The Clark County council’s recent action regarding a fee-waiver program for developers is a victory for governance over intransigence; for reason over dogma; for insight over blind adherence to doctrine.
The council voted 3-2 — over the dissent of David Madore and Tom Mielke — to move toward ending a blanket program that absolved commercial developers of paying traffic-impact fees and application fees in unincorporated Clark County. The vote triggered a warning to developers that the waiver might be abolished or adjusted by the end of the year.
In short, Councilors Jeanne Stewart and Julie Olson, along with council Chair Marc Boldt, voted in favor of responsible, fact-based governance. Because there have been few facts to support a continuation of the waiver.
In 2014, a report from the county auditor’s office determined that the fee waiver had produced little development that would not have otherwise taken place, that most of the jobs created had been low-paying service jobs, and that the program was “unsustainable.” Earlier this year, a report by the county’s Community Development Department demonstrated that job creation in unincorporated areas closely tracked job growth in cities — indicating that the fee waiver was not responsible for growth in the county. That report also showed that, in some cases, it would take the county more than a century to recoup fee waivers through property taxes and sales taxes on the new businesses.
Despite these facts, Madore has remained frustratingly bullheaded. He long has championed the fee-waiver program, and used support from Mielke to implement the system when the council consisted of three members. Since then, two members have been added to the council, leaving Madore and Mielke in the minority and providing hope that Clark County can be governed by thoughtfulness rather than megalomania.
Clark County is facing a shortfall of about $20 million in its general fund; Public Works Director Heath Henderson has noted that road funding is suffering, saying, “We’re looking at potentially delaying some projects as we move forward”; and the costs that should be covered by commercial developers likely are destined to land upon residential developers and taxpayers. But none of that has led Madore to let go of his obstinacy.
Taxpayers have been ill-served by the fee waivers, regardless of how loudly Madore doth protest, and it is reassuring to see that three council members are interested in serious governance.
All of that means the council now can go about helping job creators in Clark County in a fashion that is not damaging to citizens. They would be wise to examine a fee-waiver program adopted by the Vancouver City Council — a program providing tax breaks for companies that have 200 or more employees and that pay salaries higher than the regional median. The city’s plan also requires development agreements to ensure that companies are upholding their end of the bargain.
Unlike the county’s blanket fee waivers, Vancouver’s program actually can have an impact on the local economy and boost the local tax base. It is measurable, sustainable, and thoughtful — traits that are missing from the county’s corporate welfare.
Whether the Clark County council copies Vancouver’s plan, adopts some variation of it, or scraps fee waivers altogether, the majority on the council has indicated that amateur hour is coming to an end. And that is a victory for residents.
