Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Adequate Facilities Tax topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commissioners approve study to examine raising commercial 'adequate facilities' fee
Summary
Williamson County commissioners voted 19-4 on Feb. 10 to authorize a consultant study into raising the commercial adequate facilities tax (AFT) to $2 per square foot countywide; an amendment set the study scope back to March 2017 and a not-to-exceed budget of $60,000.
Williamson County commissioners voted 19-4 on Feb. 10 to authorize a county-contracted study to assess whether increasing the commercial adequate facilities tax (AFT) to $2 per square foot would affect education impact fee revenues and county capital funding.
Supporters said the study would show whether an AFT increase could provide non-property-tax revenue to help pay capital projects. “This is authorizing the mayor to contract for a study to increase the non residential AFT, to $2 per square foot and implement it countywide,” said Grady Taber during citizens communications. Commissioner Richards, the resolution sponsor, described the request as a study only and noted the fee is a one-time charge on new commercial development.
The commission debated scope and countywide reach. Commissioner Mary Smith offered an amendment requiring the consultant to analyze commercial growth starting in March 2017, set a reporting deadline of Sept. 1, 2025, and increase the budget ceiling to $60,000; that amendment passed 20-3. During discussion, legal counsel clarified the AFT may be imposed in incorporated areas as well as unincorporated areas but doing so could be seen as an additional charge on top of existing municipal fees.
Commissioner Richards said revenues from an increased AFT could be used for capital projects and debt service and are distinct from education impact fees; he described the AFT as a one-time fee aimed at commercial development. Opponents and cautious commissioners warned the study should account for possible effects on the county’s education impact fee and municipal development policies.
The final motion—authorizing the mayor to solicit proposals and contract for the study with funds from the unincorporated county general fund balance—passed 19-4. The board recorded the amendment vote at 20-3 prior to final passage.
The resolution text as discussed and the consultant scope changes require the selected firm to analyze commercial growth back to March 2017 and deliver findings by Sept. 1, 2025. The motion as entered into the record stated the study contract would be procured and the cost would not exceed $60,000.
The study does not itself change any tax or fee; it is an analysis that the commission authorized the mayor to procure. If the consultant identifies revenue potential, any policy change would require subsequent action by the commission.
Action provenance: the matter was introduced during citizens communications and later debated under unfinished business as resolution 2-25-2; commissioners and at least two public speakers addressed the topic before votes were taken.
Ending: The consultant selection and any policy follow-up will depend on the procurement results and on any later commission action after the study report is received.
