[Transit] Transportation Impact Fees -- DRAFT resolution to review

[Peter Campbell]

Still have little experience with this but what you say Katie (and Harry)
makes a lot of sense and the draft looks good. Support.

On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 15:23 Harry Maher <harryb.maher at gmail.com> wrote:

> I agree--the devil will be in the details, as always, and it would have
> been better to have MOB to work with, but we shouldn't shoot it down now.
>
> FWIW, they could set the fees so they are not high enough on their own to
> impact any given project to the point where it wouldn't be built... but I
> do understand the intersection with MHA, building codes, REET, already high
> property taxes, etc. could push investment that would have gone into
> housing to places outside of Seattle or different sectors (as we may
> already seeing w/ reduced building permits). But we need the money... It's
> definitely a tricky proposition, but for now I'm on board. Seconded!
>
> On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 1:01 PM Katie Wilson <katie at transitriders.org>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Transit Crew,
>>
>> I’m thinking of bringing a resolution on transportation impact fees to
>> Thursday’s membership meeting— see the draft below— and wanted to ask if
>> people have opinions/feedback. There was some discussion among MASS
>> coalition organizations about this earlier this year, and in the end most
>> organizations felt reluctant to support impact fees (even though many of us
>> had been involved in developing the original proposal with O’Brien’s
>> office) for several reasons including:
>>
>>
>>    - General mistrust of CM Herbold because of her role in raising STBD
>>    funds in last fall’s budget process, and extra mistrust of CM Pedersen (who
>>    also supports impact fees) because he’s generally anti-development.
>>    - Worries that transportation impact fees could actually deter
>>    housing development especially in the context of a housing market slowdown.
>>
>>
>> However, there was also quite a lot of misunderstanding about the nature
>> of the proposal. We thought Herbold was proposing a full-fledged impact
>> fees program, whereas in fact she was just trying to get a project list
>> added to the Comprehensive Plan, which would enable a program to be
>> designed at a later date. So the debate about rates and impacts on
>> development could be had then. But if we don’t add the project list, it’s
>> much less likely that it will be an option moving forward.
>>
>> Personally I feel it’s worthwhile keeping the Transportation Impact Fees
>> option open as a funding source, especially knowing the dire budget
>> situation that Seattle is heading towards. That’s why I think it’s worth
>> getting on board with this initial action, even if we have some concerns
>> and we’re not totally on board with the specifics of a program. (It’s worth
>> noting that neither Herbold nor Pedersen will be around when a program
>> would ultimately be designed…)
>>
>> Anyway, happy to try to provide more details, but that’s probably enough
>> for now. Any thoughts?
>>
>> - Katie
>>
>> ———————
>>
>> Resolution #173 on Transportation Impact Fees - DRAFT
>>
>> WHEREAS in 2019, TRU and transportation and climate allies worked with
>> Seattle Councilmember Mike O’Brien on a proposal for Transportation Impact
>> Fees that would be paid by developers to fund multimodal transportation
>> projects; and
>>
>> WHEREAS that work was put on hold by a combination of SEPA appeals,
>> Councilmember O’Brien’s departure from office, and the COVID-19 pandemic;
>> and
>>
>> WHEREAS Councilmember Lisa Herbold’s office has now updated the list of
>> potentially eligible projects that were identified by advocates in 2019,
>> and is hoping to add this list to the Comprehensive Plan this fall; and
>>
>> WHEREAS some of our allies who were involved in this work in 2019 are now
>> worried that transportation impact fees could deter the development of new
>> housing, among other concerns; and
>>
>> WHEREAS adding the project list to the Comprehensive Plan does not by
>> itself create a transportation impact fee program, it merely allows the
>> Council begin consideration of developing and adopting legislation for such
>> a program,
>>
>> THEREFORE BE IT
>>
>> RESOLVED that TRU supports adding the Transportation Impact Fees project
>> list to the Comprehensive Plan.
>>
>> RESOLVED that TRU will communicate this support to Seattle City
>> Councilmembers and to our transportation and climate allies.
>>
>>
>>
>> Katie Wilson
>> General Secretary
>> Transit Riders Union
>> https://transitriders.org
>> 206-781-7204
>>
>> *The Transit Riders Union is a democratic organization of working and
>> poor **people, including students, seniors, and people with
>> disabilities, taking control over our own lives, and building up the power
>> we **need to change society for the good of humanity and of the planet.
>> We will **fight to preserve, expand, and improve the public
>> transportation system in **Seattle and beyond, so that every human being
>> has access to safe, **affordable, and reliable public transit.*
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Transit mailing list
>> Transit at transitriders.org
>> http://lists.transitriders.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/transit
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Transit mailing list
> Transit at transitriders.org
> http://lists.transitriders.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/transit
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.transitriders.org/pipermail/transit/attachments/20230718/2792914b/attachment.html>