Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda - 03-25-2002 - 4 1 ORANGE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS ACTION AGENDA ITEM ABSTRACT Meeting Date: March 25, 2002 Action Agenda Item No. 4 SUBJECT: County/OCS/CHCCS Informational Reports DEPARTMENT: Budget/Planning/Purchasing PUBLIC HEARING: (Y/N) No Finance ATTACHMENT(S): INFORMATION CONTACT: As listed in "Background" Donna Dean, ext 2151 Craig Benedict, ext 2592 Pam Jones, ext 2652 Ken Chavious, ext 2453 TELEPHONE NUMBERS: Hillsborough 732-8181 Chapel Hill 968-4501 Durham 688-7331 Mebane 336-227-2031 PURPOSE: To receive reports from staff regarding several school related issues. BACKGROUND: This portion of the meeting provides an opportunity for the three elected boards to receive updates on the topics noted below. As time permits, the Boards may wish to discuss some or all of these topics, and to identify any points that staffs may need to research and bring back as the subject of subsequent reports. a. Minority Student Achievement Oral reports will be provided by school system representatives. No Attachments b. 3rd Month School Capacity/Student Membership Updates Staff can review, as the Boards may desire, information transmitted by County staff to the BOCC in early March that was based on updated membership and school capacity information submitted by the Superintendents and their staffs. A summary of student capacity by school district that was discussed at the most recent Schools and Land Use Council meeting is also provided for reference. Attachment 4b— 1 316102 Table— Student Capacity by School District Attachment 4b— 2 316102 Table— School Districts Use of Mobile Units Attachment 4b— 3 316102 Table — Elementary School Capacity 2 Attachment 4b— 4 316102 Table — Middle School Capacity Attachment 4b— 5 316102 Table— High School Capacity Attachment 4b— 6 Table— Student Capacity by School District c. Status of Durham Tech Satellite Campus Project At a January 28, 2002 work session, staff provided the BOCC with an overview of County supported facility space needs. This included presentation of the development process for an Orange County satellite campus of Durham Technical Community College. The BOCC's requested public hearing for that project is tentatively slated for April 16. Pertinent PowerPoint slides from the January 28 meeting are provided for reference. Attachment 4c Durham Tech Satellite Campus Presentation Slides d. Status of Schools Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Consideration Orange County's Planning Director has prepared the attached report on progress with the Schools APFO and elements which will need further discussion and agreement. Attachment 4d 3121102 County Planning Director Memo Re: School APFO e. FY 2001-02 School Audit Results The County's Finance Director has carried out his annual review of the two school systems audits and resulting fund balance, and has provided a few observations in the accompanying memo. Attachment 4e 3119102 County Finance Director Memo Re: School System Fund Balance FINANCIAL IMPACT: There is no financial impact tied directly to the review/discussion at this meeting of these reports. However, any discussion is likely to influence future school operating and capital budgets. RECOMMENDATION(S): The Manager recommends that the boards receive the reports for information only. updated March 6, 2002 Figure 5. Student Capacity by School District Permanent Structures Only, No Mobile Units(Including Projects Under Construction) CHCCS OCS Square Members Square Members Elementary Feet Capacity hip(1) Elementary Feet Capacity hip(1) Carrboro 60,832 563 492 Cameron Park 70,812 598 456 Ephesus 66,952 472 550 Central 52,492 463 293 Estes Hills 56,299 549 555 Efland Cheeks 64,316 509 411 Glenwood 50,764 445 371 Grady Brown 74,016 575 459 FP Graham 63,541 570 587 Hillsborough 51,106 414 393 McDougle 98,000 596 669 New Hope 100,164 601 457 Scroggs(2) 90,980 609 572 Pathways 85,282 560 427 Seawell 52,869 498 676 Total CHCCS Total OCS Elementary 540,237 4,302 4,472 Elementary 498,188 3,720 2,896 Middle Middle Culbreth 104,798 670 644 A.L. Stanback 136,000 740 744 McDougle 136,221 732 634 C.W. Stanford 107,620 726 789 Phillips 109,498 706 749 Smith ' 128,764 732 521 Total CHCCS Total OCS Middle School 479,281 2,840 2,548 Middle School 243,620 1,466 1,533 High High Chapel Hill 241,111 1,520 1,560 Orange 213,509 1,518 1,723 East Chapel Hill 258,985 1,515 1,395 Cedar Ridge* 206,500 1,000 (3) Total CHCCS Total OCS