Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutcc min 1982/09/23 NOTICE OF .AN ADj~3URNED MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Held Thursday at 4:00 p.m. September 23, 1982 The City Council met in the Council Conference Room, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California on the above date at 4:00 p.m. with the following: Councilmembers present: Cox, McCandliss, Scott, Malcolm~ Moore Councilmembers absent: None ADJOURNMENT The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 6:40 p.m. until Saturday, September 25, 1982, beginning at 8:00 a.m. in the Employee Lounge of the Public Services Building to discuss personnel matters, and to Tuesday, September 28, 1982 in the Council Conference Room, City Hall for employee negotiations, both located at 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista. I, DOROTHY HARRAH, Deputy City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that this is a full, true and correct copy of an order adopted by the City Council at the Meeting of September 23, 1982. MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Thursday, September 23, 1982 - 4:00 p.m. Council Conference Room, City Hall ROLL CALL ~mbers Present: Mayor Cox, Councilmembers McCandliss, Scott, Malcolm, Moore Members Absent: None Staff Present: City Manager Cole, Assistant City Manager Asmus, City Attorney Lindberg, Development Services Administrator Robens FULL COST RECOVERY FEE COUNCIL WORKSHOP City Manager Cole handed out copies of the proposed Full Cost Recovery Program workshop agenda specifying that no decisions were expected at this time and these items were suggestions only. The Full Cost Recovery Fee is part of a 3-year plan the Council discussed during budget sessions. The complexity of obtaining factual figures for full cost recovery was of major concern. Items discussed were the development of the full cost recovery formula, development related fees and public interest/demand fees. These fees were not to be established to "accumulate a profit or suffer a loss". City Manager Cole said the primary issues were who should bear the cost of a direct service. Can local government afford to subsidize service costs to special interest groups of the community? It is realized that different approaches may be necessary for development fees and demand fees. Should general administative costs be a part of each fee? What is an appropriate recovery range? A full service City should have a library and parks, some of which the City pa~vs for regardless of use. Should participants expect to pay 100% of the costs? The City is charging some fees now that are above full cost recovery which we will be reduced. Development of Full Cost Recovery formula (Jim Thomson, Director of Management Services): Direct cost of employees actually performing the work (salary, paid time off, vacation, sick leave, retirement pension, health costs, etc.); Department overhead costs (admi nistrati ve staff costs, services and supplies); and City-wide overhead (general government and administrative suppport departments, building depreciation, equipment depreciation, insurance, etc.). The full cost recovery multiple of salary cost for direct labor hours ranged from 1.94 to 3.26 with 2.4 being the average multiple for the City of Chula Vista while the City and County of San Diego tend to show a 2.5 multiple. General government and administrative support for the City of Chula Vista are showing 33.3% of direct salary and 25.7% for administrative support. FCR Fee Workshop -2- September 23, 1982 Mr. Thomson explained the process of using 75% or 100% recovery fees for the Building and Housing, Engineering and Planning Departments, pointing out the variables pertaining to the different methods of recovery used, giving breakdowns of staffing costs, overhead and administrative support. In reviewing the proposed fee schedules for the Building and Housing and Engineering Departments, Dave Byers, Principal Analyst, suggested that the City charge deposit fees for many services, including grading permits, parcel and subdivision maps, amendments, development plans and public hearings on conditional use permits. The Mayor called a recess at 5:35 p.m. and the meeting reconvened at 5:45 p.m. Marilyn Leuck, Principal Analyst, reviewed suggested recovery fees for the the public interest and demand areas of the Recreation, Library, Finance, Police and Fire Departments. Areas of higher costs to the city include the Library and the swimming pool activities. The high library expenses are incurred because of the computer and the pool expenses due to maintenance and high overhead. The range of the full cost recovery fees for these departments fall wi thin the 50-100% guidelines Flexibility is necessary until it is determined the degree to which the community benefits from these services and the utilization of different fees for non-residents and residents. (Mary Mancine, Principal Librarian) discussed with Council the Library's utilization of the computer services, the "book reservation" procedures and fees, and late book service charges. Charges presently imposed by other San Diego cities were also discussed. City Manager Cole, in a wrapup discussion, estimated $336,000 would be generated by the recommended fees for this year. If the City went full cost (100%) it would be over one-half million dollars and 75% would be $288,000. Various City Commissions and the Chamber of Commerce and the Library have received the projected recovery costs reports and are expected to have further input. A recommendation will be made at Tuesday night's Council meeting to continue this discussion MAYOR'S REPORT a. Mayor Cox informed the Council that Councilman Malcolm received a commitment from the Bank of America for financing the "J" Street Marina Park, subject to the sale of IDB bonds b. Mayor Cox announced the City Council will submit four resolutions for consideration to the League of Cities Conference scheduled for October. c. MSUC(Scott/Cox) the City Manager provide testimony on any resolutions that the City presents to the League of Cities Conference. FCR Fee Workshop -3- September 23, 1982 d. Mayor Cox expressed concern about the property located at the east side of 805 at Bonita Road being improperly used. e. MSUC(Cox/Scott) request the County of San Diego to move ahead on annexation of the property located at the east side of 805 at Bonita Road. f. Mayor Cox announced a meeting on Saturday, September 25 at 8:00 a.m. in the Employees Lounge in the Public Services Building to discuss personnel matters. Jennie M. Fulasz, CMC, City Clerk WPCO187C/dh