Atherton will revisit road-impact fee refund

You know, the interesting thing about these fees is that for other than developers, the builders likley passed these costs through to the owners. Do you think these builders are going to give this refunded money back to their clients? If they're honorable they will, but with the current economic climate, I'm betting a lot won't.

They shouldn't be refunding any of the road impact fees. The legality of charging those fees has never been fully explored and it is quite possible they are completely legal.

Marsala and Carlson are backpeddling on this issue for the wrong reason. They are doing so because the Town needs money.

Atherton's road impact fee is leagl.

When I was Finance Director, Jerry Carlson approved a motion by the Finance Committee to have a law firm that specializes in impact fees render an opinion on the legality of Atherton's road impact fees. The opinion that came back was that the Road Impact fee was legal.

This was an opinion that Sohagi & Associates did not hesitate to issue nor did the firm qualify its opinion. Sohagi was in fact ready to litigate this case for Atherton should it be necessary.

The reason that the Town should revisit its decision to refund road impact fees is that these fees are legal. This is a fight any good litigator would be willing to take on.

It is truly remarkable that the Town would listen to the opinion of a firm (Furth's law firm) that is inconsistent with the opinion of an expert in the field (Sohagi). It is even more remarkable that the City takes its advice from a firm that is closing its doors because it can't find enough clients that are willing to pay for the advice of the firm.

Shouldn't the fact that McDonough, Holland and Allen is going out of business be an indication that it is time to find another law firm to serve Atherton as City Attorney?

This about face by Marsala is inexplicable. He objected to the road impact fees on principal. Now, apparently because the Town is running out of money, he wants to reinstate the fee at least partialy.

Some might suggest this constitutes a new pragmatism. Others might suggest that it is Marsala's way of repudiating his former developer friends. The friends who wouldn't help him out during his financial crisis.

What most will view this as the height of irresponsibility because it opens the Town up to further litigation. It would have been one thing for the Town to stand its ground all along.

Because of Marsala's antics, the Town will find its position indefensible if it does U turn on road impact fees.