SG-W:/ My opinion piece

["Jeff Surfus" <jeffsurfus@email.msn.com>]

Thanks for the compliments on the op-ed article.  I had some "help."  Here's
the text.

Jeff

It seems that almost every week these days, there's an article in the
newspaper that relates to a development-related problem.  The article may
not note it as such, but it's there.  Here are a few examples:

? Ann Arbor high schools are so overcrowded that students can't walk down
the hallways between classes
? Washtenaw County's northwestern townships and the Village of Chelsea are
banding together to create and fund a fire protection authority
? the county's Urban Area Transportation Study releases its plan, calling
for the widening and paving of many roads in the next five years.

All of these examples point to one undeniable fact:  residential development
costs taxpayers money.  Whether its building new schools for $30-50 million
a pop, buying fire protection equipment and personnel or laying more
pavement on the land, more houses beget more people with more cars and more
kids, and they all require public expenditures to meet the demand.

A recent study conducted by the Washtenaw-Potawatomi Land Trust for the Ann
Arbor Township Board of Trustees puts it all in perspective.  In its
consideration of master plan revisions, the Township Board sought to know
the fiscal impacts of their decisions on the resident taxpayers they
represent.  As part of the study, land trust staff undertook a "Community
Cost Comparison," contrasting the future cost of providing public services
for residential development with the cost of land preservation.

The cost comparison looked at three densities for the Township's remaining
open space acreage:  ten acre lots, three acre lots and half-acre lots, with
three acre lots being the most likely future scenario.  Placing $300,000
homes on those lots would increase the population by 57% , including nearly
700 new school-aged children in need of classroom space.  While the Township
's SEV (State Equalized Value) would increase substantially, the new tax
revenues generated by these houses would not be sufficient to cover the new
expenditures in public services.  The study estimated that existing
residents would have to pay nearly 1.35 mills of new taxes, or nearly $167 a
year for 20 years or longer, to underwrite this development pattern.

The cost comparison then looked at the revenues needed to purchase
conservation easements on the Township's remaining 2,800 acres of tillable
farmland.  Recent appraisals for state and private farmland preservation
efforts were used to estimate values.  The results indicated that, in the
unlikely absence of matching funds from any source (federal, state or
private), those acres could be preserved for 1.16 mills ($144 a year for the
average household) over 20 years.  In the end, preservation costs less, and
all the benefits that are difficult to calculate-water quality maintenance,
wildlife habitat protection, real rural atmosphere with working farms, less
traffic on roadways, etc.-are also kept in tact.

There are some in our community who claim that residential development is a
net benefit from a cost/revenue review.  Their case fails to explain why we
are experiencing so many tax increases to underwrite development in and
around Washtenaw County.  Here are just some of the development-related tax
increases that have been instituted and proposed in the last few years:

? Dexter Township couldn't afford to pay for fire protection from its
general fund any more, and its citizens voted for a one mill increase
? Dexter Community Schools have raised taxes three times in recent years to
buy land and build schools, costing over 2 ¼ new mills--$100 million total!
? Canton Township voters rejected a new tax in 1998 to repair and maintain
their existing roads
? the Webster Township Board recently considered creating a special
assessment district of the entire township to charge residents one mill to
pay for emergency services.

In a developing area like Washtenaw County, tax increases are and will be
unavoidable.  The questions are:  what do you want to pay for, how much do
you want to pay and how long do you want to pay for it.  The new costs
associated with residential development are long-term-20-30 years for school
bonds and other capital costs, forever for police and fire protection and
road maintenance-and far more expensive than keeping land in an open space
condition.  The Ann Arbor Township study substantiates that preserving land
will cost some money, but it will be considerably cheaper than paying to
underwrite residential development.






===============================================================
smartgrowth-washtenaw:  Internet List and Forum for issues relating to
sprawl, smart growth, and preservation of the quality of life in Washtenaw
County.

Postings to:  smartgrowth-washtenaw@great-lakes.net      For info, send
email to majordomo@great-lakes.net  with a one-line message body of  "info
smartgrowth-washtenaw"
===============================================================