HomeMy WebLinkAbout10/30/90AGENDA
ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING HERMOSA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
Tuesday, October 30, 1990 - Council Chambers, City Hall
7:00 p.m.
MAYOR
Chuck Sheldon
MAYOR PRO TEM
Kathleen Midstokke
COUNCILMEMBERS
Roger Creighton
Robert Essertier
Albert Wiemans
CITY CLERK
Elaine Doerfling
CITY TREASURER
Gary L. Brutsch
CITY MANAGER
Kevin B. Northcraft
CITY ATTORNEY
Charles S. Vose
All Council meetings are open to the public. PLEASE ATTEND.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL:
1. Workshop of User Fee Study - Memorandum from City Man-
ager Kevin B. Northcraft dated October 25, 1990.
a. Introduction - City Manager Northcraft
b. Consultant's Study - Brad Wilkes, Erin Payton,
David M. Griffiths Associates
c. Staff's fee recommendations - Finance Director Viki
Copeland
2. Naming of new Basketball Courts - Memorandum from Com-
munity Resources Director Mary Rooney dated June 25,
1990.
3. PUBLIC COMMENT
Citizens wishing to address the Council on any item
within the Council's jurisdiction may do so at this
time.
ADJOURNMENT
- 1 -
4.
October 25, 1990
Honorable Mayor and Members Workshop Meeting
of the Hermosa Beach City Council of October 30,. 1990
WORKSHOP ON CITY USER FEES
Recommendation:
That the City Council review the information to be supplied at
your workshop meeting of October 30 in order to look in some
detail at the David M. Griffith's User Fee Study information and
the staff's recommendations for fee adjustments. While questions
in order to understand fully this complex issue are encouraged,
this meeting is not intended to formulate decisions. The formal
presentation of the report is scheduled as part of a public hear-
ing at the regular Council meeting of November 13, 1990.
Background:
In 1984, the City commissioned a major study of user fees. This
study, occurring at a time of major fiscal problems for the City,
was the first comprehensive look at our fees, and resulted in a
listing by ordinance of our fees, with percentages of recovery to
be accomplished. In staff's view, that study, while useful and
well implemented at the time, is very cumbersome to keep up to
date and has a difficult and confusing process for updating.
Because the City Council's continuing top priority goal is to
improve the City's financial picture, updating the City's user
fees is high on the list of projects to accomplish and rep-
resents the most significant effort that likely will be conducted
during the current fiscal year to accomplish that specific goal.
As a result of this priority, the City Council on March 13, 1990
authorized contracting with David M. Griffith and Associates for
development of a cost allocation plan and user fee study for our
City. In order to keep consultant costs to a minimum, the study
was limited to four departments, and omitted any recommendations.
As a result, staff has used in-house resources to cover other
areas.
Analysis:
The consultant's summary report and presentation discuss the
study methodology and rationale for setting fees in California.
In brief, the concept is that fees for special services should be
adequate to fund those services, rather than relying on the
general taxes of a city paid by all taxpayers. This allows tax-
payer funds to go for services used by all citizens, such as
police and fire protection, streets, parks and open space, etc.
The state law requires fees be set at not higher than the cost
reasonably borne in providing the services for which the fee ap-
plies. This requires a rather sophisticated study to ascertain
1
the direct, indirect, and overhead costs that should be assigned
to every service for which a fee is appropriate.
For example, the services of our police officers for special
events such as filming are appropriate to charge fees, as they
benefit the filmmaker and should not be subsidized by Hermosa
taxpayers. Accordingly, the City should charge (costs are esti-
mated for illustrative purposes only) $20 per hour direct cost
for the officer, plus $18/hr. pro -rated cost for health in-
surance, retirement, uniforms, etc. as indirect costs, plus $17
per hour for the pro -rated costs of the officers supervision, the
police department building, the Council, Clerk, City Manager, and
Finance time, the mechanics time for the officer's vehicle, the
vehicle's gas and depreciation costs, etc. the total is $55 per
hour.
There are obviously limitations to this procedure. First, not
all services are appropriate for assigning fees, and clearly no
amount of reasonable effort could be precise to the penny for
every individual request for service. To provide some allowance
for this fact, the staff recommendation does not adjust the '89-
90 data used to take into account the current year's higher
costs.
Staff actions - To follow up and continue the work initiated by
the consultant, the staff has developed recommendations based on
the following goals and criteria:
1) As pointed out on Page 6 of the consultant's handout, the
factors in determining appropriateness of a fee include the
elasticity of demand, the subsidization policy, the economic
incentives, and the competitive restraints.
2) Continuation of the basic concept adopted by the City Coun-
cil in 1984 that special services should be paid by the in-
dividuals causing and/or receiving those services, not the
taxpayer that does not receive them.
3) The process by which fees are established in the City should
be set by ordinance, and that their actual amount should be
set by a master resolution adopted by the City Council to
assure ease of administration and updating, as well as full
public accountability.
4) A procedure should be developed that causes fees to be regu-
larly and routinely updated to assure that the value of the
fee amounts remain constant despite fluctuations in the
values of the dollar. This is consistent with the Council's
direction to develop a system that would avoid repeated need
for comprehensive studies by consultants.
5) The recommended fees should not appear to be "ridiculous",
in that they would be out of line with what other cities
charge or be so high as to result in a. shock and resentment
from our citizens.
2
That the method of adjusting fees be clear and require
public input at the Council level as well as Council
approval.
Application of these criteria to the findings of the consultant
result in staff recommendation to increase 42 existing fees,
while decreasing 11 existing fees. Staff is also recommending
that 37 new fees be created to charge for services for which no
charge has been previously assessed, but which would be consis-
tent with the City's fee policy.
