Facts

Petitioner is the developer of a 274-unit redevelopment project in the City of Temecula. The redevelopment project replaced a 96-unit apartment complex, which existed at the project site. The redevelopment project added 162,871 square feet of residential space to the existing site.

The parties' dispute related to respondent's imposition of school facility fees totaling $1,352,428 on petitioner pursuant to Government Code section 53080, et seq.

The parties disputed whether the respondent should have imposed school fees on the entirety of the redevelopment project or only upon the square footage added to the site by the redevelopment project. Petitioner paid the disputed school fees under protest and filed a petition for writ of mandate.

PETITIONER'S CONTENTIONS:
Petitioner contended that since the school facility fee is to be assessed per square foot of development, respondent is required to determine the total amount of the new square footage which would be added to the site by the redevelopment project, and to assess school facility fees based on the increase in square footage over the previously-existing apartment complex, rather than on the entire square footage of the redevelopment project. Petitioner claimed that respondent failed to do so and instead, levied school facility fees on the entire square footage of the redevelopment project.

RESPONDENT'S CONTENTIONS:
Respondent contended that the school district is authorized to assess school fees based on the entire square footage of the redevelopment project. Respondent claimed that the school district does not have to limit the imposition of school fees to the increase in square footage resulting from the redevelopment project.

Result

$643,939 for petitioner.

Other Information

FILING DATE: June 10, 2009. Respondent is only authorized to impose school facility fees on the redevelopment project on the resulting net increase in assessable space. Respondent's imposition of the disputed school fees did not meet the requirements set forth in Shapell Industries Inc. v. Governing Board of the Milpitas Unified School District (1991) 1 Cal.App.4th 218 or Warmington Old Town Associates v. Tustin Unified School Dist. (2002) 101 Cal.App.4th 840, or the requirements set forth in Government Code section 66001, subdivisions (a)(3) and (a)(4).