Superintendent's Recommended FY 2014 Capital Budget and Amendments to the FY 2013-2018 Capital Improvements Program
Author: Montgomery County Public Schools (MCPS)
Date: 2012-10-30
Type: Reports - Evaluative
Subjects: Counties,Superintendents,Budgets,Enrollment Trends,Educational Facilities Planning,Long Range Planning,High Schools,Consortia,School Location,Graphs,Tables (Data),Profiles,Space Utilization,School Buildings,Special Programs,Preschool Education,Sanitary Facilities,Land Use,School Closing,Political Divisions (Geographic),Maps,Special Education,Educational Policy,Public Schools,School Schedules,Educational Planning,Educational Facilities Improvement,Elementary Schools,Secondary Schools,Educational Finance,Taxes,Income,Financial Support,Trend Analysis

In November 1996, the voters of Montgomery County (Maryland) approved by referendum an amendment to the County Charter that changed the County Council's review and approval cycle of the six-year Capital Improvements Program (CIP) from an annual to biennial cycle. The referendum specified that in odd-numbered fiscal years (on years) the County Council would conduct a full review the six-year CIP and in even-numbered fiscal years (off years), the County Council only would consider amendments to the adopted CIP. The Superintendent's Recommended FY 2014 Capital Budget and Amendments to the FY 2013-2018 CIP provides the recommended appropriation authority for funds needed to implement CIP projects during FY 2014 as well as proposed amendments to the Adopted FY 2013-2018 CIP. This document contains the following sections. Chapter 1, &quot;The Recommended FY 2014 Capital Budget and Amendments to the FY 2013-2018 Capital Improvements Program (CIP),&quot; is a review of the major factors that have influenced the development of recommended projects to the FY 2014 Capital Budget and Amendments to the FY 2013-2018 CIP. This chapter contains a table summarizing recommended Amendments to the FY 2013-2018 CIP. Chapter 2, &quot;The Planning Environment,&quot; describes the demographic, economic, and enrollment trends in Montgomery County that form the context for reviewing facility plans and addressing long-range system needs. Chapter 3, &quot;Facility Planning Objectives,&quot; outlines six facility planning objectives that guide the school system as it moves to accommodate enrollment growth and program changes. The objectives are discussed and placed in the context of the recommended CIP actions. Chapter 4, &quot;Recommended Actions and Planning Issues,&quot; is arranged by high school cluster and high school consortium. This chapter provides maps depicting school boundaries and locations, a bar graph that indicates school utilization within each cluster, tables with enrollment projections, school demographic profiles, building room use, capacity data, and other facility information. Planning issues are identified, and adopted actions and recommended actions to this CIP are discussed. Chapter 5, &quot;Countywide Projects,&quot; provides a brief summary description of the CIP projects that are programmed to meet the needs of many schools across the county. These projects involve multiyear plans with different schools scheduled each year. Several appendices, at the end of the document, contain information on a variety of topics including enrollment information, state-rated capacities, Board of Education policies, modernization schedules, available school sites, closed schools and their current use, and relocatable classroom placements. Also included are maps for identifying Board of Education, council manic, and legislative election districts. [This report was published by the Department of Materials Management for the Department of Facilities Management and the Division of Long-range Planning. For &quot;Superintendent's Recommended FY 2012 Capital Budget and Amendments to the FY 2011-2016 Capital Improvements Program,&quot; see ED557670.]