3410 La Sierra Ave. #F41 ~ Riverside, CA 92503 ~ (951) 286-4572
Community Forums    Search Site    Explore Our Community    The Board    Login/Signup    Contact Us


Residents Association of Greater Lake Mathews

RAGLM Board > General Discussion > Disasterous Development Impact Fee-Public hearing 7/1/2014 @ BOS
6/26/2014 10:29:12 PM
Disasterous Development Impact Fee-Public hearing 7/1/2014 @ BOSPost: Michelle Randall
Please attend this hearing and comment on these proposed fees.
Summary of the new proposed Development Impact Fees (DIF). Rivcocob.com/agendas-and-minutes    Agenda for June 17,2014.


The DIF are per unit or per acre fees the developers pay.  The idea of the DIF is that the residents don’t get stuck paying 100% of the infrastructure needed for new development while the Billionaire Boys who develop just walk away with their money. The DIF (Which are usually 30%) of the infrastructure costs, have traditionally been assigned by the needs of the communities. It has been assumed that the poorest communities (such as Mead Valley, for instance) have the highest DIF because they have the greatest need of the infrastructure that supports development.


The proposed DIF make Riverside County’s fees lower than the DIF for San Diego County, San Bernardino County, Orange County and many cities .  In 2009, the Supervisors cut the DIF by 50%, naively thinking they could  “stimulate the economy”.  That move has cost the county almost thirteen million dollars and, as you know, failed to “stimulate the economy”.  The proposed DIF is supposed to “encourage development” ( ie. “stimulate the economy”) by lining the pockets of those “Billionaire Boys” who do development.  


The proposed DIF holds fees at or below the fees charged in 2001. What?  Am I the only one whose food bill, clothing bill, and animal feed has doubled in the last 5 years? Has the County magically escaped inflation?  Has the cost of providing infrastructure for development fallen over the last fourteen years?  This only happens with smoke and mirrors.  I’m not into illusions. You and I will get to pay for the development infrastructure.


The proposed fees for the poorest communities (which also have the most developable land) have been slashed thousands of dollars so all communities would have a more or less even DIF playing field. That assumes that Mead Valley, therefore needs the same amount of roads, signals, parks, trails etc as the newly developed city of Eastvale. The proposed fees might be fine for Eastvale, but who do you think has to pick up the infrastructure fees for Mead Valley?  That would be you and me folks, through the General Fund (ie. Taxes).


The proposed DIF reapportions the fees so that the primary objective is building jail cells.  This reapportionment under-funds many other capitol improvement projects leaving the burden of financing them on the taxpayer.


The proposed DIF have NO requirement of commercial developers to pay for park or trail expansion.

The rational is that workers don’t use parks and trails. Parks and trails will be paid by residential developers only.  The 2001 DIF charged developers a fee across the board for park and trail expansion. Anyone with an eighth grade education knows about social migration in search of jobs and the resulting slums. Workers move close to work, and their families come with them. If those migrating families don’t get needed parks and trails, we end up with slummy neighborhoods.  


The proposed DIF has dramatically cut funding for library books.  

The 2001 DIF funded library books from single and multifamily development at the rate of $341 to $286. per unit.  The proposed fees fund them at $40 to $57 per unit. Not a problem I guess if you’re a slow reader.


Current Members: 350  ~ Total Posts: 1590  ~ Total Replies: 1928  ~ Total Polls: 16  ~ Total Poll Answers: 277  ~ Total Views: 2954471