HUNTINGTON BEACH : Schools Want to Be Part of Growth Plan

Concerned that they may be shortchanged in receiving future developer fees, school district officials are asking that schools be included in a growth management plan that the City Council will consider tonight.

Huntington Beach City School District officials have asked that the council either postpone or amend the plan, which the city is required to approve in order to receive a chunk of new Orange County sales-tax revenues.

District officials are proposing an amendment that would require developers to negotiate fee agreements with school districts.

The school district is particularly concerned about the issue of development fees because of its recently completed negotiations with the major builder of the Holly-Seacliff project.

District officials had argued that the amount of fees the state required the developer to pay would not cover the cost of the the additional students that the sprawling project would attract. After months of negotiations, the district and Seacliff Partners signed an agreement to have the developer pay 70% more in school fees than the state requires.

School officials hope that such a process can be required of nearly all new developments in the city’s growth plan.

The growth management plan will set goals, policies and programs to ensure that traffic, public facilities and services can keep pace with development. Cities must adopt such a plan in coming weeks to qualify for a share of Measure M funds.

Huntington Beach’s share of those funds is projected to be about $45 million over the next 20 years.

The city’s Planning Commission two weeks ago approved a growth plan that set development standards for traffic, storm drains, police and fire protection, lighting and other city service and facilities. But it does not address development’s impact on schools or libraries.

Because of those omissions, two commission members, Shirley Dettloff and Roy Richardson, voted against the plan.

City staff members met with Huntington Beach City school officials this week to discuss their differences on the issue. Staff members have said that it is unnecessary to include schools and libraries in the proposal because their needs can be addressed in the city’s General Plan, now being updated.

But the General Plan revision is expected to take up to two more years to complete. So the school district wants to deal with the issue sooner by including it in the growth element of the plan, said Jerry Buchanan, the district’s assistant superintendent for business services.

“We know the growth management plan is intended for traffic concerns for Proposition M,” Buchanan said. “But we think whenever you have a growth management plan, you have to look at schools and libraries.”

Staff members say that if the plan is amended, it probably would delay its approval and could ultimately cost the city its share of Measure M funding.

“So we’re still at an impasse. And we won’t know until (tonight) if it will be worked out,” Buchanan said.