User Fee Study Report 2023 — Atherton City Council, December 6, 2023

Town of Atherton,
California
User Fee Study Results
December 2023
Capital Accounting Partners, LLC
3570 Buena Vista Drive
Sacramento, CA 95864
Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners
Table of Contents
Project Scope ..............................................................................................................................................................................3 Summary of Costing Methodologies – User Fee Study .............................................................................................4 Assuring Quality Results ....................................................................................................................................................6 User Fee Study Results............................................................................................................................................................8 Report Structure....................................................................................................................................................................8 Summary of Results..................................................................................................................................................................9 Development Services ........................................................................................................................................................9 Public Safety – Police Fees............................................................................................................................................. 16 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................................................ 16 Comparison Study.................................................................................................................................................................. 18 Comparison of Development Services Fees............................................................................................................ 20 Staff Productive Hourly Rates............................................................................................................................................ 23 Observations and Recommendations ............................................................................................................................ 25 Appendices ............................................................................................................................................................................... 26 Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners
Table of Figures
Figure 1 Hypothetical Example of a Planning Fee Calculation..............................................................................6 Figure 2 Calculating Quality ..................................................................................................................................7 Figure 3 Development Services Cost Recovery.....................................................................................................9 Figure 4 Revenue Requirements to Fulfill Town and Contractor Needs ............................................................10 Figure 5 Revenue Requirements By Fee Type ....................................................................................................10 Figure 6 Current Fee Calculation for a 10,000 SF Custom Home........................................................................11 Figure 7 Prosed Fee Calculation for a 10,000 SF Custom home .........................................................................11 Figure 8 Valuation Fee Table ..............................................................................................................................12 Figure 9 Net Planning Fee Revenue....................................................................................................................14 Figure 10 Total Cost Recovery from Engineering Fees .......................................................................................15 Figure 11 Annual Revenue Impacts for Police Fees............................................................................................16 Figure 12 Recreation Cost Recovery ...................................................................................................................17 Figure 13 Results of Comparison Study ..............................................................................................................19 Figure 14 Comparison of Selected Building Fees................................................................................................20 Figure 15 Comparison of a Custom Home..........................................................................................................21 Figure 16 Planning Comparison Graphic.............................................................................................................22 Figure 17 Engineering Fees Comparison.............................................................................................................22 Figure 18 Productive Hourly Rates .....................................................................................................................24 Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 3 ends

PROJECT SCOPE
The Town of Atherton engaged Capital Accounting Partners (CAP) to provide a comprehensive User Fee study. This project was in conjunction with preparing a Full Cost, Indirect Cost Allocation Plan. These projects aim to calculate the full cost of providing various Town fee-based services. By full cost, we mean:
• An allocated portion of Citywide indirect costs.
• An allocated portion of departmental administrative costs, where appropriate. • All labor expenses, and
• All non-labor costs, such as services and supplies.

The scope of the User Fee Study included four components:
1) Private Development:
• Building fees.
• Current Planning fees.
• Development Engineering fees.
2) Public Safety – Police fees.
3) Recreation Services.
4) Development of productive hourly rates for staff.

We especially want to thank the outstanding efforts of Town staff for their excellent contribution to this project.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 4 ends

SUMMARY OF COSTING
METHODOLOGIES – USER FEE STUDY
The methodology used to calculate the cost of user fees is based on developing a driver-based costing model. This is a detailed and robust method of calculating the cost of a specific service. The approach is based on activity-based costing principles, which calculate cost by assessing operational workflows.

Practically, this means it relies on understanding the time staff invests in core business processes to provide fee and non-fee services.

Project Steps and Process
Step 1: Collect Data – This first step involves discussions with staff to identify those positions within the department that provide and support direct services. It also consists in collecting departmental budget and expenditure data, identifying the salary and benefits for each position, and identifying non-personnel expenditures and any departmental and Citywide overhead. Specifically, the steps involve the following:
• Identifying staff positions – This includes aligning staff names and positions. • Calculating the number of productive hours – For each position, vacation time, sick leave, paid holidays, professional development (training), routine staff meetings, and daily work breaks are deducted from the standard 1950 annual hours. The result is a range of hours available for each position annually. This range is typically 1,500 to 1,600 hours. Factors influencing this range are length of service with the jurisdiction, local holidays, and personal leave time policies. However, for consistency, we used 1526.5 product hours per position. • Identifying and allocating non-personnel costs – Materials and supplies costs are allocated to each position's salary and benefits.
• Assigning any other expenses budgeted in other areas – There are often expenses that should be included with the total cost of services. Examples of such costs might include amortized capital expenses for vehicles and technology.
• Identifying core business processes or activities – This step also involves discussions with staff to understand, at an operational level, the work of the operating unit. The tasks involved identifying and defining core business processes used to provide services. • Direct processes and activities – Those processes that directly contribute to processing an application or permit are first identified. Examples of direct activity are building inspection, application intake, and pre-application review.
• Indirect processes and activities – These processes support but do not directly apply to processing a specific application or permit. An example of an indirect activity is customer service or staff Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 5 ends

training to maintain certifications. Most jurisdictions highly value customer service, but assigning a specific unit of time to individual service would be impossible.

Step 2: Building cost structures – This second step involves significant interaction with staff and the development of time estimates for both direct and indirect processes in each department. Specifically, this step is at the core of the analysis. Four processes comprise this step:
• Gathering time estimates for direct processes – By interviewing staff in individual and group meetings, an estimate of time was assigned to each service by the indicated process. For example, for Building fees, core business processes included the following:
o Permit intake;
o Plan review; and
o Construction inspections.

In this analysis, staff time is estimated and assigned to each step. The sum of all the process steps is the total time that is required to provide that specific service. • Assigning indirect and annual process time – An annual time estimate is gathered from staff for those indirect or support processes in which they are involved. These may include activities such as program administration, customer service, and department administration. These costs are allocated to services proportionately to services and functions provided by the department. • Calculating fully loaded hourly rates and the cost of service – Once the total time for each direct and indirect service is estimated, the cost of service is calculated using the full loaded hourly rates for each staff member or position involved with the service. The fully loaded hourly rate for each employee is based on the employee's salary and benefit costs plus a share of non-personnel and City overhead costs divided by the employee's available work hours (i.e. 1,950 hours minus all leave hours). Thus, the direct and indirect cost by activity also includes departmental and Citywide overhead as well as nonlabor costs. The City's indirect and non-personnel costs are from the annual budget or cost allocation established by the City.
• Gathering activity or volume data – A critical element in the analysis is the number of times a given service is provided annually. This is critical data for three reasons:
• It allows a calculated projection of current revenue based on current prices. This is compared with actual revenue to ensure there is a close match.
• It allows for a calculated projection of revenue at full cost. This is compared to actual expenditures to ensure there is a close match..
• It allows for a calculation of total hours consumed. Hours consumed must closely match actual hours available.

If any of the three calculations do not approximate actual numbers, then time estimates and/or volume data need re-evaluation. Again, these are critical quality checks for costing accuracy.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 6 ends

Step 3: Calculating the full cost of services – This third step calculates the full cost by adding layers for direct and indirect costs.

