Proffers

 

At their August 4 meeting, Goochland supervisors announced that they will hold a strategic planning retreat on Wednesday, August 12, 2026, starting at 9:00 a.m. at Luck Stone, 343 River Road, Manakin-Sabot. See the county website https://www.goochlandva.us/ for details.

Following a presentation by Principal Planner Ramzi Farhat about an update to the county’s capital impact model, which is used to determine cash proffer amounts, the board voted unanimously to deny adoption pending further analysis.

Farhat thanked all who provided input in the almost yearlong update project including department heads, staff, the county attorney, and stakeholders.

The capital impact model is used to determine the real cost burden that new residential development, as the result of rezoning, places on infrastructure including schools, roads, parks, and public safety. These costs are used to calculate impact fees, including “voluntary” cash proffers, paid by developers to offset increased need for public facilities.

Goochland adopted a cash proffer policy in 2002.This is a per home amount a developer may “volunteer” to pay to have a residential rezoning project approved. In theory the policy is voluntary.

Cash proffers are a small part of an overall funding strategy and should not be regarded as a total solution for infrastructure financing needs. Therefore, other strategies and revenue sources are needed to offset the impact on infrastructure from new homes.

Go to https://www.goochlandva.us/1463/Proffers to https:

This policy applies only to residential rezoning. Commercial rezoning applications, which do not add children to the school system, typically proffer site specific upgrades to infrastructure including roads and utilities. Impacts must be attributable to a specific development. For instance, as age restricted communities are prohibited from having residents under 19 years of age, school proffers cannot be attributed to them.

Following a 2016 change in state law, Goochland County compiled a 25 year look ahead capital improvement plan. This included projected needs for schools, fire-rescue stations, roads, parks, and items costing more than $50k with a useful life of more than five years like fire-rescue apparatus. The data in this CIP, which is periodically updated to deal with inflation, is part of the computation of the impact model.

The proposed update to the policy includes a detailed study of all the components and conditions that apply to calculation of proffers. The document begins on page 85 of the August 4 board packet.

Farhat explained that a student generation rate was used to determine residential rezoning impact on schools and that a new category for age restricted multifamily was added. As school funding is a significant part of the county budget, this is important. Age restricted communities have dramatically increased the volume of EMS response, which was underweighted in previous iterations of the impact model. A geographic component was also added to consider the differing demographic trends in each part of the county.

When land is rezoned for a subdivision, the proffer amount in effect on the date of approval becomes part of its creation ordinance and includes an escalator clause. Lots already approved are not impacted by this update. It would apply to future rezonings only.

According to Farhat, the median house price in Goochland in 2019 was $391,000, making the $23,706 average cash proffer 6.1 percent of the house price. In 2026, the median house price is $646,935 making the average cash proffer of $31,704 4.9 percent of the price.

The supervisors commended Farhat and his team for the thoroughness of the report. However, there was discussion about how proffers impact housing prices and residential growth.

Charlie Vaughters District 4 asked how jurisdictions across the country deal with the issue. Virginia explained the consultant from Tischler Bise, which was retained by the county for the study, is unique in the trigger methodology it uses to assess proffers. Other places use a similar mechanism to calculate a static impact fee schedule applied to all new construction. These are dynamic models that analyze both operational and capital expenditures needed by new development. Virginia just looks at capital impacts.

Jonathan Lyle, District 5 pointed out that a developer could decline to offer cash proffers during a rezoning action, leaving it up to the supervisors to decide whether to approve the rezoning without offering any funds for capital impact mitigation. This has never happened. He said that it is appropriate for people moving to the county to help pay for the increase in capital costs generated by their arrival but the should be as little as possible.

Vaughters contended that more detailed discussion about conflicting data on the impact of cash proffers on assessment versus escalating new home costs is needed. “At the end of the day, in my mind, this is a tax. We want to make sure that the taxes are collected appropriately and do not price people out of the market. Assessments are also an ongoing issue. There is a lot to look into. We cannot say that approval of this will solve the problem.”

He commended Farhat and staff for putting together a diverse stakeholder group of residents, developers, and businesses to provide positive meaningful feedback and analysis. He said that the capital impact model data should flow through all development discussions.

Spoonhower contended that this is not the right tool to recover costs and manage growth. “This creates a bad product in my district.”

He said that the cash proffer policy, access management, and other development fees discourage orderly development in the western part of the county. “Instead of having folks clustered together you get driveway after driveway on main thoroughfares. Ending the policy is not going to make or break Goochland’s budget. Let’s get something that ensures that the people move in here pay a fraction of the cost incurred.”

Board Chair Jonathan Christy, District 1 agreed that the capital impact model is a critical tool to analyze the true cost of residential development and the deficit that each new home creates and that the county needs to find a way to fill that hole. He said that the proffer policy does not slow residential growth but incentivizes by right development.

It seems likely that this subject will be addressed during the August 12 retreat.