital; and INTENT IS DECLARED to agenda on Sept9mber 26, 1995, a discussion of the status of the County's offer relative to Los Med os Community Hospital. CH IAS MEDANOS COMMUNITY HOSPITAL DISTRICT . s BOARD OF DIRECTORS P. 0. Box 8608 PITTSBURG, CA 94565 Phone No. (510) 427-3.229 FAX No. (510) 427-1669 FAX TRANSKITTA L ` TO: d FAX NO.-646-1059 Contra Costa County PHONE NO. FROM: Linda Douglas FAX NO. 510 427-1669 Los Medanos Comm. Hospital PHONE NO._ 510-427-3229 _ DATE: September 19, 1995 SUBJECT: Responsp to Letter from Contra Costa Count of 9/8/95 Please _consider -the attached letter (with attachment) which is on the Board of Supervisor's agenda for 9/19/95 (agenda 0 D9) . Thank you. ld Attachments Total pages including cover _ 3 LM AGENDA #D9 CH Los Medanos Com7munity'Hospital September 19, 1995 Supervisor Gayle Bishop Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Supervisor Bishop; The Boards of Directors of Los Medanos Community Hospital District and Los Medanos Health Care Corporation met in joint session last night to consider the September 8, 1995 letter we received from Contra costa County regarding its use of our facilities. We appreciate the County's efforts in developing that letter; however, in deliberations last night, the Boards concluded that the Pittsburg community would be best served by attempting to address the County's needs through the District/Mt. Diablo/City of Pittsburg joint powers arrangement that is on the verge of consummation. To that end, we would encourage the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to review our letter of September 7, 1995 (copy attached) and consider convening a meeting such as we suggest. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Al Prince, President Board of Directors Los Medanos Community Hospital District AP:ld Attachment cc, Phil Batchelor Mark Finucane Mike Wall John Connolly Joe Canciamilla Mary Erbez LMCH Board of Directors 2311 Loveridge Road Pittsburg, CA 94565 * (514)432.2200 AGEVI DA #D9 September 70 1996 Gayle Bishop, chair Contra Coate County Board of supervisors 18 Crow Canyon, Court #120 Sim Ramon, CA 94583 Dear Madame Chair: We are w4ting to you, as Chair of the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, in view of today's article f n the Contra Costa Times regarding than Supaory Mss dammon to revive their bid to take over Los Medmos Co==hy Hospital. We would be recasptive to m cling with the key County officials to get a better undes'eta"dittg of their steeds and to dgWm:d as if there an opportunities for a collalora-h in 1i& of this renewed interest in Los Medaoos. Time is of the essence, vines, as you know, we are close to a final proposal with Mt. Diablo Medical Center on a vet m, All parties have spent a great deal of time and effort 3denti savices than to commm* wants, needs and will be able to sa ywL We welcome the ComWs.involv+ement. Out migual goats should be to achieve what is is the best interest of the 00==Ws currant alma fie healthcare needs. We would tip nciaete it if you could ftifitem is meeting, as soon as possible, of all of the parties involved -- County officials, Board of Supervisors, Mt. Diablo Medical Ccnw, the City of Pittsburg and the Los Medanos Hospital M rict. Your help in this magyar is greatly appreciated and we since dy wacame your input. $iticiC<"e�Yr I L. Wall Al Prince J Caadamilla pied{dot CEO . '' Board of Dirmtm WO Mt. ,Diablo mal caucr Loa Medims Hospital. District Civ► of pittaburg LK CH p � LOS MEDANOS COMMUNITY HOSPITAL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS P. 0. Box 8608 PITTSBURG, CA 94565 Phone No. (510) 427-3229 FAX No. (510) 427-1669 FAX TRANS KITTAL T0: Clark of the board FAX NO.-646-1059 Contra Costa County _ PHONE NO. FROM: Linda a glas FAX NO. 510 427-1669 Los Medanos Comm. Hospital PHONE NO- 510-427-3229 DATE: September 19. 1995 SUBJECT: Response to Letter from Contra Costa County of 9/8/95 Please consider the attached letter (with attachment) which is on the Board of Supervisor's agenda for 9/19/95 (agenda # D9) Thank you. ld Attachments Total pages including cover _3 LMAGENDA #D9 CH Los Medanos Community Hospital September 19, 1995 Supervisor Gayle Bishop Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Supervisor Bishop: The Boards of Directors of Los Medanos Community Hospital District and Los Medanos Health Care Corporation met in joint session last night to consider the September 8, 1995 letter we received from Contra costa County regarding its use of our facilities. We appreciate the County's efforts in developing that letter; however, in deliberations last night, the Boards concluded that the Pittsburg community would be best served by attempting to address the County's needs through the District/Mt. Diablo/City of Pittsburg joint powers arrangement that is on the verge of consummation. To that and, we would encourage the- Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to review our letter of September 7, 1995 (copy attached) and consider convening a meeting such as we suggest. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely,. Al Prince, President Board of Directors Los Medanos Community Hospital District AP:ld Attachment cc: Phil Batchelor Mark Finucane Mike Wall John Connolly Joe Canciamilla Mary Erbez LMCH Board of Directors 2311 Loveridge Road • Pittsburg, CA 94565 +► (510)432-2200 A Puhlir Entiry Serving East County 1 14 '+ LOS MEDANOS COMMUNITY HOSPITAL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS P. 0. Box 8608 PITTSBURG, CA 94565 Phone No. (510) 427-3229 FAX No. 510) 427-1669 FAX TRANSMITTAL TO: Smirk of the Board PAX NO-646-1059 Contra Costa County PHONE NO. FROM: Linda Douglas FAX NO. 510 427-1669 Los Medanos Comm. Hospital PHONE NO. 510-427-3229 DATE: Sentember 19, 1995 SUBJECT: Response to Letter from Contra Costa County of 9/8/95 Please consider the attached letter (with attachment) which is on the Board of Supervisor's agenda for 9/19/95 (agenda # D9) . Thank you. Id Attachments Total pages including cover _,3 LM AGENDA #D9 CH Los Medanos Community Hospital September 19, 1995 Supervisor Gayle Bishop Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Supervisor Bishop: The Boards of Directors of Los Medanos Community Hospital District and Los Medanos Health Care Corporation met in joint session last night to consider the September 8, 1995 letter we received from Contra Costa County regarding its use of our facilities. We appreciate the County's efforts in developing that letter; however, in deliberations last night, the Boards concluded that the Pittsburg community would be best served by attempting to address the County's needs through the District/Mt. Diablo/City of Pittsburg joint powers arrangement that is on the verge of consummation. To that and, we would encourage the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to review our letter of September 7,, 1995 (copy attached) and consider convening a meeting such as we suggest. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Al Prince, President Board of Directors Los Medanos Community Hospital District AF:ld Attachment cc: Phil Batchelor Mark Finucane Mike Wall John Connolly Joe Canciamilla Mary Erbez LMCH Board of Directors 2311 Loveridge Road * Pittsburg, CA 94565 * (510)432.2200 A Public Entity Serving East County AGMI A #D9 September ?, 1995 Gayle Bishopx chair Contra Costa Cowxty Board of Supervisors 18 Crow Canyon Court 0120 San Ramon, CA 94583 Dever Madame Chair: we are wddog to you, as C Mk of the Conga Costs County Board of Supervisom in view of today's article in the Contra Costa Tinos regarding the Supwvis&s decision to revive their bid to take oven Los Medanos Community Hospital. We would be receptive to meeting with the key County officials to get a better underetanciing of their needs and to determine if thm are opportunities for a collaborative effort, in lj& of this n=wed interest in Los Medattos. Time is of the essence, since, as you know, we we close to a final proposal with Mt. Diablo Medical Canter on a venture. All parties have spent a;great deal of bone and offort idend*ift Savices that dte community► wants, weds and will be able to support. We welcome the Cotmty's.involvement Out m1mial goals should be to achieve what is in the best interst of the community"s cuomraat and fuzurc healthcare needs. We would appreciate ft if you could facilitate a mooting,as soon as possible,of all of the parties involved County officials, Board of Supervisors, Mt. Diablo Medical Center, the City of Pittsburg and the Los bledanos Hospital DistriaL Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated and we sincerely welcome your input, `elv> L. Wall Al Prince /Clft,� Fo Presidanz & CFA . Cbair, Board of Directors crMt. Diablo Medical Center Los Melones Hospital District ttsburg TEL No . Sep 13 ,95 9 :00 No .002 P .01 SEP 07 '95 04145M IMIC HI)h1INISTRGTIQtd P.21a September 1. 1995 n Gayle Bishop, Chair Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors I� l IS Crow Canyon Court#120 San Rarnon, CA, 94593 Dear Madame Chair: We are writing to you, as Chair of the Conga Costa Cowity Board of Supervisors, in view of today's article in the Contra Costa Times regarding the Nupmisces detbion ttr revive'bei •bid ;• .tq. :_ovcx Us.Moda os Community Hospital, ke would be receptive to meeting with the key County officials to-get a better understanding of it .andga 'n 'L are oppOxtWnities far a collaborative efort lig t•of tx' is i sntemst in Los Medaiws. Time is of the essence, since, as you know, we are close to a final proposal with Mf, Diablo Medical C ,on.a venture' All parties have spent a great deal of time and effort identifying services that the community wants, needs and will be able to support. We welcome the County's involvement. Our mutual goals should be to achieve what is in the bast interest of the community's current and future heatthcare needs. We would appreciate it if you couldhilitata a xzneeting,as song,mg ssl Vis. 9nv6lval -- County officials,"Bb'W of SupcMsoars, Mt. Diablo Medan 5f k T_Itt;bi 'g prd thb`l:os Medanos Hospital District. Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated and we siunoexely welcome your input. sincerely, f cl�ael L. Wall Al Prince d Cmoiamilla President & CEO Chair, Board of Directors ice-Mayor Mt. Diablo Medical Center Los Medanos Hospital District City of Pittsburg Post-n"brand fax transmittal memo 7671 �a+P•ge•• 7b cn- f o. Dept. Phana N a FOX 0 Fac 9 uv to%ru 1�.co Jlu far issssr a.va mzVA-AVO auor uvo uvo i AGENDA #D9 September 7, 1995 04YIe Bishop, Chair Contra Costa Comity Board of Supervisors .18 Crow C,aayou; Court 0120 Sinn Ramon, CA 94583 Dear Madame Chair: We are wdting to you, as Chale of tba Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors, in view of today`s ardele in the Contra Costa Times regarding the Supervisor's dedsion to revive their bid to take over Los MW=s Comtnunhy Hospital. We would be receptive to meeting with the key County officials to get a better,ur ecStanditsg of their noels and to determine if thane are opportunities for a collaborative effort, in light of this renewed interest in Los Madams. Titer is o*"the essencz, since, as you lWw, we are close to a final proposal with Mt. Diablo Medical Center on a venture, All parties have spent a great deal of time and c5m identi** advices that the community wants, needs and will be able to rapport. We welcome the Cour WO involveaae nt. Our Mutual goals should be to achieve what is in the best interert of the ca muniWe current and future b,ealthem treads. We would appmdata it if you could facilitate a mating, as Soon as possible,of all of the parties Involved « County officials, Board of Superrvisors, Mt. Diablo Medical Center, d w City of Pimobu% and the Los bUdanos Hospital District. Your help in this matte is greatly appreciated and we .sincerely weld your input Sisxea+ely, AMAO L. wall Al Prince /FCity 'Ptusideert & CFA Chair; BOW of DiractonMt Diablo MedicalCenterLos Medanos Hospital Districtf Pittsburg y • LK CH LOS MEDANOS COMMUNITY HOSPITAL DISTRICT BOARD OF DIRECTORS P. 0. Box 8608 PITTSBURG, CA 94565 Phone No. (510) 427-3229 FAX No. (510) 427-1669 FAX TRANSMITTAL TO: Smirk of the Board FAX NO-646-1059 Contra Costa County PHONE NO. FROM: Linda Douglas FAX NO. 510 427-1669 Los Medanos comm. Hospital PHONE NO.- 510-427-3229 DATE: September 19, 1995 SUBJECT: Response to Letter from Contra Costa County of 9/8/95 Please consider the attached letter (with attachment) which is on the Board of Sunervisor's agenda for 9/19/95 (agenda # D9) . Thank vou. Id Attachments Total pages including cover _ 3 LM AGENDA #D9 CH Los Medanos Community Hospital September 19, 1995 Supervisor Gayle Bishop Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Supervisor Bishop: The Boards of Directors of Los Medanos Community Hospital District and Los Medanos Health Care Corporation met in joint session last night to consider the September 8, 1995 letter we received from Contra Costa County regarding its use of our facilities. We appreciate the Countyls efforts in developing that letter; however, in deliberations last night, the Boards concluded that the Pittsburg community would be best served by attempting to address the County's needs through the District/Mt. Diablo/City of Pittsburg joint powers arrangement that is on the verge of consummation. To that end, we would encourage the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to review our letter of September 7, 1995 (copy attached) and consider convening a meeting such as we suggest. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely,. Al Prince, President Board of Directors Los Medanos Community Hospital District AP:ld Attachment cc; Phil Batchelor Mark Finucane Mike wall John Connolly Joe Canciamilla Mary Erbez LMCH Board of Directors 2311 Loveridge Road 9 Pittsburg, CA 94565 (510)432.2200 VY1:jt/"lrJ 10.LO "Ulu 441 iuuv LUO az1'L'%UO nVor WJVVJ'UVJ AGENDA #D9 September ?, 1995 Gayle Bishop, Chair Contra Costa County Dowd of Sq visors 18 Crow Canyon Court #120 San Ramon, CA 94583 Dear Madame Chair. We are writing to you, as Chair of the Contra Costa County Boars! of Supervisors, in view of today's article in the Contra Costa Times regarding the Supervisor's decision to revive their bid to take over Los Madams Communi 09/19/95 11:17 $`510 427 1669 LOS NEDANOS HOSP _Z 002/003 Dolf i AGENDA #D9 CH Los Medanos Community Hospital September 19, 1995 supervisor Gayle Bishop Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Supervisor Bishop: The Boards of Directors of Los Medanos Community hospital District and Los Medanos Health Care Corporation met in joint session last night to consider the September 8, 1995 letter we received from Contra Costa County regarding its use of our facilities. We appreciate the County" s efforts in developing that letter; however, in deliberations last night, the Boards concluded that the Pittsburg community would be best served by attempting to address the County's needs through the District/Mt. Diablo/City of Pittsburg joint powers arrangement that is on the verge of consummation. To that end, we would encourage the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to review our letter of September 71 1995 (copy attached) and consider convening a meeting such as we suggest. