Chowchilla City Council
March 14, 2023

AGENDA
City Council Meeting
Council Chambers, Chowchilla City Hall
130 S. Second Street, Chowchilla, CA 93610
Tuesday, March 14, 2023
NO CLOSED SESSION ~ Open Session: 4:00 p.m.

City Council meetings are available to view and participate via Zoom. Please read Page 4 of this agenda packet for Zoom login and participation information.

Agendas for all City Council meetings are posted at least 72 hours prior to the meeting in the kiosk just outside of City Hall, 130 S. Second St., Chowchilla, CA 93610.

Agendas for Special Meetings are posted 24 hours prior to the meeting.

Any writing or documents provided to a majority of the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available for public inspection on the city website at www.CityofChowchilla.org.

The City of Chowchilla complies with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA of 1990). The Council Chambers is accessible to the physically disabled. If you need special assistance, please call (559) 665-8615, ext. 102 at least 4 days prior to a regular meeting, 1 day for a special meeting.

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL
Mayor: Ray Barragan
Mayor Pro Tem: Kelly Smith
Council Members: Waseem Ahmed, John Chavez, Jeff Troost City staff and contract employees present will be recorded in the minutes.

CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Additions and/or Deletions:

OPEN SESSION – 4:00 PM

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION:

PRESENTATIONS/WORKSHOP - Section 1

PUBLIC ADDRESS
This time is reserved for members of the audience to address the City Council on items of interest that are not on the agenda and that are within the subject matter jurisdiction of the Council.

It is recommended that speakers limit their comments to no more than 3 minutes each and it is requested that no comments be made during this period on items on the Agenda.

City Council Meeting AGENDA March 14, 2023
Members of the public who are joining the meeting via Zoom and would like to address the Council on items on the agenda should follow the policy on page 4 of this agenda packet.

The Council is prohibited by law from taking any action on matters discussed that are not on the agenda. No adverse conclusions should be drawn if the Council does not respond to public comment at this time.

COUNCIL AND STAFF VERBAL REPORTS – Section 2

2.1 COUNCIL VERBAL REPORTS
Legislative, Collaborative Agency, Ad Hoc

2.2 STAFF VERBAL REPORTS
CONSENT CALENDAR – Section 3
All items listed under Consent Calendar are considered to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. For discussion of any Consent Item, it will be made a part of the Regular Agenda at the request of any member of the City Council or any person in the audience.

3.1 Approval of the February 14, 2023 City Council Meeting Minutes (McClendon)

3.2 Consideration and Approval of the February 2023 Check Register (Williams)

3.3 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1 and No. 2 in the Amount of $66,623.00, Authorizing the City Administrator or Designee to Execute all Related Documents Thereto and Amending the Fiscal Year 2022/23 City Budget, Accepting Improvements, and Authorizing Filing of the Notice of Completion for the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project (Rogers)

3.4 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Amending Council Resolution #32-20, Giving Authorization to File a Financial Assistance Application Financing Agreement From the State Water Resources Control Board for the Planning, Design, and Construction of the Chowchilla-Fairmead Sewer Consolidation Project, to Define the Project as the “Fairmead – Chowchilla Wastewater Treatment Facility Connection Project” (Rogers)

3.5 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Accepting Improvements and Authorizing Filing of the Notice of Completion for the Chowchilla Police Department Domestic Water Piping Retrofit Project (Rogers)

3.6 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Declaring the Existence of a Public Nuisance by Virtue of Certain Weed Growth (Gaumnitz)

3.7 Consideration and Approval of the January 2023 Financials (Williams) PUBLIC HEARINGS – Section 4

4.1 Introduction of an Ordinance Deleting Title 17.40 and Adopting Title 17.42 of the City of Chowchilla Municipal Code; and,
City Council Meeting AGENDA March 14, 2023
Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Approving Implementation of Proposed Development Impact Fees per CMC Section 17.76; and, Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Temporarily Reducing Single-Family and Multi-Family Residential Development Fees for a Period of 24 Months Beginning July 1, 2023 and Ending June 30, 2025 (Hamilton) DEFERRED BUSINESS – Section 5
NEW BUSINESS – Section 6

6.1 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Approving the Purchase of the OpenGov Procurement Software Platform for Online Bidding and Contract Management, for a First-Year Price of $35,365.00, Authorizing the City Administrator or Designee to Execute all Related Documents Thereto and Amending the Fiscal Year 2022/23 Budget (Rogers)

6.2 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution Awarding the Design/Build:

Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project to Diede Construction, Inc. in the Amount of $1,204,700.00, Authorizing the City Administrator or Designee to Execute all Related Documents Thereto and Amending the Fiscal Year 2022/23 City Budget (Gaumnitz)

6.3 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution to Approve a Donation Request to the Chowchilla Union High School Class of 2023 to Contribute Towards Senior Graduation Activities and Authorizing the City Administrator or Designee to Execute Related Documents Thereto (Wisener)
ANNOUNCEMENTS – Section 7
MAR 15 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, CITY HALL, 7PM
MAR 17 YMI FISH FRY, O’LAUGHLIN HALL, RC WISENER PARK, 4:30PM MAR 18 CSWN SOUP & BAKED POTATO FUNDRAISER, REBEKAH’S LODGE, 11AM-2PM MAR 25 COMMUNITY HEALTH FAIR, CHOWCHILLA SKILLED NURSING FACILITY, 10AM-1PM MAR 28 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL, 4PM

ADJOURNMENT
I, Joann McClendon, CMC, City Clerk, do hereby declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing agenda was posted at Chowchilla City Hall, 130 S Second Street, Chowchilla, CA and made available for public review on this 9th day of March, 2023 at or before 5:00pm.

Joann McClendon, CMC, City Clerk
Public meetings are still open to the public to attend in-person.

However, if you wish to attend remotely, please read the message below.

Zoom login instructions
Use the following url to start Zoom:
https://us06web.zoom.us/j/88439411785?pwd=SW1QcExjVzdHTjg2M1BWQjlXU DVFZz09
Passcode: 722 260
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- To participate by phone, dial: 1-877-853-5247
Webinar ID: 884 3941 1785
Passcode: 722 260
Staff highly recommends that participants log into Zoom 15 minutes before the meeting begins to perform an audio check and to make sure you have optimal internet connection.

Options to participate / view / and listen to the meeting:
• If you wish to speak on an item using the Zoom platform on your computer/laptop or smart phone, please use the “raise hand” icon and you will be unmuted when it is your turn to speak. Please provide your name when unmuted. You will be able to speak to the Council for up to 3 minutes.
• If you are calling in to the meeting only (no camera/video) and you wish to make a comment, press *9 to “raise your hand” and *6 to unmute yourself.

MINUTES
City Council Meeting
Council Chambers, Chowchilla City Hall
130 S. Second Street, Chowchilla, CA 93610
Tuesday, January 24, 2023
Closed Session: 3:00 p.m. ~ Open Session: 4:00 p.m.

CALL TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: 3:06 p.m.

Mayor: Ray Barragan
Mayor Pro Tem: Kelly Smith
Council Members: Waseem Ahmed, John Chavez, Jeff Troost City staff and contract employees present: City Administrator Rod Pruett, City Attorney Mary Lerner, Police Chief Jeff Palmer, Fire Chief Fred Gaumnitz, Public Works Director Jason Rogers, Community & Economic Development Director Mark Hamilton, Deputy Director of Recreation & Community Engagement Stacy Wisener, IT System Administrator Carlos Berrocal, City Clerk Joann McClendon

CONSIDERATION OF APPROVAL OF AGENDA
Additions and/or Deletions:

Motion by Council Member Ahmed, Seconded by Council Member Troost to approve the agenda as presented. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

PUBLIC ADDRESS – CLOSED SESSION
No one spoke.

CLOSED SESSION – 3:08 PM

1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION – Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (2) or (3) of Subdivision (d) of Section 54956.9 Potential cases: 1

2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION – Initiation of Litigation – Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 Paragraph (4) Subdivision (d) (deciding whether to initiate litigation)
Number of Cases: 1
OPEN SESSION – 4:04 PM

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
INVOCATION: Council Member Troost
CLOSED SESSION REPORT: Nothing to report.

PRESENTATIONS/WORKSHOP - Section 1
Item 3.1

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
City Council Meeting MINUTES February 14, 2023

1.1 Oath of Office:
• Sergeant Brian Boivie
• Lieutenant Stacy Burns
• Lieutenant Daniel Denny

PUBLIC ADDRESS
Gilbert Felix, District Director for Assembly Member Esmeralda Soria, introduced himself to the Council and staff.

Jordan Lassiter, Activities Director at CUHS, and ASB President requested a donation from the City Council to help support Class of 2023 graduation activities.

