City officials are proposing to automatically tie most city fees to inflation each year — and are recommending a roughly 5.7 percent increase to kick off the change for the 2026-27 budget year.
The City Council discussed the matter on May 19, and set a public hearing for June 23.
Under the proposal, staff would recommend yearly increases based on the Consumer Price Index for the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario area, or another similar inflation measure chosen by the finance director. Most fees would be rounded to the nearest dollar, with some rounded to the nearest nickel.
The proposal covers a wide range of city services — including for City Clerk notary services and public records copies, while the Fire Department would add late fees for unpaid inspection bills. Parks and Recreation and Community Services would add new fees for youth programs, adult sports, senior activities, field rentals and classes at the Bourns Family Youth Innovation Center.
Public Works is also proposing changes, including new fees for lost or destroyed animal traps, late fees for parking bail violations and a $49 contamination fee for repeat problems with recycling or organics carts.
The fee changes would bring in about $862,000 in added General Fund revenue, according to the staff report.
City officials said the new fees are part of the proposed 2026-28 budget, but the financial impact of the new charges is still unknown because the city does not yet have data on how often they will be used.
Resident Aurora Chavez voiced her opposition to the increase, particularly for animal services fees.
"I think the percentage is too high," Chavez said. "We don't know what the rest of our year is going to be like. It could be higher, it could be lower… I would not like that at all, to increase anything for people not being able to get their animals."
"I just, I would recommend to do a percentage smaller and break it up, and see how the year goes, and let's see if it's a 3 percent maybe, and then later on in the year, if it's a better one, like them, put another 2 percent or whatever, but total 5.7 percent is too much," she said. "People are not going to be able to do that."
During discussion, Councilmember Sean Mill said he could not support "anything that has an automatic increase built right into the municipal code every year."
Mill also pressed staff on safeguards to ensure CPI-based adjustments do not push fees above actual service costs, and questioned whether the city had evaluated how recurring increases might affect new development, business retention and regional competitiveness.
City staff said annual CPI recommendations are meant to keep pace with rising costs between comprehensive fee studies conducted every three to five years — and that the plan is to maintain and not exceed the 80 percent cost-recovery level previously negotiated with developers.
Other council members focused on explaining that the proposed adjustments are user charges rather than broad-based taxes and stressed the need for better public outreach.
Councilmember Steven Robillard said that if the city does not charge the full cost to users, "we are then subsidizing it. So we're paying for it either way," and called it "more equitable that we have [those] using the service pay."
Councilmember Jim Perry questioned the new $49 contamination fee, asking how the figure was set and whether state rules were driving it.
Staff replied that the amount reflects the cost of remediation and staff time, that citations come only after three tagged warnings, and that enforcement is required under Senate Bill 1383.
Several members urged a stronger education campaign on contamination fines and animal services costs, along with deeper analysis of CPI-based increases, before final action.
Councilmembers unanimously voted to move the recommendations forward and set the public hearing for June.
Civic Engagement Reporter who calls the Inland Empire home. Five years covering SoCal. APU journalism grad. Good conversations over coffee and stories that matter.