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Al Prince, President Board of Directors Los Medanos Community Hospital District AP:ld Attachment cc: Phil Batchelor Mark Finucane Mike Wall John Connolly Joe Canciamilla Mary Erbez LMCH Board of Directors 7-111 T.nvPAdaaRn!aA . Pif#ah»ra rA 0AUX r+eyma21_117nn 09/19/95 11:16 '0510 427 1669 LOS MED.ANOS HOSP 2003/003 AGENDA, #D9 September 7, 1995 Uayle Bishop, CWr Contra Costa County.Board of Supervisors !R Crow Canyon Court #120 San Ramon, CA 44583 Dear Machine Chair: We at; writing to you, as C i& of the Conga Costa County Board of Supervisors, in 'view of 'today's article in the Contra Costa Tinea regarding the Sir's decision to revive their bid to take over Los Medenos C,omaauttfty Hospital. We would be receptive to mating with the key CourAy aSciah to get a b aa undarstandiag of their weeds and to detarvdne if tium are opportimitia for a ccUdx Wdve effort, in light of this renewed interest is Los Meglanos. Time is of do essence, since, as you ]mow, we are close to a fuIal proposal with Mt. Diablo Nodical Center an a venture. All parties have spent a gcent deal of time and cffaat identifying savice:s thax to comm mhY wants, needs ad will be able to seppom We welcome the County's involvement. Our mtttlta1 goals should be to aolsievm what is in the best intemest of the comaumity'a ceuanaat and fature healthem noWs. We would appreciate it if you could facilitac a mating,w soon as poasible, of all of the parties invoolved — County offiicials, Board of Supervisors, Mt. Diablo Medical Center, tba City of Ptttabarg and the Los Medicos HoapW District Your ltalp in this maybes is greatly appreciated and we sin=*Welcome your input Sincerely, /�rir,w•�rwr� -�' L. 'Wall Al Prince /ChY President& CEO C hair, Board of Dircc�Mt Diablo Medical Ginter Los Medawos Hospital District of Pittsburg LMAGENDA #D9 CH Los Medanos Community Hospital September 19, 1995 Supervisor Gayle Bishop Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors 651 Pine Street Martinez, CA 94553 Dear Supervisor Bishop: The Boards of Directors of Los Medanos Community Hospital District and Los Medanos Health Care Corporation met in joint session last night to consider the September 8, 1995 letter we received from Contra Costa County regarding its use of our facilities. We appreciate the County's efforts in developing that letter, however, in deliberations last night, the Boards concluded that the Pittsburg community would be best served by attempting to address the County's needs through the District/Mt. Diablo/City of Pittsburg joint powers arrangement that is on the verge of consummation. To that end, we would encourage the Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors to review our letter of September 7, 1995 (copy attached) and consider convening a meeting such as we suggest. We look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Al Prince, president Board of Directors Los Medanose Community Hospital District AP:ld Attachment cc: Phil Batchelor Mark rinucane Dike Wall John Connolly Joe Canciamilla Mary Erbez LMCH Board of Directors 2311 Loveridge Road • Pittsburg, CA 94565 (510)432-2200 AGENDA 4fD9 Septeaaber 7, 1595 Gayle Bishop, Chair Contra Costa County Board of Supervisors Is Crow Canyon Court #120 San Ramon, CA 94583 Deer Madame Chair: We are wAdq to you, as Chair of the Contra Costa County Board of Suers, in view of today's article in the Contra Costa Times regarding the Supervisor's decision to ravive their bid to take over Los Me =W Community Hospital. We would be receptive to meeting with the key County officials to gtt it bettor andexstauding of their needs and to detemilm If there Are opparamittes for a callaboatve effort, in light of this renewed interest in Los MWms. Time is of the essence, sim, as you know, we are close to a final proposal with Mt Diablo Medical Center on a ventine. All parties have spent a great deal of time and effort idmtib* m vices.that ft co=mnity wants, needs and will be able to support. We welcome the County's involvemeat. Our mt:t0a1 goals could be to sold vs what is in the beat inwest of the community's eurent wad future healthcare needs. We would appreciate it if you could facilitate a meeting, as soon as possible, of all of the parties involved — County officials, Board of Supervisors, Mt. Diablo b"a d Centro dee City of Pltrsburg and the Los Medanos HospW District. Your help in this matter is greatly appreciated and are sincerely wrloome your input. Y� L L CL� L. Wall Al Prince /City Cancjamiva Prasident & CEO , Chair, Board of Diractus iWbiwor Mt. Diablo Medical Center Los Madams Hospital District of Pittsburg D. 10 THE BOARD OR SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on _September 19, .1995,_ by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Rogers, DeSaulnier, Torlakson, Bishop NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: Supervisor Smith SUBJECT: East County Schools Mitigation Fee The Board received the recommendations of Val Alexeeff, Director, Growth Management & Economic Development Agency, as set forth in the attached report on the East County Schools Mitigation Fee including the final agreement to insure the fulfillment of conditions imposed to mitigate school facility needs in East County as well as being consistent with the General Plan. The Chair noted that a letter from Sanford M. Skaggs of the Law Firm of McCutchen, Doyle, Brown .& Enerson, 1331 North California Boulevard, Walnut Creek 94596, was received who expressed concerns on behalf of their client, Centex, the developer of Pacific Waterways near Discovery Bay. The following persons spoke in support of Mr. Alexeeff's recommendations: Dan Boatwight, representing the Hofmann Company, (no address given) ; Doug Adams, representing the Brentwood School District, 255 Gothric Lane, Brentwood; Dan Smith, representing the Liberty Union High School District, 20 Oak Street, Brentwood; and Peggy Green, (no address given) , Byron. Eric Hasseltine, 3182 Old Tunnel Road, Lafayette, spoke in opposition to the recommendations. All persons desiring to speak were heard. At the conclusion of the discussion on the issues presented with respect to the mitigation fees, the Board took the following actions: 1. ACCEPTED the final agreement relative to the East County Schools Mitigation Fee as sufficient to fulfill conditions imposed to mitigate school facility needs in East County and as consistent with the General Plan; 2. DIRECTED GMEDA staff to implement these recommendations by establishing necessary notification and procedure methodology; 3. DIRECTED that the Facilities Review Committee include a representative of the City of Brentwood or the County; 4. DIRECTED that staff report to the Board on October 10, 1995, on the status of the vested maps and this policy; and 5. URGED all parties to put together a study of the facilities. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN . ATTESTED: _September 19, 1995 Phil Batchelor,Clerk of the Board of Supervisors and County Administrator BY Q• �4. :22rtfL<� , Deputy cc: Gmeda School Districts County Counsel GMEDA Departments TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS FROM: VAL ALEXEEFF, DIRECTOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT & ECONOMIC :DEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: SEPTEMBER 19, 1995 SUBJECT: EAST COUNTY SCHOOLS MITIGATION FEE SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDA'rION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT the final agreement (Attachment A) as sufficient to fulfill conditions imposed to mitigate school facility needs in East County and as consistent with the General Plan. DIRECT GMEDA staff to implement these recommendations by establishing necessary notification and procedures. FISCAL IMPACT: The fee and other provisions of the agreement represent an impact on new home purchases in order to provide commensurate school facilities. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS: Described on following pages. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: \ YES SIGNATURE: V AAOto�� _RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON September J_9 19 9 5%PPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE.O 'UPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRU 'AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AN NTERED ON THF. —UNANIMOUS BSENT ) MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF PERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. AYES: NOES: ATTESTED 9: 1 9 9 5 ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PHIL.BATCHE CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPF.RVISO AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR VA:dg 13Y ,DEPUTY schoolsl.bo Contact: Val Alexeeff(646-1620) CC: County Administrator County Counsel GMEDA Depailments East County School Districts(via GMEDA) BIA(via GMEDA) VA:dg schools2.h i CONTEXT FOR EAST COUNTY SCHOOLS FEE On July 25, 1.995, the Board of Supervisors accepted the agreement reached by the East County school districts and the BIA as a means to satisfy school mitigation conditions for the present Hofinaunn approval, firture entitlements, and entitlement approvals that carried the condition of "will-serve". Since the development cominu pity and the school districts in East Contra Costa County have come to an agreement regarding school fees. The responsibility of the County and the Brentwood School District will be to incorporate this agreement within the process of development approval as permitted by law. The purpose of this paper is to provide an outline of issues and procedures for the circumstances pertaining to this agreement. An overview, prepared by the school district, is attached. CURRENT PRACTICE State law (Section 53080) has established the current rate of school reimbursement at $1.72 per square foot. It is acknowledged by all parties familiar with capital facility needs of a growing school district that this amount is inadequate. A growing district describes a situation that there is inadequate capacity districtwide rather than a shift in population from one area within the district to another. Disagreement remains regarding who should fund the district capital facilities and at what arnount. Most agree that the State has accepted primary responsibility, but does not have the funds to back it up. The demand for new facilities due to the growth of school age population has overwhelmed the financial resources coinmitted to schools. Sentiment exists that this is the State's problem, let the State solve it. While such a posture may be appealing, not many are willing to sacrifice their community or their children to prove a point. The problem in growth areas has been left to the local interests. A major hurdle faced by local entities is the politization of the process on the State level. There exists no clear procedure in statute or in case law for adequate school finance though specific points can be found in statutes and decisions. Representatives of different positions extract specific aspects of the law that may defend particular positions, but do not provide a definitive solution, process for school development, or complete rebuttal of other positions. CEQA has become the forum for identifying mitigation concerns and implementing general plan policies. Countywide general plan policies are insufficiently detailed to set procedures for each district, therefore, they must be worked out on the district level. SCHOOL DISTRICTS The school districts' perspective is oriented to seats in the school facility. There are practical limits to classroom size and school capacity. Experience with overcrowding demonstrates rapidly diininishing quality of education and safety on campus. Evaluation of campus and classroom capacity can be made to determine what are the limits of this factor. Double sessions and year-round schools also expand capacity. In each case, the cost of operation increases substantially due to State educational Vn:dg schools.fee (8/95) I I � T requirements, equal opportunity restrictions, and wear and tear on facilities. Should facility issues be the deciding factor in the approach to education in a given district? Projecting the actual need for facilities and evaluating the means to provide these facilities in any given semester in the future, requires considerable skill and some luck. Buildout rates, cohert survival rates, transfer rates, and area boundaries must be developed into a methodology that neither grossly inflates or deflates potential need. Gentrification is also a concern since schools in other County districts have closed down due to aging of the population. What will happen to the investment in this area twenty years hence? School districts have significant experience in setting curriculum, but little experience in construction. Ample experiences abound in school facility cost overruns. It is important to provide adequate oversight and balance to desires for expensive options. The development community survives by its ability to keep costs under control. A merging of school program components with constriction management components in development of new facilities are necessary to keep costs in line. DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY The concern of homebuilders is whether their product will sell within.a certain price range. If that range is exceeded, more competitive houses will sell instead. The school fees come in addition to increased traffic fees, water and sewer hook up fees, police fees, fire district fees, park fees, child care fees, and drainage fees. In addition, specific mitigation fees may also be required. If Vacaville, Los Banos, Dixon, Patterson, or Escalon have relatively similar commute times to employment centers and are more competitive, then they will be selected on a least-cost basis. The notion of affordable housing becomes abstract in the process. If there is truly inadequate school capacity, how can affordability be measured in the absence of schools? In the entire fee