Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Impact Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants recommend substantial increase to municipal and utility impact fees; commission asks for workshops
Summary
Rafftellus Consulting presented an updated impact‑fee study recommending higher municipal (police, fire, parks, general government) and water/sewer capital fees; commissioners asked staff to schedule community workshops and to include the roads component before any ordinance is returned.
Get email alerts on the Impact Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Consultants from Rafftellus Consulting presented an updated impact‑fee study on April 16 that recommends higher city impact fees to cover planned capital investments in police, fire, parks and general government facilities and higher water/wastewater capital facility fees. Commissioners asked staff to bring the full package back for workshops before final ordinance readings.
The consultant said municipal impact fees — covering police, fire, parks and general government — reflect major capital needs the city has not fully funded since the last study. Using current local data and the city’s capital plan, the presentation showed increases for a typical single‑family home from roughly $2,900 in combined fees to about $3,800 (an increase of roughly $900, or about 32%). Fire fees were singled out as the largest driver: recent and planned fire station investments, including a major Fire Station 1, substantially raise per‑unit capital costs.
On utilities, consultants presented water/wastewater capital facility (utility) fees that would increase a typical single‑family equivalent from about $4,550 to $5,685 (roughly a 25% increase). Combined municipal and utility fee increases would raise the calculated fee for a typical single‑family home from approximately $7,300 to about $9,500.
Consultants noted state statute constraints: local governments generally may limit fee increases to a capped change over a specified timeframe and that significant one‑time increases (or increases driven by “extraordinary circumstances”) require additional public workshops and a supermajority (two‑thirds) vote under state law. The consultant outlined a four‑year phasing option to soften the immediate impact on development and to comply with statutory limits unless extraordinary‑circumstances workshops are pursued.
Commissioners responded with a mix of support and concern. Several commissioners emphasized public safety and modernizing police and fire facilities; others said they wanted more detailed cost breakdowns and the roads subconsultant’s results before committing to full increases. The commission asked staff to schedule workshops and to return with preliminary road fee results in time for a workshop prior to the next commission meeting if possible.
No final ordinance was adopted at the meeting; staff said they will return with the requested data, a proposed phasing schedule and the roads component once the subconsultant completes its work.
Speakers and presenters
- Joe Williams — Senior Manager, Rafftellus Consulting Group (lead presenter). - Natalia (CFO) — City staff coordinator for the study and presentation. - Commissioners who spoke during discussion: Ken Strickland, Paula Reid, (others noted concerns). - Other staff: Ken Thomas (Redevelopment Director), subconsultant for roads (name pending) and Assistant City Attorney (legal advisement).
Clarifying details
- Municipal categories reviewed: police, fire, parks & recreation, and general government facilities; fire needs and planned fire stations were the largest single driver of increases. - Utilities: water/wastewater capital upgrades and regulatory-driven treatment changes raise capital needs; consultant recommended fee increases for capacity and treatment upgrades. - Phasing and legal process: increases greater than certain thresholds trigger “extraordinary circumstances” workshops and require two public workshops beyond the normal ordinance readings; a two‑thirds vote is required in some cases.
Outcome and next steps
- Direction: staff to schedule community workshops and return with the roads consultant’s results and proposed phasing options before a final ordinance, with the consultant available for discussion. - No vote to adopt fees occurred at the meeting.
Provenance
- topicintro: item 6d introduction and consultant introduction (impact fee study presentation). - topfinish: staff commitment to bring back workshop materials and road fee data and schedule workshops before second reading.

