Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1978-05-16; City Council; 5452; School Fee Ordinance>*" , CITY OF CARLSBAD AGENDA BILL NO. DATE: 'May 16, 1978 DEPARTMENT:City Attorney Initial: Dept.Hd._ C. Atty.X^ C. Mgr. Subject: SCHOOL FEE ORDINANCE Statement of the Matter As instructed by the City Council a draft ordinance has been prepared requiring the dedication of land and/or the payment of fees for school facilities pursuant to SB 201. Attached is a memorandum, dated May 3, 1978, which discusses some of the matters the Council may want to include in their consider- ation of the ordinance. Exhibits Memorandum from City Attorney, dated May 3, 1978. Ordinance No . Recommendation If the City Council concurs, direct the City Manager to set the ordinance to hearing before the Planning Commission or take action in regards to the ordinance as the Council considers appropriate. Council action 5-16-78 Staff was directed to send .copies of the ordinance to persons who would be involved, and that the ordinance for hearing before the Planning Commission. those be set MEMORANDUM DATE: May 3, 1978 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: City Attorney SUBJECT: DRAFT ORDINANCE REQUIRING THE DEDICATION OF LAND AND/OR PAYMENT OF FEES FOR INTERIM SCHOOL FACILITIES PURSUANT TO SB 201 The City Council has taken action, pursuant to SB 201 (California Government Code Section 65970 et seq.), to concur in the findings of overcrowded conditions made by the San Diequito, Encinitas, Vista and San Marcos School Districts. SB 201 prohibits the approval of a residential development within those areas unless the City Council either adopts a school fee ordinance or makes overriding findings. In accordance with the Council's direction, we have prepared a draft of a school fee ordinance. When the Council is satisfied with the ordinance, it is recom- mended that it be adopted as a zoning measure. The effect of the ordinance cuts across both the subdivision and the planning process; however, its primary effect is to impose a significant limitation on the development of land which is a zoning concern. More importantly, SB 201 places the school fee chapter in the State Planning Act, which indicates the ordinance should be a zoning measure. It would be appropriate if the Council concurs, and is satisfied with the draft ordinance, to instruct the City Manager to set it to hearing before the Planning Commission. The ordinance should be subjected to CEQA review. It probably will not entail any significant environmental effects so a negative declaration would be indicated. Nevertheless, based on a recent Attorney General's opinion, it is my recommendation that we subject it to the provisions of the Environmental Protection Ordinance. Because of the state law the ordinance has an unusual operative date. The ordinance can only be operative for purposes of lift- ing the SB 201 moratorium thirty days after the ordinance is effective. As the Council knows, it normally takes a first and second reading and then thirty days before an ordinance can be Mayor and City Council -2- May 3, 1978 effective. This ordinance will not be fully operative until the expiration of an additional thirty day period. Government Code Section 65974(a) provides for the location of public schools. Furthermore, in requiring the dedication of land or payment of fees for any particular development, the decision-making body is required to find that such action is consistent with the General Plan. We have assumed, in preparing this ordinance, that the currently adopted General Plan meets the Section 65974(a) requirements and that the necessary find- ings can be made. My memorandum to the Council of March 27, 1978 in regards to SB 201 identified at least sixteen unanswered questions arising from the new law. Most of those questions remain unanswered. It is my estimation that a significant lawsuit will be necessary to resolve them. The Council may recall a similar situation existed in connection with the Quimby Act, which required the dedication of land and the payment of fees for park purposes. It took a fifty page opinion from the California Supreme Court to fully establish the legality of the park fees. We expect a repeat performance for SB 201, but hope it will not arise from a dispute in Carlsbad. The ordinance incorporates the provisions of state law and generally follows the form of ordinances already adopted, or under consideration, by the counties of San Diego and Contra Costa and the cities of Chula Vista and Oceanside. It, in most cases, does not attempt to predict how the courts will resolve the many open questions in SB 201. In order to complete preparation of the ordinance, it is necessary to resolve a series of policy questions and to determine the interrelationship between the ordinance and the public facilities element of the General Plan. This memorandum will now review some of these questions. One of the most important portions of the ordinance, in terms of Council policy judgments, is Section 21.55.070(e): the definition of "residential development." SB 201 is a little less than clear on the proper scope of the term "residential development." It is defined as, a "project containing one or more residential dwellings." Section 65972, the provision