Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Danbury committee reviews first rewrite of building permit fees in more than 20 years
Summary
The ad hoc Danbury City Council committee examined a proposed rewrite of ordinance section 6-21 that would set a $100 base application fee and $20 per $1,000 of valuation; the building official said the schedule has not been meaningfully updated in over two decades and would fund additional inspectors, while committee members asked for permit counts and cost-pool detail before advancing the ordinance.
Chair Peter Bizaid convened the city council ad hoc committee on building permit fees on Dec. 17 to review proposed amendments to ordinance section 6-21.
Building Official James Sholley led the presentation, telling the committee the city’s fee schedule “has not been updated in more than 20 years” and proposing a simplified structure: a $100 application fee for the first $1,000 of project valuation and $20 for each additional $1,000. Sholley said the change would make fees easier to calculate, reduce staff time spent on complex, legacy line items and generate revenue to hire inspectors and enforcement staff.
Why it matters: committee members said the change could significantly increase costs for homeowners on small projects while leaving commercial increases comparatively modest. One member asked for permit-volume statistics and a clearer “cost pool” showing current department costs against revenue so the council can evaluate how proposed fee increases translate into staffing and service improvements.
Sholley provided an order-of-magnitude revenue figure and enforcement rationale. He said the building department collected about $2.2 million in permit fees last year while the department’s budget was roughly $750,000, and described a drop in inspection staff from nine in 2005 to around five for much of the past decade (recent hires bring the headcount closer to seven). He pointed to unpermitted work, public-safety incidents and a recent multiunit fire as part of the case for stronger enforcement funded by fees.
Sholley showed a benchmarking example: using a 2.5% annual inflation factor on a $50,000 commercial project, a 2005 permit that cost $900 would equate to about $1,438.78 in 2024; under the draft fee schedule the comparable fee would be $1,080, he said. He also noted a statutory state education fee (discussed in the meeting as roughly 26¢ per $1,000) that municipalities must remit, which affects total permit costs.
Committee questions focused on equity and transparency. Members asked to see the number of permits issued by category (single-family, multi-family, commercial), an estimate of how many small residential permits would experience large percentage increases, and a post-change illustration showing typical out-of-pocket costs for common projects so residents are not surprised. One member suggested curving down residential rates to reduce sticker shock; Sholley said the residential line could be adjusted if the committee prefers.
The mayor, speaking in support of a holistic approach, urged that the council consider these fee changes alongside broader staffing and legal-resourcing issues and suggested building a five-year review requirement into the ordinance so the schedule is revisited periodically.
Before taking any final action, the committee voted to continue the matter and requested the additional data and examples from staff. No ordinance vote was taken at the meeting; the committee adjourned after agreeing to reconvene once the requested information is prepared.
The next steps are for staff to supply permit counts, a clear cost-pool comparison showing current costs and the proposed revenue allocation (including projected hires), and post-change fee examples so the committee and public can gauge the practical effect on homeowners and businesses.
