No Change in Road Impact Fees: Good or Bad Decision?
The county commissioners recently voted 3-2 to reject a consultant’s recommendations concerning revised road impact fees.
Effective Jan. 1, 2008 the road impact fee on a new single-family home would have gone to $10,588 instead of $6,107; the road impact fee for a 10,000-square-foot medical office would have dropped from $200,000 to $35,190.
The downturn in the local housing market was given as a reason for not making the changes.
Was this an appropriate decision, or should the BCC have adopted the impact fee change recommendations?
posted by Blog Master @ 6:14 PM
96 Comments:
If you want some additional background on the impact fee decision, click on the Star-Banner Opinion link on the Blog home page and read today's editorial: "Vote On Impact Fees Is Troubling".
If they wanted to be sure our economy is kept on track, why not approve only the reduction in commercial impact fees? That might encourage more construction of businesses and other places that employ people..
Isn't the change a wash? Get revenues from one area (residential) and give them up in another (commercial). What am I missing? The decision doesn't seem like a big deal to me.
Three of the Commissioners wimped out, pure and simple.
Pass the impact fee on to the new home purchaser and it's about $12.45 per month on the mortgage. Not much on the average mortgage payment.
There are only 4 ways to fund the roads.
1. Increase Sales tax- Voted down by the people those commissioners are supposed to represent, (remember the politicians put the issue on the ballot so that the people can choose). At the time they had no stomach for raising the impact fees.
2. Increase Property Tax - If those commissioners don't know how the voters feel about that solution then they are DEAF.
3. Dig for gold - Get out your pick axes commissioners
4. Increase impact fee on new construction - The only thing left to do other than play ostrich, or mine for gold.
They did not like the first answer from the consultant, so they hired another that said impact is caused by homes. More commercial construction actually reduces trips/mile (less impact to roads).
So out of fear that an additional $12.45 per month on top of a $1000 per month mortgage will ruin the new home construction industry.
Does anyone really believe this?
So they duck the issue yet again.
The voters spoke and the county commission still won't get the message. Voters want to make the newcomers pay more for the impact that they cause. When are our elected officials ever going to get it? The only voices they seem to hear are those of developers and builders.
AMEN!!!
I smell two new Commissioners come 2008.
Won't make any difference. Most voters will have forgotten how the commiss. voted by election time next year.
Anonymous at 12:31
You left out the easy one. The fifth way to provide for roads is to increase the gasoline tax.
Marion County could add another five cents to the gasoline tax (UGH!!!!) WITHOUT even asking the voters and/or citizens.
All that is required is for them to pass it with a four-fifths vote of the five elected commissioners.
If I remember correctly from my days of studying such issues, the extra five cents would pay for all of the maintenance costs of the county, and would get the roads back to a safe condition.
The shortfall came in providing for new roads for the new subdivisions the developers are building everywhere.
Guess what . . . we are not providing that new capaicty now AND we are not maintaining the existing capacity.
But we could have something like $25-30 million more almost tomorrow if the commission voted 4/5ths to do it. --pwf
In thinking of my last post, and I am just musing out loud,
I wonder if business actually creates any demand.
New businesses are not created, new schopping centers are not built, new hospitakls are not built unless and until new people are here to support them.
It seems to me the system operates like this: nail the new homeowners with a good sized impact fee, and then nail the businesses becuase we can, and we get two whacks at the pot.
Impact fees do not hurt most of the retirees who move here, and they do not hurt most of the people moving from one home to another.
It would seem to me they do hurt first time home buyers, and they do hurt renters because property owners must rec over the cost of impact fees when they build for the rental market.
Just wondering. Any comments? --pwf
The Gas Tax is the only why that will truly provide secure revenue!
The building industry has come to a complete standstill so what good is an impact fee at this point? People have to buy Gas!!
What entitles a "1st" time home buyer to a brand new home? My 1st car or house was not new.
The people moving from other areas already have a suit case bulging with cash from the higher priced home they sold elsewhere.
The renters would have to pay impact fee but if you allocate the cost for the increase in the payments of the debt to the renters, and even if you used the value of an entire house for that rental unit it would be about $12.00 per month absolute worst case. Less than $5 per month would be more realistic.
Don't worry; there will still be quite a few home build here in the years to come.(Backlog of over 100,000)
Gas tax should be looked at since that is the method of revenue encouraged by the legislature for road maintenance. How do we compare with the price of a gallon of gas with neighboring counties?
Here are some comparisons on gasoline prices (lowest prices):
Ocala $2.54 to $2.69
Gainesville $2.68 to $2.84
Leesburg $2.59 to $2.69
Tallahassee $2.53 to $2.75
Around the Country:
Lowest Price--New Jersey $2.49
Highest Price--Hawaii $3.30
Florida (Average)--$2.70
Doesn’t look like an extra five cents would be a killer.
Source:
http://www.floridastategasprices.com/map_gas_prices.aspx
Thanks. I found a station that's 7 cents less than mine.
I think PWF has identified the best solution. I'm with the gasoline tax. May be difficult to get four votes. At least two are running scared because of next years election.
With the housing market the way it is, I think the Commissioners did the right thing in not changing the impact fees.
An impact fee is a mechanism for the government sector to charge the private sector for the incremental cost to government attributable to a private sector activity. If your explanation for not increasing an impact fee is not that the proposed figure is inaccurate, but rather that the private sector activity cannot shoulder the burden of an accurate impact fee, then you are advocating government subsidy of the private sector activity.
I have not seen the meeting in which this issue was decided but a Star-Banner editorial on the subject said that all three county commissioners who opposed the new impact fee levels cited a downturn in the housing industry. Is this what they said? If so, then how does McClain square this with his explanation that he opposed the E-One incentive package because he is opposed in principle to government subsidies to business? He was a homebuilder when he joined the county commission. Is he still? By opposing the new fee impact fee schedule, is he in effect voting a government subsidy for his own industry after telling us he opposes such subsidies?
In discussing his opposition to the E-One incentives, Stone said he would not personally put his money in E-One. Has he examined the financials of the local housing industry businesses he is using the government to subsidize to determine if he would invest his own money in them?
If you want to see the campaign contributions for the three county commissioners – McClain, Payton, and Stone – who opposed the new impact fee schedule, then just go to
http://www.voterfocus.com/ws/wscand/cand_srch.php?c=marion.
Jim Payton has it right. It's going to take something other than impact fees to fund road improvements. Why vote on something that may not be the correct solution. I'm with Jim.
I guess I’m slow on the uptake but I don’t understand what GIVING taxpayer money to E-1 has to do with TAKING impact fees from developers. It is Monday morning and perhaps my intellectual juices are not yet flowing properly.
When you get to that website Mr. Creekbaum gave you to check out the contributors to Stone, McClain and Payton, enter the name of Creekbaum's little darling (Barbara Fitos) and check out all the special interests she has taken money from also. See who will be influencing her votes in the future. Creekbaum would have us all believe only Republicans take campaign contributions. More one-sided propaganda from the left.
A gasoline tax of five cents per gallon would be an extra hit to our budget of only about $1.50 per week. Shucks, we can balance our budget to make up for that by cutting out three Star-Banner daily papers per week.
New and better roads for a little less of the Star-Banner. That’s an easy decision to make!
Voice of Reason says . .
The other option is for the Board to do what they get paid to do - prioritize spending. Eliminate the high commercial impact fees and spend a lot less taxpayer money. Cut salaries, eliminate positions, consolidate duplicate governmental functions.
On a different note, as Creekbaum posits, impact fees are a way to make developers "pay as you grow" but the public just sees them as more taxes. Indirectly, they are right because taxes are too high and government spending too stupid. It is hard for any republican to vote to take even more money out of people's pockets. The best thing would be for governments to not approve any new taxes, fees, assessments, etc. for about 15-20 years so that our economy can adjust back to a much more private economy.
On a third note, has anyone seen the residential ghost town development at 441/326 "Irish Acres?" That development shows how dumb the county commissioners are. That should never have been approved as is. It is the old Florida version of urban sprawl with unclustered large lots. As much as I hate Walmart, I have to admit it would have been a lot better for the community to have a Walmart distribution center hidden back in there. At least it would have brought some jobs to the community. Irish Acres is already functionally obsolescent and out of tune with what residential buyers are looking for. As far as the county is concerned, it is requires stretching serves and that makes the commissioners buy consultants to help figure-out whether impact fees are needed. DUH, yeah - when you have Irish Acres type development you need impact fees.
On a fourth note, have you seen that crappy "Peppertree" Doctor's building on Baseline Road? How could the Commission allow them to place the building butt-first against the road? The building should have been disapproved anyway because it is ugly - that wasn't enough for the commission - they allowed the building to go butt-first along the road. You talk about a basackward bunch of hayseeds.
I'd like to see someone impact the commissioner's face with their fist.
VoR
They should have at least reduced the commercial impact fees. Much too high compared to those on the residental construction.
This comment has been removed by the author.
The votes of county commissioners McClain, Payton, and Stone against higher impact fees on residential development have tremendous potential resonance with voters in Marion County, including fiscally conservative voters.
A few years ago, when I was doing some research relative to growth, I came across some media coverage (I believe it was from the 1990’s) of populist Republicans in the Tampa area who were much in favor of impact fees.
You can see this locally as well. One of the biggest proponents of impact fees in Marion County is John Lund, a self-styled populist Republican who is rabidly anti-tax. For years, “impact fee” has been the “Word of the Day” on Lund’s little radio show on WOCA that has a listenership that is as rabidly anti-tax as Lund.
In addition, an impact fee increase on newly constructed homes has the effect of pulling up market prices of the existing housing stock since newly constructed homes and existing homes are largely substitutable for one another. McClain, Payton, and Stone have just voted against increasing the home values of Marion County voters. For many of these home-owning voters, their home is their largest investment.
Throw in campaign money from residential development interests these commissioners rely on to fund their expensive campaigns and you have the makings of election losses for these incumbents, two of whom are up for re-election next year.
Voice of Reason says. . . . .
We can usually count on Creekbaum for far-out stuff but his latest notion that impact fees raise property "values" is light-years from reality. Impact fees are a cost that is either borne by the developer or indirectly the purchaser. Costs increase price but decrease values.
VoR
A real estate agent told me the same thing a few months ago about a new home. The fees never totally get reflected in the value of your home because they add no value in doing the land/building/location property assessment. At least that's what they told us.
Where's Clayton to weigh in on the issue?
Since the blogmaster seems to think impact fees are an important local political issue, I decided to check it out with one of my periodic man-on-the-street surveys at the Paddock Mall. I usually stop 15-20 people and ask them a question about some current hot issue. The last time I did a survey was about E-One. So far, no one has threatened to arrest me.
