HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 10222013 - C.28 (2)RECOMMENDATION(S):
AUTHORIZE the Chair to sign a letter to Tom Torlakson, State Superintendent of Public Instruction, expressing
appreciation for assistance in addressing school siting concerns.
FISCAL IMPACT:
NONE. The County could see an indirect, long term fiscal benefit from reformed school siting polices due to
decreased demand for local infrastructure investment.
BACKGROUND:
The County maintains goals in its state legislative platform that support improved school siting[1]. Actions to
improve school siting have been referred to the Transportation, Water and Infrastructure Committee. The Committee
receives regular reports and provides direction on how to proceed. The latest report to the Committee is attached.
The report provides an update on legislative activities, a meeting with California Department of Education staff, and
proposed next steps. The subject letter is being brought to the full Board of Supervisors at the direction of the
Committee.
APPROVE OTHER
RECOMMENDATION OF CNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
Action of Board On: 11/05/2013 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
Clerks Notes:
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
AYE:John Gioia, District I Supervisor
Candace Andersen, District II
Supervisor
Mary N. Piepho, District III
Supervisor
Karen Mitchoff, District IV
Supervisor
Federal D. Glover, District V
Supervisor
Contact: John Cunningham, (925)
674-7833
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: November 5, 2013
David Twa, County Administrator and Clerk of the Board of Supervisors
By: June McHuen, Deputy
cc:
C. 28
To:Board of Supervisors
From:TRANSPORTATION, WATER & INFRASTRUCTURE COMMITTEE
Date:November 5, 2013
Contra
Costa
County
Subject:Letter to State Superintendent of Public Instruction Regarding School Siting
BACKGROUND: (CONT'D)
Attachments:
DRAFT 11/5/13 Letter from the Board of Supervisors to Tom Torlakson, Superintendent of Public
Instruction
September 2013 report to the Transportation, Water, and Infrastructure Committee regarding school siting.
[1]
Transportation Issues:
135 . SUPPORT efforts to improve safety throughout the transportation system.
138 . SUPPORT efforts to coordinate development of state-funded facilities such as courts, schools, jails
and state offices with local planning.
139 . SUPPORT efforts to coordinate planning between school districts and local jurisdictions in locating
and planning new schools and funding programs that foster collaboration and joint use of facilities to help
finance off-site transportation improvements for access to schools. The County supports the California
Department of Education’s current effort to better leverage school facilities in developing sustainable
communities. Related to this effort, the County supports reform of school siting practices by way of
legislative changes related to any new statewide school construction bond authorization. The County takes
the position that reform components should include bringing school siting practices in to alignment with
local growth management policies, safe routes to school best practices, State SB 375 principles, and the
State Strategic Growth Council’s “Health in All Policies Initiative.”
CONSEQUENCE OF NEGATIVE ACTION:
Without approving transmittal of the letter, the Board will forgo an opportunity to advance its legislative platform.
CHILDREN'S IMPACT STATEMENT:
Advocating for improved siting and design will provide a community setting that is safer and more convenient for
walking and bicycling to school. Hoped outcomes are better designed communities that promote a more healthy
lifestyle for our children. These outcomes support Outcome 2: “Youth are Healthy and Preparing for Adulthood"
and ” Outcome 4: “Families and Communities are Safe” from the Contra Costa County Children’s Report Card.
ATTACHMENTS
BOS to TT re: School Siting
September Report to TWI Re: School Siting
File: > Transportation > Committees > County > TWI > 2013
G:\Transportation\Cunningham\MEMO-LETTER\Memo\2013\Sep2013TWICommittee-Update on School Siting Reform.doc
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION & DEVELOPMENT
651 Pine Street, North Wing - 4th Floor
Martinez, CA 94553-1229
Telephone: (925) 674-7833 Fax: (925) 674-7250
TO: Transportation, Water, & Infrastructure Committee
(Supervisor Candace Andersen, Chair, Supervisor Mary N. Piepho – Vice
Chair)
FROM: John Cunningham, Senior Transportation Planner
DATE: August 19, 2013
SUBJECT: Update on School Siting Reform Effort
Background
The County maintains an item in its state legislative platform addressing issues related to
school siting1. Recent and upcoming events may now make it advantageous for the Board
of Supervisors to pursue the issue:
Over the past several years, Tom Torlakson, the State Superintendent of Public
Instruction has released several reports highlighting issues with current school
siting practices and identifying potential areas for improvement.
The California State Senate Education Subcommittee addressed the school siting
issue (among other topics) at their meeting on August 7, 2012. At that meeting the
Subcommittee directed the Facilities Director of the California Department of
Education (CDE) to develop a plan to implement the findings of one of the
aforementioned reports from the Superintendent’s office.
In the Governor’s 2013‐14 Budget Proposal there is an acknowledgement that there
is no bond authority remaining for school construction or renovation. The obvious
outcome of this is that the state will need to seek new authority in 2014. However, in
the Budget Proposal there is also a statement that given new bonding authority is
needed, “…now is an appropriate time to engage in a dialogue on the future of school
facilities funding…”going on to state that, “School districts and their respective localities
should have appropriate control of the school facilities construction process and priorities.”
