Loading...
Res 53-96 RESOLUTION NO. 53-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL T.W. AGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL ODNCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY (I]4MISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ~T.~. WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACHIEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools and to provide the best quality of education to all students within the county; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education, the City commission of the City of Delray Beach desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a work_~ble compromise solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH, FLORIDA, AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Florida, hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach county Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency which is comprised of eleven (11) pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". Section 2. That the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach respectfully requests that each and every other municipality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the Board of County Cc~mnissioners adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. Section 3. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized to sub~t this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School Board. PASSED AND ADOPTED in regular session on this the 18th day of June , 1996. A2~'EST: wcity tl~k SENT BY:Xerox Telecop£er 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:00 ; * +4072437168;# 1 EXHIBIT "A" tO Resolution No. 53-96 Palm Beat[[ I:nunly MflNII IPAL P.O. BOX 1989, GOVERNMENTAL CENTER, WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA June 4, 1996 Palm Beach County Commission 301 N Olive Avenue West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Palm Beach County School Board 3320 Forest Hill Boulevard West Palm Beach, Fl. 33406 Re: School Concurrency Program Dear Commissioners and School Board Members: Thank you for inviting the Palm Beach County Municipal League to participate in the process to find a solution to the school overcmwdin8 problem. All the municipalities are concerned over the problem of school crowdin$ and are extremely interested in improving the educatiomtl experiences of all of our children. We feel that Commissioner Marcus~ Board Member Oleason and the entire task force should be applauded for their fireless work in trying to come up with a solution to the school crowding problem. The Task Force was a IFeat success in bringing divergent groups to thc table and identifying various options for addressing the overcrowding problem. As we have reviewed the proposed .school concurrency package prepared by the Task Force, we find much that we can support. The proposed school concurrency package proposal essentially has three components - Financing, Planning, and Regulating The financ~g component addresses both the funding to eliminate the current bacldo8 so that the school board can catch up with school' capacity demand and the fin~cin$ to fund future growth once the school board has cauE~t up. The planning component addresses thc requirement for the school board to prepare and adhere to a business plan for spendin8 _the money raised to eliminate the bacld0B and for fundinB future capacity needs along with more coordinated planning between the school board and local governments. The resu]atory component addresses the transfer of local decision makin8 to the County and School Board based on the availability of school capacity. While all three components are not complete, the Munic/pal League can support the proposals on financing and planning, but has serious concerns about the regulatory component of the proposal. Each component wil~ be addressed in more detail below. Page 1 of 11 SENT BY:Xerox TelecoDier 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:00 ; ~ +4072437166;~ 2 June 4, 1996 Page 2 Financing Component The proposal for financing the catchup portion of the school capacity problem is a one cent sales u~x. The Municipal League is on record supporting a one cent sales tax as a financin8 vehicle fbr an acceptable program of'addressing the school crowdin8 issue. AssuminS the League's concerns raised elsewhere in this letter are addressed, the League continues to support the one cent sales tax. There is currently no concrete proposal for fimdin8 school capacity once the sales tax revenue ends, Essentially, the school board staff told us at the last workshop that if a portion of operating expenses could be removed from the capital budget, there would be enough capital dollars to ~und capacity for new growth and that the school board would have to work on this during the next seven years. If there is to be a resulatory component to this program, that answer is unacceptable. Continued fundinl~ after the end of the sales tax is crucial. The school board needs to make a binding commitment on how new capacity will be fimded a~cr the sales tax expires. Planning Component This cornpouent addresses both the business plan for the school board and the increased coordination of planning between the school board and local governments. Business Plan The School Board needs to prepare a business plan that demonstrates how the School Board will eliminate the capacity shortfall u 'tRizing the new funding source over the next seven years and how the School Board will prevent fi~ture overcrowdinl~ beyond that seven yem' period. This concept is extremely important, and the Municipal League believes thai any new funding source should be tied to a requirement that the school board ensqe in this type of business planning. The concurrency prosrarn outlined by the task force requires that tho schoOl board adopt · five year capital facilities program and update it yearly with the addition ora new year. Since it is projected to take seven years to catch up, this business plan should include a capital fiicih'fies program that covers the seven years needed to catch up, not jus~ the five year program currently proposed. Also, this plan should include identification of the fimdin8 necessary for fliture capacity needs after the initial fundins source expires. Under the current proposal, this is left for determination in the ~uture. The task ~rce proposal creates a five year business plan by requirin8 the development ora five year capital facilities plan by the School Board. The School Board's capital prosram would be adopted in the Counts/s comprehensive plan, which is required if there is a regulatory prosrarn. Exhibit "A" to Res. 953-96 Page 2 of 11 .. SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:01 ; * +40724371§6;# 3 June 4, 1996 Page 3 The adoption of' a business pla~ is a vm7 positive benefit. However, there are other ways to ensure the development of a binding business plan by the School Board without imposing a regulatory program. For example, the same type of business planning could be requh'ed through the interlocal agreement that authorizes the use of the sales tax for school construct/on. Coordinated Planning State law requires the coordinated planning between the School Board and all local governrnents. The proposed concurrencT program utilizes a regulatory program to provide the School Board with a method of tracking new development approvals. However, existin8 programs already serve thc same purpose. For example, through the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Interlocal Agreement, thc School Board receives all comprehensive plan amendments from all rmmicipalities and the County prior to the transmittal hearing. Thus, the School Board is notified of'planned new development prior to approval or'the comprehensive plan amendment for that development and the School Board has the opportunity to comment on the plan amendment prior to thc local government transmitting the amendment to the state. NIany local governments now notify the School Board of pending zoning applications and provide the School Board with the opportunity to comment on them. If more not/ficafion is needed, the County could provide the School Board with notice of ali new residential development proposed anywhere in tho County through its implementation of'the Tra/~c Performance Standards Ordinance. Thc County is notified of ~ proposed development prior to approval and the County could certainly notify the School Board at the time it receives notification. If that method is not acceptable, thc School Board could request this information fi'om thc individual local governments that arc not currently providinS it u part of the intergovernmental coordination process required by Chapter 163, Florida Statutes, All local governments and the School Board are required to enter into an Interlocal or other A&reement on a joint process for collaborative planning. Although the proposed Interlocal Agreement between the County and the School Board meets this requirement for the County and the School Board, it does not fillfill the requirement that the School Board enter btto this type of Agreement with each municipality. Since the School Board still must enter into atp-cenents with ali the municipalities, any additional coordination requested by the School Board could be addressed in those agreements. Coordinated planning, which is what the Department of' Community Affairs (DCA) encouraged as the primary method to address school overcrowding in its April 29, 1996 letter, can be accomplished without a feudatory program. Regulatory Component The Munic/pal League continues to have serious concerns over the proposed rcsulatory Exhibit "A" to Res. #53-96 Page 3 of 11 SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:02 ; , ~ +4072437168;~ 4 June 4, 1996 Page 4 component to the concurrency program. The League has continuously voiced its concerns about the effectiveness of the regulatory program on reducin8 school overcrowdin8 and about the lack of data on the impacts of this regulatory proposal. Pr/or to proposing any regulatory program, the County Commission and School Board should fully address the following questions. AH of these issues should be satisfactorily resolved by aH affected parties prior to going forward with any regulatory program. WHAT IS THE REGULATORY COMPONENT DESIGNED TO ACCOMPLISH AND DOES IT ACCOMPLISH ITS STATED GOALS? The County Commission and School Board should clearly identi~ what that regulatory program is designed to accomplish and should evaluate the positive and negative impacts of thc program. To date, this has not been done. As shown earlier in this letter, a program of providing funds for school construction tied to an enforceable bus/ness plan by the School Board to guarantee the proper use of thc funds and a coordinated planning program between the School Board and aH local governments in the County can all be accomplidied without a regulatory program. Therefore, it is necessary to talent/fy what additional benefit is accomplished by havins a program whereby the County and School Board regulate development approvals countywide. It must be domonsmtted that this benefit outweighs any costs or uncertainty that would be created by the program prior to the Municipal League agreeing to support this part of the program. The stated goal ofthe regulatory program is to prevent the future overcrowdin~ of schools. However, based on the information that has been provided, this program will not accomplish that goal. Concurrency Will Not Prevent Future Overcrowding of Schools Thc School Board is projecting that 5,000 new students will be added to the school system each year. The School Board staff'had previously contended that 80% ofthc new school growth yearly con~s from existing units ~ 20% comes fi.om new development. More recently, a School Board's consultant estimates that the split for n~w students is 50% from exi~ing units and 50% fi.om new units. Any new students g~ted from existing units would not be subject to concurrericy. Data provided to the Task Force by the County Planning Depsrtm~nt establishes that 80% of all building pm'nits issued yearly come from vested units. The~e vested units would not be subject to school concun'ency. The following table illustrates the impact of school concurrency on school crowding. The %'s indicate percentages of the 5,000 r~w students generated yearly from existing units and new units. Exhibit "A" to Res. #53-96 Page 4 of 11 SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:02 ; w +40724371~;~ 5 June 4, 1996 80%Existing Unit~/ 50%Exi~/mg Units/ 20% New Units $~A New Unit_q Students From Existing Units Not Subject to Concurrency 4,000 2,500 Students From New Units - Vested Not Subject to Concurrency gO0 2,000 Students Potentially Kept Out of School System by Concurrency 200 SOO Thus, if no new development approvals are 8rtnted count~j~ide because of* school concurrency, 4,S00 to 4.800 of'the S,000 new students generated yetrl~ would still be added to the school system. Since it is assumed thai some new development would be approved even with school concurrency, the actual impact of& regulatory program on school overcrowding will be even loss than indicated above. Therefore, it appears that the reguhtory component will have a negligible impact on reducing school overcrowding. However, the costs ofachleving those negligible boneflts could be great. I.