Agenda - 09-23-2002 - 1 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

APPROVED 0119102 Craig explained how student generation rate categories were developed and examined — "single family" and "other". He suggests we work with the statistically valid approach we have now until we come up with something better. Craig will prepare a written explanation of that approach. Dana asked why were these specific level of service (LOS )figures chosen? Craig said they looked at other APFOs around the country. Some places were starting at 150%for LOS. The thought here was we have the ability to be tighter here, so let's go with that. With 5% as permissible overcapacity spread over 6 or 7 schools, that might lead to a maximum of 1 or 2 portable classrooms at each elementary. John noted people have differing opinions— some think 100% LOS ought to be the standard.r Others, like the business community, may see those numbers as too low and leading to the need for a development moratorium. Steve noted that elementaries have the least flexibility, so they ought to have the lowest LOS. Alice noted these are about the tightest standards in the country. John believes it necessary to make sure people are clear on LOS meaning, e.g. that it applies to a whole school system, not one school within the system. Dana suggested maybe two levels of LOS where you start higher, then definitely kick in delay in CAPs issuance when you get to the lower figure. Craig said.that's generally the concept we're looking at. Margaret noted that we haven't focused on debt capacity of the County and tax increase the public is willing to assume. John suggested that the question is at 105% can we carry out the CIP? We're in better shape than other jurisdictions that have tried APFO with regard to available capacity. His outlook is a little different than a year ago, as pressure on the CIP is coming from all sides. Margaret expressed concern that we're just leaming about pieces of State funding that will be taken away and affect our ability to address mandated services. Lisa notes that when you reach LOS, folks who have existing CAPS continue to build and more kids come into system, thus eating up more capacity of new schools. Craig said we can't control student growth associated with existing development (e.g. 45% of Carrboro growth may come from reworking of existing housing)-what we can control is impacts of new development. We will still see growth, but it won't be as steep. Dana thinks the development community wants to know that we're taking into consideration the lag time.