Citizen Portal
Sign In

Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!

Get email alerts on the Impact Fees topic

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Staff: $25 million proposal would raise Palm Coast City impact fees about 26%

3846275 · June 10, 2025
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Two staff speakers said a proposed $25 million funding increase would translate to roughly a 26% rise in impact fees and recommended differentiating fees by building type across Palm Coast City; staff review including an individual named Fong was described as extensive.

A staff member said a proposed $25 million funding increase would translate to about a 26% increase in impact fees from current levels and urged the council to consider differentiating fees by building type across Palm Coast City.

"And 26% for the 25,000,000 in funding increase from where we're at now. So what we asked you to go take a look at is actually trying to differentiate. The the buildings, in in the city. But I just wanna give you that perspective that you can see that even with the the new justification, it is not really on the high end of the impact fees. Yeah," the staff member said.

Another staff member referenced ongoing review work, saying, "I mean, my position is if our, you know, staff who and Fong has been looking at these obviously ad nauseam. If the recommendation" (comment truncated in the transcript).

Why this matters: impact fees help fund public infrastructure tied to growth and are typically set or adjusted after staff analysis and council direction. The speakers framed the $25 million figure and a 26% estimate as part of a staff recommendation and emphasized examining fee differences by building type rather than applying a single uniform increase.

Meeting discussion focused on three points: the headline percent change tied to the $25 million funding increase, the proposal to differentiate impact fees by building type across the city, and that staff work on the recommendations (including review by an individual named Fong) has been extensive. The transcript does not record a formal council motion, vote, or next-step timeline.

The record does not specify which fees would change, which building types would be differentiated, how the $25 million would be allocated, or any legal authorities governing fee changes. The transcript also does not show a final decision or a staff directive recorded on the public record.