The estimated annual impact of these recommendations would be
elimination of up to $249,826 in taxpayer subsidy of special ser-
vices. In turn, that same amount would represent an annual in-
crease in revenue to the City's budget to be utilized for ser-
vices affecting all our residents. (This figure is not adjusted
for demand changes resulting from the fee changes, and could be
less.)
Staff is also recommending a procedure for an annual automatic
minimum adjustment to apply to assure that the same fee is
charged in terms of the purchasing power of the dollar from one
year to the next. This would be accomplished by annually adjust-
ing by the lower of the percentage increase in the General Fund
operating appropriations over the prior fiscal year or the per-
centage change in the Consumer Price Index for our area. Because
unusual requests occur for which no fee has previously been es-
tablished, staff is also recommending that the City Manager be
authorized to set a fee for such circumstances, subject to appeal
to the City Council. This would eliminate provision of special
services without any reimbursement of City costs in the case
where no fee has been established.
These recommendations, when approved, will represent a major com-
ponent of long term fiscal solvency for our City. Staff also
believes the recommendations will accomplish the Council direc-
tive to implement a system that is self updating and will not
require frequent consulting services to be maintained.
Kevin B. North
City Manager
KBN/ ld
Attachments
1) David M. Griffith Report on Costs,, Fees and Revenue (sepa-
rately bound)
2) User Fee Study Summary Sheet
3) Survey of Area Cities' Selected Fees
4) Draft of Proposed Ordinance
5) Draft of Proposed Resolution
Note: Item 17 on the Police Department's Fee Study Session -
Vehicle Inspection - has an incorrect "Current Cost"
- 3-
Planning
1 ENVIRON ASSESSMENT
2 CUP CONDO 2 UNITS
3 CUP CONDO 4 UNITS
4 CUP CONDO 8. UNITS
S CUP COMMERCIAL
6 FINAL MAP
7.. ZOITE CNG / GPA
8 NONCONFORM REMODEL
9 PARKING PLAN
10 P.O.P.
11 TENT INP SUBDIVISN
12 ZONING VARIANCE
13 FINAL/TENT MAP EXTEN
14 LOT LINE ADJUSTMENT
15 PERMITTED USE REO
16 TEXT AMEND PRIVATE
17 VOLUNTARY LOT MERGER
18 PLAN COMM APPEALS
19 300' RAI NOTICING
• 20 COUNTER / TELEPHONE
• 21 LONG RANGE PLANNING
• 22 TRANSIT PROGRAMS
• 23 OTHER NON -FEE
• 24 CODE ENFORCE
TOTALS
DESCRIPTION
State Required review
Discretionary project
Review for Qualitative
Purposes, Code Coapt.,
and Public Input
Code Compliance Review
Req for chng/Pub Input
Exception/Leg Non-conf
Exception/Stand Pkg Req
See CUP Description
Code Compl/Qusl Review
Exc to Stand/Hardships
More time/req by St Law
Adjust Property line
Add to permitted list
Request Zone Ord Change
Req merge/Mut lots to 1
Plan Calm interpret Ord
Public hearing noticing
Zoning Inquiries
General Plan review
Dial-a-Ride/Comm bus
Miscellaneous
Violation Insp/Admin
City of Hermosa Beach
User Fee Study Summery Sheet
UNIT CURRENT CURRENT
VOLUME FEE COST
40.0
8.0
9.0
8.0
20.0
25.0
10.0
10.0
5.0
4.0
1.0
10.0
2.0
5.0
2.0
1.0
3.0
1.0
80.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
1.0
$230.00
$865.00
$1,185.00
$2,145.00
$320.00
$125.00
$450.00
$320.00
$320.00
$320.00
$225.00
$320.00
$0.00
$320.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00•
$0.00
$294.40
$988.25
$1,482.00
$1,975.88
$891.80
$224.28
$2,383.60
$670.20
$924.80
$1,150.75
$919.00
$924.70
$225.50
$515.60
$435.50
$591.00
$161.00
$439.00
$340.91
$56,305.00
$93,470.00
$15,654.00
$50,877.00
$56,295.00
CURRENT LEGAL FACTORS
SUBSIDY AUTHORITY CONSIDERED
$64.40 Res 84-4735 Men hours
" required,
" percentage of
• overall cost
" per project to
" applicant,
• fairness/
comeanity values
and comparison
with other
cities.
$123.25
$297.00
($169.12)
$571.80
$99.28
$1,933.60
$350.20 Res 89-5326
$604.80 Res 85-4884
$830.75 Res 90-5351
$694.00 Res 84-4735
$604.70
$225.50 New
$195.60 Res 88-5144
5435.50 New
$591.00 "
$161.00
$439.00
$340.91
$56,305.00
$93,470.00
$15,654.00
$50,877.00
$56,295.00
$7,145.00 $14,597.26 $7,452.26
• - Items marked with an asterisk have been excluded from the fee for service totals.
N
N
N
RECOMM FEE ANNUAL
FEE INC/DECR (-) IMPACT
$295 $65 $2,600_
Note 1 $900 $35 $280
Note 1 $1,200 $15 $135
Note 1 $1,800 ($345) ($2,760)
Note 1 $600 $280 $5,600
$225 $100 $2,500
Note 2 $1,200 $750 $7,500
$670 $350 $3,500
$920 $600 $3,000
$1,145 $825 $3,300
$920 $695 $695
$925 $605 $6,050
$225 $225 $450
$515 $195 $975
$435 $435 5870
$590 $590 $590
$160 $160 $480
$440 $440 $440
$340 $340 $27,200
Note 1 - Fees calculated on $600 base fee plus $150 per unit.
Note 2 - City initiated zone changes were included in current cost calculation. Applicant initiated changes are estimated to be 50%,
therefore fee is recommended at $1200.
