School districts may use accrued and unused building renewal fund money for routine preventative maintenance, Arizona Attorney General Terry Goddard stated in a formal opinion.

Bill Bell, executive director of the Arizona School Facilities Board, sought the opinion in the light of a legislative mandate passed in 2002 that required school districts to perform routine preventative maintenance on school facilities. Lawmakers hoped the requirement would help districts maximize the life spans of buildings before they had to be replaced or undergo extensive renovation, Mr. Bell said.

Mr. Bell also sought an opinion from the attorney general on what formula districts could use in determining how much of their building renewal fund money could be used for such routine preventative maintenance.

The 2002 measure defined routine preventative maintenance as “services that are performed on a regular schedule [at certain intervals and] that are intended to extend the useful life of a building system and reduce the need for major repairs.”

The building renewal fund was one component of the Legislature’s attempt to establish minimum standards for school facilities.

In 1998, then-Governor Hull signed a measure known as Students FIRST that set those standards, as well as created the School Facilities Board to monitor school districts’ compliance with the standards.

Funds For Renovations, New Structures, Correcting Deficiencies

Students FIRST also created three funds – the building renewal fund [BRF], primarily used for renovation of facilities; the new school facilities fund, designed to build new schools for growing districts; and the deficiencies correction fund, intended to bring districts up to standard.

“Although the Legislature has not funded the BRF according to the statutory formula in ARS 15-2031 since fiscal year 2002, school districts have accumulated balances in their BRF accounts,” the attorney general opinion states. “Because there is no BRF money appropriated for the current fiscal year, some districts would like to use their accrued BRF monies for this purpose. Thus, questions arise whether the Legislature intended that districts access their accrued BRF funds for routine preventative maintenance and, if so, how the 8 per cent cap established in ARS 15-2031(J) is calculated.”

The attorney general opinion states that the 8 per cent cap on building renewal funds for routine preventative maintenance applies to any accrued funds a district has, regardless of whether the Legislature in any given fiscal year has appropriated any funds for building renewal.

For example, if a district has $1 million left in building renewal funds, it could spend $80,000 on routine maintenance. —