So this time I stopped 20 people and asked them: “How does a county commissioner being for or against raising impact fees effect your voting for/against them?” By the way, it took me quite awhile to find 20 people who are registered voters.
Nine of the people had no idea what impact fees are or what they are used for. Five of the people said they would not vote for anyone who raises taxes and impact fees are a tax. Three people said they never vote. Two said it didn’t matter to them one way or another; they vote for the person who is a member of their political party. I didn’t ask them which party they belong to. One person was for any commissioner who is in favor of raising impact fees.
Bottom line, anyone on who believes they have the answers on what voters are thinking may be surprised when Election Day comes around. One thing I have discovered in my exposure to politics is that many voters are very fickle and somewhat political-issues uneducated; polls and opinions of “political experts” are nice reading but probably not any more predictive than my occasional Paddock Mall surveys.
Impact fees up or down won't change a thing in the housing situation. Too many buyers have overextended themselves and until the mortgage situation (forclosures, etc.) gets worked out housing will be in the dumps.
I agree with Stan about his poll. His poorly selected question asked of an unrepresentative sample of voters more than a year before an election probably doesn’t tell us much about what will happen on election day.
I also agree with him about being wary of predictions of “political experts.” I remember well his prediction on this blog that Fitos could not beat Harris without $80,000 to $100,000 and a large volunteer organization. She had neither and won. Stan will be scraping the egg off his face for years on that one.
The following research supports my statement above that impact fees imposed on new residential development increase the price of existing homes:
Brett M. Baden, Don L. Coursey, and Jeannine M. Kannegiesser, “Effects of Impact Fees on the
Suburban Chicago Housing Market.” The Heartland Institute Published in: Policy Studies: November 1999. (Downloadable at http://www.heartland.org/Article.cfm?artId=9497 and http://harrisschool.uchicago.edu/About/publications/working-papers/abstract.asp?paper_no=99%2E20+++)
Charles J. Delaney and Marc T. Smith. 1989. “Impact fees and the price of new housing: An empirical study.” AREUEA Journal 17, 1: 41-54. And “Price Implications of Development Extractions on Existing Housing Stick.” Growth and Change, 20: 1-20.
Marla Dresch and Steven Sheffrin, “Who Pays for Development Fees and Exactions,” San Francisco: Policy Institute of California, 1997.
Keith Ihlanfeld and T. Shaughnessy, “An Empirical Investigation of the Effects of Impact Fees in
Housing and Land Prices,” Lincoln Institute of Land Policy, 2002. Subsequently published in Regional Science and Urban Economics, 34:639-661, 2004. (Downloadable at http://66.223.94.76/pubs/PubDetail.aspx?pubid=563)
Larry D. Singell and Jane H. Lillydahl. “An Empirical Examination of the Effect
of Impact Fees on the Housing Market.” Land Economics 66: 82-92, 1990.
Stan, you like scrambled or over easy eggs? What is so easily forgotten in recalling a year or two after an election (or in 30 years as was pointed out to me sometime back) is when you make a statement prior to an campaign really getting in high gear, it is a guess.
What was said about the Harris Fitos race, and it did make the difference, is that Randy had not increased his base in his 12 years in office, but he had certainly increased his opposition and his negatives.
Anyone who watched politics locally knew he was in for a tough race -- his only "shoe-in" was against a poorly financed cnadidate who was had no support, and that was not a walk away win.
As for a poor question, keep asking them. They actually tell you what citizens -- not necessarily voters -- but residents do not know and could care less, until, of course, they get their tax bill and then they have to go ask someone what "taxes" are.
So have another cup of coffee and remember at least you were in the game. So many people didn't even know there was an election period. Now I am back to work! --pwf
Voice of Reason says . . . .
Impact fees increase the price of new homes and that makes existing homes look more attractive because there is no impact fees on the existing existing homes. The problem is that there is no greater value created by the fees.
If the homeowner wants to sell an existing home and never buy a local house, that owner might benefit because impact fees made prices for existing home go up. But how any people want to do that? Most folks would sell one house in the county and move into a different house in the county. In that instance, that purchaser either directly (new home) or indirectly (higher price for an existing home) pays the added expense of the impact fee. If the county was doing its job of keeping spending within the income generated from taxes, that added cost would not be there.
Impact fees only make sense if there is a dollar-for-dollar reduction in taxes.
VoR
PWF,
Scrambled eggs would be fine, they are less messy! I could also point out some egg-on-the-face examples for Brian Creekbaum, but I won’t. I bet you (and others) could also add a few.
Yep, I was wrong on what it would take for Fitos to beat Harris. I also made a mistake working against one of the county commissioner candidates elected in 2004. I won’t make that same mistake in 2008.
I’m no political expert, nor have I ever claimed to be. If Brian wants to designate me as one, that’s his opinion. I guess Brian has never associated himself with a losing political campaign, opined a prediction that wasn’t perfectly accurate or made any decision he regretted. Unlike him, I do have faults and imperfections. And I’ll probably be wrong again at sometime in the future when it comes to politics and a lot of other topics.
It’s not likely I’ll ever be as smart, perfect and successful as Brian. I’ll just continue to muddle along; making some occasional mistakes, wrong predictions and bad decisions that I will try to learn from. Maybe even getting egg on my face from time to time.
If you folks are interested, I’ve provided some highlights of the coverage of last nights action, by a 3-2 vote of the Alachua County Commission, to INCREASE transportation impact fees . The fees apply only in unincorporated Alachua County, not in the cities.
