DuPage GIS division seeks higher recorder fee as transactions fall; committee signals support for $30 proposal

The DuPage County Finance Committee on Tuesday heard a presentation from the county Geographic Information Systems (GIS) division detailing a funding shortfall and directed staff to pursue an increase in the recorder-collected GIS fee, with committee members expressing preliminary support for a $30 per-document fee.

Anthony (last name not provided), a county GIS lead, told the committee the GIS division is not funded from the general fund but by a per-document recording fee collected by the recorder’s office. The current fee is $21 per real-estate recording. The division’s annual operational cost is about $3.5 million; based on a multi-year average of recordings the division currently budgets at roughly $2.6 million from the fee, leaving a shortfall of about $857,000.

Staff commissioned an outside fee study in October 2024. The consultant recommended a $6.80 increase to raise the fee from $21 to $28 per recording to cover current costs. Committee members discussed alternative averages and methodologies: using a four-year average instead of a five-year average would produce a somewhat higher recommended fee (about $29.50); excluding the anomalous 2021 volume would produce an even higher figure. Several members urged the consultant and staff to reassess the model using more recent data.

Committee members also raised operational questions: the division supports 39 municipalities and many county departments, produces biannual ortho and oblique aerial imagery (staff estimated about $200,000 a year for imagery capture), maintains parcel updates pushed weekly to municipalities, and provides shared services and consulting to taxing districts and smaller jurisdictions that could not afford their own GIS staff.

Anthony said the division operates seven full-time staff and has two vacant positions that have remained open for multiple years. The division uses reserves to bridge the gap but could not sustain current service levels indefinitely. Members asked about billing to municipalities for shared services and whether indirect costs and overhead are being fully recovered; county staff acknowledged that the shared-services hourly rate does not currently include the full indirect burden and committed to reviewing cost-recovery practices.

After extended questioning and suggestions from members — who said 2021 appeared to be an outlier and recommended excluding it for the baseline — the committee chair said members appeared willing to support a $30 fee target and asked staff to return in two weeks with revised numbers and statutory checks. No ordinance was adopted at Tuesday’s meeting; the committee’s direction was to bring back a revised fee proposal and supporting documentation for formal action.

Ending

GIS staff will work with the consultant and county finance staff to recalculate fee scenarios, to review the shared-services billing model (including indirect-cost recovery), and to return to the committee with a draft fee change consistent with state statute within two weeks.