that imposes the moratorium, prohibits the Council from approving a "discretionary permit for a residential use." The listing of approvals included in the ordinance are all clearly within the definition of residential development and are discretionary. The uncertainty Mayor and City Council -3- May 3, 1978 is whether or not an individual building permit is "discretionary" and if it should be subject to the ordinance. San Diego County has applied the ordinance and the land fee requirements to individual building permits with exceptions for remodelings, reconstructions and condominium conversions. The City of Oceanside's draft ordinance does not reach individual building permits which are not connected with some other discretionary approvals. The County Counsel has prepared a short memorandum on the issues of the law involved in this question. There is some authority for the position taken by the County. However, it appears that the weight of authority in California indicates that under our ordinances the approvals necessary for issuance of individual building permits are ministerial and not discretion- ary and, therefore, beyond the reach of SB 201. The matter is open to question. The resolution of this question will have a significant impact on the amount of assistance made available to school districts, the burdens to be assumed by the City in administering the ordinance and on the costs imposed upon those seeking to construct residential housing. The extent of the fee obligation is a policy matter for the Council to resolve. Another question that must be resolved is the status of developer agreements with school districts which were entered into prior to the effective date of the ordinance. The draft provides authority for the decision-making body to consider those agreements as overriding factors (Section 21.55.170(b)). We have indications from several of the school districts that they will honor some of the agreements but not all, since some were entered into several years ago at substantially less fees than those which the districts now contemplate. One approach to this problem would be to leave the resolution of the matter to the developers and the school districts and simply require the new fees. Another approach would be to exempt any development with such an agree- ment from the provisions of the ordinance. The draft presupposes a middle approach. It would allow the Council, in an appropriate case, to find that an agreement is an overriding factor but not require it. Guidelines for determining if an agreement will be considered an overriding factor could be included in the Council resolution which the ordinance allows (Section 21.55.040) or, more appropriately, in the fee schedules which the Council will be adopting. Those schedules could provide that the developer would receive credit against the fee obligation for any pre- existing agreements. An alternative approach would be to provide for such a credit in the ordinance itself and to eliminate pre- existing agreements as an overriding factor. The matter is one of policy to be resolved by the Council. Mayor and City Council -4- May 3, 1978 The new state law is quite clear that the City Council is responsible for determining the amount of land or fees to be levied by the ordinance. The County has adopted an approach which specifies that the fees will be "established" by the school district subject to the "concurrence" of the Board of Supervisors. The draft ordinance takes a little different approach to make clear that the districts' role is limited to making recommendations in that regard. We have received indications from the districts already that their idea of an appropriate fee constitutes a substantial increase over any- thing previously collected. If the Council approves the ordinance, we would anticipate asking the districts, who have not already done so, to submit their fee recommendations, including the facts upon which they are based. The City Council will then need to consider those recommendations and make its judgment as to the appropriate fee to be charged in each attend- ance area. Setting the fees will, of necessity, it seems to me, be resolved as a policy matter by the Council after considering the views of the districts and the limitations in SB 201 in regards to fees. The policy questions involved in that judgment do not directly involve the wording of the ordinance unless the Council wishes to formally require the further involvement of the school districts in the fee-setting process. The Council will have to determine the basis for and use of the fees generated by SB 201. We have indications that at least one of our districts view it as a blanket grant of authority to charge the full costs of new permanent school facilities to residential development. The bill itself speaks only to securing financing for "interim school facilities to meet conditions for over- croxvding. " There is no case authority on the question yet. The legislative council has prepared an analyses showing why the word "interim," in the new law, really means "permanent." I find the rationale for the opinion less than convincing. What is clear is that the land or fees must bear a reasonable relationship to and be limited to the need for schools caused by the particular