Developers should pay for infrastructure

Dear Editor,

A recent article in the [Chesterfield] Observer discussed levels of service standards, which could give Chesterfield a new way to legally rein in growth that does not pay for itself. The common sense logic of these standards is that if a particular rezoning will overcrowd schools and roads and overwhelm emergency services, these hazards could be one reason for denying the rezoning.

In that Observer article, a local attorney, Mr. [Jim] Theobald, suggests that counties like ours should float bonds to pay for roads, schools, libraries, EMS and other services that new residential communities need. Theobald says government should provide these services, even though it is obvious our county government doesn't have the money. Chesterfield is $1 billion (yes, with a "b") behind in road improvements. The new Cosby High School cost $60 million, and the school board recently stated six new elementary schools are needed, four new middle schools and three new high schools. When Mr. Theobald says government, he is really talking about us citizens paying for all these new schools and roads and services when developers build homes.

My new county real estate assessment just came in the mail today, and my home's assessment jumped over $30,000 even though houses all around me sit unable to sell. Apparently, in the midst of a national housing slump, my home's value grew dramatically - despite the fact that a popular online home assessment Web site is listing my house $80,000 below what it was worth last year.

Nonetheless, I'm supposed to pony up more money for real estate taxes, plus also pay for bonds Mr. Theobald thinks the county should float to pay for growth. In the meantime, developers can flood my roads with dangerous traffic, potentially delaying the time an ambulance can get to my child in an emergency. And in the meantime, my child is also forced into trailers until new schools can be built.

When I moved here almost 25 years ago, I thought, "Now I know what people meant by the old saying, 'This is God's country.'" We have a gorgeous landscape here and a good quality of life, and we should support responsible growth for the common good. Why let developers turn our area into the overcrowded, concrete jungles you see in the bad parts of New Jersey?

Importantly, levels of service standards allow for growth, but quantify when that growth begins to harm a community's quality of life. We citizens of this great county sent a loud and clear message in the last supervisors' election: We do not want growth that does not pay for itself, because we citizens cannot afford to pay billions for that growth.

Many developers I know are smart, prominent businessmen who often preach the Republican mantra of small government, except, of course, when it comes to growing government big enough to pay for their massive developments.

Susan Ahern

Midlothian