Negotiators OK 5-Year, $5-Billion School Plan

Assembly and Senate negotiators reached agreement on a five-year plan to raise $5 billion to build new classrooms throughout the state, but the proposal faced an uncertain future in the Legislature.

The compromise package would place a limit on the amount of fees that school districts can charge developers to finance school construction and would require local districts to pay a specified share of all school construction.

At the same time, the state would raise money, primarily from bonds and tideland oil revenues, to pay for new classrooms. The construction is needed to meet an enrollment surge in public elementary and high schools of an estimated 600,000 students by 1994. Current statewide enrollment is about 4.4 million.

The plan, endorsed by a conference committee shortly before midnight Tuesday, has the backing of Gov. George Deukmejian, who had sought to raise funds for school construction while limiting developer fees and requiring local school districts to come up with part of the money. Currently, districts must pay 10% of a school’s cost only in cases in which they receive state tideland oil revenue.

The San Diego Unified School District, now nearing the completion of a yearlong study of its facilities, projects it will need eight to 12 new schools by the year 2000 to handle an expected enrollment increase of about 47,000 students, Supt. Tom Payzant said Wednesday.

Enrollment in the district--the state’s second-largest--is expected to rise from 113,000 today to about 160,000 by the turn of the century, according to a demographic study commissioned by the district.

The most growth is expected in three areas: Mira Mesa and Scripps Ranch, Mid-City and Southeast San Diego, Payzant said.

In the Senate, where some Democratic legislators had balked at a preliminary version of the agreement, Democratic Floor Leader Barry Keene of Benicia forecast that the proposal now “has a pretty fair chance of passage.”

But Senate Education Committee Chairman Gary K. Hart (D-Santa Barbara), who served on the conference committee, said he will oppose the package because it does not provide a sufficient guaranteed commitment by the state and could make it more difficult for some districts to build new classrooms.

“We have a governor who is not willing to commit one dime from the general fund (the state’s operating revenues),” Hart said. “We’re kidding ourselves to think that the mechanisms in this bill are going to meet the need,” which he estimated at between $5 billion and $8 billion.

Relies on 2 Bond Measures

The agreement worked out by the conferees counts on winning the voters’ approval of an $800-million bond measure on the Nov. 4 ballot, placing another $800-million bond measure in 1988 and spending $600 million of the state’s anticipated tideland oil revenues over four years.

School district fees that could be charged developers would be limited to no more than $1.50 a square foot for residential property and 25 cents a square foot for commercial and industrial property under the plan. For a 1,500-square-foot home, this would mean a maximum fee of $2,250.

In some districts, Hart said, the fees are now as high as $8,000 per house, and the limit could hamper the district’s ability to continue building schools.

Under the agreement, districts would be required to provide matching funds equal to the amount that could be raised by imposing the maximum fee on development. Districts could raise the money from other sources, such as bonds, property taxes or the sale of land.

The local districts’ contribution would be between $350 million and $380 million a year, the estimated maximum revenue from developer fees.