question, are rows of tenements with inadequate services and facilities, the solution to affordability? The answer is a rhetorical "no", but the present alternative of independent districts charging increasing fees with little coordination integration or accountability will not remain a satisfactory answer. It has been unacceptable for new homebuilders to say they shouldn't have to pay for schools unless they provide an alternative to ensuring adequate facilities to house new students. It is true that pre-Prop 13 financing came through property taxes and bond measures rather than fees, exactions and assessment districts. No one is predicting a return to those times. At this point, we have not come up with a better answer than new home fees or facilities' districts (assuming that avoiding or ignoring the problem is not a viable solution). It is reasonable to demand efficient programing and cost-effective construction of facilities. It is reasonable to create financing instruments that do not have unintended effects. It is reasonable to require equitability amongst developers within a given area. vn:dg schoo►s.eee (8/95) 2 1 It is reasonable to seek other solutions and have new homebuyers a last resort rather than first impulse. CONTRA COSTA COUNTY If inadequate school facilities exist, development camlot be supported. The ultimate response is for the County is to declare a moratorium until facility solutions occur. The County wants to avoid such a response since it will effect everyone in the given area. The position of the County is strengthened with CEQA. An impact of inadequate school facilities begs a clear mitigation, particularly at the time of legislative entitlement. The school districts provide the expertise in this area. They are a responsible agency and their solutions must be considered. The County looks for needs' assessment and alternatives to be judged for efficiency. Non-school solutions are also considered provided the matter is not simply deferred to the State or fiih>re legislation. The County is concerned about the effect of the fees on new homebuyers and is looking for the most efficient solution possible in facility development and use. The County procedures are affected by State statute, which, as mentioned previously, are clear on some points, but not on others. Should an applicant come in for a General plan amendment or rezoning, the enviromuental impact analysis will indicate an impact, overcrowding, and a mitigation, through joining the conununity facilities district. In order to proceed with the entitlement, the district must be joined. In the event there is a final map recorded with no conditions, building pen-nits can be obtained with no legal requirements. In situations where there exists a "will serve letter" condition or a tentative map that requires revision, a number of possibilities exist that must be evaluated on a case-by-base basis. Broader participation will reduce costs for everyone, but various stages of approval offer varying rights and obligations. The following represents the basic processing response. Contra Costa Procedures 1. In the event a general plan or zoning is requested that may result in increased units in the Liberty High School District attendance area, the application will not be brought to final hearing, unless otherwise required by law or direction, until a satisfactory agreement has been reached with the school district. 2. In the event that a final map has been approved with no conditions for schools, any fees required by State law will be collected by the involved school district at time of building penult. 3. For projects that have a "will-serve" letter requirement, it will be assumed, unless conditions of approval state otherwise, that the "will-serve" requirement can be satisfied by entering into agreement with the respective school districts. VA:dg schools.fec (8/95) 3 Addendum to Discovery Bay West # 0, ContrE J, TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS Costa Count, U FROM: VAL ALEXEEFF, DIRECTOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT & ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AGENCY DATE: JULY 25, 1995 SUBJECT: RESOLUTION OF DEVELOPER/SCHOOL FACILITY MITIGATION IN FAR EAST COUNTY SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: ACCEPT the attached agreement as fulfillment of the conditions to mitigate school facilities in East County. FISCAL IMPACT: Additional staff work and initial administration should be recoverable within the fee structure for applications. BACKGROUND/REASONS FOR RECOMMENDATIONS: While the public hearing is closed, the matter has been continued in order for the five school districts in East County, the Hofmann Company, and the BIA to come up with an agreement on the manner and amount of funding to mitigate school impacts from new development. The attached document is the agreement between the School Districts and the Hofmann Company which fulfills the conditions for Hofmann Company, and will serve as a model for future development within the school districts of Liberty, Byron, Knightsen Oakley, and Brentwood. While this solves the matter between developers and the school districts, the County's role in administration and enforcement will still receive some refinement and staff will return at a subsequent date with County procedures to implement this agreement. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: —YES SIGNATURE: 4 J,.k.- (�V� RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE Y OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON "PROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AND ENTERED UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. AYES: NOES: ATTESTED ABSENT: ABSTAIN: PHIL BATCHELOR,CLERK OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR VA:dg BY DEPUTY schools.bo Contact: Val Alexft-ff(646-1620) CC: County Administrator County Counsel GMEDA Departments School Districts(via GMEDA) Hofmann Company(via GMEDA) BIA(via GMEDA) 4 ATTACHMENT A AU 6. L,, QAAnV TO SCHOOL MITIGATION BOARD ORDER 9_19_95 OVER'V'IEW OF EAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL FACILITIES FUNDING AND MITIGATION AGREEMENT A. GENERAL Thee East Contra Costs County School Facilities Funding and Mitigation Agreement ("Agreement") has been negotiated to provide a method for financing the cost of new school facilities needed ars a result of new development being approved in East Contra Costa County. The school districts participating in the Agreement are: Liberty Union High School District, Brentwood Union School District, Byron Union School District, Knightsen Elementary School District and Oakley Union Elementary School District. Financing of the school facilities will be coordinated with the Fast Contra Costa School Facilities Financing Authority, a joint powers agency comprised of the school districts in East Contra Costa County. Developers seeking legislative development approvals through either the city or county would execute an acknowledgment of their obligations whereby they would agree to be bound by the terms of the Agreement. Negotiation of the terms of the Agreement has included participation by developers, the Northern California Building Industry Association, Contra Costa County and City of Brentwood representatives. B. MITIGATION PAYMENTS Mitigation payments shall be paid to cover the anticipated costs of needed new school facilities. Ile mitigation payments shall be increased pursuant to a construction index and review by an oversight committee. 1. Liberty Union High School District. The mitigation payment amounts vary depending upon the number of dwelling units which agree to the terns of the Agreement and the date such units are included in the Agreement. If less than 3,000 dwelling units agree to be bound by the Agreement by August 31, 1995, the mitigation payment will be based upon the square footage of the units constructed, with an average mitigation payment of$4,737. If 3,000 to 5,999 dwelling units agree to be bound by the Agreement, the mitigation payment will vary based on the number of units participating with a minimum amount of$2,500 per unit to a maximum of$4,737. If 6,000 dwelling units agree to be bound by August , -Se-P7-. 2 2- 1995, those 6,000 units shall pay the sum of$2,500 per dwelling unit. Any units over the fust 6,000 or those signing after August-H, 1995, shall pay the mitigation payment amount based on square footage with an average of$4,737. S&V . 2 2- 2. Elementary School Districts. Mitigation payments shall be based on dwelling unit size. There will be no annual special taxes on undeveloped property. There will be no BAKW&G/whwh1daM7 t ` r annual special taxes on developed property located with the City of Brentwood. Annual special taxes on developed property In Zone 2 wW be based on dwelling unit size. C. FORMATION OF COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT The school districts shall form a community facilities district to authorize the issuance of bonds and levy of special taxes on property participating in the Agreement. Developers may avoid the levy of special taxes on their developed property by paying the above-listed mitigation payments in advance. The Agreement also provides for the levy of special taxes on undeveloped property, if necessary, to ftwd shortfalls in needed school facilities. A summary of the rate and method of apportionment of the special taxes for the community facilities district is attached hereto as Attachment "1". Financing assumptions include S% for issuance costs, 10% set aside for a reserve fund and a 30-year amortization. Formation costs will be borne by the school districts. However, such amounts shall be refunded out of the proceeds of the bond sales. D. CREDIT FUNDS Provisions are included in the Agreement for reducing the school facility costs to be funded by the community facilities district. Monies received by the State of California, local funds from the sale of general obligation bonds or other similar financings and developer fee monies shall be used to reduce any unfunded construction requirements. Credit funds do not include the first $12.8 million of State funding received by Liberty Union High School District for Liberty's school facilities. E. OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE The Agreement provides for a school district/developer oversight committee to be formed. The committee shall consist of a representative of the school districts, a representative of the Financing Authority, a representative of the developers and a representative of the Northern California Building Industry Association. If necessary, a fifth representative, preferably from the county or city shall be appointed. The purpose of the committee shall be to meet on an annual basis prior to December 1 and review the costs of proposed school facilities, funding sources and timing for commcncement of construction. BAM&r,1whwhjda2737 2 Recording Requested by ) and when recorded mail to: ) ) ) } Exempt: Government Code Section 6143 ) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF OBLIGATIONS OF PARTICIPATING DEVELOPER EAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL FACILITIES FUNDING AND MITIGATION AGREEMENT This Acknowledgment of Obligations ("Acknowledgment") is entered into as of 1995, by and between , hereinafter referred to as " " and School District(s), Participating School District(s). The real property of , which is the only property subject to this Acknowledgment, is the real property shown on Exhibit "i", attached hereto and incorporated herein, consisting of (" Property" which is also a "Participating Property" defined in the Agreement more particularly described hereafter). , by execution of this Acknowledgment, acts as one of the Participating Developers and agrees to the terms of the East Contra Costa County School Facilities Funding and Mitigation Agreement ("Agreement"), a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "2". Except as expressly contained herein, the remaining terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. I hereby certify that I am authorized and directed to sign this Acknowledgment. SCHOOL DISTRICT By: By: President Superintendent BAKW&GlwhwAjd/22296b County 1 ti PROPERTY DESCRIPTION EXHIBIT "I" 1 Recording Requested by ) and when recorded mail to: ) Liberty Union High ) School District ) 20 Oak Street ) Brentwood, California 94513 ) Attention: Mr. Dan Smith ) Exempt: Government Code § 6103 Space above this line for Recorder's use only EAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL FACILITIES FUNDING AND MITIGATION AGREEMENT THIS EAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL FACILITIES FUNDING AND MITIGATION AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is made as of July 25, 1995, and is entered into between East Contra Costa School Facilities Financing Authority,- a joint powers agency established and existing under the laws of the State of California ("Authority"); Liberty Union High School District ("Liberty"), Brentwood Union School District ('Brentwood"), Byron Union School District ("Byron"), Knightsen Elementary School District ("Knightsen"), and Oakley Union Elementary School District ("Oakley"), public school districts within the State of California (hereinafter collectively "Participating School Districts"); participating governmental agencies ("Agencies"), if any, as listed on Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein, which may be amended to include additional Agencies: participating developer(s) ("Participating Developer" or "Participating Developers") as listed on Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein, which may be amended to include additional developers. This Agreement is entered into to provide a method for financing the cost of new School Facilities. (as hereinafter defined) needed as a result of new development approved within the boundaries of Participating School Districts. This Agreement shall apply to those portions of real property of the Participating Developers at such times and to the extent that the Participating Developer agrees to the terms of this Agreement by way of execution of an Acknowledgment of Obligations as set forth herein on Exhibit "C" attached hereto and incorporated herein. WITNESSETH: WHEREAS. the Authority has been established for the purpose of financing needed school facilities on a regional basis for the Participating School Districts in East Contra Costa County; and WHEREAS. the Authority and Participating School Districts propose to form one or more community facilities districts ("CFD") for financing School Facilities; and a.Axw&oins/tvaovn oe 1 07r0195 S A ! . `J WHEREAS, the Participating Developers own certain real property which is proposed for approval by governmental agencies having jurisdiction over such property and which property Participating Developers intend to be subject to this Agreement (the "Participating Property"); and WHEREAS, development of the Participating Property may require the provision of additional School Facilities for the Participating School Districts necessary to serve the student population expected to be generated as a result of such development of the Participating Property; and WHEREAS, Participating School Districts, Authority, Agencies and Participating Developers wish to create a method (other than school impact fees authorized under Government Code Section 53080) to finance the cost of School Facilities for the Participating School Districts necessary to serve the student population to be generated by the development of the Participating Property, which will satisfy their obligation to fund School Facilities as required by the implementation of the General Plans of governmental agencies and conditions of approval of proposed development of the Participating Property; and WHEREAS, Authority and Participating School Districts have established a summary of the rate and method of apportionment ("RMA") for the special taxes ("Special Taxes") to be levied by the proposed CFD(s) in order to insure timely payment of the cost of the School Facilities at time of issuance of building permits as provided in Exhibits "D" and "E" attached hereto and incorporated herein; NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the terms and conditions herein set forth, Participating School Districts and Participating Developers hereby agree as follows: 1. Recitals. The foregoing recitals are herein incorporated. 