development. It is not unreasonable to expect that developers will challenge the blanket approach being taken by some school districts. In that event, it would be my advice that the defense of such an action be tendered to the school district involved since they are the real parties in interest. Resolution of this issue is not necessary at this time but will be presented when the districts and the City set the fee. SB 201 imposes some significant obligations on the school districts. They are required to submit a schedule to the Council specifying how they will use the land or the fees to solve the conditions of Mayor and City Council -5- May 3, 1978 overcrowding. This schedule must include the particular school sites to be used, the facilities to be made available and the times when they will be available. If the districts can't meet the schedules they must submit modifications to the Council with the reasons for the changes. It is also incumbent on the districts, which have overlapping responsibilities, to reach agreement with the City as to how the land or fees will be divided. As the Council knows, that situation pertains to the southern section of our City, between the Encinitas and San Diequito districts. The districts are required to maintain separate accounts for any monies received and they must file a report with the Council on the balances in those funds, if a facility is leased, purchased or constructed and. on other actions taken during the previous year. If the Council approves the draft ordinance, my office will take the steps necessary to bring all of these and the other requirements imposed by SB 201 on the districts to the attention of our four affected school districts. The ordinance also imposes some new administrative burdens on the City. The Planning Department will be required to notify the districts of any proposed development in order for the district to advise us whether or not they want the dedication of land in such development. Those recommendations will then have to be considered by the decision-making body as a part of their deliberations on the development itself. There are also a number of administrative tasks in regards to the collection of the fees, the creation of special trust funds, the transfer of the fees to the districts, and the receiving of the districts' annual reports. If the ordinance is approved, these matters will be discussed further with the City Manager and the Council. The Council may wish to consider soliciting input on the draft ordinance before setting it to public hearing. It might be submitted, for instance, to the affected school districts for their comment, as well as to appropriate representatives of persons involved in residential development. On the other hand, the Council might be satisfied that the Planning Commission and City Council public hearings on the ordinance would afford adequate opportunity for public comment. It is important to understand that this ordinance is separate, apart, and in addition to the public facilities element of the General Plan. The General Plan requires the City Council to find that all necessary public facilities will be available concurrent with need before approving the development. Public Mayor and City Council -6- May 3, 1978 facilities include schools. Notwithstanding the adoption of the ordinance, the Council will still be required to find that the element is satisfied before approving a development. For the Carlsbad Unified School District, which has not as yet implemented SB 201, we will anticipate the continuation of the current administrative policy in regards to the public facilities element. That is, the City Council would require evidence of schools, which would usually come in the form of a school letter, before approving a development. Such a letter could continue to be required for the other districts. It would also be possible for the Council by policy to determine that developments subject to the ordinance would be deemed to have satisfied the public facilities element without the necessity for further evidence. It would also be possible for the Council to amend the element to remove schools entirely or to indicate that the element would not apply to those developments subject to the ordinance. Again, the matter is one which would require additional discussion and Council policy direction. This discussion of the Council's options regarding the SB 201 - public facilities element inter- relationship, will be supplemented orally at your meeting of May 16, 1978. CONCLUSION In my opinion, the draft ordinance is consistent with the require- ments of SB 201. The Council may wish to consider changes based on their resolution of the above-discussed policy questions. The Council should also determine whether to solicit public input in addition to and in advance of that which could be expected at the public hearings. Finally, the Council should keep in mind that due to the large number of open questions in SB 201, we can expect the the need to amend this ordinance. Chula Vista has already made one set of extensive amendments. In view of the SB 201 moratorium, and the extra period before the ordinance can be effective, it is my recommendation we adopt an ordinance as soon as possible consistent with adequate