|
Gene Galin
|
 |
« on: September 22, 2009, 05:46:54 AM » |
|
Chatham County Residents Speak Out About Impact FeesBy Jaclyn Asztalos, NBC17 http://news.mync.com/site/news/story/42109/chatham-county-residents-speak-out-about-impact-fees/Chatham County residents packed the district courtroom to discuss impact fees, which is a one-time payment for homeowners to pay for school construction. "We'll have to leave to live because we can't afford to live here. We're being taxed to death," Heather Johnson, a resident and member of the Chatham Conservative Voice, said. Every homeowner pays a one-time fee of $3,500, but if impact fees are based on how many bedrooms are in the home -- which is one of the options -- the number could skyrocket. For example, a person in a three bedroom home could pay more than $8,000. A four bedroom homeowner could get slapped with up to $14,000. "The amount is so large that if you have any family size at all you're going to have three bedrooms or more and that means you pay $8700 on a house that costs $15000," Rich George, who develops affordable housing, said. County Commissioner George Lucier says the county needs a suitable way to pay for school expenses as construction costs continue to go up. "We're looking 10 to 20 years down the road. So the need is not now, but one year from now we have to have some mechanism in place to pay our debt," Lucier said. Lucier assured the crowd numerous times during the meeting that nothing has been proposed and the county will work with resident to come up with a solution.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
srvfan
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login:December 19, 2011, 03:12:54 PM
Date Registerd:February 10, 2006, 03:21:51 PM
Posts: 1284
|
 |
« Reply #1 on: September 22, 2009, 09:04:14 AM » |
|
County Commissioner George Lucier says the county needs a suitable way to pay for school expenses as construction costs continue to go up.
"We're looking 10 to 20 years down the road. So the need is not now, but one year from now we have to have some mechanism in place to pay our debt," Lucier said.
Lucier assured the crowd numerous times during the meeting that nothing has been proposed and the county will work with resident to come up with a solution.
why do those methods of paying for school needs always have to be based on real estate, either the value of real estate of initial construction/sales/improvements? When are we going to do the smart thing and move toward a system where the revenue generated is associated with the generation of the cost rather than the arbitrary system we currently use?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"The government forces those who sell pharmaceutical drugs to list the possible side effects, even if only a few people will suffer those side effects. Unfortunately, the government itself never tells us about the bad side effects of the things it prescribes."- Thomas Sowell
|
|
|
mary51802
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login:February 06, 2012, 07:14:50 PM
Date Registerd:July 05, 2008, 04:58:25 PM
Posts: 4071
we are all beautiful
|
 |
« Reply #2 on: September 22, 2009, 09:40:32 AM » |
|
I also thought this was settled by the citizens vote of NO. I do not understand why they cannot cut the fat and find other funding for schools.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
pinning down the truth is like catching a fart in a windstorm.......
|
|
|
Silk_Hope
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Today at 10:29:03 PM
Date Registerd:April 02, 2007, 08:29:04 PM
Posts: 8300
|
 |
« Reply #3 on: September 22, 2009, 09:46:21 AM » |
|
Since when has the BoC listened to the voters?
Remember when the County Water was put out to a vote and the NW voted no? The BoC was not happy with the vote and instructed the BoE to see if there was a loophole. One was found and was stated that some residents were not notified of the vote. The matter went to referendum again and the residents of the NW voted no one more time.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
bluetick67
Chathameister
  
Offline
Last Login:June 10, 2011, 07:48:23 PM
Date Registerd:June 11, 2009, 01:33:40 PM
Posts: 846
|
 |
« Reply #4 on: September 22, 2009, 11:02:27 AM » |
|
County Commissioner George Lucier says the county needs a suitable way to pay for school expenses as construction costs continue to go up.
"We're looking 10 to 20 years down the road. So the need is not now, but one year from now we have to have some mechanism in place to pay our debt," Lucier said.
Lucier assured the crowd numerous times during the meeting that nothing has been proposed and the county will work with resident to come up with a solution.
why do those methods of paying for school needs always have to be based on real estate, either the value of real estate of initial construction/sales/improvements? When are we going to do the smart thing and move toward a system where the revenue generated is associated with the generation of the cost rather than the arbitrary system we currently use? "we have to have some mechanism in place" = scratch heads --> lightbulb!--> huh, guess we'll try this one.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Word begets Image and Image is Virus". -WS Burroughs
|
|
|
bluetick67
Chathameister
  
Offline
Last Login:June 10, 2011, 07:48:23 PM
Date Registerd:June 11, 2009, 01:33:40 PM
Posts: 846
|
 |
« Reply #5 on: September 22, 2009, 11:10:56 AM » |
|
ps: 64 pg. downloadable research in the event anyone is interested - http://www.lincolninst.edu/pubs/1308_The-Property-Tax-School-Funding-Dilemma"Property taxation and school funding are closely linked in the United States, with nearly half of all property tax revenue used for public elementary and secondary education. There is an active policy debate across the country regarding the degree to which public schools should be funded with property tax dollars. Some policy makers and analysts call for reduced reliance on property taxation and increased reliance on state funding; others claim that the property tax is a critical ingredient in effective local government. School funding is no less controversial, and nearly every state has dealt with school funding litigation and court mandates at least once over the last several decades. "
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"Word begets Image and Image is Virus". -WS Burroughs
|
|
|
|
|
XMayorRV
Member

