Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Impact Fees And Prepayment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
SPID board weighs impact fees, developer prepayment to limit borrowing
Summary
Board and consultant discussed maximizing impact fees for growth-related costs, the possibility of developer prepayment to reduce bond size, and legal constraints requiring proportional allocation of costs; staff was directed to refine impact-fee and prepayment scenarios.
Board members and the consultant discussed how impact fees and developer prepayment could change the financing picture for the sewer project.
Fred said the model includes a high-level impact-fee allocation and that roughly 58% of Phase 1 could be impact-fee eligible; he estimated an illustrative impact fee "upwards of $2,000." He explained that if impact fees are maximized under the OPID scenario in Phase 2, impact-fee revenue could cover much of growth-related capital costs, while in a SPID-only scenario debt would be higher.
Board members asked whether requiring OPID to put money up front would improve the districts position. Fred said prepayment could reduce the amount SPID needs to bond and lower interest expense, but warned that any developer contribution must be proportionate to the developers demand and could require reserving capacity for that developer. "If they came with some money to the table, then it would potentially reduce their impact fee obligation," Fred said, while noting prepayment carries restrictions and legal considerations.