~ck of Data on Impacts of Proposed Regulatory Program While the proposed regulatory program would have a negligible impact on reducing school overcrowding it could have very negative impacts on tho ability of the tnuai~p~6e., and the County to implement devalopment and redevelopment plato. The League has requested technical analysis on how concurrency would affect the Counts aducation~l r~t~ra sad the economy. To date, no real da~ has been provided on the basic s~umptions, methods, data base used and results obtained regarding the impact~ of co~cy on Palm Beach County over the next five to ten years. Prior to adopting a wholo new r~gulatory program, the County and School Board ~hould ~ least analyze how concurrency would improve the educa~oaal system; how concurrency would affect redevelopment of'our con.tad citios; how concurmgy would affect county ~owth pattarm; and where concurrency would stop growth in tho County during its impl~ment&~ion. Until a real analysis showing that the positive beneiits oftha proposed regulatory program outweigh say negative consequences, the Leagua cen nm support the propo~l regulatory program. Dapendin8 on where and wl~n n~w schools aro buiR, certain arr. a~ of the County could be in a development moratorium for a period of'years. This could result in Exhibit "A" to Res. 953-96 Page 5 of 11 SENT DY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:03 ; , ~ +4072437166;# 6 June 4, 1996 Page 6 projects being stopped, which could have serious consequences for the redevelopment of our coastal municipalities. For example, the City of West Palm Beach is actively seeking to increase the number of people residing in the downtown area. Thin is essential for the implementation ofthe new Downtown Master Plan and furthers the County Comprehensive Plan goal of directing development to the eastern areas. It has not been easy to attract new residents to downtowns. If the City is fortunate enough to attract a t'ttty unit residential apartment project for downtown West Palm Beach and that project is denied based on schooI concurrency, the negative impacts upon the City's redevelopment efforts would be great. Yet the reduction in school crowding would be negligible. That project would generate ~, total ofaround 30 students over the next 20 years. The potential negative impacts of the proposed regulatory program have not been adequately evaluated and could potentially be severe. THE SCHOOL BOARD WILL CONTROL THE LOCATION AND TIMING OF DEVELOPMENT COUNTYWIDE. IS THIS AN APPROPRIATE ROLE FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD.* Development that is otherwise consistent with adopted comprehensive plans would be delayed based on the availability of adequate school capacity. The School Board is the agency that controls the timing and location ofthe construction of new school capacity. Thus, the School Board will effectively have veto power over the implementation of adopted local comprehensive plans. Is this an appropriate role for the School Board? THE SCHOOL BOARD WILL BECOME A REGULATORY AGENCY. Lq THIS AN APPROPRIATE ROLE FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD.* Under the proposed program, the School Board will now be reviewing development applications. In addition, development will now be dependent upon the availability of school capacity and the elimination of school overcrowding. School overcrowdin8 h relieved both through creation of'new school capacity and the assignment of students to maximize u61i~afion of thai capacity. Thus~ the yearly development of both the school capital facih'ties program and the school attendance boundary assignments will now become components of that regulatory program. Becaus~ both will control where new development can occur, both will be subject to non-educaliona] related pres,rares. In order to irnplcment the regulatory program, new non- educational factors will have to be addressed by the School Board. Each area is discussed in more detail bclow. Exhibit "A" to Res. #53-96 Page 6 of 11 SENT BY:Xerox Tele¢op£er 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:04 ; ~ +40724371§6;# June 4, 1996 Page 7 School Capacity The School Board will have to provide enough capacity yearly to attain and maintain the adopted level ofservice. The School Board will be under great pressure to allocate capital funds to new schools and capacity addin8 projects. Areas subject to development restriction will exert great pressure on the School Board to fired capacity improvements in those areas. The pressure to add capacity could have a negative impact on needed renovations and upgrades of existing schools, including those in the coastal communities. After thc seven year catch up period, enough capacity is projected to be built to allow the schools in Palm Beach County to operate at a level of'service of' ! 10°,4. More information on the attainability of' this goal will be provided in the school plant survey presently being conducted. Until that survey is completed, we will not know if the 110% level of'service is attainable. If'it is not based on projected funding, the School Board will need to find additional revenues for capacity during the next seven years in order to attain the projected level of' service. School Assignment The school assignment issue is as significant as the creation of new capacity in relieving school crowding and minirnizin8 the impacts of any regulatory system. The projected level of service is 110%. This level ofservice is thc systemwide level of service - not the level of service for each school. At the last workshop, Marry Hodl~dns presented an example of'how school concurrency would s~Fect the Acreage area of the County. (See Tab 10, Workshop Binder) In his Acreage example, Mr. Hodgkins indicated that although the area currently has over 1,000 more students than permanent student stations, fi2ur new elementary schools would be constructed over the next seven years, rcsult~ in enough capacity for the Acreage area to meet the 110% level of service. Prom this analysis, it was concluded that concurrency would not s..'rect development in this area. Thh conclusion is only con'eat Lt'caps.--ity is equalized by school boundiuT assignment over the seven schools in Mr Hodgkir~' example in thc Acreage. If'capszity is not equalLzed, this area could be greatly impacted by concurrency. Usin~ Mr. Hodgkins' figures on capacity and students, it is possible that each of the four new schools could operate st ! 13% capacity and H.L. $ohnson and Cypress Trails could operate at ! 1 !% capscity m~l Loxah~chee could operate st 90% capacity. Even though the area would operate at the adopted level of service, all but Loxahatchee would exceed the adopted level of service. A major portion ofthe Acreage/Royal Palm Beach area could be shut down for new development. This is not merely a hypothetical concern. The County School System is currently operating at a systemwide level of service of 119°4. There are eighty (80) elementary schools. Enrollment at fifty (50) elementary schools currently exceeds the ex~sl~US systemwide level of Exhibit "A" to Res. #53-96 Page 7 of 11 SENT BY:Xerox Telecop£er 7021 ; 8-14-96 ; 13:04 ; ~ +40724371§6;# June 4, 1996 Page 8 service of 119%. On the other hand, fii%en (15) elementary schools have enrollments of less than 100% or' the school's capacity. If a level of'service was imposed today based on the current systemwide level of service of 119% (which is the proposed method of setting the level of' service after seven years), development in larlle areas of'the County would be precluded by concurrency due to this imbalance in school assignment. Therefore, the School Board should agree that it wtll adjust boundaries annually to equalize the utilization of all the schools. The Department of'Community Affairs (DCA) has also raised the issue of'school assilptments. In the April 29, 1996 letter, DCA indicates that concurrency must be analyzed for achievability and fin&ncial feasibility on a concurrency area by concurrency area basis. As proposed in the draft ordinance, a concurrency area would be the existing assigned school and the next three closest schools. The School Board must also agree to send the students ~enerated from a project in that area to one of those four schools so that the required geographic nexus for the regulatory program is achieved. As attendance boundaries chan~e, so does the concurrency area, which means that the financial feasibility for attaining the level of service must be re-evaluated. The only way the level of service can be financi~y feasible for each concurrency area is for the School Board to make equalization of capacity utilization one of the highest priorities in the annual boundary cycle. ARE THE SCHOOL BOARD, COUNTY COMMISSION AND MUNICXPALITIES PREPARED TO ASSUME THE POTENTIAL LIABILrI'Y FOR REGUlaTORY TAKINGS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY? Since it will now be a relpllatory a&ency, the School Board may have liability for regulatory takings that may occur as a result of the proposed regulatory prosram. Decisions on where to build new capacity and on school boundary assignments will now affect the development potential of property. Has the School Board adequately evaluated its potential liability for these activities? Since the County is proposed to be regulating development countywide based on the provision of infraStructure by the School Board, the County could have liability for resulatory talcin&s based on the decisions of the School Board for both capacity provision and school USilpunents. The present proposal does not give the County any say in school assilptment decisions and very limited say in school capacity decisions. Yet these decisions will determine the development potential of property. Has the County Commission adequately evaluated its potential liability for these acdv~ties? Even though the proposed program would be imposed on the muni~palities throulth a r, harter amendment, the municipalities may still be required to amend their oomprehensive plans to implement the concurrency program. Ir'that is the case, the municipalities may have potential liability based on a county-imposed regulatory program that is dependent on school capacity and school assignment decisions of the School Board. The municipalities will have no input into those Exhibit "A" to Res. 53-96 Page 8 of 11 SEN! BY:Xerox Telec0pier 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:05 ; , ~ +4072437166;~ 9 ~une 4, 1996 Page 9 decisions. WHY IS AN INTERIM LEVEL OF SERVICE NECESSARY? The purpose and necessity for an interim level of service has not been demonstrated. The proposed interim level of service imposes a regulatory program during the "catch-up" period of seven years. However, the proposed sales tax provides enough money to build the capacity required to elhninatc present overcrowding and provide for the new growth over the seven year~! If there is adequate fimding to build capacity for the projected new growth, why is there need to regulate that growth? On thc other hand, the proposed levels of service in years four through seven have not been supported by any data and analysis showi~ the effect they Would have on implementation of adopted comprehensive plans in the municipalities. The level of service proposals £or year~ four through seven have not been analyzed to determine their impacts on growth in the county, including their impacts on redevelopment in the coastal communities. Given that there is no need for a regulatory program during the first seven years since there are adequate funds to pay for the capacity required by growth during those 3mars and the lack of data regard[nS thc cffeet of the ~terim level of service, the Municipal Lcal~c position of not supporting the imposition ora regulato~ program durin~ the catch up period through thc proposed interim levels of service remains unchanged. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE PosmoN To summarize, the Municipal League position on thc proposed school concurrency package is as follows: - Assumin8 agreement with tho followin8 League positions, thc League supports the One Cent Sales Tax to fund new schools. - The League supports tying the new funding to the development cfa binding business plan by the School Board on how the money is spent. - This business plan should include a capital facilities plan for the life of the sales tax (not just the five years currently proposed) and for future funding to keep the school system Caught up. - The statutory requirements for coordinated planning between the School Board and ~!1 ofthe Municipalities needs to be addressed. The mutant proposal just addresses this requirement between the County and the School Board. Exhibit "A" to Res. 953-96 Page 9 of 11 SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 702t ; 6-14-96 ; 13:06 ; , ~ +40724371§6;#10 June 4, 1996 Page lO The League can not support a regulatory program durin~ the seven year catchup phase. G/ven that there will be adequate funds to prov/d,.- ~pacity for growth during this period, there is no need to impose a regulatory program during this period. - The League can not support any Charter Amendment authorizing impos/tion of a countyw/de regulatory program at this time, Based on the data prov/ded to date, there are few benefits to the regulatory component of the proposal while there are many potential negative consequences. - Prior to the initiation of any Charter Amendment author/zing imposklon of'a countywide school concurrency program, tho County and School Board should comply with the provisions of the Multi-lurisdictional Issues Coordination Forum Interlocal Agreement that was s/gned by the County, School Board and almost all of'the municipalities by submitting the proposal to the forum for development of' a consents by nil the Forum members on whether a regulatory program is an appropr/ate solution to any future overcrowding problem. LEAGUE PROPOSAL The Municipal League proposes that the beneficial portions of the proposed concurrency program be implemented through an Interlocal Agreement between the School Board, Pnhn Beach COUnty, and the municipalities. This proposal implements all of the positive benefits of the FundJn$ and Planning Components as outlined above. The Interlocal Agreement would provide for the following: - Thc levy of a one cent sales tax for .school construction over seven years. - The utilization of the entire proceeds of the sales tax for school construction (municipal sign-off is needed for the munidpal share to be used for school construction). - Creation of a business plan for spending the sales tax revenue and for keeping caught up with fi~ture demand once thc sales tax revenues are expended, - Creation of the joint plannin8 mechanisms that are required by statute bel~veen the School Board and the County and all of the municipalities in the County. A drai~ of'this Interlocal Agreement is currently being prepared and will be cimflated shortly. The Municipal League would urge the School Board and County Commission to carefully consider this proposal as an alternative to the proposed concurrency program currently under review. This proposal includes the funding and planning components that everyone agrees to and that are necessary without linking them to a potentially divisive regulatory program. Implementation of this approach would allow a unified appeal to the voters which is essential if Exhibit "A" to Res. #53-96 Page 10 of 11 SENT BY:Xerox Telecopier 7021 ; §-14-9§ ; 13:0§ ; , * +4072~37166;#11 June 4, 1996 P~,~e 11 the s&les tax is to pass. We look forward to your responses m~d to continued di~,logue on ~olving this most critical issue. P~Jm Beach County Municipal Le~;ue, Inc. cc: County Administrator Robert Wcisrnan School Superintendent Jo~n Kowal Members, Municipal League Board of Directors Mayor9 ~nd Mmmgers, P~Im Beach County Municipalitie~ Thorn~ Pelham, E~. B~o~ra Aiterrn~ Esq. Exhibit "A" to Res. #53-96 Page 11 of 11 [lTV OK I:I LKRV E:EKCK 1993 June 21, 1996 Palm BeachCounty School Board 3340 Forest Hill Boulevard Suite C-316 West Palm Beach, FL 33406-5869 Re: Resolution No. 53-96/School Concurrency Issue Dear SchoolBoard Members: Enclosed for your consideration is a copy of the City of Delray Beach's Resolution No. 53-96 adopting the position of the Palm Beach County Municipal League with regardtothe School Concurrency issue. ~s resolution was passed and adopted by the Delray Beach City Commission in regular session on June 18, 1996. Should you haveanyquestions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 561/243-7050. Sincerely, Alison MacGregor Harty City Clerk AMH/m Enclosure THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS [lTV DF I]ELR V 1993 J~e 21, 1996 Board of County Commissioners Governmental Center P.O. Box 1989 West Palm Beach, FL 33402 Re: Resolution No. 53-96/School concurrency Issue Dear Commissioners: Enclosed for your consideration is a copy of the City of Delray Beach's Resolution No. 53-96 adopting the position of the Palm Beach County Municipal League with regard to the School concurrency issue. This resolution was passed and adopted by the Delray Beach City Commission in regular session on June 18, 1996. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 561/243-7050. Sincerely, City Clerk AMH/m Enclosure THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS ~r~nted on ~ecycled Pape, [lTV OF DELFIfiV Ail-America City 1993 June 21, 1996 Ivy. Jack Horniman Executive Director Palm Beach County Municipal League P.O. Box 1989 West Palm Beach, FL 33402 Re: Resolution No. 53-96/School Concurrency Issue Dear Mr. Horniman: Attached please find an executed copy of the City of Delray Beach's Resolution No. 53-96 adopting the position of the Palm Beach County Municipal League with regard to the School Concurrency issue. This resolution was passed and adopted by the Delray Beach City Commission in regular session on June 18, 1996. Should you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 561/243-7050. Sincerely, Alison MacGregor Harry City Clerk aMH/m Enclosure cc: Robert A. Barcinski, Assistant City Manager THE EFFORT ALWAYS MATTERS Pnnted on ,RecycleC =acer MEMORANDUM TO: MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSIONERS SUBJECT: AGENDA ITEM # ~O - REGULAR MEETING OF JUNE 18, 1996 RESOLUTION NO. 53-96/SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE DATE: JUNE 14, 1996 Attached is a request from the Municipal League for support of a resolution to adopt the League's position regarding the School Concurrency Issue. The position is set forth in the attachment to the resolution (Exhibit "A"). The Municipal League is asking municipalities to take action prior to the School Board meeting scheduled for July 8th. Recommend consideration of Resolution No. 53-96. ref: agmemo 16 MEMORANDUM Altached pi~a~e ~ a sarnpl~ Resolution that ha~ been comtmcted by *dm Palm ~ County Municipal League regarding thc School Concurency Issue. Your city is encouraged to adopt this Resolution which endorses the Leaguz'$ position paper date June 4. 1996 pertaining to the School Concurrency Issue. If any city requires ~planatiors clarification or a presentation please contact the League's of~ce at (561) 355-4484 at your mrii~ convenience. / ?'~. 05-13-06 I4:Sq P.B. CO. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE 0q4 P08/08 i R~SOLUTION NO. , A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE OF · FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH Co~ MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHF. R MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOOETH~-R TOWARD ACHIEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PAI2d , BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR O~ ~ ' PURPOSES. ~ WHERF. AS, the Palm Beach County School Board, thc Board of County CommiSsioners of ~ ~ tk~ch County and the municipal 8overnments of Palm Beach County desire to work together .. in ~ to relieve overcrowdin$ of our schools within the County and to provide the best quality of ~ha~:~on to all gudents with/n the County; and , WI-II/REAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent i ~ arnons the numerous entities involved in long term piarming for education, the '. of desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County .~ MunicipvJ League, Inc. with regard to thc school concurrency issue as this position represents ~ wodmble comprom/se solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE = OF _ , FLORIDA, THAT: ~l~llLl.; The ~ Council of the of h~eby adopts the : pod/on r~.~mtly set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with resard to school .~ ~oncurrency which is comprised of eleven (11) pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit A. i ~: The Coundl of the of h~reby ml~fully ~ ~ch and every other municipality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board o/'l~/m !~ County and the Board of County Commi~oners adopt this ~ane positionin order that w~ m~ all work to~ether in a productive manner. ~: The ...... Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Re~olution to amaicipalitie~, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach SENT BY:Xerox TelecoDier 7021 ; 6-14-96 ; 13:13 ; ~ +4072437166;~ 2 County School Bo~rd. ~ This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the ~ Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of ,1996. OF Aye Nay Mayor Aye Nay Councilmembcr Aye Nay Councilmember . Aye ~ay Councilmember Aye Nay Coun¢ilmember ATTEST: Clerk (SEAL) Approved as to form and legal sut~ciency. ,,. Attorney -2- Board of County Commissioners County Administrator Robert Weisman, P.E. Ken L. Foster, Chairman Burt Aaronson, Vice Chairman Karen T. Marcus Carol A. Roberts Warren H. Newell Mary McCarty ~ Maude Ford Lee June 27, 1996 Ms. Alison MacGregor Harty City Clerk City of Delray Beach 100 N.W. 1st Avenue Delray Beach, Florida 33444 Dear Ms. Harty: This will acknowledge receipt of Resolution No. 53-96 adopted by the City Commission of Delray Beach June 18,1996. Please be assured that I will arrange to have this document placed on the County Commission Agenda to be officially received and filed as soon as possible. Sincerely, TO AVOID DELAY IN MAILING Palm Beach County Commission, District 6 KLF/nes R5C5 V5D 714% CITY CLEI K "An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer" printedon P.O. Box 1989 West Palm Beach, FL 33402-1989 (561) 355-2001 FAX: 355-3990 recycled papor (561) RESOLUTION NO. 96-221 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HYPOLUXO, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACHIEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools within the County and to provide the best quality of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education, the Town of Hypoluxo desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HYPOLUXO, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1: The Town Council of the Town of Hypoluxo hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency which is comprised of eleven (11) pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 2: The Town Council of the Town of Hypoluxo hereby respectfully requests each and every other municipality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the Board of County Commissioners adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. Section 3: The Town Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School Board. Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the Town Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF HYPOLUXO, FLORIDA THIS /o2 rt-~ DAY OF ~Zz~l&.~_~_ ,1996. _~ AYE: NAY: TOWN COUNCIL: )(l Merion, Mayor Frank Naccarato Barbara Searls Ross, Town Clerk MEMORANDUM RECEIVE ' TO: CITY/TOWN/VILLAGE CLERKS FROM: Betty Yon~iCity Clerk CITYCLERK DATE: June 20, 1996 SUBJECT: School Concurrency Resolution Enclosed is a copy of Resolution 96-07 adopting the position o~ the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the School Concurrency Issue. This resolution was passed June 19, 1996 at the regular City Council Meeting. RESOLUTION NO. O 6- i3 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIS, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, TI-IE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACHIF~VING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools within the County and to provide the best quality of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education, the City of Atlantis desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF ATLANTIS, FLORIDA, THAT: Se~ion 1: The City Council of the City of Atlantis hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency which is comprised of eleven (11) pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit A_ Section 2: The City Council of the City of Atlantis hereby respectfully requests each and every other municipality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the Board of County Commissioners adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. Section 3: The City Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School Board. Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the City Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED this / ~ day of ¢~.~//2_ ,1996. Aye/ Nay Mayo~"~il~ an~.~Howell Aye Nay ,.Vice Mayor (Jlyd'*F. Farmer  Nay Mayor Pro _Tern L~s Aye Nay ' cii/n;nlber 19nc aefC ' C~em~oll :e Nay TESTEI2}: // Betty A. Yon, City C~f'erk : (Seal) Approved as to form and legal sufficiency re~la~J. Whit e,(.12(ty -Attorney -2- VILLAGE OF PALM SPRINGS OFFICE OF THE VILLAGE CLERK Memo To: Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Palm Beach County School Board Palm Beach County Municipal League Ail Palm Beach County Municipalities Date: June 18, 1996 Subject: Palm Beach County School Concurrency Issue At their meeting on June 13, 1996, the Mayor and Village Council of the Village of Palm Springs, Florida, adopted Resolution No. 96-31 supporting the position of the Palm Beach County Municipal League in its solution to the school overcrowding problem. The Village Council urges every municipality, the Palm Beach County Commissioners, and the Palm Beach County School Board to adopt this position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. If you would like to have a copy of this statement and our Resolution, please contact my office. Sincerely, Irene L. Burroughs, CMCd/ Village Clerk c: Mayor and Village Council Joseph L. Gallegos, Village Manager RECEIVED CITY CLERK "'" '"~' ~ ; l RECEIVED C~CLEEK TOWN OF PALM BEACH SHC RES 247 Edwards Lane · Palm Beach Shores, Florida · 33404 - 5792 · (407) 844 - 3457 · Fax 863 - 1350 Mayor MEMORANDUM THOMAS CHILCOTE Vice-Mayor TO: City/Town/Village Clerks JOE BACCARI FROM: Town Clerk Sandra Holmes'' Commissioners SUBJECT: Resolution No. 472 MARGARET MCNERNEY DATE: June 19, 1996 BILL REEP CYNTHIAWATI$ Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No.472 that was unanimously approved at the Regular Meeting of the Town Commission on June 17, 1996. The Town Commission of the Town of Palm Beach Shores urges your municipality to adopt a resolution to support the position of the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue. RESOLUTION NO. 472 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF PALM BEACH SHORES, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACHIEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHFREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools within the County and to provide the best quality of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education, the Town of Palm Beach Shores desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF PALM BEACH SHORES, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1: The Town Commis~on of the Town of Palm Beach Shores hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency which is comprised of eleven (11) pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit A. ~: The Town Commission of the Town of Palm Beach Shores hereby respectfully requests each and every other munidpality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the Board of County Commissioners adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. Section 3: The Town Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County, Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach :,(_oua!oRInS l~a~l ptm maozI o1 ~ poao~dd¥ '966I ' oun£ $o ~p q:~t t gPO (l~LLdO(lV (INV (I~ISSVd 'uo!ss.namo9 un~oj~ ~ql Kq uo~dopt~ uodn Kl~l~!p~ttn~. l:~I~ ~q 11~ uo.tlnlOS~I s!qJ. ."VIr6TIY~ 'pmol~l looqos ~luno9 TOWN OF LANTANA MEMORANDUM TO: Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners Palm Beach County School Board Palm Beach County Municipal League All Palm Beach County Municipalities DATE: June 25, 1996 SUBJECT: PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE The Lantana Town Council at their regularly scheduled meeting on June 24, 1996, voted unanimously to approve Resolution R-16-96 adopting the position of the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue, requesting that each and every other municipality in Palm Beach County, the Board of County Commissioners and the Palm Beach County School Board adopt the same position in order that we may all work together toward achieving quality education in Palm Beach County. If you would like a copy of our Resolution, please contact my office at (56 l) 547-4608. Shacerely, Patricia C. Town Clerk cc: Honorable Mayor and Council Ron Fen'is, Town Manager LAKE WORTH 7 NORTH DIXIE HIGHWAY LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA 33460 BARBARA A. FORSYTHE, CMC TELEPHONE (407) 586-1662 CITY CLERK FAX (407) 586-1750 MEMORANDUM v. (c) TO: Ail Palm Beach County Municipalities FROM: City Clerk Barbara Forsythe ~ DATE: June 19, 1996 SUBJECT: Resolution No. 61-96 re School Concurrency Proposal Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 61-96, adopted by the Lake Worth City Commission in regular meeting held June 18, 1996, supporting the Palm Beach County Municipal. League's position on' school concurrency. The City of Lake Worth urges your support of this position in order that all involved may cooperate toward achieving QUALITY EDUCATION. in Palm Beach County. BAF/ble Encl. (1) cc: City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 61-96 OF THE CITY OF LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACHIEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools within the County and to provide the best quality of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS. ~in ord~.r tn wr)rk together to ~chieve quality ed;;catic, n and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education, the City of Lake Worth desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit of ail. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE WORTH, FLORIDA, that: Section 1. The City Commission of the City of Lake Worth hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency. ~ection 2. The City Commission of the City of Lake Worth additionally recognizes that improving the quality of education in this County is critical to upgrading the school system countywide and hereby requests that the School Board of Palm Beach County formulate a comprehensive plan for improving the quality of education for our schools. Section 3. The City Commission of the City of Lake Worth hereby respectfully requests each and every other municipality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the Board of County Commissioners adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. Section 4. The City Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School Board. Section 5. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its passage. The passage of this Resolution was moved by Commissioner Ramiccio, seconded by Commissioner Clager and upon being put to a vote, the vote was as follows: Mayor Rodney G. Romano AYE Commissioner Retha Lowe AYE Commissioner Jose Sosa AYE Commissioner Tom Ramiccio AYE Commissioner Lloyd A. Clager AYE The Mayor thereupon declared this Resolution duly passed and adopted on the 18th day of June, 1996. Signed this,~ day of ~ ,1996. Mayor Submitted: June 18, 1996 CITY HALL · 201 WEST PALME'I-rO PARK ROAD · BOCA RATON, FLORIDA(FoR HEARING33432'37951MPAIRED)' PHONE:TDD: (407)(407) 367-7046393-7700 · SUNCOM: (407) 922-7700 RECEIVED CITY CLERK ,, June 27, 1996 TO= All Palm Beach County Municipalities FROM: Candace Bridgwater, City Clerk SUBJECT: Palm Beach County School Concurrency Issue Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 113-96 of the City of Boca Raton conceptually supporting Palm Beach County's school concurrency ordinance and the one-cent sales tax as a funding source. The resolution was adopted by the Boca Raton City Council at their regular meeting of June 25, 1996. ~andace B~ Clerk CB: jd Enclosure ~:/'"'"'-'~Prlntedon recycled paper. AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER REVISED 6/25/96 RESOLUTION NO. 113-96 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BOCA RATON CONCEPTUALLY SUPPORTING PALM BEACH COUNTY'S SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ORDINANCE AND THE ONE-CENT SALES TAX AS A FUNDING SOURCE; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Boca Raton recognizes that quality educational facilities are an integral part of a community and that schools form a partnership with the City, providing a quality of life for City residents; and WHEREAS, the availability and quality of schools con- tribute to the economic base of the City and the desirability of its neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the City of Boca Raton wishes to encourage the development or redevelopment of schools and urges that additional schools be built within South Palm Beach County; and WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board is presently working on a five-year capital facilities plan to address the school plant planning needs of the entire county; and WHEREAS, the City Council is desirous of achieving a consensus position among the School Board, Board of County Commissioners and fellow