Council deliberation and amend as necessary in light of experience or new developments as the need arises. / VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR. City Attorney VFB/mla • 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 § 13 • OC {*g 3"s| 14 O O 5!r •2 » LU J-t |t<t 15 "-• • §5 £ g 8 tf 16IU Z CM <; 0 5 " <B2O COIt s! 17 >- o § 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (jTrU'T" ORDINANCE NO. 9500 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 21 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE ADDITION OF CHAPTER 21.55 RELAT- ING TO THE PROVISION OF INTERIM SCHOOL FACILITIES BY REQUIRING DEDICATIONS OF LAND AND FEES. The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California, does ordain as follows : SECTION 1: That Title 21 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is amended by the addition of Chapter 21.55 to read as follows: "Chapter 21.55 DEDICATION OF LAND AND FEES FOR SCHOOL FACILITIES SECTIONS : 21.55.010 Title. 21.55.020 Authority - conflict. 21.55.030 Purpose and intent. 21.55.040 Regulations. 21.55.050 Findings. 21.55.060 General plan. 21.55.070 Definitions. 21.55.080 Notice to school districts. 21.55.090 School district findings. 21.55.100 Requirements of notice of findings. 21.55.110 Restriction on approval of residential developments - City Council findings. 21.55.120 Requirement of fees and/or dedications. 21.55.130 Payment of fees in smaller subdivisions. 21.55.140 Standards for land dedication and fees. 21.55.150 Filing application for residential development 21.55.160 Notification to school districts. 21.55.170 Decision factors. 21.55.180 School district schedule. 21.55.190 Land dedication. 21.55.200 Fee payment. 21.55.210 Fees held in trust. 21.55.220 Use of land and fees. 21.55.230 Refunds. 21.55.240 Agreement for fee distribution. 21.55.250 Fee fund records and reports. 21.55.260 Termination of dedication and fee requirements 21.55.270 Operative date. 21.55.010 Title. This chapter shall be known as the "School Facilities Dedication and Fee Ordinance". COtn 0)• c "8 <ou. s| 9° ig 1^2"°5i x u, O z"! 80Si^clIE "> (- cc< < u 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 21.55.020 Authority-Conflict . This chapter'is adopted pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 4.7^Commencing with Section 65970) of Division 1 of Title 7 of the California Government Code. In the case of any conflict between the provisions of this chapter, and those of Chapter 4.7, the latter shall prevail. 21.55.030 Purpose and intent. This chapter is intended to implement the school facilities dedication and fees legislation in the City of Carlsbad and to provide authority whereby the City, affected school districts, and applicants for land development approvals may undertake such reasonable steps as the City Council determines to be necessary to alleviate overcrowding of school facilities. 21.55.040 Regulations. The City Council may from time-to- time, by resolution, issue regulations to establish procedures, interpretations and policy directions for the administration of this chapter. 21.55.050 Findings. The City Council of the City of Carlsbad finds and declares as follows: (a) Adequate school facilities should be available for children residing in new residential developments. (b) Public and private residential developments may require the expansion of existing public schools or the construc- tion of new school facilities. (c) In many areas of the City, the funds for the construc- tion of new classroom facilities are not available when new development occurs, resulting in the overcrowding of existing schools. (d) New housing developments frequently cause conditions of overcrowding in existing school facilities which cannot be alleviated under existing law within a reasonable period of time. (e) That, for these reasons, new and improved methods of financing for interim school facilities necessitated by new development are needed in the City of Carlsbad. 21.55.060 General Elan. The General Elan of the City of Carlsbad provides for the location of public schools. Those interim school facilities to be constructed from fees paid or those lands to be dedicated for school facilities as required by this chapter shall be consistent with the General Elan of the City of Carlsbad. 21.55.070 Definitions. Whenever the following words are used in this chapter, unless otherwise defined, they shall have the meaning ascribed to them in this section: (a) "Conditions of overcrowding" means that the total enrollment of a school, including enrollment from proposed development, exceeds the capacity of such school as determined by the governing body of the district. (b) "Decision-making body" means the City Council, Flanning Commission or City Engineer. (c) "Dwelling unit" means a building or a portion thereof, or a mobilehome, designed for residential occupation by one person 2. COv> o> o 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 f*il 14 IgS§ 15u.