HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 1996 1016 CC REG ITEM 07R;% 07*
o ,
CITY OF MOORPARK
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Donald P. Reynolds Jr., Administrative Services Manager
DATE: October 10, 1996
SUBJECT: Consider Setting a Hearing Date of November 6, 1996, for Revisions to the
City's Land Use Development Fees
On January 21, 1991, the Council directed staff to return each year to consider revisions
to the Land Use Development Fee Schedule to become effective in January of each year.
Government Code 66016 requires a sixty day waiting period prior to implementing any
revisions to the fee schedule. This matter is now being requested for a scheduled
hearing on November 6, 1996, to become effective January 6, 1997. In a preliminary
review, staff is requesting between 2.5 percent and .7 percent increase to the fee,
increasing it from $84 to $85 or $86 per hour. Additional revisions are recommended in
this report, requesting reconsideration April 1, 1997, establishing a slightly different
approach to the methodology and incorporating audited actual figures from the prior year,
to re- establish a pattern of adjusting fees concurrent with the adoption of the City's
budget.
Between 1984 and 1989, the City's cost per hour for Planning Fees was established at
$45. In 1989, the fee was increased to $69, and subsequent revisions over the past five
years have amounted to the current rate of $84 per hour.
In 1991, the City adopted a methodology provided by a consultant which helped to
validate the City's calculations of cost, consistent with the procedures used by the federal
government and other public entities. This methodology has been followed by the City,
and includes four cost areas: Direct Costs; Indirect Costs; General Overhead; and, Use
Allowance. To arrive at these costs, staff uses budget figures, and also compares the
proposed costs from the prior year to the actual audited costs, to assure that prior year
adjustments are made if necessary. In the past, no prior adjustments have been
recommended, as the cost of the department typically exceeds the revenue from the
fees. Changes which have evolved from the cost analysis are then incorporated in the
fee schedule by applying the percentage difference between the two fee rates.
000139
The fee schedule is also evaluated each year. Several new permit types and deposit
types have either been added, adjusted or changed based upon the evaluation. These
evaluations are the result of a time tracking system, which provides the data needed to
check current deposit amounts against the actual time spent on various permits.
Last year, staff identified a possible shortcoming in the budget process, and had originally
recommended an increase of 14 percent, increasing the rate from $79 per hour to $90 per
hour. At the November 1 hearing, staff addressed how the indirect costs associated with
the Finance Department, City Clerk and Receptionist may be proportionately too high,
and thus be the cause of the escalating rate, which is far above the cost of living
increase. It was observed that even though the number of staff positions decreased from
nine to six, that these support positions remained at the same level, and perhaps should
have been reconsidered. Staff advised the Council that if a hypothetical adjustment was
made to reflect this change, reducing the funding from Community Development fees to
support these positions from 30 percent to ten percent, the fee rate would only increase
from $79 per hour to $84 per hour, or six percent.
At that meeting, staff was directed to review the allocation of the support positions in
Finance, City Clerk and Receptionist offices, to verify if they matched the proportion of
cost shared by Community Development. Staff completed a preliminary study in March
1996, which by analyzing the amount of work completed by the Finance Department for
Community Development, recommends a reduction from 30 percent to 10 percent of staff
costs. Other assumptions regarding the City Clerk's office and the Receptionist were
made involving the implementation of a voice mail system, and the addition of a full -time
records clerk in the City Clerk's office. Both the City Clerk's department and the
Receptionist were recommended in this March report to be reduced as well from 30 to 10
percent.
Since the changes to the staff allocations related to indirect costs did not occur, staff
proposes that the City address the methodology and the Community Development
Department's budget concurrently with the draft budget in the spring of 1997. An
increase to the fee of 2.5 percent is being considered at this time, due to the salary
increase effective July 1, 1996, of the same amount.
The justification of a blanket 2.5 percent increase at this time is still being reviewed. The
direct costs equal 48 percent of the total costs. Of the direct costs, only a portion is
attributable to salary, and the balance is attributable to benefits. Although the City's
benefits increased for a full family, the rate for just the employee decreased. There are
more single family coverages in the Direct costs than full family coverages, so the net
impact to benefits was actually a reduction of $259 (A percent) compared to last year.
This off -set reduced the impact of the salary increase from 2.5 percent to 1.4 percent.
2
0001.40
r
Taking half (48 percent rounded to 50 percent) leaves an increase attributable to the
entire fee rate of only .7 percent. Salaries are part of the indirect and general overhead
costs as well, and when the staff report is prepared for the next Council meeting, staff will
have completed the study.
At this time, it is estimated that the increase may be as high as 2.5 percent, (from $84 to
$86.10 rounded to $86), but most likely will be closer to but no less than .7 percent,
($84.58, rounded up to $85).
That the City Council set a date of November 6, 1996, to consider revising the current
Land Use Development Fee Schedule.
3
000141