coachella valley community college district college of the desert dccd... · 2012-06-12 ·...

Coachella Valley Community College District College of the Desert

A Study of the

High Desert Area Educational Physical Facilities

by

Stallings & Associates

Dr. John W. Stallings, Consultant

Assistance by:

Office of Riverside County Superintendent of Schools

Dr. Brooks P. Coleman Associate Superintendent

Office of San Bernardino County Superintendent of Schools

Mr. James W. Leathy, Jr. Consultant

AUGUST, 1977

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Purpose of the Study

HISTORICAL DATA

Introduction

Election Efforts

Map A •...

Second Campus Site

Leases

Table 1

Map B

POPULATION

Population Statistics

Population Projections

Table 2

Table 3

STUDENT ATTENDANCE

Enrollment

Graduates .

Courses Offered

Table 4

Table 5

Table 6

Table 7

Average Daily Attendance (A.D.A.)

Table 8

Table 9

Projections of A.D.A.

Table 10

Table 11

ASSESSED VALUATION

Comparative Data on Assessed Valuation

Table 12

TAX RATES

General Purpose Tax Rate

Tax Rate for 1977-78

i

1

2

2

2

3

4

4

5

6

7

7

7

8

9

10

10

10

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

21

22

23

23

n

TAX RATES (Continued)

Table l3 . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

COOPERATIVE DATA FROM OTHER COMMUNITY COLLEGES 26

Introduction 26

Table 14 27

LEGAL AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS 28

Responsibility of Board of Trustees 28

Standards Adopted for Nelq Colleges and Nelq Educational Centers 30

Revie>1 by Chancellor's Office and Board of Governors 32

Review by the California Postsecondary Education Commission 32

Criteria for Reviewing Ney, Campuses , , , , , 33

Criteria for Reviewing New Off-Campus Centers 33

FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 35

Analysis of Data

RECOMHENDATIONS

CONCLUDING STATEMENT

APPENDIX A ,

Outline for Site Review

Site Review Content , ,

'.

ii

35

38

40

41

41

41

Purpose of the Study

This report was developed for Coachella Valley Community College District to analyze the need for a second campus in the High Desert area of the district. Specific factors studied were:

1. Historical Data

2. Population

3. Student Attendance

4. Assessed Valuation

5. Tax Rates

6. Legal and Policy Considerations

From the findings and conclusions of this analysis of data, recommendations were formulated for the consideration of the administrators and board members of the college district.

1

HISTORICAL DATA

Introduction

Coachella Valley Community College District is geographically one of the largest community college districts in the State of California. Its boundaries include territory in three counties - Imperial, Riverside and San Bernardino. The major segment of the district consists of physical property in.Riverside County; the minor segment is physical property in Imperial County. Approximately 13% of the community college territory is comprised of property in San Bernardino County. (See Nap A)

The College of the Desert has continually indicated a sincere desire to provide for the educational needs at the community college level for this large, diverse geographical area. The initial effort in this regard was the planning, construction and operation of a comprehensive community college in Palm Desert. This beautiful college facility is near the population center for the district in Riverside County and is named College of the Desert.

The Coachella Valley Community College District then promptly implemented a policy of taking the educational programs to the people. Recognizing that the clusters of population centers in the High Desert area were too distant from the main campus for commuting, the college initiated a program of off-campus classes. These classes were held in various locations throughout the district over the years such as high schools, churches, commercial buildings, and military agencies. The off-campus programs have been generally well-received and have resulted in considerable numbers of students in the programs.

Election Efforts

Three elections have be.en called and held by the Board of Trustees of the Coachella Valley Community College Dis trict. The firs t two elections were each for $5,000,000 in general obligation bonds and would have provided bond funds for construction of a second campus in the High Desert. These elections required a two-thirds favorable vote for passage and they each received less than a majority favorable vote. Both Low and High Desert areas defeated the issues.

The most recent election for the purpose of building a second campus was in 1975. The Board of Trustees scheduled and held a $.20 tax increase election. Unlike a bond election the tax increase election required only a majority yes vote for passage. This tax election was also defeated, receiving less than a majority vote in each section of the college district.

No elections have been scheduled by Coachella Valley Community College District since the defeat of the tax increase proposal. No further elections are proposed for the immediate future for purposes of construction.

2

, ~ , , -. , ,r; , . .. ' .. .. '" ~ " 74N <::::1): » ~ T4Jo1 ..

~ , , , , , -,-" COACHELLA VAllEY JR.. COllEGE DISl R.

• T3N J! TaN .,.

• , • , , , .... .. .. ~

IT T!,,! ct ~I T2M ..

• , SITE

~ YUCCA · ~ ~ • " ::: ll;

.. '" - "AUf.., .;~ !:> ~

'f! - - Ill: ~t MS , TIM .. ., '" .. , . , . , .,- ~ i i ffFf I :=r t :~rr ...... ;;:-r.r, ~1" ~

· ra.-,r I-:r,.w-.. ·r~II!~~........J . rn I .. 1 I .,-~ I I • 1 •• , 1 ~

ONGO .. .. II(J ~a 1 ';If l. . ,~, ,.. III " )

" '" e~N ERN ...... t.DXJ:i'I"O O"C'NT' ~ ::t "'" .• ,

ns .. '" ,ft ", ~" , TIS

."- - , RX" t:a.&ZlO oo~ . , .. • ..

, , . , 14-"",0£ SER HOT$P INGS ,

TtS'1 , ,..<~,;;J;:?, .

'. , " " , ns

• .. <=>' '.~ - ' .'-++;

w ~. '\ ·ffi •

• ",",X';_"" " '

" '" " iL

-1"'D'-:XiPA~ PRING ' ' """

~X:!)~' 1"",,- · , . / ':J;K ,

T4531 ., , ,

'" ALM ct , -, I V • , . r'=SER )\ INDIO ~ ESERTC1 I1ITER

. • · ·

T55 , ........ r- - ." , .. , TS$

I~

, il'COAC ELLA ~.

, . , , ,

, . T<S " , r<s . , . , .

- , · , 77S , I

, , . . . . . . . . . ,. JI , l7S

'~;WJO~ • .. . . . . . ,.

. I . , · • 1 " -1

7'8] -'I SfO:f ,

'" . ~" r~ • . • . 7ZJ5

• ,; ~ , %:tPB R.x1--a:.. COUNTY . . • • . " • ,

t- o 5 '0 ,. 20 umilh .. • , T9 • ,

T9J , , -' . . , . , • .. 5. : .1:; B· • : :,

A • C Xl II Til IZi.,uu:H C-Mtrs.n,.v-4e.~tI _IIUIUS;~'

• #.,4. ZII.ISU 011114"1'#1 J.. ~'IIIIIIPT.It CJJIIZ~ .. IIL

TJ()j .. . . TldS

Second Campus Site

The Horongo Unified School District was annexed to the Coachella Valley Community College District in 1967, and in 1970, the college district purchased a site from the unified school district for approximately $80,000.

The vacant site is on the north side of Highway 62 (29 Palms Highway), about halfway between Twentynine Palms and Yucca Valley. The site is approximately 120 acres and sits at the foot of Copper Nountain.

