Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Building Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Finance committee agrees to send resolution opposing proposed building-fee increases to full council
Summary
The Gardner City Finance Committee voted to transmit a council president–sponsored resolution opposing proposed building department fee increases and raised concerns about timing and a simultaneous salary request from the building commissioner.
Council President Tyrus told the Gardner City Council Finance Committee on April 7 that he had filed a resolution asking the city to reject proposed building department fee increases and to make that position public. He said the fee proposal, submitted by the building commissioner, would "substantially increase costs and give nothing additionally to the residents or businesses in return."
The resolution was placed before the committee amid concerns that it was premature. Council President Tyrus said the city had agreed in 2022 to review building-fee structures on a five-year schedule and that the new proposal came two to three years early. He highlighted specific proposed increases in the packet: a 50% rise in the minimum building-permit fee, about a 28.5% increase in per-square-foot fees for new single- and two-family permits, a near doubling of sign fees, and a tripling of fence fees.
Members also raised a potential conflict-of-interest concern after the packet included, shortly after the fee schedule, a separate proposal seeking a substantial pay increase for the building commissioner. "I do not want any of our constituents to think, not even for 1 second, that we would consider raising fees paid by residents solely to increase the salary of the department head," Tyrus said.
Mayor McAdams told the committee that department heads do periodically review fees and that he had not planned to put an ordinance forward at this time. He also said the administration had not intended to propose those fee changes immediately and that timing and broader policy considerations should guide any decision. Committee members asked for clarification on the legal framework for fees; the mayor said fees are set by local ordinance and that there is no state cap.
After discussion, Councillor Hegland moved and Councillor Doralowicz seconded a motion to send President Tyrus's resolution to the full City Council for discussion and review. The committee voice vote was "aye" and the motion carried.
The committee did not take a final vote on any fee ordinance; the item was forwarded to the full council for further consideration and public debate.
