Today’s Salisbury newspaper has a letter from the Mayor bemoaning the recent decision of the City Council about impact fees that is very misleading. Let’s consider his statements.
He states that 26 (less than 20%) of the towns in Maryland have some form of impact fees on new development, but does not say that Salisbury is one of those. Some years ago, it imposed a “capacity fee” to fund the sewer and water systems of about $5,000 for a new home, and other amounts for apartments and for nonresidential development. This impact fee is now $8,500 for a home, and it has also increased for other types of development. Nor does he point out that there is also a County impact fee for schools of more than $5,200 for a home – that’s over $13,500 for a new home. And there are other city fees that bring the total government charges to about $20,000 or more for a typical home.
He suggests that impact fees may be used for operational costs – employees (wages) – but they cannot. He also claims that “Salisbury’s been giving services away” but provides no examples of any gratuity afforded to developers and does not point out that the “developer reimbursement” policy was dropped several years ago.
The impact fees were a reason why the proposed brew-pub at the old train station was abandoned a year or so ago. These fees have an effect on new projects of all kinds.
To his credit, Ireton admits his public record, but in very vague terms – “votes taken a decade ago” – when he was on the City Council and voted against impact fees. Face it, Mayor, after you did so, and the fees at that time ended, Salisbury had major growth and new development, its tax base increased greatly, and much public revenue accrued as a result. But since the current impact fees were imposed, that growth has dropped to nearly none. Go figure.
Ireton=Obama=Deceiver
ReplyDeletehow did we ever manage in the 60's,70's 80's and now look at us. gov. spend, spend, and we will tax and fee you to no end. it was working until they tried to fix it
ReplyDeleteIn 2008 Ireton was a big campaign worker for Barack Obama, and their tax and spend policy is identical.
ReplyDeleteEach has now been stripped bare of the election rhetoric and is losing support fast now that they have exposed themselves for what they really are.
Is he truly ignorant of the facts? You would think before going public with anything, one would check their facts? Maybe he too thinks its "ok" to be deceitful,{the means justifies the end mentality} most politicians think that now-a-days? Dont people like this realize how being deceitful destroys ones integrity? If one would so quickly and easily lie to adults reading the paper....how often would someone like this lie to our children? I think his classroom agenda should be investigated in short order.
ReplyDeleteGrowth didn't drop because of the recession or because it's cheaper to build in the county? Growth didn't drop because developers wanted more frontage on 13 up north? It's just because of impact fees? Come on.
ReplyDeleteI had the option to build a house on an empty lot at a good price; I decided not to do it based on vagueness of the impacts fees.
ReplyDeleteThe fact of the matter is that with what's already in place, a developer CAN'T build a desireable product that will sell in today's market. Just drive around town and you can count the projects that have either gone down the tubes or are on the verge. Some people call it "smart growth". They might want to assist the current failing projects before they look for more dummies to start more doomed developement. Some of the most successful contractors have tried and the market just won't support the cost effects.
ReplyDeletePeople and politicians like ireton arent happy and dont feel fulfilled unless the force or trick you into over taxation, they want all the money and all the power.
ReplyDelete10:57-
ReplyDeleteJim:
If you were a developer, you would know that those fees are a killer.
Ireton was against impact fees before he was for them.
ReplyDeleteWhy have impact fees when you have property taxes?
ReplyDeleteIreton did not work for the Obama campaign, and only supported him once he was the official nominee, and even then only because he was the democrat nominee. Ireton is no Obama fan from what I hear.
ReplyDeleteIreton bombed on his "police substation" mantra, and he will on impact fees, too.
ReplyDeleteHe belongs in Clown Town.
Because democrats want all YOUR money. They create new taxes all the time, one tax is NEVER enough and they ALL must increase yearly.
ReplyDeleteIs this Ireton guy half white too?
ReplyDeleteIsnt there a law that says you can throw a politician out of office for purposely being deceitful?
ReplyDeleteOnce they get their seat adjusted to the shape of their arse it dosent take them long to change colors and turn against the citizens. Maybe their head swells up so bad it dosent get enough blood to function correctly? Should we break out the petitions? No need to procrastinate the inevitable...
ReplyDelete11:59:
ReplyDeleteWho did he support before Obama was nominated -- I'll guess it was Hillary.
hey Jimmy ever thought of cutting some of those departments?
ReplyDeletedid the thought of reducing the size of salisbury's city government ever cross your mind? and if so was it more than a passing thought? Pollitt the same goes for you with the county!
It now looks like Cohen and Campbell have parted ways from Ireton. Let's hope that they don't side with him on imposing more impact fees in Salisbury.
ReplyDeleteThis alt to stimulate growth.
ReplyDeleteAn interesting study re:DIF - Impact Fees - is contained in the PDF found here - www.impactfees.com/publications%20pdf/dif.pdf
ReplyDeleteSuccess was found with two basic assumptions; a large population base and moderate to rapid growth.
Salisbury is small and not growing. The fees here seem to be only to support existing services so the town can waste money on their frills.
"Why have impact fees when you have property taxes?
ReplyDelete11:35 AM"
because voters won't be outraged if you are taxing the few people building new homes versus raising their and everyone else's taxes.
11:59 --
ReplyDelete12:50 is wrong. He supported Barney Frank, not Hillary for President in 1998 before Obama got the nomination.
Oh no, somebody woke Wilkerson up!
ReplyDeleteI never sleep, Im always listening.
ReplyDeleteI'm with Ireton on this one. No impact fees = my taxes going up.
ReplyDeleteWhere is We Care Wicomico when you need them?
Growth? The place has all the down home charm as Glen Burnie as is
ReplyDeleteImpact fees didn't keep developers out of Fruitland. Look at the mess there. Installing wells and septics in the county are just as costly these days. Just don't have the usage fees and double taxation being outside of town limits.
ReplyDeleteIreton is an idiot if he thinks that more impact fees are going to help the horrible economic situation in new construction to turn around. It won't work, thus causing zero increase in the tax base. What is he thinking????
ReplyDeleteJust like his predecessor, Ireton has trouble with the truth. What they have in common also is their political party - Democrat. It's not just a coincidence, folks
ReplyDelete