Court ruling is a victory for valley group's decision to charge developers fees

By KEN CARLSON
kcarlson@modbee.com

E-Mail

Comments (0)

Text Size:

tool goes here

FRESNO -- A judge ruled Thursday that it is legal for the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District to charge air pollution fees on builders of housing subdivisions and commercial developments.

In 2006, the building industry, a taxpayer group and the Modesto Chamber of Commerce filed a lawsuit in Fresno County Superior Court challenging the fees. Those groups contend the fees are illegal because they are not directly related to air pollution emissions.

The district imposes the fees on developments with more than 50 housing units and commercial projects in the eight counties within its regulatory reach of San Joaquin, Stanislaus, Merced, Madera, Fresno, Kings, Tulare and Kern.

District ends 'Spare the Air' campaign, implements year-round push

The valley air district's rule was the first of its kind in the state when adopted in late 2005 and holds developers accountable for air pollution resulting from urban sprawl.

District officials Friday applauded Judge Donald Black's decision upholding the policy.

"We now hope the state Building Industry Association joins our many local developers, who have embraced this rule and are working with us to improve the valley's air quality," said Seyed Sadredin, the district's executive director. "We sincerely hope that we can work collaboratively for the valley's benefit."

A building industry official said he expected the plaintiffs will appeal.

"We knew this was going to be a long process," said Steve Madison, executive officer of the Building Industry Association of Central California. "Regardless of what occurred in the first round, we knew it is going to an appeal."

Among the plaintiffs were the California Building Industry Association, the Valley Taxpayers Coalition, the Coalition of Urban Renewal Excellence and the Modesto chamber.

Builders have questioned the fairness of imposing air cleanup costs that are passed on to home buyers and business owners in new developments, when others aren't required to pay.

Madison said increasing tail- pipe fees would be more equitable, but the district doesn't have the authority, so it is imposing the requirements on new developments as a condition of local government approvals.

He said some builders are being charged $1,000 to nearly $2,000 per house. Along with their payments, many builders are submitting letters saying they are paying under protest pending the outcome of the litigation.

The district policy aims to reduce motor vehicle tailpipe emissions as traffic circulates among new homes, shopping centers and schools in newly developed areas of cities.

Developers are given credit for designing their projects to offset pollution, by including sidewalks and bike lanes and putting retail outlets near homes, so people are walking to the store instead of driving.

Philip Jay, the air district's legal counsel, said Friday the fees average $400 to $500 per house for developers that make an effort to reduce pollution. In 2006, air district officials estimated the fees would generate more than $100 million from new construction over three years.

The money pays for efforts to reduce pollution, such as retrofitting school buses and diesel trucks with cleaner engines.

The building industry has noted that a significant portion of the fees has gone to reduce pollution caused by agricultural equipment, instead of having farmers pay to reduce pollution.

If the court decision is appealed, the case would go to the 5th District Court of Appeal in Fresno.

Bee staff writer Ken Carlson can be reached at kcarlson@modbee.com or 578-2321.