County Counsel Reverses Stand on Housing, Schools : Government: The supervisors are told that potential school overcrowding does not have to be considered in the approval of housing developments.

In a major policy reversal that could have statewide repercussions, the Los Angeles County counsel has told the county supervisors that they do not have to consider potential school overcrowding in reviewing requests to build housing developments.

Just four months ago, County Counsel De Witt W. Clinton said the opposite, telling the supervisors that they could reject zone changes for developments that threatened to overwhelm school districts.

At the time, education officials hailed Clinton’s opinion, saying it could help school districts in growing areas--such as the Antelope and Santa Clarita valleys--hold down skyrocketing enrollments.

But in an Oct. 19 memo reassessing the opinion he offered June 8, Clinton wrote: “Since that date, we have had occasion to review in depth the advice given and have concluded that it was inaccurate.”

At issue is the county’s interpretation of a ruling last November by the state Court of Appeal in Mira Development Corp. vs. the City of San Diego. In that case, the court upheld the San Diego City Council’s denial of a zone change for a proposed housing tract because there were not enough public services to support the project. The court issued a narrow ruling, applying only to zone changes.

The state Supreme Court declined to hear an appeal of the case.

The Mira decision, while giving the City Council power to reject a zone change, did not explicitly give school districts more control over development. In effect, it gave school districts leverage to negotiate with developers to obtain land or other concessions to build new schools because developers with construction requests pending before city and county authorities could not proceed if school authorities objected.

Builders predicted that they might have to scale back projects to win the support of school officials.

Two Santa Clarita Valley school districts, citing the Mira decision, have tried to block plans by two developers to build 517 homes and condominiums in Castaic. Officials in the Castaic Union School District and William S. Hart High School District say the projects will funnel hundreds of students into already crowded school systems.

The Santa Clarita Valley has been the fastest-growing region in the county for four consecutive years, and the valley’s five high school and elementary districts, with about 24,000 students, predict that they will need at least 13 new schools by 2010.

At the district’s urging, state Sen. Ed Davis (R-Valencia) asked the legislative counsel last May to assess the Mira case. The Legislature’s attorney said Mira did indeed give cities and counties the right to reject developments that would overburden schools. In June, Clinton cited the legislative counsel’s opinion when he said Los Angeles County would have to abide by the Mira decision.

On Tuesday, an angry Davis said he will consider writing legislation to force the supervisors to follow the principles set out in the Mira decision.

“I am shocked that the county counsel now, after initially agreeing with this legislative counsel opinion, has decided that Mira doesn’t apply,” Davis said in a statement.

“It is time for all of us to make the tough decisions to solve our infrastructure problems,” Davis said. “However, until there is a willingness from both developers and the county of Los Angeles to help solve these problems, I believe that the state Legislature must act.”

In his memo to the supervisors, Clinton said the county should not follow the Mira decision because it could violate the state’s school financing law that already sets a limit on how much developers must contribute toward new schools. Under the 1987 law, developers must pay school districts $1.56 for every square foot of residential construction they build. Clinton said the Mira decision in effect could force developers to pay districts more than the limit set by state law.

If the state appellate court had considered that its ruling contradicted the school financing law, “its conclusion might have been otherwise,” Clinton wrote. Clinton also said the appellate court misinterpreted earlier court rulings on land use when it drafted its opinion on the Mira case.

Although the Board of Supervisors cannot deny a zone change on the grounds that a development will burden schools, the board still can reject projects if they cause traffic problems or overwhelm other public services, Clinton wrote.

The board is scheduled to review Clinton’s memo Thursday when it considers the two developments opposed by the Castaic and William S. Hart districts.

Jim Murdoch, a lobbyist for the Coalition for Adequate School Housing, based in Sacramento, said Clinton’s reversal on the Mira case could have broad repercussions because many counties look to Los Angeles for guidance on some legal issues.

“This is really a loss for school districts statewide,” Murdoch said.