COUNCIL AND STAFF VERBAL REPORTS – Section 2

2.1 COUNCIL VERBAL REPORTS
Legislative, Collaborative Agency, Ad Hoc
Council Member Ahmed attended a Madera County Economic Development Commission Meeting and the 100-year Anniversary Special Council meeting kick off and luncheon.

Council Member Troost attended a CAPMC meeting, and the employee luncheon.

Council Member Chavez attended the Centennial procession down Robertson Boulevard.

Mayor Barragan also attended the procession and employee luncheon.

2.2 STAFF VERBAL REPORTS
Police Chief Palmer reported out on current Police Department stats. He and other staff traveled to a police academy to help recruit police officers to the department; and, will be attending the funeral for the Selma officer who was murdered.

Fire Chief Gaumnitz participated in the centennial procession and attended the employee luncheon.

Public Works Director Rogers reported that after the last City Council meeting, a draft MOU between the City and the Historical Society was created and sent to them for review; we are awaiting comment. Public Works is currently working with CalRecycle, City of Madera and Madera County to complete a Regional Organics Capacity Planning report as mandated by SB 1383. We are currently gathering information related to organics recycling and edible food recovery in order to report to the State. Staff met with Mid Valley Disposal to discuss the Annual Curbside Cleanup Event and will be scheduling the event for April 17th – 21st.

Community & Economic Development Director Hamilton Jack in the Box construction to begin soon; TF Tires is wrapping up their job site and should be ready to open by April 1. O’Reilly’s Auto Parts construction is moving along with shelving system installed; last month his department had 41 building permits, 3 encroachment permits, 5 yard sale permits and 35 plan checks, 3 new single-family dwellings construction permits in Greenhills area.

Finance Director Williams working with auditors and working on mid-year budget.

City Clerk McClendon reminded Council to complete their Form 700’s by April 1 deadline.

City Council Meeting MINUTES February 14, 2023
Recreation & Community Outreach Deputy Director Wisener working on summer events planning, looking for sponsors.

City Administrator Pruett was at the League of California Cities City Manager conference last week; met with potential grant writing firm with Director Hamilton; attended a sales tax meeting to go over the last quarters report where numbers are down but still within the City’s conservative budget; attended a CFD refunding meeting; JCI meeting continuing the PG&E reconciliation.

Mayor Pro Tem Smith thanked Public Works staff for their efforts in taking down the City’s Christmas Tree.

CONSENT CALENDAR – Section 3

3.1 Approval of the January 24, 2023 Council / RSA Joint Meeting Minutes (McClendon)

3.2 Approval of the February 7, 2023 Special City Council Meeting Minutes (McClendon)

3.3 Consideration and Approval of the January 2023 Check Register (Williams)

3.4 Consideration and Approval of a City Council Resolution (09-23) Authorizing Submittal of an Application for AB 836 (Clean Air Centers Pilot Program) and other Related Authorizations Thereto (Rogers)
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Seconded by Council Member Troost to Approve the Consent Calendar as Presented. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

PUBLIC HEARINGS – Section 4
DEFERRED BUSINESS – Section 5
NEW BUSINESS – Section 6

6.1 Consideration of Approving the Madera County Economic Development Commission’s 2023-2024 Fiscal Year Basic Service Level Budget Proposal (McClendon)
Motion by Mayor Pro Tem Smith, Seconded by Council Member Troost to Approve the Madera County Economic Development Commission’s 2023-2024 Fiscal ear Basic Service Level Budget Proposal in the amount of $34,275.20. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

6.2 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution (10-23) Designating Those Officers Having the Authority to Approve Transactions, Including Deposits and Withdrawals, to Tri Counties Accounts on Behalf of the City (Williams) Motion by Council Member Ahmed, Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Smith to Approve City Council Resolution #10-23, Designating Those Officers Having the Authority to Approve Transactions, Including Deposits and Withdrawals, to Tri Counties Accounts on Behalf of the City. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

City Council Meeting MINUTES February 14, 2023

6.3 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution (11-23) Approving Budget Amendments for Measure N to Cover the Cost of Replacing a Totaled Patrol Vehicle (Palmer)
Motion by Council Member Troost, Seconded by Mayor Barragan to Approve Amended City Council Resolution #11-23, Approving Budget Amendments to Cover the Cost of Replacing a Totaled Patrol Vehicle. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

6.4 Consideration and Adoption of a City Council Resolution (12-23) Opposing Initiative No. 21-0042A1, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act (Pruett) Motion by Council Member Ahmed, Seconded by Mayor Pro Tem Smith to Approve City Council Resolution #12-23, Opposing Initiative No. 21-0042A1, the Taxpayer Protection and Government Accountability Act. Motion passed unanimously by roll call vote.

