Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
3 <br />A summary of the proposed amendments is listed below: <br />1. Amend Section 3, School Impact Fees Imposed on New Residential <br /> Dwelling Units, by increasing the amount of the public school <br /> impact fee from $750 to $1,000 per residential dwelling unit. <br />2. Amend section 4, Public School Impact Fee Exceptions, <br /> subsection 4, to include exception provisions for replacement <br /> units. <br />3. Amend Section 4, Public School Impact Fee Exceptions, <br /> subsection 6 to include text format changes. <br />4. Amend Section 5, Collection of Fees, subsection C, Limitation <br /> on Expenditure of Funds to reflect changes to the enabling <br /> legislation which permit impact fees to be used for debt <br /> service payments and payments under leases; and extend the time <br /> frame within which impact fees must be expended from five (5) <br /> years to 10 years from date of collection. <br />5. Amend Section 5, Collection of Fees, subsection E, <br /> Reimbursement of Fees, to add a provision to permit <br /> reimbursement of fees collected in error or where an exception <br /> has been granted. <br />Commissioner Willhoit noted that a majority of the Commissioners are <br />in favor of using a sliding scale instead of a flat fee for impact fees. <br />However, because of other priorities and the time involved in updating the <br />technical study, the Board decided to hold a public hearing on a flat fee <br />increase. He has talked with the Planning Director and would like to suggest <br />that the County hire interns to gather all the data necessary to implement a <br />sliding scale for the impact fee. The County Commissioners agreed with this <br />suggestion. <br />NOTE: STATEMENTS SUBMITTED IN WRITING WERE RECEIVED FROM THE FOLLOWING: <br />William C. Harrison, Harvey A. Goldstein, PTA Council of Chapel Hill-Carrboro, <br />Betsy Spaulding, Susan Cheng, Utah-Money Magazine, Alan Belch, Charles <br />Zimmeril, Ken Broun, Patrick Mulkey, Robert P. Foley, Peter Morcombe, Sherry <br />T. Jones, and John Reinhard. These are on file in the Clerk's Office. Also, <br />31 people signed a list indicating that they attempted to attend the meeting <br />at the OWASA Building concerning school funding. However, they were not <br />permitted into the conference due to overcrowding. That list is in the <br />permanent agenda file in the Clerk's Office. <br />PUBLIC COMMENTS <br />KEN TOUW, representing the seven-member Chapel Hill-Carrboro School <br />Board, said that the School Board supports the impact fee as one revenue <br />source to help meet the need for additional classrooms. The Board supports <br />an increase in the fee to offset some of the impact of student growth on long- <br />term residents. He said that the rate of growth and overcrowding has affected <br />the ability of their school system to deliver quality education which has put <br />the children on a sliding scale because of the rapid growth. He feels that <br />a fee based on a sliding scale is justified by the technical report and a fund <br />to offset affordable housing would be supported by the School Board. He feels <br />they cannot afford not to increase the impact fee. <br />