A consultant'led review of West Linn's sanitary sewer system development charge concluded the city's sewer SDC would fall to about $1,094 per meter-capacity equivalent, a significant reduction from current charges, the City Council heard Sept. 2. Doug Gabbard of FCS presented the methodology at a council work session and said the total eligible project and reimbursement cost basis supported the lower fee.

The report matters because SDCs are one-time developer fees intended to pay for capacity-related capital improvements; they do not fund ongoing operations. "We then divide that by the growth in MCEs ... and that brings you down to the bottom line of $1,094 total SDC per meter capacity equivalent," consultant Doug Gabbard said during the presentation.

Consultants explained how the methodology separates an "improvement fee" (planned projects that add capacity) and a "reimbursement fee" (existing assets with available capacity). The FCS team adjusted the project list to account for incremental capacity added by upsized pipes and deducted improvement-fee fund balances already collected by the city to avoid double counting. They also included a modest provision for compliance costs related to SDC law.

City staff said the SDC recalculation reflects current master-plan projects and build-out projections. Eric (city staff) and the FCS team said the calculation used the sewer master plan's build-out demand and the growth in meter-capacity equivalents (MCEs) as the denominator. The consultants noted that many replacement projects do not add new capacity and therefore are not eligible for SDC funding.

Council members asked how often the city should revisit the SDC. Luke Nelson of FCS said the compliance-fee horizon in the model used a 20-year timeline; Doug Gabbard and councilors said recalculating SDCs every five years or when the city adopts a new master plan or major land-use changes is standard practice. Councilors also asked how the SDC change would affect future planning and whether major rezoning, Urban Growth Boundary changes or large new growth areas would trigger a new SDC analysis.

City staff told the council that the SDC update would be on the consent/ordinance agenda for adoption at the council business meeting on Sept. 8. No formal vote occurred at the Sept. 2 work session.

For context, staff emphasized that the SDC is only one funding mechanism for growth-related capital; replacement and rehabilitation of existing sewer infrastructure remains the subject of the utility's capital and operating budgets and is addressed through rates and other funding sources, not SDCs.

The council did not take immediate action at the work session; staff confirmed the item will return for adoption at the Sept. 8 business meeting.