ANNOUNCEMENTS – Section 7
FEB 15 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, CITY HALL, 7PM
FEB 17 COMMUNITY SCIENCE WORKSHOP, ED RAY PARK BUILDING, 3PM FEB 20 PRESIDENTS DAY, CITY OFFICES CLOSED
FEB 25 CHOWCHILLA ATHLETIC FOUNDATION HALL OF FAME BANQUET, CHOWCHILLA FAIRGROUNDS, 6PM
FEB 26 EDWARD RAY DAY
FEB 28 CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY HALL, 4PM

ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Barragan Adjourned the February 14, 2023 City Council Meeting at 4:57 p.m.

ATTEST: APPROVED:

Joann McClendon, CMC, City Clerk Mayor Ray Barragan

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.2

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: Information Regarding Monthly Invoice Payments PREPARED BY: Kerri Williams, Finance Director
ATTACHMENTS: Check list report

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

Informational only. The invoices paid are shown in the attached listing of invoices.

BACKGROUND:

Presented this evening is a list of invoices paid in February 2023.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Informational item only.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Each item shown on the invoice list includes a description of that item and the amount of the invoice.

ALTERNATIVES:

Not applicable.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

None.
3/1/2023 1:12:16 PM Page 1 of 7
Bank Transaction Report
Chowchilla, CA Transaction Detail
Issued Date Range: 02/01/2023 - 02/28/2023
Cleared Date Range: -
Cleared
Date Number Description Module Status Type Amount
Issued
Date
Bank Account: 200650906 - General Tricounties Bank
02/01/2023 64459 Temple Display, LTD Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -62,802.80 02/01/2023 64460 3AARC Enterprises Inc Utility Billing Outstanding Check -129.94 02/01/2023 64461 Yan Jun Gu Utility Billing Outstanding Check -78.23 02/01/2023 64462 Capital Equity Management Group, Inc. Utility Billing Outstanding Check -111.66 02/01/2023 64463 Jeffrey Jackson Utility Billing Outstanding Check -160.76 02/01/2023 64464 Albert Baker Utility Billing Outstanding Check -65.27 02/01/2023 64465 Andrea Blech Utility Billing Outstanding Check -113.04 02/01/2023 64466 Kristoffer Hansen Utility Billing Outstanding Check -133.81 02/02/2023 64467 AFLAC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,252.61 02/02/2023 64468 American Fidelity Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,526.74 02/02/2023 64469 Anderson Pump Co Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -603.80 02/02/2023 64470 Applied Industrial Tech Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -4,748.39 02/02/2023 64471 AT & T Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -368.86 02/02/2023 64472 AutoZone Parts, Inc Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -644.13 02/02/2023 64473 Badger Meter Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -604.60 02/02/2023 64474 BSK Associates Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -856.00 02/02/2023 64475 Chowchilla DoIt Best Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -171.39 02/02/2023 64476 Consolidated Electrical Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -37.40 02/02/2023 64477 Cook's Communication Corp Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -24,748.55 02/02/2023 64478 DATCO Services Coporation Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -63.00 02/02/2023 64479 Diede Construction, Inc Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -510,419.85 02/02/2023 64480 Farmers Hardware Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -148.78 02/02/2023 64481 Fastenal Company Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,266.32 02/02/2023 64482 Grainger Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,573.92 02/02/2023 64483 Interstate Gas Services Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -780.00 02/02/2023 64484 Jo's Auto Repair Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -304.00 02/02/2023 64485 Lozano Smith, LLP Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -10,382.20 02/02/2023 64486 Mace Pest Control Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -80.00 02/02/2023 64487 Madera County Economic Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -8,568.80 02/02/2023 64488 Madera County Farm Bureau Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -18,900.14 02/02/2023 64489 Madera Irrigation District Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -2,850.00 02/02/2023 64490 Madera Tribune Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -247.00 02/02/2023 64491 Maziar Aminsalehi Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -51.00 02/02/2023 64492 Mid Valley Disposal Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -130,644.43 02/02/2023 64493 Motorola Solutions, Inc Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -599.27 02/02/2023 64494 Navia Benefit Solutions Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -69.80 Bank Transaction Report Issued Date Range: -
3/1/2023 1:12:16 PM Page 2 of 7
Cleared
Date Number Description Module Status Type Amount
Issued
Date
