The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Report - September 16, 1981 (54)SIISPACTIOIi, a- law and affidavit of . Publication being:;on.file in the -,A 30 1982 x office of" the City Clerk, Mayor McCarty, called for the _ " WDI UNIFIED SCHOOL :'Pnb13c Hear mpi�ctioa, ing to consider the Declaration of I z CT Lodi iTnffied-School. District as adopted by the Boardof Trustees for ;the Lodi Unified School District on August - e4 4� 1981 fte-matter was introduced by City Manager Glares speaking ori behalf. of the document was Richard L: Ehrhardt,, Facility Plannei',Lodi Unified School District. Mr. Ehrhardt.#ndicated.that the Lodi Unified School District declared impaction in -the following school attendance' areas affected by current and proposed develafineat._plans, to --wit: Clements Elementary School Attendance Area Elkhorn Elementary School Attendance Areas (including Oakwood)'. Heritage Elementary School Attendance Area Lakewood Elementary School Attendance Area Lawrence Elementary School Attendance Area _ Davis Elementary School Attendance Area - Live Oak Elementary School Attendance Area - Needham Needham Elementary School Attendance Area Leroy Nichols Elementary School Attendance Area Vinewood Elementary School Attendance -Area Parklane Elementary School Attendance Area Reese Elementary School Attendance Area Washington Elementary School Attendance Area. Morada Middle School Attendance Area Senior Elementary Middle School Attendance Area Woodbridge Middle School Attendance Area r Houston Middle School Attendance Area Lodi High School Attendance Area Tokay High School Attendance Area Mr. Ehrhardt further indicated that the 1981-82 Impaction Mitigation Plan as contained in the subject document is as follows: Y,I A very lengthy discussion followed with questions being h directed to Staff and to Mr. Ehrhardt. - - -- — -2- 71. Based on a projected increase in enrollment of -900, student in 1981-82, the District will implement the'follos.ing 1; Plan, subject to receipt of revenue --specifically, as it is resolved by the Courts. 4. I. Continue to lease from the State of 'California b thirty-two (32) portable classrooms pr-esently located at six(6) sites within the District'. $ 65,000 Develop and lease the "Maxi -School" in the, Colonial_" 1 Estates North Subdivision $106,000; III. Lease or lease -purchase sixteen (16) portables, E for placement at various locations with furniture'. , and equipment :$230, 00 S ti x'$454,000.: , There being no other persons wishing to speak on the matter, the public portion of the hearing tiwas closed Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy outlined recommendation forthcoming from the recently formed County Task.Force. Y,I A very lengthy discussion followed with questions being h directed to Staff and to Mr. Ehrhardt. - - -- — August S, 1981 Dear _I W. Glaves The Lodi Unified School District Board of Trustees at its board meeting. on August a, 1981, adopted Resolution No. 81-32 declaring a state of inaction in nineteen attendance areas. Enclosed are sWlc ies of our updated Declaration of Impaction cop i for, your. use. -This nformation may-be-helpful--in--the.-review- and .! approval. of siivisivns: ..� .... .Should ?lave any questions you ,please call my office. L f t j Sincerely, .. IN r Richard Richard L. Ehrhardt y Facility Planner. RLE�s Enclosures ♦bJ: 7 . r AUG i 011 Ft ssN� f a Sa^ n S c L f ■ii11� w' d: T' :�'�+'y��4e �^.•i�� '�•4•�hW�i "�•Mid��c "�• IADI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Board of Education John Vatsula, President Am Johnston, Tice -President Laurel Wisenor,_Cierk George Abrahamson 6 Roben C. Ball Herbert Buck, Jr. Bonnie Wyer TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. -Resolution No. 81-32 Declaration of Impaction . . . . . . . . . 1-2 2. 1981-82 Impaction Mitigation Plan . . . . . . . . . . . . 3 EXHIBITS 3. District =Map . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 4 4. Master School Capacity Table . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5- 5. Option for Handling Growth in Areas of Impaction . . . 6-7 6. Projected Additional. Growth From Subdivisions in Affected Attendance Areas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8-11 7. Map - Development in North Stockton Area . . . . . . . . . . . 12 8. Subdivision Map Key . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 9. Map - Development in Lodi Area . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 10. Map - Development in Lockeford Area . . . . . . . . . . 15 11. Correspondence to County Superintendent of Schools Regarding Dependence dpon School Bonds in the Aftermath of Proposition 13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16-17 12. Recommended Master Plan Priorities . . . . . . . . . . . 18 13. Project Information . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 14. Impactt�n Fee and Expense to Date . