Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Road Impact Fees topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Residents and supervisors press county on road impact fee spike and State Route 41 funding plan

3795402 · June 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

A commenter questioned a sharp rise in projected road impact fee revenue and sought clarity on how county road funds and transfers relate to State Route 41 improvements. County staff said higher collections tied to development on the SR‑41 corridor explain the increase and that any transfer into SR‑41 project accounts would be processed as a board‑

A public commenter raised detailed questions about the county’s road impact fees and the financing plan for State Route 41 during the June 9 budget hearing, prompting staff to explain current collections and the mechanics of any future transfers.

What was asked: Dan Metz of Sierra Citizens for Sensible Government told the board the proposed budget shows a sharp increase in road impact fee revenue compared with recent years and questioned whether a $5 million transfer and a $55 million carryover relate to funding for SR‑41. Metz also cited county code language about interfund loans and asked whether proposed appropriations complied with statutory limits on use of impact fees.

County reply: Matt Treiber, chief of development services, and Joel Begay explained the apparent jump in the road‑impact fee account. Treiber said the proposed budget reflects actual impact‑fee collections in the current fiscal year totaling about $26.2 million, up from prior estimates of roughly $10 million, largely because of growth tied to development along the SR‑41 corridor. Begay and Treiber emphasized that any reallocation or loan between the county’s road impact‑fee subaccounts (for county/regional projects and the SR‑41 project) would require a formal board action and a loan/repayment agreement in accordance with county ordinance.

Project financing picture: Staff summarized the overall SR‑41 funding picture as including federal allocations, road impact fees and other sources. Begay said the county had accumulated roughly $26.9 million in identified federal funds and, combined with impact‑fee balances and enhanced financing options, the county has about $86 million available for programming though total project costs may approach $150 million. Staff said they remain close to completing preparatory work for the project and will present specific loan documents and financing steps to the board when appropriate.

Why it matters: Changes to impact‑fee projections and any decisions to move funds into a large capital project carry direct consequences for county reserves and the ability to pay for other county road needs. Metz pressed the board for transparency on transfers and legal compliance; staff invited the commenter to follow up with the county office for more detailed records.

Sources: Public comment by Dan Metz and responses by Matt Treiber and Joel Begay during the Madera County Board of Supervisors meeting on June 9, 2025.