HomeMy WebLinkAbout101-Proposed Fee Schedule Update Report.pdf
SARATOGA CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: April 20, 2011 AGENDA ITEM: DEPARTMENT: Finance & Admin Services CITY MANAGER: Dave Anderson PREPARED BY: Mary Furey, Kate Bear, and DIRECTOR: Mary
Furey Michael Taylor SUBJECT: Proposed Fee Schedule Update for FY 2011/12 RECOMMENDED ACTION: Hold public hearing to review recommendations for proposed fee changes, provide direction,
and approve resolution amending the City’s Fee Schedule effective for Fiscal Year 2011/12. REPORT SUMMARY: The City Council annually holds a public hearing to review recommendations
and provide the community an opportunity for input on proposed changes to the City’s Fee Schedule per California Government Code Section 66018: Prior to adopting an ordinance, resolution,
or other legislative enactment adopting a new fee or approving an increase in an existing fee to which this section applies, a local agency shall hold a public hearing, at which oral
or written presentations can be made, as part of a regularly scheduled meeting. After holding the public hearing the Council will consider adopting a resolution which approves fee changes
to be incorporated into the FY 2011/12 Fee Schedule. Upon Council approval of fee changes and adoption of the “Resolution of the City Council of the City of Saratoga Establishing a Schedule
of Fees”, staff will publish the updated Fee Schedule to be effective July 1, 2011. Each year, fee adjustment recommendations result from staff’s review of current fees, and from new
or amended services. Proposed fee updates are based on the actual cost to provide a service or use, with consideration given to align the City’s fees with market rates and comparable
services and rentals in other cities. With the passage of Proposition 26 in November, 2010, new fees must fall under one of seven exemptions to ensure the new charges fall within the
definition of a legitimate fee rather than a tax. These exceptions include: 1. The Special Benefit or Privilege Exception – fees which provides a special benefit or directly grants the
person paying the fee some privilege. Examples include planning permits and noise permits. 2. The Government Service or Product Exception – fees imposed for a specific service or product
provided to the person paying the fee. Examples include park and recreation classes.
3. The Licenses and Permits Exceptions – fees imposed for issuing licenses and permits, and the costs of administering enforcement of licenses and permits. Examples include health and
safety permits, background checks, and regulated businesses. 4. The Local Government Property Exception -fees charged for the use of/entry to local government property. Examples include
facility rentals, equipment rental fees, and park fees. 5. The Fines and Penalties Exception – fines and penalties imposed for violation of the law are not taxes. Examples include parking
fines, code enforcement fines, and late penalties. 6. The Property Development Exception – fees imposed as a condition of property development is not a tax. Examples are development
impact fees, grading permit fees, and development mitigation fees. 7. The Proposition 218 Exception – property assessment and property-related fees that are already subject to the approval
requirements of Proposition 218. Examples include water and sewer rates and special district assessments. This year’s fee schedule update was vetted to ensure any new fees comply with
Proposition 26. Recommendations are limited to amending the Community Development Department’s tree removal permit and appeal fees, and several of the Recreation and Facility Departments
facility rental fees. Tree Removal Permit Fees At the City Council Retreat in January, 2011, Council requested staff look at both Tree Removal Permits and Tree Removal Permit Appeal
fees to determine whether the fees charged were appropriate. In Saratoga, Tree Removal Permits are required for all trees that measure ten inches or more in diameter and for some native
species, six inches in diameter (includes several oak species, redwoods, Douglas firs, big leaf maple, and California buckeye). Trees that are smaller than these sizes are not protected
by City Code and the owners may remove them without a permit. During the month of February, staff time spent processing Tree Removal Permit applications was documented and summarized.
A total total of 25 permit applications were received and processed during the tracking period. The permits were categorized by the number of trees reviewed in the application, as shown
in the schedule below: Number of trees to review Number of permits % of permits (of 25 total) 1 11 44% 2 8 32% 3 5 20% 4+ 1 4% Time documentation showed that the average amount of time
spent on a permit was 71 minutes and is broken down into the following individual tasks (averaged): 1. 10 minutes – to take the application and fee in, enter it into a database, and
provide a receipt to the customer. 2. 34 minutes – to inspect the tree(s) on the application, meet and talk with the owner of the trees, answer phone calls and emails with questions
from the owner(s) about the process or the status, or to request additional information to approve/deny the permit.
