Orange County NC Website
Board of Commissioners 11 <br />Page 3 <br />June 26, 1996 <br />Reimbursement: A decision by the Board to reimburse the <br />impact fees for this housing project is less legalistic and would <br />not require the analysis or the time that would be involved for <br />an ordinance amendment. Presently Orange County has a policy <br />permitting reimbursement of educational impact fees paid for <br />housing units constructed by nonprofit corporations for home <br />ownership by persons meeting an affordability test. These <br />reimbursements are predicated on (1) a qualified applicant <br />(nonprofit), (2) long term affordability and (3) Orange County <br />using its general fund revenue to.satisfy a public purpose that <br />is deemed as important as the educational impact fees. The line <br />drawn by the Board concerning this policy can be redrawn. Its <br />-- present location is analogous to the property tax exemption made <br />for property used for charitable purposes. That tax exemption <br />has two features. The entity seeking exemption must be qualified <br />and the use of the property must qualify. A qualifying entity is <br />a nonprofit corporation. A qualifying use is-affordable housing. <br />Since the impact fee is not a tax, Orange County is not <br />bound by the line drawn in the property tax laws, drawn for <br />exempting property taxes. On the other hand, before the County <br />can spend general fund money, it must do so for public purposes. <br />Article V, Section 2(1) of the North Carolina Constitution <br />-provides that "[t]he power of taxation shall be exercised in a <br />just and equitable manner, for public purposes only." "The power <br />to appropriate money from the public treasury is nQ greater than <br />the power to levy the tax which put the money in the treasury. <br />Both powers are subject to the constitutional proscription that <br />tax revenues may not be used for private individuals or <br />corporations, no matter how benevolent." [Citation omitted.] <br />The definition of a public purpose is an evolving and <br />perhaps expanding one. The government may "experiment with new <br />modes of dealing with old evils, except as prevented by the <br />Constitution." [Citation omitted.] Most recently we saw <br />evidence of the North Carolina Supreme Court's view of the <br />expanding definition of public purposes in the Mareadv case. The <br />Supreme Court approved public money being spent for industrial <br />recruitment°-_~nd generally economic development. Some of the <br />language in.ahat decision, although not related to affordable <br />housing or this affordable housing project, suggests to me that <br />the line on reimbursing impact fees could be redrawn to include <br />the First Centrum project. I have enclosed a copy of the Mareadv <br />decision for your review. And, as we know, public money is spent <br />on affordable housing projects and programs at the federal, state <br />and local level. <br />• .Unlike fee exemption, fee reimbursement requires a source of <br />funds. That is, the fee must be collected and deposited in the <br />