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 15. Projected Enrollment - 1981-1987 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21 IrCLARATICK OF DWACHONN1 October 10, 1978 Revised July 30, 1981 BY The Staff of Facilities and Plannir am C. 1. Baranoff B 11M BCM OF TRttbl'F.ES OF THE LODI UNIFULO�tSCHOOL DISTRICT OF OF SAN 3QAgM, STATE 0 IPIA ® RESOLUTION NO. 81-32 DECLARATION OF IWACTICN U- S , the development of new residential property results in the demand for addi Tonal school facilities; and WHEREAS, the Governing Board has made every feasible effort to provide permanent :acilities; and WHEREAS, the financial ability of the District to provide for permanent facilities is limited or non-existent, and the construction of new residences and the resultant increase of gibers of pups -continues; and MTMAS, students generated by new residential construction in the attendance areas already full create an immediate need for interim classroom solutions, and such solutions require capital expenditures or implementation of undesirable alter- natives by the District; and WHEREAS, the District has considered and acted upon such options as (1) presentation tothe-voters of bond measures to provide capital funds for school housing, (2). temporary buildings, (3) double session, (4) bussing, (5) school atten- dance boundary realigcment.,.-and has considered, and for good and sufficient reasons chosen not to act upon,. (6) year-round school attendance and (7) extended day pro- grams (high school); and WHMMkS, -the City of 1odi tas,- enacted Ordinance No. 1149, the City of Stockton has enacted Ordinance No. �tMS-C.S., and the County of San Joaquin has enacted Ordinance No. 2574 as mitigation measures to assist school districts to reduce the impact of new home construction, and WHEREAS, the aforementioned Ordinances require residential developers to participate in the cost of interim solutions necessitated by the overcrowding of existing classroom facilities due to, new residential construction; and WHEREAS, this Board has reviewed the content of the master Site Capacity Table prepared by staff, a copy of which is attached hereto, and has approved said report for public distribution; THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED that the Lodi -Unified School District declares impaction in these school attendance areas affected by current and proposed development plans, to wit: Clements Elementary Scipl Attendance Area Elkhorn Elementary School Attendance Area (including Oakwood) Heritage Elementary School Attendance Area Lakewood Elementary School Attendance Area Lawrence Elementary School Attendance Area Davis Elementary School Attendance Area Live- Oak Elementary School Attendance Area Needham Elementary School Attendance Area Leroy Nichols Elementary School Attendance Area Vine" Elementary School Attendance Area parklane Elementary School Attendance Area Reese Elementary School Attendance Area ,.. ..':.J. 'sx6Tu'�.✓i. r�_r :Gii_�.� .-. ......r. c .. ... .. - .. .-. ..-_ _. _. ....�.�1..5%..!�F4fi k sn,rt..^rr'X4m .ax" BE ff Flit M RESOLVED that the Superintendent be, and he hereby is, directed to transmit a certified copy of this resolution and. the accompanying staff report to the City Councils of Lodi and' Stockton and the Board of Super- visors ;orf. the County of San 3oaugin for the consideration aid concurrence fo}llowring public -hearings ire their respective bodies-. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 4th day of August, 1981, by the followinz vote of the Board of Trustees, to wit: NOES: er Board of Trustees -2- JM WarSUL-A, t Board of Trustees - 'i: _ Based_M_& projected increase in enrollment of 900 stints in 1981-82, the District Will: impemerA . fns- l stjec �, t torevel of _ �---sped1ca113* as it is- Tesolved by, the. Courts. I. Continue to lease from the State of California thirty-two (32) portable classrom presently located at six (6) sites within the District. $ 64,000.00 II. Develop and lease the 'Maxi -School" in the Colonial Estates North Subdivision. 160,000.00 I1i. ease or lease-pxTJa a sixteen (16) portables for placement at -various locations with-:_fmm tuze - d equipment. 230,000.00 .$ 454,,MOA0.. Ey 1, -2-13 14 t 56 7 8 9110111.112113114 15 l6 17 A LODI UNIFIED S AnVOOLS A O"KES �—••—� . ELEAGWARY S096OU ----. AfivaESCHOOLS ♦ OT ER EV CAVOML FAcnnuS fA- ANX 1. lNf AEVMMAPJL Is. low !GU C MR63 .. ■ ' f:. r 011�CK _ •aa '�`n w'd£YE11 a.� i riFYY , s►r „r{--, dors` •g .,`g y T ��} �i r YET � .2t ii x •€ � ��a 'ai.�v.'•• a.`i -.shy '''� :�.�t r T.� ^' �` ffi."M.r� ,r.. ',+roR•�; •�{.r '�'<f t'�_: ♦ ._: f*i-'a�'�+a��. :.e �35� .�ri :s si. !71a Axa r A7 404ACIOYERROM t'AA110 r... - ,7i y." J• Q IONS B ^, +�'�`* Urz��4 4 VmNL1 W 120121 12 2 123 L24 25 126 127 128 129 130131 32 33 34 35 36 fpoL DISTRICT c- ..�• D k :rIE- � � t F _ •'' ctc iota E7 y = '� .{• is _. ::+''e.0 ", ~ O_ S ., _• - 4 , LODI UNMED SCHOOL Dt*Sl7a XAP-"133"t - ,MaMarm" w._, rarav mKAe•almrtlsaaa i" - ;�' .1:1j..1.e.r.•1... slcrr.a..w �. - ��_ saM.ltraz �-.• -:- snlaxasArMnoat ,�..,� t ,.s 4w6tyi� W juttl M -I HOP�Ba3wR _ - ' fi kt�N"a:.Y 1rt�ttftn�na lRl L-6 tA�KKifOi00t p. -J JfJyDlnpwWft/lldwRM-i 7a onsam—&-o " w t ' wtsa�ne P-9 tMnrraysoaot M-/ '1` -- rta i ►�Aht..� WMr�r.l KWArCV& M►7tiM_ F .% cr"m A-1 y '�,ti. • ,r ^;. k M -M M�e.lddM 1. - g NM'fMilC>f0a jw_A 11111Mw/Cww.�O�l `A.�.: �r t .�. X4m so -i llMi�w 4rO..MW itl lT.gJOMM17. tn-1 j - r .'- - OY+rrW tOCxtl1M7R.10i0{ M -,i XP., ftW*A� jcwDm 3" x.:1....1... IrJtAKQlDR —W.M.+...Ir.,+,.... t R n►"c"Ww�.soi.m ;: r W owpomxs m M t wyw.a 11M1MM1iy �Mw' f - nw)dm, Ma, lf-s JrtlotRWXf01K M -i _� i«u1.... ai.rw.......... AwlK. wAxl7M17f .� DK:LWDAKSWE M -M tuosniesxltacsxa M -e a1s11.e►fMa.�1...1 �C,> xsM..