High High School 500,096 3,035 2,955 School 420,009 2,518 1,723 Total All Levels 1,519,614 10,177 9,975 Total All Levels 1,161,817 7,704 6,152 3rd Month Membership (2)Capacity as approved by CHCCS Board of Education in January 2001 (3)Currently being constructed Changes from 2000-01 figures reflected in shaded background Small increases from 2000-01 in CHCCS HS square footage because of construction of concession areas Decreases in individual 2001-02 OCS elementary school membership reflects opening of Pathways-Dec 2000 Reductions in OCS elementary capacities reflect new pre-K classes-20 seats per class Figure 7. School Districts Use of Mobile Units Usage for 2001-02 School Year CHCCS OCS Assigned Assigned Elementary #Units Usage Elementary #Units Usage Carrboro 1 Classroom Cameron Park 1 Resource Room, Supply Storage Classrooms and Ephesus 7 Small Group Central 0 No Units Instruction BEH Self Occupational Estes Hills 1 Contained Room Efland Cheeks 1 Therapy and After School Classrooms, Classrooms and Glenwood 4 Resource Room, Grady Brown 3 Resource Family Specialist Rooms Room FP Graham 2 Classrooms Hillsborough 0 No Units McDougle 2 New Hope 0 No Units Scroggs 0 No Units Pathways 0 No Units Seawell 6 Classrooms Total CHCCS 23 Total OCS 5 Elementary Elementary Middle Middle Culbreth 0 No Units A.L. Stanback 1 Classroom Classrooms, McDougle 2 Classrooms C.W. Stanford 6 Resource Rooms Phillips 0 No Units Smith 0 No Units Total CHCCS 2 Total OCS 7 Middle School Middle School High High Chapel Hill 6 Classrooms Orange 2* Classrooms East Chapel Hill 0 No Units Cedar Ridge 0 Phoenix Academy/Lincol 3 Classrooms n Center Total CHCCS 9 Total OCS High 2 High School School Total All Levels 34 Total All Levels 14 * to be returned upon opening of Cedar Ridge in Aug 2002 ���Currently being constructed All- G� -.. updated March 6,2002 Figure 8. Elementary School Capacity Permanent Structures Only, No Mobile Units CHCCS OCS Capa Member %of Capa Member %of School city ship(1) Capacity School city ship(1) Capacity Carrboro 563 492 87.4% Cameron Park 598 456 76.3% Ephesus 472 550 116.5% Central 463 293 63.3% Estes Hills 549 555 101.1% Efland Cheeks 509 411 80.7% Glenwood 445 371 83.4% Grady Brown 575 459 79.8% FP Graham 570 587 103.0% Hillsborough 414 393 94.9% McDougle 596 669 112.2% New Hope 601 457 76.0% Scroggs 609 572 93.9% Pathways 560 427 Seawell 498 676 135.7% Total CHCCS Total OCS Elementary Elementary' School 4,302 4,472 104.0% School 3,720 2,896 77.8% CHCCS Elementary OCS Elementary Capacity at 105% Capacity at 105% Level of Service 4,517 4,472 99.0% Level of Service 3,906 2,896 74.1% (1)3rd Month Membership F updated March 6,2002 Figure 9. Middle School Capacity Permanent Structures Only, No Mobile Units CHCCS OCS Capa Member %of Capac Member %of School city ship(1) Capacity School ity ship(1) Capacity Culbreth 670 644 96.1% A.L. Stanback 740 744 100.5% McDougle 732 634 86.6% C.W. Stanford 726 789 108.7% Phillips 706 749 106.1% Smith 732 521 71.2% Total CHCCS Total OCS Middle Middle School 2,840 2,548 89.7% School 1,466 1,533 104.6% CHCCS Middle OCS Middle School Capacity School Capacity at 107% Level of at 107% Level of Service 3,039 2,548 83.8%1 Service 1,569 1,533 97.7% ��� 3rd Month Membership updated March 6,2002 Figure 10. High School Capacity Permanent Structures Only, No Mobile Units CHCCS OCS Capa Member %of- Capa Member %of School city ship(1) Capacity School city ship(1) Capacity Chapel Hill 1,520 1,560 102.6% Orange 1,518 1,723 113.5% East Chapel Hill 1,515 1,395 92.1% Cedar Ridge 1,000 Total CHCCS Total OCS High High School 3,035 2,955 97.4% School 2,518 1,723 68.4% CHCCS High School Capacity OCS High School at 110% Level of Capacity at 110% Service 3,339 2,955 88.5% Level of Service 2,770 1,723 62.2% (1J 3rd Month Membership (2) Opening Fall 2002 STUDENT CAPACITY BY SCHOOL DISTRICT Summary Comparison of 2002 and 2001 Reports—March 2002 Chapel Dill—Carrboro City Schools (CHCCS) Orange County Schools(OCS) Level Year Capacity Membership %of Year Capacity Membership %of Capacity Capacity Total 2002 4302 4472 104.0 2002 3720 2896 77.8 Elem 2001 4444 103.3 2001 3820 3078 80.6 Diff 0 28 Diff Loss (100) Loss (182) Total. 