Publications
Fall 2001 Newsletter
San Diego Using Collaboration to Build New Schools & Revitalize
Neighborhoods
School Districts have historically been characterized as
jurisdictions that take what they need without regard to the community,
neighborhood or residents they are effecting. That paradigm still
exists in a few districts around the state, but it certainly doesn't
characterize the San Diego Unified School District which is bending
over backwards to involve stakeholders, reach out to the planning
and redevelopment communities and truly use school facilities
as a mechanism not just to improve learning and education, but
to revitalize neighborhoods and increase quality of life. NSBN
was pleased to speak with Lou Smith, Chief Operating Officer for
the San Diego Unified School District who talks to us about the
evolving nature of school facilities construction, why it is no
longer simply about construction and what the state can do to
help other districts use this model to effectively change the
way they envision, design and build schools.
Lou, San Diego is making some impresive strides with respect
to school facilities with funding from state and local bond measures.
What are some examples of the projects you're implementing? And
how are you making this happen within the rather limited parameters
of State facilities funding?
Let's first begin with the fiscal component. San Diego's Prop.
MM is a $1.5 billion local school facilities bond measure. That
bond is divided into two major funding streams--$500 million is
allocated for school construction and $1 billion is targeted at
school facility maintenance and upgrades. That new school facility
allocation is then supplemented with Prop. 1A funds while the
maintenance and upgrades are supplemented with private donations.
With that capital we have the ability to construct 13 new elementary
schools and rehabilitate 165 existing schools--virtually every
school in our district will have work done.
A great example on the maintenance, repair and upgrade side is
a high school in La Jolla. It's being upgraded with additional
classrooms and new science facilities through substantial help
from a Foundation. In fact, we've received so much aid from that
Foundation that we're helping them create a swimming pool on a
site owned by that school. We gave them $4 million and got back
a facility worth $10 million. The School District now has the
ability to use the pool for physical education and swim team practice.
And the community now has a facility they can use and enjoy.
And on the new facilities side?
On the new facilities side we're in the process of building 13
new elementary schools, half of which will be located in City
Heights, one of our most densely populated and underrepresented
urban areas.
The historic framework for building schools is to go into these
areas, take about 9-acres of land, displace a lot of families
and unravel some of a neighborhood's community fabric. However
in working with City Planning, the Redevelopment Agency, Price
Charities and the New Amercian Schoolhouse we've found a way to
use the same amount of land, not only construct a school, but
to provide affordable housing, a commercial/retail component including
municipal service providers and two joint-use play fields. It's
a win-win-win situation on that site.
This project has brought up a lot of questions that still need
to be answered. And we are charting new territory by asking other
agencies to aid in the deliverance of the land acquisition, design
and construction aspects, but in the end we'll have a revitalized
neighborhood and a new school built. There may be a lot of questions
that still need to be answered, but it's a win-win-win situation
for all.
You've had success creating cooperative working environments
in San Diego. However, in other municipalities across the state,
there have been cases where this type of collaboration has been
frowned upon because other departments or entities are afraid
to work with the school district and/or the state process. How
have you overcome that sense of fear in San Diego?
We're very fortunate to have a Superintendent, School Board, City
Council, Mayor and Prop. MM Independent Citizens' Oversight Committee
who are huge fans of joint-use. This, more than anything, has
helped persuade staff to prioritize this collaborative way of
thinking.
And what have you heard when you've tried to partner with
your Library or Recreation and Parks Departments about the advantages
and disadvantages in the past of partnering with the school district?
The institutional bureaucracy has a lot of scar tissue regarding
joint-use and partnerships because of some bad experiences over
the past several decades. After a while, both sides simply gave
up and stopped trying to make the relationship work. However,
with the election of a new City Council that paradigm has changes.
Additionally, there's a realization that joint-use and collaboration
benefits taxpayers. When taxpayers look to the City, the School
Board and the School District to provide things for them, they
don't see 12 different governmental agencies working for 3 or
4 different bureaucracies, they only see "government".
We're realizing that we must act like a cohesive government if
we hope to provide taxpayers the services that they deserve and
pay for.
And how does that translate into "success"?
You've come into this process, you've been there a year and a
half. In your experience, what should be success?
Success should be defined as "better, cheaper and faster."
