Onslow said there are also areas where one side of the street is within Ridgefield city limits and the other side is unincorporated county land. Therefore, one side of the street would be free of fees, while the other would not.
“It’s unfair competition,” he said. “If the county goes out and eliminates fees, you’re talking a difference of thousands of dollars. We’re trying to get businesses out here and the county is basically saying if you settle outside of Ridgefield or Washougal we’ll give you a break.”
Battle Ground Councilmember Adrian Cortes shared Onslow’s concern.
“Is it a good thing when government wants to do something to spur economic activity? The short answer is yes, but it’s also equally important that you do it the right way,” he said. “I think what the county is doing now, while it might sound good, will put it and all the local jurisdictions in direct competition.”
Madore admitted that county fee elimination puts competitive pressure on cities, but he said that’s a good thing because “competition makes everybody better.”
While Cortes agreed that competition is often positive, he said in this case it’s “unrealistic, long-term.”
“The reason it’s unrealistic is because the county is operating off of a much larger general fund than most other small jurisdictions,” he explained. “Even if smaller cities like Battle Ground were to try to [eliminate all fees], we could not keep it up as long as the county would be able to in terms of subsidizing costs.”
The city of Washougal was successful in eliminating most of its development fees as of this year. However, according to Mayor Sean Guard, officials decided that traffic impact fees and system development charges needed to remain intact.
According to Guard, a major reason Washougal stuck with its traffic impact fees is because they play a critical role in obtaining federal and state grants, since fees paid by a developer can satisfy private match requirements.
“Obviously it sounds better to say get rid of all of them. That makes a statement,” explained Guard. “Instead, we said we’re going to get rid of 95 percent of them because the other 5 percent are just so absolutely critical to what we do. To just take that whole thing and kick that bucket over doesn’t make much sense.
“If we turn that faucet completely off,” he added, “we just cut our own throat because none of these projects are going to be built and funded because we’re never going to have that money (without grants).”
Last year, the city of Camas considered doing away with its traffic impact fees, but ultimately decided against the idea. That decision, Guard said, came after officials from Washougal voiced concern over the effect it might have on them.
That’s the sort of communication RSV Building Solutions CEO Ron Frederiksen said the county is missing out on because of its lack of involvement in the Columbia River Economic Development Council (CREDC).
“The CREDC was a really good communication link for these kinds of discussions because it would be a logical thing for someone from the county to say, ‘we’re considering this, how would that affect Ridgefield and Battle Ground?’ and there would be some discussions. Since [David] Madore cut ties to that organization, the county has no link to the Economic Development Council at all,” he said.
Frederiksen, who has more than 30 years of experience in the building industry, said that Madore is correct in thinking that development fees can be “deal killers,” especially traffic impact fees in Salmon Creek and Hazel Dell. However, he said that a more prudent approach to spurring development would be to target some fees, not all. He also spoke against the notion that projects are sitting on the sidelines because of fees.
“The idea that the floodgates will open if the county removes permit and traffic impact fees shows a total lack of understanding about how a commercial project or residential subdivision is developed,” said Frederiksen. “It takes months, if not years to bring these things to fruition. No one is sitting there waiting to do something based on waiving some fee.”
Frederiksen said the county should focus less on fees and more on getting developers through the permitting process in a timely fashion.
“That would be the homerun in how you would set the county as a place that wants job creation, versus just waiving all the fees and causing problems for the small cities,” he said.
{jathumbnail off}