2002 2840 2548 89.7 2002 1466 1533 104.6 Middle 2001 At 2326 81.9 2001 " 1504 102.6 Diff 0 222 0 29 Total 2002 3035 2955 97.4 2002 2518 1723 68.4 High 2001 44 2815 92.8 2001 " 1672 66.4 Diff 0 140 Diff 0 51 Total 2002 10177 9975 98.0 2002 7704 6152 79.8** All 2001 " 9585 94.2 2001 7804 6254 80.1 Levels Diff 0 390 Diff ' Loss(100) Loss(102) KEY Diff=Difference between the * Based on OCS 2002 capacity which is 100 students 2002 and 2001 reports fewer than 2001 capacity at the elementary level ** Based on OCS 2002 capacity which is 100 students fewer than 2001 capacity for all levels combined NUMBER OF STUDENT SEATS AVAILABLE (OR NEEDED)— 2002 REPORT CHCCS OCS Elementary (170) 824 Middle 292 _ (67) High 80 795 All Levels 202 1552** LI C Durham Tech Satellite Campus ■ Board endorsed the development of an Orange County campus in April 2001 ■ BOCC and Durham Tech officials joint meeting on October 11, 2001 ■ BOCC received proposed timetable for development via Manager's Memo in December 2001 Durham Tech Satellite Campus ■ Action items required within the next few months include: —Adoption of Resolution to Pursue Establishment of a Satellite Campus of Durham Technical Community College (February--March 2002) — Public Hearing (March--April 2002) 22 f Durham Tech Satellite Campus — County officially notifies Durham Tech Board of Trustees of Intent to Match State Bond Funds for the Development of a Satellite Campus (March--April 2002) — County adopts site selection process (March -- April 2002) Durham Tech Satellite Campus — Durham Tech Trustees notify State Board of Community Colleges of Intent to Establish a Satellite Campus in Orange County (April--May 2002) 23 Durham Tech Satellite, Campus Site Selection ■ BOCC responsible for selection of site ■ Recommended that County establish site criteria for evaluation of: — Sites sought out by County; and/or — Sites offered to the County through other means Durham Tech Satellite Campus ■ Suggested criteria: — 20-acre minimum to accommodate on-site parking and future expansion (Durham Tech recommendation) —Centrally located within the County —Close to public transportation and/or major roadways 24 f Durham Tech Satellite Campus — Cost of land to County — Site development costs ■ Does site present development challenges that would drive construction costs up? — Environmentally"clean" site — Compatible with surrounding uses of land Durham Tech Satellite Campus Proposed Site Selection Process: ■ Establish work group to include at least the following: ■ County Commissioners(2) ■ County Manager ■ Director of Purchasing and Central services ■ County Engineer ■ Planning Director ■ EDC Director ■ Durham Tech Representative(s) ■ Chambers of Commerce Representatives 25 Durham Tech Satellite,Campus Proposed Site Selection Process, continued ■ Tasks for work group: — Recommend final criteria — Establish a criteria matrix that weights criteria according to criticality — Determine"minimum" number required for site acceptability — Bring forward for BOCC approval Durham Tech Satellite Campus ■ Timeline for site selection • Board appoints selection committee February—March 2002 • Site selection committee completes criteria, scoring matrix, etc. March 2002 26 Durham Tech Satellite Campus (Timeline for site selection, continued) ■ BOCC endorses selection process by April 2002 ■ Site selected and acquisition underway no later than Spring 2003 27 Orange County • and Inspections Department Memo To: Rod Visser,Assistant County Manager From: Craig N.Benedict,A1CP,Planning Director Date: March 21,2002 Re: School APFO The School Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance (School APFO) is being proposed in a three step process: 1) Memorandum of Understanding_(MOU This document sets forth the general understanding of how a School APFO functions. The document also includes, as an exhibit, a Model School APFO which is an example of the regulatory code framework. Each local government in Step 3 will adapt the Model School APFO to the specific Section of the land development regulations that comports. 2) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) also includes certain elements of the School APFO of which the parties shall reach agreement prior to the adoption of the Step 3 ordinance. Those elements are elaborated further on the attached page,but are listed briefly as follows: ■ Student Generation Rate ■ Student Membership ■ School Capacity ■ Student Projection Methodology ■ Student Projection Rate ■ School Capital Investment Plan These elements set the technical basis of the APFO system. The Memorandum of Understanding(MOU)suggests that each year a technical team of planning directors and school district representatives evaluate and update the initial elements and report to all parties prior to formal updating of the APFO system. These