Offline
Last Login:April 12, 2010, 04:52:13 PM
Date Registerd:July 22, 2009, 07:18:32 AM
Posts: 34
|
 |
« Reply #7 on: September 22, 2009, 04:55:21 PM » |
|
I fully support higher fees and taxes for everyone. We have to pay for our bus.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
Who's buying lunch?
|
|
|
Populist
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:October 15, 2009, 02:22:59 PM
Date Registerd:March 22, 2009, 04:18:09 PM
Posts: 229
|
 |
« Reply #8 on: September 22, 2009, 05:16:34 PM » |
|
If there are no fees and no LTT how does the NCHBA, NCAR and CCGOP propose to pay for new school construction in the future? If we select BONDS then the principal and interest will need to paid from somewhere--will that be tax increases? I would like an answer to this conundrum.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
snowcamper
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login: Today at 10:13:39 PM
Date Registerd:January 16, 2007, 12:22:51 PM
Posts: 2958
Let there be light!
|
 |
« Reply #9 on: September 22, 2009, 05:20:30 PM » |
|
Cut out the bus, cut out the human relations director, cut out the non-profit contributions, cut out all of the studies (and just listen to your constituents), cut out things like the Parks department's new office space (use a cubicle, like everyone else), cut out the special elections...
Then see how much money you have. Cuts first...tax increases if that's not enough.
Our spending has gone up by >50% in 5 years... there is fat aplenty to cut.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
chathambooks
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login:February 04, 2012, 02:28:12 PM
Date Registerd:April 29, 2006, 12:43:05 PM
Posts: 1748
|
 |
« Reply #10 on: September 22, 2009, 05:26:33 PM » |
|
Nicely said camper!!
All of these are honorable things, but discretionary spending must STOP in these tough economic times. I wanted to say something to the commissioners about their new hires..
I would like to get into shape and would like to hire a personal trainer. I would surely be better off because I would be healthier. My children would benefit because they'd have their mom around longer. Hubby would think I am more attractive. But guess what?! I cannot afford it!! So I must go without. I won't burden my friends by asking them to pay for it!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
"You can't baby proof the world".
~Muddylaces
|
|
|
integrityticket
Chathamohican
   
Offline
Last Login:August 29, 2010, 03:13:54 PM
Date Registerd:March 18, 2006, 12:53:58 PM
Posts: 1537
|
 |
« Reply #11 on: September 22, 2009, 05:32:09 PM » |
|
 Cut out the bus, cut out the human relations director, cut out the non-profit contributions, cut out all of the studies (and just listen to your constituents), cut out things like the Parks department's new office space (use a cubicle, like everyone else), cut out the special elections...
Then see how much money you have. Cuts first...tax increases if that's not enough.
Our spending has gone up by >50% in 5 years... there is fat aplenty to cut.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
The bottom line is the iPhone and modern medicine came from democracy and the free market, not a government agency.
|
|
|
GOP Chair
Member

Offline
Last Login:January 28, 2010, 07:46:26 AM
Date Registerd:March 14, 2009, 03:06:52 PM
Posts: 51
|
 |
« Reply #12 on: September 22, 2009, 05:33:55 PM » |
|
I don't think anyone, certainly not us, is saying that there should be no fees. We are saying that it's time to look at other alternatives to impact fees. Some possibilities are listed in the press release. We also believe that overall spending can be reduced by at least 7% as outlined in a bipartisan proposal currently being circulated around the county. We have to prioritize! If we prioritize our spending we would have a better understanding of what we really need. Plenty of studies have shown that impact fees lead to higher housing prices and goes against a goal of creating more unaffordable housing. (before you ask, yes we too want affordable housing) It's a myth that these costs are absorbed by the builder. According to Commissioner Lucier, the BOC is open to alternatives. I believe they are. It's our hope that they will be more innovative and that raising impact fees is not what they ultimately decide.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
Populist
Chathamite
 
Offline
Last Login:October 15, 2009, 02:22:59 PM
Date Registerd:March 22, 2009, 04:18:09 PM
Posts: 229
|
 |
« Reply #13 on: September 22, 2009, 05:37:34 PM » |
|
All fees are passed on, just like those at the bank. There may be other solutions, but it will require honest bipartisan work by all parties devoid of hysteria.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
GOP Chair
Member

Offline
Last Login:January 28, 2010, 07:46:26 AM
Date Registerd:March 14, 2009, 03:06:52 PM
Posts: 51
|
 |
« Reply #14 on: September 22, 2009, 05:41:08 PM » |
|
All fees are passed on, just like those at the bank. There may be other solutions, but it will require honest bipartisan work by all parties devoid of hysteria.
On that we agree. Would you agree that spending needs to be part of the equation?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|