-°3< ilis 16 11 ij 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 or a group of two or more persons living together as a domestic unit. (d) "Reasonable methods for mitigating conditions of over- crowding" shall include, but not be limited to, the following: (1) Agreements between a subdivider and the affected school district whereby temporary-use buildings will be leased to the school district; (2) The use of temporary-use buildings owned by the school district; (3) The use of temporary portable classrooms, student bussing, classroom double sessions, year-round use of school facilities, school boundary realignments, and elimination of low priority school facility uses; (4) The use of available annual tax rate bond revenues or state loan revenues, to the extent authorized by law; (5) The use of funds which could be available from the sales of surplus school district real property and funds available from any other sources. (e) "Residential development" means a project containing residential dwellings, including mobilehomes, of one or more units or a subdivision of land for the purpose of constructing one or more residential dwelling units. Residential development includes, but is not limited to: (1) A tentative or final subdivision map or parcel map or a time extension or amendment to such a map. (2) A conditional use permit. (3) A site development plan. (4) A variance. (5) A privately proposed specific plan or amendment thereto which would allow an increase in authorized residential density. (6) A privately proposed amendment to the City General Plan which would allow an increase in authorized residential density. (7) An ordinance rezoning property to a residential use or to a more intense residential use. (8) A grading permit. (9) Any other discretionary permit for residential use, 21.55.080 Notice to School Districts. 'The City : shall notify all potentially affected school districts of an application for any residential developments proposed for location within their boundaries. 21.55.090 School district findings. If the governing body of the school district which operates an elementary or high school in the City of Carlsbad makes a finding supported by clear and convincing evidence that: (a) Conditions of overcrowding exist in one or more attendance areas within the district which will impair the normal functioning of educational programs including the reason for such conditions existing; and 3. o<CO 00 CJ £o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 gas! 14 Z v_ W br ig|| 15 "- ' si o £ I 8 d 16B| = 2 l| I 17< < 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 (b) That all reasonable methods of mitigating conditions of overcrowding have been evaluated and no feasible method for reducing such conditions exist, the governing body of the school district shall notify the City Council of the City of Carlsbad. The notice of findings sent to the City shall specify the mitigatio measures considered by the school district. After the receipt of any notice of findings complying with .this section, the City Council shall determine whether it concurs in such school district findings. The City Council may schedule and hold a public hearing on the matter of its proposed concurrence prior to making its determination. If the City Council concurs in such findings, the provisions of Section 21.55.110 shall be applicable to actions taken on residential development by a decision-making body. . 21.55.100 Requirements of notice of findings. Any notice of findings sent by a school district to the City Council shall specify: (a) The findings listed in Section 21.55.090. (b) The mitigation measures and methods, including those listed in Section 21.55.070(d) considered by the school district and any determination made concerning them by the district. (c) The precise geographic boundaries of the overcrowded attendance area or areas. (d) Such other information as may be required by the City Council. 21.55.110 Restriction on approval of residential develop- ments — City Council findings. Within the attendance area where it has been determined pursuant to Section 21.55.090 that condition of overcrowding exist, no decision-making body shall approve an application for a residential development within such area, unless such decision-making body makes one of the following findings: (a) That action will be taken pursuant to this chapter to provide dedications of land and/or fees to mitigate conditions of overcrowding, or (b) That there are specific overriding fiscal, economic, social or environmental factors which in the judgment of the decision-making body would benefit the City, thereby justifying the approval of a residential development otherwise subject to the provisions of this chapter. An agreement between the applicant for a residential development and the school district to mitigate conditions of overcrowding within that attendance area may be considered by a decision-making body as such an overriding factor. 21.55.120 Requirement of fees and/or dedications. For the purpose of establishing an interim method of providing classroom facilities where overcrowding conditions exist as determined pursuant to Section 21.55.090, the City may require, as a condition to the approval of a residential development, the dedication of land, the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, as determined by a decision-making body during the hearings and other proceedings on specific residential development appli- cations falling within its jurisdiction. Prior to imposition of the fees and/or dedications of land, it shall be necessary for a decision-making body acting- on the application to make the following findings: (a) The City General Plan provides for the 4. It %> i- oc E S o 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 . 