The site is certainly useable for a community college, but presents developmental costs of estimated considerable proportion. The topography of the site will result in quite large expenditures for proper drainage and flood control. These conditions could be accommodated more easily if the site were south of the highway rather than north. Utilities could also present problems in getting services to the site.

The site is of ample size. Its location midl,ay between population centers is also viewed favorably.

No attempt was made in this study to do a cost analysis of this site for development since that was beyond the scope of this report. A visit was made to the area to see the site and the communities involved. It was concluded that if the district decided to develop a second campus in the High Desert, the second campus could be located on the district-Dlmed site. This is not to be construed as recommending that the campus be located there. The location of the second campus should b", decided after and if it is decided to build a new college for the district.

Leases

The college district in the High Desert. costs incurred. Nap

is currently leasing facilities for program Table 1 shows the four leased sites and the B ShOl1S the locations of these sites.

operation size and

The Catholic Church is the largest facility, having more than 11,000 square feet. This is roughly the equivalent of eleven classrooms. Altogether, the district is leasing the equivalent of about 24 or 25 classrooms.

The lease cost of $.08 per square foot is exceedingly reasonable. The annual cost is $22,800. This does not include all maintenance and operation. The college district provides classified employees to service the facilities. Nevertheless, the lease rates are certainly attractive enough so as not to be a deterrent to offering programs in the High Desert.

4

TABLE 1

HIGH DESERT LEASE SITE LOCATIONS/COST PER SQUARE FOOT PER MONTH COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, 1977-1978

Approx. Approx. Monthly Square Nonth1y Cos t

Lease Site Rent Footage Per Sq. Ft.

I Briggs Building $ 300. 1,960 i $ .15

I Carter Building 500. 6,500

, .08 ,

Catholic Chlirch , , Building ·800. n,225 , .07

i

Lutheran Church 300. 3,360 ! .09 I !

TOTALS , $1,900. 23,045 i $ .08

TOTAL ANNUAL LEASE COST: $22,800.

5

MAP B

COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

HIGH DESERT LEASE SITE LOCATIONS

LANDERS

-.; .. ! •

i ! ,I.,; J .. ..

I.dl •• T,.II : ... • : 29 Palm. Hw. ...

JOSHUA YUlE

1, BRIGGS BUILDING 6244 Adobe Road, 29 Palms

2, CATHOLIC CHURCH 6785 Sage Street, 29 Palms

3. CARTER BUILDING 75850 Baseline, 29 Palms

MAIIINI!! BASil!

A .. ~.. • .. ,

-----

4. LUTHERAN CHURCH 74301 Two HUe Road, 29 Palms

6

POPULATION

Population Statistics

Table 2 gives the best available estimates of population for the Coachella Valley Community College District. The total population estimate for 1977 was 151,237 divided into 122,367 population for Low Desert and 28,870 population for High Desert. Therefore, 19% of the population was High Desert and 81% was Low Desert.

Almost 20% of the High Desert population was associated with the Marine Corps Base at Twentynine Palms. In April, 1977, the base had a population of 5,489.

The urban population in the High Desert was larger in the Morongo/Yucca Valley (11,763) in 1977, -than Twentynine Palms (8,664). Joshua Tree had almost 3,000 population in 1977.

Population Projections

Table 3 presents data on population, housing and population projections by planning districts. These data were provided as preliminary by the San Bernardino County Planning Department.

It is noted the April, 1977, population shown in Table 3 is identical to the population shown for the High Desert in Table 2. The next column of Table 3 gives the estimated dwelling units in the High Desert area in April, 1977, as a total of 18,349.

The populations shown in the projections for the marine base are almost constant, actually a small decline of about 100 people.

The population is expected to increase by 1,530 between 1977 and 1980 -from 28,870 to 30,400. In the next five years from 1980 to 1985, the population is projected to increase only 752 people - from 30,400 to 31,152.

The next two five-year increments of time are projected to increase populations by 1,368 and 1,112 respectively. The total projected growth from 1977 to 1995 is 4,762 people in the High Desert, resulting in an estimated projected population in 1995 of 33,632 people.

As of August 1, 1977, the San Bernardino County Planning Department confirmed the projections shown in Table 3. Nevertheless, the marine base reports expecting 1,000 additional service personnel assigned to the base in the Fall, 1977. Including families this could increase the population of the High Desert by approximately 4,000 people.

7

TABLE 2

GENERAL POPULATION COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

LOH DESERT HIGH DESERT

Location Population (1976) Location Population (1977)

Lm<er Valley 44,048 Norongo Valley 11,763 (Indian Hells, (Also includes: Indio, Cathedral Yucca Valley, City, Rancho Landers, and Nirage, Coachella) Pioneer town)

Palm Springs 33,093 Twentynine Palms 8,664

Palm Desert 30,830 Narine Corp Base

Desert Hot Springs 8,797 29 Palms 5,489

Chuckwalla 5,599 Joshua Tree 2,954

TOTAL 122,367 TOTAL 28,870

PERCENT 81% PERCENT 19%

8

-0

POPULATION PLANNING DISTRICT/ SPECIAL CENSUS

CENSUS TRACT APRIL, 1975

104.01 29 Palms 8,423

104.02 29 Palms, u.s. Marine Corps Base 5,297

104.03 Joshua Tree 2,847

104.04 Morongo/ Yucca Valley 11,364

Total 27,931

TABLE 3

SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PLA.'1NING DP"",ARTMENT 1977 ESTIMATE OF POPULATION AND HOUSING/POPULATION PROJECTIONS TO 1995

BY CENSUS TRACT AND PLA.~ING DISTRICT - PRELIMINARY COPY

DWELLING ESTIMATED ESTIMATED POPULATION POPULATION UNITS POPULATION DWELLING UNITS PROJECTION PROJECTION

APRIL, 1975 APRIL, 1977 APRIL, 1977 1980 1985

6,516 8,664 6~716 9,150 9,495

844 5,489 871 5,776* 5,600*-

2,173 2,954 2,238 3,101 3,218

8,275 11,763 8,524 12,373 12,839

17,808 28,870 18,349 30,400 31,152

POPULATION POPULATION PROJECTION PROJECTION

1990 1995

9,777 10,032

5,480* 5,382*

3,779 4,171

13,484 14,047

32,520 33,632

*Population of the U. S. Marines is likely to be increased in fall, 1977, by 1,000 marines. This is estimated to increase the population in the High Desert by about 4,000 people.

STUDENT ATTENDANCE

Enrollment

Table 4 gives the enrollment figures for the High Desert by semesters from the fall, 1969, through spring, 1977. The enrollments have grown from 665 students to 2,403. The programs for the last three years, 1974-1977 include the students from the marine corps, so they are somewhat inflated in comparison with prior enrollments.

The military services have discontinued the high school graduation (PREP) program, as well as severely restricting the benefits of the GI Bill. These changes may affect enrollments from the marine base in the community college programs.

Graduates

Table 5 presents numbers of total graduates by years from the High Desert attendance centers. Six students graduated in 1971 and 89 graduated in

'1977. The high number was 100 graduates in 1976.

