Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Permit Fees Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Plan commission discusses state 'Bill 1001' limits on permit fees and creates research request
Summary
Commissioners discussed a recently enacted state bill (referred to as 'Bill 1001') that limits how often fees can be changed and requires permitting fees to be held in a separate fund; the board asked staff to research fee comparisons and report back for a future decision.
The Kosciusko County Plan Commission spent a substantive portion of its meeting reviewing implications of a recently enacted state measure referred to in the meeting as "Bill 1001," which changes how local governments may set and use permitting fees.
Staff outlined the current local fee schedule (permit fee examples discussed: $25 for a new house, $10 for small additions, $150 filing fee for a variance; some transcript items were unclear and are recorded as quoted by staff). The chair summarized key constraints in the state measure: once the bill goes into effect, counties may adjust fees only in reference to a mean/median income metric calculated from a multi-year lookback and may change fees only once every five years absent a demonstrable, unusual event. "One thing in that bill is that if we would feel that our fees need to be adjusted... we can only change our fees as it's written once every five years now," the Chair said.
The bill also requires permitting fees and related receipts to be placed in a separate fund rather than County General; staff said the new fund must be used for permitting-related items such as permitting software, documents, materials and equipment, while wages were described as "questionable" uses pending guidance. Part of the bill was described in the meeting as taking effect Jan. 1, which raises timing and budgeting issues because county budgets are set on a different schedule.
Commission members asked for comparative data from surrounding counties and how the fund restrictions would affect the planning department’s budgeting. The chair asked staff to research fee comparisons, clarify allowable expenditures from the new fund with the State Board or appropriate authority, and return with recommendations after budget season. A motion to schedule that follow-up and report back was moved, seconded and approved by voice vote.
The commission did not set a new fee schedule at the meeting; instead members directed staff to gather data and legal clarifications before making any changes, noting the statutory five-year lock on fee adjustments and the potential fiscal impact of moving fee revenue to a restricted fund.
