If not cash proffers, what?
An interesting proposal from the Free Enterprise Forum to remove cash proffers from Albemarle County’s toolbox for managing new growth. I’m curious to know what alternatives exist that would replace proffers. Proffers are not always effective at restricting growth or helping the County achieve the desired revenue stream to support infrastructure development.
Impact fees, adequate public facilities regulations and legislation … what else could be done so that new homeowners don’t bear the full burden of growth? (it’s not merely mean old rich developers who pay the fees … they pass those fees on to new homeowners). This is one bill that failed in the Virginia General Assembly a few years ago – Conditional zoning; replaces cash proffer system with system of impact fees.
The only answer which I can come up with now is that there is no easy answer as to how to pay for the impacts of growth and the lack of sufficient infrastructure, other than we can all agree that both need to be paid for, but we want someone else to pay for it.
I’m curious as to how many developments have gone by-right (not needing a rezoning) because going through the proffer/rezoning process and paying the proffers were cost-prohibitive.
If you’re curious about impact fees (which I believe are traditionally fought by real estate/developers, but I could be wrong), spend a few minutes reading the Virginia Code
A. Any locality that includes within its comprehensive plan a calculation of the capital costs of public facilities necessary to serve residential uses may impose and collect impact fees in amounts consistent with the methodologies used in its comprehensive plan to defray the capital costs of public facilities related to the residential development.
B. Impact fees imposed and collected pursuant to this section shall only be used for public facilities that are impacted by residential development.
C. A locality imposing impact fees as provided in this section shall allow credit against the impact fees for cash proffers collected for the purpose of defraying the capital costs of public facilities related to the residentialdevelopment. A locality imposing impact fees as provided in this section shall also include within its comprehensive plan a methodology for calculating credit for the value of proffered land donations to accommodate public facilities, and for the construction cost of any public facilities or public improvements the construction of which is required by proffer.
D. A locality imposing impact fees under this section may require that such impact fees be paid prior to and as a condition of the issuance of any necessary building permits for residential uses. ¶