The average age of graduates for the last three years has been in the mid 30's. That indicates that the High Desert Campus has been serving a mature student body.

It is also noted in the last column in Table 5 that about half of the graduating students started college earlier at another college and transferred to the College of the Desert.

Table 6 shows the major field of study for the graduates of the High Desert area for the last three years, 1975-1977. The table also indicates whether the program was transfer or occupational. The percentages of graduafes by major field are also given. The number of. graduates has about doubled from 1975 when 49 degrees were issued, to 1977 when 93 degrees were earned.

In round numbers, the High Desert can be thought of as having 100 graduates from community college each year and about two-third's of these graduates major in transfer subjects.

Courses Offered

To give a perspective on program offerings by College of the Desert in the High Desert area, Table 7 is presented. This report is not designed to assess or evaluate any program aspects for College of the Desert. Table 7 is given only to represent the level of student interest in the High Desert area to help evaluate the need for a physical plant to house the programs offered.

Each regular semester the college operates about 2.25 course sections in the High Desert. The largest departmental offerings are in Art, Business, Technology, English, and Social Science. The Learning Lab classes at the marine base were large when the PREP program was at its peak.

10

TABLE 4

HIGH DESERT STUDENT ENROLLMENTS BY SEMESTER COACHELLA VALLEY CO~~ruNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

SEMESTER HIGH DESERT ENROLLMENT

Fall, 1969 665 Spring, 1970 1,000

Fall, 1970 946 Spring, 1971 875

Fall, 1971 1,061 Spring, 1972 .1,110

Fall, 1972 978 Spring, 1973 1,054

Fall, 1973 1,096 Spring, 1974 1,226

Fall, 1974 *1,898 Spring, 1975 *2,547

Fall, 1975 **2,652 Spring, 1976 **2,829

Fall, 1976 **2,356 Spring, 1977 **2,403

* Figures include marine corps students in special programs.

** Figures include marine corps students in special programs and students enrolled in Learning Lab who were formerly enrolled in PREP.

11

Year

1971

1972

1973

1974

1975

1976

1977

TABLE 5

COMMUNITY COLLEGE GRADUATES FRON HIGH DESERT AREA COACHELLA VALLEY CO~lMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, 1971-1977

Number of Graduates Average Age Transferred from High Desert Area of Graduate Other Colleges

6 Not Available Not Available




49 34 years 58%

100 35.5 years 46%

89 37 years 55% I

12

f-' W

TABLE 6

HIGH DESERT GRADUATES BY MAJORS COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, 1975-1977

Graduates - Number and Percent

1975 1976 Major Field Transfer Occupational Transfer Occupational Transfer

Business I Administration 10 (20%) 4 (4%) 7 (7%) 7 (8%)

Electronics 2 (4%) 2 (4%) 4 (4%) 18 (17%) 8 (9%)

General Business 8 (16%) 5 (5%) I 16 (15%) 5 (5%)

I Law Enforcement 1 (2%) 3 (6%) 2 (2%) 8 (8%) 2 (2%) I , Liberal Studies 21 (43%) 27 (26%) 31 (33%)

Real Estate 3 (3%) 1 (1%)

Refrigeration and Air Conditioning 1 (1%)

Science (Fire) 1 (2%) 1 (1%) 3 (3%) 1 (1%)

Science (Secre-tarial) 2 (2%)

Miscellaneous 1 (2%) 4 (4%) 2 (2%)

Sub-Totals/Degrees 34 (69%) 15 (31%) 43 (41%) I

61 (59%) 58 (62%)

Total Degrees* 49 104

*Number of degrees granted exceeds number of graduates. Some graduates earn more than one degree.

1977 Occupational

2 (2%)

10 (11%)

10 (11%)

5 (5%)

1 (1%)

4 (4%)

3 (3%)

.

I 35 (38%)

93

Department

Agriculture Art Crafts Business Community

Education Community

Services Developmental

Education Technology Education English Fire Science Foreign

Languages Health-PE Home Economics Law Enforce-

ment Nathematics Husic Nursing Bio-Physical

Science Social Science Spp.cia1

Education Learning

Resources Learning Lab (29 Palms) Learning Lab (Yucca Valley)

TABLE 7

COURSES OFFERED BY DEPARTHENTS - HIGH DESERT COACHELLA VALLEY CONHUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, 1975-1977

Number of Courses Offered - High Desert

-Spring Summer Fall Spring Summer Fall Spring

1975. 1975 1975 1976 1976 1976 1977

1 2 3 4 3 18 1 20 29 3 43 33

1 4 3 6 6 33 9 34 41 5 34 32

7 8 11 1 l3 8

1

2 29 6 27 27 4 20 27

3 5 17 4 23 31 5 20 19

5 5 7 5 4

4 3 3 3 4 7 1 9 l3 1 3 4 2 5 5

3 4 5 4 3 5 2 4 8 2 8 9 5 11 11 11 7 4 4 2 2 3

10 1 9 12 2 10 10 23 6 19 26 6 23 28

2 2 6 7 3

16 3

32 32 16 16 28

Basic Education 2 2 2 2 2 Hotel

Hanagement 1 I

Totals 210 32 231 279 29 234 240

,

14

Summer Fall 1977 1977

3 3 30

3 6 35

4

5 25 4

4 18 5

4 1 3

1

5 2 7

7 7

1 9 5 30

1 3

11

11 2

28 227

The faculty and administration assigned to the High Desert programs are sho,;u in Table8. The full-time teaching equivalents in teaching, administration and counselor positions are given. The full-time equivalent teaching positions "ere about 31 in the fall semester and about 35 in the spring semester. Two administrators and two counselors were employed •.

In addition to the certificated employees, the college employed 10.0 full-time classified employees. In summary, the complete staffing for the High Desert program "as approximately as fo110"s:

Administrators 2.0

Counselors 2.0

Teachers 33.0

Sub-total 3 7 • 0 Full-time

Classified

Clerical 4.5

Secre tary Aide 2.0

Instructional Aide 2.5

Custodian 1.0

Sub-total 10.0 Full-time

Total (All Employees) 47.0 Full-time

Average Daily Attendance (A.D.A.)

As of June 30, 1977, computer attendance data were analyzed to determine the A.D.A. generated by the High Desert portion of the Coachella Valley Community College District. Table 9 displays the information for 1976-77 school year first period attendance. (Spring semester, 1977)

The total district, both Lo" and High Deserts, generated 3,837 A.D.A. in this report. The second period attendance report was 4,266 A.D.A. This combines the A.D.A. of full-term,. short-term and ungraded hours of attendance. The bulk of this first period A.D.A., about 3,490 A.D.A., was from full-term, graded students.

The High Desert students alone produced about 617 A.D.A. during the year. This "as 16.1% of the districts attendance.

