My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Bill 324 Impact Fees Letter from Planning Director
PublicDocuments
>
Planning Department
>
General Planning Department Information
>
Bill 324 Impact Fees Letter from Planning Director
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/5/2011 9:03:41 AM
Creation date
11/30/2011 4:12:46 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
8
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Honorable Fete Hoffmann <br />Chair and Presiding Officer <br />and Members of the County Council <br />COUNTY COUNCIL <br />Page <br />September 9, 2008 <br />of the house, but the difference is small: only about % more for a 4,000 square foot <br />house vs. a 1,000 square foot house. For simplicity's sake, Bill 324 did not vary the fees <br />by house size. <br />In contrast, property taxes are proportionate to value. For example, the property tax bill <br />for a home with a taxable value of $100,000, after applying all exemptions, in the <br />homeowners' class, is $555/yr., whereas for a borne with a taxable value of $1,000,000, <br />after exemptions, the property tax bill is $5,550/yr. A 5% across -the -board increase in <br />property tax rates to generate the equivalent of an impact fee) would cost the owner of <br />the S 100,000 ,00 home 2 7.' yr., while the owner o f the 1, 000, 000 borne would pair an <br />additional 27.yr. <br />In this sense, impact fees can be considered regressive compared to property taxes, again, <br />if the hnnebuyer bears the cost of the impact fee. <br />4. The County will have to budget operating funds for the new facilities, especially <br />parks. <br />If the Count} builds new parks with impact fees, it also has to budget funds to operate the <br />parks from other revenue sources. By law, impact fees cannot be used for operating <br />expenses or salaries. The operating and maintenance costs for roads are relatively to <br />compared to the capital costs, and the impact fee will not generate enough funds to <br />greatly increase county investment in police, fire, or solid waste facilities. <br />5. Impact fees involve considerable administrative costs. <br />Naturally, these fees have to be collected and put in the proper accounts. The interface <br />with the fair share system creates some administrative issues (the prior fair share payment <br />has to be offset against any impact fee.) The affordable housing grants and loans will <br />also require much record - keeping and administration to determine eligibility. The impact <br />fee program will need additional staff in Planning, Finance, DPW-Building Division, and <br />the f f ice of Housing and Community Development. <br />6. The proposed impact fees are less than the "fair hare" assessments. <br />The current "fair share'' assessment is about $11,500 for a single - family dwelling. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.