HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - 19890330-_~ :`i
ORANGE COUNTY BpNUTES
ARD OF COMMISSIONERS
SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 30, lggg
The Orange Count i
y Board of Commissioners met in special session with the Towns of r
Carrboro and Chapel Hill on March_30, 1989 at 7;30
Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina for the ur oseiofthearinrtroom of the Old
proposed Impact Tax legislation, p p
g public comments on the
ORANGE CQUNT~' BARD MEM~~ PRE_S~ Chairman Moses Care Jr.
Stephen Halkiotis, Shirley E. Marshall and Don Willhoit. y' ~ and Commissioners
ORANGE COUNTY BOARD MEMBER BSENT• John Hartwell.
C~ BOARD MEMO PRESENT, Mayor Eleanor G. Kinnaird, and Aldermen Jay Br an
Tom Gurganus, Randy Marshall and Judith Wegner.
CHAPEL HILL BOARD MESS PRE, S~T~ Mayor Jonathan Howes and members David Godschalic
Joe Herzenberg, and Art Werner.
ATT~ PRESENT_ Geoffrey Gledhill.
STAFF PRESET County Manager John M. Link, Jr., Assistant County Manager Albert
Kittrell, Deputy Clerk to the Board Kathleen Baker, Clerk to the Board Beverly A. B1 the
Finance Director Ellen Liston and MPA Intern Beth McIver.
y ,
INTRODUCTORY REMAgKs
Vice-chairman Stephen Halkiotis made introductory remarks. He stated that Orange
County's attorney Geoffrey Gledhill will make the presentation. At the conclusion of that
presentation, public comments will be heard.
Mayor Jonathan Howes o.f Chapel Hill thanked council members Werner and Godschalk for
their participation on the committee that drafted the proposed Impact Tax Legislation.
Mayor Eleanor Kinnaird thanked Aldermen Wegner and Marshall who worked many hours on
the Impact Tax Legislation. She and her Board are interested in what the citizens have to
say about this proposal.
,~
Vice-Chairman Stephen Halkiotis entered into the official record letters from Helen
Urquhart supporting the legislation, and Blue Cross-Slue Shield opposing the pro osed
legislation., A telephone message was received from the Hillsborough Savings andpLoan
Association opposing the proposed legislation.
PRESENTATION
Geoffrey Gledhill, with the use of an overhead projector, gave an overview of the
justification for the Impact Tax. He stated that the focus of this bill is to create a
source of revenue to partially fund the planning, design, construction and improvement of
public facilities which are necessary in whole or in part because of the development of
land within Orange County. Orange County feels this kind of a tax is justified because
historically and now public facilities for which local governments are responsible have
been provided principally through the use of revenue from ,sales tax and property tax. The
committee that drafted this proposal concluded that it is neither possible nor appropriate
far the local governments in the County to rely solely on the methods that are presently
available in order to construct all of the capital needs of the County. A tax on the
impact o£ the development is an appropriate way to, in part, fund that portion of the cost
of capital projects which cannot be precisely attributed to any one development and
therefore cannot be made a requirement of development approval and cannot be reasonably
taxed to the people of the County that were not responsible for the increased capital
needs. This proposed legislation is intended to replace authorization that is now in
place which allows the local governments in Orange County to impose impact fees as part of
the bill. The local governments would like to make the impact tax a replacement for the
impact fees because impact fees, where they are in place, have proven to be difficult to
administer and inflexible to changing local priorities. The tax is easier to administer
and the revenues can be flexibly applied to the capital needs on an ongoing basis. The
legislation itself does not put the tax in place. Orange County would have to adopt an
ordinance. The tax will be imposed on the impact of land development and the person
responsible for paying the tax will be the owner of the property where the construction
occurs. The method of applying the tax will be that it will be applied on each square
foot of dwelling space in the case of a dwelling and each square foot of commercial
building enclosed floor space. The tax will be collected at the time an occupancy permit
is issued ar at the time the building is occupied where someone occupies the building
without' obtaining an occupancy permit. Generally speaking the latter doesn't occur and
the tax will be imposed at the time the occupancy permit is issued. The tax rate will be
established annually by Orange County after consultation with Carrboro and Chapel Hill.
The rate will be uniform countywide. It may vary depending on the type of construction.
The bill also provides far a disclosure statement which is intended to provide notice to
homeowners of the obligation to pay this tax. The authorization to impose this tax
applies only to Orange County excluding the Town of Hillsborough.
Michael Brough, Attorney for the Town of Carrboro, went through the provisions of the
bill section by section. A copy of this proposed bill is in the permanent agenda file in
the.Clerk's Office. He reviewed some of the definitions that are stated in the proposed
bill. He listed the types of facilities that would be exempt from the tax. Section III
explains the purpose and relates to how the funds may be expended. Orange County can-
spend these funds for capital improvements related to specific areas as listed in the
bill. Section IV deals with the mechanics of how the bill would operate and how the tax
would be collected. Section V states that the Board of Commissioners will set the rate at
~' budget time. Section VI establishes the distribution formula. It provides that Orange
County will distribute to Chapel Hill and Carrboro 75~ of the net proceeds received by the
°---= county due to development that has taken place within those municipalities' corporate
limits, extraterritorial planning jurisdictions and transition areas as has been
established by the Joint Planning Agreement.
