Hillsborough, School Board fee feud goes to court

Fill out this form to email this article to a friend

TAMPA — Two of Hillsborough's biggest governments are feuding over who will pay the massive costs associated with the area's now-faded housing boom.

The dispute between Hillsborough County and the School Board spills into Circuit Court today. Whoever wins, taxpayers are still on the hook for millions to build adequate streets, sidewalks and traffic signals around new schools. What's at stake is which government pays a greater share of those costs.

The governmental faceoff is a telling snapshot of post-boom Florida, where an anemic economy has drained public coffers just as money is needed to pay for infrastructure to support the growth from the past few years. It's every government for itself in a mad scramble to find new revenue and shed costs.

"Hillsborough just happened to be one of the very first that has gone this far," said Bill Montford, chief executive officer of the Florida Association of District School Superintendents. "Sooner or later, Florida had to address this issue as to who is responsible for the infrastructure. The budget just happened to be the thing that brought it to the head quicker."

During the Hillsborough housing boom of 2002 to 2006, developers pulled more than 73,000 housing permits, and the district built 36 schools.

Both the county and the School Board lauded an arrangement where school officials reviewed rezonings to determine if there were enough classrooms before commissioners approved new housing. School officials didn't object to more than 90 percent of the county rezonings between 2003 and July 2005.

But as its construction budget swelled, the School Board concluded it needed more money to cover the costs of this growth.

Only commissioners could approve an increase, and they initially resisted. After sniping between the boards, commissioners in 2006 reluctantly approved an increase — from an average of $196 per home to the current $4,000 per home.

The county, meanwhile, faced mounting pressure to cover its own costs. The state was requiring counties to show they had enough money to pay for roads. Estimates vary between $3-billion and $6-billion as to how much it would cost to improve all of the county's congested roads.

With budgets for both governments getting tighter, school officials say the county started forcing the district to pay for development expenses that are not its responsibility.

The county was essentially saying it would "extort tax dollars" to pay for items the schools have never paid for, School Board attorney Tom Gonzalez said. "It'd be like saying that a fire station has to take care of roads. The only reason the fire station is there is because you have growth."

Tensions boiled over this spring at a $75-million campus under construction in east Hillsborough. The district is building an elementary and high school and eventually plans to open a middle school there, too.

The school district objected to paying for a county-required turn lane at McIntosh Road and U.S. 92, an improvement that costs about $1-million and sits nearly a half-mile from the campus.

But facing class-size requirements, school officials decided they couldn't delay construction. They agreed to the county's conditions "under duress," Gonzalez said. He believes that Florida law only allows the district to pay for infrastructure that is on or contiguous to the campus.

The county maintains that the district is misreading Florida law, and that schools can indeed pay for infrastructure that isn't adjacent to the campus.

Commissioner Jim Norman said he was disappointed that the case ended up in court. He said he wants to work out an arrangement where the county could use a percentage of each school impact fee to pay for these improvements.

School officials believe the impact fee can only pay for actual school construction and land purchases.

A better way to address the shortfall is to raise the county's separate road impact fee, said Paul Flora, a fiscal analyst with the Hillsborough County Planning Commission. That fee is an average of $1,475 per home. Compared to jurisdictions that charge more — in California, it's as high as $8,000 — Hillsborough's is "ridiculously low," Flora said.

"The average taxpayer doesn't care who pays, be it the county or school district," Flora said. "Either way, it's public money."

Michael Van Sickler can be reached at mvansickler@sptimes.com or 226-3402. Letitia Stein can be reached at lstein@sptimes.com or 226-3400.

Comments on this article

by Lola	Jun 27, 2008 6:53 PM
Tim needs to look at how many companies run by "Business People" are going under. Maybe Tim needs to run for office.

by rico	Jun 24, 2008 11:36 AM
This is why the county mayor amend. should pass. Too many chief's in charge and no one execpting responseablity

by Brondie25	Jun 23, 2008 5:52 PM
Why do high schools need five assistant principles? How about cutting some of those positions?

by tim	Jun 23, 2008 5:52 PM
This is what happens when we vote in school teachers, political activists and law and order types to run local government. Business people who understand finance are the only one's who'll protect our rights.

by Johnny Citizen	Jun 23, 2008 5:52 PM
When the counties whine about reduced revunues through property taxes, remember how much of our money they piss away being inefficient.

by Rose	Jun 23, 2008 11:06 AM
They rob Peter to pay Paul. Why? To CLAIM they cut taxes. Imagine if actual education cost had "increase ? from an average of $196 per home to the current $4,000 per home." The point is to anger voters so they blame schools and "privatize." Con job

by Jenny	Jun 23, 2008 11:06 AM
We all profit from growth, we should all share the costs? Stop wasting the money and get out of court.

by Joshu Jones	Jun 23, 2008 11:06 AM
Stop the irresponsible tax cuts NOW!

by Tender Foot	Jun 23, 2008 11:06 AM
On their honor they will do their best, to serve themselves and cheat the rest.

by Rick	Jun 23, 2008 9:56 AM
I love how posters always complain about their government, who spin someone's legit comments to feed their anger. Don't drag us down to your level. If you don't like your government, join it and do better.

by Alex	Jun 23, 2008 9:56 AM
This was caused by local governments approving new residential growth without requiring developers to pay for infrastructure costs. Now the rest of us are going to get stuck with the bill. Everyone will forget soon, and the cycle will repeat itself

by Fed Up In Clearwater	Jun 23, 2008 9:56 AM
I think that what Clearwater is doing is much worse.The city has wasted hundreds of thousands of tax dollars fighting its firefighters.The city has lost every case brought before an independant 3rd party.Go to www.saveclearwaterfire.org to learn more

by Jason	Jun 23, 2008 9:55 AM
We all want beter roads but no one is willing to pay. Unless you want your taxes to go up stop complaining and deal with traffic and congestion. We get what we pay for.

by Terry	Jun 23, 2008 9:55 AM
I believe Paul Flora was telling us that impact fees/development IS NOT paying for itself. Both Hills.Co. and the school system knew this was going to happen and the worst possible place to locate a high sch, elem & mid sch..all with one way in & out

by David	Jun 23, 2008 9:00 AM
I love how people working for the government, like Paul Flora, always point at another location and say something along the lines of "See we have it easy , just look at how bad it is in California!" and then try to justify dragging us to that level.

by HCB	Jun 23, 2008 9:00 AM
Many jokes will be made about how utterly stupid it is for one agency to sue another. But it's serious. These people are not serving the people - they are serving their egos. They should pay the attorney's fees and costs involved personally.

by Rich	Jun 23, 2008 9:00 AM
And who is footing the bill for this litigation? You guessed it, the Taxpayers! So not only do the taxpayers pay for the improvements needed but also for government agencies fighting amongst themselves in a court of law. CLASSIC !