Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the SB5290 topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning staff outlines options to avoid SB 5290 refunds: fees, on‑call reviewers and contingent staffing
Summary
Staff briefed council on Senate Bill 5290, which requires refunds to applicants if statutorily mandated review timelines are missed. Staff proposed three measures to avoid refunds: adopt reasonable fees (done), expand on‑call permitting assistance (contracted reviewers funded by clients where applicable), and budget contingent FTEs to be filled when permit revenue increases; staff recommended documenting measures in a resolution tied to the November budget package.
Planning Director Carol Helland updated council on Senate Bill 5290 and staff proposals to avoid the fiscal exposure created by mandated refunds when review timelines are missed.
Helland said SB 5290 requires jurisdictions to reimburse applicants when statutorily mandated timelines are not met. To insulate the city from refunds, staff proposed adopting three additional measures that the statute recognizes: 1) maintain reasonable fees (staff pointed to a fee study completed earlier this year and adopted fee changes), 2) budget for and expand on‑call permitting assistance so the city can contract third‑party reviewers (structural, civil and other reviewers) on an as‑needed basis and charge clients for that service, and 3) budget new positions that are contingent on increased permit revenue so staffing can be scaled when demand and revenue support hiring.
Helland said the city has engaged Matrix as a consultant and received interim reports; staff will rely on Matrix recommendations to prioritize additional process improvements. Staff proposed identifying the three additional measures in a resolution and specifying triggers for filling contingent positions, noting that some council members favored formal documentation so the city can demonstrate compliance with the statute.
Councilmember Fields questioned whether a resolution is necessary and whether council has sufficient visibility into how far short current processes are from best practices. Staff and Director Cochran said contingent FTEs would be included in the 25‑26 budget as approved but would require later budget adjustments to fund hiring when revenues or needs justify it. Councilmember Stewart and Council President Kritzker expressed support for documenting the measures and reviewing the proposed resolution and triggers at a meeting where council members could dig into the details.
Staff said they would return redlines of the proposed resolution and continue working with Matrix; the item is tied to the November budget work and staffing discussions.
