01 - Laserfiche WebLink

Mrs. Testa added, "As the two bodies come together, I would hope there would be more advocacies when going to the State for changing the cap of the developer's fees. To not move forward on anything until we receive more state funding. We have an impossible situation with facilities in the next couple of years. The district office is a prime piece of land. Our students can go into portables, so can our administrators. This land could be sold and go back into the development pot. I hope we are not leading up to another bond. Thank you." Mayor Thorne closed the public hearing and asked for further comments from the Board or City Councilmembers. Trustee Bowser commented, "School construction is the responsibility of the State. It's not that the school district is mismanaging it. We have only the GO Bond, along with developer fees, based on the state standards. We do struggle with this yet the students still come to our district and its very important that we find housing for them." Mr. Fialho responded, "The changes in the different housing units that we do see, we do see a higher student ratio factor from having less density, we tend to generate more students from that. We look forward to working with the City to make sure our demographics are up to date based on our plans the Council passes." Trustee Arkin commented, "In regards to what our public speaker stated, about the statutory amount for development fees at the state, at the CSBA level that has been brought up and there was discussion on it numerous times. However, one of the topics they are going to address is the School Facilities State Bond. Assemblymember Joan Buchanan was here recently and asked about this topic. I think legislatively there's support for that, but the Governor doesn't want to put that on the ballot so far, yet many people are still pushing for this and I'm already asking about this every time I see one our legislators." Councilmember Brown commented, "We keep talking about an elementary school. The students will probably need middle schools and high schools. So how we are going to cover these additional students, I've heard many discussions in the community, how the East Side might be a big burden to the school district if additional funding isn't in place. I'm very aware of it and I'm hearing from the public their concerns, you're bringing in the range from the environmental impact report is 0-2,200 units and how those students will not only impact the elementary schools but the secondary schools as well. This is something very important to think about." 7. OVERVIEW OF SCHOOL FACILITY SCENARIOS Superintendent Ahmadi stated, "On September 10, 2013, the Governing Board was presented with two possible furutre scenarios for elementary schools for discussion purposes. Based on that presentation they gave us feedback and requested additional scenarios to address the needs of our students and populations that we have. We came back to the Governing Board with that information and tonight we will be presenting on the school facilities needs. We have Mr. Issac Johnson from the David Demographics & Planning, Inc to present to us those scenarios. At our April 8 board meeting we will be discussing our debt services and our facilities needs." Mr. Issac Johnson noted the information presented tonight is based on information received from the Fall of 2012 and he will continue to update this information as it's received this year, which includes the numbers for the East Pleasanton Plan. Mr. Johnson stated, "We did a ten year projection for each one of the nine attendance areas and there's definitely a need for a facility in the northern part of the district. We will look at the Alisal attendance area as we look at the development from the East Pleasnton Specific Plan (EPSP)." Scenario 1 - Lydiksen, Donlon and Fairlands are all over capacity between 600-700 students and are going to continue to grow over these amounts in the future. This scenario brings relief to these areas with an average of 600-700 students. Scenario 2A— creates a boundary for school 11 by combining Ruby Hill with the East Pleasanton, creates a larger resident population for East Pleasanton by 2020, sends residents of Ruby Hill along Joint City Council Page 9 of 11 March 17, 2014 PUSD Board Minutes