Chamber opposes fees

Published in the Culpeper Star Exponent Monday, June 18, 2012
Traffic Impact fees were developed with good intentions. In fact, the Culpeper County Board of Supervisors has good intentions in implementing the fees. However, the net benefit of the fees is minimal at best and more likely detrimental. The fees are derived from the projected number of additional vehicles entering the business or new homes as a result of the new construction residentially or commercially. Sounds reasonable, right?

The revenue from the fees must be directed toward specific road projects. If the designated road projects do not move forward after a period in time then the funds may be used for general road improvements. So far sounds ok?

When a business is looking for a location or trying to add a drive thru window, they will now encounter a Traffic Impact Fee to add to their start up costs. Most areas ask for proffers (additional funds) from business and developers to supplement impacts to the community. These are usually discretionary and not always clearly quantified, allowing the planning offices to negotiate the best deal for the community. Now, the traffic impact fees could potentially limit the proffers from business and developers by defining the impact fees. The net result could be less from the business or developer than the community may be able to negotiate. Now, this is not looking as attractive.

On the other hand, if a business or developer is considering a community to determine start up costs and project viability, then, the Traffic Impact Fees are an additional “Fixed” cost that they will add into their equations for viability. Given aggressive competition among localities, this may simply disqualify us before we even have a chance to open discussions about the benefits of our community. This is a big deal in the recruiting game. We invest significant budget dollars in recruiting business and now we are limiting our opportunities… Thus the new Traffic Impact Fees could diminish the significant dollars that we invest in Economic Development. It seems that we are working against ourselves. Again – this is not looking very good.

Finally, if we diminish commercial business opportunities for Culpeper, the real impact fees could come from the residential tax payer. Business taxes are an offset to the residential taxes. If there is less business tax revenue then the likely place to find additional tax revenue for schools and government services is from the residential real estate tax rates. The new Traffic Impact Fees could actually increase residential tax rates by discouraging revenue from new business or business growth in our community.

Culpeper would be the first County to implement the fees in the Commonwealth of Virginia.  Why would we be the first? Could it be that the other Counties in Virginia know that this is not the time to risk limiting economic opportunities. 

The Culpeper Chamber of Commerce opposes the implementation of Traffic Impact Fees and encourages the Board of Supervisors to reconsider their vote to begin imposing the Traffic Impact Fees effective on July 1, 2012.

Jim Charapich, President/CEO
Culpeper Chamber of Commerce