02/02/2023 64495 NBS Government Finance Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -500.00 02/02/2023 64496 Occupational Health Centers of California Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -206.50 02/02/2023 64497 ODP Business Solutions, LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,145.13 02/02/2023 64498 Point Emblems LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,535.75 02/02/2023 64499 Price Paige & Company Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -2,700.00 02/02/2023 64500 Principal Financial Group Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -9,032.65 02/02/2023 64501 ProClean Supply Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -666.70 02/02/2023 64502 PROtech Security & Electronics Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -135.00 02/02/2023 64503 Prudential Overall Supply Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -276.37 02/02/2023 64504 Purl's Sheet Metal & Air Conditioning Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,068.94 02/02/2023 64505 Quad Knopf, Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -20,700.90 02/02/2023 64506 Railworks Track Systems LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -215.00 02/02/2023 64507 Rod Pruett Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -336.00 02/02/2023 64508 S & W Auto Parts Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -47.06 02/02/2023 64509 Sparkletts Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -5.99 02/02/2023 64510 State Water Resources Control Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -365.00 02/02/2023 64511 Steves Chevrolet of Chowchilla Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -59.95 02/02/2023 64512 TeamCalifornia Economic Development Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -600.00 02/02/2023 64513 The Radar Shop Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -530.00 02/02/2023 64514 Thomas Hollier Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -60.00 02/02/2023 64515 Tyler Business Forms Reversal Accounts Payable Outstanding Check Reversal 580.00 02/02/2023 64515 Tyler Business Forms Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -580.00 02/02/2023 64516 Tyler Technologies, Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -7,993.75 02/02/2023 64517 Van De Pol Enterprises Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -3,457.33 02/02/2023 64518 Verizon Wireless Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -2,598.49 02/02/2023 64519 Vision Service Plan - (CA) Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -970.21 02/02/2023 64520 Waseem Ahmed Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -333.75 02/02/2023 64521 Water Technology of Fresno Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -550.00 02/02/2023 64522 West Coast Pet Memorial Service Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -313.40 02/02/2023 64523 Wulff, Hansen & Company Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -17,500.00 02/02/2023 64524 Yamabe and Horn Engineering Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -19,587.68 02/09/2023 64525 Mario's Traditional Mexican Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -750.00 02/09/2023 64526 Steves Chevrolet of Chowchilla Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -239.80 02/09/2023 64527 Adrian Rocha Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -661.26 02/09/2023 64528 Gary Twitty Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -965.52 02/09/2023 64529 Jalynn Klups Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,639.81 02/09/2023 64530 Jeff Troost Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -284.40 02/09/2023 64531 John Chavez Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -210.61 02/09/2023 64532 Nicholas Palmer Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,636.20 02/09/2023 64533 Waseem Ahmed Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -284.40 02/14/2023 64534 US Post Office Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -2,375.68 02/15/2023 64535 Aanonson Sprinkler Company Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -32.88 02/15/2023 64536 AFLAC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,252.61 Bank Transaction Report Issued Date Range: -
3/1/2023 1:12:16 PM Page 3 of 7
Cleared
Date Number Description Module Status Type Amount
Issued
Date
02/15/2023 64537 American Fidelity Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -950.00 02/15/2023 64538 AT & T Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -79.54 02/15/2023 64539 Blue Shield of California Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -75,350.17 02/15/2023 64540 BSK Associates Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -490.00 02/15/2023 64541 CA State Disbursement Unit Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -385.37 02/15/2023 64542 California Highway Patrol Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -100.00 02/15/2023 64543 Chowchilla DoIt Best Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -8.25 02/15/2023 64544 Chowchilla Employees Assn. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -165.00 02/15/2023 64545 Chowchilla Mid-Management Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -240.00 02/15/2023 64546 Chowchilla Office Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -120.00 02/15/2023 64547 Chowchilla Peace Officers Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -860.00 02/15/2023 64548 Void Check Accounts Payable Voided Check 0.00 02/15/2023 64549 Comcast Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -43.37 02/15/2023 64550 CSMFO Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -125.00 02/15/2023 64551 David Burnett Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -111.00 02/15/2023 64552 De Lange Landen Financial Services Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,517.01 02/15/2023 64553 Department of Justice/Acc Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -128.00 02/15/2023 64554 Farmers Hardware Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -7.60 02/15/2023 64555 Ferguson Enterprises, Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -241.29 02/15/2023 64556 Fitness Peak Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -122.50 02/15/2023 64557 Franchise Tax Board- Tax Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -227.74 02/15/2023 64558 Freedom Pools Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -4,000.00 02/15/2023 64559 Golden Valley Door & Millwork Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -993.74 02/15/2023 64560 Grainger Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -387.28 02/15/2023 64561 Grover Landscape Services Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -6,792.29 