elements are prerequisite steps that are collected at different times of the year depending on the item. G JCassie/SLUCa"032202-M-RV 3) School APFO Implementation Process After Steps 1 and 2 are complete,the local governments will incorporate,through a public hearing process,the specific ordinance into the development review process. This step also sets forth an effective date which anticipates agreement and collection of the technical data noted in Step 2. A status report of the actions of the various parties is also attached. The Orange County Planning Director will be available to explain any questions regarding these items. Attachments(2) 2 STATUS OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING AND ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE Memorandum of Understandin ** Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance Jurisdiction Review Public Adoption Review Public Hearing Adoption Hearin Carrboro 6-12-01 3-26-02 Chapel Hill 2-13-01 2-19-01 4-8-02* Hillsborough 3-25-01 3-11-02 Orange County 9-25-00 4/16/02 ? 10-02-00 5-28-02 ? Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools 1-17-01 *** Orange County Schools 12-11-00 *** Schedule updated on 3-18-02 * Scheduled for vote by town council ** Includes model APFO *** May reapprove to note late 2001 changes 3 SCHOOL ADEQUATE PUBLIC FACILITIES ORDINANCE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING(MOU) INCLUDES MODEL ORDINANCE (SCHOOL APFO) ,./ 1. THE SCHOOL APFO FORMULA WITH VARIABLES AC=SC—(M+ND) AC=Available Capacity is the result of the equation VARIABLES: SC= School Capacity is determined by joint action of county commission and school districts and includes schools built and future Capital Investment Plan (CIP)funded capacity. M= Membership is recorded by school districts on an annual basis as of November 15. ND=New Developments and the school level membership they generate are based upon local governments approved residential development and the Student Generation Rate(SGR) associated with the two housing types.. The Memorandum Of Understanding(MOU)notes the intent to agree on the description of the variable source. Items for Discussion Possible Choice suggested by SLUC A. Student Generation Rates(SGR) Tischler&Associates Study,2001 (Section 1.c.(M) (Two housing categories for each school district) B. Membership Date(NI) As of November 15 by School District and Level (Section La.) (i.e.2°d month) C. School Capacity(SC) As of November 15 (Section I.b.) 1. Criteria of class size or programming agreed to by School Facilities Task Force 2. New capacity determined by School CIP adoption by BOCC CAPITAL INVESTMENT PLAN (CIP) PROCESS Items for Discussion Possible Choice A. 1. Student Membership Average of five(5)projection models to start Projection Methodology School APFO 2003 System(two linear and (Section 1.c.(iii)) three cohort methods). 2. Projected Growth Rate 6/2001 t projected growth rates ranged (Section 1.c.(ii)) between and + V 52 trri G,.�• Orange County Finance Department 208 South Cameron Street Tel: 919 732-8181 Post Office Box 8181 919 968-4501 Hillsborough, NC 27278 919 688-7331 919 227-2031 Fax: 919 644-3324 MEMORANDUM TO: John Link, County Manager Rod Visser,Assistant County Manager FROM: Ken Chavious, Finance Director DATE: March 19, 2002 SUBJECT: School System Fund Balance I have reviewed the Annual Financial Reports for both schools systems for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2001. My review included an analysis of fund balance in the school system's general fund, as you requested. My observations are as follows. Orange County Schools • Expenditures exceeded revenues by approximately$46,000 thus reducing total fund balance. • After required reservations ($825,000) and an appropriation of $2,000,000 for the 2001-02 budget, undesignated Fund Balance at year-end was $928,000. • Undesignated fund balance represented 5.5% of general fund expenditures at year-end. Chapel Hill-Carrboro City Schools • Expenditures exceeded revenues by approximately$305,000 reducing total fund balance. • Total fund balance was further reduced by a$64,000 auditor adjustment related to the previous fiscal year and an operating transfer of$12,000 to the food service fund. • After required reservations ($1,800,000)and an appropriation of$1,500,000 for the 2001-2002 budget, undesignated fund balance at year-end was$817,000. • Undesignated fund balance represented 2.25% of expenditures at year-end. Please call me if you have any questions.