Longmont – The City Council, in considering how to interpret its unique-to-Colorado law that restricts growth if the surrounding schools can’t handle it, has taken a U-turn.
The City Council said this week it will consider only current school capacity when evaluating whether new development will be allowed.
“As far as I’m concerned, that’s the easiest way out of this dilemma,” Councilman Roger Lange said.
He was referring to a complex tangle of issues involving the ordinance’s wording, the St. Vrain Valley School District’s financial situation and the outcries of parents worried about crowded schools.
The law had said the council will refuse new developments unless space for new students is or “will be available” at the schools the developments would feed into. A school was considered to be full when it reached 25 percent over capacity.
The City Council had been considering clarifying the ordinance to say “will be available” can also mean the district has a plan and the funds to open a new school to relieve crowding. The council had approved that change on first reading last month.
However, at a meeting this week, the council decided against making the change and instead decided to strike “will be available” altogether. In return, the council voted to raise the level at which a school is considered to be full to 50 percent over capacity.
No St. Vrain Valley schools in Longmont are at that mark.
The new wording simplifies the process, Lange said. In the past, he said, the council based some decisions on projections that turned out to be wrong.
Now, “until (the schools) hit 150 percent, we let subdivisions through,” Lange said.
The new change will get its final approval next week.
The abrupt move left both parents and school district officials bewildered as to who won.
Some parents, particularly those with students at Eagle Crest, an overcrowded elementary school in southwestern Longmont, had protested the original change. They said that while the district has bond money and a goal to build a new school, it does not have the revenue to operate that school. Because of this, the district has said it won’t be able to open new schools in the immediate future.
Making the original change, they felt, would have allowed new development without first ensuring there were solutions to handle crowding.
“The city’s not going to make the school district build a school,” said parent Scott Neuhard. “We’re just asking them to cut off development.”
The school district had been in favor of the original change. More growth, in part, helps the district’s tight financial situation.
Still, school board President Sandi Searls said the new change could be a good thing.
She said: “If we don’t have to get into the projections – because we don’t have crystal balls – it does make it a lot easier.”
Staff writer John Ingold can be reached at 720-929-0898 or jingold@denverpost.com.