02/15/2023 64562 Healthwise Services, LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -386.38 02/15/2023 64563 James Dewall Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -85.00 02/15/2023 64564 Jason Rogers Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -554.00 02/15/2023 64565 JMP Office Technologies Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -260.78 02/15/2023 64566 Kelby Grissom Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -68.00 02/15/2023 64567 Madera County Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -25,790.83 02/15/2023 64568 Madera County Sheriff Civil Division Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -337.23 02/15/2023 64569 Madera Tribune Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -257.70 02/15/2023 64570 Mark Hamilton Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -167.00 02/15/2023 64571 Mark Hamilton Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -185.00 02/15/2023 64572 Mid Valley Disposal Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -2,383.46 02/15/2023 64573 MuniServices LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,144.74 02/15/2023 64574 Myers Stevens & Toohey & Co Inc Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -714.80 02/15/2023 64575 National Band & Tag Company Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -268.12 02/15/2023 64576 Navia Benefit Solutions Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -64.80 02/15/2023 64577 NBS Government Finance Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -535.80 02/15/2023 64578 Occupational Health Centers of California Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -217.50 02/15/2023 64579 ODP Business Solutions, LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,370.54 Bank Transaction Report Issued Date Range: -
3/1/2023 1:12:16 PM Page 4 of 7
Cleared
Date Number Description Module Status Type Amount
Issued
Date
02/15/2023 64580 O'Reilly Auto Parts Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -91.45 02/15/2023 64581 Pacific Plan Review Inc Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -297.50 02/15/2023 64582 Prudential Overall Supply Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -206.27 02/15/2023 64583 Quad Knopf, Inc. Reversal Accounts Payable Outstanding Check Reversal 420.00 02/15/2023 64583 Quad Knopf, Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -420.00 02/15/2023 64584 Ray Barragan Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -333.75 02/15/2023 64585 Rick Manuel Medeiros Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -855.00 02/15/2023 64586 Riggs Ambulance Service Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -6.00 02/15/2023 64587 Robin Roman Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -22.00 02/15/2023 64588 Rod Pruett Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -185.00 02/15/2023 64589 S & W Auto Parts Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -396.85 02/15/2023 64590 SCA of CA, LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -7,520.00 02/15/2023 64591 Shyanne Watson Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -255.00 02/15/2023 64592 Sparkletts Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -66.91 02/15/2023 64593 Stacy Turner Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -255.00 02/15/2023 64594 Superior Pool Products, LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,474.59 02/15/2023 64595 T & T Pavement Markings & Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -4,347.37 02/15/2023 64596 Terryberry Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,871.45 02/15/2023 64597 TF Tire & Service Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -558.34 02/15/2023 64598 The Sand Trap Bar & Grill Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -52,500.00 02/15/2023 64599 The Shirt Shak Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -405.09 02/15/2023 64600 T-Mobile Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -186.90 02/15/2023 64601 Toshiba Financial Services Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -763.44 02/15/2023 64602 U.S. Bank (PARS) Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -278.52 02/15/2023 64603 US BANK (CAL-CARD) Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -3,106.33 02/15/2023 64604 Van De Pol Enterprises Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -502.85 02/15/2023 64605 Vulcan Materials Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -540.97 02/15/2023 64606 Water Technology of Fresno Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -750.00 02/15/2023 64607 West Coast Arborists Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -4,500.00 02/15/2023 64608 Wilmer Inzunza Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -68.00 02/15/2023 64609 Zoom Imaging Solutions, Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -336.99 02/15/2023 64610 Farmers Hardware Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -185.38 02/15/2023 64611 US BANK (CAL-CARD) Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -28,579.02 02/15/2023 64612 Void Check Accounts Payable Voided Check 0.00 02/15/2023 64613 Alliant Insurance Service Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -7,680.00 02/23/2023 64614 Adrian Rocha Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -661.26 02/23/2023 64615 CA State Disbursement Unit Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -385.37 02/23/2023 64616 Chowchilla Employees Assn. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -165.00 02/23/2023 64617 Chowchilla Mid-Management Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -240.00 02/23/2023 64618 Chowchilla Office Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -135.00 02/23/2023 64619 Chowchilla Peace Officers Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -860.00 02/23/2023 64620 Void Check Accounts Payable Voided Check 0.00 02/23/2023 64621 Fitness Peak Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -122.50 Bank Transaction Report Issued Date Range: -