15

TABLE 8

FULL-TIME TEACHING EQUIVALENTS BY SEMESTER - HIGH DESERT COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, 1975-1976

Fall Semester 1975 Spring Semester 1975

Full-Time Full-Time Position Eauivalents Position Equivalents

~.entynine Palms 24.86 ~entynine Palms 28.33

Yucca Valley 6.86 Yucca Valley 7.93

Total: 31. 72 Total: 36.26 ~

Administrators 2.00 Administrators 2.00

Counselors 2.00 Counselors 2.00

Fall Semester 1976 Spring Semester 1976

Full-Time Full-Time Position Equivalents Position Equivalents

Twentynine Palms 25.93 Twentynine Palms 29.86

Yucca Valley 5.00 Yucca Valley 4.13

Total: 30~93 Total: 33.99

Administrators 2.00 Administrators 2.00

Counselors 2.00 Counselors 1.50

16

TABLE 9

A.D.A. - TOTAL DISTRICT AND HIGH DESERT COACHELLA VALLEY CO~IDNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, 1976-1977

FIRST CENSUS REPORT, SPRING, 1977

High Desert Factors Total District High Desert % of Total

Hours 57,458.5 8,555.5 14.9%

Full Term Units 42,275.0 6,963. 16.5%

Graded People 7,111. 1,380. 19.4%

A.D.A. 3,489.646 519.604 14.9%

Hours 71,588.4 27,668.4 38.6%

Short Term Units 3,718.0 1,483.0 39.9%

Graded People 2,125. 522. 24.6%

A.D.A. 136.359 52.702 38.6%

Ungraded Hours 110,665.5 23,450.1 21.2%

Units 6,197.0 1,906.0 30.8%

People 3,939. 798. 20.3%

A.D.A. 210.791 44.667 21.2%

TOTAL A.D.A. 3,836.796 616.973 16.1%

17

A further analysis of the High Desert attendance revealed that 60 A.D.A (60 of th~ 617 A.D.A.), carne from the marine corps attendance. This was approximately 10% of the High Desert attendance.

Projections of A.D.A.

Estimates of future A.D.A. for the High Desert portion of Coachella Valley Community College District ·can be made if several assumptions are adopted. First, it was assumed that population increases in the area would attend college classes in the same ratio as existing population. Second, it \qas assumed that the opportunities for college attendance in the future would be at least as accessible as in the past. Third, it was assumed that the construction of a college facility in the High Desert \qould increase the attendance by 10%. Fourth, and last, it was assumed that there would be no new constraining or prohibiting state laws or regulations on community college attendance.

Table 10 gives projections of A.D.A. for the High Desert portion of Coachella Valley Community College District. The columns from the table listing estimated populations are from a report of the San Bernardino County Planning Department. The estimated A.D.A. columns are based on the projections based on 1977 data. The High Desert in 1977, generated one A.D.A. for each 42 units of population, excluding the marine base (23,381 -I-

557 = 42).

The Low Desert generated one A.D.A. for each 38 units of population (122,367 "I- 3,220 = 38) in 1977. This is about 10% difference bet\qeen the High Desert and Low Desert \qith the Low Desert having the better ratio. Experience has indicated at other community colleges that opening a second campus normally produces at least 10% increased attendance from the area served·by the college.

The marine base A.D.A. was held constant in Table 10 since the variations in population were so minor. This could change if ne\q Federal programs in education are approved for military personnel or new troops arrive.

The short term (by 1980) A.D.A. projection for the High Desert indicates an increase of only 29 A.D.A. from the present level. The A.D.A. was 617 in 1977, and is projected to 646 in 1980. The A.D.A. is projected to increase only 22 more units between 1980 and 1985 - from 646 to 668.

Table 11 estimates the A.D.A. that could occur in the High Desert with the operation of a new college campus in the area. The A.D.A. 's projected from the population figures in Table 10 are increased by 10% which results in 711 A.D.A. in 1980. The estimated A.D.A.'s are 735 in 1985 and about 800 in 1995.

If the 1,000 additional marines are stationed in the High Desert and are accompanied by 3,000 family and support people, the additional A.D.A. generated could be about 80. This is based on about 10 A.D.A. for the marines and about 70 A.D.A. for the 3,000 additional people.

18

t-'

'"

High Desert Year Pop. (Est.)*

1977 28,870 (Est.)

1980 30,400

1985 31,152

1990 32,520

1995 33,363

TABLE 10

PROJECTED A.D.A. - HIGH DESERT COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

High Desert High Desert

Marine Base Population A.D.A.

Exclud. Narine Exclud. tlarine Pop. (Est.)* Base (Est.)* Base (Est.)*

5,489 23,381 557

5,776 24,624 586

5,600 25,552 608

5,480 27,040 644

5,382 27,981 666

Total Marine Base High Desert

A.D.A. (Est. ) A.D.A. (Fost.)

60 617

60 ** 646

60 ** 668

60 ** 704

60 ** 726 .

*Population estimates provided by San Bernardino County Planning Department, July, 1977. These figures are expected to change in fall, 1977 by 1,000 additional marines.

**":he A.D.A. generated by marine base additional personnel is estimated at 80. Therefore, the totals may need to be increased by 80 A.D.A.

Year

1977

1980

1985

1990

1995

TABLE 11

ADDITIONAL A.D.A. WITH NEW COLLEGE - HIGH DESERT COACHELLA VALLEY CO~llirnNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

Total Projected Projected A.D.A. Additional A.D.A. A.D.A. with New Campus

High Desert New Campus High Desert

617 -- --646 65 711*

668 67 735*

704 70 774*

726 73 799*

*These totals may be increased by 80 A.D.A. when the new marines arrive in fall, 1977.

20

ASSESSED VALUATION

Comparative Data on Assessed Valuation

Table 12 shows a comparison of assessed valuation for the High Desert and Low Desert, as well as the total Coachella Valley Community College District. A ten-year history, from 1967-68 to 1976-77 is listed.

The High Desert average in 1977-78 is more and just over 12% of the district average. Desert has averaged about 13% of the total

21

than one hundred million dollars Over the ten years, the High

district's assessed valuation.

N N

YEAR

1967-1968

1968-1969

1969-1970

1970-1971

1971-1972

1972-1973

1973-1974

1974-1975

1975-1976

1976-1977

1977-1978*

*Estimate

TABLE 12

COMPARATIVE DATA REGARDING ASSESSED VALUATION COACHELLA VALLEY COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

1967-1968 - 1976-1977

HIGH DESERT LOW DESERT AVERAGE % OF DIST. AVERAGE % OF DIST.

$ 51,802,390. 12.6 $360,091,430. 87.4

54,985,460. 12.7 376,160,285. 87.3

61,401,170. 13.8 382,546,570. 86.2

61,597,430. 13.3 400,207,868. 86.7

67,654,610. 13.9 419,634,940. 86.1

73,770,120. 13.9 449,677,945. 86.1

78,943,010. 13.6 500,297,816. 86.4

83,598,070. 13.1 554,832,597. 86.9

89,149,070. 12.7 610,336,856. 87.3

91,962,950. 12.4 650,461,145. 87.6

102,998,504. 12.1 747,811,682. 87.9

.

TOTAL DISTRICT - AVERAGE

$411,893,820.

431,145,745.

443,947,740.

461,805,298.

487,289,550.

522,448,065.