3. 27 minutes – to prepare and mail notices to neighbors, mail approved permits to residents, update the database with approval and expiration dates, conditions required, attach the
permit, notice and other information relevant to the application, and scanned and attached to the database. Denied Tree Removal Permits do not receive a refund as an application fee
is collected to reimburse the City for staff time required to review a permit application; the fee is not for the purchase of a permit. For FY 2011/12, the billing rate for the City’s
Arborist is $103.85 per hour. At an average of 71 minutes spent on each permit, the issuance of a Tree Removal Permit is therefore calculated to cost $122.89 of staff time. Additionally,
City code requires a notice of the application be mailed to neighbors within 150 feet radius of the tree to be removed, (15 neighbors on average) which between materials and postage
runs approximately $7.92 per permit. Together, these costs total $130.81 per permit. As shown in the chart on the preceding page, 44% of tree removal applications are requests to remove
one tree. Looking at comparable city information in the chart below, Tree Removal Permit fees vary greatly; in both the fees charged, and the structure of the fee. Saratoga has the lowest
fee for unlimited trees per permit; only Los Altos is lower if the permit is for a single tree removal. As it generally does not take longer to inspect a larger tree than a smaller tree,
size is not a cost factor in the permit fee. City Removal Permit # of Trees Saratoga $100 Unlimited Los Gatos $130 $65 1st Tree Each addt’l Cupertino $160 $81 1st Tree Each addt’l Campbell
$150 $50 1st Tree Each addt’l Mt. View $116 Unlimited Sunnyvale $244 Unlimited Palo Alto $314 Unlimited Los Altos $50 Per Tree In constructing this study, staff determined that on average,
the time required to review additional trees in a permit is negligible and would not warrant an additional fee. It was also determined that establishing lower fees for dead trees versus
live trees would not be defensible as the permit process is the same. Furthermore, it would be problematic as applicants often are not accurate in their determination of when a tree
is dead, which may lead to additional staff time for discussion, particularly with an incentive to obtain a lower cost permit. Staff reports that many applicants contend the $100 Tree
Removal Permit application fee is too high; however, due to the number of tree removal applications the City processes each year (typically about 400), an increase in the Tree Removal
Permit fee to $125 is warranted to more accurately recover costs as the overall $10,000 subsidy by the City is substantial.
Tree Removal Permit Appeals For the last several years, an average of one Tree Removal Permit is appealed per year; typically by the owner of the tree when denied approval. The appeal
of the administrative decision to the Planning Commission requires the appellant to file a notice, together with the appeal fee payment, within 10 days after the administrative decision
has been made. The appeal is then scheduled for a Planning Commission meeting and published in the newspaper. In addition, notices of the appeal are sent to neighbors within 150 feet
radius of the tree approved for removal. Only one tree removal permit was appealed in recent months (December, 2010), and as it was a typical appeal, the total time spent by staff on
this appeal is documented for Council review below. The appeal took a total of 7.75 hours, and is broken down into the following eight individual tasks: 1. 70 minutes – for correspondence
with the appellant and his neighbor by phone and email. 2. 90 minutes – to prepare the staff report. 3. 60 minutes – to prepare a Planning Commission resolution. 4. 45 minutes – to prepare
public notices, mailings, and placement of ad in the paper 5. 45 minutes – for the site visit and to calculate the appraised value of the tree. 6. 45 minutes – for the Planning Commission
site visit. 7. 50 minutes – for the Planning Commission hearing. 8. 60 minutes – to rewrite the resolution to adhere to the Planning Commission’s determination. At the City’s Arborist
billing rate of $103.85 per hour, the 7.75 staff hours is calculated to cost $804.84 of staff time. Additionally, reviewing an appeal takes Planning Commissioner and administrative staff
time; as well as direct costs for placing the hearing notice in the paper, mailings, and site visits. Simply adding the clearly defensible $7.92 for materials and postage costs would
bring the Planning Commission appeal cost to $812.76. As shown in the following chart, the City’s current fee charged for the tree removal permit appeal to the Planning Commission is
far less than actual costs incurred, although higher than most of the neighboring cities listed below. City Appeal Fee Appeal Board (s) Appeal Process Saratoga $500 $600 Planning Commission
City Council 1st appeal to Planning Commission Final appeal to City Council Los Gatos $65 $321 Planning Commission Town Council 1st appeal to Planning Commission Final appeal to City
Council Cupertino $162 City Council Appeal to City Council only Campbell $200 $200 Planning Commission City Council 1st appeal to Planning Commission Final appeal to City Council Mt.