2. Definitions. Capitalized terms as used in this Agreement shall have the meanings set forth herein or as set forth in the RMA (Exhibits "D" and "E"): "City" means any incorporated City which elects to become one of the Agencies. "County" means the County of Contra Costa. California. "Credit Funds" means the following, to be allocated to the Participating Property: (i) State Funds. Any and all funds. and in kind contributions, received from the State by Participating School Districts for the construction of the School Facilities subsequent to the date of this Agreement for students from future development of the Participating Property. State Funds does not include. but not by way of limitation. funds "AKW&G/AB/W20975 08 07/20195 received for technology, modernization or reconstruction of existing school facilities, or School Facilities for existing development, so long as such funding does not increase the capacity of Participating School Districts to accommodate additional new students. IState Funds also do not include monies received by Participating School Districts pursuant to Sections 53080 and 65995 of the Government Code presently in the amount, as to residential development, of$1.72 per square foot of assessable area. (ii) Local Funds. The proceeds of any certificates of participation or lease revenue bonds to be paid from general fund revenues for permanent financing of permanent facilities or general obligation bonds authorized and issued subsequent to the date of this Agreement for permanent financing of permanent School Facilities for Participating School Districts. This includes all funds excluded as subparagraphs (i), (ii) and (iii) of paragraph (d) of Section 3.3 of this Agreement. This excludes any revenues from or relating to the Mitigation Payments. Special Taxes or financing proceeds relating to Special Taxes of the CFD. Local Funds does not include, but not by way of limitation, funds received for technology, modernization or reconstruction of existing school facilities, or School Facilities for existing development so long as such funding does not increase the capacity of Participating School Districts to accommodate additional new students. (iii) Subsequent Government Mandates. If, notwithstanding the provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, Participating School Districts, or any other subdivision of the State of California are mandated or permitted by existing law or future legislation to impose and collect any fee or charge, however denominated, for the financing of School Facilities for development of the Participating Property, the amount of any such fee or charge so collected. (iv) Facilities Credits. Amounts set forth in any facilities'construction agreement for School Facilities constructed by Participating Developers conveyed to Participating School Districts in accordance with Section 4.3 of this Agreement. (v) Calculation of the Amount of Credit Funds from State Funds and Local Funds. The amount of Credit Funds from State Funds and/or Local Funds shall be identified on a facility by facility basis. The amount of any such Credit Funds shall be determined after first satisfying any unfunded construction requirement for a particular School Facility. Thereafter. the amount of such Credit Funds shall be multiplied by the percentage that the Participating Property contributed to the total costs of the particular School Facility. The calculation of such Credit Funds shall not include the first $12.8 million of funding received by Liberty from the State for the School Facilities of Libertv. "Formation Proceedings of the CFD" shall be deemed to have occurred upon the occurrence of the formation of the CFD in accordance with Exhibits "D" and/or "E", as applicable, the expiration of the statute of limitations provided in Section 53359 of the Mello Roos Act (hereinafter "Act"), and the entry of a final non-appealable judgment in a validating action in the Superior Court of County validating the formation, levy of Special Taxes and the authorization of a bond issue for the CFD. This shall include the authorization by the qualified OAKW&G/AB/tL20975 09 3 07120/95 electors for the levy and collection by the CFD of the Special Taxes and the authorization by the qualified electors of the issuance of bonds ("Bond Issue"). Bonds shall not be sold prior to, or in amounts greater than, needed by Participating School Districts. "General Obligation Bonds" means any local ballot proposition presented to and approved by the electorate of Participating School Districts after the date of this Agreement authorizing Participating School Districts to issue general obligation bonds. "Index" means the Lee Saylor Class D Construction Index. In the event the Lee Saylor Class D Construction Index ceases to be published, the index used by the State Allocation Board in place of the.Lee Saylor Class D Construction Index shall be applied or any comparable index as reasonably determined by Participating School Districts. In the event the Index is not sufficient to cover increases in costs related to the School Facilities, such as increases in land costs or other unanticipated expenses, the applicable Participating School District shall present such documentation to the Oversight Committee, as defined in Section 7.6 herein, who shall review such documentation and, if appropriate, increase the Index for that year in an amount not to exceed 4% per annum. "Mitigation Payment" means a payment to be made as provided under Section 6 of this Agreement to Participating School Districts prior to the issuance of each residential building permit in the amounts set forth in Table 1 of Exhibits "D" and "E" for the benefit of Participating School Districts. The Mitigation Payment shall be increased pursuant to the Index commencing July 1, 1996, and each July 1st thereafter. In the event the Formation Proceedings of the CFD are not completed, for whatever reason, prior to the issuance of any residential building permit for structures on the Participating Property, the Mitigation Payment to Participating School Districts shall be paid prior to issuance of a building permit in these initial amounts as adjusted annually as herein provided. If owners of Participating Property consist of 6,000 dwelling units prior to August 31, 1995, the Mitigation Payment shall be the Original Mitigation Agreement amount as set forth on Table 1 of the RMA. If owners of Participating Property consist of between 5,999 dwelling units and 3.000 dwelling units prior to August 31. 1995, the Sliding Scale Amount as set forth on Table 1 of the RMA shall be the Mitigation Payment. If owners of Participating Property consist of less than 3,000 dwelling units on August 31, 1995, the Mitigation Payment applicable to such dwelling units shall be the Ordinary Dwelling Unit amount set forth on Table 1 of the RMA. If owners of Participating Property consist of more than 6,000 dwelling units, those dwelling units in excess of 6,000 shall pay the Ordinary Dwelling Unit amount set forth on Table 1 of the RMA. If more than 6,000 dwelling units execute the Agreement, for those dwelling units determined by Liberty to be in excess of 6,000 the One-Time Special Tax shall be the Ordinary Dwelling Unit amount which varies based on dwelling unit size as set forth on Table 1 of the RMA. "School Facilities" means the acquisition, construction and/or financing of land and capital school facilities consisting of interim and permanent School Facilities for grades K through 12. for Participating School Districts, including central support, administration, special education facilities, and special education busses. as is consistent with the Master Plans to be approved by the governing boards of the Participating School Districts, together with 9AKw&G/AB/W20975 oa 4 OV20/9s furniture. equipment and technology, to serve needs created by residential development.of the Participating Property. "State" means the State of California. 3. Mitigation of School Facilities Impacts. 3.1 Formation Proceedings of the CFD. Subsequent to August 31, 1995, Authority, and/or applicable Participating School Districts, shall initiate and diligently pursue to completion the Formation Proceedings of CFD No. 95-1, or a comparable individual community facilities district or districts, to include the Participating Property. The Formation Proceedings of the CFD shall be accomplished on the basis of the provisions set forth in Exhibits "D" and/or "E", as applicable. Participating Developers agree to participate in such Formation Proceedings of the CFD as it relates to their property and execute all documents reasonably requested by Authority or Participating School Districts and required for the Formation Proceedings of the CFD in order to accomplish the Formation Proceedings on or before December 31. 1995 or as soon as practicable thereafter. Participating School Districts which pay the costs of formation of the CFD shall be reimbursed for such costs out of the proceeds of a Bond Issue. Participating Developers which annex into the CFD, shall pay the costs for annexation. 3.2 CFD Operation and Mitigation Authority. Provided Authority and applicable Participating School Districts are in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement, the CFD shall be authorized to finance the School Facilities required by development of the Participating Property as set forth in this Agreement. The CFD shall levy or collect only the Special Taxes as set forth in Exhibits "D" and/or "E", as applicable to this Agreement, as increased pursuant to the Index. 3.3 Prohibition of Additional Mitigation. Provided a Participating Developer is in compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. the Participating Developer and their respective successors and assigns, shall be deemed to have fulfilled and mitigated their entire obligation to finance School Facilities to serve the student population to be generated by the residential development of the Participating Property upon the occurrence of the Formation Proceedings of the CFD or the payment of the Mitigation Payment described in Section 6 of this Agreement. The Authority and Participating School Districts agree that upon payment of the Mitigation Payment or the applicable Special Taxes for the period of time specified in the RMA as set forth in Exhibits "D" and/or "E" to record a notice absolving such property from any future obligations under this Agreement. Such notice shall be recorded with the County Recorder of County upon receipt of payment by Participating Developer of any actual reasonable costs of recording such notice. This Agreement. as to the School Facilities needs of the residential development of the Participating Property, shall be deemed to satisfy any and all present and future requirements and conditions of the entitlements for the residential development of the Participating Property. Participating School Districts. including their successors and assigns, hereby covenant that they will not under any circumstances at any time: 9AKW&G/AB/uW20975.09 5 07/20/95 (a) exercise any power or authority (including, but not limited to, Section 53080 of the California Government Code or any other provision of applicable law) to levy a fee, charge, dedication, or other form of requirement against any development of the Participating Property (including any Senior Citizen Housing as defined in Section 65949.1 of the Government Code and any commercial or industrial property development) undertaken within the boundaries of the Participating Property for the purpose of funding or financing any School Facilities. If a Senior Citizen Housing dwelling unit is converted to use other than as specified in Section 65999.1 of the Government Code, it shall be subject to the Special Taxes for the remaining portion of a period of thirty (30) years from the date of the issuance of the building permits for such dwelling unit or units. (b) require the City or County or any other governmental entity to exercise, or cooperate with the City or County or any other governmental entity in the exercise of, the power under Title 7, Division 1, Chapter 4.7 of the California Government Code (commencing with Section 65970) or any other provision of applicable law, to require the dedication of land, the payment of fees in lieu thereof. or both for School Facilities as a condition to the approval of residential development of the Participating Property (including any Senior Citizen Housing and any commercial.or industrial development). (c) oppose or legally challenge any residential development including rezoning of the Participating Property on any basis or seek other forms of mitigation for any residential development of the Participating Property (including Senior Citizen Housing) with respect to the adequacy of School