TUCSON, Ariz. – Doug Boyd, a landowner in Wrangler Ranches, expresses dismay over the exorbitant permit fee imposed by Pima County for building a house on his property. The bill totaled over $10,000, with a significant portion, more than $8,000, designated for a Roadway Development Impact Fee. Despite his residence being situated on a dirt road, Boyd was stunned by the hefty fee, particularly given the road’s condition and lack of maintenance.

Road Condition Concerns and County Response

Boyd’s neighborhood’s road has garnered local attention due to its deteriorating state, characterized by bumps and potholes. Despite this, Pima County’s transportation department has previously categorized the road as being in Good condition. Despite being added as an agenda item for discussion at a Pima County Supervisors meeting, the road remains in disrepair, with no plans for repair in 2024.

Disparity in Fees and Landowner Perspective

Boyd, who chose to reside in Wrangler Ranches for its spaciousness and tranquility, questions the fairness of being charged the same impact fee as residents in urban areas. He acknowledges the expectation of less frequent maintenance for dirt roads but argues against paying equivalent fees for road development. Pima County maintains that the impact fee is uniform for all landowners seeking to build single-family homes and is directed towards constructing new roads and enhancing existing ones to accommodate growth.

Landowner Dilemma and County Justification

Despite reservations about the fee’s fairness, Boyd intends to comply with the payment, citing a reluctance to violate the law. However, he voices dissent against what he perceives as an unjust imposition. Pima County reiterates that the fees do not fund road maintenance and are reinvested in the respective areas where they are collected.

Seeking Fairness in Fee Assessment

The disparity in permit fees for road development between urban and rural areas highlights a broader issue of equitable resource allocation and infrastructure development. Landowners like Boyd advocate for a fairer assessment that considers the distinct characteristics and needs of rural communities, while counties must balance revenue generation with the provision of essential services to all residents. As discussions continue, stakeholders seek resolutions that promote fairness and community well-being.

Source