Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout5/15/2002 - STAFF REPORTS (29) DATE: May 15, 2002 TO: City Council FROM: Executive Director-Airports SCHOOL DISTRICT LAND TRANSFER RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council review materials concerning a boundary change between two Valley school districts and consider adopting a position Resolution. SUMMARY: This action, if any, would result in the City being on record concerning a boundary change between the Palm Springs Unified School District and the Desert Sands Unified School District. BACKGROUND: The Mayor asked that this issue be brought forward at a City Council meeting. Attached are briefing sheets from Palm Springs Unified School District and District representatives will be present at the Council meeting to discuss this item. A Resolution is also attached for consideration should the City Council decide to take a position on this issue. ALLEN F. SMOOT, AAE Executive Director-Airports APPR ED-c ;�:; ter City Manager ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution 2. Information Sheets (PSUSD) APR-25-2002 14:35 PSUSD SUPT.OFF. 760 416 6015 P.02i10 Proposed Territory Transfer from Palm Sprints Unified School District to Desert Sands Unified School District— Frank Sinatra/Monterey The petition by the City of Palm Desert should be denied based on the severe negative impact the transfer has on the 22,000 students in the Palm Springs Unified School District. The following points illustrate the direct impact the transfer causes for students and their families: For sometime the District has planned to provide K-12 schools in the transfer area. Two school sites have been identified with assistance from the City of Palm Desert. The schools would be located within walking distance of the existing housing developments, The transfer, if adopted, would also severely disrupt and delay the plans for the construction of these K-12 schools, which directly affects the students in the Rancho Mirage and Thousand Palms areas. The construction of these K-12 facilities will also provide, a much needed relief to the aver-crowded Cathedral City area specifically Cathedral City High, James Workman Middle and Nellie Coffman Middle Schools. Planning and funding for the new K-12 schools within the transfer area was included in the District's current bond measure ("S"), which was approved by the voters in November 2000. In addition to prolonging the current over-crowded conditions in the Cathedral City High school area, the transfer directly impacts the students of Rancho Mirage and Thousand Palms areas who would also attend the fourth high school. The District's bond measure provides funds for construction of file K-8 school facilities but only site acquisition for the fourth high school, The $38 million in redevelopment revenue was designated to fund the construction of the first phase of the fourth high school. Loss of this area and the redevelopment revenue delays the high school project, while the district seeks a now site. The construction of the new high school would also require going back to the remaining 120,000 taxpayers for a new bond measure to pay for the construction cost. Further, the transfer of this area impacts the remaining high school age students of Rancho Mirage and Thousand Palms by reducing the number of students that would be available to attend the new high school. It is extremely difficult and more expensive to offer a rich, well-balanced and comprehensive educational program at a small high school. A reduced number of students make it virtually impossible to offer Advanced Placement, Honors and other college preparation courses similar to the quantity seen at our district high schools. � �As APP,-25-2002 14:36 PSUSD SUPT.OFF. 760 416 6015 P.03i10 • Transfer of the area limits and impairs the district's ability to provide a diverse ethnic mix, reflective of the population within the district boundaries and the valley. The transfer area is primarily white, 80% or more. Without the transfer area, the remaining attendance area would always have a 70% or greater Hispanic student population. • The transfer of territory falls to improve or initiates a better delivery of educational services to the students of this area. • The Frank Sinatra/Monterey area has been reviewed previously by the Riverside County Committee and denied in 1994. The basis for the denial was the negative impact on the students of the palm springs Unified School District. Not only does the same basis for denial continues to exist today but there are additional items of negative items on students. • The transfer petition has been requested based on a perceived need to have coterminous boundaries between the city and school district in order to provide a "community identity". The vast number of cities and school districts in the State and specifically in Riverside County are not coterminous and still maintain a sense of "community identity". As the above points illustrate, elimination of this territory has a pronounced and far reaching impact on the thousands of students throughout the entire Palm Springs Unified School District. Uitimately, the parents of students within the transfer area will have neighborhood schools as promised in Bond Measure "S". Should a whimsical notion of"community identity" for this parcel of territory, overshadow and play greater importance than the day-to-day educational services provided to 22,000 students? 