Charter Review Commission Charter Provisions and School Concurrency

Charter Review Commission Charter Provisions and School Concurrency August 11, 2011

Presentation Outline § Charter Provisions § School Concurrency § Growth Management Legislation

Charter Provisions § Chairman Martinez memo – 2000 § Increase in land use density § OCPS – determination of capacity

Charter Provisions § Charter language § Approved by Charter Commission July 2004 § Approved by voters November 2004 § Charter Section 704 B. 2.

Charter Provisions B. County ordinances shall be effective within municipalities and shall prevail over municipal ordinances when: 2. The county ordinances provide that the county's and any municipality's rezonings or comprehensive-plan amendments (or both) that increase residential density are effective only upon approval by the governing boards of all significantly affected local governments when:

Charter Provisions (a) The attendance zone for any public school to be affected by the increase in residential density lies only partly inside a municipality; and (b)The school district cannot certify to the governing boards of all significantly affected local governments that the school, the attendance zone for which straddles a municipal boundary, can accommodate the additional students that will result from the increase in residential density.

Charter Provisions § Applicability § If Comprehensive Plan amendment or rezoning is required § If school capacity is insufficient § If no Capacity Enhancement Agreement § Then approval required by other affected government

Charter Provisions § Capacity Enhancement Agreement § Agreement between developer and School Board § Mitigate impact of residential development § Prepaid impact fees/other contributions § Timing of development

School Concurrency Senate Bill 360 (2005) § Required school concurrency § Capacity must be in place concurrent with impacts of development

School Concurrency Capacity Enhancement Applied to projects increasing residential density Capacity evaluated on individual school level Only new units created through increased density are counted School Concurrency Applied to all residential projects Capacity evaluated within the Concurrency Service Area (which consists of multiple schools) All units are counted (unless exempt)

GM Legislation House Bill 7207 (2011) § Concurrency optional for schools, parks and transportation § 80 percent participation required to keep school concurrency § County 63. 9% § Orlando 21. 5% § Other cities 14. 6%