$13,505
$6,360 $63,405
Building
' 1 COUNTER / TELEPHONE
' 2 ZONING ENFORCEMNT
3 BUILDING PERK/INSP
4 PLBG/IECN PERM/INSP
5 .BLECTRICAL PERM/INSP
6 PLAN CNECKING
7 SIGN REVIEW
8 TEND SIGN PERMIT
9 RIR RES INSP
10 OCC PERMIT COMM INSP
11 BOARD OF APPEALS
12 LEGAL DET NEARING
13 ZONING APPEALS
TOTALS
DESCRIPTION
UNIT CURRENT
VOLUME FEE
Public Contact 1.0
Zoning Code Enforcement 1.0
New Bldg Construction 1.0
New Plmb/Mech Installatn 1.0
New Floc Installation 1.0
Review plans/Code Conf 1.0
Review new signs 44.0
Review Temporary signs 50.0
Insp Res Prop(et sate) 287.0
New Bus. inspections 197.0
Appeal Bldg Code Natters 4.0
PC Appeal Dwelling Stet 2.0
Appeal Bldg Ofcl Dec 2.0
50.00
50.00
$170,000.00
134,000.00
540,000.00
$104,000.00
525.00
$0.00
540.00
525.00
175.00
50.00
10.00
$348,165
City of Hermosa Beach
User Fee Study Summery Sheet
CURRENT
COST
$16,708.00
$99,596.00
$171,718.00
134,216.00
141,609.00
5104,710.00
578.27
$29.46
$40.38
$38.97
$150.75
5998.00
$452.50
CURRENT LEGAL
SUBSIDY AUTHORITY
516,708.00
599,596.00
51,718.00
5216.00
$1,609.00
5710.00
553.27
529.46
$0.38
$13.97
$75.75
$998.00
$452.50
$470,345 $122,180
• • Items marked with an asterisk have been excluded from the fee for service totals.
Exec Ord 9/84
M
Ord 84-762
Ord 77-574
New
Res 84-473
Exec Ord 9/84
Ord N.S. 508
New
New
FACTORS
CONSIDERED
NO RATIONALE FOR
GENERAL TAXPAYER
TO SUBSIDIZE
CONSTRUCTION
ACTIVITY
RECOMMENDED FEE ANNUAL
FEE INC/DECR (-) IMPACT
SO SO SO
SO SO SO
5170,000 SO SO
134,000 SO SO
$40,000 So $0
$104,000 SO SO
S80 S55 $2,420
S30 $30 $1,500
$40 S0 SO
S40 - S15 52,955
5150 175 5300
11,000 11,000 12,000
5450 5450 5900
5349,790 11,625 510,075
Fire Department
1 MUTUAL AID (FIRE)
2 SUPPR TRAINING
3 FIRE REPT COPIES
4 EARTNQUAKE PREP
S STATION TOURS
6 SCHOOL FIRE SAFE
7.,OPEN HOUSE
• 8 SAFETY LECTURE
9 ENER MED PROBLEM
• 10 CPR CLASS 8 HOUR
• 11 CPR CLASS 4 HOUR
•• 12 P/N RESP TRANSPORT
13 P/N RESP NON -TRANS
• 14 P/N STAND-BY
15 8/P SCREENING
• 16 PHOTO INSP FIRE/SAFE
17 LOCK OUT (CAR)
18 LOCK -OUT (MOUSE)
19 FLOODING WATER REM
20 S/RAIr BOOTH PERM
21 'SPRAY BOOTH INSP
• 22 PLAN CHECK NEW CONST
• 23 ALARM SYS PLAN CHECK
• 24 ALARM SYS INSPECT
25 FIRE PROT SYS EXIST
• 26 FIRE PROT SYS NEW
27 OPEN FIRE PERMIT
28 SPRINKLER CERT TEST
29 CON BLD / APT INSP
30 FUMIGATION PERM/INSP
DESCRIPTION
Helping other Cities
Fire -fighting Trng
Sale of Report copies
Trng/Various groups
School/group tours
Sfty trng at schools
Ann Fire Prey Week
Sfty talks/Var grps
Einer Sfty grp talks
CPR instruction
Transp/In lieu of Amb
No P/M transport
Stand-by/Var Events
Citizen B/P check
Photos Taken at Insp
Open Car/Key stuck
Open Nouse/Key stuck
Vacuum leaked water
Auto paint Bus perm
Insp/Prior to permit
Fire Dept Plan Review
Insp New Facilities
Insp Existing Fac.
Insp New Facilities
Fire Pits/Park & Home
Pressure Test System
Ann Insp/Re-Insp
Iss Perm/Insp Tents
UNIT CURRENT
VOLUME FEE
City of Hermosa Beach
User Fee Study Summery Sheet
CURRENT
COST
CURRENT LEGAL
SUBSIDY AUTHORITY
8.0 $0.00 $75.25 $75.25
12.0 $0.00 $308.50 $308.50
28.0 $2.50 $8.64 $6.14 Dept Policy
4.0 $0.00 $258.75 $258.75
14.0 $0.00 $393.93 $393.93
2.0 $0.00 $166.50 $166.50
1.0 $0.00 $3,319.00 $3,319.00
8.0 $0.00 $167.88 $167.88
8.0 $0.00 $167.88 $167.88
2.0 $0.00 $943.00 $943.00
6.0 $0.00 $578.67 $578.67
502.0 565.00/105.00 $201.10 $201.10 Dept Policy
494.0 $0.00 $99.67 $99.67 New
1.0 $0.00 $269,553.00 $269,553.00
545.0 50.00 $11.42 $11.42
2.0 50.00 $41.00 $41.00
170.0 $0.00 $59.48 $59.48
40.0 $0.00 $94.65 $94.65
30.0 $0.00 $86.50 $86.50
8.0 $0.00 $15.38 $15.38
8.0 $0.00 $298.13 $298.13
30.0 $0.00 $54.23 $54.23
35.0 $0.00 $38.09 $38.09
35.0 $0.00 $298.31 $298.31
80.0 $0.00 $106.91 $106.91 New
20.0 $0.00 $596.55 $596.55
50.0 $0.00 $42.62 $42.62 New
60.0 50.00 $91.95 $91.95 New
925.0 $0.00 $126.37 $126.37 "
224.0 $28.20 542.67 $14.47 Ord 84-762
New
N
N
N
FACTORS
CONSIDERED
RECOMM FEE. ANNUAL
FEE INC/OEC (-) IMPACT
Cities help us SO
In-house trng SO
100% of Cost S9
Pub info/awareness SO
" SO
" SO
N $0
" SO
N SO
N $0
N SO
Note 1 5100/150
Note 2 S50/100
SO
Public Relations SO
City Use SO
No chg if Emarg 560
" $95
No chg/City cause $87
100% of Cost $15
$300
Bldg Dept Collects SO
" SO
SO
Note 4 $105
" SO
100% Cost to Issue $43
100% of Cost $92
Note 3 $175
100% of Cost $43
SO
SO
S7
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
50
SO
$35/45
S50/100
SO
SO
SO
S60.