Three bills have been introduced that are potential vehicles for a 2014 school
construction and modernization bond:
AB 41 (Buchanan) School Facilities
SB 45 (Corbett) Leroy F. Greene School Facilities Act of 1998
SB 301 (Liu) Kindergarten‐University Public Education Bond Act
1 128. SUPPORT efforts to coordinate development of state-funded or regulated facilities such as courts, schools,
jails, roads and state offices with local planning. The County supports coordinating planning between school
districts and local jurisdictions in locating and planning new schools and funding programs that foster
collaboration and joint use of facilities to help finance off-site transportation improvements for access to schools.
g:\transportation\cunningham\memo-letter\memo\2013\sep2013twicommittee-update on school siting reform.doc
Recent Events
Communication to Tom Torlakson from the Board of Supervisors on the school siting
issue resulted in County staff being invited by Kathleen Moore, Director of School
Facilities Planning (California Department of Education ‐ CDE), to meet to discuss the
topic of school siting. County staff, accompanied by Kiana Buss (California State
Association of Counties) and the County’s legislative advocate, Mark Watts met with Ms.
Moore and her staff on August 16th to discuss school siting issues. Relevant points from
our meeting and the outcomes (after the fact observations in parenthetical italics) are below:
Identification of CDE Limitations: In order to better understand the deadlock that
we have experienced on this issue we inquired as to what limitations and barriers
CDE faces when attempting to implement new policies. We made these inquires so
that we could be better equipped to propose changes that would not meet with
substantial resistance. (We may get a better understanding of any barriers by way of
outreach to our legislative delegation and any new partners.)
School Sitting Difficulties: CDE staff explained the numerous constraints and
complexities with siting new schools. The comment was that school districts
typically select sites far outside any potential conflict areas. Unfortunately, these
areas are often exurban in nature with minimal supportive infrastructure.
New 2014 Construction/Modernization Bond: CDE staff confirmed that with a
new bond, the best opportunity for policy changes is with the complimentary
legislation associated with that new bonding authority.
Best Practices: CDE staff made us aware of several best practice type examples
from around the state regarding collaborative city‐county/school district planning.
(Staff will investigate these examples for opportunities)
Voter Adopted Urban Limit Line/Urban Growth Boundary: While far from
solving the broader school siting problem, and despite no clear agreement from
those involved in our meeting as to how to address the subject issue, there seemed
to be acknowledgement that school sites developed in these areas were problematic.
Problem identification: In terms of school siting decisions, local land use agencies
and the state have little to no authority. It is the school districts that have ultimate
control over school siting decisions. (This scenario is in stark contrast to 1) the State’s
substantial albeit indirect entry in to land use regulation by way of SB 375, and 2) local
land use agencies being excluded from land use decision making. School districts would
either have to be compelled through some mechanism to make better school siting decisions
and/or some control would have to be shifted to the State or local land use agencies to allow
them to succeed in meeting their obligations.)
Establishment of an Ongoing Dialog: At the end of the meeting Ms. Buss
committed to keeping lines of communication open between CSAC and CDE. Ms.
Moore, in response, committed to contact CSAC staff for assistance as they move
ahead with policy development.
g:\transportation\cunningham\memo-letter\memo\2013\sep2013twicommittee-update on school siting reform.doc
Next Steps/Recommendations
Staff has been tracking and reporting on this issue, and the possibility for changes in
policy, for several years now. The combination of the current school construction bond
capacity being exhausted, along with indications from various elements within the state
acknowledging the need to make changes in policies, indicate that now would be the time
to aggressively pursue the County’s goals on this matter.
Staff makes the following recommendations and looks forward to discussing options with
the Committee:
1. Make use of the CDE and CSAC offer to stay engaged in the policy
development process as it moves ahead. The goal is early review and comment of
documents, ideally prior to broad public distribution.
2. Develop specific policy recommendations: Staff has been focused on reviewing
proposals from CDE on changes to school siting policies. Absent this type of
information, staff recommends drafting new policies independently and
submitting them to CDE for consideration. Staff recommends that any proposed
policies be:
based on, or consistent with, the aforementioned policy imperatives from the
Governor and the Superintendent of Public Instruction,
focused on implementing existing state policies, and
developed in cooperation with our identified partners.
3. Engage partners of record: The County should contact partners directly or via our
appointed representatives so that we can prepare them to weigh in as legislation
and policies are drafted and moved through the process. Existing partners include:
Metropolitan Transportation Commission
Contra Costa Transportation Authority
California State Association of Counties
Contra Costa Legislative Delegation
4. Identify new partners:
Discussion at September TWI Committee meeting
5. Direct staff to continue working with County Counsel for alternate approaches
to a resolution on the issue: This would include interpreting state obligations
relative to existing regulations and new approaches to achieving satisfactory
outcomes.
6. In response to the meeting with CDE, the Board of Supervisors should send
appropriate follow up communication to our various partners including
Superintendent Torlakson.
c: C. Kutsuris, Director – DCD
S. Goetz, Deputy Director ‐ DCD
J. Bueren, Director, PWD
L. Delaney, CAO/Legislation Committee Staff