Skip to content

Elly Tierney: Annapolis school crowding bill is flawed as proposed

Alderwoman Elly Tierney represents Ward 1 in Annapolis.
Joshua McKerrow / Capital Gazette file
Alderwoman Elly Tierney represents Ward 1 in Annapolis.
Author
PUBLISHED: | UPDATED:

As we all know, the city has been wrestling with Adequate Public Facilities for schools legislation for several years. During the last City Council meeting on Monday, another postponement was agreed per a majority vote.

I agreed with Mayor Gavin Buckley’s request for postponement. Following that, I conducted research which has convinced me to vote “no” on the ordinance as it stands, or postpone it again until we can have a viable solution for our overcrowded high school. That is disappointing to a council that wants to get things done.

Meanwhile, the County Council, as of January, approved their school utilization chart based on 2020 projected enrollment — where one in three schools will exceed capacity including Annapolis High School.

At the same time, The Capital reports that the county is pushing redistricting proposals, none of which include Annapolis High School feeder schools. As reported, we have crowded schools or “inadequate facilities.” Student-to-teacher ratios have increased, resources have diminished and portable classrooms are necessary.

There is no question passing the Adequate Public Facilities bill as it stands would delay non-exempt residential development within city limits for six years. But I question what would it do to solve the acute and long-term school overcrowding problem or, more importantly, what has it done?

Adequate Public Facilities is meant to be a “concurrency law” per definition. That means that infrastructure keeps up with development, capital improvement budgets are aligned, and roads, schools, etc., are proactively measured against future development.

The structure of a concurrency regulation is critical because it has economic implications. For example, if infrastructure capacity is unavailable and new construction is temporarily prohibited, an adequate facilities ordinance operates in a manner similar to a development moratorium until the city can provide needed public services.

This causes a reduction in new housing supply and puts upward pressure on existing home prices. That might suit existing property owners just fine, but it is not good for the kind of residential infill development we need within the existing city limits to increase our tax base to pay for expected services, aging infrastructure and other resiliency challenges.

The argument of “residents are attracted where there are better schools” has become unattainable.

As the mayor said at the meeting, he doesn’t want to pull up that drawbridge.

County Executive Steuart Pittman’s administration is barely three months post-inaugural. Much has to be discussed with this new county administration. As a city, we are at a disadvantage because we are not the driver of school construction for the facilities that serve city students.

The county has and will continue to shift the cost of infrastructure development to owners of developable land in the county, that is why new schools are being built in Crofton and Severna Park. Retroactively asking for Annapolis High relief is the position the city finds itself in in right now.

Will city developers pay for upgrades or expansion? It’s unlikely.

Housing market characteristics are very different in the city and the county. The structure of our city adequate facilities bill is a closed system because we don’t have complete control. The challenge is to have a mutual APF structure with the county to achieve our planning objectives.

I believe that the mayor and the county executive will meet to discuss these goals and come to a mutually successful adequate public facilities model that the city can share.

If we continue on the path we are on, in lieu of managing growth, the unbalanced implementation will drive up property values and taxes while offering a potential developer no incentive to build workforce housing in the city.

We will continue to be a divided city and not One Annapolis.