McHenry County staff pitches fee-schedule overhaul to close permit office shortfall; committee tables ordinance

McHenry County planning staff presented a two-model rewrite of the department's fee ordinance on April 7, proposing higher flat fees, new charges for incident action plans (IAPs) for large gatherings and a restructuring of zoning and building fees intended to reduce a projected five‑year revenue‑to‑expenditure gap.

The presentation, led by Adam, planning department staff, laid out two approaches: Model 1, a moderate update designed to bring fees closer to current staff costs, and Model 2, a larger adjustment that assigns maximum salary grades and produces a much bigger immediate revenue lift. "The average five‑year revenue to expenditure gap is $693,000," Adam told the committee, saying the models incorporate hard costs such as the SmartGov permit platform (about $45,000 per year) and Bluebeam review software.

Why it matters: the department says fees have not been comprehensively updated since 2015 even as permit volumes and the unit costs of review rose; staff said the proposed changes would improve transparency (flat fees rather than acreage calculations) and better align fees with review time and external costs such as ZBA per diems.

Key proposals and debate

- Flat fees and models: Staff said Model 1 would recover roughly 31% of operational costs and is their recommended starting point; Model 2 would approximate 65% recovery. Adam described Model 1 as "a good update and gets us caught back up," while noting some permits (for example, conditional uses) include hard costs that materially increase the fee under either model.

- Temporary-use permits and IAPs: Temporary-use permits (barn sales, country antiques events) currently carry a $100 base fee. Staff proposed raising the base (Model 1 roughly $250; Model 2 higher) and creating a separate fee/structure for incident action plans tied to events that draw more than 500 people (rodeos, concerts). Commissioners widely agreed major events impose substantial staff and interagency costs; several members pressed staff to identify legal limits and separable stormwater or battery/solar fees. Adam said the county currently issues fewer than 50 temporary‑use permits per year on average and that the incident action plan work involves multiple agencies.

- Small alteration fees: Several members worried that large jumps for small residential alterations could push ordinary homeowners away from permits. "If you raise this from $5.75 to $900, you're never gonna see a 601‑square‑foot resident… They’ll just go do it," said Joe Gottemoeller, a committee member, warning high fees can discourage compliance. Staff replied small alterations take disproportionate review time and are a major driver of workload; they offered to test lower tiers and revisit the schedule periodically.

- Solar and stormwater: Commissioners pressed staff to confirm statutory caps and asked whether stormwater fees for solar and battery sites should be separated or increased. Adam said he would verify statutory caps (he cited a commonly used cap formula for some fees) and would return with comparisons to neighboring counties.

Committee action and next steps

After extended discussion, the committee voted to remove the fee ordinance from the consent agenda and table the item so staff can return next month with a single ordinance draft (committee direction: start with Model 1 and incorporate targeted Model 2 elements where legally and operationally justified, especially for IAPs and major developments). Chair closed the action by urging commissioners to submit written suggestions to staff ahead of the next meeting.

The committee's vote did not adopt the ordinance; it instructed staff to refine the models, verify legal fee caps, provide comparative data from nearby counties, and return with a consolidated draft for formal review and a 30‑day public notice period.