- April 25, 2024
-
-
Loading
Loading
The following was sent to the Palm Coast Observer by Palm Coast Mayor Jon Netts:
There appears to be some confusion resulting from the May 9 front-page article in the Palm Coast Observer regarding impact fees. Please allow me to offer some clarification on the issue.
Transportation impact fees are one-time charges to developers designed to pay for the impacts on the transportation system that are created by their new development(s). The idea is that new growth should pay for itself and should not create a burden on existing residents.
Historically, Flagler County levied transportation impact fees on all development within the county and had the discretion to use this money countywide. This is not the money we are talking about.
As time went on, the county recognized that the vast majority of development was occurring in the eastern portion of Flagler County and consequently agreed to restrict the use of impact fee dollars collected in Eastern Flagler County to transportation projects within Eastern Flagler County. This is not the money we are talking about.
Still later, and shortly after Palm Coast incorporated, the city agreed that our Building Department would collect impact fees on behalf of the county from all development within Palm Coast. The city and county further agreed that these fees would be used by Flagler County for transportation projects within Palm Coast — projects that were specifically enumerated in a written interlocal agreement. This is the money we are talking about.
(Dear Readers: Please don’t take my word or the word of others about what this document does or does not say. I urge you to read this document for yourself. Visit http://palmcoastgov.com/impactfees.)
Several years after incorporation, Palm Coast began to collect its own transportation impact fees. The $4.2 million dollars (not $2.1 million as stated by the county) currently under discussion is the money collected by Palm Coast under the terms of the interlocal agreement. All we ask of the county is that they use this money for any one, or more than one, of the agreed-upon transportation projects specified in this agreement. It is my contention that the county had no authority to pledge any of these dedicated impact fee dollars for any project not specifically enumerated in the interlocal agreement.
Commissioner Holland, this is not a complicated issue. While it may be true that “Historically, impact fee money was spent in (many) different areas that benefited many residents” (your words), what we are talking about are funds collected by and within Palm Coast for specific projects within Palm Coast.
Commissioner McLaughlin, it is not a “misnomer” to call this “pot of impact fees ‘Palm Coast money.’” Read for yourself the interlocal agreement. Contrary to your assertion, the money in question was not collected countywide.
It is the position of the city that the Old Kings Road extension and the Palm Harbor extension must be built before any interchange is opened to avoid diverting even more traffic onto our local streets.
Mr. Coffey, if you truly believe that an interchange at Matanzas Woods Parkway will not contribute to local traffic, then why build it in the first place?
Commissioners, for you to say that you will give these dedicated dollars to Palm Coast only if we take over responsibility for a county road (Matanzas Woods Parkway) — well, I continue to call that blackmail or, if you prefer, “hostage-taking and holding our assets for ransom.”
Jon Netts
Mayor, city of Palm Coast
