Raleigh council revisits impact fees

Motions to research the issue are simplistic and politically motivated, say some on council

RALEIGH -- In a sign that election season has officially begun, the City Council spent more than 40 minutes Tuesday rehashing the issue of impact fees and whether they need to be raised to pay for Raleigh's rapid growth.

The contentious debate over the fees is likely to continue on the campaign trail. The council also agreed Tuesday to build a skate park at Marsh Creek Community Park in northeast Raleigh. The park isn't expected to open until late next year.

But it was impact fees that drew the strongest response from officials.

Council member Russ Stephenson, who placed the item on the agenda, proposed three separate motions asking city staff members to research the possibility of raising various fees to pay for parks, roads and other infrastructure improvements. The last two motions were defeated in 4-3 votes.

The first motion, asking city staff to research how other communities have paid for growth, was held over until the next meeting so that council member Jessie Taliaferro, who was unable to attend, could vote on the issue.

The debate Tuesday was nearly identical to the protracted one the council had over impact fees after the 2005 municipal election. After more than a year of discussion, the council voted 5-3 to raise impact fees 72 percent in April 2006.

The three officials on the losing end of Tuesday's 4-3 votes -- Mayor Charles Meeker and council members Thomas Crowder and Stephenson -- are the same three who voted against the 72 percent increase last year. Meeker, Crowder and Stephenson wanted the city to raise impact fees twice that much.

In reviving the issue, Stephenson said Tuesday that Raleigh needs to find creative ways to pay for delivering services to its growing population.

"The goal is not to limit growth but to sustain quality growth over the long term," he said.

Philip Isley and Tommy Craven were joined by Joyce Kekas and James West in sinking the two motions.

West said Stephenson's proposals sounded like simplistic solutions to a complex problem. Isley described Stephenson's efforts as a political ploy launched with the Oct. 9 election in mind.

"We already had this debate," Isley said. "This is nothing but a waste of time."

Candidate filings for the election began last week. Kekas is the only incumbent to announce she won't run for re-election.