Step 4: Set fees
The recommended fees can be established based on new, existing, or revised cost recovery policies. The recommended fees will be established based on City staff recommendations and Council discussion in the future. The fee analyses in this report are based on full cost recovery, although the Council always has the option of setting each fee at a different cost recovery rate. The only stipulation is that the final fee cannot be more than full cost.

Assuring Quality Results
In our analysis, we utilize both quantitative and qualitative tests for quality. These tests are an essential part of our costing models and processes. Without these, the results lack defensibility and integrity.

Qualitative
Our process incorporates substantial input from both individuals and groups. Our bias is that we get the best data from group interviews. For example, in determining how much time is required for any specific building inspection, we want to hear the perspective of an inspector, the inspector supervisor, and the counter tech or project manager. Each will have a perspective. Each will contribute value to the estimate.

When all perspectives agree, we have confidence in our results.

Quantitative
We also utilize four quantitative measures of quality data. When each of these measures match and there are no major disagreements with the quantitative assessment, we have significant confidence in our results.

These quantitative measures are:

Application or Fee Title
Signing Programs (Five or More Signs)
Community
Development
Director
Planning
Manager
Associate
Planner
Executive
Assistant Totals
Pre-submittal meeting 0.5 0.5 1
Land Use Application Intake 0.25 0.25 0.25 0.75
Application Review 1 6.5 7.5
Development Review Committee (DRC) 0.5 2 2.5
Prepare for decision 0.5 1.25 5 1 7.75
Public hearing 0.33 0.33 2 0.33 2.99
Plan Check of accepted plans – post entitlement 1.25 0.5 1.75 Total Time by Position 0.83 3.83 17.50 2.08 24.24
Calculated Full Loaded Hourly Rate 203.67 183.96 152.38 128.66 Total Direct Cost by Position 169 705 2,667 268 3,808
Total support or indirect costs assigned $ 574
Total Cost Assigned $ 4,382
Assigning Staff Cost and Time
Figure 1 Hypothetical Example of a Planning Fee Calculation Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 7 ends

Quantitative Analysis Targeted Margin of Error
1) Budgeted expenses entering the cost models must equal total expenses accounted for in the costing model.
0%
2) Projected revenue from fees must closely match actual revenue from fees. + or – 5%-10%
3) Available staff time must be fully accounted for in the costing models. 0%
4) Total revenues from fees and contributions from the general fund or other sources must match total expenses.
0%
Figure 2 Calculating Quality
Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 8 ends

USER FEE STUDY RESULTS
The Town of Atherton stands to gain significant new revenues by bringing its user fees up to full cost recovery. We would expect this, given it has been ten or eleven years since a full evaluation of its fees.

Our bias is that keeping user fees at or near full cost recovery results in better service to stakeholders, reduces the demand on the General Fund, assists in keeping technology up to date, and maintains the integrity of long-term planning. From our experience, those municipal agencies that maintain full cost recovery are better able to fund essential services like police an fire because they do not have the competition for staffing Development Services. Furthermore, maintaining annual adjustments to fees sets the expectation that Development Services, the major component of user fees, should pay for itself. This is a standard value that most municipal agencies hold.

Report Structure
This report is separated into four parts:

1. Summary of Results. In this section, we will summarize the basic findings of each work unit and compare current cost recovery vs. cost recovery at full cost.

2. Comparison study with selected benchmark cities. This project’s scope included comparing calculated fees at full costs vs similar fees of selected benchmark cities.

3. General observations and recommendations. In this section, we will summarize our observations and make recommendations that the City may consider as it moves forward.

4. Appendices – Fee Report Tables. This section provides a detailed analysis of each work unit studied.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 9 ends

SUMMARY OF RESULTS
The summary of results is presented in three sections:
1) Development services, which comprise Building, Planning, and Engineering fees. 2) Public Safety – Police Fees
3) Recreation Services.

Development Services
Please note that there is no single department called “Development Services.” For the purposes of this report, we organized Engineering, Building, and Planning into a single section. This is because these work units are closely tied together and represent a system for the support and regulation of City development.

The following table outlines the total cost recovery of these three work units.

Annual Revenue Impacts
Work Unit Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Building Fee Revenue $2,133,135 $1,347,670 ($785,465)
Planning Fee Revenue $1,204,283 $276,530 ($927,753)
Engineering Fee Revenue $596,812 $482,055 ($114,756)
Totals $3,934,230 $2,106,255 ($1,827,974)
Figure 3 Development Services Cost Recovery
Building Fees
The role of the Building Department is to enforce the provisions of Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, generally referred to as the California Building Code and the Atherton Municipal Code.

The intent and purpose of the Building Code is to establish the minimum requirements to safeguard the public safety, health, and general welfare through affordability, structural strength, means of egress facilities, stability, sanitation, light and ventilation, energy conservation, green building, construction standards, and safety to life and property from fire and other hazards attributed to the built environment.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 10 ends

The Building Department issues permits reviews construction plans and performs building inspections for new construction and alterations within the Town of Atherton. As such, the Division has primary responsibility for ensuring that all new construction and building alterations meet Municipal Building codes, consistent with the State of California Building Codes. This work is primarily contracted to Interwest Consulting Group.

In working with Interwest and staff from the Building Department, it was clear that the Town has a robust and exhaustive Building Fee Schedule that required little modifications. One of the challenges in calculating Building fees is determining the Town’s actual cost. Interwest is the contracted service provider and does not charge the Town on a per-fee basis. Instead, Interwest and the Town split the revenue so that each will recover its cost in full.

The contract with Interwest is in the process of being updated after ten years. Therefore, to calculate the full cost of Building services we updated staffing costs to fully staff the Town for plan check, inspection, and counter tech services. We then added the Town’s expenses which included administrative overhead. The total estimated costs to the Town are reflected in the figure below:

With updated estimates of hourly costs for plan check, inspection, and counter tech services, we were able to calculate the cost of the flat fees as well as the total revenue from these fees. From this we were able to calculate the remaining revenues that would be required to fully compensate the town and Interwest. These costs were then assigned to the valuation-based fees. In summary, these revenue breakdowns are as follows:

Cost Requirements (Budget FY 23-24)
Cost Requirements (Interwest) $ 1,600,000
Cost Requirements (Town) $ 533,135
Total Cost Requirements $ 2,133,135
Figure 4 Cost Requirements to Fulfill Town and Contractor Costs Cost Requirements by Fee Type
Building (new construction) Permit Cost $1,022,189
Building Plan Check Cost $568,069
Flat and Trade Permit Cost $542,877
Total Projected Cost $ 2,133,135
Figure 5 Revenue Requirements by Fee Type
Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 11 ends

The end result is that the valuation-based fees must increase by an average of 45.6% to recover the costs for both the Town and Interwest.

