Warmington Old Town Associates, L.P. v. Tustin Unified School District

Good Law
101 Cal. App. 4th 840·124 Cal. Rptr. 2d 744·2002 Cal. App. LEXIS 4578·2002 Daily Journal DAR 10022·2002 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8013
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 30, 2002G027494California9,642 words

Opinion

Opinion

Moore, J.

In this case of first impression, we decide whether redevelopment construction is exempt from the imposition of school-impact fees under Education Code section 17620, subdivision (a)(1)(C)(i). The statutory provision does not expressly address redevelopment construction. However, the legislative history and the statutory exemptions given other types of construction under Education Code sections 17620, subdivision (a)(1)(A), and 17626 convince us the Legislature did not mean to provide an exemption for redevelopment construction.

Nonetheless, Government Code section 66001, subdivision (a)(3) and (4) requires that a school district’s governing board, in imposing school-impact fees on redevelopment construction, must establish a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the need for the public facility, on the one hand, and on the other hand, the type of development project, i.e., the demolition and replacement of housing units. In the case before us, the school district’s governing board exercised its authority under Education Code section 17620 to impose school-impact fees on a redevelopment project, but failed to comply with the requirements of Government Code…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.