Minutes - 10-17-2000 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Metadata

Thumbnails

Annotations

John Link said that once the school board has funding in their budget, it is their money. If they have $50,000 in their fund balance, they can spend that for preliminary work. What this is saying is that if additional funds are needed for preliminary planning, the schools will need to come before the County Commissioners for approval. Commissioner Brown said that she wants to know what items would be included in the funds for planning. Commissioner Brown made reference to page 4 under Site Standards and suggested changing the third bullet to say, "The availability of public utilities within the urban service boundaries." There was a consensus to make this change. Commissioner Brown said that there was no specific reference to value engineering and asked if it should be included. Donna Dean said that it was mentioned on page 6 and was called "cost effective facilities initiative." Commissioner Jacobs made reference to the concept pre-planning phase and said that it does need clarification. He suggested that the document could be specific on what would be included in the pre-planning phase. He made reference to potential school sites and asked why these discussions would not be in closed session. Geoffrey Gledhill said that typically school boards will have already selected a site and made an option on the property before they come before the County Commissioners to request the necessary funds. Commissioner Jacobs made reference to page 3, the first page of Attachment 1, and the fact that the Superintendents will provide the County Manager with project updates. He would like to make sure that these are written project updates for the Board to see. Commissioner Gordon made reference to page 5 under Construction Standards and said that it should be clear that co-location of facilities is to be encouraged where appropriate. Commissioner Brown made reference to page 5 and the last paragraph where it uses an example of a "larger than standard gymnasium". It would seem that although this is used as an example that it is something that fits in with the standards that have been developed for parks. She said that the standards for parks may not have been brought to the attention of the school boards. Commissioner Halkiotis asked who decides when there is an opportunity for co-location of facilities. John Link said that the memo of understanding says that this process is one between the schools, the Towns, and the County. Commissioner Halkiotis asked where the coordination would come from. Chair Carey said that when this document is brought back with the revisions, the Memorandum of Agreement for Providing Coordinated Site and Facility Planning should also be included. Commissioner Brown suggested that maybe once a year the Board and the school boards review the documents that have been agreed upon. A motion was made by Commissioner Brown, seconded by Commissioner Jacobs to approve a policy on planning and funding school capital projects with the following revisions: 1) Clarification on the pre-planning and planning process; 2) The discussions about sites in an open or closed session; and 3) Clarification on the Memorandum of Agreement for Providing Coordinated Site and Facility Planning. This also includes the changes in language by Commissioner Brown and Commissioner Gordon. A corrected copy will be in the Permanent Agenda File in the Clerk's office and also placed in the policy handbook located in the Clerk's office. VOTE: UNANIMOUS It was decided that a revised copy would be submitted to the County Commissioners on November 1St for their confirmation of the changes made. b. Draft Schools Adeauate Public Facilities Ordinance Memorandum of Understandina Transmittal The Board discussed and considered transmitting the proposed Schools Adequate Public Facilities memorandum of understanding and ordinance, and a resolution of support from the Schools and Land Use Councils to the two school boards and the municipalities in Orange County.