CollectionsImpact Fees
IN THE NEWS

Impact Fees

NEWS
August 23, 1990 | By E.J. Brown, Special to The Inquirer
West Pikeland Supervisors have joined the rising chorus of opposition from Pennsylvania communities to portions of a bill that would give them official state sanction to impose impact fees against land developers. Protesting officials think that House Bill 1361, scheduled to be acted upon by the General Assembly next month, would tie the hands of municipalities in using the funds collected. The state-sanctioned impact fees would be levied against builders to force them to pay the costs of upgrading transportation, water and sewer systems that have to be improved because of their developments.
NEWS
October 1, 1990 | By Robert Zausner, Inquirer Harrisburg Bureau
The House, in the next-to-last session before the general election, is scheduled to consider two bills this week dealing with impact fees, the charges levied by municipalities on developers. Although such fees - used to cover costs of such things as new roadways, water and sewer lines made necessary by new housing - have been around for some time, courts in several counties have agreed with developers that the fees are illegal. The legislation before the House is intended to create impact fees that are legally sound and will withstand court tests.
NEWS
January 29, 1989 | By Lisa Scheid, Special to The Inquirer
The West Chester Regional Planning Commission last week heard how municipalities can impose fees on developers to pay for roads, parks, sewers and other needs caused by developments. The so-called impact fees were dropped from the state Municipal Planning Code approved by the legislature in November 1988. According to state Rep. David W. Heckler (R., Bucks), without such legislation, municipalities are vulnerable to lawsuits from developers questioning the municipality's right to impose those fees.
NEWS
August 30, 1990 | By Laurie Halse Anderson, Special to The Inquirer
State Sen. Edwin Holl (R., Montgomery) has received the support of Upper Gwynedd officials for his proposed legislation that would legalize the impact fees that municipalities now charge developers. The Upper Gwynedd Board of Commissioners unanimously approved a resolution supporting Holl's bill at a board meeting Monday. Robert J. Kerns, township solicitor, called it "a much simpler solution to the impact fee problem" than a bill pending in the state House. Impact fees are charged by municipalities to developers to help pay for the effect a development and the additional residents who move there would have on a municipality.
NEWS
April 12, 1992 | By Georgia S. Ashby, SPECIAL TO THE INQUIRER
As they write an impact-fee ordinance, Uwchlan planners are finding it's a time-consuming and costly process. And that, according to area officials, is exactly what the legislature had in mind when Act 209 was enacted in December 1990 regulating how and when municipalities could impose impact fees. Until the legislature stepped in, impact fees were negotiated as developers came knocking on township doors in the 1980s. A developer couldn't refuse officials' demands. Now, a developer can refuse, unless an ordinance is in place.
NEWS
October 7, 1990 | By Joyce Vottima Hellberg, Special to The Inquirer
Developers on the Main Line are hopeful that a measure passed by the General Assembly last week would, in the words of one builder, eliminate "municipal extortion. " Michael Main, who builds luxury homes throughout the Main Line, said the impact-fee bill, which would regulate fees charged to developers, would eliminate charges being levied on a "willy-nilly basis. " Under the bill, "municipalities have to have a plan, and then must have a formula that is equally applied to every developer," he said.
NEWS
April 24, 2001 | By David A. Waronker
Growth and planning are issues that greatly concern the members of the Builders League of South Jersey and the New Jersey Builders Association. We applaud Stephen M. Sweeney, director of the Gloucester County Board of Chosen Freeholders, for his recognition that New Jersey must meet the shelter and workplace needs of a growing population ("Gloucester County: Much gain, no pain," April 17). We also agree that providing for our social and economic necessities need not come at the expense of the environment.
NEWS
October 19, 1990 | By Jeffrey Fleishman, Inquirer Staff Writer
Bristol Township police are investigating whether the previous and current township administrations failed to collect more than $1 million in impact fees during the last two years as a favor to developers, police and township officials said yesterday. The investigation will focus on the administration of former Republican Executive Edna Roth, but also will seek to determine why the current Democratic administration of James J. A. Gallagher, who took office in January, also is not collecting the fees, said a police official, who asked not to be identified.
NEWS
November 3, 1999
Last month, New Jersey seemed near a legislative breakthrough over a controversial but smart proposal to allow property-tax-stressed towns to charge developers "impact fees" for new housing tracts. Put that under the well-worn category of too good to be true. State Sen. President Donald DiFrancesco (R., Union) sent out a press release on Oct. 18 praising a compromise impact-fee bill as "a giant step in our continuing effort to provide municipalities with the tools to hold down property taxes.
NEWS
July 26, 1990 | By Laurie Halse Anderson, Special to The Inquirer
After a lengthy discussion about proposed legislation in Harrisburg that would formally allow municipalities to charge developers impact fees, the Upper Gwynedd Board of Commissioners has decided that it likes the concept but isn't thrilled with the way the bill was written. "I'm not against a bill. We should make impact fees legal. We just feel that a lot of things in the bill as it now stands are not good for Upper Gwynedd Township," said board President Jean DeBarth Upper Gwynedd has traditionally negotiated with developers to come to a decision about the amount and type of improvements, from traffic signals to tennis courts, that a developer is liable to pay. There are no statutes that allow for the imposition of such fees, even though the practice is common in the state.
« Prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | Next »
|
|
|
|
|