6 Santa Clarita Measures Seek School Funds From Builders

Voters in five Santa Clarita Valley school districts will be asked on the Nov. 4 ballot to approve propositions that would tax developers an average of about $6,000 on each new residential unit to finance school construction.

Developers, who could pass on their heightened costs to buyers, oppose the measures, saying they would drive up the cost of new housing and price some families out of the housing market. Besides, they argue, a $5-billion state financing plan, approved by the state Legislature last month, would probably provide the districts with the money they need for new schools. The state plan, which includes an $800-million bond issue for building schools, is also on the Nov. 4 ballot.

But administrators of the Castaic, Newhall, Sulphur Springs, Saugus and Hart school districts say that there is no assurance the statewide bond issue will be approved, or, even if it is, that their school districts will be among those to benefit.

With student population expected to double by the year 2000 because of rapid residential construction, the administrators say they need to be assured there will be funds to build new schools.

Los Angeles County planners recently increased the Santa Clarita Valley’s projected population for the year 2000 to 213,000--more than double its present 103,000. Building-permit applications for about 30,000 new residential units are on file with the county, and another 20,000 are proposed.

At least 10 new elementary schools, two junior high schools and two high schools will be needed within the next 15 to 20 years to accommodate the estimated 14,000 new students whose families will be drawn to the area because of the housing construction, according to projections by EdCorp International, a consulting firm hired by the school districts.

Trustees of the five school districts approved the ballot propositions and set maximum tax rates per residential unit in each district in July. The measures require a two-thirds vote for passage.

On the ballots of each of the area’s 52,657 registered voters will appear two tax proposals--one for the William S. Hart Union High School District, which serves the entire area, and one for the elementary school district in which voters live.

The Hart district tax rate is set at up to $3,439 per new housing unit in the Newhall, Saugus and Sulphur Springs districts and appears on the ballot as Proposition M.

Proposition N, which will be on the ballot in the Castaic district, requests a $2,418 rate for the high school district. Hart Supt. Clyde Smyth said Hart trustees set the lower rate for Castaic because that district educates seventh- and eighth-grade students, whereas pupils in those grades who live in the other three districts are sent to junior high schools operated by the high school district.

Voters in the Castaic district, which has had the highest rate of growth, also will be asked to approve Proposition G, which sets a maximum tax rate of $3,783 for each new residential unit. In the Newhall district, Proposition Z asks for a $2,542 tax rate. The Saugus district, in Proposition FF, asks for a $2,861 rate. Proposition HH in the Sulphur Springs district, which serves the Canyon Country area, proposes a $2,000 rate.

School administrators view the tax as a “safety net” that will insure that financing for new classrooms is available, Smyth said.

Tax rates, which could be considerably lower than the maximum amounts in the ballot proposition, will be set by trustees each year, according to the districts’ needs, he said. The taxes will be collected with building-permit fees.

“The concept is simple,” he said. “The propositions authorize the districts to levy up to a certain amount, and only if no other funds are available.”

Those provisions are written into resolutions adopted by trustees, he said.

“It is not our intention to stop growth,” Smyth said. “If we don’t need the tax, we won’t levy it. But if the students are here, it is our obligation to see that they are educated.”

Developers maintain the tax will slow building in that levies in the range of $6,000, if added to housing costs, could price many potential first-time buyers out of the market, said Gloria Casvin, a vice president of Newhall Land and Farming Co.

“Builders are going to be active in opposing this,” she said, “as are other people.”

In addition to the $800-million bond issue, Casvin said, a $5-billion school-construction program approved by the state Legislature gives local school boards the authority to impose maximum fees on developers of $1.25 per square foot on residential and 25 cents per square foot on commercial construction.

‘Our Schools Will Qualify’

“We think the election is premature,” she said. “We’re convinced our schools will qualify for state funding.”

Casvin said developers believe that if the state officials are aware that a district already is collecting $6,000 in developers’ fees for each new residential unit built, as proposed by the Santa Clarita Valley district, they will be reluctant to give that district additional funds for new schools.

But, Smyth said, the developers’ fees approved by the state are contingent on passage of the bond issue. Even with the new state money, he said, the school shortage is so acute throughout California that the Santa Clarita Valley districts may never receive any of the funds.

Statewide, enrollment in kindergarten through high school is expected to increase by 600,000 students, to a total of 5 million, by 1994. Enrollment in the Los Angeles Unified School District alone is increasing by 15,000 students a year--the equivalent of an average-sized school district in the state.

Terry Dixon, an attorney representing four of the five school districts, said developer fees collected by school districts to add classrooms is not a new concept. About 150 school districts in California already impose developers’ fees through special assessment districts.

School district attorneys are pressing the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors to levy interim fees on developers before either state or local legislation would go into effect.

“Our concern is that a lot of developers will obtain permits between now and then to escape paying the fees,” he said.

Supervisors will consider the proposal Tuesday.

Information Effort

Meanwhile, school districts are preparing information sheets for parents on the tax issue, and about 300 volunteers have been recruited to work toward passage of the local propositions through an organization called Citizens for Adequate School Housing (CASH). John Fuller, vice president for administration at the California Institute of the Arts in Valencia, is heading the volunteer effort.

“Basically, we’ll be working to inform people what the election is all about,” Fuller said. “We’ll also be working for the state bond issue.”

He sees no way that district administrators could have predicted the unprecedented growth, Fuller said.

“Approval at the state level takes time,” he said. “I think if we’re going to maintain quality schools, we must act now.”

Fuller, also, calls the local developer tax a “safety net.”

“After all, it is the new houses creating the need,” he said.