$95
$87
$15
$300
SO
SO
SO
$105
SO
543
S92
$175
$15
SO
SO
$182
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
SO
50
$0
$26,606
541,990
SO
SO
SO
$10,200
$3,800
$2,610
$120
$2,400
SO
SO
SO
$2,100
SO
$2,150
$5,520
540,469
$3,315
31 NAZ-NAT STORAGE Naz -Nat Storage Fees 1.0
32 ARSON/FIRE INVEST Investigate Incident 1.0
33 AUTO REP PERMIT New Auto Rep Bus 20.0
34 WOOD SYS IWSP - NEW Restaurant Fire Hoods 1.0
"35 CAPTAIN NRLY RATE 465.0
"36 ENGINEER NRLY RATE 465.0
"37 FIREMAN WRIT RATE 920.0
"38 FF/PARA NRLY RATE 930.0
39 OTNER NON -FEE 1.0
TOTALS
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$0.00
$1,100.00
$903.00
$56.20
$119.00
565.26
$54.92
$41.95
$45.68
$791,444.00
$1,100.00
$903.00
$56.20
$119.00
$65.26
$54.92
$41.95
$45.68
$791,444.00
$30.70 $1,072,076.04 $1,072,045.34
- It marked with an asterisk have been excluded from the fee for service totals.
•- Revenue for this fee area is based on an estimated recoverable volume.
Sae REVENUE/COST COMPARISON sheet for more information.
ew Note S
City Use Only SO SO SO
N 100% of Cost $57 $57 $1,140
Bldg Dept Collects SO SO SO
N
N
N
"These hourly rates are calculated for use in 2nd party response calls and DUI accident response calls.
They can be broken down into per -minute rates as shown below:
Captain per -minute:
Engineer per -minute:
Fireman per -minute:
FF/Para per -minute:
$1.09
$0.92
$0.70
$0.76
$1,081 $1,050 $142,602
ote 1 -$100 for residents, $150 for Non-residents - if paid within 60 days. Goes to $150/$200 if paid after 60 days.
Based on 50/50 Res/non-res rates and 30% collected within 60 days; 70% collected after 60 days
•ote 2 -550 for all if paid within 60 days. Goes to $100 after 60 days. Based on 30% collected within 60 days; 70% collected after 60 days.
+ote 3 - First inspection 5 1 re -inspection per year free; $175 each thereafter. Figures based on 25% of total inspections billable.
+ote 4 - First inspection i 1 re -inspection per year free; $105 each thereafter. Figures based on 25% of total inspections billable.
+ote S - This fee will cover the costs involved in the inspection of the premises, issuance of the permit,
and the costs associated with the administration of the hazardous materials program. Four subcategories will be implemented as follows:
Category I
0-500 gallons
0-5,000 pounds
0-2,000 cubic feet
$100 annual fee
Category II 501-2750 gallons $300 annual fee
5,001-25,000 pounds
2,001-10,000 cubic feet
Category III Over 2,751 gallons $700 annual fee
Over 25,001 pounds
Over 10,001 cubic feet
Category IV Governmental agencies Exempt
Police Department
•• 1
FALSE ALRM RESPONSE
2 ALARM PERMITS
3 JAIL SVCS PROGRAM
4 TRUSTEE ADMIN PROG
S AMPLIFIED SOUND PERK
6 CLEARANCE LETTERS
7. ACC REPT T/C W/INJ
8 ACC REPT T/C NO INJ
9 FINGER PRINT SVC
10 POLICE PHOTOGRAPH
11 INCID REPT PROCESS
12 CRIME REPT MINOR
13 CRIME REPT MAJOR
14 BICYCLE REGISTRATN
IS SPEC EVENT SEC MINOR
16 SPEC EVENT SEC MAJOR
17 VEHICLE INSPECTION
18 VEHICLE TOWING
•••19 DISPATCH HRLY RATE
'•4120 ►SO HOURLY RATE
'•421 SGT HOURLY RATE
OFFICER HRLY RATE
• 23 ALL OTHER NON FEE
...22
City of Hermosa Beach
User Fee Study Summery Sheet
UNIT CURRENT CURRENT CURRENT
VOLUME FEE COST SUBSIDY
Resp to False Alarm 456.0 $100.00 $87.75
Permit/Alarm System 140.0 $10.00 $25.04
"Pay for Stay" Program 144.0 $85.00 $123.86
"Pay for Stay" Crt Ord 1.0 $120.00 $200.00
Permit for Amp Sound 26.0 $30.00 $34.23
Pessprt/Travel Letters 20.0 $26.50 $4.80
Acc w/Inj Report Copy 138.0 $24.00 $17.77
Acc w/o Inj Report Copy 450.0 $24.00 $11.86
Take Prints/Citizen Apps 100.0 $25.00 $11.76
Copies /Police Photos 20.0 $25.00 $6.75
Var Calls for Service 500.0 $24.00 $11.87
Copy of Offense Report 350.0 $24.00 $17.76
" 150.0 $24.00 $17.72
Bicycle Licenses 77.0 .$3.00 $5.99
Security for Fiesta, 18.0 5440.00 $798.78
Filming, etc. 9.0 $448.00 $822.00
Ckg vehicles for Corr 500.0 $6.00 $85.96
Tow veh/Police/Pkg 656.0 $35.00 $34.31
100.0 $22.80 $31.02
500.0 $20.40 $34.90
250.0 $36.60 $63.62
1500.0 $31.80 549.03
1.0 0 $3,676,771
LEGAL FACTORS RECOMM FEE ANNUAL
AUTHORITY CONSIDERED FEE INC/DEC (-) IMPACT
(512.25)Ord 89-984 After 3/yr
$15.04 " 100% of Cost
$38.86 Ord 84-762 100% of Cost
$80.00 N N
$4.23 Ord 88-971
($21.70)CC Act 8/85
($6.23) "
($12.14) " 11
($13.24) " "
($18.25)Dept Policy "
($12.13)Ord 84-762 100% of Cost
($6.24)CC Act 8/85 100% of Cost
($6.28) "
$2.99 "
$358.78 "
$374.00
N
N
N
$79.96 CC Act 8/85 Note 1
($0.69)CC Act 8/85 100% Recovery
$8.22 New
$14.50 "
$27.02 "
$17.23
$3,676,771
TOTALS $1,585.10 $3,679,267.78 $3,677,682.68
• - Items marked with an asterisk have been excluded from the fee for service totals.
