The Smart Growth lobby has reacted negatively to the impact-fee bill submitted by Sen. John Watkins, R-Powhatan, and backed by the home builder’s lobby. In a word, they think it … (starts with an “s” and rhymes with “bucks.”)
SB768 would dismantle Virginia’s “proffer” system in which developers negotiate voluntary contributions to local infrastructure to offset the impact of their re-zonings, according to a press release distributed today under the name of five environmental and conservation groups. The bill would substitute a state-directed, capped, and technically complicated impact fee system, and increase home seller’s “grantor’s tax.”
“We see this bill as a tax increase on existing Virginia homeowners and taxpayers,” said Stewart Schwartz, Executive Director of the Coalition for Smarter Growth. “It pushes even more of the costs of new development onto existing residents.”
At the same time, the conservationists say, the bill would short-change local governments. Said Chris Miller, president of the Piedmont Environmental Council: “Capped by the state, the fees would be far less than the current value of cash and in-kind proffers, and would be reduced by so many credits, that they would shrink to virtually nothing. Developers would also evade even these fees by developing in rural areas where impact fees cannot be imposed under this law.”
Builders in Northern Virginia would pay on average only $8,000 per new single-family house, $6,000 per townhouse, and $4,000 per multifamily unit. Elsewhere in the state, payments would be $5,000, $3,750, and $2,500. While some local governments might be tempted because these fees would apply to existing “by-right” zoning, the bill excludes subdivision plats and site plans that have been filed already.
The impact fees wouldn’t come close to covering the cost of new infrastructure, and it would lead to “routine” rejection of Smart Growth developments, Schwartz said.
So much for my insta-analysis in “Watkins Bill Would Revolutionize Impact Fees in Virginia” last Sunday. I overlooked the ludicrously low impact fee schedule in my first take. Still, there are attractive aspects to the bill, especially leveling the playing field between rezoned properties and by-right properties. I wonder if the bill might be salvageable by adjusting the impact fees higher to a number that the environmental lobby could live with.
Update: The Virginia Association of Counties boils down the bill to its major constituent parts. Much easier than reading the bill itself. Click here to read the summary.