The transportation impact fee increase will not take effect until November 2008, giving impact fee opponents a chance to sell a sales tax to the public that could cancel the fee increase if passed.
The current general residential fee is $1,052 per 1,000 square feet. The commission voted to increase it to $2,073 per 1,000 square feet. If it is eventually implemented in November 2008, the increase would then be phased in over several years.
Most commercial fees are now $3,814 per 1,000 square feet, but varying fees would be charged under the proposal and they would be increased from the current fee. The fees are based on traffic lured by the store, traffic that passes by and the average trip length. Many of the commercial fees would be lower if the building is part of a complex rather than if it stands alone.
More than 30 speakers addressed commissioners; about two-thirds opposed to the increase.
Opponents of a transportation impact fee increase proposed instead a penny sales tax increase by voter referendum for roads, schools, recreation and open space. An added penny would generate $500 million over 10 years. Opponents of the impact fee increase said it would price some residents out of homes, tamp down growth and hurt the economy. Also, the commission has not adopted a plan to spend the money it collects from impact fees.
But supporters of the increase said it will bring in more money to offset the costs of growth, stabilize unsustainable growth in the housing market and improve the quality of life, and that current impact fees were discounted and have not been keeping pace with growth.
IMO: Skip all those reference articles put on here by Creekbaum.
A bunch of high brow and hard to understand stuff. Not worth the time to read them unless you need something to put you to sleep.
Go talk to a local realtor or appraiser.
I want V of R to write an article on impact fees. Then I can list it as one of my references supporting my point of view. You can find articles and books supporting both sides of any argument. I'd rather hear from Clayton Ellsworth.
I prefer the 5 cent gas tax over impact fees.
Voice of Reason says . . .
If I write an article about impact fees, the article will certainly not put anybody to sleep - and City Guy can use it as a reference also, nyuk, nyuk, nyuk.
The impact fee issue is very easy - you don't need academic BS treatises to understand the issue. When people lived in relatively compact cities, taxes were enough because the infrastructure was not spread out all over the county. Then came Florida sprawl where farmland was converted to the dreadfully boring subdivisions that blanket the county. These boring subdivisions are characterized by equally spaced lots with homes built right in the middle of the lots, no common green space, destruction of all native/mature trees, and streets designed to promote car use and inhibit pedestrian use. The land was cheap but it cost the city a lot more to spread the services further and further out. Developers loved these subdivisions because they were highly profitable because existing city taxpayers paid for the infrastructure and services up front. Homebuyers loved the developments because they could get more square footage to store their big wheels, b-b-q grills, unused clothing, tons of trans-fat groceries, exercise machines, plasma TVs, x-box games, Justin Timberlake CDs, 4 BMWs, Egyptian cotton sheets, riding lawnmowers, pressure washers, krocks shoes, golf clubs, and posters of grown men wearing silly uniforms dunking a basketball into a basket.
Even with Florida sprawl, cities could provide services. But, cities started to get into the business of giving minorities money, giving failing businesses money, giving government employees to rich of salary and benefits, and general fiscal incompetence and flat-out fraud.
Therefore, the government needed more money. Impact fees came along with great rationale. Unfortunately, however, the fees are nothing more than another way for governments to get money above and beyond what they need to get the job done.
VoR
Lake County Commissioners also recently voted not to increase road impact fees. A single family home would have gone from $2000 to $11,000.
If you want to read something that really gets to the heart of what’s wrong with the housing market-and it ain’t impact fees—request a copy of an August 13, 2007 article by Dr. George Friedman “Stratfor on the Geopolitical Impact of the Subprime Crisis”
E-Mail: marketing@stratfor.com and request a copy.
Voice of Reason says . . .
I'd rather watch the Waltons sort cranberries.
VoR
That's the way I feel about B. Creekbom's obsolete articles.
I hate to say it, but I now believe the Commisssioners made a mistake in not voting for the changes to impact fees.
Don
(OTOW)
i thought jimmy walton rented stuff and he and payton ran a lawn enquipmebnt business. Didn't know he was into cranberries. better have brian scope this one out.
Voice of Reason says . . .
Anon 1:47 - The Waltons were a family who lived on a prairie near Mankato, Minnesota. There was a father Charles and his wife and three little girls. Charles was a hard worker and did a variety of odd-jobs like lumber handling, farming, and flour sack stacking.
His girls usually hung out with a kid in town named Willie who had an obnoxious sister named Nellie. Willie's mother was obnoxious too but his father was a decent guy. Charles Walton had a friend named "Mr. Edwards" who like the town's only school teacher. I don't think that the teacher liked Mr. Edwards though but maybe she did.
There was a perfect church in that town too - the preacher was actually honest and he could conduct the entire service (with a sermon included) within the the 1 hour show period. And the preacher didn't require that his name be put on the church sign (i.e. Walton's Prairie Church, Rev. Alden, Senior Pastor) Compare with the megalomaniac pastors of today). Rev. Alden's sermons were usually 3-4 minutes long and more meaningful than the campfire stories you hear from the "one-verse-Charlie" pastors of today.
Anyway, that's the Waltons that I spoke of.
