Wednesday, June 23, 2004

Who Will Pay for the Cost of Development?

Mr. Freemon' posting of June 4, 2004, is correct; but, does not go nearly far enough. The cost of $6,500 per pupil is correct; however, the average household has 2.3 children in school at an annual cost of approximately $15,000. This does not include any capital cost requirements for new school facilities to house the added students.

In addition, new hosing will add to the County's cost for police, fire departments, emergency life and rescue services. Some of these are presently volunteer; but, as the housing increases these will increasingly have to become funded out of taxes to provide more full time personnel.

Also, with each new house add two plus vehicles on the county roads, causing an increase in road maintenance and as subdivisions are added the roads in those subdivisions will be added to the County roads for maintenance.

Sewers will become another expense.

Also, while not paid for by taxes, other utilities will need to expand and while these are currently provided by private companies, the cost of the expansion will be covered by the public in the form of increased rates.

Each new house will add significantly more to the taxpayer cost and increase taxes, unless the cost of the house is well beyond the range of most prospective home owners.

The push for the development of Dearborn County will probably become stronger, since Butler, Hamilton and Clermont Counties in Ohio and Campbell, Kenton and eastern Boone Counties in Northern Kentucky are already significantly developed and Warren County in Ohio, currently experiencing the problems of burgeoning development (lagging utilities, increased public service costs, increased traffic, etc.) are declaring moratoriums on building. The next areas include western Boone County in Kentucky and Franklin and Dearborn Counties in Indiana. As we all know, Dearborn is the most readily accessible of the three areas.

We can look forward to Dearborn County to become the next County with the problems of development and the associated increase in taxes, traffic, etc.

Ralph Thompson, Jr., PE

No comments: