William F. Meehan’s Feb. 1 letter (“Impact fees: New homes, owners should foot the bill”) reminded me of the good old times in the sixties, when my monthly payment for a $20,000 home was roughly the amount he cites for a $200,000 loan, now. This is very unfortunate, as the inaccurate reading of the mortgage tables tends to overshadow the true significance of the two points made by his piece: woefully inadequate impact fees, and property tax increase by reappraisal.
It could be said, that in a just society each person, or family, carries its own weight, as far as its impact on infrastructure, such as roads, water, power, and, government services, including schools, fire protection, police, libraries, etc. is concerned. That means that the thirty-year resident would rarely see a property tax increase, except to pay for new parks, sports arenas and the like. Adding the calculated figure up front to the mortgage of individuals, and using it as a basis for the impact fees charged to developers of commercial construction, condominiums and apartment buildings, seems appropriate. Naturally this cost would and should be passed on to homebuyers and renters. I think that aside from preventing much of the huge tax increases on established properties, this approach would encourage a healthy way to keep growth under control. Huge tax increase, you ask? The assessed value of my home has jumped 39 percent in two years. I bet the property tax will follow at the same rate. Dear Tim Eyman, is it possible you overlooked something?
Marysville
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.