579,240,826.

638,430,667.

699,485,926.

742,424,095.

850,810,186.

TAX RATES

General Purpose Tax Rate

The Coachella Valley Community College District has levied a>general purpose tax rate of $0.891 for the last two years - 1975-76 and 1976-77. This has been less than the maximum permissible tax rate for the district by about $0.06 per $100 of assessed valuation. In 1977-78, the maximum permissible tax rate ,.,as revised for College of the Desert, but the rate of $0.891 is still almost $0.06 below the nex maximum tax rate. The district also levied a bond interest and redemption tax in 1976-77 of $0.083, making a total tax of $0.974. The bond rate for 1977-78 is estimated to reduce ben,een 1.5 and 2.0 cents. The total tax rate for 1977-78 would be about $0.957.

Table 13 gives an approximation of tax income received by Coachella Valley Community College District from property taxes from 1967-68 through 1976-77 from the High Desert portion of the district. This portion is the property in San Bernardino County and in the Coachella Valley Community College Dis tric t.

The data in Table 13 are reasonably accurate, but are not exact because of delinquent taxes, prior-years taxes and varying tax rates for second and unsecured averages. Nevertheless, the figures on tax income should be considered quite close to reality.

The income anticipated in 1977-78 from the High Desert area exceeds $1,000,000. The High Desert portion of the district has paid about $5 1/4 million in property taxes from 1967-1977. After 1977-78, the total will be abou t $6 1/4 million.

If the A.D.A. approximates 620 in the High Desert in 1977-78, this would mean that the High Desert pays about $1,620 per A.D.A. in tax support. The state support per A.D.A. averages about $275 for the Coachella Valley Community College District. Therefore, the district ,wuld have about $1,895 per pupil or per A.D.A. from the High Desert area. The district spent an average of $1,636 per pupil in 1975-76 and approximately $1,750 per pupil in 1976-77.

The High Desert is paying its way in expenditures for the district. Education of pupils in the High Desert is not being subsidized by taxpayers in the LDI' Desert in Coachella Valley Community College District. In fact, the balance of income and expenditures for the High Desert portion of the district is about equal.

Tax Rate for 1977-78

If the tax rate for the Coachella Valley Community College District were maintained at $0.891 for 1977-78, the projected income for the year would provide approximately $500,000 more than the preliminary budget that was adopted. The increase in revenue results from the 15% upl<ard change in assessed valuation for the district. The comparison in computations is as follol<s:

23

Preliminary Publication Budget Budget Increase

Unsecured A.V. $ 829,397. $ 914,384. $ 84,897.

Secured A.V. 5,664,731. 6,079,332. 414,601.

Totals $6,494,128. $6,993,716. $499,588.

The difference between the preliminary budget and the publication budget in terms of tax income is projected to be a $499,588 increase. This is based on a 92% collection and a tax rate that is the same as 1975-1976 and 1976-1977.

This one-half million dollars could be placed in a special reserve account and ear-marked for capital improvement programs. It is probable that the district could add equivalent amounts to the special reserve account over the next ruo years. This would enable the dis trict to plan and begin construction on physical facilities in the High Desert to meet special identified educational program needs.

24

Year

1967-1968

1968-1969

1969-1970

1970-1971

1971-1972

1972-1973

1973-1974

1974-1975

1975-1976

1976-1977

1977-1978*

TABLE 13

ESTIMATED TAX INCOME - HIGH DESERT COACHELLA VALLEY COM}ruNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT

1967-1968 - 1976-1977

Total Average S an Bernardino Estimated

County Tax Rate Tax Income

$ 51,082,390. $ .5269 $ 269,153.

54,985,460. .5659 311,163.

61,401,170. .6190 380,073.

61,597,430. .6210 382,520.

67,654,610. .6710 453,962.

72,770,120. .6710 488,288.

78,943,010. .7180 566,811.

83,598,070. . 7620 637,017 .

89,149,070. . 9630 858,506 •

91,962,950. .9740 895,719.

102,998,504. .9740 1,003,205.

*Estimate for 1977-1978.

25

CONPARATlVE DATA FRON OTHER COHNUNITY COLLEGES

Introduction

It was determined that data and experience of other community colleges would help decide about a new college for the High Desert. The colleges selected were those of similar size and in the same geographical section of the state. San Bernardino County has two community college districts fitting these limitations. They are Barstow and Victor Valley. San Bernardino Community College has built a second campus in Redlands/Yucaipa. Crafton Hills Community College was contacted for information.

Riverside County has two community college districts that were used for comparison purposes. They are Nt. San Jacinto and Palo Verde. The other community college districts were much larger in terms of enrollment than the High Desert area enrollment.

Table 14 shows selected comparative data for these college districts. If the High Desert was a new campus and had about 617 A.D.A., it would be considerably smaller than the one-campus colleges except the one in Blythe - Palo Verde. Crafton Hills College, the second campus of San Bernardino Community College District, enrolls about 1,700 full-time day students and 1,700 night students. The Crafton Hills College cost about $14,000,000 for site Iwrk, construction, equipment and landscaping. This is a high cost because of excessive site work required, but a complete community college, even a small one, could cost between 5 and 10 million dollars.

26

TABLE 14

SELECTED COHPARATIVE DATA - COHHUNITY COLLEGES

General Total Expenditure Purpose Tax

A.D.A. A.V./A.D.A. Per A.D.A. Rate District 1975-1976 1975-1976 1974-1975 1975-1976 1976-1977

Barstow 1,184 $108,828. $1,614. $2,164. $1. 2 701

Victor Valley 2,221 115,248. 1,454. 1,467. 0.9360

Ht. San Jacinto 1,449 257,342. 1,589. 1,865. 0.503

Palo Verde 410 129,226. 1,985. 1,945. 0.646

Coachella V1y. Corom. College 4,419 157,794. 1,527. 1,636. 0.891

High Desert* 617 144,500. 1,527. 1,636. 0.891

*Treatment of High Desert as a separate college district for purpose of comparison.

27

LEGAL AND POLICY CONSIDERATIONS

Responsibility of Board of Trustees

The Board of Trustees of Coachella Valley Community College District has certain legal constraints in the formation of a new college as defined in the California Education Code and California Administrative Code, Title 5.

Sections 51800 and 51801 of Title 5 were amended in March, 1977, to read that a community college board of trustees planning the formation of a new college or a nel., educational center shall employ standards prescribed and that the plans for new colleges and new educational centers shall be reviewed by the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges.

The avo complete sections of Title 5 follm.,:

Chapter 10. New Colleges and Educational Centers

51800. Responsibilities of Boards of Trustees. (a) A community college board of trustees planning the formation of a new college as defined in Section 5l082(a) of these regulations to be operated under the jurisdiction of the district, shall, as required by Section 22650 of the Education Code, employ the standards contained in Sections 51804, 51806 and 51808 of this chapter.

(b) A community college board of trustees planning the formation of a new educational center, as defined in Section 5lS02(b) of these regulations, to be operated under the jurisdiction of the district, shall employ the standards contained in Sections 5lS04, 51806 and 51808 of this chapter.