VoR
It's too bad we don't have more like Rev. Alden. What some of the ministers and lay people are doing to and with religion today makes me sick.
sorry i mixed up jimmy walton with THE Waltons of TV fame. that was a good program
jimmy thinks he is destined tyo sit beside his business mentor and partner jim payton and be next county commissioner. what we need is someone who will make rough, tough business decisions and who can say not no but hell no to some of these developers i'll go for THE Waltons anytime.
That article about the subprime crisis is actually pretty interesting.
I was amused by the phony humility posted by Stan, who has been dispensing cocksure analyses of local politics for about five years now, which I find interesting given that he hasn’t lived here much longer than that.
I don’t make many incorrect political predictions because I don’t make many political predictions, but if it makes anyone feel any better, here is one of my political predictions that proved incorrect. Shortly after the 2004 general election, I ran into one of the county bureau chiefs at a local drugstore and told him I thought the next female county commissioner would be a Republican. Wrong.
Ferguson (pwf), who predicted on this blog shortly before the election last year that Harris would win, is into revisionist history again when he says that “anyone who watched politics locally knew he [Harris] was in for a tough race.” When I have time, I’ll post to the open thread some comments and actions of people experienced in watching politics locally who thought, ranging from more than a year out from the election through election day, that Harris was a shoe in to win against Fitos.
This comment has been removed by the author.
After I put together the citations of research addressing the effect of impact fees on the prices of existing homes that I posted above, I came across a recent report (June 14, 2007) to the City of Destin prepared by Jim Nicholas of the University of Florida. Nicholas is a widely recognized expert on impact fees who has done a lot of consulting work with local governments on the subject. If memory serves me, Marion County has previously engaged him. Nicholas has probably forgotten more about impact fees than any of us will ever know.
In addressing the relevant research literature, Nicholas states in his report: “So the literature is clear that there will be higher housing prices with impact fees, but it is less than clear that housing prices would be less if impact fees were not used, unless investment in infrastructure was less because of the non-use of impact fees.”
Elsewhere in the report, he says the current economic situation in Destin, characterized by steady or declining real estate prices, casts doubt on whether impact fees at this time could be passed forward to buyers and that lessened profits for builders are a more likely result from impact fees and perhaps postponements of new construction.
The research I cited on this blog was not cherry picked and constitutes the bulk of the research Nicholas cites in the section of his City of Destin report that addresses the effect of impact fees on home prices. The effect on prices of existing homes is only briefly mentioned in this report, but if you want to see the report, which is written for a general audience, you can find it by putting the report title “The Economic Impact of Impact Fees” into Google.
Creekbaum says..."I don’t make many incorrect political predictions because I don’t make many political predictions, but if it makes anyone feel any better, here is one of my political predictions that proved incorrect. Shortly after the 2004 general election, I ran into one of the county bureau chiefs at a local drugstore and told him I thought the next female county commissioner would be a Republican. Wrong."
Wait a minute, does he or does he not make political predictions. One sentence he says not and another he does?
I would not trust any statement this guy places on the blog.
You are a joke Creekbaum!!! Every village has an idiot.
NOW, NOW! Don’t be too harsh with Brian.
Brian Creekbaum is much like Nancy Stacy. His is the only opinion that counts. I think we should all stop posting comments on the blog and let BC give us the correct opinion to any question or issue raised. The blogman can post an issue and we all tune in to find out what BC has to say. Sounds a lot like the way John Lund and Randy Harris operate. Wait a minute! Creekbaum as opinionated as them?
Know it alls usually know very little, and usually are lacking in common sense.
That's my opinion for the morning. Off for some good golf.
Voice of Reason says . . .
When cities hire guys like James Nicholas to do their impact fee "analysis," they are hiring him with the specific purpose of "hitting the numbers" that they want. In other words, Nicholas' impact fee studies are designed from the ground up to support the impact fee that the city/county wants to implement. Nicholas and other academic expert like him are the City's "hired gun."
No doubt that Nicholas has scraped-up academic journal articles to support his "findings." But don't think that he could also find an equal and opposite number of academic journal articles that discredit his findings. There is also nothing preventing Nicholas from creating a study that makes conclusions that favor implementation of impact fees, publishing that study and then using that study to support the city's efforts to raise impact fees.
Nicholas will always find a way to make impact fees as costly as possible, that is what cities and counties pay him handsomely to do.
Getting back to the Walton's - the little house that they lived in was very open and every night before the family went to sleep, they would say good night to each other. You would hear: "Good night Charles," then, "Goodnight Laura," and then, "Goodnight Carrie," and then Goodnight Ma," and then, "Good night Willie." For a time, there was a cousin Oliver and John-Boy who stayed in the little house on the prairie for some time. At that time they also said, "Goodnight Oliver," and, "Goodnight John-Boy." I would like to see those days come back. You didn't hear about impact fees then.
VoR
Voice of Reason says . . .
In the previous post, the second sentence in the second paragraph should read:
"But don't think that he could NOT also find an equal and opposite . . . "
VoR
Noticed that list of gasoline prices by county. Anyone know how much the gas tax is in each of those counties?
The voters never said don't fix, maintain, or build our roads. The commission was clear when they said the need does not go away. All the voters said was do not pay for those needs by raising the sales tax.
As usual by the time the commission checks with the developers, builders, real estate salespeople, contributors, EDC, Chamber, Hospital, PWF, Brad Rogers, tea leaves they do what they always do. Nothing! They play ostrich!