municipalities so as to build and ensure public support for the funding of adequate schools; now therefore BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BOCA RATON: Section 1. The City Council of the City of Boca Raton conceptually supports Palm Beach County's proposed school concurrency ordinance, with a one-cent sales tax as a funding source, provided certain assurances are given as adopted unanimously by the general membership of the Palm Beach County Municipal League at its meeting of March 27, 1996, and further explained in that certain letter from the Palm Beach County Municipal League to the Palm Beach County Commission and the Palm Beach County School Board dated June 4, 1996, including, but not limited to: (1) Creation of a business plan for spending the sales tax revenue and for keeping caught up with future demand once the sales tax revenues are expended; (2) Creation of the joint planning mechanisms that are required by statute between the School Board and the County, and all of the municipalities in the County; (3) Elimination of the current backlog before the imposition of any regulatory program restricting a munici- pality's right, after public hearing, to determine local land uses; (4) Suspension of the regulatory program if the School Board does not adequately finance and carry out its adopted capital improvement plan; and (5) Completion of an analysis by the School Board and County of how the proposed changes would affect growth patterns and improve the quality of education. Section 2. The City Council of the City of Boca Raton urges the Palm Beach County School Board to address the needs for redevelopment of existing schools and to consider the needs of the entire county when formulating its capital plan. Section 3. The City Council of the City of Boca Raton urges the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners, the Palm Beach County School Board and the Palm Beach County Municipal League to work together to resolve their differences on school concurrency and supports the placement of this issue on the ballot for the general public to decide in November, 1996. 2 Secti6n 4. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to furnish copies of this resolution to the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners, the Palm Beach County Administrator, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Super- intendent of the Palm Beach County School District, the Palm Beach County Municipal League and every municipality in the County of Palm Beach. Section 5. This resolution shall take effect immedi- ately upon adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Boca Raton this ~ ~ day of ~ , 1996. CITY OF BOCA RATON, FLORIDA ~~ ! ~n,' Mayor Candace Bri2~y Clerk C/A RD1/96086 COUNCIL VOTE NAME YE__S NO ABSTAINED ,/ ABRAMS ~// ,..._ .--. WHELCHEL ~ ~ 3 County Administration RO. Box 1989 West Palm Beach, FL 33402-1989 September 11, 1996 (561) 355-2030 Fax: (561) 355-3982 Alison MacGregor Harty City Clerk City of Delray Beach · 100 N. W. First Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444 Dear Ms. Harty: Palm Beach County 5 ~ Board of County This letter acknowledges receipt of Resolution No. ~ Commissioners 96, of the City Commission of the City of Delray Beach, Ken L. Foster, Chairman Florida, adopting the position of the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the School Burt Aaronson. Vice Chairman Concurrency issue; requesting that each and every other KarenT. Marcus municipality in Palm Beach County, the Board of County Commissioners and the Palm Beach County School Board Carol A. Roberts adopt the same position in order that we may all work Warren H. Newell together toward achieving quality education in Palm Beach County; providing an effective date; and for MaryMcCarty other purposes. MaudeFordL~e The Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners officially received and filed your correspondence at the July 16th, 1996 Board meeting. A copy of your county/utministrator Resolution was sent to the Municipal League. Robert Weisman, RE. Sincerely, cc: Municipal League ~An Equal Opportunity Affirmative Action Employer' ~ prlnted on recycled paper Boynton Beach !...... 100 E. Boynton Beach Boulevard  P.o. Box310 Boynton Beach, Florida 33425-0310 City Hall: (407) 375-6000 F~: (407) 375-6090 August 12, 1996 Ms. Alison MacGregor Harty, City Clerk City of Delray Beach 100 NW 1 st Avenue Delray Beach, FL 33444-2698 RE; RESOLUTION #R96-118 - SCHOOL CONCURRENCY Dear Ms. Harry: Attached please find the above mentioned resolution which was approved at the City Commission meeting held on August 6, 1996 with regard to the school concurrency issue. This resolution requests that each and every municipality in Palm Beach County, the Board of County Commissioners and the Palm Beach County School Board adopt the same position and work together toward achieving quality education in Palm Beach County. The City Commission of Boynton Beach thanks all of you in advance for considering this school concurrency issue very seriously. Sincerely, CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH Sue Kruse, CMC/AAE City Clerk mas/ disc/merge/cityltr RESOLUTION R96-//~ A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC., WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACHIEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECT!VE DATE. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools and to provide the best qualify of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education~ the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1. The City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach, Florida hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc., with regard to school concurrency which is comprised of eleven (11 ) pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit "A". Section 2. That the City Commission of the City of Boynton Beach respectfully requests that each and ewry other municipality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the Board of County Commissioners adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. Section 3. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School Board. PASSED AND ADOPTED this _~_ day of August, 1996. CITY OF BOYNTON BEACH, FLORIDA Commissione" mmissioner A~EST: (Corporate Seal) LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL ~:"--~- 4 ~:~-~'~ DA~ 7/23/96 To: City of Delray Beach IIATTENf'A --- Alison MacGregor-HartY100 N.W. FirstAve. F School Concurrency Issue Delray Beach, FI 33444 , WE ARE SENDING YOU:r-~ Attached [~ Under separate cover via the following items: ~ Shop drawings ~ Prints ~ Plans ~ Samples r~ Specifications [~ Copy of letter ~ Change order' COPIES DATE NO. DESCRIPTION 1 Copy of Resolution No. 96-11, passed and adopted by the Village Council at their June 25, 1996 Meeting, with regards to the School Concurrency Issue. THESE ARE TRANSMITTED as checked below: ~ For approval ~ Approved as submitted ~ Resubmit__ copies for approval ~ For your use ~ Approved as noted ~ Submit__ copies for distribution ~ As requested F-~ Return for corrections ~-~ Return __ corrected prints ~ For review and comment REMARKS Please qiYe this resolution your full and favorable consideration. COPYTO All Pa%m Beach County Municipalities.~ School Board of Palm Beach Court, NED ~ Board of County Commissioners AwildaRoddguez Village Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 96-11 A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACHIEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools within the County and to provide the best quality of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education, the Village of Wellington desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit o£ all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF WELLINGTON, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1: The Village Council of the Village of Wellington hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency which is comprised of eleven (11) pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 2: The Village Council feels very strongly that the School Board needs to adopt a seven year business plan as described in Exhibit A. The Village Council believes that this plan should include at a minimum, · a seven year capital improvement plan outlining exactly which schools the School Board plans to build, where the proposed schools will be built, land acquisition costs (if the School Board does not already own the property), the cost of building each proposed school in the plan, and a schedule indicating when each school will be built. · an operation and maintenance component that shows how the schools will be staffed and maintained. Specifically, this component should include reasonable estimates for each school of the number of teachers and ancillary staff necessary to operate the facility once built, the cost of their salaries and benefits, the cost of utilities, of materials and supplies and of capital equipment that the school will need once built, and · a funding component that demonstrates how the School Board will fund not only the new schools but the existing schools as well. Section 3: The Village Council further recommends that an independent review panel be established to monitor the School Board's implementation of the seven year plan. This panel would be made up of representatives of the County, the municipalities, the development community and the public. If, after three years and each year thereafter, the review panel determined that the School board was not following its business plan, collection of the sales tax would be suspended until such time as the School Board had taken appropriate corrective action. Section 4: The Village Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School Board. Section 5: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the Village Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED this c~0.9~ day of ,.-~r, t" ,1996. ATTEST: Village Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 96SB A RESOLUTION OF THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF GOLF, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY~ ALL WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACHIEVING THE QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools within the County and to provide the best quality of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education, the Village of Golf desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF GOLF, FLORIDA, THAT: ~ The Village Council of the Village of Golf hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency which is comprised of eleven (11) pages and is attached Hereto as Exhibit A. ~ The Village Council of the Village of Golf hereby respectfully requests each and every other municipality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the Board of County Commissioners adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. ~ The Village Council of the Village of Golf does not concur with the Palm Beach School Board and Palm Beach County approving future "development" A single family residence constructed on a privately owned finished lot by the owner should not be considered a "development". There are presently twenty-two privately owned lots within the Village of Golf residential area. Secti~ The Village Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School Board. ~ This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the Village Council. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE VILLAGE COUNCIL OF THE VILLAGE OF GOLF, FLORIDA THIS /~ DAY OFj~'z/~.- , 1996. ATTEST ~ ~~.