Who Pays for Pollution?
Do sprawling residential and commercial developments cause air pollution? Officials in California's San Joaquin Valley think so. Last week they passed what they believe to ...
Do sprawling residential and commercial developments cause air pollution? Officials in California's San Joaquin Valley think so. Last week they passed what they believe to be the nation's first rules holding developers accountable for tailpipe pollution.
The concept of an "impact fee" is nothing new in many states. Local governments often require builders to pay for the roads and schools that the buyers of their product will use. What San Joaquin is doing, however, takes this concept one step further.
Beginning in March, builders will have to pay a fee into an air pollution fund. Unless, that is, they build using some smart growth principles that let people who live, work and shop in their projects get around more easily without driving. Features that lower developer fees include: Locating services such as restaurants, banks or dry cleaners on-site; reducing the amount of parking in the development; and building homes with cabling that facilitates telecommuting.
It's an interesting idea. Not surprisingly, builders hate it. They've got a point: The concept of "polluter pays" seems pretty straightforward. But what if your product oh, kind of, sort of, contributes to pollution in a secondary way?
Join the Discussion
After you comment, click Post. You can enter an anonymous Display Name or connect to a social profile.
The Overlooked Races of the 2014 Elections3 hours ago
Why Texas May Tap Its Rainy Day Fund During Boom Times1 hour ago
Austin, Texas, Has a Renewable Energy Plan. The City-Owned Utility Isn't on Board.2 days ago
After Residents of Cheshire, Ohio, Complained of Health Problems, Coal Utility Bought the Whole Town2 days ago
The Week in Public Finance: The Motherly Advice Edition2 days ago
As Ebola Fears Spread, Drastic Measures Are Taken2 days ago