�a1AwMv D, WA W'ASA AK7db,A'ION Al -J 1 on tM.M"swe T � U , V is 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27[281 29130131132 33 3q 35 136 EXHIBITS Revised July 1981 LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT Facilities and Planning q wE, iWtor School CaRgAy Table `' 4 y� ! M Permanent District Interim b "► y ,y Existing Portable Instructional Extra Extended i y ClastrRoas Closgrogm Ca0cityLoad capacity t= Elementp�y Schools% Clewents 3 6 Q8 12 120. 91 12 103 Davis,., 20 0 X43 47 590 615 69 684 Dsvie-#tni 0 0 0 180 *180 0 0 0 Ekhan 7 6 4,03 103 *510 837 531. 1,368 Elkh6t7b-Mini 0 0 6 240 *240 0 0 0 Henderson 4 0 1-08 12 120 0 0 0 Heritage 18 0 $33 47 580 524 1,114 1,638 Lakewood 17 0 478 102 .380 542 257 '799 Lawrence 7 02t1 20 240 213 131 344 Live VOk 11 2 13 5 35 420 334 107 441 Lockeiord 7 2 175 25 300 247 20 267 Needhiue 14 0 393 35 430 469 0 469 taeroy Nichols 20 0 560 50 610 648 253 901 Oakwood 0 6 62 240 *402 368 30 348 %+ dark Lane 9 67S 445 *720 798 428 11226 Ray, 4 0 738 12 1S0 101 0 101 lteut 17 0 478 42 520 464 40 .504 'Tokay.Colony. 4 1 165 is 180. 148 0 148 Turner ` 3 0 83 8 90 45 0 45 Venice King 2 0 55 5 60 0 0 0 victor. 9 0 273 25 300 233 0 233 Visi►ood 18 0 ,880,5 135 640 574 281 -854 Waehipgton 21 0 ¢15 SS 670605 30 635 '�23 6,7`60 1,892 1,,651 7,856 3.303 — 1.1�59�- •' ` ' Middle Schools: - ft%!! 13 0 351 39 390 359 15 - 374 12 1 351 159 6510 454 160 614 $eator:`.Eleeamt ry 32 3 045 105 1.050 1,042 1,244 2,286 } Voodbrif a 17 11. 174 606 228,�� 2,610 2,461 1,647, ,,410�'�t� bools s t, rd2, 81=1s School 4 20161 197 21,364 1,955 308 2:263 ; s ? 81sh fatiool 435 *2, 586 2,224. 1, 312 �n�„�tt��r yt � 10 �:�� O�...�. _i;t `'.J�i�`s`•Yr'�`'`` t�r�l a t,'lh tC�j�Mi 632 ,16010 4,493 1,620f M,''aal �. fir. W, t ■.�i�w� Wl�{IIW r�V.nw.i.��. 2i 380r !, '.t�1}d2X 3,001 16,422 140810 6,570<�{. Y, r rased ta6i11t oe (Min Ba�►ooI 3 Stas yb' Cttlbles) �st '} f °iq•S tyi"yx,"� OPTIONS "Daw cRowTH-ni AREAS OF M&TON am General ft -t I at The school district believes in the concept of neighbor- hood schoolt andwill. asks. every reasonable effort to provide education in he= aleme:ntary. -grades in the lundia-te neighborhood of the pupil; -for pupils in grades 7 And8, instruction will be -provided in the general area; for pupils In the high schools, Instruction will be provided at the school of assignment -whicb: winbo generally the closest of the two major high schools. As growth: continues and attendance areas become ` impacted, the district will consider or has considered the following alternatives to neighborhood schools: 1. Equal loadint of all schools throughout the district. The district has adopted an equal loading policy which will.cause all schools -throughout the. district, within a given grade span to house the same proportion- of students relative to capacity. Equal loading Is, a concept that -works- wall In an -urban-area but provides extraordinar7 -long- bus ridam for students when the area of impaction and growth Is- sub- stantially removed from the area where classrooms- are available. 2. Bussing. Bussing is used as an -interim process to implement the equal load policy. The board finds -that no pupil should be bussed from his attendance area, but 1-f necessary, never more -than 10 miles from the "full" -schwl to the school of redirection. 3. Double sessions. -Vm&la -as"lons- -in the primary grades retain the same -amount -act time. in -each --of the Instructional sections, double sessions Gre perceived as b*b* disadvantageous to the students attending school In the p.m. shat. T -he fabric oUsociety rejects the concept of young children being In school from 12:30 p.m. to 3:00 p.m. followed by vhat may be an extended period of time an the school bus. Older children (above. grade 4) -lose a significant amount of instructional time through the d&vdc4:of:double sessions, and.it is perceived as being totally un- acceptable as other than an extremely short term measure for pupils other than K-3. 4. Extended day :+rograms. Progress In the early morning'or in the late afternoon say be devised., to utilize a highschool plant at above normal carrying capacity. Such pyograms are found to have relatively small. pupil/parent Imtercat.9 are not conducive to integration with established bussing schedule$, and are not viable answers to impaction. Temporary -buildings. Temporary buildings are the next best answer to permanent buildings to. the questions posed by school impaction and growth. It to the feeling of the,governing board that some twenty to twenty-five percent of total clssxrobm space'at an elementary or middle school should alvayw.beju 5. portables -to provide long range flexibility. Portable buildings have -6- been used in the district extensively and would continue to be utilized in. any balanced program of building. District funds are not available to purchase needed portable classrooms to meet student growth. b. School boundary realigmmuent. -x This device has been used to accommodate growth in an immediately adja- cent attendance area. Where growth is scattered or substantially removed froia school houses with room available, realignment is ineffective. With the growth rate -of the several attendance areas in this district, boundary, realignment is not a viable permanent solution beyond that already accom- plished. 7. Year-round schools. Year round school education has -the potentiality of increasing available classroom space by twenty to twenty-five percent. The district has studied YRS and has determined that it is not a viable solution to the question of pocket growth removed a distance from available school houses. 