~. - ~gd~-~ Mayor ~ill~ge Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 6 8 7 A RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPAUTY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOC, ETHER TOWARD ACHIEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together In order to relive overcrowding of our schools within the County and to provide the best cluality of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entitles Involved In long term planning for education, the Town Commission of the Town of Highland Beach desires to adopt the Dosition recent set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency Issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVEL) BY THE TOWN COMMISSION OF THE TOWN OF HIGHLAND BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1: The Town Commission of the Town of Highland Beach, Florida hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency, which is comprised of 11 pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Secl~n .2: The TOWn Commission of the TOWn of Highland Beach, Florida hereby respectfully requests each and every other municipality within Palm Beach counW, as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the BOard of County Commissioners, adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. .Section 3: The Town Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach CounW and the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. Secl~n ~L- This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the Town Commission of the Town of Highland Beach, Florida. / MUNICIPAL COMPLEX C3e//e D/de. q-/orlda 33q30 TELEPHONE (407) 996,-0100 OFFICE or CITY CLERK' DEBRA IR. BUFF, CITYCLI=RK July 5, 1996 DIANNE CARTER, DEI=UTYCrrYcLEm< TO: Palm Beach County Board of' County Commissioners Palm Beach County Administrator Palm Beach County School Board Palm Beach County School District Superintendent Palm Beach County Municipal League Palm Beach County Municipalities FROM: Debra R. Buff', City Cler~ DATE: July 5, 1996 SUBJECT: Palm Beach County School Concurrency Issue Enclosed is a copy of Resolution No. 2189 which was adopted at a Special Meeting of the Belle Glade City Commission on July 2, 1996, supporting the Palm Beach County Municipal League's position on school concurrency and the one-cent sales tax as a funding source. DRB/ddc Enclosure cc: Lomax Harrelle, City Manager Trela White, Municipal League Attorney (Via Fax) RESOLUTION NO. 2189 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BELLE GLADE, FLORIDA, RELATING TO SCHOOLS; PROVIDING SUPPORT OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE'S POSITION ON SCHOOL CONCURRENCY AND THE ONE-CENT SALES TAX AS A FUNDING SOURCE; AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WHEREAS, the City Commission of the City of Belle Glade recognizes that quality e~u~ cational facilities are an integral part of a community and that schools form a partnership with the City, providing a quality of life for City residents; and WHEREAS, the availability and quality of schools affect the economic base of the City and the desirability of its neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the City of Belle Glade wishes to encourage the development or redevelop- ment of schools and urges that additional necessary schools be built within Palm Beach County; and WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board is presently working on a five-year capital facilities plan to address the school plant planning needs of the entire county;, and WHEREAS, the City Commission is desirous of achieving a consensus position among the School Board, Board of County Commissioners and municipalities so as to ensure public support for the construction funding of needed schools. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF BELLE GLADE, FLORIDA: Section 1. The City Commission of the City of Belle Glade supports the Palm Beach County Municipal League's position on school concurrency, with a one-cent sales tax as a funding source, conditioned on and provided that certain assurances are given as adopted unanimously by the general membership of the Palm Beach County Municipal League at its meeting of March 27, 1996, and further explained in that certain letter from the Palm Beach County Municipal League to the Palm Beach County Commission and the Palm Beach County School Board dated June 4~ 1996, including, but not limited to: (1) Creation of an enforceable business plan for spending and accounting of the sales tax revenue proceeds and for keeping caught up with future demand once the sales tax revenues are expended; (2) Creation of the joint planning mechanisms that are required by statute among the School Board and the County, and all of the municipalities in the County; (3) Elimination of the current construction backlog before the implementation of any regulatory program relating to a municipality's right to determine local land uses; (4) Suspension of the regulatory program if the School Board does not adequately finance and carry out a capital improvement plan for construction of schools, and (5) Completion of an objective analysis by the School Board and County of how the pro- posed changes would affect growth patterns and improve the quality of education. Section 2. The City Commission of the City of Belle Glade urges the Palm Beach County School Board to address the needs for redevelopment of existing schools and to consider the needs of the entire county when formulating its capital plan. 1 of 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2189 Section 3. The City Commission of the City of Belle Glade urges the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners, the Palm Beach County School Board and the ~:~::. County Municipal League to work together to resolve all issues relating to school concurrency so as to present a unified plan to the electorate. Section 4. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to furnish copies oftMs reao- lution to the Palm Beach County Board of County Commissioners, the Palm Beach County ministrator, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Superintendem of the Palm Beach County School District, the Palm Beach County Municipal League and every municipality in the County of Palm Beach. Section 5. The position adopted by this Resolution shall not be interpreted nor in anyw~ae construed as a delegation, at any time, of any of the powers of the City of Belle Glade, Florida. Section 6. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption. DONE AND RESOLVED at Special Session of the City Commission of~he City of Belle Glade, Florida, this 2nd day of July , 1996. /~ Mayor-Comnu~oner ATTEST: 2 of 2 RE(~EIgEDT//~//~'6 ............ R~SOLUTION NO. 126-96 ,, CITY CLERK A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVIERA BEACH, FLORIDA, ADOPTING THE POSITION OF THE PALM BEACH COUNTY MUNICIPAL LEAGUE, INC. WITH REGARD TO THE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY ISSUE; REQUESTING THAT EACH AND EVERY OTHER MUNICIPALITY IN PALM BEACH COUNTY, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THE PALM BEACH COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD ADOPT THE SAME POSITION IN ORDER THAT WE MAY ALL WORK TOGETHER TOWARD ACI-ffEVING QUALITY EDUCATION IN PALM BEACH COUNTY; PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. WHEREAS, the Palm Beach County School Board, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the municipal governments of Palm Beach County desire to work together in order to relieve overcrowding of our schools within the County and to provide the best quality of education to all students within the County; and WHEREAS, in order to work together to achieve quality education and to prevent divisiveness among the numerous entities involved in long term planning for education, the City of Riviera Beach desires to adopt the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to the school concurrency issue as this position represents a workable compromise solution for the benefit of all. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RIVIERA BEACH, FLORIDA, THAT: Section 1: The City Council of the City of Riviera Beach hereby adopts the position recently set forth by the Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. with regard to school concurrency which is comprised of eleven (11) pages and is attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 2: The City Council of the City of Riviera Beach hereby respectfully requests each and every other municipality within Palm Beach County as well as the School Board of Palm Beach County and the Board of County Commissioners adopt this same position in order that we may all work together in a productive manner. Section 3: The City Clerk is hereby authorized to submit this Resolution to all municipalities, the Board of County Commissioners of Palm Beach County and the Palm Beach County School Board. Section 4: This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption by the City Council. 126-96 PASSED AND ADOPTED this 19TH day of JUNE , 1996.  _,Y OF RIVIERA BEAC~_I_~ Aye Nay Clara Williams, Mayor Aye Nay Cinthia Becton, Chair Aye Nay ' Aye Nay ~ Eaflene lor~,~ ~Vestqn, Councilperson ( , ~'// '}'~ Ay~ N.y M.~n M~tt, doun~i~ Aye Nay ~arga~et ~n~ey,~d~ncilper~'~ ~.Gw~dol~- a~s, City Clerk (Seal) ' Approved as to fo~ and Ci~ Aaom~ wpwin60\wpdoe~vbe~eh.r~ =2- Palm lll aCil Couill ' MUNICIPAL LEAGUE P.O. BOX 1989, GOVERNMENTAL CENTER, WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA 33402 (407)355-448~, June 4, 1996 Pahn Beach County Commission 301 N. Olive Avenue West Palm Beach, Fl. 33401 Palm Beach County School Board 3320 Forest Hill Boulevard West Palm Beach, Fl. 33406 Re: School Concurrency Program Dear Commissioners and School Board Members: Thank you for inviting the Palm Beach County Municipal League to participate in the process to find a solution to the school overcrowding problem. All the municipalities are concerned over the problem of school crowding and are extremely interested in improving the educational experiences of all of our children. We feel that Commissioner Marcus, Board Member Gleason and the entire task force should be applauded for their tireless work in trying to come up with a solution to the school crowding problem. The Task Force was a great-success in bringing divergent groups to the table and identifying various options for addressing the overcrowding problem. As we have reviewed the proposed school concurrency package prepared by the Task Force, we find much that we can support. The proposed school concurrency package proposal essentially has three components - Financing, Planning, and Regulating. The financing component · ' addresses both the funding to eliminate the current backlog so that the school board can catch up with school capacity demand and the financing to fund future growth once the school board has caught up. The planning component addresses the requirement for the school board to prepare and adhere to a business plan for spending the money raised to eliminate the backlog and for funding future capacity needs along with more coordinated planning between the school board and local governments. The regulatory component addresses the transfer of local decision making to the County and School Board based on the availability of school capacity. While all three components are not complete, the Municipal League can support the proposals on financing and planning, but has serious concerns about the regulatory component of the proposal. Each component will be addressed in more detail below. June 4, 1996 Page 2 Financing Component The proposal for financing the catchup portion of the school capacity problem is a one cent sales tax. The Municipal League is on record supporting a one cent sales tax as a financing vehicle for an acceptable program of addressing the school crowding issue. Assuming the League's concerns raised elsewhere in this letter are addressed, the League continues to support the one cent sales tax. There is currently no concrete proposal for funding school capacity once the sales tax revenue