"Any increase in fees has the potential to reduce choice available to families," Benns said.
"Those least able to afford the changes are most affected.
"Unfortunately for many families, the nice-to-haves are going to have to be left behind."
Benns said a Work and Income Funeral Grant sits at $2152.
"There's a huge shortfall for most families. It's $2500 short for a cremation, and much more for a burial."
The association continues to lobby Winz to increase the grant to cover a standard burial or standard cremation.
Benns also said due to inflation, price increases are coming from all suppliers - floristry, timber, plywood, caskets, food.
"It compounds and ends up hitting the families. We just need to bridge the gap."
According to the council, the increases aim to better reflect changes in land values, staff and other costs.
A council spokesperson said the proposed increases would more accurately reflect the cost of delivering these services in 2022.
Manager infrastructure operations Glenn Rainham said significant cost increases in maintenance requirements associated with cemeteries are one of several contributing financial pressures.
Rainham also said charges previously included a plot purchase (or ash berm fee), and a separate ground maintenance fee (currently $151), while in the proposed changes these two fees would be combined, as is the practice of several other Northland councils.
"This has made the increase look larger than it is in reality," Rainham said.
While the submission forms ask whether the respondent supports changes to ash berm and burial plot fees, the proposed increase to the service fee hourly rate is not mentioned.
Respondents can express opinions on this 40 per cent increase by writing in the section for general comments.
According to Rainham, cemetery fees and charges in the Far North have not been raised for a number of years, and most of the council's proposed cemetery fees will still be below those charged by other Northland councils for the same services.
Other proposed increases include costs for special circumstances fees, such as when hand digging of graves is required, or when burials are conducted on public holidays.
The second area of consultation is resource consent application fees, with the proposed changes aimed at making total costs clear up front.
According to manager environmental services Rochelle Deane, the council charges an initial lodgement fee to begin resource consent applications and then invoices property owners for the balance once fees for engineering reports, planners and other experts are known.
Deane said lodgement fees do not provide applicants with an accurate indication of the total cost for processing and issuing consents, and actual costs are loaded at the back end of the process when final invoices are issued.
The proposal to adopt higher lodgement fees will provide a more accurate indication of the total cost and better manage expectations.
"We want to make consent processing costs more transparent from the beginning so customers can better assess the project budgets," Deane said.
"I want to stress that this will not increase what the council charges for resource consents.
"Although the council will still issue a final invoice, in most cases, additional charges will be minimal."
An itemised breakdown of costs is provided with all resource consents and where the lodgement fee exceeds final costs, a refund is provided.
However, a planner in the Far North expressed some concerns about the proposed changes.
They said the council sometimes uses consultants rather than in-house planners who cost more per hour, and overall costs should be relative and comparable regardless of who is working on a consent. They said if the end cost is higher than set-out totals, there needs to be some justification.
They also pointed out that the proposed fee schedule has the potential to be confusing, and would benefit from more detail to help people interpret it clearly.
Finally, they expressed concerns over some fees that are proposed to change to instalments. It's unclear what additional anticipated charges would be for, and whether additional fees would be charged on an hourly basis or a set amount.
Finally, the council is asking for public feedback on proposed changes to dog impound fees.
It proposes simplifying charges by removing a $125 after-hours impounding fee and increasing handling charges from $7.70 to $15 a day.
Deane said $15 daily would not cover the full hygiene, medical, food and staff costs required to house dogs, and the increased fee would still be lower than similar fees charged by other Northland councils.
"We believe $15 a day strikes a good balance. It's affordable for most owners but high enough to discourage owners leaving their pets at the animal shelter for extended periods."
A Proposed Fees and Changes Schedule listing all current and proposed fees is available at https://www.fndc.govt.nz/Whats-new/Have-your-say/Fees-and-Charges.
Submission forms feature four pages of yes/no questions, with the option to spell out concerns in detail. Respondents need answer only the questions they would like to, and have until Monday, April 4, to have their say.
The submission process is public, with submissions published online. However, those submitting can request that their personal contact details be removed from this online platform.
Paper applications are an option and are available at all council service centres and libraries.
Comments from submitters who email the council, rather than follow the outlined submissions process, are also taken into account.
For full details of the proposals and to make a submission, go to www.fndc.govt.nz/haveyoursay. Submissions can be emailed to submissions@fndc.govt.nz.
