My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
CC - Agendas - City Council - REGULAR - 8/14/2018
>
City Clerk
>
Permanent Records
>
Permanent
>
CC - Agendas - City Council - REGULAR - 8/14/2018
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/15/2020 11:47:58 AM
Creation date
11/12/2018 11:24:04 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
CC - Agendas
Department
City Clerk
Sub
Clerk Records
Content
Agendas
Committee Status
Current
Document Type
City Council
Meeting Type
REGULAR
Meeting Date
8/14/2018
Retention
Permanent
Retention Type
Permanent
Security
Public
Scanner
Conversion
Scan Date
8/14/2018
Record Series
GS1016, #10260
Supplemental fields
Conversion Number
3230194
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
248
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
9.E.a <br />BFED #1 <br />League of Arizona Cities & Towns Resolution <br />Pursue collaborative discussions with homebuilding industry stakeholders on potential <br />modifications to the impact fee statutes that will streamline the adoption process and ensure that <br />new development pays for the associated demand of new and expanded infrastructure. <br />A. Purpose and Effect of Resolution <br />As a result of SB 1525 in 2011 and the regulations it established, cities and towns have <br />experienced some challenges implementing the complex regulatory requirements established by <br />the legislation and maintaining the philosophy of impact fees: growth paying for itself rather than <br />assessing existing residents who've already paid their proportionate share. Cities and towns do <br />their best to project what type of development will occur in their communities and when <br />infrastructure will be needed to service it; however, when development does not occur as <br />projected, it increases the likelihood of taxpayers paying for the cost of growth to avoid refunding <br />impact fees if the infrastructure is not built within the time frames established by the 2011 <br />legislation. <br />The requirements established by SB 1525 were written at a time when the housing industry was <br />struggling, but the result is unduly burdening existing taxpayers instead. Today, with the housing <br />market growth and demand increasing, it's time to review these requirements and explore <br />modifications that will streamline the adoption process and add flexibility to ensure that new <br />development pays for the associated demand of new and expanded infrastructure. <br />B. Relevance to Municipal Policy <br />There are 40 cities in the state that currently levy impact fees in at least one of the seven categories <br />of necessary public services. As a result of changes to the impact fee statutes in the last 10 years, <br />15 cities and towns have discontinued levying impact fees due to the complex regulations <br />established and the expense to comply. <br />C. Fiscal Impact to Cities and Towns <br />There is no estimate of the fiscal impact to cities and towns that levy impact fees. Ideally, any <br />changes would result in the use of less taxpayer dollars to fund infrastructure that impact fees <br />should be paying for. <br />D. Fiscal Impact to the State <br />There is no fiscal impact to the state. <br />E. Contact Information: <br />Sponsoring City or Town: Prescott <br />Name: Phil Goode, Councilman <br />Phone: (928) 777-1100 <br />Email: phi1.goode(a Prescott-az.gov <br />League Staff: Tom Savage <br />Attachment: 2018 League Conference Resolutions Packet (2125 : League Resolutions Voting) <br />11 <br />Packet Pg. 147 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.