8. Financial resources. The traditional methods of raising funds to build school houses include; the passing of bond -issues or of tax override measures. Legal opinion subsequent to :the passage of Proposition 13 has indicated that such measures --are no longer valid. 9. Inter jw extra load. Lang term class load factors are twenty-seven pupils at grades K-3, and twenty-eight pupils at grades 4-8-; however, it has been necessary because of lack of space to load the classrooms at an average of thirty pupils on an interim basis. 10. Emergency school classes. Assembly Bill No. 8, signed by the Governor on July 24, 1979, enacted the Emergency School Classroom Law of 1979. Under this Law, Lodi Unified' School District has, received thirty-two (32) portables for use in 1981-82. These buildings are subject to recall by the State of California should there be greater need elsewhere in California. -7- :C11CtAII1' Parklane S Stonewood Estates S Golden Bear S Single.Tree.Estates S Stissex Gardens S #iarpers -Terry S Davis Oaks 250 10 7 86 8 10 531 C Woodbridge °Greens 64 C Ferrero Subdivision 52 L Rivergate 60 L Burlington Wnor 10 C Country View Estates 64 C Fairway Estates 7 297 S Fox geek S Clairmont Place S Cimarron S Zinfindel Estates Morada C Morada Estates North C Oak Creek S Fox Creek S Clairmont Place C Greenwood Estates C Mosher Manor C Gnekaw C Marada West C Morada Place Tokay High r L L S S S L S L L L L Beckman Ranch Matthews - Diablo Meadows Colonial Estates North Bear Creek Estates Stonewood Estates (Lodi South) Summerfield Zinfindel Winchester Acres Southeast Lodi--Johnson-Tandy Wood Brook Grupe - Lake Shore Village Cambridge Place Golden Bear Single Tree Estates Sussex Gardens Morada Estates North English Oaks 6 $ 7 -8- 35 `- 198 70 125 15 19 17 6S 2 20 4 16 160 42 8 80 12 125 18 62 15 S17 18 92 23. , 3 43 15' 10 • _ _ ,:ram C Oak Creek "'Stonebrook L Bergundy;Village S Fox reek S Clairmont Place C Greenwood Estates C Nbsher''Manor S Cimarron L The Oaks - Grupe C Gaekow C Morada Place C Morada West S Harpers Perry S Davis Oaks r Lodi High : L Homestead Manor 14 L Sun West 8 L Rivergate 30 C Lambert, Village 15 L Burlington I4anor 5 1 C Fairway Estates 4 F L Colony Ranch 43 L Mokeiumne Village 26 L Millswood 1-7 C Woodbridge Greens 32 - C Country VievEstates -33- L Homestead- Oaks S L Aaron Terrace 4 L Sanguinetti Park 15 } C Ferrero Subdivision 26 L Pinewood Court 3 L Las Casitas Z3' Z Senior Elementary S Colonial Estates.North 8G f S Bear Creek Estates 12 S Stonewood Estates 16$ f S Golden Bear Ez`ates 10 S Single Tree Estates 5 - S Sussex Gardens 43 L Bec) man Ranch 42 - L Matthews - Diablo Meadows 8 L The Oaks 12 L Homestead Manor 14 L Sun West 8 S Cimarron 40 S Harpers Ferry 4 .: S Davis Oaks 5 - L (Lodi South) Summerfield 18. L Aaron Terrace 3ki L Winchester Acres 15 • f -9- _ live -Oak Leroy Nichols Woodbridge C Morada Estates North C -Oak Creek C Mosher Manor 01 30 37 40 07 L Beckman Ranch MWIVISION ITIONAL STUDENTS Matthews - Diablo Meadows 18 MAW The Oaks 24 L .(Lodi South) Summerfield 37 Senior Eleaa~nta�y Winchester Acres 30 L {cont:). L Southeast Lodi - Johnson -Tandy 517 15 L Wood Brook 10 L Lake Share Village - Grupe 99 R.ivergate L Cambridge Place 23 _ S S Zinfindel b3 L L Las'Casitas 23 MokeltmDcte Village L Bergundy Village g 16 L Stonebrook 7 C L English Oaks 6 7 10 Woodbridge Greens 32 L 1,2 live -Oak Leroy Nichols Woodbridge C Morada Estates North C -Oak Creek C Mosher Manor 01 30 37 40 07 L Beckman Ranch 84 L Matthews - Diablo Meadows 18 L The Oaks 24 L .(Lodi South) Summerfield 37 L Winchester Acres 30 L Wood Brook 3S L Stonebrook 15 L English Oaks, Units 6 $ 7 10 -.S1 L R.ivergate 30 L Burlington Manor S C Fairway Estates 4 L Colony Ranch 34 L MokeltmDcte Village 26 L Millswood 16 L homestead Oaks S C Country View Estates 32 C Woodbridge Greens 32 L Sanguinetti Park is C Ferrero Subdivision 26 L Pinewood Court 3 S Bear Creek Estates 30 L Grupe - Lake Shore Village L Homestead Manor L Stn West L Aaron Terrace L Las Casitas 183 29 16 7 46 281 1,030 68 16' 2114 Davis C Greenwood Estates C Gnekow `C N%rada Nest - C Morada Place Washington L Sanguinetti Park — 1 4 7 54 4 30 �CibOI: ATTR ARFA SUBDIVISION PAMCM ADDITIONAt, STWENTS: Lotliford Ciements C Lambert Village 32 Houston` C Lambert Village, 15 Erma Reese L M llswood 40 L Pinewood Court 7 Lawrence L Colony Ramh 69 L Homestead -Oaks 10 L Nlakeb=e - Village 52 Davis C Greenwood Estates C Gnekow `C N%rada Nest - C Morada Place Washington L Sanguinetti Park — 1 4 7 54 4 30 --Apt 0 Cs LJ SUBDIVISION -MAP KEY 1. Fairway Estates 2. Woodbridge Greens 3. Awl ington Mawr 4. Riveirgate S. *keluune'Village 6. Sangunetti Park 7. Colony Ranch 8. 1411swood 9. Homestead Oaks 10. Homestead Manor 11. &m West 12. Aaron Terrace 13. Lake Shore 14. Beckman Ranch is. Diablo Meadows 16. Woodbrook 17. Lodi South - Summerfield, 18. Southeast Lodi 19. Winchester Acres or Winchester Oaks 20. Country View -Estates 21. Cambridge Manor 22. La Caritas 23. Bergundy Village 24. English Oaks Manor - Unit 6 25. English Oaks Manor - Unit 7 26. Pinewood 27. Stonebrook 28. Stonetree 29. Ferrero Subdivision -13- Lit •' —1, .'t� �^" S U-$ D ! v i s I til iY1 A'P i 1— ' , t —'tog • 1 • • U - �.NCr_ 1 .. • . «may, � � � —! –•�'� ir • ��' � ' � Isla : � � AWL (BH�l'� B_ =, , IV i . r.-•t - •. '•; i � + .. — � afi. •�••'� � i l:ll. w' Tom• (�� ,� bs CITY. Uwas. i,� .