NOTE: Authority cited for Chapter 10 (Section S1800-5l808, not consecutive): Sections 193, 197 and 22650, Education Code. Reference: Sections 199, 200.4, lSOOl and 22650, Education Code.

History: 1. New Chapter 10 (Sections 5lS00-5l808, not consecu,... tive) filed 6-27-7S; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 75, No. 26).

2. Amendment filed 3-lS-77; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 77, No. 12).

51801. Responsibilities of Board of Governors. The Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges shall review plans for new colleges and new educational centers to be operated under the jurisdiction of a community college district. The Board of Governors review shall employ the standards contained in Sections SlS04, 5lS06 and 51808 of this chapter.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 193, 197 and 22650, Education Code. Reference: Sections 199, 200.4, lSOOl and 22650, Education Code.

History: 1. New section filed 3-18-77; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Regis ter 77 '. No. 12).

28

Chapter 10 was added to the California Administrative Code, Title 5, in June 1975, and amended in March, 1977. Section 51802 adds definitions for "college" and "educational centers." That section reads:

51802. Definitions (a) College. As used in this chapter, "college" means a degree-granting institution intended to provide instruction through the second year of college, including but not limited" to one or more of the following categories: (1) standard collegiate courses for transfer to higher institutions; (2) vocational and technical fields leading to employment; or (3) general or liberal arts courses and for which institution the district intends to obtain accredi.ta tion.

(b) Educational Center. As used in this chapter, "educational center" means a postsecondary operation established and administered by an existing college or district at a location away from the campus of the parent institution. An educational center is an operation planned to continue for three or more years and expected to enroll over 300 ADA by the third year of operation. The center typically has an on-site administrator and may offer programs leading to certificates and/or degrees conferred by the parent ins ti tu tion.

History: 1. Amendment filed 3-18-77; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 77, No. 12).

The Chancellor's Office and the Board of bilities in relation to establishing new centers for community college districts. Section 51803:

Governors have certain responsicolleges and new educational These are enumerated in Title 5,

51803. Responsibilities of the Chancellor's Office, Community College Districts and the Board of Governors. (a) The Chancellor's Office shall maintain an inventory of all off-campus programs and facilities in the community colleges. This inventory shall be updated annually, and shall be distributed to each community college district and the Postsecondary Education Commission for use in planning activities.

(b) The Chancellor's Office shall develop procedures to identify and reviel< plans for new colleges and nel< educational centers lVithin the district's Five-Year Academic and Capital Outlay Mas ter Plans.

(c) Community college districts shall prepare and submit to the Chancellor's Office proposals for new colleges and new educational centers as defined in this chapter. These proposals should contain at least the follolVing elements: (1) Assessment of Needs and Preferences (Section 51804), (2) Definition of Objectives (Section 51806), and (3) Analysis of Alternative Delivery Systems (Section 51808) .

(d) The Chanc"ellor' s Of fice shall review each proposed new college and new educational center and shall recommend approval or disapproval to the Board of Governors. The Chancellor's Office analysis of these proposals shall stress inter-district concerns and evaluation of the delivery system proposed.

29

I

(e) The Board of Governors shall approve or disapprove each nm, college or educational center and transmit its findings to the community college district initiating the proposal and to the California Postsecondary Education Commission.

NOTE: Authority cited: Sections 193, 197 and 25510, Education Code. Reference: Sections 199, 200.4, 15001 and 22650, Education Code.

History: 1. New section filed 3-18-77; effective thirtieth day thereafter (Register 77, No. 12).

The application of these four sections (51800-51803) to the Coachella Valley Community College District likely means that the district would need to comply if plans' were developed for a new college in the High Desert. Further application of the sections would indicate that the on-going educational program that has been operating in the High Desert at the college level since fall, 1969, and presently has more than double the minimum of 300 A.D.A. specified would be defined as an educational center. But most importantly, the High Desert program would not be defined as a new educational center. Therefore, sections 51800-51803 would be presumed to be non-applicable to the continued operation of the educational center in the High Desert. The High Desert planned program was not submitted for review when it was begun, nor did the policy requiring review exist at that time.

Standards Adopted for New Colleges and New Educational Centers

Three sections of Title 5 contain standards that have been adopted for proposed new colleges or new educational centers. Section 51804 deals with assessment of needs and preferences; Section 51806 covers identification of objectives; and Section 51808 identifies analysis of alternative delivery systems. These sections follow: •

51804. Assessment of Needs and Preferences. (a) The community area and characteristics of individuals to be served should be identified adeq ua tely •

(b) Projections of potential enrollment demand in the service area should demonstrate significant unmet need, taking into account plans of nearby secondary and postsecondary institutions.

(c) Significant community support should be evident and possible community opposition should be identified.

(d) Preferences for community college programs and services on the part of individuals in the service area should be identified.

(e) Insofar as possible, present and future labor market requirements should be identified for the proposed service area', a broader adjacent region, and the state.

30

(f) Projected labor market requirements and community program preferences should be reconciled, if possible.


51806. Identification of Objectives. (a) Proposed college or educational center programs and services should be directed to the identified educational needs and preferences of the communi·ty to be served.

(b) Objectives of the proposed programs and services should be sufficiently specific that the district board may evaluate the success with which needs and preferences are met.


51808. Analysis of Alternative Delivery Systems. (a) The proposed operation should be the most effective and equitable of feasible delivery system alternatives for providing intended programs and services.

(b) Criteria for selecting the proposed delivery system should include:

(1) accessibility of programs and services to individuals in the service area,

(2) content and quality of programs and services, and

(3) cost of programs and services.

(c) Depending on the delivery system proposed, alternatives for providing the proposed programs and services should include, but need not be limited to:

(1) increased utilization of existing district resources,

(2) forming a new college, educational center, and/or outreach locations, and

(3) use of media such as television, computer-assisted instruction or programmed learning packages.

Alternative delivery systems considered should be adequately described, generally mutually exclusive, and limited to a manageable number to facilitate analysis and review.

(d) Proposed sources of funding for needed resources should be identified for both short and long-term operations.


31

It should be noted that major portions of the standards outlined in Title 5 are concerned with educational programs, needs of students, labor market potential, content and quality, and costs. These topics are beyond the scope of this report, but would need to be developed if a second campus were planned for the High Desert.

Revie,., by Chancellor's Office and Board of Governors

As of July 7, 1977, the Chancellor's Office (Specialist in F.acilities Planning and Utilization) indicated that the procedures required by Title 5, Section 51803 are being developed. They are not ready yet for distribution.

Part of such review includes a site review. An outline for a site review is included in Appendix A. The site owned by College of the Desert in the High Desert has already been through a site review.but any other site, if one were chosen, would be required to be reviewed.

Section 5l803(e) indicates that the Board of Governors for California Community Colleges shall approve or disapprove each new college or educational center and transmit its findings to the community college district initiating the proposal and to the California Postsecondary Education Commission.

Review by the California Postsecondary Education Commission

The California legislature established the California Postsecondary Education Commission and directed the Commission to advise the Governor and the legislature concerning the need for and location of new institutions and campuses of public higher education. The legislature stated its intent that California Community Colleges shall not receive state funds for acql.Iisition of sites or c-onstruction of new institutions, branches, or off-campus centers unless recommended by the Commission.

