Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Finance Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Newberg receives first reading of annual fee update; council hears proposed legal‑review and grant‑writing fees
Summary
Finance presented a first reading of the 2025 master fee schedule update, proposing a higher city‑attorney research rate (from $300 to $404 per hour), reinstating a demolition permit fee ($108.22) under engineering, and adding a $50/hr grant‑writing service by the city’s digital archivist; council did not vote on adoption.
Dan Coiler, the city’s accounting manager, presented the annual update to Newberg’s master fee schedule during a public hearing first reading. The proposed changes include a raise in the City Attorney research rate for public‑records work from $300 per hour to $404 per hour, the reinstatement of a demolition permit fee at $108.22 under the engineering section, and a new fee of $50 per hour for grant‑writing and GRAMA‑type services provided by the city’s digital archivist/grant writer.
Coiler said the master fee schedule (created in February 2016) centralizes fees for citizens and that most permit fees are indexed annually to the CPI‑U; for 2025 that index value was 2.9%. He noted one exception: a parking fee‑in‑lieu uses the Engineering News‑Record Seattle construction cost index (4.5%).
Library and permit changes: the library proposed a $5 charge for interlibrary loans after a borrower’s 12th loan to help cover postage; most public‑works and police fees were unchanged in this update. Coiler explained the demolition permit was moved from building to engineering for tracking and reporting purposes.
Legal‑fee clarification: a council member and the city attorney clarified that charging for attorney legal opinions on whether records may be released is restricted; however, charges for redaction and thorough review are applied where outside counsel is needed. Coiler said the $404 rate is intended to approximate the loaded cost for a junior partner who typically handles such reviews.
Council action: the presentation was a first reading; Coiler indicated he would return at the next council meeting for formal action. No ordinance or resolution was adopted at this meeting.
What’s next: the council did not adopt the fee schedule at the March 3 meeting; staff will return with the formal adoption item at a later meeting and continue to rely on CPI and other indices for annual updates.