� �•,... 1, cif- - iil--- ..•s.t =. AA,.�:v.�b.»�..ii..4....�,-.., -14- ;�. - ,. ,� � � ,s` �' �'3 xa•. -+" � � • 1` s. :'^ir z t. - F.'• z t F i .n''. '�r-7CHy�`c,� I Ory a k tx E Y w • ALIle �15- ah— "�- :�:. ..' -_-, -: ':. ,.r .._- .: �.. ��- _..••-+�-+••�••..»s•p•,�n,,,a-.•� ssL_ r �.a-,i'R'�8ss-az. OCRALD A. SN[RWIN COUP&T V GovNsu. MIC11A[i. N: QARRIQAN CNK► Ot►YT9 cOYNT1 COYINSL PATRICK N. CURRAN 91119P Dt►VTT COUNTY COVNKL CarFICZ OF TNt COUNTY COUNSEL COUNTY W SAN JOAQUIN couRTNovss 222 CAST WsscR AV[NU[ STOCKTON. CALIFORNIA 03.242 TZLA"O"e /64.2$/1 Mhe& tees 2011 June 13, 1978 Dr. Gaylord A. Nelson County Superintendent of Schools County of San Joaquin Courthouse - Fourth Floor Stockton, Ca. 95-202 Res School Bonds Dear Dr. Nelson: IM"Att MCO:Itw ..0vfr ttRRtNct R. 0110"001 ..i.rr %&Wft"-.tww.f. ►AVA604 M. 7R2O92tN:K ba -w" i...ff iov,Ni. KttR GROOR ..I.►r iw.r. .W..t. MARK ►. ORNtKtA4 ..y11tr i.wn iW..i. .t:..IT t...rf tMr.ii. •toRat ». e�lfff.fwef.w .t..fr i...fr tWMI. 11t1tGtw A. iAv1/ ee~v tw.1f tWM.. MANK-d. 11WM0. J4 .l.1Nf iw.fr-CW.ii.' As you may be aware., County Counsel Gerald Sherwin recently provided Richard Cherry, Superintendent of Manteca - Unified School_District.with a memorandum opinion dealing with the affect of Proposition 13 on future school bond elections. We have been asked to provide this information to all school districts- in the -County and herewith submit same to you for d°-istributL=--.. Generally speaking_, the issue is whether Proposition 13 prohibits a school bond election. Although that measure does not specifically address the subject, the answer for all practical purposes is "yes". Proposition 13 adds_ Article XIII A to the Constitution. Section l(a) of that Article provides that the maximum rate of taxes levied against any real property may not exceed one percent of the full cash value of such property. The one percent so levied is apparently to be distributed among all the taxing jurisdictions within the County within which the property is located. Section l(b) expressly excepts from this limitation "ad valorem taxes or special assessments to pay the interest and redemption charges on any indebtedness approved by the voters prior to the time this section becomes effective". Mr. Sherwin advised Superintendent Cherry that a November bond election, in the Manteca Unified School District would not benefit from the exception provided by Section l(b). Although much of Proposition 13 is a state of cansiderable uncertainty which may be resolved only by court action or legislative clarification, it appears to us at this time that the one percent limitation may not be increased in order to finance school bond measures, even though such measures may be approved -16- Q Dr. Gaylord A. Nelson June 13,1978 Page Two by the requisite percentage of voters residing in the school district. In practical terms, school districts will'be competing with other taxing entities on a pro .ata basis for the fixed amount of dollars generated by the one percent limitation. At-th-is time it would appear that the most that could be accomplished -by a bond measure would_ be.to increase slightly the proportion of such monies to which school districts would -be -entitled In the event that thts-- pro rata competition for limited tax dollars becomes reality, it is unlikely that sufficient taxes could be levied for the benefit of a school district to satisfy the requirements of the Education Code for the ppaayytmaent of bonds. Specifically, . Education Code Section 15250 provides in pertinent part. "The tax shall not be lees than sufficient to pay the interest on the bonds as it becomes due and to provide _a sinkincl fund for the payment of the principal on or before maturity and may include -an .alaowanca for=an.-annuarl zessrrve,, established for the purposa of -avoiding fluctuating tax levies. The tax shall be sufficient to provide funds for the payment of the interest on the bonds. as it becomes. -due and also such part of the principal and interest as is to become due before the proceeds of a tax levied at the time for making the next general tax levy can be made available for the pay ment,of the principal and interest." As a result of the foregoing discussion, and in the. absence of specific legislative action in this area, it would appear that the advancing of a school bond election measure would be of little benefit to a school. district as the law stands now. Very truly yours, GERALD A. SHERWIN County Counsel By MARK F. ORNELLAS Deputy county Counsel MFOBjgs -17- RECOHHENDED MASTER PLAN PRIORITIES PHASE I - 1981-82 Sell Nfliswood School Site ProcEts with Special Education Development Center Application for Vanda Prepare State Building. Program Application for: A. Stonewood Estate Elementary B. Claremont Elementary Q. holt Elementary D. Grupe Elementary E. Elkhorn Middle School Service Center or Transportation Satellite Operation ROP/C--Adult Education --Center Established at. Lincoln School PEASE II - 1983-87 Sell, trade, or retain English Oaks Prepare State Building Program Application for: A. .Southern High School: fat Phase B. Morads Middle School.Expasaim C. Johnson -Tandy Elementary D. I-3 Neat --or Equivalent Elementary (Addition to Parklane and Oakwood) PROJECT INFORMATION 9 PHASE I �r Millwood School Site Originally 34 acres was acquired by the Woods School District for a future Middle School. In 1978, 14 