That's the mantra we use around the office. That's what we're
moving toward all the time. And that mandate puts a lot of pressure
on us to find new ways of making things happen.
But it also leads us to the realization that "better, cheaper
and faster" isn't only related to us providing a school facility.
It too goes back to the collaboration I've spoken of previously.
It's not just about building schools anymore, it's about fulfilling
the needs of a community.
Now, the speed issue has been used as an excuse for failure
in other large districts trying to grapple with overwhelming growth.
What have you learned about the advantages and disadvantages of
pursuing speed as the primary objective in getting these projects
built?
John Madden always says, "speed kills". And there's
a lot of truth in that, but not necessarily in a negative way.
We tend to spend a lot of time breaking down each individual
step and trying to find ways of doing things in parallel that
used to be done in series. Because of that we can determine whether
or not the first phase must take 6 months. Maybe it can be done
in 4 months. And maybe the second phase can be done at the same
time as the first.
Once you find out how long it really takes, you can show people
that it's not just a matter of shaving 5-percent off the timeline,
it's shaving 40- or 60-percent off. That translates into less
problems because the problems you would've faced had you progressed
slower are no longer there.
To put it bluntly, you've got to teach people that it's okay
to run. You don't have to walk all the time.
And does this new culture provide a better product? There
have been those in academia that say the product constructed by
school districts is less than an A-level product. How are you
changing that culture so you get the best out of the consultants
and professionals you're hiring?
Unfortunately because of the system we created we had been getting
a lot or C-level effort from people who should have been A-level
students. So we spent a lot of time during the last 14 months
"throwing the bums out", people who don't provide us
with quality work are simply not invited back.
Now that that message is starting to get out, people are finally
beginning to know what to expect from us and subsequently what
we expect from them. Because of that we now have more quality
firms biding on our work.
Translate that experience and evolution into something
that can be replicated statewide. You've been drawn into discussions
by the Speaker's Office and New Schools€Better Neighborhoods
on how to improve the state funding process for new school facilities
making these exceptional projects you describe the norm rather
than the exception. What concerns do you bring into those discussions
and what are the possibilities of those discussions at the state
level, for doing things in a new way? What are the problems that
need to be addressed if we are going to consider doing it in a
different way at the state level?
Getting these pilot projects into the mainstream really comes
down to communication. There are a lot of agencies and stakeholders
involved in building of new schools and if we can communicate
and work cooperatively, both at the state and local levels, we
can do wonderful things. I'm really encouraged that we're having
this high-level leadership and that people continue to be interested
in the subject matter.
But what must happen? What would be the real changes that
would facilitate the kinds of City Heights-type and renovation/modernization
projects that you've used as examples, system wide? What would
you need to have changed?
We must alter the system so that the regulatory agencies download
more authority either to us or some city agency. Let us complete
EIRs, let us complete siting and let us complete design approvals.
All of these facets don't need to go to the Department of Education
or the State Architect, other agencies have the wherewithal and
knowledge to handle them in a timely matter. The process presently
in place doesn't allow us to shorten the current and lengthy review
period.
Now representing San Diego in the State Senate is Dede
Alpert, the Chair of the Education Committee and a well-respected
member of the Legislature. Are you thinking about how to use that
political leadership to reform the rules that you work under?
Or is there, as in many communities, a disconnect between the
frustrations at the local level and what's happening in Sacramento?
The link between the School District and Senator Alpert is getting
stronger and stronger. She has been an enormous help to us and
is in the process of aiding in the development of a streamlined
school development process that will alleviate some of the aforementioned
problems through design-build legislation recently signed by Governor
Davis.
That legislation relates directly to the "better, cheaper,
faster" mantra. From my experience with the federal government
we found that design-build can cut construction time, provide
a higher quality product and control cost more effectively than
the normal construction process.
How does this actually translate to people outside of
San Diego and at the state level? What should they be taking away
from what you've learned with respect to facilities?
This "new" facilities system isn't something that requires
a bunch of new employees or special consultants. What I most admire
about this collaborative environment we've created is that we're
using the same 47 people we had on board when I arrived. It's
just a matter of showing them that there's a system that works.
Nothing major needs to be changed, we just need to let everybody
play to their strengths and keep a clear focus on the collective
goal.
If we use everyone's background and really prioritize those assets,
we have the ability to be creative and take changes--even an East
Coast offense throws a deep pass once in a while.
|