3/27/02 PD 42 APR-25-2002 14:37 PSUSD SUPT.OFF. 760 416 6015 P.04i10 K1rY PORTS Ft7R TDIAy,�_C�ART��N�1��1D TRALYSFER " Both PSUSD and DSUSD are already organized oil the basis of a substantial community identity based upon the work,completed in 1994 to realign the district boundaries. This realignment was intended to be a final adjustment to boundaries in an effort to faclEtate long-term planning for school facilities in both districts. " This territory was reviewed in 1994, and the transfer to Desert Sands was denied at that point because it was deemed that the move would have a negative impact on Palm. Springs Unified students. Today, there would be an additional negative impact on PSUSD students. " The district's current bond measure and projected $38 million in redevelopment revenue have been committed to facilities projects including ti►e building of K-S schools and site acquisition and construction for the district's fourth high school in the transfer area. Without this land,funding and completion of the high school project would be jeopardized. Both existing and future district students from this area as well as from Rancho Mirage and Thousand Palms will attend these new schools. * DSUSD would need to construct additional facilities to serve the students in the transfer area. These projects were not part ofDSUSD's bond measure approved last fall. The current Desert Sands bond measure does not go into affect until 2005 and does not include facilities for this area. There has been no demonstration of how these students from this area would be served by Desert Sands. * The transfer will disrupt PSUSD's long range facility master plan and prompt a multi-year delay in providing new school facilities for our Rancho Mirage and Thousand Palms students and alleviating crowded conditions at Cathedral City High and the two Cathedral City middle schools. Additional interim facilities to relieve existing overcrowded campuses in the district would also result in additional costs for the district, • Losing this territory would mean a loss of students in the eastern portion of the district boundaries malting it necessary to build a smaller high school to serve our Rancho Mirage and Thousdand Palms students. It would be extremely difficult to offer a rich and well-balanced comprehensive educational program at a small high school, The district would have to adjust its master plan to build smaller school facilities at a higher cost per student due to a loss of economies of scale, tR th Y RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITYCOUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM SPRINGS,CALIFORNIA, OPPOSINGTHE PROPOSAL TO TRANSFER CERTAIN PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT TERRITORY TO THE DESERT SANDS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT. WHEREAS the residents of the City of Palm Springs are served by the Palm Springs Unified School District (hereinafter"PSUSD"); and WHEREAS in 1992 and 2000, registered voters in PSUSD approved a general obligation bond measure (hereinafter"GO Bond"), by which a tax is assessed against their properties in order to finance construction of schools throughout the PSUSD; and WHEREAS PSUSD is using GO Bond proceeds and other funds to acquire the necessary school sites and to plan and construct school facilities, in accordance with its long range facilities master plan,for a K-8 school and a high school in the eastern portion of the PSUSD, to relieve the overcrowding of existing school sites; and WHEREAS the City of Palm Desert has submitted Resolution No. 01-117 to the Riverside County Board of Education proposing to transferthe Frank Sinatra/Monterey area within the PSUSD to the Desert Sands Unified School District (hereinafter "DSUSD"); and WHEREAS Section 35753(a)of the California Education Code sets forth certain criteria which the California State Board of Education must determine,with respect to any proposal and the resulting district, have been substantially met before approving a proposal for reorganization; and WHEREAS Resolution No. 01-117's express and sole intention is to promote the community of the City of Palm Desert rather than to enhance the educational mission of any affected school district; and WHEREAS the Frank Sinatra/Monterey area was the subject of a proposed transfer to the DSUSD in 1994; and WHEREAS the PSUSD and DSUSD reached a tacit agreement in 1994 regarding their mutual