Developers would be more likely to foot some of the costs for expanding over-capacity schools in areas where they build large housing complexes under changes to the county’s growth policy debated by Montgomery County’s council Monday.
The Planning, Housing and Economic Development committee members analyzed a planning board proposal to charge developers a school-facilities payment when development would cause projected enrollment at area schools to increase to 110 percent of listed capacity.
The proposal would also put a moratorium on development around schools once they have reached more than 135 percent of capacity. Only permanent classrooms, not portables, would be factored into infrastructure capacity calculations.
“One of the problems with all the infrastructure is that it tends to be lumpy,” Planning Board Chairman Royce Hanson said. “You can’t build enough lane for one car or enough school for one student so you have to do it in bigger batches. Part of the trick here is to try to design a policy that can produce clumps of money that make it possible to produce clumps of infrastructure.”
The concept of school facility payments, in which funds are to be used toward improvements in specific school clusters that would offset projected capacity shortfalls, was approved by the council in 2003, but no payment has been made since it became law.
Council staff say under the planning board proposal, a payment would be required in seven of Montgomery County’s 25 school clusters.
According to council staff, County Executive Ike Leggett supports even more aggressive rules. He wants payments to be mandated when a school was expected to hit 100 percent of its program capacity, rather than 110 percent. Under his recommendation, 17 of the 25 clusters would require a school facilities payment if developers wanted to build in those areas.
Documents provided by council staff said many individuals have written to the council to express dissatisfaction with the concept of a school facilities payment, worrying that a “housing development can buy its way out of providing adequate school capacity without the guarantee that school capacity will actually be provided before the housing development is occupied.”
Council Member Marc Elrich echoed those concerns. “If all it is would be collecting the money and there is no requirement [to add to school capacity], we may not be solving the problem,” Elrich said.