8 9 10 11 12 I 13 O) I 14 § 15 o- 16 in 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 location of public schools. (b) The land or fees, or both, transferred to a school district shall be used only for the purpose of providing interim elementary, junior high or high school classroom and related facilities. (c) The location and amount of land to be dedicated or the amount of fees to be paid, or both, shall bear a reasonable relationship and will be limited to the needs of the community for interim elementary, junior high or high school facilities and shall be reasonably related and limited to the need for schools caused by the development. (d) The facilities to be constructed, purchased, leased, or rented from such fees or the land to be dedicated or both is consistent with the City General Plan. 21.55.130 Payment of fees in smaller subdivisions. Only the payment of fees shall be required in subdivisions containing fifty (50) lots or less. 21.55.140 Standards for land dedication and fees. The standards for the amount of dedicated land or fees to be required shall be determined by the City Council and set by resolution. The governing board of each school district where a determination has been made pursuant to Section 21.55.090 that conditions of overcrowding exist, shall recommend standards for their attendance areas to the City Council. Such standards and the facts supporting them shall be transmitted to the City Council. If the City Council concurs in such recommended standards, they shall, until revised, be used by decision-making bodies in situations where dedications of land and/or fees are required as a condition to the approval of a residential development. Nothing herein shall prevent the City Council from using standards other than those recommended by the school district in the event the City Council is unable to concur in those transmitted by the district. 21.55.150 Filing application for residential development. At the time of filing an application for approval of a residential development located within an attendance area where the findings required by Section 21.55.090 have been made, the applicant shall, as part of such filing, indicate whether it prefers to dedicate land for school facilities, to pay a fee in lieu thereof, or do a combination of these. If the applicant prefers to dedicate land, it shall suggest the specific land. 2^1.55.160 Notification to school districts. Upon receipt of an application for a residential development within an attendance area where the findings required by Section 21.55.090 have been made, the Planning Director shall notify the affected school districts thereof. Said notification shall be made no later than thirty (30) days prior to consideration of the application by a decision-making body. 21.55.170 Decision factors. (a) Upon receipt of the notification required by Se.ction 21.55.160, the governing board of the affected school district shall recommend whether a 5. CO<n NRT F.Y - CI0 ELM, CALI(J 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 sjS 8 o-"sl I4 o O 2 2 z 2^12 15CD TT * -. J-3 16 i 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 dedication of land within the development, payment of a fee in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, should be required. The school district shall then transmit the determination to the Planning Director for submission to the appropriate decision- making body for concurrence. If the decision-making body concurs in such recommendation, it may, at the time of its consideration of a residential development application, impose such requirements In their respective actions regarding this determination, the school district and the decision-making body shall consider the following factors: (1) Whether lands offered for dedication will be. consistent with the City General Plan. (2) Whether the lands offered for dedication meet the criteria established at Education Code Section 39000, et seq. (3) The topography, soils, soil stability, drainage, access, location and general utility of land in the development available for dedication. (4) Whether the location and amount of lands proposed to be dedicated or the amount of fees to be paid, or both,will bear a reasonable relationship and will be limited to the needs of the community for interim elementary, junior high school, or Senior high school facilities and will be reason- ably related and limited to the need for schools caused by the development. (5) If only a subdivision is proposed, whether it will contain fifty (50) parcels or less. Nothing herein shall prevent a decision-making body from imposing requirements other than those recommended by the school district in the event that a decision-making body is unable to concur in the district's recommendation hereunder. (b) If the school district has entered into an agreement with the applicant for the residential development to mitigate conditions of overcrowding within the attendance area covered by the application, the governing board shall upon receipt of the notification required by Section 21.55.160 so advise the Planning Director and transmit a copy thereof for submission to the appropriate decision-making body for consideration as an overriding factor under Section 21.55.110. 