The Baltimore County Council Monday night passed heavily amended, controversial legislation that attempts to restrict development near overcrowded schools.
Critics of the bill, which updates the county Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance, say it will do little to relieve crowded classrooms and will only worsen the county’s affordable housing crisis.
The council rejected a proposal from Councilman Julian Jones, a Democrat, that would have allowed projects that include affordable housing to go forward even in an overcrowded school district.
“These developments and these opportunities don’t come that often,” Jones said.
But County Council Chairman Izzy Patoka, who sponsored the legislation, disagreed with Jones’ amendment.
Patoka asked, “If we have an overcrowded school and we decide to add children that might live in those affordable housing units, are we being fair to those children?"
Baltimore County is legally obligated under an agreement with the Department of Housing and Urban Development to create 1,000 affordable housing units by 2027.
In a statement after the vote, County Executive Johnny Olszewski said the complex bill could cause “detrimental impacts on Baltimore County’s moral and legal obligations to address attainable housing. In light of those concerns and a flurry of amendment activity, we will carefully review the final version of this legislation in the coming days to determine the appropriate next step.”
The council spent several hours going through dozens of amendments.
For instance the bill, as originally written, would have lowered what is considered an overcrowded school from 115% capacity to 100%. The County Council Monday night changed that to 105%.
“This gives a little bit more flexibility,” said Democratic Councilman Mike Ertel. “At 105 (percent) the schools are still manageable. There are a lot of things that can be done to help mitigate that.”
Under the legislation, a proposed development would have to receive a school capacity approval certificate from a newly created committee in order to go forward. The original bill would have allowed a development to proceed without the certificate after waiting five years, because the county should have had time to prepare for a possible overcrowding issue. The council Monday night changed that waiting period to four years.
Councilman Pat Young, who along with Councilman Jones opposed the legislation, did not like the idea of a committee making those decisions.
“We are leaving it to them and ceding our control to a body that has yet to be appointed,” Young said.
The legislation also will get rid of the adjacency loophole.
This allows developers to build in an overcrowded school district as long as there is a nearby school that is below capacity. The idea is that the school board could then shift students from one school to the other through redistricting.
But that rarely happens.
There were a couple of attempts Monday night to keep the adjacency loophole in place, but they were batted back by the majority of council members.
The legislation passed on a 4-2 vote with Jones and Young voting against. Republican Councilman Todd Crandell, who was not in attendance so did not vote, has in the past spoken out against the bill.
The council also agreed to add to the legislation a requirement that each year there would need to be a memorandum of understanding between the committee and the Baltimore County Public Schools.
School officials had been concerned that they were not being involved in the process.
“It’s good to have the dialogue between both units of government,” said Republican Councilman David Marks, who added it “will go a long way to engendering the spirit of trust and cooperation.”
Republican Councilman Wade Kach said the legislation is needed to help relieve the pressure developments put on the schools.
“If the bill has flaws, that can be worked out in the future,” Kach said. “This is not the last time you’ve seen this legislation, I can tell you that.”