Guidelines and procedures were developed and adopted by the Commission that assume that all proposals for new campuses and off-campus centers, regardless of the source of funding, "'ill be submitted for Commission review. The Commission emphasizes, however, that the Commission will be providing advice only and not a recommendation on these proposals by community college districts ",hich involve solely local funding.

Since Coachella Valley Community College District ",ould not be utilizing state funding for sites or buildings, the review by the California Postsecondary Education Commission would be required, but would be advisory to the Board of Trustees and administrators of the district.

The criteria used by the Commission and its staff to evaluate proposals for new campuses and off-campus centers are included in a report entitled, The Commission's Role in the Review of Proposals for New Campuses and Off-Campus Centers - Guidelines and Procedures, April, 1975. Proposals submi tted for review should meet as many of the cri teria as possible. These criteria are:

32

CRITERIA FOR REVIElo/ING NEW CAHPUSES

1. Enrollment projections should be sufficient to justify the establishment of the campus.

2. Alternatives to establishing a campus should be considered.

3. Other segments, institutions, and the community in .. hich the campus is to be located should be consulted during the planning process for the ne .. campus.

4. The proposed campus should be located to serve the maximum number of persons in the most effective manner.

5. State .. ide enrollment projected for the University of California should exceed the planned enrollment capacity of existing University campuses.

6. Projected state .. ide enrollment demand on the California State University and Colleges should exceed the planned enrollment capacity of existing State University and Colleges unless there are compelling regional needs.

7. Projected enrollment demand on a community college district should exceed the planned enrollment capacity of existing district campuses.

8. The establishment of a ne .. University of California or California State University and Colleges campus should take into consideration existing and projected enrollments in surrounding institutions.

9. The establishment of a ne .. community college campus should not reduce existing and projected enrollments in adjacent community. colleges to a level that .. ould damage their economy of operation, or create excess enrollment capacity, at these institutions, or lead to an unnecessary duplication of programs.

10. Enrollments projected for community college campuses should be .. ithin a reasonable commuting time of the campus, and should exceed the minimum size for a community college district established by legislation (1,000 units of average daily attendance tHo years after opening).

11. Programs proposed for a ne .. community college campus should be designed to meet demonstrated needs of the community.

12. The campus should facilitate access for the economically, educationally, and socially disadvantaged.

CRITERIA FOR REVIElo/ING NEW OFF-CAHPUS CENTERS

1. Programs to be offered at the proposed center should be designed to meet demonstrated needs of the community in which the off-campus center is to be located.

33

2. The off-campus center should not lead to an unnecessary duplication of programs.

3. Enrollments projected for the off-campus center should be sufficient to justify its establishment and be within a reasonable commuting time.

4. The establishment of University and State University and Colleges off-campus centers should take into consideration existing and projected enrollments in adjacent institutions.

5. The establishment of a community college off-campus center should not reduce existing and projected enrollments in adjacent community colleges to a level that would damage their economy of operation, or create excess enrollment capacity, at these institutions.

6. Alternatives to establishing an off-campus center should be considered with respect to cost and benefit.

7. Other segments and adjacent institutions should be consulted during the planning process of the off-campus center.

8. The proposed off-campus center should be located to serve the maximum number of persons in the most effective manner.

34

FINDINGS AND. CONCLUSIONS

Analysis of Data

From the data presented previously in this report, several findings and conclusions may be drawn. These are summarized as follows:

1. Coachella Valley Community College District is geographically very large ',ith 13% of the district territory in San Bernardino County.

2. Three unsuccessful bond and tax elections have been conducted in the college district in recent years. The elections would have provided funds for a High Desert Campus, but failed in that portion of the district, as well as in the Low Desert.

3. The college district has purchased a potential site (120 acres). The site has pro's and con's. The most favorable point is public acceptance, being about half-way between centers of population. The most unfavorable factor is the site topography, resulting in very high potential development costs.

4. The district is operating classes in leased facilities in the High Desert. The annual cost of $22,800 is about $1,000 per classroom per year.

5. The district leases approximately 23,000 square feet of building space in the High Desert. This is the equivalent of about 24 or 25 classrooms.

6. The population estimate for Coachella Valley Community College District in 1977 is 151,237. This is divided into 122,367 population in the Low Desert and 28,870 population in High Desert.

7. The population percentage in 1977 was 19% in the High Desert and 81% in the Low Desert.

8. The High Desert population is projected to grow by 1,530 people from 1977 to 1980. The population would then be 30,400 in 1980.

9. There is very little projected population grm.,th from 1980 to 1985 in the High Desert, only 752 population increase in five years. The population is projected to be 31,152 in 1985.

10. The population is projected to be 32,520 in 1990 and 33,632 in 1995 in the High Desert.

11. Based on these projections, the High Desert population is not extected to increase dramatically or rapidly. An exception could be in fall, 1977, when the marine base expec ts to expand by 1,000 marines plus 3,000 family members and other support people.

12. The student enrollments in the High Desert have increased from 665 students in 1969, to 2,403 in 1977.

13. Six students living in the High Desert graduated from community college in 1971; 89 students graduated in 1977.·

35

14. About 2/3 of the High Desert graduates major in transfer subjects; 1/3 in vocational.

15. College of the Desert operates about 225 course sections each semes ter in the High Desert.

16. The college employs approximately the equivalent of thirty-three full-time teaching positions and four administrative and counseling positions in the High Desert.

17. The college employs about the equivalent of ten full-time classified positions in the High Desert.

18. In 1976-77, the Community College generated 3,837 A.D.A. in the first period report. Of this, 617 A.D.A. was from the High Desert. The High Desert A.D.A. was 16.1% of the total district attendance.

19. Of the High Desert A.D.A., 60 A.D.A. of the 617 A.D.A. was from the marine corps base.

20. A.D.A. projections for the High Desert without a new college are 646 in 1980; 668 in 1985; 704 in 1990; and 726 in 1995. These projections should be increased by about 80 A.D.A., if the marine base expands in fall, 1977.

21. Projections of A.D.A. for the High Desert with a new college are 10% higher than without a college. The projections are 711 A.D.A. in 1980; 735 A.D.A. in 1985; 774 A.D.A. in 1990; and 799 A.D.A. in 1995. These projections, also, should be increased by about 80 A.D.A., if the marine base expands in fall, 1977.

22. The criterion of the Postsecondary Commission for a new community college campus is a minimum of 1,000 A.D.A. within two years after opening.

23. The assessed valuation in the High Desert portion of the district is estimated more than $100,000,000 in 1977-78. just over 12% of the assessed valuation of the district.

college This is

24. The estimated tax receipts from the High Desert in the Coachella Valley Community College District for 1977-78 are expected to slightly exceed $1,000,000.

25. The High Desert is paying its way in educating the pupils from the area in the college district.

26. The Coachella Valley Community College District can raise about $500,000 in 1977-78 from tax sources without increasing tax rates. The general purpose tax rate 1<auld remain at $0.891 - the same level as for the last two years.