Facilities, including, but not limited to, the establishment of developer fees, the payment of any money by Developer (regardless of how denominated or labelled), or the dedication of land permitted by present or future State law, rulings, regulations or court decisions if the proceeds of such fees, assessments or requirements will be used to finance or fund the School Facilities. (d) issue bonds, except a Bond Issue. or incur any other form of indebtedness, payable from taxes or assessments of any kind applicable to the Participating Property (other than Participating School Districts' portion of the existing ad valorem property taxes including any ad valorem taxes for general obligation bonds of the Participating School Districts) levied on any property within the boundaries of the CFD, the proceeds of which are to be used in whole or in part. directly or indirectly, for funding or financing the School Facilities. The limitations contained in this clause (d) shall not be applicable to any (i) General Obligation Bonds. (ii) bonds of a community facilities district formed under the Act or other local financing, which may be approved by the registered voters within the boundaries of a Participating School District, or (iii) assessments pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, or other assessment proceedings available to Participating School Districts, providing for an assessment district encompassing the Participating School District. li AK W&G/AB/u/20975 09 6 O W20195 3.4 Other ProRerties. In order to equalize treatment of landowners seeking to develop within School Districts' boundaries, Participating School Districts agree to use their best efforts to enter into agreements comparable to this Agreement with Participating Developers in order to obtain financial commitments for School Facilities from them at least equal to the commitments for the amount of the Mitigation Payments and/or Special Taxes set forth in Exhibits "D" and "E" to this Agreement. However, if notwithstanding the use of such best efforts, Participating School Districts are unable to enter into any such other agreements with other Participating Developers, such inability shall not constitute a breach of this Agreement. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, it is agreed that no other agreement shall be more favorable to any other Participating Developers. In the event Participating School Districts enter into any other agreement after the date of this Agreement relating to materially less burdensome Mitigation Payment or One-Time Special Taxes per dwelling unit for the classes of property set forth in Exhibits "D" and "E" to this Agreement, or other material provisions, Participating School Districts shall give notice to Participating Developers of such other agreement by providing Participating Developers with a copy of such other agreement in the manner provided in Section 7.7 herein concurrently when Participating School Districts record such other agreement with the office of the County Recorder of the County. If any other agreement contains provisions which are materially less burdensome than those contained in this Agreement, Participating School Districts shall promptly amend upon request of Participating Developers, this Agreement to incorporate, on a prospective basis, such more favorable provisions. The effective date of any such amendment to this Agreement shall be the effective date of the other agreement containing such more favorable provisions. 3.5 Covenant to Construct School Facilities and Serve Students. At the time sufficient funds are received pursuant to this Agreement, and other agreements or from other sources, Participating School Districts covenant for the benefit of Participating Developers that they will use their best efforts to acquire or construct School Facilities sufficient to serve the students generated from development within the Participating Property. 3.6 Disclosure of Special Taxes. Participating Developers hereby covenant to Participating School Districts that Participating Developers shall provide. or by contract with any developer or merchant builder of any part of the Participating Property require to be provided. the "Notice of Special Tax" required by Section 53341.5 of the Act or any similar successor statute. Developer expressly acknowledges that Participating School Districts, Authority and the CFD shall have no duty or obligation and shall incur no liability, jointly or severally, with respect to the foregoing covenant of Participating Developer. 4. Credit Funds. 4.1 State Aid Application. Participating School Districts. to the extent that it is realistic and feasible. shall apply for and utilize their best efforts to obtain approval of any State funding for School Facilities for the area within the CFD or a comparable community facilities district that may become available to Participating School Districts. Subject to the ongoing obligations of Participating School Districts to reasonably seek to obtain State Funds. Participating Developers acknowledge that the risk of denial of any such application by the BAKW&G/ABIW20975 08 7 0X20195 State shall be borne by Participating Developers and by other payers of the Special Taxes within the CFD and shall not be a basis to lodge a protest of any Special Taxes payable or to file a claim for the recovery of any Special Taxes paid. The reasonable fees and charges of any consultant retained by Participating School Districts and expenses to pursue such State funding for the School Facilities may be included in the Administrative Expenses for which the Special Taxes of the CFD may be expended. 4.2 Application of Credit Funds. Developer and Participating School Districts agree that, to the extent legally permissible, the Participating Property's share of any Credit Funds received by a Participating School District shall be applied as provided in Section 53313.9 of the Government Code. It is the intent of this Agreement, that Credit Funds shall be applied proportionately and prospectively to reduce the amount of outstanding bonds, reduce the rate of Special Taxes, and/or shorten the period of time during which Special Taxes are levied. However, the Participating School District, after making a finding that it is not judicious and prudent under all of the then existing circumstances, may apply the Credit Funds in another manner allowed by law. The parties agree that such application shall be made by Participating School District following a determination at a public meeting, notice of which pursuant to Section 6062 of the Government Code has been given, to owners and residents of the Participating Property who shall have an opportunity to appear and be heard as to such determination or determinations. 4.3 School Facilities Provided by Developer. Participating Developers may request alone, or in conjunction with one or more other Participating Developers, that it or they may acquire land and/or construct School Facilities as an alternative means, in whole or in part, for mitigation of its impacts on the School Facilities of Participating School Districts. Any such proposal shall conform to all applicable legal requirements for constructing School Facilities and the Educational Policies of the Participating School Districts, as reasonably determined by Participating School Districts. Participating School Districts shall reasonably accept or not accept such proposal. Any acceptance shall be conditioned on the execution of a facilities construction agreement which in detail covers what is to be built by whom, identifies the assured sources of funding, performance, labor, and material bonds in the amount of 110% of an agreed project cost and the amount of the Facilities Credit. The amount of the Facilities Credit shall be based on a reasonable determination by the Participating School Districts as to what its cost of acquiring or constructing such School Facilities would have been which shall be the amount of the resulting Facilities Credit to Participating Developers. The Facilities Credit shall not be treated as a more favorable agreement as set forth in paragraph 3.4 herein. 5. Binding on Communitv Facilities District. Upon completion of the Formation Proceedings of the CFD, the governing board(s) of applicable Participating School Districts shall cause to be executed such documents as may reasonably be required to confirm that the CFD is bound by this Agreement, and copies of such documents shall be provided to owner(s) of the Participating Property. 6. Payment of Mitieation. If the CFD is not formed prior to the time residential building permits are requested by applicable Participating Developers or if the BAKW&QAB/n/20975M O 07/20/95 Formation Proceedings of the CFD are initiated prior to the time when residential building permits are requested by applicable Participating Developers and Participating Developers either (i) protest the Formation Proceedings of the CFD, (ii) fail to vote at an election thereon, or (iii) vote "no" at an election thereon, Participating Developers shall pay to Participating School Districts the applicable Mitigation Payment per dwelling unit in the amounts as set forth in this Agreement prior to issuance of each building permit for the Participating Property. Upon payment of the Mitigation Payment. the Special Taxes shall not be levied on the applicable property. 7. General Provisions. 7.1 Successors All of the covenants, stipulations, promises and agreements contained in this Agreement by or on behalf of, or for the benefit of, any of the parties hereto. shall bind and inure to the benefit of the successors of the respective parties. This Agreement shall be a covenant and condition on the Participating Property. 7.2 Amendment and Waiver. This Agreement shall be amended only by a written instrument executed by the parties hereto or their respective successors and assignees. All waivers of this Agreement must be in writing and signed by the appropriate authorities of the parties hereto. 7.3 5eveity. If any provision of this Agreement shall be held invalid, illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the validity, legality or enforceability of the remaining portions hereof shall not, in any way, be affected or impaired thereby. 7.4 Integration. This Agreement supersedes any and all other agreements, either oral or in writing, between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. , 7.5 District/Developer Oversight Committee. A District/Developer Oversight Committee ("D/PDOC") shall be formed. The D/PDOC shall consist of a representative of the Participating School Districts. a representative of the Authority, a representative of the Participating Developers and a representative of the Northern California Building Industry Association ("NC/BIA"). If necessary, the four representatives shall jointly appoint a fifth representative, preferably from County, City or Agencies. The D/PDOC shall exist until the School Facilities are substantially completed. Its purpose shall be, prior to December 1, on an annual basis, to review the reasonable costs of the proposed School Facilities. the funding sources, as well as the need for completion and commencement of School Facilities construction in the next fiscal vear. The D/PDOC shall meet for the first time only prior to January 31, 1996 and thereafter. prior to December 1. The Participating School Districts in cooperation and good faith, after consultation with D/PDOC. shall annually increase or decrease and if reasonably determined appropriate. thereafter increase or decrease the projected costs of the School Facilities in accordance with reasonably equivalent School Facilities throughout Northern California. in accordance with applicable law. and the then BAKW&G/A9/ta/20975 08 9 01/70/95 applicable reasonable Education Policies of the applicable Participating School Districts but not to amounts greater than the Equivalent Amounts set forth and adjusted as provided in Exhibits "D" and "E". The objective shall be to assure the lowest reasonable cost for the School Facilities and costs to Participating Developers and taxpayers, while maintaining the Participating School Districts' objectives of availability of adequate School Facilities concurrent with development of the Participating Property, considering students generated by other development as well, consistent with applicable State area standards and cost limits. Participating School Districts will consider and, if appropriate, implement reasonable use of cost saving alternatives with regard to method of design, construction techniques, construction materials and construction management so as to assure the lowest, reasonable, feasible cost while still meeting the applicable legal requirements, reasonable Educational Policies of the Participating School Districts and not substantially increasing future operation and maintenance costs of the Participating School Districts. In the event that such determinations affect the cost of School Facilities, then the Mitigation Payments or Special Taxes of the CFD as herein specified, shall be adjusted proportionately with such determination. 7.6 Notices. Demands and Communication. Formal notices. demands and communications among Participating School Districts. Authority, Participating Developers and Agencies hereunder shall be sufficiently given if(i) personally delivered, (ii) mailed by registered or certified mail, postage prepaid. return receipt requested, or (iii) delivered by Federal Express or other reliable private express delivery service to the principal offices of Participating School Districts, Authority, Participating Developers, or Agencies as set forth below. Such written notices, demands and communications may be sent in the same manner to such other addresses as either party may from time to time designate by mail as provided in this Section. Such notices demands or communications shall be deemed received upon delivery if personally served, or upon the expiration of three (3) business days if given by other approved means as specified above. If to Participating School Districts: To the Applicable Participating School District as set forth below: Liberty Union High School District 20 Oak Street Brentwood. California 94513 Brentwood Union School District 250 First Street Brentwood. California 94513 Byron Union School District 14401 Bvron Highwav Byron. California 94514 OAKW&G/AB/u/20975A 10 012019S Knightsen Elementary School District Delta Road Post Office Box 265 Knightsen. California 94548 Oakley Union Elementary School District 91 Mercedes Lane, Post Office Box 7 Oakley, California 94561 If to Authority: East Contra Costa School Facilities Funding Authority c/o Knightsen Elementary School District Post Office Box 265 Knightsen, California 94548 If to Participating Developers: As set forth on Exhibit "B" If to Agencies: As set forth on Exhibit "A" 7.7 Arbitration. Any controversy or claim arising out of or relating to this Agreement, or breach thereof shall be settled by binding arbitration in County in accordance with the rules of the American Arbitration Association and judgment upon the award rendered by the arbitrator may be entered in any court having jurisdiction thereof. 