Current Valuation Based Fee Model
Number of SF 10,000
Value Per SF $ 350
Total Valuation $ 3,500,000
Total Fee (permit only) $ 16,269
Plan Check (45% of Permit) $ 7,321
Total Fees $ 23,590
Figure 6 Current Fee Calculation for a 10,000 SF Custom Home Proposed Valuation Based Fee Model
Number of SF 10,000
Value Per SF $ 509
Total Valuation $ 5,090,000
Total Fee (permit only) $ 22,676
Plan Check (45% of Permit) $ 10,204
Total Fees $ 32,881
Figure 7 Prosed Fee Calculation for a 10,000 SF Custom home Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 12 ends

Total Valuation Building Permit Fee Plan Review Fee
$1.00 to $500 $24.70 65% of Building
Permit Fee
$501 to $2,000
$25.95 for the first $500. plus $3.37 for each
additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and
including $2,000
65% of Building
Permit Fee
$2,001 to
$25,000
$76.47 for the first $2,000, plus $15.46 for each
additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and
including $25,000
65% of Building
Permit Fee
$25,001 to
$50,000
$432.06 for the first $25,000, plus $11.15 for each
additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and
including $50,000
65% of Building
Permit Fee
$50,001 to
$100,000
$710.89 for the first $50,000, plus $7.73 for each
additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and
including $100,000
65% of Building
Permit Fee
$100,001 to
$500,000
$1,097.40 for the first $100,000, plus $6.18 for
each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and
including $500,000
65% of Building
Permit Fee
$500,001 to
$1,000,000
$3571.03 for the first $500,000, plus $5.25 for each
additional $1,000, or fraction thereof, to and
including $1,000,000
45% of Building
Permit Fee
1,000,001 and
up
$6,193.74 for the first $1,000,000, plus $4.03 for
each additional $1,000, or fraction thereof.
45% of Building
Permit Fee
Figure 8 Valuation Fee Table
About Valuation Model
The result is that valuation fees will increase 45.6% from $350 value per square foot to $509 value per square foot. In addition, setting a value of $509/SF has little, if anything to do with actual construction value. This valuation number only creates the multiplier to establish the final fee. It is the final fee that is charged the applicant that must be in alignment with the actual cost of providing plan check and permitting services.

For smaller projects, we added a minimum fee of $168. This is to ensure that the Town has a fee that is adequate to recover the cost of processing a permit and providing a minimum of one inspection.

Observations and Recommendations
While we recognize that these fee increases are not inconsequential, it should be noted that it has been ten years since the last adjustment to these fees. Therefore, the increase is in line with what we Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 13 ends

would expect. As always, we strongly advocate for user fees to be updated by a simple labor adjustment factor annually. This is then followed up with a full user fee study every three to five years.

Planning Fees
The Planning Department serves a variety of functions including:
• Preparation of town-wide planning documents (e.g., the General Plan) • Administration of the Zoning Title and Subdivision Ordinance • Works as the staff liaison to the Planning Commission in furtherance of the Town's land use laws.
• Review of development proposals to ensure consistency with the General Plan and Zoning Title
• Preparation of environmental documents required under CEQA • Preparation of staff reports regarding land use matters for the Planning Commission and City Council
Thus, the Planning Department works with the community and developers to design and build structures that will meet the Town’s land use laws and requirements.

Like the Building Department, the Planning Department has a robust fee schedule. In working with staff and the contracted service provider (M-Group), we took this opportunity to simplify the fee schedule where appropriate and expand the schedule to account for the full breadth and scope of Planning services. Staff from the M-Group are also working to strengthen the Planning Department, streamline application processing, and ensure that the Town’s Planning codes are being fully implemented.

Figure 9 below illustrates the current revenue shortfall from processing Planning applications. It shows that the Town is supporting private development by an amount equal to $927,753.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 14 ends

From our observation, there are three reasons why the revenue shortfall is so high:

1. The Town did not bring its Planning fees up to full cost ten years ago when the last fee study was completed. This alone will create a significant gap to close if the Town determines that full cost recovery is in its best interests.

2. In the last ten years, there have been substantial changes to Land Use regulations, which drive costs. This is a common observation that we see in most of our work with Planning organizations. The regulatory environment is always becoming more complex, which drives costs higher.

3. The Town has established a new contract for Planning staff. The rates for these new staff are higher, as the rates for the previous staff were 30% below market. In addition, the level of reviews being provided to the Town from the prior vendor was insufficient to fully support Planning requirements.

Observations and Recommendations
Our bias is to fully recover the cost of Town land development services. As stated earlier, we see trends that suggest that those cities and towns with the highest cost recovery provide the highest levels of service to the development community. We fully recognize that bringing Planning up to full cost may cause concern within the development community. Therefore, the Town might consider $1,204,283
$276,530
$(927,753)
$(1,500,000)
$(1,000,000)
$(500,000)
$-
$500,000
$1,000,000
$1,500,000
Net Revenue From Planning Fees
Full Cost Current Cost Recovery Net Revenue
Figure 9 Net Planning Fee Revenue
Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 15 ends

phasing these new fees over a three-year period or select a percentage of cost recovery that is appropriate to the Town.

Development Engineering
Development Engineering works closely with the Building and Planning Departments to provide seamless and effective services for the development community. Its mission is to ensure the protection and development of public infrastructure in a way that is personal, responsive, and innovative.

As with Building and Planning, engineering staff and leadership took this opportunity to review the fee schedule. This included deleting no longer relevant fees, adding fees, and changing the language in some fees. In summary, there was a substantial effort to bring all the fees up to the current regulatory requirements.

Figure 6 below illustrates that bringing Engineering fees to full cost will generate an additional $114,756 in annual revenue. This should fully reimburse the Town for its cost to provide private development engineering services to the development community.

Observations and Recommendations
The reader will note that several Planning applications have been added to the Engineering fee schedule. We have added these applications because Engineering has a significant role in reviewing $596,812
$482,055
$(114,756) $(200,000)
$(100,000)
$-
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
1 Net Revenue From Engineering Fees
Full Cost Current Cost Recovery Net Revenue
Figure 10 Total Cost Recovery from Engineering Fees
Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 16 ends

them for impact to public infrastructure. Over the last several years, we have been seeing more and more detailed reviews of Planning applications by the engineering team. Therefore, to capture the full cost of Planning applications, we worked with Engineering leadership to identify those Planning applications that they review on a regular basis. Internally, the Town will have multiple ways of recognizing these revenues to the Engineering function and presenting the appropriate fee levels to the general public.

Public Safety – Police Fees
The Police Department has a limited number but very common set of fees. Our approach was to review with Police leadership and staff the processing requirements for each fee. Then, recalculate the cost of each fee based on these new time estimates and update productive hourly rates for each position.

The reader will note that bringing Police fees up to full cost will result in an additional $26,814 of revenue. While not a significant increase in revenues. However, on a percentage basis, the rate of increase is lower than development services. This is because the Town increased Police fees in both 2020 and 2022.

Recreation
Our approach to calculating the cost of Recreation services differs from how we approach the other fees in the project. Calculating the cost of individual Recreation services requires extensive analysis that quickly becomes invalid. Recreation services are often driven by seasonal, market, and economic & social values. For example, many cities will adjust their prices for recreation facility rentals based on seasonal and market forces. Others will include social and economic factors in setting fees for recreational services. In addition, the consensus we see is that the Town is not under a legal obligation to align the fees charged for recreational services with a reasonable estimate of cost. This is in contrast to development fees, where there is a solid legal requirement to align development fees with the cost of each service.

