Editorial: School Facilities Agency a bad idea

There’s no disputing that Hawaii’s aging public school buildings and infrastructure can be stumbling blocks to 21st-century learning. Many campuses contend with frustrations ranging from outdated classroom design to strained electrical systems, stressed internet access and a sweltering absence of adequate air conditioning.

Some 180,000 students enrolled in state Department of Education (DOE) schools deserve facilities that encourage academic success and help prepare them for challenges in the workplace and elsewhere.

What’s questionable — flat-out objectionable, really — is a strategy being pushed by a coalition of state lawmakers that aims to speed the pace of new construction and renovation by foregoing safeguards in the law. Under Senate Bill 3103, a new state agency would be tasked with development, planning and construction of capital improvement projects at public schools.

Unlike the DOE, which now shoulders that responsibility, the School Facilities Agency would be exempt from all county ordinances other than building codes, as well as from state laws on historic preservation, environmental protection, budgeting, civil service and parts of the procurement code and the transparency-focused Sunshine Law. That is alarming, especially without careful vetting.

The governor would appoint the agency’s executive director and five members of an advisory School Facilities Board, which would also include the schools superintendent and a Board of Education (BOE) representative.

Yes, lawmakers should find ways to minimize bureaucratic delay in modernizing facilities and property redevelopment. But projects should also meet muster with regulations tailored to protect the public’s interest, health and safety, and natural and cultural resources.

Backed by Gov. David Ige and others, SB 3103 has echoes of government overreach that surfaced in 2011 when lawmakers created the Public Land Development Corporation (PLDC).

Tasked to work with the private sector on development projects on underused state land, projects were to be overseen by a board that could make development deals free from many state and county environmental and zoning controls. But in 2013, before developing a single project, PLDC’s opponents successfully prodded repeal.

In response to the school facilities proposal, some state agencies, along with public worker unions and others, are raising valid concerns. The bill’s framers should re-think this ill-advised strategy — and any regrouping must involve schools Superintendent Christina Kishimoto and the BOE.

It’s stunning that Kishimoto and the BOE were left in the dark when this bill was drafted. After all, it is education leaders who are best versed on facilities-related needs and problems, and should be key to proposed fixes.

Sen. Michelle Kidani, Education Committee chairwoman, said the proposed facilities agency is needed to spur progress on mandates such as the 2013 Act 155, which aims to generate revenue from underused DOE property to improve schools, but has made little traction. With the agency in place, she said, “the superintendent and everyone can concentrate on the students’ learning and curriculum.”

However, there are 140 non-educator employees in the DOE’s Office of Facilities and Operation, including architects, planners, building inspectors and engineers. The bill lacks clarity on how their duties would be affected — and on how to avoid paying for a duplicative bureaucracy on the taxpayer’s dime.

Certainly, Kishimoto must explain the impediments and delays over directives such as Act 155, so reasonable cutting of red tape might be pursued, openly and publicly. Students stand to benefit when nimbleness and innovation aid the handling of facilities — but SB 3103’s misguided exemptions and developer-driven vision could instead undermine Hawaii’s public schools.