Director Cowley presented Matrix Consulting Group’s citywide fee study at the Stonecrest mayor and council work session on Jan. 12, outlining a methodology that uses estimated staff time, fully burdened hourly rates and overhead to calculate the “maximum justifiable fee” for 293 line items across building, planning and zoning, land development, parks and recreation and finance. "That will equal the full cost of the fee that is in the report, and that's the maximum justifiable fee that can be assessed," Director Cowley said.

The study’s stated objectives are to streamline the fee structure, apply consistent time assumptions and ensure legal compliance, with the consultant team recommending rounding some fees to whole dollars for practical billing. Staff said the draft master fee schedule is in the meeting packet and that the council could consider adoption at the Jan. 26 mayor and council meeting.

Councilmembers raised several follow-up questions. Councilman George Turner asked whether the report compares Stonecrest’s full costs to other jurisdictions; staff said the draft provides comparison examples and graphs showing where Stonecrest stands against selected peers but does not include every item for every jurisdiction. Turner also asked whether being under market on some fees might attract developers and unintentionally reduce revenue, a point staff acknowledged as part of the policy tradeoff.

Several members asked about using incentives. Turner asked whether waiving fees to attract a particular development could violate the city’s gratuities rules. City legal counsel responded that the law allows incentives when the city can show a substantial public benefit—such as job creation, economic opportunity or an improved tax base—and that incentives should be justified with expected public returns.

Councilmember Alicia Washington and others asked whether Stonecrest had a prior fee study and whether the city should enroll in professional benchmarking (for example, the Government Finance Officers Association or a customer price index). Staff said this appears to be the first recent comprehensive study and that they would follow up on the GFOA/CPI questions.

Parks users and informal groups drew specific attention: Councilmembers asked how new park fees would affect longstanding community leagues that use Farrington Park weekly. Staff said informal, noncontractual use does not automatically qualify for grandfathering and that established contracts or agreements would be treated differently. The consultant recommended revisiting fees every five to seven years or sooner in response to technological or organizational changes.

What’s next: staff said they re-presented the draft for council review and that a decision could be scheduled for the Jan. 26 mayor and council meeting. Council members requested follow-up on specific items (comparables, GFOA membership/CPI and grandfathering language for parks) before final action.