3/1/2023 1:12:16 PM Page 5 of 7
Cleared
Date Number Description Module Status Type Amount
Issued
Date
02/23/2023 64622 Gary V. Twitty Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -486.68 02/23/2023 64623 Jalynn S. Klups Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,639.82 02/23/2023 64624 Justine R White Reversal Accounts Payable Outstanding Check Reversal 461.52 02/23/2023 64624 Justine R White Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -461.52 02/23/2023 64625 Madera County Sheriff Civil Division Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -337.23 02/23/2023 64626 Nicholas Palmer Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,682.21 02/23/2023 64627 Randall L. Hadley Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -73.07 02/23/2023 64628 U.S. Bank (PARS) Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -132.86 02/23/2023 64629 Justin R White Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -461.52 02/24/2023 64630 A-1 Auto Electric Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -567.16 02/24/2023 64631 Anderson Pump Co Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -8,235.00 02/24/2023 64632 AT & T Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,222.23 02/24/2023 64633 AutoZone Parts, Inc Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -21.75 02/24/2023 64634 Brian Boivie Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -111.00 02/24/2023 64635 BSK Associates Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -656.00 02/24/2023 64636 Caltronics Business Systems Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -447.44 02/24/2023 64637 CDW Government, Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -2,128.06 02/24/2023 64638 Central Valley Veterinary Clinic Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -2,891.02 02/24/2023 64639 Void Check Accounts Payable Voided Check 0.00 02/24/2023 64640 Chowchilla DoIt Best Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -57.77 02/24/2023 64641 CivicPlus, Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -9,921.09 02/24/2023 64642 Comcast Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -265.84 02/24/2023 64643 D & V Sporting Gear Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -32.63 02/24/2023 64644 Department of Justice/Acc B/A Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -70.00 02/24/2023 64645 Department of Transportation Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -2,104.26 02/24/2023 64646 Elizabeth Fernandez Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -70.27 02/24/2023 64647 Farmers Hardware Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -4.25 02/24/2023 64648 Fastenal Company Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -15.16 02/24/2023 64649 Fresno Police Department Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -593.00 02/24/2023 64650 FunFlicks Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -6,453.00 02/24/2023 64651 Grainger Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -106.02 02/24/2023 64652 Grover Landscape Services Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -6,990.00 02/24/2023 64653 Guadalupe Gonzalez Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -100.00 02/24/2023 64654 H & R Families Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -28.00 02/24/2023 64655 Home Depot Credit Services Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -706.58 02/24/2023 64656 Interstate Battery Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -894.72 02/24/2023 64657 Johnson Controls Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -9,240.00 02/24/2023 64658 Mace Pest Control Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -80.00 02/24/2023 64659 Michael Baker International Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -3,849.30 02/24/2023 64660 ODP Business Solutions, LLC Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -567.22 02/24/2023 64661 PACE Supply Corp Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -174.32 02/24/2023 64662 Pacific Plan Review Inc Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -7,480.00 02/24/2023 64663 Precision Dynamics Corporation Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -79.06 Bank Transaction Report Issued Date Range: -
3/1/2023 1:12:16 PM Page 6 of 7
Cleared
Date Number Description Module Status Type Amount
Issued
Date
02/24/2023 64664 Prudential Overall Supply Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -436.20 02/24/2023 64665 Quad Knopf, Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -728.00 02/24/2023 64666 Rahn's Fire Safety Services Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -266.44 02/24/2023 64667 S & W Auto Parts Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -31.71 02/24/2023 64668 US BANK (CAL-CARD) Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -6,048.57 02/24/2023 64669 Vulcan Materials Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -538.43 02/24/2023 64670 Water Technology of Fresno Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -5,756.25 02/24/2023 64671 West Coast Arborists Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -22,750.00 02/24/2023 64672 Wilmer Inzunza Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -111.00 02/24/2023 64673 Yamabe and Horn Engineering Inc. Accounts Payable Outstanding Check -1,148.12 Bank Account 200650906 Total: (218) -1,248,653.40
Report Total: (218) -1,248,653.40
Bank Transaction Report Issued Date Range: -
3/1/2023 1:12:16 PM Page 7 of 7
Summary
Bank Account Count Amount
200650906 General Tricounties Bank 218 -1,248,653.40
Report Total: 218 -1,248,653.40
Cash Account Count Amount
**No Cash Account** 4 0.00
999 999-0100-0215 Cash In Bank 214 -1,248,653.40
Report Total: 218 -1,248,653.40
Transaction Type Count Amount
Check 215 -1,250,114.92
Check Reversal 3 1,461.52
Report Total: 218 -1,248,653.40

