My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
02/04/2004
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
2000's
>
2004
>
02/04/2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/23/2022 4:19:34 PM
Creation date
10/1/2015 6:03:29 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
BCC Joint Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
02/04/2004
Meeting Body
Board of County Commissioners
Archived Roll/Disk#
2926
Book and Page
126, 504-510
Supplemental fields
SmeadsoftID
409
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
6
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
<br />the different ways (concurrency service areas, county-wide, or school attendance zones) to <br />accomplish adding school concurrency and specified that in PBC they used concurrency service <br /> <br />areas as their method. <br /> <br />Angela Usher, <br /> <br />Palm Beach County School District, spoke on level of service (LOS) and <br />other technical issues. She explained their project was approved in January 2001; their Comp Plan <br />was amended based on FISH (Florida Inventory of School Houses) capacity, and they used a LOS <br />of 110% to be in place by August of 2004. In order to reach that LOS, they implemented a tiered <br />or step-down LOS method to give them time to construct and add the new capacity. For them, <br />concurrency has been made up of three major components: coordinated planning for which they <br />came up with a 5-year capital plan, a regulatory review for oversight, and financial feasibility. They <br />made a commitment to local governments not to just provide new schools but to also modernize old <br />ones. She enumerated the challenges they faced which included site acquisitions, compliance with <br />municipal regulations, compliance with Federal government regulations, competing objectives, <br />school concurrency, full choice advocates, magnet programs, charter schools, boundary changes, <br />and funding issues that could necessitate a referendum. She explained that a 2-year rule was <br />implemented by an amendment to their interlocal agreement. (Clerk’s Note: A copy of Ms. Usher’s <br />PowerPoint presentation is on file with the backup in the Office of the Clerk to the Board.) <br /> <br />B) DQ <br />ISCUSSION UESTIONS <br /> <br />Chairman Ginn opened the floor to questions from the table. She understood that <br />school concurrency is optional and all municipalities in the county must participate unless they are <br />exempt. <br />Mr. NobleMs. Usher <br /> and responded to numerous questions from the table <br />concerning how the multipliers were determined, the number of schools that had been built since <br />PBC has had school concurrency, how best to handle impact of intense development in certain <br />February 4, 2004 3 <br /> <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.