Annual Revenue Impacts
Revenue at Full Cost of
Services
Projection of Revenues
at Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
$ 97,432 $ 70,618 ($26,814)
Figure 11 Annual Revenue Impacts for Police Fees
Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 17 ends

Therefore, calculating the cost of recreation programs has more value than costing each individual fee or service. To this end, we reviewed the budgeted revenues and expenditures for the Recreation funds and developed three levels of cost recovery.
1) Direct budgeted revenues and expenses.
2) Direct budgeted revenues and expenses plus an allocated amount for Town administrative overhead.
3) Direct budgeted revenues and expenses, Town administrative overhead, plus an allocated amount for general park maintenance. This allocation of general park maintenance is somewhat arbitrary. In working with Town Financial leadership, we agreed that it would be appropriate to include something for park maintenance in the Recreation Services cost allocation. However, lacking any definitive allocation measure we agreed that it would be appropriate to include 10% of the total cost of park maintenance to the costs for Recreation Services.

In summary, these data are reflected in the following figure:

Recreation Cost Recovery Ratios Total Recovery
Percentage
Direct Budgeted Expenses & Revenues 180%
Plus, Town Administrative Overhead 141%
Plus, Allocated Park Maintenance 103%
Figure 12 Recreation Cost Recovery
From our experience, the Town of Atherton is fully recovering the cost of its recreation services.

However, we do not recommend that charges for Recreation Services be set exclusively based on this analysis. We recommend that this analysis be used as a starting point for conversations surrounding the appropriate levels of cost recovery. As stated earlier, these are values-based decisions that reflect community social and economic forces as well as competitive factors with surrounding municipal agencies.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 18 ends

COMPARISON STUDY
As part of this analysis, a survey was conducted to compare selected fees with five benchmark cities.

Our approach to comparison studies is to identify a small number of relevant projects or services rather than comparing the universe of fees. Our benchmark cities for the comparison are Los Altos Hills, Woodside, Belmont, Hillsborough, and Belvedere. These communities were selected because 1) they were used for the last fee study, 2) they are similar in size, and 3) they represent a similar social and economic demographic.

In comparing fees and services, we do urge caution for the following reasons:
• Communities have different policies regarding user fees. Some desire to subsidize their fees, while others charge the full cost. Therefore, newly calculated costs are being compared against prices that may be intentionally subsidized.
• Many cities and counties do not routinely update their fees. Therefore, comparisons contrast today’s cost against prices established 10-15 years ago. • Service levels can vary dramatically from community to community, and fees reflect these service levels. For example, most municipal building departments aim to respond to a request for a building inspection within 24 hours. However, we recently had a client that responded in 8-12 days for routine Building inspections.
• Service descriptions can vary, and cities will often bundle services while others keep them separate. For example, the entire list of Building and Safety fees for a recent client was two pages for another city of approximately the same size, it was 104 pages. • Many cities will calculate building plan checks and inspection (permitting) fees based on the value of the construction project. However, there are multiple options for calculating a value.

These include:
o Given construction costs.
o Value calculated based on a published standard such as the International Code Council (ICC). The ICC is updated at least annually. However, cities are not obligated to use the most current table. We routinely find cities using an ICC Table of 5-15 years old.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 19 ends

o An established value or cost per square foot. This is the method utilized by the Town of Atherton.

Therefore, comparing one service that is provided by the Town of Atherton with the same service for a neighboring city can be challenging – at best. We urge caution. We advise looking at trends. Do the trends show high fees, low fees, or fees that are within a reasonable range? In our view, the trends we see in this comparison illustrate what we would expect - fees that are reasonably aligned with benchmark cities.

Figure 13 Results of Comparison Study
Town of Atherton Los Altos Hills Woodside Belmont Hillsborough Belvedere Average Planning Fees/Projects Atherton Actual or
Estimated Cost Los Altos Hills Woodside Belmont Hillsborough Belvedere Average Conditional Use Permit $ 8,360 $ 6,080 $ 2,800 $ 11,604 $ 2,000 $ 7,211 Variance $ 10,428 $ 5,200 $ 2,970 $ 12,302 $ 5,800 $ 2,000 $ 7,340 Lot Line Adjustment $ 3,008 $ 3,500 $ 2,850 $ 3,315 $ 5,000 $ 2,000 $ 3,168 Tentative Parcel Map $ 11,179 $ 10,000 $ 10,000 $ 12,426 $ 20,000 N/A $ 10,901 Plan Review - Fence $ 986 $ 520 $ 660 $ 481 $ 722
Engineering Fees/Permits Atherton Actual or
Estimated Cost Los Altos Hills Woodside (plus
actual costs for each) Belmont Hillsborough Belvedere Average Driveway Connection to Street: $ 451 $ 679 $ 600 $ 1,609 $ 229 $ 260 $ 638 Right-of-Way Landscaping, Fence,
Etc. - Standard (up to 2 inspections) $ 522 $ 679 $ 600 $ 609 $ 229 $ 260 $ 483 Connection to Storm Drain or
Atherton Channel: In pavement $ 1,016 $ 1,326 $ 600 $ 1,162 $ 229 $ 260 $ 765 Utility Connect/Disconnect: in
pavement $ 734 $ 1,326 $ 600 $ 2,861 $ 229 $ 260 $ 1,002 Grading and Drainage: with
detention system $ 3,950 $ 1,326 $ 500 $ 1,073 $ 1,164 $ 1,603 Building Atherton Actual or
Estimated Cost Los Altos Hills Woodside (plus actual costs for each) Belmont (Includes
Plan Check) Hillsborough Belvedere Average
8,000 Sf Ft new home, (two story)
4,000 Sq Ft basement (12,000 total
SqFt) (Permit only)
$ 50,523 $ 52,380 $ 17,792 $ 87,000 $ 23,945 $ 23,129 $ 42,461 800 SF detached garage (Permit
only) $ 2,472 $ 2,902 $ 1,600 $ 4,836 $ 2,399 $ 2,239 $ 2,741 1500 SF pool house (permit only) $ 4,954 $ 6,872 $ 4,450 $ 11,453 $ 4,764 $ 4,485 $ 6,163 1000 SF pool $ 2,542 $ 1,800 $ 2,700 $ 3,000 $ 1,677 $ 1,554 $ 2,212 Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 20 ends

Comparison of Development Services Fees
Selected Comparative Examples
The following three comparisons, select a single fee from the chart on the prior page. In total, they demonstrate the challenges of comparisons. The difference between the lowest and the highest cost for the same fee can be very great. Therefore, we advocate looking at trends wherever possible.

Building Comparison
The following graphic demonstrates that on average, newly calculated Building fees are comparable with the benchmark communities.

Figure 14 Comparison of Selected Building Fees
Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 21 ends

Figure 15 Comparison of a Custom Home
Planning Comparison
Planning fees, like Building fee comparisons demonstrate that Planning fees are also in line with the selected benchmark communities.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 22 ends

Engineering Comparison
As with Building and Planning fee comparisons, Engineering fee comparisons also show good alignment with their Benchmark communities. The one exception to this is the Grading and Drainage fee.

Figure 16 Planning Comparison Graphic
Figure 17 Engineering Fees Comparison
Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 23 ends

STAFF PRODUCTIVE HOURLY RATES
As part of our analysis, the Town also requested that we calculate productive hourly rates for public safety offers, Administrative and Finance staff. The objective of this analysis is to develop rates for the event where the services of these staff can be charged.

