Citizen Portal
Sign In

Committee backs resolution to shift commercial use-and-occupancy fees to new property owners

6430064 · October 23, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
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

The Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee voted 3-0 to move a resolution recommending that use-and-occupancy (U&O) fees tied to a change of ownership in commercial centers be paid by the new owner rather than individual tenants; staff will draft technical amendments.

The Transportation, Infrastructure, Energy and Environment Committee on Thursday voted 3-0 to move forward a resolution (CR-93-2025) that would make the buyer of a commercial property responsible for required use-and-occupancy permits rather than charging each individual tenant.

Sponsor Chair Olsen said the measure was prompted by a recent large shopping-center sale in which smaller tenants were billed for U&O permits. The resolution would make the new owner of an entire commercial center responsible for the main U&O and for obtaining and paying related administrative costs for tenant U&Os in many circumstances.

The county planning department recommended clarifying language. Lori Paris, chief of staff with the Department of Planning and Management Enforcement, told the committee that the department wants the draft amended to specify that when a building changes ownership, the new owner is responsible for the primary U&O and that, where feasible, the owner should obtain and pay for tenant-level U&Os rather than requiring individual tenants to come to county offices.

Deepak (last name not specified in the transcript), identified as a departmental representative, said the administration will work with Council staff on a friendly amendment and does not oppose the proposal so long as the fee is paid. The discussion noted an administrative fee listed in the county fee table: "$66 plus [UNO fee]." Committee members said the table language needs to be split and clarified so it unambiguously assigns payment responsibility to the new owner, not a new tenant.

Committee member Denoga moved a favorable recommendation “as amended”; Council member Fisher seconded. The roll call was Chair Olsen — Aye; Council member Denoga — Aye; Council member Fisher — Aye. The committee recorded the motion as favorable (3–0) and asked staff to return a revised draft for introduction.

Next steps: staff from the Department of Planning and Management Enforcement will work with sponsor offices to draft the technical amendment and return the resolution for introduction and further committee consideration.

Votes at a glance: CR-93-2025 — Favorable recommendation to be amended; mover: Denoga; second: Fisher; committee vote 3–0 (Olsen, Denoga, Fisher voting Aye).