Laserfiche WebLink
sewer capacity charges, Municipality concerns, and the results of staff's Impact Fee Collection <br />survey. He recommended the Board not change the timing of Impact Fee collections. <br />A lengthy discussion ensued whereby the Board discussed payment and dispute issues, <br />administration issues, impact fee determinations, water and sewer Impact Fees, the collection of <br />Impact Fees and base facility charges, capacity, and the survey results. <br />The Chairman opened the Public Hearing. <br />Joseph Paladin, Black Swan Consulting, opposed the proposal, feeling this would <br />benefit out-of-town builders and developers, not small local developers. <br />John Higgs, 45 Wax Myrtle Way, provided reasons as to why he felt this proposal would <br />be unfair and impractical. <br />John Scurlock, 1656 70 Court, stressed the significance of water and sewer Impact <br />Fees, and urged the Board to support staff's recommendation to not change the timing of the <br />Impact Fee collection. <br />Carolyn Corum, Dolores Street, felt that due to the economic downturn, the Impact Fees <br />should be paid up front. She requested the Board not change the timing of Impact Fees. <br />Peter Robinson, 315 Greytwig Road, revealed that he had suggested moving the Impact <br />Fee to CO at the Economic Summit Meeting, believing that it would encourage businesses and <br />jobs to come to the County. He believed that if the Impact Fee was moved to CO, it would be <br />the builder's decision to pay early or later because it could sometimes be easier to pay at the end <br />of the project than at the beginning He encouraged the Board to take the risk, see if moving the <br />collection of Impact Fee payments to CO would work, and if it does not work, then change it <br />back to collection at Building Permit Issuance. <br />10 <br />May 18, 2010 <br />