PNJ.com headlines: Here’s what’s in the news on Friday, May 3
In the news today: After a three-day trial, a Santa Rosa County jury is ready to deliver its verdict in the Jason Curtis murder trial.
After a failed attempt in 2021, Escambia County may once again consider requiring developers to pay to upgrade the infrastructure around their projects.
Escambia County Commissioner Jeff Bergosh asked the rest of the board of county commissioners to consider enacting some type of concurrency requirements in the county’s land development codes, especially around schools.
Generally, concurrency rules require each development to be evaluated for its impact on the schools and county roads, and if the project causes a school or the roads in the area to go over their designed capacity, the developer would have to pay to increase the capacity.
Bergosh made the request before in 2021 and at first a majority of commissioners were open to the idea, but as the proposal began to take shape around creating traffic mobility fees it lost support.
On Thursday, Bergosh said the time has come for Escambia County to do something because, without concurrency, the county really has no way to mitigate the impact of large developments.
“I understand we’re a growing community,” Bergosh said. “I’m not anti-growth; I’m actually pro-growth, but it has to be done intelligently. Right now, we’re the only large county in the state that does not have both local option sales tax and some form of transportation, mobility fees, concurrency or impact fees.”
Bergosh said Escambia County hasn’t had any type of concurrency rules since 2013 and there have been several developments near Perdido Key and in the Beulah area, both in his district, that have created issues for traffic and the schools.
“Let’s get concurrency back in the land development code, and let’s get transportation mobility fees,” Bergosh said. “We need that. Our roads, they’re taxed − they’re overtaxed − in some instances. Traffic is the No. 1 issue that I’m hearing from my constituents. And then they ask, and it’s a legitimate question to ask, ‘Why are you approving all this additional residential development, and the roads aren’t keeping up?’ It’s a legitimate question.”
Bergosh made the proposal in 2021 after it was part of his re-election campaign in 2020. Bergosh is running for re-election and currently has one challenger in the Republican primary, Steven Stroberger.
“I won the (2020) election, and I brought it up,” Bergosh said. “I had no support on the board. I didn’t have three votes. I’m up for election right now, and I’m bringing it again. Look, there will always be people that no matter what I do, they will lob insults. But I’ve done it after the election. Now I’m doing it before the election. I think we have a problem. Other counties have figured this out.”
Commission Chairman Steven Barry, who dropped his support for the proposal in 2021, said “the pendulum swings” and things change.
“I think the pendulum has swung where the conversation can be had,” Barry said.
Previously: ​​​​​​​Escambia County mulls rule change to make developers pay for infrastructure upgrades
Barry said he would support looking at what other Panhandle counties have done to address the issue.
Barry also cautioned that people shouldn’t be under the impression that the developers would pay a fee without passing that fee on to their customers, raising prices on homes.
“There’s a very popular narrative on social media that says, ‘Well, make them pay, make them pay,'” Barry said. “That’s not how their businesses work. If anyone thinks (the developers are) going to eat the expense to the detriment of their bottom line − that’s not how they put together pro formas for projects. The outcome may be that they don’t do a project.”
Commissioner Lumon May said he supported looking into the idea but wouldn’t support any policy that would raise the price of small or infill developments, especially for any project that would add affordable housing.
“We have to be very cautious of the fees that are included,” May said. “… To me, there’s a difference between an infill builder and someone who’s building in a (Community Redevelopment Area), versus an outside multi-development developer from South Florida who comes here in and increases capacity by 500 units.”
Commissioner Mike Kohler also said he supported the idea of looking more into the concept, but he wanted to see what the proposal would do to home prices before fully backing it.
Bergosh said he believes the county has the ability to craft a proposal that’s targeted and even increases incentives for urban infill projects though that may make those existing residents unhappy.
“It’s going to be difficult, but I would say, while we’re doing this, why don’t we incentivize that in areas that are already built out, we can add density without overtaxing the roadways,” Bergosh said.