I find it difficult to reconcile the vagary of the fee structure - and, I'm focused on RENEWAL, but the argument applies to all the other fee category variations.

The total current renewal revenue is $3.4 million per cycle.  The proposed renewal revenue is $6.9 million.  Renewal fees are essentially doubling since they were established in 2004 (See the Agency Background Document, 2025-05-13).  An increase is reasonable - but the stated 110% inflation rate over the past 20 years is grossly inflated.  According to Google AI, the cumulative inflation since 2004 is about 65%.  The Federal Reserve calculates the cumulative rate to be 71%.

If one were to divide the current revenue ($3.4M) by the total number of licenses (47,441), the average renewal fee is $73.  Increasing that by 65% equals a updated renewal fee of $120.

Therefore, the renewal fee for each license should be $120 and should not vary by license type.  DPOR has provided no evidence that suggests a Landscape Architect should pay more than any other profession.

And, why does the Landscape Architect fee go up 173%, while all the other fees go up 200%?

Without some clear rationale and cost accounting, the variations in licensing fees appear Arbitrary and Capricious.  All professions licensed through the APELSCIDLA Board should have the exact same fee structure.  Why would there be any difference given we are all licensed by the same Board.