To capture these costs, we included the following:
• Labor and benefit costs.
• Services and supplies.
• Town administrative costs.

Figure 14 below details the calculations by individual staff members. To maintain some degree of confidentiality, we have omitted the names.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 24 ends

Figure 18 Productive Hourly Rates
Department / Work Unit Title/Position Salary Plus Benefits Services & Supplies Citywide Cost Allocation Totals PHR Police 19.2% $ 1,658,099
Chief of Police * $ 274,561 $ 52,639 $ 75,956.19 $ 403,156.00 $ 244.34 Commander $ 315,573 $ 60,502 $ 87,302.15 $ 463,377.47 $ 280.83 Sergeant (84hrs) $ 268,815 $ 51,537 $ 74,366.56 $ 394,718.66 $ 180.73 Sergeant (84hrs) $ 265,410 $ 50,884 $ 73,424.56 $ 389,718.76 $ 178.44 Sergeant (84hrs) * $ 228,958 $ 43,896 $ 63,340.26 $ 336,193.92 $ 153.93 Officer (84hrs)* $ 205,235 $ 39,348 $ 56,777.59 $ 301,360.92 $ 137.99 Sergeant (84hrs) * $ 228,958 $ 43,896 $ 63,340.26 $ 336,193.92 $ 153.93 Officer (84hrs) * $ 203,578 $ 39,030 $ 56,319.09 $ 298,927.30 $ 136.87 Officer (84hrs) * $ 209,722 $ 40,208 $ 58,018.76 $ 307,948.75 $ 141.00 Officer (84hrs) * $ 201,117 $ 38,558 $ 55,638.25 $ 295,313.59 $ 135.22 Officer (84hrs) $ 230,058 $ 44,107 $ 63,644.75 $ 337,810.07 $ 154.67 Officer (84hrs)* $ 176,961 $ 33,927 $ 48,955.59 $ 259,843.75 $ 118.98 Officer (84hrs) * $ 206,955 $ 39,677 $ 57,253.22 $ 303,885.47 $ 139.14 Officer (84hrs) $ 213,418 $ 40,917 $ 59,041.26 $ 313,375.90 $ 143.49 Officer (84hrs) $ 215,502 $ 41,316 $ 59,617.71 $ 316,435.53 $ 144.89 Officer (84hrs)* $ 181,346 $ 34,768 $ 50,168.72 $ 266,282.74 $ 121.92 Officer (84hrs)* $ 166,057 $ 31,836 $ 45,938.89 $ 243,831.86 $ 111.64 Officer (84hrs)* $ 170,861 $ 32,758 $ 47,267.94 $ 250,886.13 $ 114.87 Officer (84hrs)* $ 186,309 $ 35,719 $ 51,541.63 $ 273,569.77 $ 125.26 Officer (84hrs) * $ 165,888 $ 31,804 $ 45,892.39 $ 243,585.09 $ 111.53 Officer (84hrs)* $ 162,485 $ 31,152 $ 44,950.70 $ 238,586.83 $ 109.24 Officer (84hrs)* $ 148,593 $ 28,488 $ 41,107.61 $ 218,188.69 $ 99.90 $ -
Dispatch
Dispatcher $ 180,870 $ 34,676 $ 50,036.86 $ 265,582.88 160.96 Dispatcher $ 168,566 $ 32,318 $ 46,633.25 $ 247,517.38 150.01 Dispatcher $ 153,118 $ 29,356 $ 42,359.57 $ 224,833.74 136.26 Dispatcher * $ 160,819 $ 30,832 $ 44,489.82 $ 236,140.56 143.12 Dispatcher * $ 142,403 $ 27,302 $ 39,395.35 $ 209,100.44 126.73 Admin - Civilian
Exec Assistant $ 160,485 $ 30,768 $ 44,397.58 $ 235,650.98 142.82 CSO/Dispatcher $ 161,558 $ 30,974 $ 44,694.41 $ 237,226.47 143.77 Code Enforcement * $ 121,824 $ 23,356 $ 33,702.05 $ 178,881.87 108.41 Hyrbid Code Enf Disp * $ 117,573 $ 22,541 $ 32,526.04 $ 172,639.90 104.63 Total Police $ 5,993,575 $ 1,149,091 $ 1,658,099 $ 8,800,765 Administration 29% $ 324,694
City Manager $ 313,664 $ 90,166 $ 123,483 $ 527,313 $ 320 Asst to CM/City Clerk $ 220,933 $ 63,509 $ 86,977 $ 371,419 $ 225 Management Analyst II $ 171,713 $ 49,361 $ 67,600 $ 288,674 $ 175 Receptionist/Clerk $ 118,457 $ 34,052 $ 46,634 $ 199,143 $ 121 Total Administration $ 824,767 $ 237,088 $ 324,694 $ 1,386,549 Finance 34% $ 277,224
Finance Director 285,121 $ 96,838 $ 137,224 $ 519,182 $ 315 Accountant 152,859 $ 51,917 $ 73,568 $ 278,344 $ 169
Jr. Accountant 138,032 $ 46,881 $ 66,432 $ 251,345 $ 152 Total Finance $ 576,012 $ 195,635 $ 277,224 $ 1,048,871 Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 25 ends

OBSERVATIONS AND

RECOMMENDATIONS
Besides the observations and recommendations referenced earlier, the Town can benefit from our standard recommendations:

1. Updating its fees through a simple CPI adjustment each year.

2. Conducting a thorough assessment of its fees every 3-5 years.

These practices are a part of our standard recommendations for any municipal or state agency. We find that if cities were to adopt these practices, their cost recovery would be sustainable, and they would have the ability to provide a higher level of service to their citizens.

Town of Atherton Report
Capital Accounting Partners

Page 26 ends

APPENDICES
Building Fee Table
Town of Atherton
Building Fees
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Other
external
costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge
or (Subsidy)
Revenue at
Full Cost of
Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Permitted Value of Construction
New Habitable Construction
Valuation
base: per SF $509 $509
$350
($159)
Remodeled Habitable Construction
Valuation
base: per SF $437 $437
$300
($137)
New or Remodeled Non-Habitable
Construction
Valuation
base: per SF $182 $182
$125
($57)
Valuation - non defined project Valuation base
$1
$1
Non-habitable construction: ie. Patio covers &
gazebos (> 1000 Sq Ft or attached to new
construction)
Valuation
base: per SF $146 $146
$100
($46)
Flat Fees **
Swimming pools (first 1000 sf )
Plan check and
inspection 21.00 $918 $1,207 $2,125
$1,095
($1,030) $44,625 $22,995 ($21,630)
Swimming pools (Over 1000 sf)
Plan check and
inspection 7.00 $1,098 $1,444 $2,542
$1,313
($1,229) $17,793 $9,191 ($8,602)
Patio covers & gazebos (up to 1000 Sq Ft)
Plan check and
inspection 9.00 $675 $888 $1,563
$813
($750) $14,070 $7,317 ($6,753)
Drive way gates
Plan check and
inspection 31.00 $558 $734 $1,291
$661
($630) $40,027 $20,491 ($19,536)
Non Habitable new pool house including
cabanas (up to and including 1500 sf)
Plan check and
inspection 2.00 $1,090 $1,435 $2,525
$1,336
($1,189) $5,049 $2,672 ($2,377)
Other Building (Flat) Fees
Plumbing, Mechanical, Electrical (MP&E)
Permit (single inspection) 263.00 $130 $171 $301 $143 ($158) $79,186 $37,609 ($41,577) MP&E each additional inspection $94 $123 $217 $97 ($120) MP&E plan check (min .5 hour) $55 $72 $127 $88 ($39)
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 1 of 4 ends

