Loading...
Productivity Committee Impact Fee Subcommittee Minutes 12/03/2008 Productivity Committee Sub-committee Meeting Alternative Policy Approaches for Impact Fees 12/03/08 Members Present: Larry Baytos, Gina Downs, Doug Fee, Steve Harrison, Janet Vasey, John Barlow, Staff Present: Joe Schmitt, Administrator CDES;Norman Feder, Administrator, Transportation; Amy Patterson, Impact Fee Manager; Paula Fleishman, Impact Fee Coordinator; Mike Sheffield, County Manager's Office; Barbetta Hutchinson, Office of Management and Budget Others in Attendance: Brenda Talbert, CBIA; Ron Rice, City Gate; David Rivera, EDC of Collier; Kristi Bartlett, EDC of Collier; Steve Hart, Chamber; Roger Rice, Attorney; Billi Spinelli, Chamber, Tammie Nemecek, EDC. Call to Order: The meeting was called to order by Larry Baytos at 1:06 p.m. Discuss Possible Alternative Policy Approaches for Impact Fees: What is our task? It is not to come up with a new tax to replace impact fees—simply to work within the impact fees themselves. Larry reviewed three possible options: Hold the course; provide minimal fee relief; provide more aggressive relief—roll back to 2007. Gina Downs said that a lot of time has already been spent working on impact fee reviews and doesn't see any other way to offset impact fees. Janet Vasey gave a history of past studies and the decision being made not to impose franchise fee. Norman Feder said that the revenue generating items were removed from the agenda by our Board of County Commissioners. Doug Fee stated that there are many foreclosures and the home values have gone down. Since we have excess inventory, he doesn't feel a large need for capital infrastructure and therefore feels that there would be no harm in keeping everything the way it is now. Janet Vasey said that she thinks about where the money is going to come from to fund the things that are already being funded. Commissioners have said that growth pays for growth and there are very many good reasons why they say that. The people have voted down sales tax and the people said they want roads in place before the growth and then this year people said they didn't want to pay for growth once again. What does that do to building? In the high market, it didn't affect us at all. If we cut back to 2007, where do you come up with the money if you can't go places the people don't want to go? The Productivity Committee has previously said that the impact fees should not be implemented except Transportation, but they didn't listen. Where do we go from here? • Steve Harrison said the County has already spent the impact fees that we have yet to collect. The methodology that we currently use may not be working. We may need to go to higher density or reduce fees in some geographical locations and go higher than other. Steve said sooner or later we have to address additional revenues. Norman Feder added that there needs to be funding for maintenance of the roads that impact fees have built. John Barlow that our county counts on revenues from tourism and retirees. With the reduction in the revenue stream we would be ill served not to recognize what is happening to the credit markets. He believes it would be wise to try and stimulate and increase the revenue streams if we could. What could we do to stimulate building? A reasonable reduction in impact fees should be implemented to try to stimulate the workforce population. The bigger issue is if we don't diversify the economy we will continue to live through booms and busts. There are not enough jobs being created and no industry is being built. We need a plan to make it happen. Gina said one county eliminated impact fees for new businesses that moved into the county. Whatever we do should not curtail the county's ability to get back into sync when the economy comes back. A rolling average would better serve us. School impact fee: The school district did not participate in impact fees for many years. This will be updated in 2009. There is $5M outstanding in debt for the school board. Public Speakers: Roger Rice, City Gate— We need economic diversification is needed badly. When industry is looking to relocate, they crunch the numbers and they find that the fees are much greater in Collier County. In 2006 Tindale-Oliver did a study on lane mile cost. In the current study,the fee used was 10%less than in 2006. The proposed industrial fees have risen in spite of the reduction. The impact fees should be going down 10% in conjunction with the declining road cost. We need to attract people and business to this county and we can't do that when we are being inconsistent with the facts. Ron Rice, City Gate—He is developing at I75 and 951. He sold a lot to a builder to build a MRA building. Impact fees went up to $1M for a 33,000 sq. ft. building so the builder backed out. There are more stories like this. He is traveling the country and can't find buyers because of the exorbitant impact fees. David Rivera from EDC—He's heard some good ideas. This is complex problem, but he's glad that it is recognized that industrial jobs need to be brought to Collier. We need to attack the issue of economic diversity today. This is not an easy area to move into because of the impact fees, but we need to look at new sources aggressively and some type of relief should be brought to the table. We should also bring experts to the table to talk about these things and get something going. We need the tools in place to make sure the efforts of the EDC aren't useless. Janet Vasey said that she isn't a big fan of EDC incentives, but she doesn't understand why the NRA guy wasn't coming for incentives? Why has the EDC asked for$0 in FY09 for incentives? Amy Patterson said that the county has money available for incentives. Bill Spinelli, Naples Chamber of Commerce - About 8 years ago he sat in CBIA's office and discussed the lack of road building. That group begged the government to get better at building infrastructure and they did. We have been building 4,000 houses a year here. 8,000 construction workers lost their jobs here and can't meet their bills. We are at a new juncture in the life of Collier County. The needs of our time are not, "growth pays for growth"—the need is to give people jobs. We need to refocus—is it more important to collect the impact fee or is it more important to put someone to work so they don't lose their homes. We need to get serious about putting people to work. Do we need a public works program? Larry summarized the meeting by saying that his impression from the group that is not a consensus in making any reductions in impact fees. Gina would agree that is additional spending is seen through infrastructure then she would agree to a reduction in that amount. Norman Feder said that the BCC wants to maximize impact fees to legal limits. We need additional revenues besides impact fees besides impact fees because impact fees cannot legally be used for maintenance. We have added miles coming in without people moving in. Amy said that school impacts represent 10-11 thousand dollars per home. If the school districts say they do not need the money, the board does not need to collect it. It would have to come from the school districts, not from staff. Tammie Nemecek- She thinks that the issue with impact fees is that this community is very dependent on residential impact fees. If you don't collect impact fees do you collect the money from? There is only a certain amount of places you can go to for revenue. Even if you offer up an immediate reduction, what is the long term strategy? Computer and software services will put us on the map. There has to be a correlation in how much we collect in residential taxes and commercial taxes. Is there a goal where we may need to get to in regard to that and not necessarily looking at the retail jobs? Janet can't see how changes help anything—there is no building anyway. Not indexing at all would be only $1,500 and it really wouldn't be helpful. Janet also would be agreeable to look at a long term plan from Tammy. Steve Harrison feels like it would be a shame if the Productivity Committee did nothing. We should take some little chunk and do something. Norman Feder said we should look at the legality of taxing some and not others. Larry will provide a written report to the full committee and present the report at the next full meeting on December 17. Doug would not support the report the way it is,unless the entire Productivity Committee could change his mind. Adjourn: Doug Fee motioned to adjourn. Gina Downs seconded. The group voted unanimously. arr Bayto. b-commi' Chair