The state has plenty of money for schools until 2003
The PVUSD may be crying wolf on this one because all new construction is being funded.
By Peter Nichols
pnichols@tellingthetruth.com
WATSONVILLE _ As city officials race to complete requirements of the Memorandum of Understanding, and district officials wrestle with site approval, state Proposition 1A school funding sources _ for the time being _ remain intact.
According to Koren Lamar, Project Manager for the Office of Public School Construction, the district submitted its most recent application Feb. 14 of this year and is in line for funding of the project. That application includes funds for site acquisition and hardship money. The previous application was incomplete and never made it into the funding line.
``The project is still in the preliminary review period,'' said Lamar. ``But it appears that all necessary documentation may be complete.''
One requirement to satisfy that review is the site approval from the School Facilities Planning Division. Consultant John Dominguez is responsible for making that determination for the Department of Education.
That approval is contingent on the property being accepted for school use by the Department of Transportation Aeronautics Program.
Lamar said the first step in the funding process is applying for the hardship funds which the district has already done. Those funds will cover the district's 50 percent share of site acquisition and construction costs when a general bond measure for a new school fails but receives more than 50 percent of the vote. The state contributes the other 50 per cent.
There typically are accounting issues that must be overcome before a district can qualify for the full amount. According to Carolyn Harmon, Audit Supervisor for the Office of Public School Construction, districts must disclose amounts of money they have to put toward a project when they apply. If they have money available, it comes off their hardship funding grant.
When asked if her office allows districts so spend funds identified through the audit process as offsetting hardship grants, Harmon said, ``They can withdraw their application and come back later and re-apply when their financial situation changes.''
She said there is no line for hardship funding, but if the acquisition and construction application process is not completed within six months of the hardship approval, a new hardship application would be required.
Harmon also said, at this time districts are not lining up for new construction funding. ``Were funding all the new construction projects.'' she said.
The first round of Proposition 1A funding which included $1.35 billion for new school construction and $500 million for hardship funds was made available in late 1998. Harmon said some of those funds are still available. The second round of funding will make $1.55 billion for new schools and $500 million for hardship funds available in July of this year. She cited projections that indicate this funding source should last until early 2003.
According to Casey, the only funding source available after that would be a general bond measure similar to the one attempted in 1998 requiring a two- thirds majority vote of the district electorate. He indicated that a changed attitude regarding funding a high school may be present by then if the current plans to develop the Harkins Slough Rd. project fail to come together in time.