Town of Atherton
Building Fees
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Other
external
costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge
or (Subsidy)
Revenue at
Full Cost of
Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Demolition Permit Fee 43.00 $283 $372 $654 $286 ($368) $28,134 $12,298 ($15,836) Landscape Screening Permit Fee 33.00 $224 $294 $518 $389 ($129) $17,101 $12,837 ($4,264) Water Well Permit Fee 15.00 $393 $517 $909 $397 ($512) $13,636 $5,955 ($7,681) Solar Panels Permit Fee * $283 $372 $654 $500 ($154)
Heritage Tree Removal - Staff Level (First Tree) 207.00 $309 $407 $716 $261 ($455) $148,298 $54,027 ($94,271) Heritage Tree Removal - Staff Level (Each
Additional Tree) $107 $141 $248 $103 ($145)
Excavation Permit
Plan check revision Fee (1 hour min) Hourly 193.00 $134 $176 $310 $198 ($112) $59,786 $38,214 ($21,572) Address Change $285 $375 $660 $275 ($385)
Property Search (plus photocopying and/or
printing posts and excludes public records
searches) Hourly $95 $125 $220
$92
($128)
Reactivation of an Expired Permit (Up to OneHalf the Amount Required for a New Permit for Such Work)
(Up to OneHalf the
Amount
Required for a
New Permit for
Such Work)
Code Enforcement - Administrative (Penalty) Hourly
Second Utility Deposit (Ordinance 15.04.040) $5,000 $5,000 Landscape Screening Deposit (Ordinance

17.50.060) $5,000 $5,000
Temporary Occupancy Deposit: $5,000 $5,000
$176 $176
Administrative Fee (TOC) $173 $227 $400 $176 ($224)
Excavation Road Deposit (Ordinance

15.04.045) $5,000 $5,000
Recycled Deposit
$1000 Min &
$500 Min for
reroof permits
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 2 of 4 ends

3.30%
$0 $0 $0
Storm water compliance review/inspection T&M $500 $500
Tree protection verification (deposit) + COP T&M $2,500 $2,500 Tree protection administration for flat fee
permits (initial inspection) 44.00 $321 $423 $745 $293 ($452) $32,762 $12,892 ($19,870) Tree protection administration for flat fee
permits (full inspection) $393 $517 $910 $732 ($178)
Additional Arborists Inspection $107 $141 $248 ($248)
Tree protection zone execption (staff level) $309 $407 $716 $732
$16
Tree protection verification (deposit) + COP
Reroofing < 5000SF Per app 57.00 $321 $423 $744 $328 ($416) $42,410 $18,696 ($23,714) Reroofing > 5000SF Per app $446 $587 $1,034 $458 ($576) Reroofing requiring additional inspections Per insp. $125 $165 $290 $130 ($160) Reroofing requiring plan check (min one hour) Per PC $110 $145 $255 $176 ($79) SMIP Fee (State Mandate)
Building Standards Administration Special
Revolving Fund ( Senate Bill No. 1473 State
Mandate)
Surcharge for General Plan Maintenance and
Update (2.0%) 1.00 2.55% $0 $0 $0
57 Generator installation (per valuation schedule) New
63 Minimum New Construction Fee $73 $96 $168 ($168)
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 3 of 4 ends

APPENDIX

Page 4 of 4 ends

Planning Fee Table
Town of Atherton
Planning Division
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Conditional Use Permit 4.00 $5,723 $2,638 $8,360 $2,920 ($5,440) $33,442 $11,680 ($21,762) Variance 2.00 $7,138 $3,290 $10,428 $2,920 ($7,508) $20,855 $5,840 ($15,015) Heritage Tree Removal Permit 6.00 $4,642 $2,139 $6,781 $2,245 ($4,536) $40,688 $13,470 ($27,218) Special Structures New 4.00 $5,525 $2,547 $8,072 ($8,072) $32,287 ($32,287) Excessive Height Delete
Lot Line Redesignation $4,014 $1,850 $5,864 $2,920 ($2,944) Lot Line Adjustment $2,059 $949 $3,008 $1,685 ($1,323)
Tentative Parcel Map 2.00 $7,652 $3,527 $11,179 $2,920 ($8,259) $22,358 $5,840 ($16,518) Final Parcel Map 2.00 $3,593 $1,656 $5,249 $2,920 ($2,329) $10,498 $5,840 ($4,658) Appeal 6.00 $4,020 $1,853 $5,873 $842 ($5,031) $35,237 $5,052 ($30,185) School Master Plan 6.00 $4,523 $2,085 $6,607 $842 ($5,765) $39,644 $5,052 ($34,592) Initial Review/Negative Declaration $6,416 $2,957 $9,373 $2,245 ($7,128) Zoning Ordinance Amendment $9,154 $4,219 $13,374 $5,615 ($7,759) General Plan Amendment $21,657 $9,982 $31,639 $5,615 ($26,024) Zoning Review for Home Occupation
Business
$554 $255 $809 $107 ($702)
Pre-Application Review Hourly $180 $83 $263 $51 ($212)
Street Easement Vacation $4,560 $2,102 $6,661 ($6,661)
Code Enforcement - Administrative
(Penalty) $904 $416 $1,320 $1,065 ($255)
Initial Review (2 reviews for fee amount;
additional reviews billed hourly):
a. Fence 68.00 $675 $311 $986 $180 ($806) $67,043 $12,240 ($54,803) b. Accessory Structures (includes pools) 172.00 $820 $378 $1,198 $506 ($692) $206,084 $87,032 ($119,052) c. Accessory Buildings 52.00 $856 $395 $1,251 $1,067 ($184) $65,064 $55,484 ($9,580) d. Additions 20.00 $1,403 $647 $2,050 $1,095 ($955) $41,002 $21,900 ($19,102) e. New Construction 30.00 $1,857 $856 $2,712 $1,570 ($1,142) $81,369 $47,100 ($34,269) Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 1 of 2 ends

Town of Atherton
Planning Division
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Revisions to Previously Approved Plans
School Master Plan Plus CUP $6,257 $2,884 $9,141 ($9,141) Technology Surcharge (upgrade and
maintain development technology) Percentage 3.60% $0
Subdivision Exception New 2.00 $7,228 $3,331 $10,559 ($10,559) $21,118 ($21,118) SB 9 Tentative Map New 16.00 $7,690 $3,544 $11,234 ($11,234) $179,747 ($179,747) SB 9 Final Map New 8.00 $4,744 $2,186 $6,930 ($6,930) $55,439 ($55,439) Wireless WTF (minor modification) new 6.00 $4,857 $2,239 $7,095 ($7,095) $42,572 ($42,572) Wireless WTF (major modification) new $7,042 $3,246 $10,288 ($10,288) Junior accessory dwelling unit new 10.00 $532 $245 $778 ($778) $7,779 ($7,779) Accessory dwelling unit new 52.00 $1,722 $794 $2,516 ($2,516) $130,842 ($130,842) Environmental Impact Report (deposit for
staff time plus consultant actual cost plus
25% admim)
new $1,424 $656 $2,080 ($2,080)
Recording Fees (County and State) new
Planning Commission Tree Protection
Zone Exceptions (PTPZ) 18.00 $2,708 $1,248 $3,956 ($3,956) $71,214 ($71,214) Town Planner $203 $94 $297 ($297)
Sr. Planner $180 $83 $263 ($263)
Associate Planner $163 $75 $238 ($238)
Assistant Planner $128 $59 $187 ($187)
Admin $84 $39 $123 ($123)
$ -
Revenue at
Full Cost of
Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual
Surplus
(subsidy)
$ 1,204,283 $ 276,530 ($927,753)
Annual Revenue Impacts
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 2 of 2 ends