ends. Essentially, the school board stafftold us at the last workshop that ifa portion of operating expenses could be removed from the capital budget, there would be enough capital dollars to fund capacity for new growth and that the school board would have to work on this 'during the next seven years. If there is to be a regulatory component to this program, that answer is unacceptable. Continued funding at, er the end of the sales tax is crucial. The school board needs to make a binding commitment on how new capacity will be funded at, er the sales tax expires. Planning Component This component addresses both the business plan for the school board and the increased coordination of planning between the school board and local governments. Business Plan The School Board needs to prepare a business plan that demonstrates how the School Board will eliminate the capacity shortfall utilizing the new funding source over the next seven years and how the School Board will prevent future overcrowding beyond that seven year period. This concept is extremely important, and the Municipal League believes that any new funding source should be tied to a requirement that the school board engage in this type of business planning. The concurrency program outlined by the task force requires that the school board adopt a five year capital facilities program and update it yearly with the addition ora new year. Since it is projected to take seven years to catch up, this business plan should include a capital facilities program that covers the seven years needed to catch up, not just the five year program currently proposed. Also, this plan should include identification of the funding necessary for future capacity needs at~er the initial funding source expires. Under the current proposal, this is lef~ for determination in the future. The task force proposal creates a five year business plan by requiring the development of a five year capital facilities plan by the School Board. The School Board's capital program would .be adopted in the County's comprehensive plan, which is required if there is a regulatory program. June 4, 1996 Page 3 The adoption ora business plan is a very positive benefit. However, there are other ways to ensure the development ora binding business plan by the School Board without imposing a regulatory program. For example, the same type of business planning could be required through the interlocal agreement that authorizes the use of the sales tax for school construction. Coordinated Planning State law requires the coordinated planning between the School Board and all local governments. The proposed concurrency program utilizes a regulatory program to provide the School Board with a method of tracking new development approvals. However, existing programs already serve the same purpose. For example, through the Comprehensive Plan Amendment Coordinated Review Interlocal Agreement, the School Board receives all comprehensive plan amendments from all municipalities and the County prior to the transmittal hearing. Thus, the School Board is notified of planned new development prior to approval of the comprehensive plan amendment for that development and the School Board has the opportunity to comment on the plan amendment prior to the local government transmitting the amendment to the state. Many local governments now notify the School Board of pending zoning applications and provide the School Board with the opportunity to comment on them. If more notification is needed, the County could provide the School Board with notice of all new residential development proposed anywhere in the County through .its implementation of the Traffic Performance Standards Ordinance. The County is notified of all proposed development prior to approval, and the County could certainly notify the School Board at the time it receives notification. If that method is not acceptable, the School Board could request this information from the individual local governments that are not currently providing it as part of the intergovernmental coordination process required by Chapter 163, Florida Statutes. All local governments and the School Board are required to enter into an Interlocal or other Agreement on a joint process for collaborative planning. Although the proposed Interlocal Agreement between the County and the School Board ineets this requirement for the County and the School Board, it does not fulfill the requirement that the School Board enter into this type of Agreement with each municipality. Since the School Board still must enter into agreements with all the municipalities, any additional coordination requested by the School Board could be addressed in those agreements. Coordinated planning, which is what the Department of' Community Affairs (DCA) encouraged as the primary method to address schOol overcrowding in its April 29, 1996 letter, can be accomplished without a regulatory program. Regulatory Component The Municipal League continues to have serous concerns over the proposed regulatory June 4, 1996 Page 4 component to the concurrency program, The League has continuously voiced its concerns about the effectiveness of the regulatory program on reducing school overcrowding and about the lack of data on the impacts of this regulatory proposal. Prior to proposing any regulatory program, the County Commission and School Board should fully address the following questions. All of these issues should be satisfactorily resolved by all affected parties prior to going forward with any regulatory program. WHAT IS THE REGULATORY COMPONENT DESIGNED TO ACCOMPLISH AND DOES IT ACCOMPLISH ITS STATED GOALS? The County Commission and School Board should clearly identify what that regulatory program is designed to accomplish and should evaluate the positive and negative impacts of the program. To date, this has not been done. As shown earlier in this letter, a program of providing funds for school construction tied to an enforceable business plan by the School Board to guarantee the proper use of the funds and a coordinated planning program between the School Board and all local governments in the County can all be accomplished without a regulatory program. Therefore, it is necessary to identify what additional benefit is accomplished by having a program whereby the County and School Board regulate development approvals countywide. It must be demonstrated that this benefit outweighs any costs or uncertainty that would be created by the program prior to the Municipal League agreeing to support this part of the program. The stated goal of the regulatory program is to prevent the future overcrowding of schools. However, based on the information that has been provided, this program will not accomplish that goal. Concurrency Will Not Prevent Future Overcrowding of Schools The School Board is projecting that 5,000 new students will be added to the school system each year. The School Board staff had previously contended that 80% of the new school growth yearly comes from existing units and 20% comes from new development. More recently, a School Board's consultant estimates that the split for new students is 50% from existing units and 50% from new units. Any new students generated from existing units would not be subject to concurrency. Data provided to the Task Force by the County Planning Department establishes that 80% of all building permits issued yearly come from vested units. These vested units'would not be subject to school concurrency. The following table illustrates the impact of school concurrency on school crowding. The %'s indicate percentages of the 5,000 new students generated yearly from existing units and new units. June 4, 1996 Page 5 80%Existing Units/ 50%Existing Units/ 20% New Unit~ 50% New Units Students From Existing Units Not Subject to Concurrency 4,000 2,500 Students From New Units - Vested Not Subject to Concurrency 800 2,000 Students Potentially Kept Out of School System by Concurrency 200 500 Thus, if no new development approvals are granted countywide because of school concurrency, 4,500 to 4,800 of the 5,000 new students generated yearly would still be added to the school system. Since it is assumed that some new development would be approved even with school concurrency, the actual impact of a regulatory program on school overcrowding will be even less than indicated above. Therefore, it appears that the regulatory component will have a negligible impact on reducing school overcrowding. However, the costs of achieving these negligible benefits could be great. Lack of Data on Impacts of Proposed Regulatory Program While the proposed regulatory program would have a negligible impact on reducing school overcrowding, it could have very negative impacts on the ability of the municipalities and the County to implement development and redevelopment plans. The League has requested technical analysis on how concurrency would affect the County's educational system and the economy. To date, no real data has been provided on the basic assumptions, methods, data base used and results obtained regarding the impacts of concurrency on Palm Beach County over the next five to ten years. Prior to adopting a whole new regulatory program, the County and School Board should at least analyze how concurrency would improve the educational system; how concurrency would affect redevelopment of our coastal cities; how concurrency would affect county growth patterns; and where concurrency would stop growth in the County during its implementation. Until a real analysis showing that the positive benefits of the proposed regulatory program outweigh any negative consequences, the League can not support the proposed regulatory program. Depending on where and when new schools are built, certain areas of the County could be .!n a development moratorium for a period of years. This could result in small residential infill June 4, 1996 Page 6 projects being stopped, which could have serious consequences for the redevelopment of our coastal municipalities. For example, the City of West Palm Beach is actively seeking to increase the number of people residing in the downtown area. This is essential for the implementation of the new Downtown Master Plan and furthers the County Comprehensive Plan goal of directing development to the eastern areas. It has not been easy to attract new residents to downtowns. If the City is fortunate enough to attract a fifty unit residential apartment project for downtown West Palm Beach and that project is denied based on school concurrency, the negative impacts upon the City's redevelopment efforts would be great. Yet the reduction in school crowding would be negligible. That project would generate a total of around 30 students over the next 20 years. The potential negative impacts of'the proposed regulatory program have not been adequately evaluated and could potentially be severe. TIlE SCHOOL BOARD WILL CONTROL TI~E LOCATION AND TI~ING OF DI~VELOPMENT COUNTYWIDE. IS THIS AN APPROPRIATE ROLE FOR TFIE SCHOOL BOARD? Development that is otherwise consistent with adopted comprehensive plans would be delayed based on the availability of adequate school capacity. The School Board is the agency that controls the timing and location of the construction of new school capacity. Thus, the School Board will effectively have veto power over the implementation of adopted local comprehensive plans. Is this an appropriate role for the School Board? TIlE SCHOOL BOARD WILL BECOME A REGULATORY AGENCY. IS Tills AN APPROPRIATE ROLE FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD? Under the proposed program, the School Board will now be reviewing development applications. In addition, development will now be dependent upon the availability of school capacity and the elimination of school overcrowding. School overcrowding is relieved both through creation of new school