Pennsylvania's state house yesterday unanimously passed legislation that will give school districts more time to plan for impending residential development. It requires municipalities to notify them within a month after approving a residential development. The Bill's primary sponsor is Northampton County's very own State Rep. Rich Grucela, himself a retired teacher. Grucela's education bill now moves on to the state senate.
"The Lehigh Valley has expanded dramatically over the past decade, yet school districts were not able to plan for that substantial growth," Grucela said. "School districts should have advance notice of construction and development that could add significantly to student enrollment, so officials can effectively budget for additional facilities, staff and instructional materials. I believe it will ultimately help schools become more cost-efficient and save taxpayer dollars."
Northampton County has seen its population soar from 267,000 residents in 2000 to a projected 294,787 in 2008.
Grucela has also proposed education impact fees on new residential development, designed to enable schools to develop programs and facilities necessary to accommodate increased student enrollment due to new development in the district.
spell check title before someone jumps on that
ReplyDeleteLooks like I need more "scchol."
ReplyDeleteI thought most municipalities already are in the practice of notififying school districts. I know that my municipality does. Who doesn't? Is this redundant or needed?
ReplyDeleteRegarding "educational impact fee": this is something that has been talked about for at least the past several years. I know that one of the municipalities near where I work had floated the idea.
While in an economic slow down, I would support such a fee. Most municipalities already impose traffic and recreation impact fees. Schools are the largest property tax, and residential development obviously impacts that. New development adds permanent impact on the educational system, like traffic does to a municipality, so why shouldn't developers pay?
However, the devil is in the details. Reading the linked bill, one of my concerns was addressed in that collected monies must be in a separate account and can only be used to build, add, or renovate facilities. In today's world of shell games, and tight budgets, this is important. Yet, I do wonder if the amount is excessive. For example a 300 unit development of 4 bedroom homes would yeild $2,250,000, and add $7,500 to the cost of each home.
The chair of Allentown's planning commission told me in a public meeting that the concerns of the city and school district are on parallel tracks and their concerns are of no concern to his commission. Explains a lot doesn't it.
ReplyDeleteScott Armstrong
Yeah; but Fourcek writes Boss Pawlowski a nice check at re-election time so it doesn't matter if he said that.
ReplyDeleteSo in an economic slow down where residential building is non-existent and blue collar workers in that industry have had significant unemployment issues, is it really in anyone's interest to throw up another hurdle for residential development? Its the anti-stimulus.
ReplyDeleteAnd school districts are not left out in the cold. A developed residential lot generates more property tax revenue than a cornfield.
Anon 9:56 ("And school districts are not left out in the cold. A developed residential lot generates more property tax revenue than a cornfield")
ReplyDeleteThe reality is, however, that residential development has far greater impact costs than it brings in tax revenues as you state.
Case in point: BASD passed an 09-10 budget with a "total budget expenditures" of $195,402,663. Divide that by the budgeted 15,242 students, and you get a per student cost of $12,820 (and .01), which is actually lower than some area school districts.
The bill proposes an educational impact fee for new construction, additions, or renovations per bedroom over 1. At one point in the past two decades, I moved into such a new development (with no impact fee, of course). I have three kids in school, so I am costing BASD $38,460 next year. Yet, I just received my property tax bill, and I will only say that it is a fraction of that figure. Mulitiply that by all the years my kids go through the system. Our elementary was added on to ($), and our high school was added on to ($), due to the waves of residential development I was admittedly a part of.
Quite honestly, now that I have done the math, I do not think the fees in the bill are excessive. Residential development, compared to commercial development, has a huge financial impact on the schools--who are not looking for the development, but have to deal with the consequences of them, long after the developer/workers have moved on.
and a cornfield has an economic impact on the schools of $0.00 per year.
ReplyDeletelighthouse:
ReplyDeleteBut how does your calculation take into account the property taxes paid by homeowners with no children in their school district or with children in private schools? These homeowners pay the tax without any additional burden on the school district. What about property taxes paid by commercial property owners (again no strain on the system). You individually may not be paying the educational costs of your three children (I was one of 7 so my parents certainly didn't) but it is shared among the community.
Also, property taxes are not the only revenue generator for the school districts.
My point is that in this economic climate its unwise to deter economic development.
I know that I will be paying for the next generation, as well, after my kids are done. And yes, there are other sources of money (which one way or another ultimately come from taxpayers).
ReplyDeleteI wholeheartedly support economic development in the form of business development. However, a one time upfront impact fee, that is passed on to the homeowner, is reasonable.
I can recall several conversations over the years with folks from Bethlehem, Saylorsburg, Nazareth, and Lehigh Twp. They were complaining of how their school taxes were going up because of the need for construction at their various schools, and how development was the cause for the need for brick and mortar costs, yet they contribute nothing. That really could be said by someone living in many Lehigh Valley school districts. Property taxes don't even pay for the annual cost per pupil, let alone capital costs. This bill proposes that those who create the impact help pay for part of it.
I tend to agree them. As property owners we pay for the schools and municipal government. That is our obligation for a good quality of life. No argument there. But why should tax payers subsidize the profit margin of residential developers who buy up farm land and try to squeeze as many homes as possible on there?
As a taxpayer, I am looking at cost-benefit, and I see a lot more cost than benefit....and we are not even talking traffic etc.