Impact of Growth Issues Workshop
Tuesday, January 4,
2005 – 5:00 p.m.
School
Board Meeting Room
Stuart, FL 34994
Members
Present
Susan Hershey –Chairman
Lorie Shekailo-Vice-Chair
Laurie Gaylord
Nancy Kline
Dr. Sara A. Wilcox, Superintendent
Tom Elfers, School Board Attorney
Members
Absent
Katie Gillen, Student Representative (MCHS)
Dr. David Anderson
Staff
Present
Rodger Osborne, Rose Taylor, Ruth Pietruszewski, Steve
Rusnak, Jim Copeland, Dr. Frank Raffone, J.Lisle Bozeman,
Public
Kim Delaney,
Marty Sanders
Press PBPost – Mike Bender Stuart News – Kelly Tyko
MCEA – No representation AFSCME – No representation
Call to order by the Chairman and Pledge of
Allegiance to the Flag of the United
States.
1. Discuss Request to Modify County PUD
Review Process to Include the MCSD
Dr. Sara A. Wilcox felt it was important to have a
workshop, in order to be prepared for the upcoming joint meeting with the City
of Stuart and the Martin County Board of County Commissioners. She wanted to present information, share
data, and review what was discussed at the last joint meeting.
Rodger Osborne, MCSD Director of Facilities and Planning,
said that MCSD has wrestled with the question of how to handle property for
schools for a long time. Buildable
property within the Martin
County urban service
district is shrinking quickly while the price is rising. Several boundaries limit the availability of
land. With the tremendous growth in this
area, future school sites need to be identified.
J.Lisle Bozeman, the School District’s
Planner, has delved into the issues extensively and worked with the community
to come up with some direction. J.Lisle
presented information about Martin County’s current planning process, and the Interlocal
Agreement jointly signed by the School District, Martin
County, and the City of Stuart. J Lisle furnished charts to give a visual
presentation of the County’s current review process and provided a verbal
explanation. Before the Interlocal
Agreement, the School District had no
involvement in the review process. The School District now has an ex officio member on the Local
Planning Agency (LPA). J. Lisle will be attending as a staff member for the School District on the Development Review Committee (DRC).
The DRC reviews projects going before the County. Under the Interlocal
Agreement, the School District is to provide
the County with a school impact statement concerning the impact from each
proposed project seeking County approval. She stated that the interlocal
process is working very well. Good
information is flowing from the City and the County to the School
District. The County is
able to provide GIS information through the Internet. Although this new shared
information is valuable to the School District, it does not introduce the School District into the development process early enough
to sufficiently address the issue of obtaining new school sites or funding for
their construction.
J.Lisle gave suggestions to modify the County process to
involve the School District earlier in the
review process. Earlier involvement will
provide a better time frame for the District to negotiate with developers and
secure donated land, voluntary monetary and/or some other type of consideration. She created a chart
1. Discuss Request to Modify County PUD
Review Process to Include the MCSD (Con’t)
for a visual presentation of the recommended
modifications. She also provided a chart
of what the County is proposing to do.
Her modified process would enable the School
District to be involved early enough in the
development process of potential developments to
negotiate and determine feasibility of projects for school sites and to give
the district the possibility of acquiring donated land and/or contributions of
mutual benefit from developers. The
proposed modifications would more appropriately coordinate planned growth
between the School District and the community.
Our community to the north, St Lucie County, looks to
secure voluntary monetary contributions from small developers that are unable
to donate land for school sites. St Lucie County looks to secure donated school
sites from large tract developers. Martin County,
on the other hand, looks to get large tract developers to set aside sites and
determines the best use of possible sites for all governmental uses, avoiding
competitive costly negotiations. The idea behind Martin County’s
proposed change is based on St. Lucie County’s process.
J. Lisle compared the St. Lucie County process to the Martin County
process. Martin County’s
process secures land for County and School District
purposes, but does not ask for voluntary monetary contributions in lieu of a
site, whereas St Lucie County’s process does. St Lucie County’s impact fees do
not include land acquisition cost. Martin County’s
impact fees include facilities and land acquisition cost. Part of St Lucie’s process is to make up for
that difference.
