February 1999

By James Lawlor

Utah: More on quality growth. Nothing is ever as simple as it should be. Legislative chair Wilf Sommerkorn describes the slow process of drafting the Quality Growth Act as having "more peaks and valleys than an Alaskan mountain range."

Sommerkorn notes that Republican moderates in the house of representatives were eager to capitalize on the public's concerns about urban growth and the loss of open space to diminish the power of the conservative "cowboy caucus." With the decision of conservative house speaker Mel Brown not to seek reelection to the post and his succession by a mainstream legislator, Martin Stevens, moderate Republicans have actually gained power.

It's surprising, therefore, he says, that the moderate Republicans seem to have become more cautious in pursuing a growth management agenda. Rep. Susan Koehn, who drafted the act with Rep. Kevin Garn, is the new chair of the rules committee. Sommerkorn says Koehn may attempt to tone down the bill in an effort to mend fences with conservatives, who objected to several provisions--including open space acquisition--that they see as impinging on private property rights.

Meanwhile, Gov. Mike Leavitt remains a strong supporter of the Envision Utah process. The state's long-term planning effort, which is scheduled to finish its work later this year. The governor is eager to get the quality growth legislation moving, Sommerkorn says.

At this point, he continues, the legislature is likely to establish a commission that would define quality growth areas (where development would be permitted), fund assistance to local jurisdictions for cooperative planning or coordination with other jurisdictions, and establish a fund for the preservation of agricultural land. The commission would be composed of seven representatives from local governments, four from the private sector and two from state government, appointed by the governor with the consent of the senate.

Rhode Island: Impact fees on the agenda. Past president Kevin Flynn, AICP, has been named to a commission studying an impact fee bill introduced late in the 1998 legislative session at the behest of the state's building industry. To aid the commission, the Rhode Island League of Cities and Towns surveyed its members to find out what fee structures, if any, are currently in place in their jurisdictions.

Rhode Island law currently authorizes cities and towns to impose fees to mitigate the impact of land development. But the provisions are general in nature, leaving many questions unanswered. The impact fee bill is an attempt to clarify the rules, but some chapter members are concerned that the draft proposal is too favorable to the development industry. There is some difference of opinion among members, Flynn says, about whether it would be better to try to improve the draft or to seek to kill the bill altogether.

One troubling aspect of the draft bill is a provision that would create an impact fee review committee for each locality. As the bill stands now, the committee, which would hear all appeals of impact fee decisions, would be dominated by representatives of the development community. Another problem, says Flynn, is the bill's definition of a "capital improvements plan," which seems to add nothing to the one already in the statutes.

Chapter members also object to wording in the draft noting that public facilities finance methods should not "inhibit" growth and development. The fear is that any law that shifts costs to new development could be seen as inhibiting that development.