Ordinance 3254-12 - Laserfiche WebLink

data if it is derived through statistically reliable methodologies. Information must be consistent with Office of Financial Management (OFM) population forecasts. Student generation rates must be independently calculated by each school district. • The CFP must comply with Chapter 36.70A RCW (the Growth Management Act). • The methodology used to calculate impact fees must comply with Chapter 82.02 RCW. The CFP must identify alternative funding sources in the event that impact fees are not available due to action by the state, county or cities within the District. When the County adopted its School Impact Fee Ordinance in November 1997, it established the specific criteria for the adoption of a CFP and the assessment of impact fees in the County. Section 3 of the Ordinance defines the requirements for the biennial CFP updates. Table 1 of the Ordinance outlines the formulae for determination of impact fees. Overview of the Mukilteo School District Twenty-six square miles in area, the District encompasses the City of Mukilteo, portions of the City of Everett, and portions of unincorporated Snohomish County. The Mukilteo School District is bordered by the Everett School District to the north and the east and the Edmonds School District to the south. The District serves a student population headcount of 14196 (October 2009) with eleven elementary schools (grades K-5), four middle schools (grades 6-8), two comprehensive high schools (grades 9-12), and one alternative high school (grades 9-12). For the purposes of facility planning, this CFP considers grades K-5 as elementary, grades 6-8 as middle school, and grades 9-12 as high school. For purposes of this CFP, enrollment in the Sno-Isle Skills Center is not included. The most significant issues facing the District in terms of providing classroom capacity to accommodate existing and projected demands are: • Facility shortfalls currently exist at elementary and high schools. New shortfalls from growth are projected in both the near and long-term at the elementary level. Middle schools show additional deficiencies in 2014,high schools in 2015. • Uneven growth rates exist between geographic sectors within the District. Such uneven growth patterns imply that some schools will reach maximum capacity sooner than others and this will increase the difficulty of maintaining stable school boundaries. • School choice is required by federal and state regulations. Students attending Title 1 funded schools in improvement may choose to attend schools which are not in improvement. The resulting shift in demographics may cause the receiving schools to reach capacity more quickly than anticipated. Conversely,the sending Title 1 schools may reach their capacities later than anticipated. These issues are addressed in greater detail in this CFP. 2