Council pauses citywide fee overhaul after proposed cannabis and permit increases draw surprise

City council members on March 23 reviewed a draft citywide master fee schedule and cost‑recovery methodology that lays out how the city would recover the full cost of services through updated permits, application fees and service charges.

Staff presented an itemization of tasks, estimated times and blended productive‑hour rates used to compute proposed fees. The presenter described splitting each service into discrete tasks, assigning productive hourly rates to staff roles and aggregating overhead; using that method, for example, a typical burn permit would be recalculated at roughly $19.30 and the proposed fee was shown as $20, up from the current $5 charge.

Council members and staff said the ad hoc committee that developed the schedule used a detailed time‑study approach and comparables from nearby jurisdictions. "We went through a methodology that looked at a total cost recovery for all expenses in each department," the presenter said, describing the accounting and minute‑by‑minute task estimates that produced the draft rates.

But several council members expressed strong concern about proposed increases for cannabis‑related permits and certain planning fees, which some members said rose from longstanding nominal amounts to thousands of dollars under the draft schedule. "These numbers are surprising to me," one council member said, and others warned that sudden, large increases could harm existing local businesses and make the city uncompetitive.

Council asked staff to provide before‑and‑after revenue estimates showing current fee receipts and projected revenue under the proposed schedule (with and without cannabis categories) and to hold additional ad hoc review with affected business categories. One council member moved to table further action and return after three weeks (with a public hearing process to follow), a motion that was seconded and approved by voice vote.

The council emphasized the presentation was informational and asked staff to refine the schedule and outreach plan rather than adopt fees immediately. Staff said the intent of the exercise was to show what full cost recovery looks like and to give council options on where to set fee levels, acknowledging some items might be adjusted before any public hearing or adoption.

Next steps: staff will return with additional analysis, stakeholder outreach results and clearer before/after revenue figures; council signaled it expects at least one more ad hoc committee meeting prior to a public hearing.