by Wayne Daltry (Used with Permission – Published in the Banana Peel – Deborah M Maclean Publisher)
“What is Truth” asks the philosophers. “It is what can be reasoned through the mind and experience” states the scientists. “It is what compels you through the heart,” state the poets. The rest of us have to look at the record.
The record states that unincorporated Lee County lagged behind the cities in the recovery resulting from new construction and increased values of existing property, from the time of the impact fee reduction until…well, now.
And the cities kept the fees. Go figure.
The record states that prior to 1987, Lee County citizens imposed upon themselves a one cent gas tax, and didn’t lynch the Commissioners who passed 4 cent gas taxes, in order to relieve congestion. This was also the time the State passed the 6th penny sales tax, and passed half to local governments for infrastructure. This was also the time that congestion continued to grow. Not enough money? So the Commission then passed the impact fee.
Of interest to me is the deterioration of aging Big Carlos Pass Bridge replacement and the diversion or it seems the money to update/repair/replace (whatever) is diverted (by allocating 10M in gas tax dollars) to Alico Road widening east of Treeline/BHG for widening a road without much traffic, so speculators’ sprawl won’t have to do it.
After that time period saw the beginning of congestion reduction overall. But, yep, there was/and is still congestion. Which is generally caused not by fees but by their absence, and by bad land use decisions, which are contrary to the land use plans which link population (and traffic) growth to road (school, park, etc.) needs. When development is allowed (in size or character) contrary to the land uses and services to be built, then you get sprawl or wasted infrastructure.
BTW, the 2020 fund millage was diverted to other uses (that shortfall mentioned was indeed real, and was indeed being met by reserves), and now 80 percent of that is still diverted to other purposes.
During the time period the impact fees were reduced. Which does lead to the question, if the voters do not support a renewed 2020 program in 2016, will the millage be reduced accordingly?
And finally, the 48 percent (or so) reduction in property values had already occurred prior to the end of 2012, and improvements began after that, for both the cities and the county, and the cities in the aggregate improved at a higher percentage.
In closing if impact fees were raised 1000 percent, it would indeed pay for all the projects. Since it isn’t fair, I don’t recommend it. Returning them to the fair level, as recommended by staff and consultant, would be the right thing to do, which is 85 percent of 2012 rates (or thereabouts).
Pendergrass’ version of: The Truth about Impact Fees here: http://1drv.ms/1zP1aOf