•• - Revenue for this fee area is based on an estimated recoverable volume.
See REVENUE/COST COMPARISON sheet for more information.
$100 $0 $0
$30 .S20 $2,800
$125 $40 $5,760
ACTUAL COST SO SO
$35 $5 5130
S5 ($22) ($430)
$18 ($6) ($828)
$12 ($12) ($5,400)
S12 ($13) ($1,300)
S7 ($18) ($360)
S12 ($12) (56,000)
S18 (S6) ($2,100)
$18 ($6) ($900)
$6 $3 $231
ACTUAL COST SO SO
ACTUAL COST SO SO
$6 SO SO
S35 SO SO
$439
($27) ($8,397)
"-
These These hourly rates are currently charged on a per -minute basis. The comparison between
the current per -minute charge and the full cost per -minute charge is as follows:
Current Full Cost
Oispstch per -minute: $0.38 $0.60
ISO per -minute: $0.34 $0.63
Sergeant per -minute: $0.61 $0.95
Officer per -minute: $0.53 $0.78
Mote t -'Fee level is in line with those of neighboring cities.
IP
/v
•
Public Works
1 BANNER PERMIT
2 SYR EXCAV CONSTR
3 STR EXCAV UTIL CO
4 SEWER PERM LATERAL
5. MOO SEVER PERMIT
6 CASH DEP SIDEW PROC
7 LIEN AGR SIDEW PROC
8 LIBRARY GEN MAINT
9 ENCROACH FILING FEE
10 STRAND PERMIT
11 OIJMPSTER DROP
12 SPEC CURB MKG-SURVEY
13 SPEC CURB MKG-INSTAL
14 BEACH VOLLEY CTS
15 COIN OUTS DINE ENCR
16 DIRECTOR HOURLY
17 SUPERINTNT HOURLY
18 CREW CDR HOURLY
19 NAINT II HOURLY
20 NAINT 1 NOURLY
21 SWEEPER HOURLY
22 ALL OTHER NON -FEE
TOTALS
DESCRIPTION
Banner/Non-profit grps
Priv Work/Rt of Way
Utility/Rt of Way
Hookup to City Sewers
Sewer cap inspection
Dep/In lieu of install
To allow for Cash Dep
Library grnds mint
Private use/Rt of Way
Vehicle on Strand
When on Pub Rt of Way
Insp for Loading Zone
Nark Loading Zone
Install Beach Courts
Comm Use/Rt of Way
City of Hermosa Beach
User Fee Study Summery Sheet
UNIT CURRENT CURRENT
VOLUME FEE COST
11.0 $100.00 $183.36
100.0 $50.00 $146.75
288.0 $50.00 5117.07
51.0 $50.00 $151.84
43.0 $40.00 5152.00
4.0 525.00. $74.50
4.0 $25.00 $74.50
1.0 $4,788.00 $6,573.00
10.0 5151.00 5287.40
3.0 $25.00 $20.00
23.0 $25.00 $40.83
1.0 $350.00 $249.00
1.0 5100.00 $172.00
3.0 $0.00 $201.67
4.0 5151.00 5277.75
50.0 $35.70 593.96
50.0 $19.00 564.26
100.0 $19.00 $53.75
100.0 $19.00 $40.95
100.0 $19.00 $31.57
40.0 $19.00 $37.63
1.0 $0.00 51,773,863
CURRENT LEGAL
SUBSIDY AUTHORITY
$83.36 Mena 6/84
$96.75 Ord 84-762
$67.07 Ord 84-762
$101.84 Dept Policy
$112.00 N
$49.50 N
$49.50 Res 82-4499
$1,785.00 Ord 84-762
$136.40 Res 88-5202
(55.00)Res 79-4303
$15.83 Res 79-4304
(S101.00)Ord 84-762
$72.00 N
5201.67 New
$126.75 CC
$58.26
$45.26
$34.75
$21.95
$12.57
$18.63
$1,773,863
$6,060.70 51,782,906.79 51,776,846.09
Act 5/88
New
N
N
N
N
M
FACTORS
CONSIDERED
User should pay,
no direct or
indirect benefit
to Public.
