BDAB advises council to combine two phase‑2 fee scenarios, keeping 5 bins and $10M revenue target

Members of the Bend Development Advisory Board (BDAB) recommended that Bend City Council consider a combined version of scenarios D and E for the citys phase‑2 transportation fee model, saying the package best balances revenue needs and administrative simplicity.

BDABs recommendation, reached by motion and recorded as approved at the meeting, asks council to: keep a five‑bin rate structure; adopt a full doubling of the residential fee as previously projected; raise the floor for the lowest bin to the current charge; treat medical offices as a lower commercial bin (Bin 2); and move restaurant uses to a lower commercial bin (Bin 4). Staff will draft a formal letter and run follow‑up scenarios (including potential fee caps) for presentation to council at the April work/regular session and a final adoption vote expected in May.

Why it matters: the citys budget and capital planning assume the transportation fee will generate about $10,000,000. BDAB and staff said retaining that revenue target while shifting which account types pick up more or less of the cost is the primary tradeoff being considered; the combined D+E approach was presented as a way to limit large bill jumps for certain commercial categories while using the broad residential account base to absorb a share of the cost.

Discussion and evidence: staff told the board the modeling is based on updated account data and on crosswalks from NAICS/ITE use categories into the citys rate bins. Staff said there are roughly 38,000 residential accounts and about 2,300 commercial accounts in the dataset; the current median monthly nonresidential fee is about $48 and an average of about $92 (the difference driven by a small number of very large accounts). Staff noted roughly five customers currently pay more than $1,000 per month and about 17 customers pay more than $750 per month under phase 1 rates. Those long‑tail accounts drive many of the extremes seen in the model.

Board members and staff ran through the scenarios presented in a memo: a baseline five‑bin model (bin 1 floor set to current rate), options that reduce the citys revenue target, a scenario that applies a full doubling of the residential fee (the original expectation in outreach), and targeted moves that place medical offices and restaurants into lower bins. Several board members said options that simply lower the overall revenue target do not materially reduce monthly bills for affected businesses but would reduce the funds available for operations and maintenance.

Administrative and outreach considerations: staff emphasized administrative simplicity as a reason to move whole categories (for example, medical office NAICS group) rather than creating bespoke exemptions. BDAB members asked staff to run scenarios showing the effect of an explicit fee cap for the highest bills; staff said they can model caps and return those results to BDAB and council. Board members and staff also discussed outreach: staff plans an April public information campaign tied to councils work session and asked BDAB whether to supply a formal letter and/or an oral report at council.

Timeline and follow up: staff said the council discussion is scheduled for April (the April 2 session was moved from work session to regular session to accommodate the item), a public outreach phase would follow, and final council action is expected in May. BDAB asked for periodic implementation reports; staff agreed to provide updates (members requested 3‑ and 6‑month checks) and to track incoming public comments during implementation.

Votes at a glance: BDAB moved and approved a motion to forward to council a recommendation summarized by Dwayne (as described above) and to ask staff to prepare supporting materials. The motion passed by voice vote (recorded as "Aye"; no oppositions recorded in the transcript).

What was not decided or remains unresolved: staff will model explicit fee caps and quantify revenue impacts; the board did not set a specific cap amount. The exact implementation date and final ordinance language will be set by council in the coming weeks. BDAB also agreed to revisit the fee structure with new data in roughly one year.

Background: the phase‑2 modeling builds on phase 1 billing data and updated consumption/land‑use crosswalks. BDAB and staff said the citys transportation system plan lists additional funding tools that could be considered before any future phase 3 increase; BDAB discussed returning to a broader revenue conversation after phase 2 data are available.

End note: staff committed to drafting the formal BDAB letter for board review, returning to council at the April session to present the combined D+E scenario and supporting comparisons, and to provide further modeled options (including fee caps) if the board or council requests them.