The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutAgenda Statement 1982/01/05 Item 17ITEM TIT SUBMITTE During bu fees woul bring in directed mendation Fee Schec COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT I'1 Item ~-6a ;-~ i-S-Q'z- Meeting Date ~l Resolution /0 730 Amending the Master Fee Schedule • O>F•dinance /~li / Amending Several Chapters and Sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, all Relating to the Transfer of Fee Requirements as Specified in the Code to the Master Fee Schedule Adopted by Resolution of the City Council BY: City Manager ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No x ) get deliberations for the Fiscal Year 1981-82 budget, staff indicated that certain be ra sed to keep pace with inflation. These fee increases were anticipated to 50,000 in additional revenue above that of Fiscal Year 1980-81. Accordingly, I hat all department heads review the Master Fee Schedule and forward, their re om- for change to me. The recommended changes have been incorporated into the Paster le and therefore it is my RECOMMEN TION: That Council adopt the attached revised Master Fee Schedule and that Council adopt the Ordinance modifying various ordinances that refer to fees included within the Master Fee Schedule. DISCUSSIOIN: In 19.78, hen the Master Fee Schedule was adopted, a Blue Ribbon Committee assisted by staff re iewed tike Master Fee Schedule to ensure that the City was practicing full cost recovery for ser ices funded by fees. Since that time, staff salaries have increased 25 per- c wit an ove~all increase of about 30 percent when fringe benefits are applied, and the C~mer Price Index (CPI) has increased 44 percent. Therefore, by applying the staff increase percentage to those fees which relate primarily to staff time and the CPI percentage increase to those fees which pay for items affected by the CPI (such as traffic signal construc ion, sewer lateral material, park development, etc.) the City Management Team thought hat it would be a fairly easy and quick process to revise the Master Fee Schedule. We wante to have a quick and easy process as a complete update of all City fees was antici- pated as part of ', the new budget format, cost accounting and full cost recovery systems being st died by a City task force. Unfortunately, it has not proved to be an easy or quick task to ccomplish the attached Master Fee Schedule revision. A study f the Master Fee Schedule revealed that not all City fees are included in the Master F e Schedule. Furthermore, not all of the fees .relating to certain activities such as subdi ision map processing were included in the Master Fee Schedule. As I believed that it was a propriate to include many items that were not included in the Master Fee Schedule, I have d ne so and, by necessity, have had to request that the Council modify the governing ordinanc s. This was done for two reasons: First, i makes it easier for a developer to look in one place to determine what the fees for a ce tain development will be. Second, i expensivE involved a specifl Fee Schec r ~ U t reduces cost to the City for subsequent revisions. This is because it is less to modify by resolution instead of by ordinance due to the advertising costs and revisions of the Municipal Code. The revision to the ordinances simply removes c amount from the ordinance and indicates that the fee may be found in the Master ule. Form A-113 (Rev. 11/79) ~t7 Page 2, Item '9'$~b Meeting of " ,~~ „ As I indi ated above, most of the revisions relate to staff salary increases or CPI increases. There are exceptions however. In some instances, we have been better able since 1978 to determine the actual cost, particularly within the Planning Department, because that depart- ment has been on an automated time accounting system for a longer period. In other cases, we know hat the actual costs for such things as street names and regulatory signs are and, therefor can include that cost in our Fee Schedule. In some other cases, there may be other reasons which I will enumerate below for increases to fees which are above either the staff salary or CPI increase. I will list below by the four categories, that is, staff salary i crease, CPI increase, actual cost recovery, or other, all of the sections within the Mast r Fee Schedule. For the most part, these will include the section number only. Those fe s affected by staff salary increases are: S ction Title • .20.240', .24.060. .40.020 .16.020.A .20.090'.. .20.100' .20.110'... .20.120 .24.050 .28.0201 .28.060' .06.010 .12.030 x.14.160 x.14.440 i. 48.040 fee (Zoning Administrator) fee Driveway excessive width fee Application for waiver of public improvements Street vacation fees Sewer connection charges application Sewer inspection fees Cesspool or septic tank discharge fee Sewer disconnection fee Additional inspection fee Adjustment plat examination fee Preliminary parcel map fee Subdivision map fees General Plan amendment fees Rezoning application fees Zoning variance fee Site plan and architectural approval PC zone general development plan fee Those se~tions affected by increases in the CPI are as follows: .58.040 Engineering Department document fees 13.16.020 Sewer connection charges (except for the application fee) 15.51.020 Traffic signal participation fees 17.10.040 Parkland acquisition fees 17.10.060 Parkland development fees 18.28.010 Street tree deposit fees Those s ctions which are to recover actual costs which are different from a simple staff salary r CIP increase application are as follows: 2.58.030 Police Department document fees 5.20.040 Cardroom license fee 6.12.040 Animal impoundment fees 2.20.240.8 Excessive driveway appeal fee 2.28.050 Encroachment permit application fee 2.44.020 Street name and regulatory sign fee • 5.32.040 and 32 070 5 Deferral of undergrounding of utilities fee ~~ . . 