acres were sold. Based on current projections, the need for the remaining acreage is less now. Therefore, this site becomes surplus and -is recomsended for disposal. Special Education Development Center (Leroy F. Greene Lease Purchase Fund) As the District awes to satisfy the mandated needs of Special Education, tt becomes more evident that -the responsibility of educating students in a develop - sent center must be a local responsibility. This program is considered in that it can be eligible under the Leroy. F. Greene Lease -Purchase Law. The most probable location for this program is to make modification at Washington School. It is assumed that the d=istrict will be "given" the Trainable Mentally Retarded facility now at Dorothy Mahin School by the County. Otherwise, another similar facility will be necessary. Stonewood Estate Elementsa (Leroy F. Greene Lease Purchase Fund) An 11 acre site has been reserved just ►,outh of Bear Creek and west of Thornton Road. It is planned for an elementary school using the "Victor Flan"`, togo ther with a multi-purpose building and additional permanent and relocatable-classrooms. Claremont Elementary (Leroy F. Greene Lease Purchase Fund) The developer has. reserved approximately 10 acres in the Claremont subdivision just west of Normandy Village. Planned improvement includes the building designed -in the "Victor Plan", -plus a multi-purpose building -=and permanent and relocatable classrooms. Holt Elementary (Leroy F. Greene Lease Purchase Fund) This would be a school designated in the Colonial Estates neighborhood north of Hammer Lane. Presently, no site is designated. However, a large land parcel owned by the Holt family would be studied for an 8 to 10 acres school site. Planned Improvement includes the building designed in the "Victor Plan", plus a multi- purpose building and permanent and relocatable classrooms. Grupe Elementary (Leroy F. Greene Lease Purchase Fund) A school site southwest of the Lakeshore development would need to be considered and developed. Planned improvement includes the building designed in the "Victor Plan", plus a •ulti-purpose building and permanent and relocatable classrooms. Elkhorn Middle School (Leroy F. Greene Lease Purchase Fund) Preliminary discussion has occurred with the Beck organization to trade the: present Elkhorn School site for 20 acres southwest of that location. The exchange would provide for the continued use of the Elkhorn School until Stonewood Estates and Holt Schools were operational. The plan would require the construction of a comprehensive middle school for 750 students. Service Center Facility (Local Funding) The planned acquisition of the Happyholme site is the preferred approach. However, the alternative of developing a transportation yard at Nichols can be considered as an interim solution. ROP/C-Adult Education (Local and Categorical Funding) The plan provides for developing at the Lincoln School sites facilities for the ROP/C classroom and related office and service facility for the'ROP/C- Adult Education Programs. =19- DIPAGTION FEE ►'IRAN" 1979-80 (OOPS) Relocation of Portables -- Oab ood Parte Tokay High _ Wwol 1990-81 EMERG3Cf =PORTABLES. Lease Payments to State Development- 1981-82 PORTABLE LEASE PAYMI M Encumbered ��_ .16 -20- $ 73,952.00 417,600.00 6,t3�.o0 $ 508,183.00- $ 1009000.00 $ 60,142.00 141,400.00 64,000.00 $ 365,542.00 $ 1421641.00 • ' ATAst N tau►1sArA Orrltt or total alAlStaratl PROJs= 8liRmimW FOR PACILM MASTER PLAN ►tell► ►t"tfot IlfttrCt t0�11Tt a►►ttCU101r rs9. 1=1 UNIFIED SAN Jowly ry j tAAwt 1980-i2 PROJECIEO ENAOILMENT FKI IST 00111" 610 ratty AVtRArC CHANGE YEAR 81-82 82-83 83-84 84-85 85-86 8647 R Wil 1910 903 twl 28 18 1980 9" trw TOM 2664 _ N 142 13 AVERAGE ATIENOAR6t 19,.11 a IDS 2 {ti it 207 39IN twat. s H tr ., rr.t E31. AOA GRADE ENROLL. x EST. ADA x 1320 .9T 1200 N 3688 T -t 3722 4-6 1-1 4929 T►.tt .�i 3 11.3 3002 /• 1 :11 VIA ---------- _.......-._ .._ 4 6 X-6 8449 8959 9472 10116 10801 11491 t • rti ' 7-8 2367 2638 2887 2745 2%5 3111 S Ta tt Tx 9-12 4649 4770 3081 $433 SISI 6080 Tout IL aT. Touu ?v: NILS ' `•'.': 13,465 16.367 17.440 12.4% 19.517 20.682 >OtAI WMAL 848 902 1.073 1.056 1.021 1.165 SPECIAL E0. Pupils PUPIL UNITS - ODNTINUATION N. S. (tfttsi tMett01AT) . 3 1 ►orrt OAt. I it". oa0 Ito. MSS DAV= q/". A6to I o►it ar►4900, tttivilr off -MA ta&o flar —2 Z X. A1AH. BIC. Bank 1980 $22 aN -37i Wil 1910 903 twl 28 18 1980 9" trw TOM 2664 _ N 142 13 AVERAGE ATIENOAR6t 19,.11 a IDS 148 TOTAL p1ADt 207 39IN twat. s H tr ., rr.t E31. AOA GRADE ENROLL. x EST. ADA x 1320 .9T 1200 N 3688 T -t 3722 4-6 1-1 4929 T►.tt .�i 11.3 3002 /• 1 :11 VIA ---------- _.......-._ .._ 246 Vic. to. -------- ---- 169 0"T.L.21CN—....--..