Commissioners delay impact fee vote

During their Oct. 25 meeting, Clay County Commissioners delayed for 30 days a vote on the implementation of new impact fees that would add to the cost of new construction within the county and would fund infrastructure improvements.

An impact fee study completed for the county describes the maximum allowable impact fees for six classes of future facilities.

For a new home between 1,500 and 2,499 square feet, the study says the county could charge a $6,577 fee to fund future growth.

Several representatives of the development and construction industries asked commissioners to delay taking action on the proposed fees.

T.R. Hainline Jr. of the Rogers Towers law firm told commissioners that if they implemented the impact fees, the county would be obligated to spend $334 million on infrastructure improvements, and the impact fees would only cover $153 million, leaving the county obligated to come up with the remaining $181 million from other sources.

“If the county does not expend those funds,” Hainline said, representing the Northeast Florida Builders Association, “if it falls behind or just decides it’s going to do something else, that means that the standards haven’t been met, the fees have no basis. And what can people do who have paid fees? They can come in and ask for a refund.”

Susan Frazier, representing the Reinhold Corporation and Northeast Florida Builders, questioned some of the assumptions in the impact fee study.

“I think the approach is right, and the methodology’s right, but the details of the numbers have not really gotten a shakeout,” she told commissioners.  

Austin Nicklas, the director of government affairs with the Northeast Florida Builders Association, told commissioners the impact fees would negatively impact Clay County’s building industry, which employs hundreds of residents.  

“They will also damage Clay County’s economy and housing market during a pivotal time when the nation has already entered a recession,” he said.

Nicklas also said the county failed to communicate the impending fees to the public adequately.

“This is obvious because we have been unable to find anyone outside county government that was aware these changes were occurring,” he said, “including attorneys who solely focus on Clay County government.”