2. Process to Determine Voluntary Contributions Related to
Growth Issues
J.Lisle Bozeman stated that the reason for moving towards
voluntary contributions was the tremendous gap
between funding sources and the revenue that will be
needed to build new schools necessary to accommodate new growth in Martin County. 98% of new school construction is funded
through local property taxes and impact fees. The estimated gap faced over the
next five years is $87 million. Future land
costs represent $20 million of the estimated deficit. J. Lisle’s analysis
determined that the County’s tremendous growth was attributed to inmigration,
not population increases. She proposed a solution to implement a process to
request developers to donate land and/or fees in lieu of land based on St
Lucie’s criteria formula. She recommended that the process be integrated with
the County.
Marty Sanders, St Lucie County’s Facilities Director,
answered questions. He stated that St Lucie County has a School
Board member sitting on zoning and planning on all three of the local
governments in St Lucie County. He felt the modified process presented at the
workshop was an excellent enhancement.
Nancy Kline asked if density considerations are a factor in the
voluntary donations. Marty stated that
mixed reasons drive the contributions, from re-zoning, density issues, and
contributing to the basic infrastructure of the community. Marty stated this is a “smart growth
concept.”
Sue Hershey mentioned that a school site benefits the
developer, because it is an excellent selling feature. Dr. Sara A. Wilcox
thanked Kim Delaney, Treasure Coast Regional Planning Council, for the mutually
beneficial opportunity for our school districts to get together, collaborate,
and learn from each other’s models. Sue Hershey stated that the existing Martin County
system puts the School District in the process
too late, and it is unfair to the developer. Sue wants to be in the beginning
planning stages to work jointly with the County and achieve mutual
benefits. Lorie
Shekailo felt developers should be given the opportunity to
plan right from the start. Lorie Shekailo and Sue Hershey discussed our impact
fees. Dr. Wilcox advised the public that
Martin County School District
was scheduled to update their impact fees this year.
Rodger Osborne interjected that the estimated figures being
used have not been updated. Construction,
materials, and labor costs have increased at least thirty per cent. Rodger reported that Martin County
has a mechanism in place for developments of more than 50 units, but not a
process in place for land or contributions for all other developments. He stated the price of property is included in
our impact fees, but it doesn’t address the availability of land. If a developer is trying to attract families
with school age children, donating land for a school site would be a marketable
selling feature. On the other hand, if
the developer was planning a retirement community, he would probably feel he
was paying twice and ask for credit for the land on his impact fees. Nancy Kline asked if the Treasure Coast
Builder’s Association had any input. Marty
Sanders confirmed that developers are taking a new view on impact fees. Marty said that Don Santos, impact fee
specialist, stated publicly, “schools sell houses.” Nancy Kline asked if the
process starts as voluntary and moves to mandatory. He answered the cost of land will move
towards mandatory through the impact fee ordinance. Individual agreements will be negotiated for
each development. St Lucie County
excludes legally binding age restricted housing. Dr. Sara A. Wilcox affirmed there is still a
value to the age restricted developments to have good schools located in the
County because it keeps values higher. Sue
Hershey asked if Don Santos would review our prototype and make recommendations
before we had a finished product. . Dr. Sara
A. Wilcox stated that the School District
always contacts the Treasure Coast Builder’s Association when MCSD is getting
ready to do the impact fees study. Sue
Hershey added that the Taxpayer’s Association is also informed.
3. Open to the Public
·
No
representation.
.
4. Open to the Board
·
Nancy
Kline said the workshop was a great informational opportunity. She thanked Marty Sanders for sharing the
information from St Lucie County. She
stated we learn by partnering with our neighboring counties.
There being no further business to bring before the
Board, the meeting was adjourned at 6:30
p.m.
_______________________________
CHAIR (Sue
Hershey)
_______________________________
SECRETARY
(Sara A. Wilcox, Ph.D.)