Engineering Fee Table
Town of Atherton
Engineering Division
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Encroachment Permits and Fees $ - $ - $ - $ -
Class A - One Inspection Required: Per app
Driveway Connection to Street: Per app 2.00 $274 $178 $451 $270 ($181) $903 $540 ($363) Additional Plan Check Per app $43 $28 $71 $60 ($11)
Additional Inspection Per app $57 $37 $95 $91 ($4)
Per app
Class B - Two Inspections Required: Per app
Driveway Connection to Street: Per app 4.80 $359 $233 $593 $360 ($233) $2,844 $1,728 ($1,116) Additional Plan Check Per app $43 $28 $71 $60 ($11)
Additional Inspection Per app 45.57 $57 $37 $95 $91 ($4) $4,320 $4,147 ($173) Per app
Class C - Three or More Inspections
Required: Per app
Driveway Connection to Street -
Asphalt/Pavers: Per app
Without Driveway Culvert (up to 3
inspections) Per app $445 $289 $734 ($734)
Additional Plan Check Per app $43 $28 $71 ($71)
Additional Inspection Per app $57 $37 $95 ($95)
Per app
With Driveway Culvert (up to 4
inspections) Per app 34.80 $530 $345 $875 $450 ($425) $30,439 $15,660 ($14,779) Additional Plan Check Per app $56 $37 $93 $60 ($33)
Additional Inspection Per app 118.09 $57 $37 $95 $91 ($4) $11,194 $10,746 ($448) Per app
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 1 of 7 ends

Town of Atherton
Engineering Division
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Driveway Connection to Street - Concrete: Per app
Without Driveway Culvert (up to 4
inspections) Per app $530 $345 $875 $560 ($315)
Additional Plan Check Per app $56 $37 $93 $80 ($13)
Additional Inspection Per app $57 $37 $95 $91 ($4)
Per app
With Driveway Culvert (up to 5
inspections) Per app $701 $456 $1,157 $650 ($507)
Additional Plan Check Per app $56 $37 $93 $80 ($13)
Additional Inspection Per app $57 $37 $95 $91 ($4)
Class D - Public Right of Way Per app
Right-of-Way Landscaping, Fence, Etc. -
Minor Construction (up to 2 inspections) Per app 45.60 $316 $206 $522 $362 ($160) $23,804 $16,507 ($7,297) Additional Plan Check Per app $85 $56 $141 $122 ($19)
Additional Inspection Per app $57 $37 $95 $123 $28
Per app
Right-of-Way Landscaping, Fence, Etc. -
Standard (up to 2 inspections) Per app 20.40 $359 $233 $593 $484 ($109) $12,088 $9,874 ($2,214) Additional Plan Check Per app $85 $56 $141 $123 ($18)
Additional Inspection Per app 49.78 $57 $37 $95 $123 $28 $4,719 $6,123 $1,404 Per app
Connection to Storm Drain or Atherton
Channel: Per app
a. In Pavement Per app 1.20 $615 $400 $1,016 $864 ($152) $1,219 $1,037 ($182) Additional Plan Check Per app $85 $56 $141 $266 $125
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 2 of 7 ends

Town of Atherton
Engineering Division
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Additional Inspection Per app $214 $139 $353 $133 ($220) Per app
b. Outside Pavement Per app 1.20 $530 $345 $875 $665 ($210) $1,050 $798 ($252) Additional Plan Check Per app $256 $167 $423 $266 ($157) Additional Inspection Per app 2.47 $57 $37 $95 $133 $38 $234 $329 $94 Per app
Utility - Minor (One Inspection Required): Per app 27.60 $274 $178 $451 $331 ($120) $12,461 $9,136 ($3,325) Additional Plan Check Per app $43 $28 $71 $61 ($10)
Additional Inspection Per app 63.94 $57 $37 $95 $91 ($4) $6,061 $5,819 ($243) Per app
Utility Connect/Disconnect: Per app
a. In Pavement Per app 118.80 $445 $289 $734 $450 ($284) $87,153 $53,460 ($33,693) Additional Plan Check Per app $43 $28 $71 $61 ($10)
Additional Inspection Per app 953.18 $57 $37 $95 $91 ($4) $90,357 $86,739 ($3,617) Per app
b. Outside Pavement Per app 15.60 $359 $233 $593 $259 ($334) $9,244 $4,040 ($5,203) Additional Plan Check Per app $43 $28 $71 $61 ($10)
Additional Inspection Per app 245.20 $57 $37 $95 $91 ($4) $23,244 $22,313 ($931) Per app
Utility Main (up to 100 LF) Per app
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 3 of 7 ends

Town of Atherton
Engineering Division
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
a. In Pavement Per app 56.40 $487 $317 $804 $602 ($202) $45,354 $33,953 ($11,401) Additional Plan Check per 100 LF Per app $85 $56 $141 $123 ($18) Additional Inspection per 100 LF Per app $171 $111 $282 $91 ($191) Per app
b. Outside Pavement (up to 100 LF) Per app $487 $317 $804 $511 ($293) Additional Plan Check per 100 LF Per app $85 $56 $141 $123 ($18) Additional Inspection per 100 LF Per app $85 $56 $141 $91 ($50) Per app
Wireless Telecommunication and Utilities
Installation Permit (25 LF or less): Per app
i. Without Trenching Per app 4.80 $1,462 $951 $2,412 $2,246 ($166) $11,580 $10,781 ($799) ii. With Trenching Per app 56.40 $1,720 $1,118 $2,838 $2,337 ($501) $160,063 $131,807 ($28,256) iii With Trenching > 25 LF (per 100 LF or
fraction thereof) Per app $342 $222 $564 $426 ($138)
Property Improvement Permits and
Reviews
Per app
Grading and Drainage: Per app
a. Without Detention or Treatment System Hourly/min $1,795 $1,167 $2,962 $1,625 ($1,337) b. With Detention System Hourly/min $2,393 $1,556 $3,950 $1,625 ($2,325) c. With Multiple Detention / treatment
Systems
Hourly/min $3,077 $2,001 $5,078 $2,167 ($2,911)
d. With Stormwater treatment system Hourly/min $2,393 $1,556 $3,950 ($3,950) Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 4 of 7 ends

