TBO.com - TBO is Tampa Bay Online

No-Brainer For Pasco County Schools: Take Charge Of Concurrency

ADVERTISEMENT

The Tampa Tribune

Published: January 20, 2008

For years, the Pasco County school district has struggled to keep pace with the county's rapid residential growth, as well as to convince county government that it is a taxing entity responsible for building new schools to accommodate that growing population - and not a developer.

Given these struggles - the latest stemming from the county's heavy demands that the district be responsible for road and other off-site infrastructure improvements needed for schools - it would be foolish for the district to pass on the opportunity to change the status quo.

In implementing a state law tying approval of new developments to adequate classroom capacity, the school system has a chance to control its destiny by taking responsibility for deciding school concurrency issues, instead of the county.

The district's concurrency consultants say the district, indeed, should be the authority, and the school board should jump at the chance.

Taking on this responsibility is not about stopping growth - that's not the school district's role. Concurrency is about making sure enough classrooms are available to accommodate new development. School officials certainly know the district's needs better than county officials who, for the most part, have been indifferent to the district's challenges except for approving school impact fees.

If it is the school district instead of the county that negotiates with builders and developers on their proposed projects, the school district would be better positioned to protect its interests and forge better planning. Land, facilities, money and other mitigation could be required of developers, who shouldn't resist if they want to build their projects badly enough.

Limiting the negotiations to two parties - the developer and school system - would simplify the process and prevent a possible scenario in which the school system works out a deal with a developer only to be overruled by the county.

It's also possible that the stalemate between county government and the district over who should pay for off-site infrastructure - a major dispute that has prevented a new inter-local agreement for concurrency from being approved by both parties - could be solved.

Developers could be made responsible for those needs, as long as they're reasonable, as part of the concurrency determination process.

The process could work like this: A developer meets with school planners to discuss a proposed development and determine how much new capacity would be needed. Depending upon the amount, school officials would determine what compensation or mitigation is needed, ranging from impact fees, a proportionate fair-share payment or construction of a wing or entire school, among other possibilities.

That's how growth management should work.

Granted, being the decider of concurrency will require more work for the school system, which will need more staff. But considering the district's history with county government, the benefits will be enormous.

Residents also should strongly back the school district on this issue. They should know that county government doesn't have a very good record of requiring growth to keep pace with the infrastructure it requires.

By being the sole decider on school concurrency, the school system at least will require developers to pay their fair share to meet the needs for more schools and classrooms, addressing a major flaw in growth management in Pasco County.

Share this:

Loading Comments...

Email Print

ADVERTISEMENT