21.55.180 School district schedule. Following the action by a decision-making body to require the dedication of land or the payment of fees, or both, the Planning Director shall notify each school district affected thereby. The governing body of the school district shall then submit a schedule specifying how it will use the land or fees, or both, to solve the conditions of overcrowding. The schedule shall include the school sites to be used, the classroom facilities to be made available, and the times when such facilities will be available. In the event the governing body of the school district cannot meet the schedule, it shall submit modifications to the City Council and the reasons for the modifications. 6. 2 £ | 8 dm z CM rf0 £ - mM I " 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 13 BC < 14 15 16 " 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 21.55.190 Land dedication. When land is to be dedicated, it shall be offered for dedication to the affected school district in substantially the same manner as prescribed in Title 20 regarding streets and public easements for subdivisions. Dedicated land which subsequently is determined by the school district to be unsuitable for school purposes may be sold with the approval of the City Council. The funds derived therefrom must be used in accordance with this chapter. 21.55.200 Fee payment. If the payment of a fee is required, such payment or the pro rata amount thereof shall be made at the time a building permit within the residential development is approved and issued. 21.55.210 Fees held in trust. Fees paid under this chapter shall be held in trust by the City. Such fees, plus accrued interest, less a reasonable service and handling charge of no more than the accrued interest, shall be transferred to the school districts operating schools within the attendance area from which the fees were collected from time-to-time as the City Council may determine. 21.55.220 Use of land and fees. All land or fees, or both, collected pursuant to this chapter and transferred to a school district, shall be held-in trust and shall be used only by the district for the purpose of providing interim elementary, junior high or high school classroom and related facilities in the attendance area from which the land or fees were collected. 21.55.230 Refunds. If a residential development approval is vacated or voided, and if the affected school district has not made use of the land and/or fees collected therefor, and if the applicant so requests, the governing board of the school district shall order the land and/or fees returned to the applicant. 21.55.240 Agreement for fee distribution. If two separate school districts operate schools in an attendance area where the City Council has concurred that overcrowding conditions exist for both school districts, the City Council will enter into an agreement with the governing body of each school district for the purpose of determining the distribution of revenues from the fees levied pursuant to this chapter. In the event the school districts do not agree, the City shall retain all fees until an agreement is secured. 21.55.250 Fee fund records and reports. Any school district receiving funds pursuant to this chapter shall maintain a separate account for any fees paid and shall file a report with the City Council on the balance in the account at the end of the previous fiscal year and the facilities leased, purchased, or constructed during the previous fiscal year. In addition, the report shall specify which attendance areas will continue to be overcrowded when the fall term begins and where conditions of overcrowding will no longer exist. Such report shall be filed by August 1 of each year and shall be filed more frequently at the request of 7. VINCENT F. BIONDO, JR.CITY ATTORNEY - CITY OF CARLSBAD1200 EUM AVENUECARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 920081 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 the City Council. 21.55.260 Termination of dedication and fee requirements. When it is determined by the City Council that conditions of overcrowding no longer exist in an attendance area, decision- making bodies shall cease levying any fee or requiring the dedication of any land for that area pursuant to this chapter. Action under this section shall not affect the validity of conditions already imposed for levy of fees and dedications of land and such conditions shall remain binding. 21.55.270 Operative date. This chapter shall become oper- ative thirty (30) days after its effective date." EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its adoption, and the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be published at least once in the Carlsbad Journal within fifteen days after its adoption. INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad City Council held on the day of ,1978 and thereafter PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the day of , 1978 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT : RONALD C. PACKARD, Mayor ATTEST : MARGARET E. ADAMS, City Clerk (SEAL) 8.