Two months after rejecting a proposed increase to school impact fees, the Woodland City Council revisited the topic on Monday, May 4, during a workshop with school district leaders. Council members still appear divided on the issue.
Woodland School District Superintendent Asha Riley and consultant LeAnne Bremer explained to council members how school impact fees are calculated and why district officials say more revenue will be needed as the student population grows.
The district’s 2025-31 Capital Facilities Plan (CFP) calls for raising fees to $10,545.93 for single-family homes and $13,664.57 for multifamily units, up from the current $5,900 for both housing types. After the council previously rejected the planning commission’s recommendation, which closely matched the district’s proposal, the commission met again on Feb. 19. Commissioners voted to send their original proposal back to the council, with one change: single-bedroom accessory dwelling units would stay at $2,000. The council rejected that recommendation in a 2-5 vote during a March 2 meeting. Council members Melissa Doughty and Jason Friend voted in favor of the increase. Several council members had indicated they wanted a phased approach to the impact fee increases brought before them.
The district projects Woodland will add 418 students over the next six years, according to the CFP. Of those, 164 are expected at the elementary level, 94 at the middle school level, and 101 at the high school level. The plan identifies the need for a new elementary school, which would require a voter-approved bond.
District leaders reiterated Monday that the fees would not come close to fully funding a future elementary school, which the district estimates at roughly $31 million, including land acquisition. Riley stressed the district is currently using impact fee revenue primarily to purchase portable classrooms and manage enrollment growth.
“We do see growth, we do expect kids,” Riley said. “…We can't predict when they're coming. We can't predict the exact number… We use the statistics provided to us. The amount that's being collected by the impact fee is a minor proportion of the total cost of what the impact would be.”
As of January, the district owns 31 portable classrooms, 20 of which serve elementary schools. Many have been refurbished to continue serving past their lifespan. If enrollment growth exceeds permanent building capacity, more students may be housed in additional portables. According to Riely, the district has either paid or will soon pay about $266,000 for a portable classroom, up $20,000 from the previous year.
Bremer, who works with local school districts on capital facilities planning and impact fee calculations, said the district is required under the Growth Management Act to project future capacity needs and recalculate recommended fees accordingly.
Council members again questioned why Woodland’s proposed multifamily fee is substantially higher than neighboring jurisdictions. Bremer said Woodland’s fee recommendations were based on Woodland’s higher amount of multifamily housing units, which generate more students locally than single-family homes.
“It's really based on the number of students generated from either a single-family home or a multifamily unit,” Bremer said.
During public comment, speakers raised concerns that Woodland residents and developers are shouldering a disproportionate share of costs because Cowlitz County does not collect school impact fees. According to school officials, children from Cowlitz County account for more than half of local students. Of four public comments, one supported increasing impact fees.
“It’s not about (being) for or against children,” Local resident Max Bondar argued, “It’s about protecting Woodland residents from paying more than their fair share… So the question is, how is it proportional that Woodland residents have to fully fund capacity that is significantly used by students of Cowlitz County,” Bondar said.
Bremer noted that efforts to establish school impact fees in Cowlitz County failed about 20 years ago and said further attempts would likely waste district resources.
“We actually developed the ballot measure and tried to get that passed,” Bremer said. “It didn't, it failed miserably.”
Community Development Director Travis Goddard said he believes frustrations raised by developers are understandable, but he maintained the district’s impact fee calculations are accurate.
“The question is, can you trust that it is fair?” Goddard said. “That I cannot advise you on, but there are other factors that are weighing into this that are making it look like the school district is taking advantage of loopholes, but the reality is, the math is the math. It is fundamentally correct.”
Goddard also cautioned that portable classrooms are only a temporary solution.
“Those portables have a finite lifespan,” Goddard said. “And if the school district isn't forward to the idea that they need to build that elementary school, eventually those portables are going to be in disrepair.”
Councilor Melissa Doughty noted the council has repeatedly revisited the issue without reaching a conclusion.
“We've sent it back to the planning commission; they came back with the same number,” Doughty said.
Doughty also warned that the city is approaching the limits of available development as school capacity pressures increase.
“If we don't have the money coming in from impact fees and we're almost at capacity as far as building, we're not getting any more buildings,” Doughty said.
Mayor Todd Dinehart indicated the council is currently divided on the topic and suggested staff begin exploring a phased implementation approach rather than bringing back the full increase immediately.
“I need direction,” Dinehart said. “And if I read the room here, I see a three-three split.”
Dinehart said he plans to work with City Attorney Emily Guildner and city staff to draft possible phased-in fee language before bringing the issue back to the council in the coming weeks.
At the start of the May 4 meeting, Dinehart said he had received Jennifer De Luz’s resignation letter, initiating the council’s multi-week process of selecting an interim councilor.