How about they do the following:
Lead, or get out of the way. (Note the absence of follow; they have that one down pat, when it comes to the power brokers)
Rate them yourself:
1. Infrastructure
2. Garbage
3. Fiscal policy
4. Growth Management
Is this a better community or is it worse? All they do is finger point, posture, and blame the past. They need decisive action now. To show statesmanship even if the power brokers don't support their re-election.
Brian....You better update that personal file you keep about me and all my activities. We have lived here nearly nine years, not five. Oh my goodness, you made a factual error!
You don’t need to live in Marion County all your life to develop a good feel of what goes on here, politically and otherwise. There are folks who have lived around here for 50+ years and have not contributed one idea, penny or volunteer minute to help make Marion County a better place to live. I’ll put my local “short-term” record of community service, contributions and volunteer work up for scrutiny any day of the week. Even against yours.
Stan-You are nuts to have any interchange on the blog with Creekbaum. He hates republicans, especially those he thinks might have some influence. Ignore him and move on. What he thinks concerning you is insignificant.
There's a comment above about Lake County road impact fees. What wasn't mentioned is the fact that the Lake School Board just voted unanimously to approve a 108% increase in school impact fees.
Have a great Labor Day weekend!
Anonymous @ 12:03 PM said....
“As usual by the time the commission checks with the developers, builders, real estate salespeople, contributors, EDC, Chamber, Hospital, PWF, Brad Rogers, tea leaves they do what they always do. Nothing! They play ostrich!”
Would you rather the Commissioners not seek input from anyone and just make decisions the way our Dictator President Bush does it? Or perhaps we need to have Emperor Harris back. He would surely make decisions! Including many bad ones (as we are now discovering) and others causing possible expensive law suits and reversals costing taxpayers much money.
I want politicians who ask for opinions before making decisions. I don’t know if the Commissioners are playing ostrich or not. Many things they are faced with are not easy decisions to make. Many are complicated because of State bureaucracy, archaic laws and (as you said) sins of the past.
I’m not saying our Commission is the cream of the crop, but I’m not willing to let them run free to make decisions without input from several constituencies. I doubt your list above is even half inclusive of the people/organizations our Commission gets points of view from (solicited and unsolicited).
Gun Nutt says...
The thing I liked about the Waltons was the way everyone worked and no one expected money from nothing (either from the government of from their neighbors). That type of attitude is what made this nation great.
Now, by contrast, we have these filthy bums everywhere looking to get something for nothing. This includes the unwashed Gabby Hayes look-a-like and the guy who gets the fruits of another government giveaway because he was able to obtain the sought after designation of "victim." Either way both are bums. That type of attitude is what will ruin this nation.
Maybe we should charge these parasites an "impact fee" to help offset the damage that they do to the collective work ethic.
V OF R--
I'm with you that Nicholas guy is another one of those research prostitutes who sells conclusions to the highest bidder. Can't believe someone who is supposed to be as bright as Creekbaum wants us to believe he is would get suckered into buying all the stuff Nicholas is selling.
Maybe he ain't all that bright after all.
Voice of Reason says. . .
8:36 Anon, I think that you've got it right with Creekbaum, he goes bottoms-up with Nicholas' Cool-Aide. People like Creekbaum must be confident in their own common (an uncommon) sense and not get hoodwinked by numbers, ratios, multipliers, and factors. Its just a big shell game.
I think that I have a politician who can bring together hard-core right wingers like Gun Nutt with leftist like Creekbaum: Gordon Olsen. Gordon ran for Mayor of Ocala about 25 years ago. Gunn Nutt would like him because (I think) he was a Nam Vet and I know that he was a serious patriot. Creekbaum would like Olsen because he looked like the homeless guys that Gunn Nutt rails against. They both would like him because he wasn't a useful idiot for either party and he wanted to clean-up government. I'd like to see Gordon Olsen make another run. I think that Gordon Olsen also had a brother Merlin Olsen who was on the show Little House on the Prairie.
VoR
Wasn't Merlin Olsen also a pro football player?
Voice of Reason says . . .
Yes, Merlin Olsen was a pro football player but he was also the character Jonathan Garvey (Michael Landon's sidekick) on the Waltons. Olsen also had his own crappy show for awhile and did commercials for FTD florists.
Gordon Olsen, however, ran for mayor of Ocala in the early 80's. Gordon would have been a great mayor because he was a true non-partisan. He probably would have clashed with the Police Department though because Gordon's sympathies fell with what were known as the Beatnik-Yippie-Hippie movement. This movement progressed from the coffee house poem readings of the Beatniks to the large scale protests and "love-ins" of the Hippies.These movements focused on an idealized society of shared possessions, heightened insight through drug experimentation, fusion of world religions, celebration of rock and roll music, demolition of sexual boundaries, rejection of traditional male/female roles, and skepticism of American nationalism.
Beatniks began a counter-culture by dressing in tight-fitting colorful clothes, grooming themselves with foreign hair and mustaches/beards like the Goatee, Fumanchu, and Lambchops. Beatniks would compose and publicly read poetry with political and social messages.
Hippies followed the admonition of Harvard professor Timothy Leary and "Tuned-into" hallucinogenic drugs and "Dropped-out" of traditional society. Hippies had strong philosophical differences with their parent's generation and deeply opposed American involvement in Southeast Asia. However, the hippies are most characterized and remembered by long hair, tie-dye t-shirts,large rock and roll music festivals, brightly painted Volkswagen camper vans, the Broadway musical "Hair," throwing Frisbees, and the musical act, "Sonny and Cher."