See Number 1
See Number 1
See Number 1
Existing cont.
See Number 1
See Number 1
See Number 1
See Number 1
See Number 1
See Number 1
See Number 1
• • Items marked with en asterisk have been excluded from the fee for service totals.
'• - Current hourly rates are used in billings for public property damage, development review, request for street
vacations, billings to LACPW (storm drain maintenance), and project reimbursement for grants.
+ote 1 - Projects with estimated value over $5,000 will be based on time and material costs.
RECOMM FEE ANNUAL
FEE INC/DECR (-) IMPACT
$185 $85 $935
Note 1 $145 $95 $9,500
$115 $65 $18,720
$150 $100 $5,100
$150 $110 $4,730
$75 $50 $200
$75 $50 $200
54,788 SO SO
$285 $134 $1,340
$20 ($5) ($15)
$40 $15 $345
$250 ($100) (5100)
$170 $70 $70
$200 $200 5600
$280 $129 $516
56,928
$998 542,141
USER FEE COMPARISON CHARTS
PLANNING
EIR Report
HERMOSA 1 MANHATTAN
t BEACH + BEACH
230.00 1 358.00
,
320.00 ;
41.
320.00 1
--I
,
320.00 ;
225.00 1
,
125.00 ;
Variance
Minor
Lot Line
Adjustment
Exc to Non -con.
Ord.
Tent Parcel/
Tract Maes
1
r r r
TORRANCE EL SEGUNDO HAWTHORNE I
37.00 , 110.00 ,
750.00 ; 3,605.00 ; + 300.00 1
10 .00 for Ne:.Dec.'
•75.00
935.00 ; 1,502.00
1.835.00 ;
375.00
520.00 ; 1,502.00
1.020.00
689.00 ; 1,000.00
204.00
REDONDO
BEACH
585.00
535.00
Final Maps
386.00
413.00
198.00
1,000.00
Zone Change
,
450.00 ;
,
f
Lot Split ; 450.00 1
689.00 1 1,000.00
675.00
935.00
1 8 .00
935.00
1,320.00
3.060.00
1,502.00
880.00
2,198.00 880.00
689.00 1 900.00
1,502.00
675.00
Cond. Use Per. 1 320.001 689.00 ; 1,000.00 935.00 1 1,502.00 ; 730.00
(Amendment) + 338.00 4 1,832:22_4
CUP Condo per 1 320.00 1 ; ; 1,819 Base 1 935.00.
Unit 4+ 160.004
+ 150.00 ; • 470.00
Gen. Plan Amend; 450.00 1 689.00 1 750.00 1 1 2,158.00 1
,
1
Parking Plan 1 320.00 1
Development
Agreements
Plan.Comm.
Appeal
11,500.00
} Deposit
1 348.50
1,235.00
1,170.00
274.00
80.00
170.00 1 3/4 of
235.00 1 original
460.00 1 fee
Zoning
Ordinance
}
16.00 1
Planned Dev. 1 320.00 1 689.00 ; 1 1,170.00
Permit (Amend.); 1 204.00 1 ' '
USER FEE COMPARISON CHARTS
HERMOSA MANHATTAN
BUILDING FEES ; BEACH BEACH
REDONDO
TORRANCE BEACH
Building Permits; 735.25 484.70
($50,000 project)
395.00
756.46
Plan Check Fee i 477.91
($50,000 project)
484.70 405.00
393.36
Elec. Permits
Redondo Beach goes by sq. ft., Torrance &
M.B. by outlets. Our is by branch circuits
- No viable comparison
Plmbg. Permits
8.00
3.30
8.76
Mech. Permits ; 12.00
(per furnace)
8.80
13.14
RBR ; 40.00
45.00
/3-
• USER FEE COMPARISON CHARTS
FIRE
HERMOSA
BEACH
MANHATTAN
BEACH
REDONDO
TORRANCE EL SEGUNDO BEACH
Paramedic trans.; 100.00
150.00
Open fire permit 43.00
Sprinkler Cert. ; 92.00
test
100.00 Res.
150.00 Non
35.00
57.00
+.50/per head
115.00
+1.00/head
Comm.Bldg./Apt.
Insp.
175.00
after 2
S.F.
300.00<15000
625.00>15000
50.00 1st
50.00 2nd
200.00 3rd
<15000 sq.ft.
35.00
Fumigation
permit
Spray booth
permit
Auto repair
Fire reports
43.00
315.00
57.00
9.00
28.00
57.00
28.00
10.00
96.00
113.00
35.00
70.00
70.00
5.00
USER FEE COMPARISON CHARTS
j HERMOSA MANHATTAN
POLICE
Clearance letter
BEACH BEACH
5.00 ; 12.00
REDONDO
EL SEGUNDO BEACH
35.00
T
Accident report
18.00 1 12.00
59.00 i 32.00
T
Fingerprint 12.00
r
Photographs i 7.00
12.00
10.00
+.10 card
10.00
12.00 5.00
18.00
Alarm permit
30.00
256.00 Bus.
128.00 Res.
25.00
False alarm ; 100.00
. response }after 3rd
Vehicle insp.* 1 6.00
100.00
after 3rd
5.00
4.00 -0-
*Hawthorne, Torrance do not charge
USER FEE COMPARISON CHARTS
PUBLIC WORKS
Banner permit
HERMOSA ; MANHATTAN i REDONDO
BEACH } BEACH. EL SEGUNDO 4 BEACH
185.00 i 74.70 ; 80.00
St. Excay.
145.00
33.85
140.00
+ actual
cost of insp
40.00
Strand Permit
Dumpster drop
20.00
33.85
40.00 i 50.00
80.00
l
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. 90 -
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA BEACH, CALIFORNIA,
AMENDING ARTICLE XIII OF THE HERMOSA BEACH CITY CODE
RELATED TO FEES AND SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE/COST COMPAR-
ISON SYSTEM.
