Supervisors debate temporary waiver of park impact fees as housing affordability concerns mount

The board received a staff briefing and lengthy discussion on a proposed temporary waiver of park and recreation impact fees under county code chapter 7.85. The ordinance draft arose from a request by Supervisor Carnell to consider fee relief to help spur smaller home construction.

Staff reported that ACRA—s regional account showed about $670,894 and that the county has sent approximately $583,096 to ACRA since January 2021; the county—s local park fee balance was noted at roughly $404,106. Staff warned that waiving fees reduces funds available for regional projects unless backfilled and that local and regional components are tracked differently.

Supervisors discussed several design options: making waivers a one‑time per‑person benefit (the county used a limited program in 2008), restricting relief to primary residences or to homes under a square‑foot threshold (a starter‑home carve‑out such as under 1,200 sq ft), or making waivers available only by application. Concerns raised included ensuring there would be money to complete projects already in the pipeline (e.g., Molly Joyce biking/walking improvements and planned Pioneer Park tennis/pickleball upgrades), the administrative complexity of case‑by‑case waivers, and how waivers might be gamed by builders.

Several supervisors and members of the public framed the debate in housing affordability terms: one speaker noted rising costs for local construction and a perception that park investments (for example, recent multi‑hundred‑thousand‑dollar court projects) can seem to conflict with the need for affordable starter housing. Others noted that impact fee funds are statutorily restricted for facilities (not operations) and that regional fees are intended to fund larger projects used by all jurisdictions.

Outcome: Board members did not adopt the waiver ordinance at the meeting. They directed staff to gather additional facts — specifically: a jurisdictional breakdown of what each city has collected and remitted to ACRA, clarity on the regional pot available for projects, and options for drafting a waiver that could be limited to starter homes or set as a one‑time per residence benefit. Staff will return with revised options and more detailed accounting.

Quote: "If we do waive it for two years, that money you can't go back and recoup it from future development," a staff member warned. "Either that money is gone or it has to be backfilled from other sources," the staff memo said.

Next steps: Staff to report back with concrete figures on ACRA receipts by jurisdiction, legal constraints on targeted waivers, and draft ordinance language reflecting board direction.