9.14.030 9.14.070 Variance or conditional use permit Zoning Administrator fee Conditional use permit application fee - Public Hearing required ~ 9.14.571 Precise plan approval application fee ' "I Page 3, Item ' Meeting of • /`,S•t~ Se tion Title 19 14.582 Site plan and architectural approval Design Review Committee fee 19 14.590 Fees for appeals and requested action before the Planning Commission and Zoning Administrator 19 48.090 Sectional planning area fee 19 48.130 Sectional planning area plan modification 19.60.500 Planned signing program application fee Those fee which, I believe, require more explanation are listed below: 2.58.020 City Clerk fees. During budget deliberations, the Council authorized a fee of $35 for mailing of City Council, Planning Commission, and Redevelopment Agency agenda and minutes. The current Master Fee Schedule includes other Board, Commissions and Committees under the same fee. As they do not require the work of the agenda and minutes from the Council, Planning Commission and Redevelopment Agency, I am recommending that they be separated. The attached Master Fee Schedule reflects this recommendation. .70.030. Library fines and fees • The City Council approved all of these fines and fees during h e the Council Conference on the PAPE review of the Library. T Library Board had approved all of the fines and fees except for the darkroom fee. The Library Board had not recommended that the darkroom be opened. The Council, during the Council Confer- ence, however, decided to have the darkroom be open on a trial basis. During discussions, Library and PAPE staff indicated that the darkroom fee would be $4 per hour. .02.190 Solicitor identification cards .20.070~.A Cardroom manager work permits .20.070'.8 Cardroom employee permits The basic change on all of these is the requirement for a renewal fee and an indication of the length of time (1 year) for which the various permits or fees would be valid. The Police Depart- ment has requested this in an effort to improve their control. .20.030 .20.040 Dog licenses .20.050 06q As the City is in the process of the yearly renewals for dog 20 . . licenses, I am not recommending a change at this time. However, I am recommending new fees that will be in line with other agencies within San Diego County to become effective January 1, 1983. This will give us a chance to have new forms printed up • with the new fees on them. _ :r t~~~ • Sec ion 19. C The attac present 1 and the as adoptE Departmer present < DCB:rms/~ Title ~~ Page 4, Item T~"'b Meeting of -~-~~2./81 Housing permit fee, penalty for late payment 15.0.040 When the Finance Department began collecting this fee, it was collected at the same time penalties for late payment of busi- ness licenses and the penalty charge was the same. However, in 1978, when the business license penalty changed, the housing permit penalty was inadvertently not changed. This change to the housing permit penalty fee will bring it into line once again with the business license penalty fee. Plan unit development fees 14.360 This fee was last increased in 1971. Since then, the Planning Department has been on a time accounting system and has determined that the fees, as indicated in the attached Master Fee Schedule, are more appropriate to fully recover costs to the City. I have not included in the Master Fee Schedule the old fees as they were in a format different from the proposed format. I will, however, include them below. Drccont Faa 1 thru 20 units - $150 21 thru 40 units - $150 + S3/unit 51 thru 100 units -5240 + 52/unit 100 thru 200 units - X340 + $1/unit 201 units or more - 5440 + 50~/unit Proposed Fee Residential up to 20 units - 5500; each unit over 20, add 510/unit. The non-residential fee has not changed hed revised Master Fee Schedule shows the proposed new fee in plain type and the 'ee in parenthesis lined out. Fees that were not changed, show no fees in parenthesis ~ection numbers were not listed in the four categories above. The revised Fee Schedule ~d, will' have the lined out portions deleted and will include only the approved fee. it Heads responsible for administering the fees in the Master Fee Schedule will be ~t the Oouncil Meeting, if required to answer questions. 023 ~,~. ~ . .. -. ,..., G{~:~~a t, ~~~~, C~; ~~ ~ ~ i~ ~ ~ ~"-PAY _', ~~~ ~- - - - - .~;y ~,\