A01927 Summary:

BILL NO    A01927 

SAME AS    No same as

SPONSOR    Thiele

COSPNSR    

MLTSPNSR   

Add S64-k, Town L

Permits towns and villages in the Peconic Bay region to assess special
development fees in connection with the issuance of building permits.

A01927 Actions:

BILL NO    A01927 

01/14/2009 referred to local governments
01/06/2010 referred to local governments

A01927 Votes:

A01927 Memo:

 BILL NUMBER:  A1927

 TITLE OF BILL :  An act to amend the town law, in relation to
permitting towns and villages in the Peconic Bay region to assess
special development fees in connection with the issuance of building
permits

 PURPOSE OR GENERAL IDEA OF THE BILL :  This legislation would permit
towns and villages within the Peconic Bay region (Towns of East
Hampton, Riverhead, Shelter Island, Southampton, and Southold) to
impose special development or impact fees on building permits for new
construction or the substantial improvement of existing construction
for the purposes of: (a) community facilities, (b) traffic mitigation,
and (c) school facilities.

 SUMMARY OF SPECIFIC PROVISIONS :  This legislation adds a new section
64-f to the town law by authorizing towns and villages to impose
special development fees for the purposes of community facilities,
traffic mitigation, and school facilities on building permits issued
for new construction or the substantial improvement of existing
construction. Revenues from each fee shall be placed in a trust fund
to be used exclusively for the purpose it was collected. In the case
of community facilities and traffic mitigation, the governing board of
each local government imposing the fees must approve a plan for the
use of the trust funds as part of the annual budget process. An
advisory committee shall be established to assist in creating the
plan. In the case of school facilities, the fees shall be turned over
to the respective school district from which it was generated to be
used by that school district exclusively for the construction of
school facilities. Affordable housing shall be exempt from such fees.

 JUSTIFICATION :  Local governments in the Peconic Bay region have
undergone an unprecedented rate of development over the past decade.
The number of new residential dwellings has increased by 12.5% to more
than 86,000 housing units between 1990 and 2000. Record numbers of
building permits for new residential construction were issued during
the 1990's.  Population for the Peconic Bay region has increased to
over 120,000 people. In addition, the number of "second" homes in the
region is nearly half the total number of residential dwelling units.
Consequently, the seasonal population during the summer is often in
excess of 350,000 people.

Such rapid development has resulted in significant stress to the
regions existing infrastructure and an increased demand for new
infrastructure and facilities. Such impacts have included crumbling
roads, a demand for new police stations, fire stations, recreational
facilities and schools.

More than a third of the existing land area in the Peconic Bay region
remains available for development. Thus, the existing stresses on
infrastructure and facilities will continue well into the future.

It has been well established that new residential development does not
sustain itself through the generation of new property tax dollars. It
has been demonstrated that new residential development demands $1.30
in new services and infrastructure for every dollar generated in
property taxes.

Therefore, the recent development boom in the Peconic Bay region is
adversely impacting local budgets by requiring higher taxes to provide
increased services and infrastructure.

It is the purpose of this legislation to allow local government to
impose impact fees to address the demand for services and
infrastructure. Currently, existing real property taxpayers are
absorbing these increased costs for new development. Impact fees will
permit a more equitable distribution of cost by requiring new
development to pay its fair share for new infrastructure.

The result will be a stable property tax levy in the future.

 PRIOR LEGISLATIVE HISTORY :

2007-08, A.985; Referred to Local Governments 2005-06, A.2986;
Referred to Local Governments
2003-04, A.1873; Referred to Local Governments
2001-02, A.9727; Referred to Local Governments

 FISCAL IMPLICATIONS :  None to the State.

 EFFECTIVE DATE :  Immediately.