View $50 Urban Forestry Board (Under Park and Rec Commission) Appeal to Urban Forestry Board only Sunnyvale $150 Planning Commission Appeal to Planning Commission only Palo Alto $213
Planning and Transportation Board Appeal to Planning and Transpor-tation Board only. Los Altos $550 $1650 City Council Appeal to City Council only Appeal at higher fee if other than
owner or neighbor
These costs are again duplicated if the appellant decides to bring the appeal to the City Council. A staff report must be produced, the appeal is published in the newspaper, mailings
are sent out (this time to a 500 foot radius), and additional site visit by City Council Members may be required. In FY 2007/08, as a result of increasing numbers of appeals and an increase
in the use of staff time to address the appeals, the City Council voted to increase appeal fees: from $250 to $400 for development project appeals, and from $250 to $600 for appeals
to the City Council. Tree Removal Appeal fees were already established at $500 and not adjusted by Council at that time. The appeal increases were adopted to ensure an appellant had
pursued other available avenues prior to filing an appeal to a City body in an effort to make best use of staff time. It had become apparent that a lower fee was not a deterrent. With
the higher appeal fee, the majority of the cost of the appeal is borne by the appellant. While an increase in the appeal fees would more accurately recover costs of the appeal process,
the higher fees have reduced the number of appeals to a manageable level and resulted in a lower cost to the City overall. Staff recommends Council concur with the prior Council’s decision
to establish the appeal fee at the current level as it maintains a balance between cost recovery and a resident’s financial feasibility to appeal a decision. Facility Rental Fees The
Recreation and Facility Department is recommending several new and increased rental fees: to establish fees for new rental facilities and equipment; and to increase rental fees to either
align with other City facilities or more accurately compensate the City for the construction and maintenance of its parks, facilities, and equipment. Azule Park Petanque Court ($10 per
hour/$15 non-resident) -NEW rental fee for reserved use of the new Petanque Courts at Azule Park. Blaney Plaza Rental ($200 per day) -NEW rental fee for reserved group usage provides
increased oversight of City property; reflects additional staff time used in the orientation and training for use of the plaza; and for the preparation and cleaning of facilities. Audio/Visual
Equipment Rental ($45 per day) -NEW rental fee provides increased oversight of the use of City property and reflects additional staff time used in orientation and training for use of
equipment as well as provides a mechanism to fund replacement. Recreation Portable ($55 per hour) – NEW rental fee for use of portable meeting rooms is comparable with rental fees charged
by the City for similar facilities. Wildwood Park Stage ($50 resident/$60 non-resident per use) – INCREASE in rental fee from $45/$55 brings the fee in line with the other fees charged
for park reservations. Friendship Hall ($150 per hour) – INCREASE in rental fee from $120 per hour to better reflect demand and actual depreciation of property. Of the 12 area cities
surveyed, the average rental fee for a comparable facility was $217 per hour.
Warner Hutton House ($130 an hour) – INCREASE in rental fee from $115 per hour to better reflect demand and actual depreciation of property. Of the 12 area cities surveyed, the average
rental fee for a comparable facility was $161 per hour. With the resident and non-profit discounts, the above rental fee increases will have minimal impact on local renters. FISCAL IMPACTS
Staff reviewed current fees and associated expenditures, and concluded that the proposed revisions to the Fee Schedule are necessary for the City to maintain its approach toward a cost
recovery position. Additionally, the Staff Billing Rate Schedule is updated each year in conjunction with increases in labor and benefit costs. The recommended fee increases are directly
related to costs that: support related functions; reflect an assessment of the time spent providing the service; or reflect comparable rental rates. Staff has maintained proper documentations
to support and justify the proposed new fees. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT FOLLOWING RECOMMENDED ACTION The Council would not direct staff on fees established for Tree Removal Permits and Tree
Removal Permit Appeals, and the City would not establish revised fees as recommended for the various park and facility rental fees. ALTERNATIVE ACTION N/A FOLLOW UP ACTION Staff will
update the current Fee Schedule for FY 2011/12, to be effective July 1st, 2011. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT April 5, 2011 – Notice of Public Hearing Published April 20,
2011 – Council to hold a Public Hearing and consider adoption of the Fee Schedule Resolution July 1, 2011 – Effective date for the FY 2011/12 Fee Schedule ATTACHMENTS 1. Proposed FY
2011/12 Fee Schedule Resolution 2. Proposed FY 2011/12 Fee Schedule
RESOLUTION NO.2011-RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SARATOGA ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE OF FEES WHEREAS, the City Council annually adopts a resolution that establishes the
fee schedule for the ensuing fiscal year, NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Saratoga hereby resolves as follows: Section 1: The fees set forth in the Annual Fee Schedule
are hereby established pursuant to the Saratoga City Code and shall be paid to or collected by the City for each of the applications, permits, extensions, renewals, services or other
matters enumerated therein. No application shall be deemed filed or complete until all required fees have been paid in full to the City. Section 2: Resolution Number 2010-019 and all
amendments thereto are hereby repealed in their entirety, it being the intent of the City Council that the fee schedule adopted by this resolution shall supersede all prior schedules
pertaining to the same subject matter. Section 3: This resolution shall become effective on July 1, 2011, and shall be applicable to all fees and deposits which are payable to the City
from and after the effective date hereof. The above and foregoing resolution was passed and adopted at a regular meeting of the Saratoga City Council held on the 20th day of April, 2011,
by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: Howard A. Miller, Mayor Attest Ann Sullivan, City Clerk