-�... S22 111 q/". A6to I o►it ar►4900, tttivilr off -MA ta&o flar —2 Z X. WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 1149, entitled, "An Ordinance of the City of Lodi to Provide for the Dedication -of Land or Fees or Both as a Condition to the Approval of New Residential Developments, for the Purpose of Providing Classroom Faci- lities Where Conditions of Overcrowding Exist in a Public School Attendance Area", which was adopted by the Lodi City Council on August 2, 1978, provides that the Governing body of a school district which operates, in whole or in part, within the City of Lodi may at any time pursuant to Government Code Section 65971, notify the City Council that it has found that: (1) conditions of overcrowding exist in one or more attendance areas within the district which will impair the normal function- ing of educational programs including the reason for such conditions existing; (2) all reasonable methods of mitigating conditions of overcrowding have been evaluated; and (3) no feasible methods for reducing such conditions exist. Such notification shall remain in effect until withdrawn in writing by the governing body of the school district. Upon receipt of such notice, the City Council shall schedule and conduct a public hearing on the notification for the purpose of allowing interested parties to comment on the matter. Following such hearing, the City Council shall determine -1- H whether it concurs in such finding_. If the City Council concurs, it shall by resolution designate the school as an overcrowded school.. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi does hereby set a Public Hearing on Wednesday, September 16, 1981 at the hour of 8: 00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, in the Council Chambers, City Hall, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California, to receive public input on notification received from the Lodi Unified School District declaring a state of impaction in nineteen attendance .areas. Information regarding this item may be obtained in the o_ffic-e:-of the City Clerk at 221 W. Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested persons are invited to present their views either for or against the above proposal. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at said hearing. Dated: August 5, 1981 By Order of the City Council M. . *ICE'* AHE City Clerk Jim Pinkerton �. Comments on School Impaction_ Council Meeting September 16, 1981 . .:.On -page 8 you have the Lodi Unified Facilities and Plannimg T all the -way through here and you have the Johnson -Tandy Ranch which totals up to a projection of 2,064 students --there hasn't been a grapevine pulled --there hasn't been a thing- done out there --and so let's take out the Johnson -Tandy Ranch, ? ? 21-064 students-. I'm only taking out one .subdivision, which is .. a long way from producing 2,000 and you duplicate the 517 twice. So in Tokay sigh School we take out that 517 and Lodi's share o -f students in that is 31.55 percent. Stockton is 57.27 percent and San Joaquin County is 11.18 percent --basically S05 students. So- that school is in the city limits of Lodi and it is impacted, basic -illy, by the city of Stockton. Then we come- -in to Lodi 'High and the percentage of the Lodi High School people that are coming in are from the Lodi district which is 63.7 percent and the San Joaquin County is coming in at 36.3 percent. Then we go down to the Senior Elementary School. After we take out the 515 people from Johnson -Tandy Ranch you said you were going to have, that leaves 307 people at Senior Elementary. And that's 41.66 percent ? _ 58.34 coming in from Stockton. And Lakewood San Joaquin County is 72.76 percent of the impaction there. So, basically, if you take all the total students that you are bringing in in this impaction the city of Lodi is producing 43.22 percent; Stockton is producing 44.61 percent; and Y San Joaquin County is producing 4.69 percent. And yet you are asking the citizens of Lodi, the young people in this town;who can't qualify for a house now to pay for something that if`''it were just the city of Lodi we could take care of the people within the city of Lodi school limit Because every school that you've got with Stockton coming in, it's the highest impaction out of Stockton. I can't see penalizing the young people in the-City of Lodi who are trying to get started if you..look, at the pages of the Sentinel and the Lodi Life and Times, there are young people getting married that can't buy homes i town. If you .put another $2-50to $500 on 'them., they're never going to qualify for a home and where are the Jim Pinkerton Comments o -n School Impactio n Council Meeting September 16, 1981 ® . .On page 8 you have the Lodi Unified Facilities and Planning all the way through here and you have the Johnson -Tandy Ranch which totals up to a projection of 2,064 students --there hasn't been a grapevine pulled --there hasn't been a thing done ou.t there --and so let's take out the Johnson -Tandy Ranch, ? ? 2,064 students. I'm only taking out one subdivision, which is a long.way from producing 2,000 and you duplicate the 517 twice. So in Tokay High School we take out that 517 and Lodi's share of students in that is 31.55 percent. Stockton is 57.27 perrcent and San Joaquin County is 11.18 percent --basically 805 students- So tudents-.So that school is in the city limits of Lodi and it is impacted, basically-, by. the city of Stockton. Then we come in to Lodi High and the percentage of the Lodi High School people that are coming in are from the Lodi district which is 63.7 percent and the San Joaquin County is coming in at 36.3 percent. Then we go down to the Senior Elementary School. After we take out the 515 people from Johnson -Tandy Ranch you said you were going to have, that leaves 307 people at Senior Elementary. And that's 41.66 percent ? 