7.8 Interpretation. The terms of this Agreement, including all Exhibits hereto, shall not be construed for or against any party by reason of the authorship of this Agreement, but shall be construed in accordance with the meaning of the language used. The Section headings are for purposes of convenience only, and shall not be construed to limit or extend the meaning of this Agreement. 7.9 Recordation. Subordination and Participating School Districts Certification. (a) Recordation. This Agreement or a notice describing the existence of this Agreement and the Participating Property shall be recorded by Participating Developers or by Participating School Districts. The parties hereby agree to execute such documents as may be needed to give such notice. (b) Subordination. Any existing monetary encumbrances of record shall be subordinated to this Agreement concurrent with its execution by the parties or completion of the formation of the CFD, which ever shall first occur, prior to Participating School Districts certifying to County the availability_ of School Facilities for the Participating Property. (c) Participating School Districts Certification. Promptly upon receipt of confirmation of such recordation of the specified subordination, applicable ©AK W&GIAB/WS0975 09 11 07/20/95 Participating School Districts shall provide to Participating Developers written certification, in a form reasonably acceptable to Participating Developers as well as County, that all requirements of Participating School Districts with respect to mitigation of all school impacts from the development of the Participating Property will be satisfied upon performance of the terms of this Agreement. Provided Participating Developers are in compliance with this Agreement, and even though Formation Proceedings of the CFD are not completed Participating School Districts shall promptly provide to County the certification required pursuant to Section 53080(b) of Government Code, or similar successor law, with respect to the issuance of any building permit required for residential development of the Participating Property. 7.10 Execution. This Agreement may be executed in several counterparts each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same Agreement. 7.11 Mutual Cooperation. Each party to this Agreement agrees to cooperate with the others, to act in good faith, to sign any other and further documents, and perform such other acts. as may be reasonably necessary or proper in order to accomplish the intent of this Agreement. The parties shall refrain from doing anything which would render their performance under this Agreement impossible or impractical. 7.12 No Third Partv Beneficiaries. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the parties and their successors and assigns. No other person or entity shall have any right of action based on any provision of this Agreement. 7.13 Existins Brentwood Agreement . The agreement regarding school facilities between Brentwood City Council, Brentwood Union School District and developers entered into on March 12, 1992, shall not be affected by this Agreement. /// enxw&cinaiw20975 oe 12 o7roros 7.14 Exhibits. All Exhibits attached hereto are incorporated into this Agreement by reference. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement on the day and year first above written. LIBERTY UNION H H SCHOOL DISTRICT By: i Superintendent BRENTWOOD UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT By: Superintend&t BYRON UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT, ) S erintdndent KNIGHTSEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT By: V Superintend OAKLEY UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT T 1 / Bv: <<i 7/ �: � Superintendent / :r EAST CONTRA COSTA SCHOOLF" ACILITIES FINANCING AUTHORITY By: i P dent of the Board of Directors BAKW&G/ABtw20975.09 t j 07/20/95 P RTICIPATING GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES EAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL FACILITIES FUNDING AND MrrIGATION AGREEMENT aAKW&G/Ivwiij&22339 EXHIBIT "A" PARTICIPATING DEVELOPERS EAST CONTRA, COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL FACii_,rrrF_ c IIUNDING.AND MITIGATION A GREEWNT The following developers have executed Acknowledgment of Obligations ("Acknowledgment") to the terms of that certain East Contra Costa County School Facilities Funding and Mitigation Agreement: 1. Hofmann Construction Company - real property consisting of approximately 300 dwelling units which property is proposed to be rezoned and developed pursuant to No. 2963-RZ of the County of Contra Costa. Acknowledgment Executed July 25, 1995. BAKW&G/wWAjda2297 EXHIBIT "B" Recording Requested by ) and when recorded mail to: ) Exempt: Government Code Section 6103 ) ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF OBLIGATIONS OF PARTICIPATING DEVELOPER EAST CONTRA COSTA COUNTY SCHOOL FACILITIES FUNDING AND MITIGATION AGREEMENT This Acknowledgment of Obligations ("Acknowledgment") is entered into as of 1995, by and between , hereinafter referred to as " " and School District(s), Participating School District(s). The real property of , which is the only property subject to this Acknowledgment, is the real property shown on Exhibit "l", attached hereto and incorporated herein, consisting of (" Property" which is also a "Participating Property" defined in the Agreement more particularly described hereafter). , by execution of this Acknowledgment, acts as one of the Participating Developers and agrees to the terms of the East Contra Costa County School Facilities Funding and Mitigation Agreement ("Agreement"), a copy of which is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit "2". Except as expressly contained herein, the remaining terms and conditions of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. I hereby certify that I am authorized and directed to sign this Acknowledgment. SCHOOL DISTRICT By: By: President Superintendent 3AKW&G/whwi"d/222% EXHIBIT "C" SUMMARY OF RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF SPECIAL TAXES FOR LIBERTY UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT CFD I. UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY TAXES ZONE 1 AND ZONE 2 Undeveloped Property consists of all parcels in the CFD for which no building permits have been issued. A. One-Time Special Tax (i) If fewer than 3,000 Dwelling Units execute the Agreement before August 31, 1995, the One-Time Special Tax shall be the Ordinary Dwelling Unit amount which varies based on Dwelling Unit size as set forth on Table 1. (ii) If 3,000 - 5.999 Dwelling Units execute the Agreement before August 31, 1995, the One-Time Special Tax shall be the Sliding Scale Amount, which shall be a minimum of$2,500 and a maximum of$4,737 per Dwelling Unit to be calculated based on the number of Dwelling Units as set forth on Table 1. (iii) If 6,000 Dwelling Units execute the Agreement before August 31, 1995, the One-Time Special Tax shall be the Original Mitigation Agreement amount which is $2,500 per Dwelling Unit as set forth on Table I. (iv) If more than 6,000 dwelling units execute the Agreement, for those Dwelling Units determined by the Liberty Union High School District ("Liberty") in excess of 6,000. the One-Time Special Tax shall be the Ordinary Dwelling Unit amount which varies based on Dwelling Unit size as set forth on Table 1. (v) For Dwelling Units which do not execute the Agreement before August 31, 1995, the One-Time Special Tax shall be the Ordinary Dwelling Unit amount which varies based on the Dwelling Unit size as set forth on Table 1. Payment of the One-Time Special Tax shall be made prior to issuance of building permits. B. Secured Interest-Bearina Note Option Instead of paying a One-Time Special Tax. the landowner can delay payment by executing a promissory note based on terms to be set by Liberty. If the terms are unacceptable to a landowner. he may appeal to an Administrative Panel. which can approve a different set of terms with a two-thirds vote. DAKW&G/whwiij&21937 EXHIBIT "D-1" C. Ann al S� pCcial Tax Only occurs when there is a "Cashflow Shortfall" at the time that a School Facility is needed (the "Trigger Event"), as listed in Table 2. Cashflow Shortfall means that the accrued value of the One-Time Special Taxes collected by July 1 of the current Fiscal Year for Zones I and 2, plus the construction component of the bonds supportable by annual Special Taxes on existing Developed Property in Zone 2, plus monies received for new School Facilities from any source, including monies received pursuant to Sections 53080 and 65995 of the Government Code presently in the amount, as to residential development, of$1.72 per square foot of assessable area to pay for specific School Facilities for Liberty as listed in Table 2, is not sufficient to fund such School Facilities. The exact dollar amount of the Maximum Annual Special Tax per Undeveloped Property acre will be determined once the number of undeveloped acres included within the CFD is determined. The actual annual Special Tax levied per Undeveloped Property acre will be based upon the Cashflow Shortfall at that time. No annual Special Taxes may be levied on undeveloped property for which a One-Time Special Tax was previously paid or a Secured Interest-Bearing Note was executed. Those units executing the Agreement prior to August 31, 1995, up to a maximum of 6,000 units, may only be taxed to cover the Cashflow Shortfall in the amount of$12.8 million for the Third Phase of Second High School. If less than 3,000 Dwelling Units execute the Agreement prior to August 31, 1995, no Undeveloped Property annual Special Tax shall be levied on such undeveloped property included within the CFD. D. Increases in Undeveloped Property Special Taxes On each July 1, commencing July 1, 1996, the Maximum Annual Special Tax and the One-Time Special Tax for all Undeveloped Property in Zones I and 2 shall be increased from the previous Fiscal Year's Maximum Annual Special Taxes and One-Time Special Taxes by an amount equal to the annual percentage change in the Lee Saylor Class D Construction Index (the "Index"). In the event the Index is not sufficient to cover increases in costs related to the School Facilities. such as increases in land costs or other unanticipated expenses. Liberty shall present such documentation to the Oversight Committee, as defined in Section 7.6 of the Agreement, who shall review such documentation and, if appropriate. increase the Index for that year in an amount not to exceed 4% per annum. The percentage change in the Index shall be measured for the twelve month period ending May 31 of the previous Fiscal Year. II. DEVELOPED PROPERTY TAXES Developed Property consists of all parcels in the CFD for which one or more residential building permits have been issued. A. Annual Special Tax (1) Zone I No Annual Special Taxes shall be collected from Developed Property in Zone 1. DAKW&tGtwhwfijda1937 EXHIBIT "D-2" (2) Zone 2 (a) No Annual Special Taxes may be levied on Dwelling Units for which a One-Time Special Tax was paid prior to building permit issuance, or for which a Secured Interest Bearing Note was executed prior to issuance of the Certificate of Occupancy. (b) All Dwelling Units for which a One-Time Special Tax was not paid, or for which a Secured Interest Bearing Note was not executed, shall pay Annual Special Taxes based on Dwelling Unit size as listed in Table 3. The figures in Table 3 represent the Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Taxes for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year. An alternative Backup Special Tax based on lot size will also be determined, for use just in case the developer does not build enough dwelling units to cover all debt service payments. The Backup Special Tax shall not apply if the One- Time Special Tax amount was previously paid or a Secured Interest- Bearing Note was executed. B. Increases in the Developed Property Special Taxes On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 1996, the Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Taxes and the Backup Special Taxes for all Developed Property in Zone 2 shall be increased from the previous Fiscal Year's Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Taxes and Backup Special Taxes by an amount equal to the annual percentage change in the Index. In the event the Index is not sufficient to cover increases in costs related to the School Facilities, such as increases in land costs or other unanticipated expenses, Liberty shall present such documentation to the Oversight Committee, as defined in Section 7.6 of the Agreement. who shall review such documentation and, if appropriate. increase the Index for that year in an amount not to exceed 4% per annum. The percentage change in the Index shall be measured for the twelve month period ending May 31 of the previous Fiscal Year. III. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE MAXIMUM ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX TO PROPERTY IN ZONES 1 AND 2 OF CFD NO. 95-1 Commencing Fiscal Year 1995-96 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year, Annual Special Taxes for Liberty shall be levied as follows: First. The Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Tax shall be levied on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property in Zone 2. except for each Assessor's Parcel for which the property owner paid the One-Time Special Tax or executed a Secured Interest-Bearing Note. in which case the Maximum Annual Special Tax shall be waived. If the JPA chooses to levy Annual Special Taxes at rates below 100 percent of the rates listed in Table 3. it shall do so Proportionately for all Land Use Classes listed in these tables. antcw&crwnwr„a21937 EXHIBIT "13-3" Second: If additional monies are needed due to a Cashfiow Shortfall after the first step has been completed, the Annual Special Tax shall be levied in equal percentages on each Assessor's Parcel of Undeveloped Property in Zones I and 2, up to 100% of the Maximum Annual Special Tax for Undeveloped Property. Third: If additional monies are needed due to a Cashflow Shortfall after the first two steps have been completed, then the levy of the Annual Special Tax on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property in Zone 2 whose Maximum Annual Special Tax is determined through the application of the Backup Special Tax shall be increased in equal percentages from the Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Tax up to the Maximum Annual Special Tax for each such Assessor's Parcel. IV. LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX The Annual Special Tax will be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes. Assessor's Parcels in Zone 2 for which a residential building permit was issued prior to March I of a given Fiscal Year shall commence paying Developed Property Annual Special Taxes in the following Fiscal Year. The Developed Property Annual Special Tax shall be levied for a maximum of 35 years for each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property, or until the bonds assigned to that Assessor Parcel have been redeemed, whichever is sooner. BAKW&G/whW/ijd123937 EXHIBIT "D-4" TABLE 1 Zones 1 and 2 One-Time Special Tax For Libertv Union High School District (1995-96 Fiscal Year) LIBERTY Dwelling Unit Types Description Land Use (Square Footage for Orig. Mit. Agrmnt. Sliding Scale Amount Ordinary Class(1) Detached Homes)(2) Dwllg. Units (SSA)** Dwelling (if 6,000 DUs)(3) (if 3,000-5,999 DUs)(4) Units (5) 1 2,401 and above $2,500 SSA $7,398 2 2,301 - 2.400 $2,500. SSA $7,079 2,201 - 2,300 $2,500 SSA $6,812 4 2,101 - 2,200 $2,500 SSA $6,493 5 2,001 - 2,100 $2,500 SSA $6,227 6 1,901 - 2,000 $2,500 SSA $5,908 7 1,801 - 1,900 $2,500 SSA $5,641 8 1,701 - 1,800 $2,500 SSA $5,322 9 1.601 - 1,700 $2,500 SSA $5,003 10 1.501 - 1.600 $2,500 SSA $4,737 11 1,401 - 1,500 $2,500 SSA $4,418 12 1,301 - 1,400 $2,500 SSA $4,152 13 1,201 - 1,300 $2,500 SSA $3,833 14 1,101 - 1,200 $2,500 SSA $3,565 15 0 - 1.100 $2,500 SSA $3,247 16 Attached Homes $2,500 SSA $2,981 a ** Sliding Scale Amount (SSA) equals $12,800,000 : number of Original Mitigation Agreement Dwelline Units. but not less than $2,500. BAKW&G/whw/ijd/21937 EXHIBIT "D-5" TABLE 2 Undeveloped Property Maximum Annual Special Tax Facility Financed with Annual Special Trigger Event for Annual Special Taxes Taxes from Undeveloped Property from Undeveloped Property Third Phase of Second High School 3,060 high school students F T First 7Two Phases of Third High School 4,320 high school students Third Phase of Third High School 5,040 high school students The Trigger Event shall be determined by using CBEDS for student enrollment. At such time as the CBEDS state that the Trigger Event has occurred. the Maximum Annual Special Tax shall be levied in the next Fiscal Year. BAKW&G/whw,ij&21937 EXHIBIT "D-6" TABLE 3 Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Taxes for Developed Property for Liberty Union HI¢h School District (1995-96 Fiscal Year) (Assumes No One-Time Special Tax or Secured Interest-Bearing Note) LIBERTY Dwelling Unit Types Description Land use (Square Footage for Orig. Mit. Agrmnt. Orig. Mit. Agrmnt. Ordinary Class(t) Detached Homes)(2) Dwllg. Units Dwelling Units Dwelling (if 6,000 DUs)(3) Sliding Scale Annual Units (5) Special Tax (SSAST)** (if 3,000-5,999 DUs)(4) 1 2,401 and above $297 SSAST $860 2 2,301 - 2,400 $297 SSAST $824 3 2,201 - 2,300 $297 SSAST $793 4 2,101 - 2,200 $297 SSAST $756 5 2,001 - 2,100 $297 SSAST $726 6 1,901 - 2,000 $297 SSAST $689 7 1,801 - 1,900 $297 SSAST $658 8 1,701 - 1,800 $297 SSAST $621 9 1,601 - 1,700 $297 SSAST $585 10 1.501 - 1,600 $297 SSAST $565 11 1,401 - 1,500 $297 SSAST $518 12 1,301 - 1,400 $297 SSAST $487 13 1,201 - 1,300 $297 SSAST $451 14 1,101 - 1,200 $297 SSAST $420 15 0 - 1,100 $297 SSAST $383 16 Attached Homes $297 SSAST $352 *• SSAST equals the Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Tax necessary to pay debt service for an Original Mitigation Agreement Dwelling Unit for a bond amount based on the Sliding Scale Amount calculated in column (4) of Table I, assuming level debt service, an annual interest rate of 8.0%, a 30-year bond term. 15.0% of bonds allocated for issuance costs and a reserve fund, and $10 per year for administration. _J1 BAKW&G/whwAjd/21937 EXHIBIT "D-7" SUMMARY OF RATE AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT FOR FOUR PARTICIPATING ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT CFDS BRENTWOOD UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT BYRON UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT KNIGHTSEN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT OAKLEY UNION ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT I. UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY TAXES ZONE 1 AND ZONE 2 Undeveloped Property consists of all parcels in the CFD for which no building permits have been issued. A. One-Time Special Tax All Dwelling Units may pay One-Time Special Tax which varies based on Dwelling Unit size per Table 1. B Annual Special Tax No Annual Special Tax may be levied on Undeveloped Property. C. Increases in Undeveloped Property Special Taxes On each July 1, commencing July 1, 1996, the Maximum Annual Special Tax and the One-Time Special Tax for all Undeveloped Property in Zones I and 2 shall be increased from the previous Fiscal Year's Maximum Annual Special Taxes and One-Time Special Taxes by an amount equal to the annual percentage change in the Lee Savior Class D Construction Index (the "Index"). In the event the Index is not sufficient to cover increases in costs related to the School Facilities, such as increases in land costs or other unanticipated expenses, applicable school districts shall present such documentation to the Oversight Committee, as defined in Section 7.6 of the Agreement, who shall review such documentation and, if appropriate, increase the Index for that year in an amount not to exceed 4% per annum. The percentage change in the Index shall be measured for the twelve month period ending May 31 of the previous Fiscal Year. II. DEVELOPED PROPERTY TAXES Developed Property consists of all parcels in the CFD for which one or more residential building permits have been issued. BAKW&G/whwAjW22424 EXHIBIT "E-1" A. Annual Special Tax (1) Zone 1 No Annual Special Taxes shall be collected from Developed Property in Zone 1. (2) Zone 2 (a) No Annual Special Takes may be levied on Dwelling Units for which a One-Time Special Tac was paid prior to building permit issuance. (b) All Dwelling Units for which a One-Time Special Tax was not paid shall pay Annual Special Taxes based on Dwelling Unit size as listed in Table 2. The figures in Table 2 represent the Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Taxes for the 1995-96 Fiscal Year. An alternative Backup Special Tax based on lot size will also be determined, for use just in case the developer does not build enough dwelling units to cover all debt service payments. B. Increases in the Developed Property Special Taxes On each July 1, commencing on July 1, 1996, the Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Taxes and the Backup Special Taxes for all Developed Property in Zone 2 shall be increased from the previous Fiscal Year's Initial Maximum Annual Assigned Special Taxes and Backup Special Taxes by an amount equal to the annual percentage change in the Index. In the event the Index is not sufficient to cover increases in costs related to the School Facilities, such as increases in land costs or other unanticipated expenses, applicable school districts shall present such documentation to the Oversight Committee, as defined in Section 7.6 of the Agreement, who shall review such documentation and, if appropriate. increase the Index for that year in an amount not to exceed 4% per annum. The percentage change in the Index shall be measured for the twelve month period ending May 31 of the previous Fiscal Year. IH. METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF THE MAXIMUM ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX TO PROPERTY IN ZONES 1 AND 2 OF CFD NO. 95-1 Commencing Fiscal Year 1995-96 and for each subsequent Fiscal Year. Annual Special Taxes for each of the four participating elementary school districts shall be levied as follows: First: The Maximum Annual Assigned Special Tac shall be levied on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property in Zone 2, except for each Assessor's Parcel for which the property owner paid the One-Time Special Tac, in which case the Maximum Annual Special Tax shall be waived. If the elementary school district chooses to levy Annual Special Taxes at rates below 100 percent of the rates listed in Table 2, it shall do so Proportionately for all Land Use Classes listed in these tables. DAKW&G/whwiijda2424 EXHIBIT "E-2" Second: If additional monies are needed after the first step has been completed, then the levy of the Special Tax on each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property in Zones 2 whose Maximum Annual Special Tax is determined through the application of the Backup Special Tax shall be increased in equal percentages from the Maximum Annual Assigned Special Tax up to the Maximum Annual Special Tax for each such Assessor's Parcel. IV. LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ANNUAL SPECIAL TAX The Annual Special Tax will be collected in the same manner and at the same time as ordinary ad valorem property taxes. Assessor's Parcels in Zone 2 for which a residential building permit was issued prior to March I of a given Fiscal Year shall commence paying Developed Property Annual Special Taxes in the following Fiscal Year. The Developed Property Annual Special Tax shall be levied for a period of 35 years for each Assessor's Parcel of Developed Property. BAKW&G/whwA.j&22424 EXHIBIT "E-3" Zdhes Uue-TI.... e 5 Tax Peaal:, For<Elft entjry School Dis i3,,... Description Dwelling Unit Types Land Use (Square Footage Class (1) for Detached Homes) (2) Ail Origuia1114itlgation: ' Ordmarp;Dw�elly .;. Agreemenc.Dwelling�Jnits>(3) .,' Vi�fiits�a� ` .:;' 1 2,401 and above $12,943 $12,943 2 2,301 - 2,400 $12,385 $12,385 3 2,201 - 2,300 $11,919 $11,919 4 2,101 - 2,200 $11,360 $11,360 5 2,001 - 2,100 $10,895 $10,895 6 1,901 - 2,000 $10,337 $10,337 7 1,801 - 1,900 $9,870 $9,870 8 1,701- 1,800 $9,312 $9,312 9 1,601 - 1,700 $8,753 $8,753 10 1,501 - 1,600 $8,287 $8,287 11 1,401 - 1,500 $7,729 $7,729 12 1,301 - 1,400 $7,263 $7,263 13 1,201 - 1,300 $6,705 $6,705 14 1,101 - 1,200 $6,239 $6,239 15 0 - 1,100 $5,680 $5,680 16 Attached Homes $5,215 $5,215 EXHIBIT "E-4" Zune. Initial Ma)dmum:Anaval Spee Tomes for Deyeloped>P�operty , For Elernentarv:ScKool Dictr�ets;;: %moi Fiscal:Year (Assumes::::One-Tlme Spec: ..T Description Dwelling Unit Types Land Use (Square Footage .... Class (1) for Detached Homes) (2) Original 11Zitigatioa Ordinary Dwelling A�t?eemeat.D�avelling Units�3) ;Utdfs{4} 1 2,401 and above $1,498 $1,498 2 2,301 - 2,400 $1,434 $1,434 3 2,201 - 2,300 $1,380 $1,380 4 2,101 - 2,200 $1,316 $1,316 5 2,001 - 2,100 $1,262 $1,262 6 1,901 - 2,000 $1,198 $1,198 7 1,801 - 1,900 $1,145 $1,145 8 1,701- 1,800 $1,080 $1,080 9 1,601 - 1,700 $1,016 $1,016 10 1,501 - 1,600 $963 $963 11 1,401 - 1,500 $899 $899 12 1,301 - 1,400 $845 $845 13 1,201 - 1,300 $781 $781 14 1,101 - 1,200 $727 $727 15 0 - 1,100 $663 $663 16 Attached Homes $610 $610 i:\CLMffm mExrnME=MM ELM.noc EXHIBIT "E-5" STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ) before me. e— 2 r �—(here insert name and title of the officer), perso appeared (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the personN whose nameN is/�subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sheAhey executed the same in hisAwfAheir- authorized capacity(e4, and that by his/helhek signature(s) on the instrument the person(*,, or the entity upon behalf of which the personK acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. r Signature C . (SEAL) i OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL JANE E.RODRIGUEZ .v Notary Public—C Hforms CONTRA COSTA COUNTY My Comm.Expires NOV 13.1995 BAKw&aiAenu20975 09 14 M'2019s STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ) On ( V,54 j /49s before me, M76ra 71, (here insert name and title of the officer), personafly appeared , personally known to me of salis-4-tery to be the personal whose nameW is/are-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/sheAhey-executed the same in hisAteb4heir authorized capacity((&) and that by his%� signature(&)--en the instrument the person(s)- or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)-acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (SEAL) OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL i' JANE E.RODRLNOV15.1995 Notary Public—CCONTRA COSTA My Comm.Expires BAKW&G/AB/W2097S 08 14 07/70/95 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ) On �G�!!S f 1, /4qS before me, ''iai.!e Z (here insert name and title of the officer), person,,Aly appeared L. 6 (or proved to me on the base of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(}whose name(s) is/aFo subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/#tey executed the same in his1her/6v-4 authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(sHn the instrument the persons}-- or the entity upon behalf of which the person4)-acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (SEAL) J OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL JANE E.RODRIGUEZ la Notary Public-Caftmmia CONTRA COSTA COUNTY hi►y Comm,Expires NOV 15,1995 13AKW&G/AB/W20975.09 14 07/20/95 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ) On 1�1 ,15 1, 1995 before me, 5A D�Qruubl (here insert name and title of the officer), personally appeared personally known to me bgsis to be the persons} whose name(- is/arm-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he{she/thy executed the same in-hifAer/fir authorized capacity(ies), and that by hi-Aer/ter signature(&}on the instrument the persons) or the entity upon behalf of which the person(&)-acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (SEAL) OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL vJANE E.RODRIGUEZ Notary Public—Cadlarda My Comm.ExCONTRA COSTA COUNTY pires N OV 15,1995 BAKW&G/AB/ta/30975 08 14 0120/95 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ) On JAus�_/, /445- before me, (here insert name and title of the officer), personall appeared , personally known to me ( e to be the person(4 whose name(4 is/am-subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he4he4hey executed the same in hisA3er/� authorized capacity(-ieo, and that by hisAwrAheir signatures)-on the instrument the personfsj, or the entity upon behalf of which the persor*o-acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (SEAL) r,, •. OFFICIAL NOTARY SEAL JANE E.ROORIGUEZ -s NotvyPublic—Catitofta CONTRA COSTA COUNTY My Comm.Expires NOV 15,1995 BAKW&GSAB/w20975.08 14 ,720/95 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF CONTRA COSTA ) On before me, 12ic 1�7 Dd/`iA r Mdlirab i (here insert name and title of the officer), personally appeared 5 , personally known to me to be the person(*whose name(. is/arhserbeci to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she key executed the same in hisAwp4heir. authorized capacity(ies4, and that by his4wir signatures}on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s)-acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. r�v� Signature (10"- !