Howdy TexAg Community!

At last night's City Council meeting, there was a long discussion about the effects of the City's impact fees charged to developers to build affordable housing in the community. Essentially, the data presented by the City made it seem like impact fees have no effect on the cost of a starter home. However, the developer that spoke after made it seem like it does have a significant impact, especially on multi-family development.

While I understand the need for the City to find a way to be able to fund infrastructure, new development also seems like an added bonus in other revenue areas. On the flip side, these fees also seem like they unfairly penalize first-time homebuyers before they even know it all because they bought a home in a new development area. As a first-time homebuyer myself, for the most part, the only houses within my price rage at the time were primarily in new developments.

Anyway, thoughts from those with more knowledge on this?

Here's a link to the presentation: https://blog.cstx.gov/2025/03/27/live-from-city-hall-thursdays-city-council-meeting-march-27/

This is an age old argument on how to cover fixed costs of new development. Charge those fixed costs to the people that actually create the need for the new fixed costs (new development) in the system or roll those fixed costs longer term into taxes and/or usage fees on bills (CSU: electric, water, sewer, etc.) and have everyone subsidize the fixed costs of the new development (and the new entrants eventually are helping subsidize the newer entrants down the road). When cities like go through a large lengthy growth spurt they tend to get a lot of flack from the citizenry about subsidizing new development massive fixed cost amounts at the expense of the existing populace. IF growth was consistent, either method would probably be a wash in the end over who is subsidizing who. But growth is NOT consistent so it ebbs and flows. When growth is high/fast the fixed costs skyrocket up.

CS came through a period of high growth where the local elected officials over the last decade decided to move in the direction of impact fees. (We can argue wether or not those impact fees are accurate....) The CS political market over the last decade has said we don't need all this growth this fast so lets try to control (slow down) the growth to more managable levels. Council "could" elect to dig deeper into actual fixed costs and lower (or raise) their impact fees or vote to do away with them but the current council reps appear to solidly support the concept and structure. Why should the rest of us pay more taxes and higher (yet) utility bills to subsidize your first home? It would appear Councils move in the impact fee direction has done what it was supposed to with all the developer gnashing of teeth. Bryan and outlying areas that don't charge them have cheaper houses (taxes and utilities). So buy a house there....that is the market at work.

I have come to the conclusion that the upper echelons of CoCS staff are either inept buffoons, or comic book villains.

The place in a laughingstock and maybe a peg above Hearne in terms of boneheadedness.

I will continue to espouse this idea until they prove me otherwise.