SALT LAKE CITY — When Salt Lake City leaders last year approved a one-year moratorium on collecting impact fees from new construction projects, they forfeited an estimated $7 million that would have been spent on roads, public safety and parks.

Now, with the moratorium on track to expire Nov. 2, the Salt Lake City Council — reluctant to let the city relapse to its old fee structure without a new, vetted plan in place — is considering extending the moratorium for several months.

And as each month goes by, the city loses another $500,000.

Council members have expressed frustration that Mayor Jackie Biskupski did not submit a new impact fee proposal plan until earlier this month, leaving them little time to review it or submit it to a public process before the November moratorium deadline.

Biskupski has said it wasn't until late summer that she had the opportunity to review the consultant's initial findings and provide feedback to help guide the plan. And it wasn't until last month that her administration received a draft plan, leaving just a few weeks to host two open houses to gather public and developer feedback before submitting a final draft to the City Council on Oct. 14.

But it's the lack of a plan for what to do in the interim, after the moratorium expires, that has rankled the City Council. When Council Chairman James Rogers asked for a suggestion from the mayor's office during Tuesday's meeting, the council was met with silence.

"It's just convenient that they get up and leave before the questions come," Rogers said. "This is so infuriating to me."

Councilwoman Erin Mendenhall said she was "disappointed" that it's landed on the council to come up with a plan to either extend the moratorium or let it expire and revert to the previous fee structure.

"I feel like this should be a dialogue and it isn't," Mendenhall said.

During the council’s formal meeting later Tuesday night, Patrick Leary, Biskupski's chief of staff, said there has been a dialogue all along, and ultimately it's up to the council to make the decision.

"You have been involved in this process. There has been dialogue these past months," Leary told the council. "We even brought in at your request a consultant to answer your questions. From our point of view, please take the time you need, but this is a decision for the council to adopt."

Last year, the City Council agreed to former Mayor Ralph Becker's proposal to halt the city's impact fees while officials made sure the city was properly collecting and spending that money, as only certain projects can be funded by impact fees under state code. Developers also complained that the fees were too high and imbalanced.

Councilman Stan Penfold said he "hopes and expects" the city to move forward on the plan quickly and have a new fee structure in place by the end of the year.

Councilman Charlie Luke, however, was reluctant to rush the process, pointing out that the public will need time to mull the newly proposed fees and call for changes if need be.

Mayor's proposal

Biskupski's proposal calls for increased fees on single-family homes, while reducing fees on commercial, office and industrial projects.

For example, a single-family home developer would be charged $3,459 under the current fee structure, but under the new plan, parks, fire, police and road impact fees would amount to $5,732. For a commercial development of 1,000 square feet, a developer would pay $3,630 under the current fee structure. Under the mayor's proposal, that commercial fee would drop to $1,986.

Multifamily units would also see increases on parks, fire and police fees, while getting a reduction in road costs, upping costs slightly from $3,284 under the old structure to $3,538 under the proposed plan.

The City Council is scheduled to discuss the new plan Nov. 1. In the meantime, the council informally voted to extend the moratorium until the new impact fees go into effect, whenever that might be.

According to Utah code, fee reductions go into effect immediately after the council adopts the new plan, but any fee increases won't go into effect until after a 90-day waiting period.

Related topics