PART I – ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOLS
SEC. 221. PURPOSE.
The purpose of this part is to provide assistance for the modernization, renovation, and repair of elementary and secondary school buildings in public school districts across America in order to support the achievement of improved educational outcomes in those schools.
SEC. 222. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.
There are authorized to be appropriated, and there are appropriated, $25,000,000,000 to carry out this part, which shall be available for obligation by the Secretary until September 30, 2012....
This provision, no different than the previous one sundowns at the end of the current fiscal year. That probably holds true throughout the bill so there is no need to repeat it. If there are different dates I'll note them.
As with previous provisions this one is divided between the Secretary of Education and the Secretary of the Interior or help to American Indians and USA Possessions.
Cited Law:
(ESEA) (20 U.S.C. 6311 et seq.) for fiscal year 2011 (click title to entry - thank you)
Below is the PRIMARY law that others are built on. In this case there have been repeated code revisions to the this, the baseline, document. So, to refer to this 'edition' of the law is somewhat useless. It is replaced by updated versions and the latest is the one of 2011. It is not unusual for this law to be revised by nearly every administration along the way.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (click here)
Now, the previous mention of allocation of funds to local 'agencies' makes sense. The delineation is quoted here and is based on NEED. I sincerely do not believe when a bill is this clear the Governors can interfere. They are children in special need. A frank example I can think of off the top of my head is the special monies and assistance set up in legislation some time ago for improvement of the populous of Appalachia. It was a unique need by the people there, it was moral and appropriate. So, if the delineation to distribute monies to 'local agencies' is poverty and need, there can't be interference if the bill is so stated. It makes sense now, these words did not appear in the previous provision of Teacher Stability. It doesn't mean this is the final draft either.(1) the Secretary shall allocate 40 percent of such remaining amount to the 100 local educational agencies with the largest numbers of children aged 5-17 living in poverty, as determined using the most recent data available from the Department of Commerce that are satisfactory to the Secretary, in proportion to those agencies' respective allocations under part A of title I of the ESEA for fiscal year 2011; and
(2) the allocation to any State shall be reduced by the aggregate amount of the allocations under paragraph
(1) to local educational agencies in that State....
Forget it. The ability for local agencies to apply directly to the Federal Government is included. So the State Governors are not gatekeepers to much of these funds if they are refused by the Governor.
And if these words appear in the final law there is no reason why a local agency could not file a grievance they were excluded from any monies unfairly.
SEC. 224. STATE USE OF FUNDS.
(a) RESERVATION. Each State that receives a grant under this part may reserve not more than one percent of the State's allocation under section 223(b) for the purpose of administering the grant, except that no State may reserve more than $750,000 for this purpose.
There is a limit on administrative funds in these provisions. The monies are suppose to go to the place they are intended and not sucked up by the State or anyone else. The administrative costs are sufficient but I would not say over generous.
The funds under this provision are less per local agency than the poverty provision. Of the funds received by the State at least has to be 'granted' to local agencies including charter schools considered to be local agencies but not less than $10,000.
The grants are determined by previous qualifications under fiscal year 2011.
...in accordance with their respective allocations under part A of title I of the ESEA for fiscal year 2011...
The remaining funds are to be used with discretion in areas in need and in the bill it mentions rural communities. As a rule these communities do not have a large tax base to support maintenance and improvements. So, it makes sense. The State should know where these problems are within their cities and towns. I would think as soon as this law is passed there should be correspondence ready to mail to the State and/or Federal governments indicating the needs of the school systems or local agency. I would not hesitate. I'd be meeting on this now and act on it as soon as possible. I think the letters should include all possible expenses to the local agency to be sure the maximum amount qualifies. Don't hold back. I would never allow any aspect of need to be disqualified and make it clear. The 'cut' will come as it does and hopefully it will fill a lot of holes.
The State Applications need to include how it determines priorities and criteria and ASSURANCES. The focus is on:
SEC. 225. STATE AND LOCAL APPLICATIONS.
(a) STATE APPLICATION. A State that desires to receive a grant under this part shall submit an application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such information and assurances as the Secretary may require, which shall include—
(1) an identification of the State agency or entity that will administer the program;...
(i) the needs of local educational agencies for assistance under this part;
20
(ii) the impact of potential projects on job creation in the State;
(iii) the fiscal capacity of local educational agencies applying for assistance;
(iv) the percentage of children in those local educational agencies who are from low-income families; and
(v) the potential for leveraging assistance provided by this program through matching or other financing mechanisms;
These are building projects so the energy imprint should be a focus. I can't imagine any responsible government agency not being prudent about energy efficiency and there is a Green provision to the bill. Energy efficiency is a matter of saving money and using budgeted energy monies to the best interest to the budget to make educational dollars go further.
