Sandpoint council delays new development impact fees until Jan. 1, 2026 after public hearing

The Sandpoint City Council voted on Sept. 3 to delay the effective date of a revised development-impact-fee ordinance to Jan. 1, 2026, following a public hearing in which residents, consultants and developers urged differing outcomes.

Community Planning and Development Director Jason Welker told the council the ordinance amends “title 12, which is our development impact fee ordinance,” and that the change is the final step to implement a fee study conducted after the city updated its comprehensive plan. Welker summarized the timeline and said the new fees would normally take effect 30 days after adoption.

Why it matters: The fee changes update a study last performed in 2011 and raise impact fees across several categories the study covers (parks, police, fire, streets and pathways); the change affects any project that must pay impact fees at the time of building-permit issuance. Several speakers during the hearing said the timing of the increase could make or break projects already in the pipeline.

During the hearing, consultants, residents and business representatives gave competing accounts of local impacts. David Ekret, identifying himself as a land-use economist and longtime resident, urged the council not to “miss this opportunity” to keep a waterfront hotel project feasible, saying the private development could bring recurring tax revenue and jobs. Ben McGrath, who represented Averell Hospitality, asked the council to “extend the implementation of the new impact fees to August 2026” so a complex hotel redevelopment can complete permit review and secure financing.

Others urged strict enforcement of the fee schedule. Opponents argued that delaying the fee implementation would grant an uneven benefit to one well-capitalized project. Paul Vogel, who said he is not a city resident, told the council “itis time to say no. The impact fees exist for a reason.” Resident Jace Bordenave argued the fees should apply equally to all developers and not be altered to accommodate a single project.

Council discussion focused on two main points: the statutory process for adopting impact fees and staff capacity to implement the new fee schedule in the city permitting system. Welker told the council that, because the cityhas to enter about 100 line items into the permit system and the permit technician is on maternity leave, staff would prefer more time to implement the schedule. One council member suggested 60 days; Welker recommended an end-of-year target to allow the permit technician to return.

Council President Deb Ruhle moved to amend the ordinance to set an effective date of Jan. 1, 2026. Councilor Kyle Schreiber seconded; the amendment passed on roll call. After a subsequent vote the council approved first reading by title and, by a separate roll call, suspended rules and passed the ordinance under suspension of the rules. Mayor Jeremy Grimm and councilors recorded their votes during each roll call.

The ordinance on the agenda updates the city code reference to the 2025 development-impact-fee study prepared for the city, clarifies the difference between fee credits and reimbursements, and replaces the 2011 study citation in Title 12. Per state law described in the staff presentation, fees adopted by ordinance would otherwise go into effect 30 days after adoption; the councilchose to set a later effective date.

Whathappens next: The ordinance will take effect Jan. 1, 2026, as amended. Staff will enter the fee schedule into the citypermit system and follow the implementation timeline agreed by council. Council members and speakers said they expect to revisit policy questions such as whether to allow deferred fee-payment mechanisms by contract, an option Welker said would require additional ordinance language and "an airtight contract" to protect the city.

Votes at a glance: The council approved an amendment setting the effective date to Jan. 1, 2026 (motion by Deb Ruhle; second by Kyle Schreiber; roll call: motion passed). The council then approved first reading by title and, after a motion to suspend rules, passed the ordinance under suspension (roll-call votes recorded in meeting minutes).