Against best interests of most, BOCC votes to kill concurrency
This article ran in the Citrus Chronicle on Saturday, May 2, 2015
The Citrus County Board of Commissioners (BOCC), against the wishes of the Citrus County School Board (CCSB), gave the “kill order” at the Commission meeting on April 28th, 2015, with a 3 to 2 vote to terminate the Inter-Local Agreement between the BOCC, School Board, City of Crystal River and City of Inverness. Their actions were solely to remove school concurrency.
This is now the third time within the last several months that the BOCC has ignored the needs and desires of the Citrus County School Board and supported the demands of the local Builders Association lobbyist. This latest vote to terminate school concurrency is concerning because the provision that protects the school district and the taxpayers from a large developer putting an undue educational demand on the school district requiring increased capital capacity has been removed.
What is “concurrency”? Concurrency is a planning tool to ensure that a community has adequate public facilities and can help a community better manage and finance growth on a development-by-development level. Concurrency can apply to transportation, water/sewer, schools, and park facilities. If adequate facilities are not in place, the applicant is required to provide the additional facilities needed, wait until adequate facilities are available, or provide some form of alternative mitigation. Concurrency, including school concurrency, is agreed to by the BOCC, CCSB and the Cities through the Inter-Local Agreement. Just a few years ago, school concurrency was required by law to better ensure the protection of school districts and taxpayers. However, a few years later, lobbyist got legislators to remove the statutory requirement. Sixty-three (63) out of sixty-seven (67) Florida Counties continue to see and understand the great value and protection of maintaining school and other concurrency in their county’s Inter-Local Agreement, even though it is no longer required. It is also important to understand that this protection comes at no cost to taxpayers.
I want to thank Commissioners Dennis Damato and Joseph Meek for supporting the School District. I am perplexed as to why the other three did not. Why would three commissioners purposely ignore the Citrus County School Board’s multiple pleas to maintain school concurrency and instead take direction from the Builder’s lobbyist? In an effort to stimulate growth in Citrus County, the BOCC has suspended the collection of any school impact fees. Now that impact fees are no longer being collected, why remove the only “insurance” or “protection” the School Board and taxpayers have in the event that school capital capacity improvements are required?
At the BOCC meeting in March, one of the commissioners asked if the School Board had responded to the BOCC’s desire to remove school concurrency. It was stated at that meeting that the CCSB had not. This was shocking to hear because the CCSB had sent numerous communications to the BOCC clearly stating the CCSB’s desire to maintain school concurrency in the Inter-Local Agreement. Therefore, at the School Board’s April 14th, 2015 meeting, the CCSB unanimously stated our desire as a School Board to maintain school concurrency. We instructed our attorney Wes Bradshaw to send a correspondence to the BOCC, again stating our desires to maintain the protection of school concurrency along with the supporting documentation of previous correspondence to the BOCC stating the same position from 2012, 2013 and 2014.
During the BOCC’s April 28th meeting and prior to the BOCC voting, Commission Attorney Denise Lyn briefly explained the termination of the Inter-Local Agreement and indicated that the CCSB wanted to maintain school concurrency. Chairman Adams asked Ms. Lyn what the CCSB wanted, and Ms. Lyn repeated that the desire was to maintain school concurrency. Commissioner Meek asked a couple of clarifying questions and shortly after that the vote was called, 3 to 2, to terminate the Inter-Local Agreement.
Florida law requires that counties have an Inter-Local Agreement. The Citrus County Inter-Local Agreement has a clause where any of the four parties may terminate the agreement with 30 days’ notice.
It needs to be clearly understood that neither the Citrus County School Board, the City of Inverness, nor the City of Crystal River asked to terminate the Inter-Local Agreement. It is only the BOCC’s desire to terminate the agreement in order to remove the protection of school concurrency at the request and support of the Builder’s Association.
First, the BOCC, with the request and support of the Builder’s Association, suspended impact fees, including school impact fees, against the recommendation of the Citrus County School Board. Next, at the request and support of the Builder’s Association, the BOCC voted to drastically limit the input of the School Board’s Representative and Planner on the Citrus Planning Board without any previous conversation with the School Board. Now, the BOCC, at the request and support of the Builder’s Association lobbyist, terminated the Inter-Local Agreement in order to remove school concurrency against the needs and desires of the School Board.
One can only wonder, what is next?
How are these decisions by the BOCC positive for the citizens, students and taxpayers of Citrus County? Why is the BOCC unwilling to have a Joint Public Meeting with the School Board on these types of issues before voting on these impactful decisions? The BOCC has proven unwillingly to build a positive relationship with the School Board. It is unclear as to why the BOCC is being destructive to the School Board when our community has benefited from having a successful school district. The Citrus County School District— recognized for its success in our state and nation— is one of the greatest assets in our community. Why doesn’t the BOCC capitalize on the school district’s successes to draw more residents and businesses to Citrus County instead of doing everything in its power to destroy it?
Comments Off on Against best interests of most, BOCC votes to kill concurrency
Filed under: News & Updates
Inverness City Council agrees with with School Board on concurrency. City councilman Cabot McBride said he could think of no sound reason why the county opted out of the agreement in the first place. City Administrator Frank DiGiovanni likened the county’s move to an iconic 1970s commercial for an oil company filter which warned, “You can pay me now or pay me later.’”