boundarieswhich included an agreement that the Frank Sinatra/Monterey area would remain within PSUSD; and WHEREAS the 1994 boundary realignment was to facilitate effective long-term planning for school facilities within PSUSD and DSUSD and was intended to be the final adjustment of the affected districts' shared boundaries; and gA May 15, 2002 Page Two WHEREAS PSUSD's Evaluation of Compliance as set forth in Resolution No. 01-117 concludes that the transfer proposal would negatively impact the students and residents in PSUSD and Palm Springs residents, because seven of nine feasibility criteria of Education Code 35753(a), are not substantially met, as set forth below: • Since the two affected districts are already organized on the basis of a substantial community identity, it is not necessary that there be a transfer to create"coterminous boundaries" between affected cities and school districts; • The effect of moving this territory will result in an inequitable division of existing property and facilities of PSUSD because the $38 million redevelopment revenue to be derived from the transfer area has already been committed for various planned expansion projects for two school sites which were created in part to relieve overcrowded PSUSD area schools: • The reorganization will impair PSUSD's ability to provide diverse ethnic mix, reflective of the population within the district boundaries and the Valley, because the students comprising the transfer area are predominantly white, whereas the students making up the majority of PSUSD are at a greater percentage a Hispanic: student population; The proposed petition will result in substantial increase in costs to the State if the Resolution is granted at its initial hearing because it will set a precedent for similar resolutions from other nearby cities which may seek similar city/school boundary adjustments in Riverside County; • The petition, if approved at its initial hearing, will significantly disrupt the educational programs and long-term masterplan of the PSUSD by(1)causing a multi-year delay in constructing new facilities; (2) contributing to the prolonged over-crowding of existing school sites; (3) imperiling existing and potential magnate school programs, and (4) increasing racial and ethnic segregation; • If the petition is approved at its initial hearing, there will be a significant increase in school housing costs because PSUSD will incur additional planning costs for interim facilities to house students while the revised master plan facilities plan is prepared and implemented; further, PSUSD's loss of students from the transfer area will result in the district having to build marginally smaller school facilities at a higher cost per student due to a loss of"economies of scale"; • If the petition is approved, it will generate higher property values within the transferarea which is in contravention to the criterion established in Education Code Section 35753(a)(8) which is to ensure against school district reorganization as a means for property owners to enhance property values; and ;Z May 15, 2002 Page Three The proposed reorganization will cause a substantial negative effect on the fiscal management/status of PSUSD in that it will lose future pass-through payments from the transfer area which in turn results in an increase in tax rates for all remaining property owners in the district as they will be forced to shoulderthe entire burden of the general obligation bond;further, PSUSD will lose significant "per pupil" operating funding from the State. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Springs, California, as follows: SECTION 1. OPPOSITION TO CITY OF PALM DESERT RESOLUTION NO. 01-117 The City of Palm Springs hereby opposes the City of Palm Desert's proposal to transfer an area of Frank Sinatra Drive and Monterey Avenue within the boundaries of Palm Springs Unified School District to the Desert Sands Unified School District as such transferwill substantially and negatively impact the students and residents of Palm Springs on both educational and financial terms. SECTION 2. JOINDER WITH PALM SPRINGS UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT The City of Palm Springs herebyjoins the Palm Springs Unified School District in opposing said proposal and concurs with the Palm Springs Unified School District's Evaluation of Compliance wherein it has been determined that such reorganization would negatively impactthe residents and students in the Palm Springs Unified School District in contravention to the criteria set forth in California Education Code Section 35753(a). SECTION 3. CERTIFICATION That the City Clerk shall certify as to the adoption of this Resolution and shall cause the same to be processed in the manner required by law. ADOPTED this day of , 2002. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: CITY OF PALM SPRINGS, CALIFORNIA City Clerk City Manager REVIEWED &APPROVED AS TO FORM a�,e 3