Henry Raymond
Fairfax News => Political Issues/Comments => Topic started by: Henry on July 22, 2005, 07:43:34 AM
-
Channel 3 was in town on July 21, 2005 and interviewed Ed Nuttall regarding impact fees in one of the fastest growing towns in Vermont vs the town of Richmond a slower growing town.
For almost twenty years, many Vermont cities and towns have relied on impact fees on new housing development to bolster their budgets -- based on the assumption that new housing means more demand for municipal services. But now comes a contrarian view. A new study concludes that impact fees may actually HURT local budgets and taxpayers in certain cases in which a town's growth has been slower than average. Andy Potter reports.
The assumption has been that more new housing brings new families -- and a greater burden on taxpayers. Now comes economist Dick Heaps with a new study that challenges that assumption. It's an analysis of the town of Richmond's new proposed impact fees, which Heaps himself originally supported. Richard Heaps/Economist says, "this time when I went through the initial process calculating, is it justifiable to do an impact fee, I came to the conclusion , no it's not." The study commissioned by the Homebuilders and Remodelers Association -- a group opposed to impact fees -- says a long-term decline in school age population means new home construction will not overcrowd the schools. Andy Potter reports: "part of the argument against impact fees contained in this report is that they tend to discourage new housing development -- and therefore new student enrollment. But under Vermont's school funding system, Act 68, fewer students also mean fewer education dollars for the community." Heaps says: "Then with Act 68. It now works out that additional children in the Richmond school will lower the per pupil spending, and since Act 68 determines your taxes under per pupil spending, the tax rate will go down in the town." Heaps points out that his conclusion apply only to town like Richmond with low growth rates. In places like Fairfax, with one of Vermont's fastest growth rates, Heaps says impact fees are still justified. Fairfax select board member Ed Nuttall says the town needs the extra revenue. Edward Nuttall/Fairfax Selectboard says "the selectboard in conjunction with the planning commission looked at the growth rate of Fairfax and saw the future being one of an explosion, if you will." Richmond remains divided over the wisdom of impact fees. Select board Chairwoman Fran Thomas represents a three-member majority on the five-member board -- in support. Fran Thomas/Richmond Select Board Chairwoman says, "At the current time enrollment is going down, but who's to say that the enrollment isn't going to go up? And we still have the capital debt that goes with those schools. And so it seems appropriate that any new houses that are built which will have students, will pay a part of that capital construction through an impact fee." Most towns collect impact fees, but now opponents have picked up some ammunition in a debate that continues across Vermont.
Andy Potter, Channel 3 news, Richmond.