The social dynamics of typical Hippie/traditional parent interaction and conflict is well portrayed Rob Reiner's character "Meathead," and Carol O'Connor's character "Archie Bunker" in the popular television series, "Allin the Family" and "Maude." Beatniks through Hippies often clashed with police.
Mayoral candidate Gordon Olsen would have had trouble dealing with the Police office. Olsen would probably spend more time criticizing the police than supporting them.
VoR
Voice, refresh my memory about Olson.
What did he do for a living.
Was he the guy who owned the "hotel" on North Magnolia who clashed with the city for so long he finally got arrested and now the half finished hotel sits idly and unused.
Meanwhile, the "homeless" who may well have lived in that "hotel" play a Larry Craig and crap in my parking lot and do whatever else they do.
Stunning that no one ran fro city counicl. I would have loved a cam,paign theme of "remember E-One an Gutman" for someone to run against Kent Guinn who is trying to build his legacy by screwing up downtown. --pwf
WOW !! See what you miss when lightening knocks out your computor.
On impact fees, I agree with the anonymous who says that in this morass of housing inventory, problems with sub-prime, foreclosures,tightening money, yadi yadi yadda, it all doesn't amount to a hill of beans. [ My choice of words in summary]
Regarding commercial developement, projects in the county are already being suspended in mid completion.
This is also true in residential developments.
Not so, however at OTW , Ken Colen does it with cash.
It is now apparent that my forecasts on real estate and developement in the county erred on the conservative side. We will be living with the problem for years,no less than five and more like ten years.
Clayton Ellsworth
This comment has been removed by the author.
Stanley, as his wife calls him, knows very well that we first met in 2000 when he had lived here for a year or so and that I know how long he’s lived here without consulting any files. The five years I mentioned above, Stan, dates from your head expanding involvement in the 2002 Cretul campaign after which you began spouting off all this cocksure political prognostication. No factual error in the rest of what I posted, just an implied opinion on my part that nine years isn’t much longer than five when others have lived here for decades. I know someone in McIntosh who was still referred to as a new resident after living there for 20 years. Just think, Stan, eleven years from now you can still be the new guy!
I’m surprised Stan brought up his massive amount of community volunteer involvement since it just raises the question of how someone who networks so relentlessly in the community was so wrong in analyzing the Harris-Fitos race. Well, to be fair, he had a lot of company on that one.
As someone suggests, an awesomely powerful citizen like Stan, who must hardly know an insignificant person like me, is far too busy to quibble further about how long he’s lived here. He’ll be busy giving his mall survey results to Stan, Charlie, and Jim, and pwf probably has some more fish stories he can tell him over breakfast at Wolfy’s.
Mr. Ellsworth: Glad to start seeing your comments again. I don't think the impact fees are a big issue. Good to hear your point of view. Hope you got your computer back in shape.
What political office does Stan hold? I'd like to know. If Creekbaum is writing sarcastic stuff about him, I want to vote for him.
He's a former Dunnellon City Councilman.
Webmaster....
What happened to my two comments?
They were deemed inappropriate.
Try again.
Creekbaum,
You seem to have much intimate knowledge about Stan and his personal life. With all your sniffing around into his activities, would you share with us which hand he uses to wipe his butt. We really need to know that about him. Also, maybe the same about his wife.
Frankly, I never heard of the fellow and don’t care what his wife calls him, who he eats meals with or which politicians he talks to. Your obsession is pretty ridiculous. Perhaps even sick!
Let's see if the Webmaster lets this one through. He has x-ed out a couple of others.
lets see, creekbaum has ben obcessed with harris for 10-12 years, hes obcessed with some member of ppi, hes obcessed with fitos, hes obcessed with harris, with porn for kids, with whatever pwf writes, hes obcessed with his own scarcism. and when anyone answers him hes obcessed all over again. seems like a big bully, sort of like pat straight or chuck pardee to me. btw, whatever happened to chuck and pat?
I finally got around to viewing that site for campaign contributions that Mr. Creekbaum gave us. Yes, Stone, McClain and Payton have money from developers. What I also noted is the large number of individuals not developers who also contributed to the past campaign of all of them. I also know some of the people on the lists who are registered Democrats.
All said, I'm not sure what I have gained or learned from the lists.
I noticed B. Rogers’ column today slicing and dicing three of the County Commissioners.
The solutions for many of the problems related to growth is not a factor of who we have leading the County government. It probably won’t be much different if it were Democrats, Independents, Communists, Libertarians, etc. I sure don’t see any of the current candidates for County Commission in 2008 as being any more effective than what we have. One or two might even take our economy back into the Dark Ages.
The opportunity we now have as voters is to give some of the local growth planning review and approval directly to the voters. That’s why I am supporting the Florida Hometown Democracy movement. I don’t think the Star Banner is in favor of it; most likely because it might take some of the Banner’s circulation-improving attention off the backs of the Republican Commissioners. Do you think the Star Banner is going to criticize the decisions of voters and risk people cancelling their subscriptions? That may not be nice, but probably true.
Go to the website, sign the petition and join the movement today:
http://floridahometowndemocracy.com/
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
This comment has been removed by the author.
The Sunday column by Star-Banner editorial page editor Brad Rogers referred to above is titled “A Refusal to Lead” and is at:
http://www.starbanner.com/
article/20070902/OPINION/
209020317/1094/news08
In one of the bluntest columns I’ve seen from Rogers, he takes county commissioners McClain, Payton, and Stone to task for their recent votes against the proposed transportation impact fee changes.