� 1-A (SEAL) OFRCIAL NOTARY SEAL JANE E.RODRIGUEZ NoaryPublic—Callt fta CONTRA COSTA COUNTY Ow Comm.EXPIMS NOV 15,1995 BAKW&G/Ae/ua0975.08 14 07120/95 SCHOOL FACILITIES GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT (AS AMENDED BY THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS: SEPTEMBER 22, 1992) 7.13 SCHOOLS INTRODUCTION The provision of adequate school facilities and an effective education program is necessary to the long range economic health and vitality of the County. The financing and implementation of the school facilities is shared by the State, local school boards, and the Contra Costa County Community College District. Although the State of California has preempted the field of provision of school facilities through exactions on development projects, it is the responsibility of local government to ensure that the timing of growth is coordinated with the efforts of the school districts to provide school facilities. For this reason, the Contra Costa County General Plan addresses the provision of the school facilities. It is well recognized in California that all children have a right to equal access to quality educational opportunities. It is therefore appropriate that the County General Plan address the changing needs for educational facilities generated by the growth in population envisioned by this plan. Private schools also exist in the County which provide an alternative to public schools for those that can afford this option. Such institutions add vitality to the overall educational community. Map of School Facilities There are 18 school districts and one community college district in the County as indicated in Figure 7-9. Figure 7-9 also indicates sites for proposed new schools. Information was gathered from the individual school districts which are autonomous and prepare their own district facilities plans. The information is incomplete because not all districts have made long term plans for new schools, but, instead, take part in planning for new developments when they occur. However, this General Plan is designed to accommodate, through the growth management and land use review process the new school sites as proposed by each district. Currently, overcrowded attendance areas have been identified in many school districts in the County. For example, in the East County area of Oakley, where much of the unincorporated growth will occur, schools are presently severely overcrowded. Adoption of the General Plan will increase existing overcrowding in the schools substantially. In order to accommodate the projected population growth in the Plan and achieve State-adopted standards in the provision of school facilities in all areas in the County, the following goals, policies and implementation measures were developed. SCHOOLS GOALS 7-AO. To assure the provision of adequate primary, secondary, and college facilities in the County. 7-AP. To provide new schools in optimal locations to serve planned growth. :ck 7-7-73 ckcp1.schools.gpa z 7-AQ. To encourage the efficient multi-purpose uses of school facilities. 7-AR. To assure that primary and secondary school facilities are adequate or committed to be adequate, prior to approvals of major applications for residential growth. 7-AS. To maximize the use of existing educational resources and school facilities. 7-AT. To assure that school districts are seeking and receiving their fair share of state and/or federal funds for school facilities. SCHOOLS POLICIES 7-140. The environmental review process shall be utilized to monitor the ability of area schools to serve development. 7-141. To the extent possible, new residential development General Plan Amendments or Rezonings shall,in the absence of the Planning Agency's satisfaction that there are overriding considerations (e.g. provision of low or moderate cost housing), be required to adequately mitigate impacts on primary and secondary school facilities. 7-142. The development of quality schools shall be supported by coordinating development review with local school districts including such activities as designating school sites, obtaining dedications of school sites, and supporting local fees, special taxes, and bond issues intended for school construction. 7-143. The hearing body in reviewing residential projects shall consider the availability of educational facility capacity. 7-144. School site donation by developers shall be encouraged through the use of density transfer or other appropriate land use alternatives. 7-145. To the extent possible, the development of school facilities should be provided in conjunction with and adjacent to local parks and trailways. 7-146. Adequate provision of schools and other public facilities and services shall be assisted by coordinating review of new development with school districts, the cities and other service providers through the Growth Management Program (see Chapter IV), and the environmental review process and other means. 7-147. The county shall support efforts to create a branch state college on the Ygnacio Valley site. 7-148. The County shall support efforts to build a new Community college in the South County. 7-150. The County expects that all growth impacted school districts, where appropriate, shall actively pursue state and/or Federal funds for school facilities. ck 7-7-74 ckcp 1.schools.gpa a a 7-151. School Districts shall demonstrate, in the school facility plan, efficient utilization of its facilities. The school facility plan shall consider scheduling alternatives, use of relocatable facilities and boundary adjustments. SCHOOLS IMPLEMENTATION MEASURES 7-cm. Revise the County CEQA Guidelines to require that the impacts of proposed new developments on school districts be identified. 7-cn. Lobby for State financing of new schools within the County. 7-co. In concert with the school districts, prepare an education facilities plan amendment to this General Plan which recommends locations for future school facilities. 7-cp. Work with the interested school districts to ensure that new development contributes, to the extent allowable under State law, its fair and full share of the cost of additional facilities which are necessary, irrespective of jurisdictional boundaries. 7-cq. To the extent allowable under State law, specify in the County's list(s) and criteria for development entitlement application's determination of completeness procedure, that a development entitlement application is not complete unless it contains satisfactory written evidence that any involved school district has been advised of and provided with the proposed application and requested to provide its recommendations thereon to the applicant and the County planning agency. 7-cr. The procedure provided in School Implementation Measure 7-cq. is to be applied in those school districts indicating to the County their current concern about education facilities and desire to participate in the development entitlement review process. Upon the receipt of any such indication, the involved and interested school district shall be appropriately designated in the planning agency's notification and contacts list for development entitlement applications pending in the district's area. 7-cs. To the extent allowable under State law, specify in the County's list(s) and criteria for development entitlement application's determination of completeness procedure, that a development entitlement application for a Rezoning or a General Plan Amendment is not complete unless it contains an identification of the number of residential units which will be subject to school facility mitigation. All residential units except senior housing, housing for very low-income households, studio and one-bedroom units shall be included. 7-ct. Develop, in conjunction with interested school districts and residential developers, the content and format of district facility :ck 7-7-75 ckcpl.schools.gpa information which will be used to identify the impact of a proposed residential project on the district and possible appropriate facility mitigation. The facility information shall utilize state classroom size standards as a basis for determining the adequacy of area schools. The facility information should include consideration of district reorganization of boundaries to the extent possible. 7-cu. To the extent allowable under State Law, specify in the County's list(s) and criteria for development entitlement application's determination of completeness procedure, that a residential development General Plan Amendment or Rezoning application is not complete unless it indicates the manner in which adequate mitigation for primary and secondary school facilities needed to serve children generated by the new development is proposed to be provided. 7-cv. The procedures provided in School Implementation Measures 7-cp, 7-cs, 7-ct and 7-cu are to be applied to those school districts which notify the County that they may have inadequate facilities to handle additional residential development and which provide both evidence of diligent participation in all State and/or Federal funding programs for school facilities and sufficient district facility information so that the County may determine the impact of a proposed residential project on a district and determine any appropriate facility mitigation. :ck 7-7-76 ckcpl.schools.gpa McCUTCHEN, DOYLE, BROWN & ENERSEN SAN FRANCISCO COUNSELORS AT LAW WASHINGTON, D.C. LOS ANGELES 1331 NORTH CALIFORNIA BOULEVARD TAIPEI SAN JOSE POST OFFICE BOX V WALNUT CREEK WALNUT CREEK,CALIFORNIA 94596 AFFILIATED OFFICES MENLO PARK TELEPHONE(510)937-8000 BANGKOK FACSIMILE(510)975-5390 BEIJING September 19, 1995 SHANGHAI DIRECT DIAL NUMBER (510)975-5310 INTERNET HAND DELIVERY sskaggs@mdbe.com Hon. Gayle Bishop, Chair, and Members of the Board of Supervisors Contra Costa County c/o Clerk of the Board County Administration Building Martinez, CA Agenda Item D.10 Meeting of September 19, 1995 Our File 14205-047 Dear Supervisors: We represent Centex, the developer of Pacific Waterways near Discovery Bay pursuant to Vesting Tentative Maps 7679 and 7881. In its report under the above agenda item, staff recommends that the Board accept the East Contra Costa County School Facilities Funding and Mitigation Agreement and direct GMEDA staff to implement the recommendations by establishing necessary notification and procedures. The purpose of this letter is (a)to seek confirmation that any Board action on this item does not apply to development under Centex's vesting maps 7679 and 7881, does not purport to impose any fee or condition on Centex or its development and does not constitute an interpretation of the existing conditions of approval of those maps or related entitlements; or, in the alternative (b)to document the objections of Centex to the recommended action. The procedures set forth in the staff report do not address the conditions of Centex's maps relating to schools. Those conditions are unique and differ substantially and importantly from the conditions imposed on other developments in-the area. The conditions of approval to VTM 7881 include number 16 which implements an agreement reached between the Byron Union School District and Centex. Presumably, the recommended procedures do not seek to overturn this agreement between the affected parties. Hon. Gayle Bishop September 19, 1995 Page 2 As to the Liberty Union High School District as to VTM 7881 and both districts as to VTM 7679,the condition of approval again is unique. Condition 15 of VTM 7881 and condition 15 of VTM 7679 are identical and provide alternative approaches to satisfy the conditions: Centex must either obtain a will-serve letter or satisfy the Zoning Administrator that all legally established school facilities funding requirements are satisfied. The latter alternative was intended, and consistently has been interpreted by the Zoning Administrator, to require only that Centex pay fees levied pursuant to sections 53080 et seq. of the Government Code. The County may not change its ordinances, policies or standards applicable to these maps because Centex has a vested right to develop under the law in effect on the dates when the applications for the maps were complete. Subdivision Map Act, §§ 66498.1(b). Any attempt to do so would be an unconstitutional and unlawful taking of Centex's vested rights. The proposed form of agreement and the funding plan implied therein are not supported by evidence in the record establishing the requisite, or any, nexus with the impacts created by Centex's development. For that reason, to the extent the Board takes any action to impose the agreement on Centex's development(directly or by a post hoc interpretation of the conditions of approval), it would be acting in an unconstitutional and unlawful manner. The proposed form of agreement and the funding plan implied therein were not adopted pursuant to the provisions of section 53080 et seq. or 66000 et seq. of the Government Code and are prohibited by the provisions of section 65995 et seq. of the Government Code and, therefore, are unlawful. The proposed form of agreement and the recommended action by the Board are inconsistent with the provisions of the County's General Plan and therefore unlawful in that the Liberty and Byron Districts have not complied with the procedural and substantive prerequisites to any such County action. Finally, to the extent that any Board action is intended to interpret, amend, modify or otherwise affect the conditions of approval of the entitlements for those Centex tracts, the action is unlawful because the requirements of the federal and state constitutions and law for notice and hearing, including those set forth in the Subdivision Map Act and the Planning and Zoning Law, have not been met. Very truly yours, Sanfor . Skaggs cc: Steve Garrett