Not the way

To the editor:

I read with some disappointment in the May 27 Osceola News-Gazette that the County Commission is considering allowing developers to pay their related transportation impact fees over a period of years instead of at the time of permitting, as I assume they currently do.

My two primary concerns with this plan are the increased tax burden it will place on existing residents and businesses and the stresses on infrastructure that will arise when it takes longer to complete road projects because of delayed cash flow.

As a lifelong Republican, I believe that taxes should be low and government should be small. However, I also believe that people and businesses should pay their fair share in taxes and do so in a manner that covers their individual impacts on the system. For that reason, I am in favor of impact fees and their timely collection by local government.

Simply put, implementing a plan that forces hard-working residents to cover the development impacts of others, even temporarily, is wrong. The people of Osceola County already have the threat of millage increases, gas tax increases and sales tax increases hanging over their heads. Adding the prospect of having to pay someone else’s taxes, that of developers no less, will not sit well with voters.

Secondly, the purpose of impact fees is to mitigate the impacts of new development on infrastructure. Presumably, developments are approved, road projects are planned, impact fees are paid and the necessary roads are built. This should all happen in a timely manner as close to the completion of the development as possible.

Unfortunately, this payment plan proposal will throw that logical process out of whack. The process being considered would allow large development to occur without collecting the necessary funding to ensure that our roads do not face further gridlock or it would simply pass that funding need on to existing residents and businesses in the form of a new or increased tax. Either way, residents pay with increased traffic, a lighter wallet, or both, while developers enjoy the benefit of being able to earn returns on their free cash (a gift from taxpayers).

Finally, I hope that the failure of economic stimulus efforts by the federal government and even of neighboring local governments has taught us all a lesson: Government does not stimulate the economy. What all of those stimulus efforts have accomplished, even in those counties that have gone so far as to place moratoriums on impact fees, is to reinforce the idea that supply and demand still rules the market.

All across our nation, supply, whether it be in the form of houses, shopping centers or warehouses exceeds demand. That oversupply was generated despite impact fees, primarily because impact fees do not make or break a development project.

Whether impact fees are zero or $1 million, substantial new development will not occur until consumer demand calls for it.  When we reach that point – where demand exceeds supply – development will commence and impact fees will be paid as they have been for many years. Government only needs to allow the market to work for us to get to that point and when we get there, residents should not be asked to cover the costs of others anymore than they already do.

I commend the commission for looking at ways to impact the economy in a positive manner but this plan is not the way to do it.

Ray Walls
Harmony