capacity and the assignment of students to maximize utilization of that capacity. Thus, the yearly development of'both the school capital facilities program and the school attendance boundary assignments will now become components of that regulatory program. Because both will control where new development can occur, both will be subject to non-educational related pressures. In order to implement the regulatory program, new non- educational factors will have to be addressed by the School Board. Each area is discussed in more detail below. June 4, 1996 Page 7 School Capacity The School Board will have to provide enough capacity yearly tO attain and maintain the adopted level of service. The School Board will be under great pressure to allocate capital funds to new schools and capacity adding projects. Areas subject to development restriction will exert great pressure on the School Board to fund capacity improvements in those areas. The pressure to add capacity could have a negative impact on needed renovations and upgrades of existing schools, including those in the coastal communities. At~er the seven year catch up period, enough capacity is projected to be built to allow the schools in Palm Beach County to operate at a level of service of 110%. More information on the attainability of this goal will be provided in the school plant survey presently being conducted. · Until that survey is completed, we will not know if the 110% level of service is attainable. If it is not based on projected funding, the School Board will need to find additional revenues for capacity during the next seven years in order to attain the projected level of service. School Assignment The school assignment issue is as significant as the creation of new capacity in relieving school crowding and minimizing the impacts of' any regulatory system. The projected level of service is 110%. This level of service is the systemwide level of service - not the level of service for each school. At the last workshop, Marty Hodgkins presented an example of how school concurrency Would affect the Acreage area of the County. (See Tab 10, Workshop Binder) In his Acreage example, Mr. Hodgkins indicated that although the area currently has over 1,000 more students than permanent student stations, four new elementary schools would be constructed over the next seven years, resulting in enough capacity for the Acreage area to meet the 110% level of service. From this analysis, it was concluded that concurrency would not affect development in this area. This conclusion is only correct if capacity is equalized by school boundary assignment over the seven schools in Mr Hodgkins' example in the Acreage. If capacity is not equalized, this area could be greatly impacted by concurrency. . ' Using Mr. Hodgkins' figures on capacity and students, it is possible that each of the four new schools could operate at 113% capacity and H.L. Johnson and Cypress Trails could operate at 111% capacity and Loxahatchee could operate at 90% capacity. Even though the area would operate at the adopted level of service, all but Loxahatchee would exceed the adopted level of service. A major portion ofthe Acreage/Royal Palm Beach area could be shut down for new development. This is not merely a hypothetical concern. The County School System is currently operating at a systemwide level of service of 119%. There are eighty (80) elementary schools. ~Em'ollment at fifty (50) elementary schools currently exceeds the existing systemwide level of ...~,~ June 4, 1996 Page 8 service of 119%. On the other hand, fifteen (15) elementary schools have enrollments of less than 100% of the school's capacity. If a level of service was imposed today based on the current systemwide level of service of 119% (which is the proposed method of setting the level of service after seven years), development in large areas of the County would be precluded by concurrency due to this imbalance in school assignment. Therefore, the School Board should agree that it will adjust boundaries annually to equalize the utilization of all the schools. The Department of Community Affairs (DCA) has also raised the issue of school assignments. In the April 29, 1996 letter, DCA indicates that concurrency must be analyzed for · achievability and financial feasibility on a concurrency area by concurrency area basis. As proposed in the draft ordinance, a concurrency area would be the existing assigned school and the next three closest schools. The School Board must also agree to send the students generated from a project in that area to one of those four Schools so that the required geographic nexus for the regulatory program is achieved. As attendance boundaries change, so does the concurrency area, which means that the financial feasibility for attaining the level of service must be re-evaluated. The only way the level of service can be financially feasible for each concurrency area is for the School Board to make equalization of capacity utilization one of the highest priorities in the annual boundary cycle. ARE THE SCltOOL BOARD, COUNTY COMMISSION AND MUNICIPALITIES PREPARED TO ASSUME THE POTENTIAL LIABILITY FOR REGULATORY TAKINGS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY? Since it will now be a regulatory agency, the School Board may have liability for regulatory takings that may occur as a result of the proposed regulatory program. Decisions on where to build new capacity and on school boundary assignments will now affect the development potential of property. Has the School Board adequately evaluated its potential liability for these activities? Since the County is proposed to be regulating development countywide based on the provision of infrastructure by the School Board, the County could have liability for regulatory takings based on the decisions of the School Board for both capacity provision and school · assignments. The present proposal does not give the County any say in school assignment decisions and very limited say in school capacity decisions. Yet these decisions will determine the development potential of property. Has the County Commission adequately evaluated its ' potential liability for these activities? Even though the proposed program would be imposed on the municipalities through a charter amendment, the municipalities may still be required to amend their comprehensive plans to implement the concurrency program. If that is the case, the municipalities may have potential liability based on a county-imposed regulatory program that is dependent on school capacity and ..school assignment decisions of the School Board. The municipalities will have no input into those June 4, 1996 Page 9 decisions. WHY IS AN INTERIM LEVEL OF SERVICE NECESSARY? The purpose and necessity for an interim level of service has not been demonstrated. The proposed interim level of service imposes a regulatory program during the "catch-up" period of seven years. However, the proposed sales tax provides enough money to build the capacity required to eliminate present overcrowding and provide for the new growth over the seven years! If there is adequate funding to build capacity for thc projected new growth, why is there a need to regulate that growth? On the other hand, the proposed levels of service in years four through seven have not 'been supported by any data and analysis showing the effect they would have on implementation of adopted comprehensive plans in the municipalities. The level of service proposals for years four through seven have not been analyzed to determine their impacts on growth in the county, including their impacts on redevelopment in the coastal communities. Given that there is no need for a regulatory program during the first seven years since there are adequate funds to pay for the capacity required by growth during those years and the lack of data regarding the effect of the interim level of service, the Municipal League position of not supporting the imposition of a regulatory program during the catch up period through the proposed interim levels of service remains unchanged. MUNICIPAL LEAGUE POSITION To summarize, the Municipal League position on the proposed school concurrency package is as follows: - Assuming agreement with the following League positions, the League supports the One Cent Sales Tax to fund new schools. The League supports tying the new funding to the development of a binding business plan by the School Board on how the money is spent. This business plan should include a capital facilities plan for the life of the sales tax (not just the five years currently proposed) and for future funding to keep the school system caught up. The statutory requirements for coordinated planning between the School Board and all &the Municipalities needs to be addressed. The current proposal just addresses this requirement between the County and the School Board. June 4, 1996 Page 10 - The League can not support a regulatory program during the seven year catchup phase. Given that there will be adequate funds to provide capacity for growth during this period, there is no need to impose a regulatory program during this period. - The League can not support any Charter Amendment authorizing imposition of a countywide regulatory program at this time. Based on the data provided to date, there are few benefits to the regulatory component of the proposal while there are many potential negative consequences. - Prior to the initiation of any Charter Amendment authorizing imposition of a countywide school concurrency program, the County and School Board should comply with the provisions of the Multi-Jurisdictional Issues Coordination Forum Inteflocal Agreement that was signed by the County, School Board and almost all of the municipalities by submitting the proposal to the forum for development ora consensus by all the Forum members on whether a regulatory program is an appropriate solution to any future overcrowding problem. MUNICII'AL LEAGUE PROPOSAL The Municipal League proposes that the beneficial portions of the proposed concurrency program be implemented through an Inteflocal Agreement between the School Board, Palm Beach County, and the municipalities. This proposal implements all of the positive benefits of the Funding and Planning Components as outlined above. The Interlocal Agreement would provide for the following: The levy of a one cent sales tax for school construction over seven years. - The utilization of the entire proceeds of the sales tax for school construction (municipal sign-off is needed for the municipal share to be used for school construction). Creation of a business plan for spending the sales tax revenue and for keeping caught up with future demand once the sales tax revenues are expended. Creation of the joint planning mechanisms that are required by statute between the School Board and the County and all of the municipalities in the County. A draft of this Interlocal Agreement is currently being prepared and will be circulated shortly. The Municipal League would urge the School Board and County Commission to carefully consider this proposal as an alternative to the proposed concurrency program currently under review. This proposal includes the funding and planning components that everyone agrees to and that are necessary without linking them to a potentially divisive regulatory program. .Implementation of this approach would allow a unified appeal to the voters which is essential if June 4, 1996 Page 11 the sales tax is to pass. We look forward to your responses and to continued dialogue on solving this most critical issue. .~_~ierely' Gale English, Palm Beach County Municipal League, Inc. cc: County Administrator Robert Weisman School Superintendent Joan Kowal Members, Municipal League Board of Directors Mayors and Managers, Palm Beach County Municipalities Thomas Pelham, Esq. Barbara Alterman, Esq.