WHEREAS, the City has conducted a general review of its user
fees and cost allocations as part of a study performed by David
M. Griffith Associates; and
WHEREAS, the purpose of this review is to update fees and
charges and clarify the procedure by which fees and charges are
kept current, to allow more frequent and routine updating; and
WHEREAS, the procedure developed in 1984 during the last
general update has not proven to be a clear or efficient method
to keep fees and charges updated; and
WHEREAS, fees and charges are typically established by or-
dinance but set by resolution, where they can be consolidated for
easier reference and updating;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA
BEACH, CALIFORNIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:.
SECTION 1. Article XIII of the Hermosa Beach City Code is
hereby amended by deleting in their entirety Sections 2-110, 2-
112, 2-113, and 2-114; by amending Sections 2-109 and 2-115; by
adding a new Section 2-111, and by renumbering sections so that
Article XIII is amended to read as follows:
"ARTICLE XIII. FEE AND SERVICE CHARGE REVENUE/COST
COMPARISON SYSTEM.
Sec. 2-109. Intent.
Pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, it
is the intent of the city council to require the ascertainment
and recovery of costs reasonably borne from fees and charges
/7
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
levied therefor in providing the regulation, products or
services.
Sec. 2-110. "Costs reasonably borne" defined.
"Costs reasonably borne," as used and ordered to be applied
in this article are to consist of the following elements:
(a) All applicable direct costs including, but not limited
to salaries, wages, fringe benefits, services and
supplies, operations expenses, contracted services, spe-
cial supplies, and any other direct expense incurred.
(b) All applicable indirect costs including, but not re-
stricted to, building maintenance and operations, equip-
ment maintenance, communication, printing and reproduc-
tion, and like distributed expenses.
(c) Fixed assets recovery expenses, consisting of deprecia-
tion on fixed assets, and additional charges, calculated
on the current estimated cost of replacement, divided by
the approximate life expectancy of the fixed asset. A
further additional charge to make up the depreciation
not previously recovered and reserved in cash also shall
be calculated so as to recover such unrecovered
depreciation over the remaining life of the asset.
(d) General overhead, expressed as a percentage, distribut-
ing and charging the expenses of the city council, city
manager, finance department, city treasurer, city clerk,
city attorney's office, community promotion, personnel
office, and all other staff and support services.
(e) Departmental overhead, expressed as a percentage, dis-
tributing and charging the cost of each department head
and his or her supporting expenses.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Sec. 2-111. Schedule of Fess and Service Charges.
Fees and service charges shall be set and adjusted by
resolution of the City Council following a public report and
recommendation from City staff reflecting the cost reasonably
borne and the recommended percentage of recovery, except that the
City Manager is hereby empowered to set a fee for service
requests, not subject to Section 54990 et. seq. of the California
Government Code, when no fee has otherwise been established, and
the request cannot be met unless the City incurs costs that can
be reasonably borne from fees and charges. Fees specified in
Sections 54990 and 54991 of the California Government Code shall
be effective only after meeting the requirements set forth in
Section 54993.
Sec. 2-112. Appeal to city council.
Any person who feels that any fee or charge is in excess of
the percentage of costs reasonably borne to be recovered, or is
inappropriately set, may appeal in writing to the city council.
SECTION 2. This ordinance shall become effective and be in
full force and effect from and after thirty (30) days of its
final passage and adoption.
SECTION 3. Prior to the expiration of fifteen (15) days
after the date of its adoption, the City Clerk shall cause this
ordinance to be published in the Easy Reader, a weekly newspaper
of general circulation published and circulated in the City of
Hermosa Beach, in the manner provided by law.
SECTION 4. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and
adoption of this ordinance, shall enter the same in the book of
original ordinances of said city, and shall make minutes of the
/9
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
passage and adoption thereof in the records of the proceedings of
the City Council at which the same is passed and adopted.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this
1990.
day of
PRESIDENT of the City Council, and.
MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
NOTE: To be added - Sections of City Code that must be amended
to remove actual fee amounts or inappropriate code
references and replace with clauses that indicates fees
are to be set by resolution -
HBCC Sec. 4-4, non -household pets permit
4-11, dog and other licenses
4-18, animal redemption fees
4-40, cat licenses
7-4.3, mechanical permit fee
17-55.14, alarm system fees
19.5-21, noise permit
29.5-12, tentative maps
� U
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION NO. 90 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HERMOSA
BEACH, CALIFORNIA ESTABLISHING A MASTER SCHEDULE OF SERVICE
CHARGES AND FEES
WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XIIIB of the Constitution of the
State of California, it is the intent of the City Council of the
City of Hermosa Beach to ascertain and recover costs reasonably
borne from fees and charges levied therefore in providing certain
City regulation, products or services; and
WHEREAS, in furtherance of this objective the Hermosa Beach
City Council authorized a study in 1990 by David M. Griffith and
Associates and City staff to review the City's revenue structure
and costs related to non -tax supported services to the public;
and
WHEREAS, such study was completed pursuant to the
requirements of Article XIIIB Section B (6), and found that
revenue from fees and charges for certain services benefiting
only portions of the general taxpaying public, or which are used
in varying amounts by rate payers, were inadequate to avoid being
subsidized by the general tax paying public, and in a few cases
were higher than appropriate; and
WHEREAS, increases in service fees and charges will in many
cases cause the services to be self-supporting, thereby freeing
much needed tax revenue to provide services to our citizens at
large; and
WHEREAS, it is organizationally beneficial to consolidate as
many fees and charges as reasonable into one resolution for, easy
reference and updating; and
02/
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
WHEREAS, notice and public hearing requirements for fees
subject to Government Section 54992 have been met prior to
passage of this resolution;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the
City of Hermosa Beach that a master schedule of service fees and
charges for services performed by City Departments shall be as
set forth below:
SECTION 1. BUILDING AND SAFETY
2. FIRE
3. PLANNING
4. POLICE
5. PUBLIC WORKS
6. RECREATION AND PARKS
7. MISCELLANEOUS FEES
8. All fees and charges specified in this resolution
shall be administratively adjusted annually on
September 1 of each year up a maximum percentage of
the lower of the following:
a. the percentage increase in the City's General
Fund operating appropriations over the prior
fiscal year, or
b. the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index
for all urban consumers, Los Angeles/Long Beach
area, all items, for the twelve months ending the
prior May of the same calendar year.
