11/10/2015 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Impact Fee Consultan.ts Research and Recovery Specialists' Mr. Joseph Baird Indian River County Administrator Vero Beach, FI. 32960 Dear Sir, Indian River County SEP 2 3 2015 Office of the County Administrator On August 24, and August 28, 2015 Impact Fee Consultants submitted the first 28 refund applications on behalf of our clients. According to the list provided by the County in response to public information request submitted and fees paid by Impact Fee Consultants there are at least 300 similar applications that may be pending. The refund request stated that the reason for the refunds were that there was no growth in the time since the collection of these fees. No growth equals no fee. On September 18, 2015 Planning Director Stan Boling denied the refund requests stating: "School impact fees collected during 2008 were properly expended or encumbered for capital improvements made necessary by new growth and development, and that those fees were expended or encumbered by June 30, 2014....therefore, the 28 subject refund applications are denied". As Agent and on behalf of the applicants, Impact Fee Consultants does hereby appeal the decision of the Planning Director under section 100.06 of the County Code. The reasons for the appeal are In part as follows: 1. No growth occurred in the time period making the expenditure "necessary for new growth" impossible. Simply put no growth...no fee regardless of the time of the expenditure or the reason. As the first responsible officer it was required of the Planning Director to consider more than the accounting and dates of fees but the eligibility of such expenditures. 2. Expenses claimed since 2008 had already been accounted for by previous collections and a carryover of funds. 3. Fees paid in 2008 cannot be used to fund a deficit that existed prior to their collection. Funds are for future growth. 4. There are actually less student stations today than in 2008. Impact fees cannot be used to replace existing student stations, for repairs or for remodeling. 5. Impact fees cannot be used for students that are ineligible to receive those funds. 6. School impact fees are calculated on errant population figures and not "the latest and best data" as required. 7. These fees do not meet the dual rational nexus test or the prohibition against land banking as outlined in case law. 8. State statutes prevent the use of preferential consideration for government 9. It is required that the government prove that the fees were eligible and properly spent. The burden of proof lies with Mr. Boling and the school district, not the applicant and was not proven as required. 2001 9th Avenue, Suite 105 • Vero Beach, Florida 32960 Office 772.492.9086 • Fax 888.822.1310 • www impactfeeconsultants com Attachment 3a 133