SERVICES EXPANSION FEE TAX ON NEW RESIDENTIAL CONSTRUCTION FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF JOINT-USE EDUCATIONAL/MUNICIPAL FACILITIES, FOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS, AND FOR PARKS AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENTS
Major provisions: This measure calls for an excise tax to be imposed for 15 years to provide funds for new services expansion. The fee would be at a rate of not more than $1.00 per square foot on new residential construction. The city is permitted to invest the funds and to increase the city's debt by an amount which could be repaid using the funds expected from this excise tax. The city council would determine the terms of issuance of bonds with a repayment period of not more than 14 years and at an interest rate not greater than 8.50%. The principal amount would be $6 Million, and the repayment cost would be $10,486,764. The funds would be spent on capital construction of improvements related to joint-use educational/municipal facilities, transportation, and parks and recreation. At least 50% of the funds are to be spent on joint-use facilities.
Those in FAVOR say:
-- Community growth in housing puts additional burdens on a city which fees already collected do not cover. The service expansion fee makes it possible to add new recreational and school facilities at the time new home developments are built, so that overcrowded classrooms and strained infrastructure can be avoided.
-- Voters have not always passed district bond issues so that new buildings were ready when needed. With a service expansion fee, the city and schools districts can leverage their dollars, making effective use of their resources to provide needed facilities.
-- The proposed tax would be imposed only on residential construction. Desirable commercial and industrial development in the city would not be affected. If needed facilities are built in synch with new residences, new housing developments would then be evaluated on their merits and their value to the city.
-- Impact fees are already imposed for water and sewer taps. It is equally appropriate to impose impact fees for school facilities, parks, and public transportation, as long as the new developments benefit from the funds raised in this way.
-- If sometime Broomfield forms a single school district, the city will already be invested with part ownership in some of the school facilities.
Those OPPOSED say:
-- This measure unfairly taxes long-time residents of Broomfield who choose to build a new residence in the city.
-- Potential commercial and residential builders will view Broomfield as unfriendly and refuse to do business with the city.
-- The excise tax is a hidden property tax increase because it will cause prices of both new and old houses to go up, and many people will be unable to afford to buy a home.
-- The money is projected to be spread among too many projects to be effective and thus represents just another general revenue for Broomfield.
-- Broomfield citizens are already paying taxes to the school districts and the districts themselves should fund new schools when they become necessary. If this measure passes, Broomfield residents would be forced to pay more taxes for schools than Thornton, Westminster, or Adams County residents in the same school district pay.
-- The taxes are slated to help build schools in Adams County and will not benefit Broomfield residents who live in Boulder County.
-- Some $10 Million in additional debt repayment will become the responsibility of Broomfield taxpayers unless there continues to be enough growth and service expansion revenues to pay this cost.