Berlin work session: council and fire company press for clearer impact-fee math and streamlined contract terms

The Berlin mayor and council and leaders of the Berlin Fire Company met in a work session to discuss how the town can capture development revenue and clarify the legal basis for its impact fees. Council members and the town attorney said the ordinance currently lists a $2,000 figure but the supporting calculations cannot be located; staff and fire-company leaders agreed to search for the original justification and to prepare interim documentation so any amendment would be defensible.

Why it matters: Several council members warned that incoming development—including a hotel and several commercial projects—could produce EDU (equivalent dwelling unit) revenue that the town may not capture if the impact-fee framework is not updated before building permits are issued. Without written justification, the town cannot lawfully raise or add fees without amending the ordinance and documenting the methodology.

Fire-company leaders said they issued an RFP to study impact fees but received no respondents; they have since reached out to Beacon (Salisbury University’s business/economic outreach) and John Hickman to consider the work. The fire company described a basic method to justify fees: estimate capital need (for example, the depreciation of a ladder truck over a 20‑year life), allocate a share to fire/EMS capital, and divide by EDU or call volume to arrive at a per‑EDU fee. Councilmembers asked staff to produce a broader breakout (residential vs. commercial and high‑occupancy residential vs. single‑family) to support defensible rates.

Council attorney and staff cautioned that changing the fee set in the ordinance requires documented math; several members said the town could pursue a staged or temporary add‑on while the full study is completed, but only if the town can produce a defensible justification.

Separately, the group discussed reworking the existing fire-company contract into two parts: a static recital (policy/terms) and a separate annual or multiyear funding schedule so the parties would not need to renegotiate standard language each year. Options ranged from two to five years for the contract term, with some councilmembers favoring shorter or staggered terms so newly elected members have an opportunity to review terms. The parties agreed staff would draft options that keep standard language stable while requiring annual review of budget numbers.

What’s next: Staff and the fire company will search for the missing fee calculations, send updated justification or interim documentation, and return with draft contract-term options and a recommended process for approving any fee changes.