27. A special reserve fund for capital outlay can be established that 1<Quld be $500,000 for 1977-78 and increased by about the same amounts in 1978-79 and 1979-80.

36

28. Hhen comparing a High Desert college campus with existing small community colleges, only Palo Verde College would be smaller. All others, Barstow, Victor Valley, Crafton Hills, and Ht. San Jacinto would be about twice as large or larger.

29. If the High Desert had sufficient A.D.A. for a college (1,000 A.D.A.), the A.V./A.D.A. using 1977-78 assessed valuation would be $100,000. The California state A.V./A.D.A. for community colleges is approximately $135,000.

30. Formation of a new college or a new educational center requires certain standards be met and review and approval by the Chancellor's Office, Board of Governors, and California Postsecondary Education Commission.

31. College of the Desert may continue to operate the off-campus programs in the High Desert without reviews by these agencies since those programs are not new.

32. Establishing a new college in the High Desert would require reviews by the Chancellor's Office, Board of Governors, and Postsecondary Education Commission.

33. Guidelines and criteria for the reviews have been published by the· Commission, but those from the Chancellor's Office and Board of Governors are in the process of development.

34. The guidelines relative to enrollment and A.D.A. would be difficult for a new college in the High Desert to meet. (1,000 units of average daily attendance tlqO years after opening.)

35. Other criteria established for a new college such as (1) excess enrollment over the planned enrollment capacity of the existing campus; and (2) alternatives to establishing a new campus, might be difficult to document in support of a new college.

37

RECONMENDATIONS

The following recommendations are developed from the findings and conclusions:

1. The Coachella Valley Community College District should not proceed at this time to plan and construct a new college in the 'High Desert.

a. The present and projected enrollment for the High Desert is insufficient to warrant a separate college.

b. The A.V./A.D.A. in the High Desert is below the state average.

c. The existing off-campus classes have met the demonstrated educational needs of the High Desert.

d. Significant support for a college in the High Desert has not been demonstrated either by that community or the Lm< Desert.

e. The existing enrollment capacity at College of the Desert has not been exceeded.

2. The Coachella Valley Community College District should conduct a needs assessment of the High Desert to determine the nature and extent of unmet educational needs at the college level.

3. The college district should proceed at this time to plan physical facilities to provide educational programs that satisfy the identified educational needs. These new physical facilities would provide housing for an Educational Center nota new college. The district would continue to operate classes in leased facilities elsewhere throughout the High Desert area in addition to those classes at .the Educational Center.

a. For example, it is assumed that a need may be identified for science programs in the college transfer program. This would require .that the district plan and construct laboratories.

b. A second area of presumed need is nursing. This would require special facilities in conjunction with medical facilities (hospital) in the High Desert.

4. The district should proceed to identify the most appropriate site for the expanded educational center in the High Desert.

a. This could suggest a site other than the one presently owned.

b. Proximity to utilities and other development may be higher priorities.

38

5. In 1977-78, the district should maintain same as the previous two years. The tax preliminary budget should be placed in a capital outlay program of the district. almost $500,000 in 1977-78. The overall for 1977-78 by the reduction in the bond

a tax rate ($0.891) the revenue over and above the special reserve for the This is expected to produce tax rate would be reduced tax rate.

6. The district should plan housing for administrative services as a part of the new educational center.

a. This would give identity to the college in terms of a physical entity in the High Desert.

b. Communications about the college and its programs would be improved.

7. Both the site and buildings planned for the educational center should be integrated into a plan for a future new college in the High Desert. In a sense, these facilities become the first unit of a future complete college.

8. Further increments of the college should be based on population growth and educational needs of the High Desert.

a. Unless the growth proceeds much more rapidly than projected, the High Desert should not realistically anticipate very many more college additions in the foreseeable future.

b. The college should continue to operate classes throughout the High Desert. These classes should reflect changes of student needs with the vocational classes related to the job market.

9. The plans for the Educational Center in the High Desert by Coachella Valley Community College District should be transmitted to the Chancellor's Office, Board of Governors, and the California Postsecondary Education Commission. The review and advice of these agencies would be beneficial.

10. This planning and implementation of an Educational Center is expected to take about three years to complete. This program should be cost estimated and related to the total of $1,500,000 generated by three years of tax revenue at $500,000 each year.

39

CONCLUDING STATENENT

The administration and board of trustees of the Coachella Valley Community College District are to be commended for their concern about meeting the educational needs of the students in the High Desert portion of the district. The concerns are to provide college programs that are accessible economical and sound educationally. The current off-campus classes have served ,veIl and can be improved if the recommendations that have been made are implemented.

The real ques tion is not whether a netv college be planned for the High Desert. I t is tvhen should the new college be planned? The conclusion reached by this study is that the appropriate time has not yet arrived -but it is time to make a beginning!

The growth and population of the High Desert may out-step the projections made and used in this study. It is doubtful .that the projections are far enough in error to invalidate recommended actions over the next three years. A new look at the problem can be taken at that time.

The support, cooperation and help of the college administrators and the County Office personnel on this study were outstanding. All the people were very professional and ethical. The brightest of commendations are due them for their relationships with this study. Each of the people with whom the survey team worked has our respect, thanks and appreciation.

The sincere desire of all of us is that whatever decisions are made will be in the best interests of all the students of Coachella Valley Community College District.

40

APPENDIX A

OUTLINE FOR SITE REVIEH

REFERENCES

Education Code Section 81031-81043, general provisions for site review, and Section 81836, on site recommendation.

Education Code Section 10700-10703, Roads to schoolhouse.

Education Code Section 72305, Powers and duties of Dis.trict Board -New school planning and design.

Education Code Section 81036, Proximity to airports.

LIST OF EXHIBITS

Exhibit A - Report of geological and engineering studies (Education Code Section 81033)

Exhibit B - Report from Planning Commission (Education Code Section 81035)

Exhibit C - Report from Department of Aeronautics (Education Code Section 81036)

Exhibit D - Reports from Appraiser(s)

Exhibit E - Haps

Exhibit F Local Board Action

Exhibit G - Environmental Impact Report (Academic Palns) (Reports to CPEC)

SITE REVIEH CONTENT

Introduction

General circumstances District plans - timing, maximum size, academic direction

Interdistrict arrangements Statement of problem in general Alternatives - disposition of them Site(s) now considered

District proposal and justification Reports

41

I nves ti ga t ions

Identification and location Environment

Climate General description and aesthetic quality Type of neighborhood

Residential - commercial - industrial Ethnic composition Trends

Proximate community recreational facilities and potential for joint use

Public transportation Potential detractions

Airports - freeways - railroads Noise - odor - smoke

Physical characteristics Access to site Distance from nearest community college Size - shape Topography - ground cover Subsurface conditions . Potential advantages for development Potential disadvantages

Cos t fac tors Source of funds - timing Purchase price \ Site development

Grading - drainage Subsurface indications Utilities

Reports

Recommendations:

Preparation of report

Transmittal

42

coachella valley community college district college of the desert dccd... · 2012-06-12 ·...

Documents