HomeMy WebLinkAboutResolutions 2006 Failed RESOLUTION SUPPORTING THE USE OF
IMPACT FEES BY SCHOOL DISTRICTS
Resolution No.
St. Croix County, Wisconsin
WHEREAS, St. Croix County is the fastest growing county in Wisconsin; and
WHEREAS, this rapid growth is forcing rapid expansion of the public schools in the
Hudson area; and
WHEREAS, the rapidly rising need for new school buildings and other facilities is
causing a significant increase in school district tax levies; and
WHEREAS, impact fees shift a portion of the costs of capital improvement from
residents to developers of new developments; and
WHEREAS, state law permits the use of impact fees by cities, villages, towns and
counties for capital improvements; and
WHEREAS, current state law does not allow school districts to use impact fees; and
WHEREAS, a significant number of other states, including Washington, Oregon,
California, Georgia and Ohio, permit school districts to impose impact fees.
THEREFORE, be it resolved that the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors supports
allowing school districts in Wisconsin to use impact fees to help fund the cost of capital
improvements.
FURTHER, be it resolved that a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Wisconsin
legislature representing St. Croix County.
Offered by the Finance Committee.
NEGATIVE AFF ATIVE
n
Reviewed by Corporation Counsel on
4
Greg Iii4imerman, Corporation Counsel
I
This Resolution was adopted by the St. Croix County Board of Supervisors on
Cindy Campbell, County Clerk
I
Impact Fees
This fee should be called what it is and that is a tax... a tax on a new house.
This seems attractive to some because it taxes someone else.
But we should be very careful. This is the worst of taxes because it not only is a tax
without regard to use but is a tax without regard to actual need. It purports to be
needed to fund capital needs for schools because of new students. But there is no
correlation between a new house and new students. Worse, this tax would be for
undetermined future capital needs.
Many of the people moving into a new home in a new development are already in the
district. Maybe it is the young couple living in an apartment. They have saved the down
payment for a first time home and now we seek to pile a tax on that home?
Maybe it is the family seeking to move up from a starter home to their next home.
Already here, they may or may not have children that need schools in the future. And
now we seek to pile a tax on their new home?
The potential addition of this tax has the likely result of forcing some potential home
buyers to locate in another school district because they have been priced out of this
district, causing artificial disruption of population and causing pressures on other districts
as well.
People should be able to choose where they live without regard to tax policies that cause
significant disparities between jurisdictions.
This resolution is ill advised, anti competitive and discriminatory.
I spoke against this resolution in finance and voted in the negative. I now urge its
rejection by the full board.
�jrUrn � ,�,� ( std �.-Fe✓