At its Dec. 23 meeting, Columbia Borough Council engaged in an extended, substantive debate over proposed changes to the 2026 fee schedule and several zoning issues that residents have raised.

On fees, Councilmember Pete (identified in discussion) proposed adopting a tiered building-permit fee schedule based on Lancaster City’s structure to scale commercial fees for large projects such as those on the McGinnis property. Supporters said a tiered approach would be more equitable for high-value commercial development; others said integrating the change requires rewriting the ordinance and suggested handling it first through a workshop or administrative review.

Council also addressed an inconsistency between the fee schedule and the nonprofit facilities-use application: the fee schedule lists the nonprofit application fee as free, while the application form still shows a $50 charge. Staff recommended mirroring the fee schedule on the application or removing the separate nonprofit line to avoid confusion.

A major point of contention was how to handle ‘quick-ticket’ appeals. Council discussed keeping a $25 appeal fee, but making it refundable if the appellant prevails (current practice is mixed in the packet). Some members argued high-value quick-ticket appeals (e.g., $500 fines) should require an upfront payment equal to the ticket and be refundable if the appellant wins, noting parallels to district-justice procedures. Others warned that a high appeal cost could discourage rightful appeals; no final vote was taken and staff was directed to clarify practices, refund rules and legal comparisons to district-justice costs.

Separately, the council discussed zoning briefs for upcoming hearings and short-term rental proposals. Planning commission packets prompted concern that staff memos could be interpreted as predeciding outcomes. Members debated whether to make conditional approvals tied to the current owner (for medical reasons, for example) and emphasized that rental licenses require two off-street parking spaces per unit; neighbors voiced opposition to a proposed short-term rental at 515 Chestnut Street, citing parking and quality-of-life concerns.

Council directed staff to further evaluate ordinance language, parking-enforcement mechanisms, the nonprofit application form, and to consider the fee changes at a workshop or through a committee process before formal action.