9. All portions of prior resolutions conflicting with
this resolution are hereby superseded.
fc
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10�
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
10. This resolution, following its adoption by the City
Council, shall take effect upon the effectiveness of
its companion ordinance on the same subject, or
January 1, 1991, whichever is later.
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED this
1990.
day of
PRESIDENT of the City Council, and
MAYOR of the City of Hermosa Beach, California
ATTEST:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
CITY CLERK
CITY ATTORNEY
October 25, 1990
Honorable Mayor and Members Special Meeting of
of the City Council October 30, 1990
LOGAN COTTON BASKETBALL COURTS
Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission
Recommendation
The Parks, Recreation and Community Resources Commission
recommends that Council deny this request.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that Council approves naming the soon to be
constructed basketball courts at Clark Field the "Logan Cotton
Basketball Courts."
BACKGROUND
At the September Parks, Recreation. and Community Resources
Commission meeting, the City Manager relayed a citizen's request
to consider naming a park or recreation facility in honor of long
time community activist, Logan Cotton as part of a special
celebration honoring his 90th birthday on November 2nd. The
Commission suggested that the City's new basketball courts at
Clark Field might be a possibility.
Atthe October meeting, the Commission voted not to support the
idea of naming the courts after Cotton adding that they did not
want to name any public areas after individuals.
ANALYSIS
While the Commission was not in favor of naming the courts in
honor of Logan Cotton, they wanted Council to be aware that this
recommendation was in no way a reflection on the merits of Mr.
Cotton; rather that the Commission feels they do not want to name
future recreation facilities and/or parks after people. This
sentiment was in line with the Commission's previous
recommendation regarding Edith Rodaway Friendship Park. The
Commission wanted to emphasize that they thought honoring Logan
Cotton in some fashion in the City was a positive idea.
Staff submits that since the courts are projected to be completed
in the near future and since the courts would not necessarily be
named for any other purpose, this selection seems both timely and
relatively non -controversial. Logan Cotton is deserving of
recognition in Hermosa Beach (see attached biography) and has by
virtue of his membership in the Elks, Shrine, Salvation Army,
Kiwanis and Cal -State Dominguez Hills Advisory Commission, been
active in youth related projects throughout the years, making the
selection of a sports facility particularly relevant. Because of
the location of the courts at the park, it also ties Mr. Cotton
2
to the park and building built during the 1930's, when he served
on the Hermosa Beach City Council.
Naming the courts after Mr. Cotton would heighten the excitement
of ribbon -cutting next year and would add a special community
spirit to our newest recreation facility.
Other alternatives available to Council include:
1. Deny the request.
2. Select another park or recreation facility to be named
after Logan Cotton.
3. Select a City street or building to be named after
Cotton.
4. Dedicate a plaque at City Hall in his honor.
Concur:
4
Kevin B: Northc aft
City Manager
Respectfully Submitted,
Mary C. ooney, Director
Dep . of Community Resources
LOGAN R. COTTCN
1930 Elected to City Council, Hermosa Beach
1932-34 Mayor of Hermosa Beach
1932 Served on Olympic Committee
1936 Presented an award from Governor Frank Merriman for community
service to City and State
1936 General chairman, International sports regatta, aquaplane
races from Catalina to South Bay.
1936 Patron Playa Linda Chapter, Eastern Star
1940's Received citation from Secretary of State for active
participation in war bond drive in the State
1942 Elected to office; elected Exalted Ruler of Elks
1942 Elected Lt. Governor of Kiwanis, 1st District, L.A. County
1946 Chairman 65th District Republican County Central
1945 Elected Grand Patron, Order of Eastern Star, State of
California
1950's Appointed General Chairman of the All Year Club of Southern
California
1954 Appointed by County Supervisor to the Economy and Efficiency
Committee to study the County government
1954 Elected Governor, California, Nevada, Hawaii District of
Kiwanis International
Awards - Highlights of Others
1960's Chairman, Public and Business Committee of Kiwanis International
for United States
1964
Selected asone of 50 people in U.S. to make an inspection
trip with rRadio Free Europe, Re the iron curtain countries
1965 Assists ormation of Round Table
1970's
Past President of Redondo Beach Round Table
LOGAN R. COTTON
page 2
1975 Received Citizen of Year award
1980's
Past President of South Bay Chapter City of Hope
Past President Royal Order of Scotland
Past President South Bay Shrine Club •
Past President Hermosa Beach Kiwanis Club
- Chairman International Surf Festival - Five years
- Received the "Others" award from the Salvation Army
- Aide to the potentate of Al Malaikah Temple
- Appointed to Advisory Comittee, California State University
Dominguez Hills; also a member of their Foundation Committee
- Graduate U.S.C. - Life member of alumni
- Served Board of Trustees, St. Andrews Presbyterian Church
- Taught accounting and economics at Loyola University
- Past President of Salvation Army Board
- Recipient of awards from United States Junior Chamber of
Commerce and State of California for outstanding public
service
- Traveled extensively in Europe and South East Asia
- President of South Bay Hospital Cancer Foundation
- A teacher -mentor fcr co-workers and new businessmen
- A trusted counselor for older citizens in the area
- A man who has done a number of special things for others without
wanting recognition and reward