Commissioner Murman quoted in this Tampa Bay Times article on transportation fees:
Big Bend development at center of Hillsborough fight with Tallahassee over transportation costs
Saturday, October 24, 2015 4:14pm
TAMPA — It seems like an ordinary development project: a plan to build warehouses and retail space in booming southeast Hillsborough County.
But the proposal has become a proxy in the county’s fight with the state over who should pay to build roads when new developments emerge.
And it comes as Hillsborough is wrestling with its own plan to pay for other much-needed transportation improvements throughout the county.
Duke Realty has an agreement with Hillsborough to build 1.5 million square feet of warehouse space and 28,000 square feet of retail on Big Bend Road near U.S. 41 in Gibsonton.
The expected rise in traffic will require the widening of Big Bend from four lanes to six between U.S. 41 and Waterset Boulevard at a cost that could reach $5 million.
Six years ago, that expense would have fallen on the shoulders of the developer. However, a change in state law means the county is on the hook for all but $34,000 of the expense, which Duke Realty will pay.
The arrangement has several Hillsborough County commissioners steaming. At Commissioner Sandy Murman’s urging, commissioners voted 5-0 last week to pen a letter to area lawmakers asking for relief and a fix. Commissioner Kevin Beckner told the county attorney to examine whether Hillsborough can rescind its approval of the Duke project.
“The Legislature did a really bad thing when (it) took away our ability to get fees from developers to help our roads,” Murman said. “It is hurting us. And we’ve got to make them aware.”
In 2009, with Florida’s real estate market reeling from the recession, state lawmakers passed legislation that drastically altered how municipalities charge developers for roads and other infrastructure necessitated by new construction.
Previously, if a developer wanted to build homes, businesses or offices along an already crowded road, local government could force the developer to pay to widen the road to create room for more cars. Now that same developer only has to pay an amount that’s based on the proportion of new vehicles the specific project is contributing to overall traffic.
The change has sharply driven down the amount that developers pay in so-called impact fees.
It was one of the legislative session’s most controversial measures. Environmental groups and editorial boards panned it and said it would lead to unmitigated growth. Many counties, including Hillsborough, lined up against it as an unfunded mandate imposed upon cash-strapped local governments with shrinking transportation resources.
But proponents of the law, signed by then-Gov. Charlie Crist, said it was needed to jump-start construction and reinvigorate Florida’s economy. It also appeased developers who often complained that localities held off on necessary transportation work until they could dump the costs on whichever developers came along.
The effects of the 2009 law statewide has yet to be seen, in part, because development is just starting to bounce back, said Eric Poole, assistant legislative director for the Florida Association of Counties.
Hillsborough County, particularly in the southeast between U.S. 41 and U.S. 301, may see the effects sooner than most. The nearby Amazon Fulfillment Center in Ruskin, the Hillsborough Community College SouthShore campus and the new St. Joseph’s Hospital-South are driving growth in the area, but the emerging suburbs still have plenty of transportation needs.
“Because of the economy and the population down in that area, it’s probably one of the first communities as we come out of this economic slump where we’re seeing these kinds of challenges,” Poole said, “and it will creep up in other areas as (the economy) gets better.”
The Duke Realty development is a bit of an “anomaly,” said Mike Williams, Hillsborough County’s director of transportation planning and development. The cost to the county is on the higher end compared to other developments.
How pervasive the problem is, however, is unclear. Since the 2009 law went into effect, Williams said the county has collected about $6 million in impact fees — barely more than the cost of the Big Bend widening alone.
The commission last week called for a review of how much the county has spent on infrastructure for new development since the law passed.
The county is weighing ways to extract more from developers as a means to build support for Go Hillsborough, the proposed referendum to increase the sales tax to pay for 30 years of transportation projects. Many residents have said they want to see builders pay their fair share for sprawl before they are willing to tax themselves.
As it is, the county is considering changing its impact fees to mobility fees, an alternative structure that charges developers more the farther they build from designated urban cores. The county hopes that could provide incentives for more in-fill and redevelopment, or at least will bring more revenue to pay for any outward growth.
Williams said county staff hopes to present a plan to commissioners by the end of the year. Pasco County has implemented mobility fees.
Sen. Tom Lee, R-Brandon, said with the economy improving, the Legislature should review the 2009 changes to encourage smart growth and mitigate some of the financial burdens on localities.
But Lee, who also is an executive for a home-building company, said mobility fees that push growth to certain areas might not be a panacea, either.
“It’s incumbent upon government to not just rely on taxing developers to persuade them to build in the urban core,” Lee said, “but also to improve those areas to attract people and businesses.
“Striking that balance, sometimes, can be very difficult.”