They should get clobbered. Bet the impact fee change is implemented before the 2008 elections, as well as some other pro Commission PR actions. You think these guys were born yesterday. Remember many people had McClain dead in the water, including the Star Banner, and he won. Many months yet until the election.
I can't get that link to the article about the Commissioners to work. It keeps saying I have to be a member to get it.
Regarding The Star Banner :
Guilty of failing to print local news. Unless I have missed something, TSB has failed to report local facts on foreclosures, housing sales, housing inventorys,subprime effect on local lending, tight [ or even non-existing] money for commercial and residential developement,personal and commercial bankruptcys, familys walking away from their homes unable to make the payments or anything else having to do with these subjects and the efect on the local economy.
Until they pass the denial stage or inept reporting of these facts, then they have no right to critize commissioners for their votes on impact fees, which I have pointed out is really a mute point that in this economic enviroment means nothing now and won't for some time.
Instead of reading local business news we are subjected to a story about high employment and the difficulty of finding workers in Timbuctwo. {Montana I think ]
Clayton Ellsworth
I know people of all political stripes who have major issues with the Star-Banner’s coverage or lack of coverage of local news. I’m one of them. Their news and editorial divisions are separately organized, however, and what the news division does has little to nothing to do with whether the editorial board, which does its own research, is in denial about anything.
I just put the word “subprime” into a search on the Star-Banner’s website and got 206 hits. I don’t know how much is locally based news coverage but one of the hits is their editorial “Vote on impact fees is troubling” which refers to “the crash of the market for subprime mortgages.”
http://www.ocala.com/article/
20070824/OPINION/208240331
One of the things I will give the Star-Banner personnel is that they are grownups who don’t hide who is responsible for the content of the paper. In the case of their editorials, you can read in the paper everyday the names of the editorial board members – the editorial page editor, the assistant editorial page editor, and the publisher.
I find it’s common these days for newspapers to require some sort of registration process that is usually without charge. I don’t recall what registration I’ve done with the Star-Banner, but I know I have access to their on-line content without paying them for that and without reference to any subscription to the print edition of the paper. I’m sure anyone who really wants to read the Star-Banner material to which I’ve referred can do so.
Once again, the Sunday column by Star-Banner editorial page editor Brad Rogers referred to above is titled “A Refusal to Lead” and is at:
http://www.starbanner.com/
article/20070902/OPINION/
209020317/1094/news08
If you are having trouble accessing the article by Brad Rogers, just click on the "Star Banner Editorials/Opinions" link on this blogs home page and then look for Brad's picture on lower right to access his article.
I couldn't get the other link to copy and paste correctly.
The editorial board of the Star Banner did not write the article bashing the Commissioners, Brad Rogers did. I believe Clayton's point still stands. Brad is writing about the wrong issue. Why is he not picking up on some of the items Clayton mentioned? Why, because they would not as easily used against three Republican Commissioners. They are problems that need solutions by our Democratic controlled Congress and that group is in a greater state of problem/isssue denial than even the Star Banner!
Wow, for once I actually agree with PWF - why did no one run against Guinn? What a mess with downtown and how much has that cost us? Now we are suing the developer, not once, but twice for nonpayment. And what is that going to cost the city? Ocala has been duped again; E-One and the downtown deal. What an embarrassment not to mention, just plain stupid! Did anyone bother to get a financial background check on this clown? Just plain common sense...
Voice of Reason says . . .
The lack of opponents shows that the electorate has given up on this town. Ocalan's just don't believe in the city anymore. The only bright spot in the city has been the Primary Oven at the corner of Pine and Silver Springs Boulevard. Its a place that will make it despite high taxes and the inept local government because a warm strudel beats bad government any day.
VoR
Brian & Clayton,
In case you missed it. Your concern about more local news may be partially answered. I noticed that the Star-Banner is launching a daily four-minute newscast online. They have provided this for awhile but not daily. It’s called SBTV.
I viewed the pilot edition several times. A little less cute and clever from the newscasters and a little more focus on providing meaningful news would be helpful. Looks like the newscasters might be auditioning for TV-20! However, in fairness, it is a work in progress.
This seems the trend: more online and less print. Newspaper advertising in particular is heading that way. I saw a study by Veronis Suhler Stevenson quoted in the Wall Street Journal that is predicting “ads on Web sites of traditional media will overtake print-newspaper advertising in 2010 as the largest advertising category.” I would not be surprised to see traditional news reporting go in the same direction.
Clayton, I’m with you, impact fees is a drop-in-the-ocean item in the great sea of county problems.
The new Star Banner SBTV is not bad. A suggestion before starting the video, click on the tab in the lower right corner of the video viewer called “Click to view SBTV in Widescreen”. A much better picture and on my computer it even improved the sound quality.
A follow up comment to my post above about the Star-Banner’s new SBTV news program. Discovered that it is not for us over age 40 folks. Its target is the under 40 group who don’t like quality and serious news.
It’s not for our group according to the S-B because: “They like their news delivered with unerring precision. They want it to be serious, deep, meaningful. SBTV might not appeal to them.”
I like precise and meaningful news, so I guess I can stop viewing SBTV.
I think the Star-Banner may have missed the point about why the under 40s aren’t buying newspapers. It may not have a thing to do with the way news is delivered but a more important factor of “why should we trust it”.
Post a Comment
<< Home