58.34 coming in from Stockton. And Lakewood San Joaquin County is 72.76 percent of the impaction there. So, basically, if you take all the total students that you are bringing in in this impaction the city of Lodi is producing 43.22 percent; Stockton is producing 44.61 percent; and San Joaquin County is producing 4.69 percent. And yet you are asking the citizens of Lodi, the young people in this town who can't qualify for a house now to pay for something that if it were just the city of Lodi we could take care of the people within the city of Lodi school limit. Because every school that you've got with Stockton coming in, it's the highest impaction out of Stockton. I can't -see penalizing the young people in the City of Lodi who are trying to get started If you look at the pages of the Sentinel and the Lodi Life and Times, there are young people getting married that can't buy homes in town. If you put another $x°50 to $500 on them, they're never going to qualify for a home and where are the young people going to go. True --you're saying that these people are going to gener-a=te kids, but 1 -think someplace along the line the school system is going to have to look at its own self and cut back on their costs and their overhead and stop giving all -the goodies out and .making people start to work 12 months out of the year instead of paying them $125 a day and giving them four months a year vacation. If you'll look at the last U.S. News and World Report at how many teachers are out of a job and how many teachers are losing their jobs because of ? population. . . Jim Pinker 4no �' Comments on School Ympaction Council Meeting September 16, 1981 . . .on page'8 you have the Lodi Unified Facilities and Planning all the way through here and you have the Johnson -Tandy Ranch which totals up to a projection of 2,064 students --there hasn•t been a grapevine pulled --there hasn't been a thing done out there --and so let's take out the Johnson -Tandy Ranch, ? 2,-064 students. I'm only taking out one subdivision, which is a long way from producing 2,000 -ond you duplicate the 517 twice. So in Tokay High School we take out that 517 and Lodi's share of students in that is 31.55 percent. Stockton is 57.27 percent and San Joaquin County is 11.19 percent --basically 805 students. So that school is in the city limits of Lodi and it is impacted, basically-,_ by the city of Stockton. Then we come in to -Lodi High and the percentage of the Lodi High School people that are coming in are from the Lodi district which is 63.7 percent and the San Joaquin County is coming in at 36.3 percent. Then, -,we go down to the Senior Elementary School. After we take out the 515 people from Johnson -Tandy Ranch you said you were going to have, that leaves 307 people at Senior Elementary. And that's 41.66 percent ? 58.34 coming in from Stockton. And Lakewood San Joaquin County is 72.76 percent of the impaction there. So, basically, if you take all the total students that you are bringing in in this impaction the city of Lodi is producing 43.22 percent; Stockton is producing 44.61 percent; and San Joaquin County is producing 4.69 percent. And yet you are asking the citizens of Lodi, the young people in this town who can'_t qualify for a house now to pay for something that if it were just the city of Lodi we could take care of the people B within the city of Lodi school limit. Because every school that you've got with Stockton coming in, it's the highest Impaction out of Stockton. I can't see penalizing the young people -in the City of Lodi who are trying to get started If you look at the pages of the Sentinel and the Lodi Life and Times, there are young people getting married that can't buy homes in town. If you put another $250 to $500 on them, they're never going to qualify for a home and where are the young people going to go. True --you're saying that these people are going to generate kids, but I think someplace along the line the school system is going to have to look at its ownselfand cut back on their costs and their overhead and -stop giving- aLl the goodies out and making people start to - work 12 months out of the year instead of paying them $125 a day and giving them four months a year vacation. If you'll look at the last U.S. News and World Report at how many teachers are out of a job and how many teachers are losing their jobs because of ? population. . x to the building cost index published quarterly in the Engineering News=Record-that. the: building. costs in San Joaquin County have P. TS NT risen by approximately, 30 percent since Resolution No. R-78-2224 z > was adopted; Np<,i, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the fee schedule applicable to the -overcrowded school attendance areas in the Lodi Unified L School District be revised as follows to wit: = 1; For mobile spaces the rate shall be $325.00 per space. t For all other residential dwelling units, including 2 err; units containing a single (one) bedroom, the rate shall be s s260.00 per bedroom. r�, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be trans- mitted.forthwith to the County Building Department for implementation. ,fPASSED AND ADOPTED this th day of August, 1981, by the follow- .a y,C _. .,: ing..vote of the Board of Supervisors, to wit: Ch1= t 4 c l YOSHIKAW AYES: tiRALVA, COSTA. WltHO1T NOES • NONE ABSENT Wo, WILHUXTS Chat n.- i' ATTEST: JORETTA J. HAYDE Boa' of S rvisors " Clerk of the Board of Super- County of Sin. Joaquin {� ` visor`s,of the County of San State of California Joaquin, St e, of CaliforniCak.}� AXI Ta Oftiu of the County Cour:sm Prepared by ,a,q a �4 Direction of f Approved Dy_'% AUG 18 1961