Ray Williford listed some significant points of the Impact Tax. The estimated cost of
all the capital improvements anticipated to occur within the municipalities and the County
during the next ten years totals more than two hundred million dollars. Between 1980 and
1988; 1,626 units (housing. and commercial) were constructed annually in Orange County,
including municipalities. Using transparencies, Williford showed an example of what
revenues would be generated by using fifty cents per square foot for residential and $1.00
per square foot for commercial development. The revenues generated annually by this tax
would total approximately $1,500,000. Over a ten year period approximately $15,000,000
would be generated by this tax. This would be 7-l/2 or 8$ of the total amount needed to
fund the capital improvements that are anticipated over the next ten years. This tax will
assist all the citizens in Orange County in meeting the expansion of the infrastructure
for these new units being added in the county.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS
LARRY CARROLL spoke representing the Home Builders Association of Durham and Chapel
Hill. (His complete statement is in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office). He
stated that in general the Home Builders Association opposes impact taxes because of their
negative affect on affordable housing and the long term economic health of the County.
However, he recognized that any development should pay their fair share for the cost
associated fox providing new or expanded facilities necessitated by new growth and
development. However, any fees or taxes collected should be used to provide facilities or ,~.,„
services to benefit those who paid for them. The funds should be earmarked for a
particular purpose and they should not be held indefinitely. He noted that the County
needs•to encourage more industrial and commercial development.
5HERYL LLOYD WYNN spoke on Ben Lloyd's behalf. (A copy of the statement she made is
in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office). She read a statement from Ben Lloyd
which opposed the impact tax.
FRED B. CATES, Mayor of Hillsborough, submitted two letters for the record. These
letters are in the permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office. The letters from Vietri
Incorporated, Hillsborough and Tricor, Charlotte asked that the impact tax not affect the
Hillsborough area. Fred Cates stated he felt this would be a regressive tax. It has been
commented that with Hillsborough excluded, the town would not participate in a fair share
of contribution to the school system. He stated that on a per capita basis with
developments of these sorts, that Hillsborough will contribute much more to the Orange
County School systems than any other area of the county. He read a resolution from the
Town Board of Hillsborough in which they requested to be exempted from the proposed Orange
County excise tax on land development.
PETE THORN (A copy of his complete statement is in the permanent agenda file in the
Clerk's Office). stated his firm is actively involved in building affordable housing fnr
new home buyers in Chapel Hill. He expressed concern because .the impact tax proposal
threatens the affordability of these homes. He believes that new homes can actually
provide a net positive impact an local government tax revenue. He asked that the new home
buyers not be burdened with any type of tax that is especially designed just for them.
Rather, let everyone pay a fair share equally, since everyone benefits equally from the
services that government provides. .. _
KENT SCOTT, a local homebuilder, spoke in opposition to this tax. He feels that a lot
of people cannot afford a home because already the cost of property is high.
ALOIS CALLEMYN, local surveyor, spoke in opposition of this tax. He spoke in support
of affordable housing. A lot of people live here, because of their jobs and have no choice
of going to other locations. He asked that if this tax is approved that there be an
exemption for the lower end. ..Geoffrey Gledhill stated that the committee felt there were
other ways to deal with the affordable housing issue. Callemyn stated that there should
be a fair way to finance the growth coming into this area. He asked that the Board
consider the small guy in this issue.
BOB HARTFORD,'Hartford Construction Company, questioned if there would be the same
impact to someone adding to an existing structure. A lot of people would rather expand an
existing structure than build a new one. Chairman Carey stated that, as the bill is
written, additions also would be affected. However, the Board of Commissioners have not
discussed additions to homes but he intends asking for an amendment that would exempt
additions.
SETH I'AR50NS, homeowner and property owner in Chapel Hill, stated concern with the
title of the proposed legislation, which refers to part of the capital improvements. The
purpose is to generate revenues to pay part of the cost of the capital facilities. He
asked what part of the capital facilities this refers to and suggested why not 100. For
too long, the property owners have been subsidizing new development and new growth. He
does not have the facts and would like to have the authorities make a study on just what
are the costs of new growth. He has seen figures which indicate that the cost of a
marginal addition to the population is somewhere in the range of $3,000 to $5,000 per
person. That is the capital cost of the roads, the police and fire protection, schools,
water, etc. Citizens are entitled to know just what the cost of capital facilities are
that are generated by the new population growth. He questioned page 2, paragraph 3, which
states "person responsible for the impact of land development". That suggests that this
person is an additional person moving into the area. He expressed concern for the problem
young people have in financing a new Name in Chapel Hill. Persons who have lived here all
their lives are not contributing to the capital growth impact because they are already
.here. He asked that a clause be placed in the ordinance that would exempt such persons.
He feels the governing authority should accept the offer from developers who have
expressed several time this evening that they want to pay a fair share. He asked that a
way be found to determine what the cast of new development is and hold the developers to
that commitment to pay a fair share. He urged the Commissioners to ga ahead and enact
this legislation.
THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED.
Chairman Carey spoke about the issue of affordable housing stating that everyone wants
to continue to do everything passible to make housing as affordable as possible. While
this tax will have an impact on the cost of housing, the cost of housing in this area is
driven by forces far beyond the control of any of the Boards acting on this matter. He
expressed concern about the cost of housing and assured those in the audience that the
County will. continue to do all it can to try to come up with a variety of ways to provide
affordable housing.
Chairman Carey asked that the Managers and Attorneys work with the Governing Boards in
incorporating into the proposal those changes mentioned and come up with a draft that will
~" be sent forward to the Legislature if the three Boards so approve. Contact will be
made with the legislative delegation and any suggestions they may have will be
incorporated into the proposal.
With no further items for consideration, Chairman Moses Carey adjourned the meeting.
The next regular meeting of the Board will. be held on April 3, 1989 at 7:30 in the
courtroom of the Old Courthouse, Hillsborough, North Carolina.
Moses Carey, .Jr., Chair
Beverly A. Blythe, Clerk