 |
| John Moscato |
By John Mosato - Recently published comments by Greg Lennes the Las Cruces Bulletin and Michael Hays in the Las Cruces Sun-News have exhibited fundamental misunderstandings of how developmental infrastructure is built and how the new impact fees—especially the category related to roads—will mark a drastic change from the status quo. As has been the case for several decades, the City’s subdivision regulations and design standards require developers to build all of the infrastructure within the boundaries of a new subdivision. This infrastructure includes City utilities (water, sewer, and gas), drainage structures, and roads. In addition, developers arrange for the installation of wire utilities (electric, phone, and TV cable). Moreover, if adequate infrastructure has not already been extended to the boundary of the subdivision, developers are responsible for building such extensions.
 |
| Las Cruces City Hall |
It appears to be a common misperception that the City pays for this developmental infrastructure. In fact, the City does not; developers do. (To its credit, the City does an admirable job of building such community-wide infrastructure as water and wastewater plants, and the City sets utility impact fees to pay for these plants.) The City regulates the planning and engineering of subdivisions through a rigorous approval process and inspects the construction as the developer’s contractors build a project. Even the approval and inspection of a project adds to the developer’s costs: the developer pays the City a permit fee of 4 percent of the cost of construction to defray the City’s expenses. The developer also pays gross receipts taxes on the costs of planning, engineering, and construction. Needless to say, the developer creates or sustains jobs at every step in the process.
What is noticeably absent from this process is the payment of impact fees by the developer. Why? The reason is simple: developers are not charged impact fees. Impact fees are levied when a home (or a commercial building, in the case of a commercial project) is built, and the impact fees are borne by the new homeowner (or business). Readers can now see how misguided Mr. Lennes was when he accused Councilor Connor of “pander[ing] to the developers by eliminating or reducing impact fees.” Developers have not paid impact fees in the past, they do not currently pay impact fees, and they will not be subject to impact fees under the new system recently approved by City Council. Developers build what the City requires. If the City determines (as it has in the past) that new homeowners or businesses are having an impact on the availability of community-wide City services, it has the right under New Mexico law to impose impact fees. Those fees have been limited to parks and certain City utilities until recently, when City Council voted to impose impact fees related to public safety, flood control, and roads. Read rest of column here:
News New Mexico
Impact Fees Fact and Fiction
What is noticeably absent from this process is the payment of impact fees by the developer. Why? The reason is simple: developers are not charged impact fees. Impact fees are levied when a home (or a commercial building, in the case of a commercial project) is built, and the impact fees are borne by the new homeowner (or business). Readers can now see how misguided Mr. Lennes was when he accused Councilor Connor of “pander[ing] to the developers by eliminating or reducing impact fees.” Developers have not paid impact fees in the past, they do not currently pay impact fees, and they will not be subject to impact fees under the new system recently approved by City Council. Developers build what the City requires. If the City determines (as it has in the past) that new homeowners or businesses are having an impact on the availability of community-wide City services, it has the right under New Mexico law to impose impact fees. Those fees have been limited to parks and certain City utilities until recently, when City Council voted to impose impact fees related to public safety, flood control, and roads. Read rest of column here: News New Mexico
Posts
2 comments:
I agree that the CLC cannot be depended upon to build roads on a developer's schedule. In addition, the CLC has no incentive to keep costs under control if they are just turning around and charging the developer.
However, if a developer is required to improve the infrastructure (i.e. roads) to a new development, then why do we have stupid situations like following 2-lane choke points in otherwise 4-lane roads:
(a) Sonoma Ranch Blvd between Hwy 70 and Los Colinas, and (b) Mesa Grande between Hwy 70 and Engler)?
Why? You can thank city council for killing the SAD (Special Assessment District) that would have connected Sonoma Ranch Blvd to I-25. The current mayor is the ONLY city dad that voted for that improvement. Connor and the rest of the left-wing progressives voted to strand the golf course and hamstring the developers. This was AFTER they approved the cost of appraising the land in a 7-0 vote. They'll try to tell you that the city had some kind of financial liability. When you hear them allege this, know this; they're not telling the truth. Everyone of these city councilors need to be replaced. Unfortunately, the citizenry of LC doesn't care. Oh well, you get what you vote for or what you don't vote against.
Post a Comment