Town of Atherton
Engineering Division
Fee Type Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Support and
Service Costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Detention System Annual Report Filing Per app $684 $445 $1,129 $542 ($587) Detention System Annual Report -
Submittals Out of Compliance Per app $513 $334 $846 $542 ($304) StormWater Permit Compliance
Review/Inspection Deposit Hourly $639 $639
StormWater Permit Compliance
Review/Inspection Hourly
Stop Work Order (Penalty) 100% of
permit
Code Enforcement - Administrative
(Penalty) Hourly
Work without a permit (penalty) 100% of
pemit
Public Works application fee Per app 376.80 $94 $61 $155 $150 ($5) $58,483 $56,520 ($1,963) Oversized load permit (outside of right of
way) Per app $342 $222 $564 $426 ($138)
Technology Surcharge (upgrade and
maintain development technology) (2.37%
of fee)
Per app 2.37% $0
Additional work not reflected above - at
cost
Hourly
New Fees $ - $ - $ - $ -
Traffic Control Permit (includes plan check
& first week of inspection) Base $274 $178 $451 ($451)
Traffic Control Inspection
(each
additional
week)
$85 $56 $141 ($141)
Traffic Control Inspection (for longer term
projects)
Inspection
(per
month)
$256 $167 $423 ($423)
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 5 of 7 ends

15.04.045)
Storm water compliance review/inspection
/ month
$128 $83 $212 ($212)
Planning Review $ - $ - $ - $ -
Lot Line Adjustment $991.56 $644.82 $1,636.38 ($1,636.38) Tentative Parcel Map $1,572.30 $1,022.47 $2,594.77 ($2,594.77) Final Parcel Map $1,237.78 $804.94 $2,042.72 ($2,042.72) Street Easement Vacation (deposit) $3,507.05 $2,280.65 $5,787.71 ($5,787.71) Note: all plan reviews include two reviews.

Each additional will be at the applicable
hourly rate
Office Specialist (0.5) $102.62 $66.73 $169.36 ($169.36) Associate/Senior Engineer $170.96 $111.17 $282.13 ($282.13) PW Director/City Engineer $206.30 $134.16 $340.45 ($340.45) Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 6 of 7 ends

APPENDIX

Page 7 of 7 ends

Police Fee Table
Town of Atherton
Pollice Dept
Fee # Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Other
external
costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Copy of Police Report:

Without Photos or digital media 737.84 $0.32 $0 $0.32 $236 $236 With Photos or digital media Hourly $250 $250 $64 ($186) Vehicle Releases 5.70 $108 $108 $83 ($25) $613 $473 ($140) Vehicle Repossession Fee $43 $43 $19 ($24)
Initial Alarm Registration fee 23.82 $108 $108 $100 ($8) $2,562 $2,382 ($180) Renewal Alarm Fee 967.00 $50 $50 $50 $48,350 $48,350
Alarm Alert Signs 32.00 $197 $197 $40 ($157) $6,292 $1,280 ($5,012) Garage Sale/Estate Sale Permits $36 $36 $27 ($9)
Fingerprints (plus DOJ processing of
$53) Delete $96 $96
Solicitor Permit (Valid for six months;
business license required)
$43 $43 $40 ($3)
After Hours Emergency Construction
Permits
$289 $289 $79 ($210)
Special Service Request 362.84 $31 $31 $27 ($4) $11,330 $9,797 ($1,534) Administrative Fee Delete
On-Site Personnel Fee Hourly (4 Hr
min) $684 $684 $332 ($352)
Police Department Clearance Letter $36 $36 $27 ($9)
Microfilmed Reports Delete $94 $94 $79 ($15)
Subpoena Acceptance fee (police
personnel)
Per day $275 $275
Code Enforcement - violation fee
(varies)
Fine
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 1 of 2 ends

Town of Atherton
Pollice Dept
Fee # Fee Type
Actual Work
Volume
Direct Unit
Cost
Other
external
costs
Total Cost
Assigned
Current
Fee / Revenue
Unit Surcharge or
(Subsidy)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
Unit Cost Summary Annual Cost Calculations
False Alarms: (first 3, warnings-no fee) $1,164 $1,164 ($1,164) False Alarm - 4th 40.50 $388 $291 $679 $200 ($479) $27,501 $8,100 ($19,401) False Alarm - 5th $388 $407 $795 $300 ($495)
False Alarm - 6th and above $388 $466 $854 $400 ($454)
Citation Sign Off Fee new $47 $47 ($47)
Sign (e.g. Real Estate Sign) Removal
Fee
new $36 $36 ($36)
Revenue at Full
Cost of Services
Projection of
Revenues at
Current Fees
Annual Surplus
(subsidy)
$ 97,432 $ 70,618 ($26,814)
Annual Revenue Impacts
Capital Accounting Partners

APPENDIX

Page 2 of 2 ends

Recreation Cost Recovery
Town of Atherton
Recreation Cost Recovery
Program Net Revenue
Calculations
Revenues
(2022-2023
Actual)
Expenses Net
Revenues
Net Ratio
(ratio of
revenues
to
expense)
Citywide
Admin
Net Revenue
(Program +
City Admin)
Net Ratio
(ratio of
revenues
to
expense)
Social Fees $ 85,487 $ 56,224 $ 29,263 $ 11,764 $ 17,499 Meeting Fees $ - $ - $ - $ - $ -
Class Fees $ 8,278 $ 5,444 $ 2,833 $ 1,139 $ 1,694
Weddings $ 22,186 $ 14,592 $ 7,594 $ 3,053 $ 4,541
Park Day Use Fee $ 15,234 $ 10,019 $ 5,215 $ 2,096 $ 3,118 Catering Service Fee $ 34,839 $ 22,913 $ 11,926 $ 4,794 $ 7,131 Park Admin Fee 30%-NonResident $ 8,784 $ 5,777 $ 3,007 $ 1,209 $ 1,798 Park Admin Fee 15%-Resident $ 1,515 $ 996 $ 519 $ 209 $ 310 Subtotals $ 176,322 $ 115,966 $ 60,357 $ 36,092

PROPERTY RENTAL REVENUE
(PLAYSCHOOL) $ 53,420 $ 53,420 $ 7,351 $ 46,069
Tennis $ 50,615 $ 40,000 $ 10,615 $ 10,786 $ (171)
Totals $ 280,357 $ 155,966 $ 124,392 180% $ 42,402 $ 81,990 141% Town of Atherton
Recreation Cost Recovery
Program Net Revenue
Calculations
Social Fees
Meeting Fees
Class Fees
Weddings
Park Day Use Fee
Catering Service Fee
Park Admin Fee 30%-NonResident
Park Admin Fee 15%-Resident
Subtotals

PROPERTY RENTAL REVENUE
(PLAYSCHOOL)
Tennis
Totals
General Parks
Maintenance
Allocation (10%)
Total Net
Revenue
Net Ratio (ratio
of revenues to
expense)
$ 22,275 $ (4,776)
$ - $ -
$ 2,157 $ (462)
$ 5,781 $ (1,240)
$ 3,969 $ (851)
$ 9,078 $ (1,946)
$ 2,289 $ (491)
$ 395 $ (85)
$ 13,919 $ 32,149
$ 13,188 $ (13,359)
$ 73,051 $ 8,939 103%

Atherton City CouncilDecember 6, 2023

Atherton City Council
December 6, 2023