(F) a description of how the State will give priority to the use of green practices that are certified, verified, or consistent with any applicable provisions of—
(i) the LEED Green Building Rating System;
(ii) Energy Star;
(iii) the CHPS Criteria;
(iv) Green Globes; or
(v) an equivalent program adopted by the State or another jurisdiction with authority over the local educational agency;
If there is a local agency applying for the funding, they do not have the same demands as an entire State School System would have. It isn't practical to include all those organizational demands with THE AGENCY receiving the funding. Below:
(b) LOCAL APPLICATION. A local educational agency that is eligible under section 223(b)(1) that desires to receive a grant under this part shall submit an application to the Secretary at such time, in such manner, and containing such information and assurances as the Secretary may require, which shall include —
(1) a description of how the local educational agency will meet the deadlines and requirements of this part;
(2) a description of the steps that the local educational agency will take to adequately maintain any facilities that are modernized, renovated, or repaired with funds under this part; and
(3) such additional information and assurances as the Secretary may require.
The monies can be used toward recent Bonds:
SEC. 226. USE OF FUNDS.
(a) IN GENERAL. Funds awarded to local educational agencies under this part shall be used only for either or both of the following modernization, renovation, or repair activities in facilities that are used for elementary or secondary education or for early learning programs:
(1) Direct payments for school modernization, renovation, and repair.
(2) To pay interest on bonds or payments for other financing instruments that are newly issued for the purpose of financing school modernization, renovation, and repair.
There can be no substitution for previous commitments with these funds.
(b) SUPPLEMENT, NOT SUPPLANT. Funds made available under this part shall be used to supplement, and not supplant, other Federal, State, and local funds that would otherwise be expended to modernize, renovate, or repair eligible school facilities.
except that—
(1) section 9501 shall not apply with respect to the title to any real property modernized, renovated, or repaired with assistance provided under this section;
(2) the term "services", as used in section 9501 with respect to funds under this part, shall be provided only to private, nonprofit elementary or secondary schools with a rate of child poverty of at least 40 percent and may include only—
(A) modifications of school facilities necessary to meet the standards applicable to public schools under the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 12101 et seq.);
(B) modifications of school facilities necessary to meet the standards applicable to public schools under section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794); and
(C) asbestos or polychlorinated biphenyls abatement or removal from school facilities; and
(1) above appears to me to exclude Private Schools from paying the mortgage with these funds. It is suppose to go to moderization, etc. Jobs, not property.
The statement below appears regularly through this bill. It is to enforce the spending of the monies and not the return of the monies to the federal government. Example: If expenditures are not as much as the monies determined to be distributed based on eligibility to that local or state agency, then those monies CAN AND SHOULD be used for the purposes they were intended where needed and as they apply to the particular provision, be it Teacher or Emergency Worker Stabilization or Modernization of Schools. This tells me the 'paid for' part is not to come back to the Federal Government for either reallocation and/or deficit reduction. So, the 'paid for' aspects of the bill is highly intended to serve the purpose of the bill.
What does that tell me about the intent of President Obama in asking the nation for their support?
That is is hoping in all ways possible the nation will regain confidence in their government and know he is dedicated to serving them with every penny he asks for. That is those FIVE words tell me.
...the remainder shall be available to...
This provision defines timelines of funds:
SEC. 228. ADDITIONAL PROVISIONS
(a) Funds appropriated under section 222 shall be available for obligation by local educational agencies receiving grants from the Secretary under section 223(b)(1), by States reserving funds under section 224(a), and by local educational agencies receiving subgrants under section 224(b)(1) only during the period that ends 24 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) Funds appropriated under section 222 shall be available for obligation by local educational agencies receiving subgrants under section 224(b)(2) only during the period that ends 36 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Section 439 of the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232b) shall apply to funds available under this part.
(d) For purposes of section 223(b)(1), Hawaii, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico are not local educational agencies.
That is page 22, the next section is Community College Modernization and goes for about three or so pages. I think I might review that one, but, I am going to take a short break.
The statement below appears regularly through this bill. It is to enforce the spending of the monies and not the return of the monies to the federal government. Example: If expenditures are not as much as the monies determined to be distributed based on eligibility to that local or state agency, then those monies CAN AND SHOULD be used for the purposes they were intended where needed and as they apply to the particular provision, be it Teacher or Emergency Worker Stabilization or Modernization of Schools. This tells me the 'paid for' part is not to come back to the Federal Government for either reallocation and/or deficit reduction. So, the 'paid for' aspects of the bill is highly intended to serve the purpose of the bill.
What does that tell me about the intent of President Obama in asking the nation for their support?
That is is hoping in all ways possible the nation will regain confidence in their government and know he is dedicated to serving them with every penny he asks for. That is those FIVE words tell me.
...the remainder shall be available to...
(a) Funds appropriated under section 222 shall be available for obligation by local educational agencies receiving grants from the Secretary under section 223(b)(1), by States reserving funds under section 224(a), and by local educational agencies receiving subgrants under section 224(b)(1) only during the period that ends 24 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
(b) Funds appropriated under section 222 shall be available for obligation by local educational agencies receiving subgrants under section 224(b)(2) only during the period that ends 36 months after the date of enactment of this Act.
(c) Section 439 of the General Education Provisions Act (20 U.S.C. 1232b) shall apply to funds available under this part.
(d) For purposes of section 223(b)(1), Hawaii, the District of Columbia, and the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico are not local educational agencies.