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.3

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: Resolution Approving Change Order No. 1 and No. 2 in the amount of $66,623.00, Authorizing the City Administrator or Designee to Execute all Related documents Thereto and Amending the Fiscal Year 2022/23 City Budget and Accepting the Improvements and Authorizing Filing of the Notice of Completion for the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project
PREPARED BY: Noel Azevedo, Administrative Analyst
APPROVED BY: Fred Gaumnitz, Fire Chief
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

City Council adopt a resolution approving Change Order No. 1 in the amount of $27,315.00 and Change Order No. 2 in the amount of $39,308.00 totaling 66,623.00 with Diede Construction, Inc. and amend the City of Chowchilla Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Budget. Accepting the improvements and authorizing filing of the Notice of Completion for the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Chowchilla recently requested proposals from qualified building contractors to design, expand and renovate the fire station located in Chowchilla, California. This project will include renovating the approximately 6,100 square feet existing fire station, expanding it by approximately 5,820 square feet, and adding 1,500 square feet covered reloading area. When complete, the building should represent a finished structure and meet the requirements of an essential services building. As authorized by City Council, Staff advertised for bids and bids were opened in May 2021. The construction contract was awarded to Diede Construction, Inc. on July 27, 2021.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

After receiving the bid award for the project, Diede Construction, Inc. began work on November 1, 2021.

During construction, a review of the building was conducted and recommended to pour a concrete apron on the North side of building, add motor/power doors, and add power receptacles and lighting for the apparatus yard. As a result, Diede Construction, Inc. has submitted Change Orders No. 1 and No. 2 as a request to replace these items not within the original scope of the project. Upon review between the Public Works Department and Fire Department, staff recommend the approval of the change order.

The Contractor, Diede Construction, Inc., has completed the work required for the Project. The City’s Public Works Department has inspected the improvements required by the Project and all of the improvements have been completed. The City must accept the improvements and file the Notice of Completion in order to closeout the Project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The current Council approved budget for this change order is $66,623.00 short and will need to be amended in order to move forward the Notice of Completion. After discussion with the City Administrator, we determined that a transfer out of the Measure N fund would be appropriate.

The Project is funded with Measure N and Fire Development Impact Fees (DIF) Funds. The approved construction contract was in the amount of $1,166,000, and City Council approved a total construction budget of $1166,000 for all engineering, inspection and construction costs. The final construction cost for the Project was $1,232,623, or $66,623 over the approved construction budget. This overage was due to unforeseen recommendations encountered during construction and additions to the project. Tabulated below are the funding and costs related to the project.

WORK DESCRIPTION CONTRACT AMOUNT
Original Bid Contract Amount of Funding>>>>> $ 1,166,000.00

Total Funding Amount>>>>> $ 1,166,000 .00
• Final Construction Cost with Change Orders $ 1,232,623.00 Total Construction Amount >>>>> $ 1,232,623.00
ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

1. The resolution and budget amendments will be sent to the Finance Department for inclusion into the FY 22/23 Budget

2. The change order is approved

3. Filing of Notice of Completion with Madera County Recorder.

4. Release of 5% retention in the amount of $61,631.15.00 to Diede Construction, Inc.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -22

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA APPROVING CHANGE ORDER NO. 1 AND NO. 2 IN THE AMOUNT OF $66,623.00, AUTHORIZING

THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE ALL RELATED DOCUMENTS THERETO AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 CITY BUDGET AND ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION FOR THE DESIGN/BUILD: FIRE

STATION EXPANSION AND RENOVATION PROJECT
WHEREAS, Diede Construction, Inc. has prepared Change Order Request No. 1 and No. 2 for items and tasks not included in the original bid proposal; and WHEREAS, City staff have reviewed Change Order No. 1 and No. 2 and approve it; and WHEREAS, the budget transfers between funds and the budget amendment exceeds $50,000 and requires City Council approval, and
WHEREAS, expenditure and transfer accounts will need to be amended within the Project budget, Measure N budget in the amount of $66,623.00 for the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project; and
WHEREAS, an adequate fund balance is available in said Funds to allow for said increase of appropriations; and
WHEREAS, Diede Construction, Inc., has completed the work for the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Public Works Inspector has inspected the improvements required by the City and all improvements required by the City have been completed; and WHEREAS, the Fire Chief recommends acceptance of the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project and requests City Council to authorize the Director of Public Works to record the Notice of Completion for the Project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby finds, determines and declares the following:

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

2. Approve Change Order No. 1 and Change Order No. 2 to Diede Construction, Inc. in the amount of $66,623.00.

3. Authorizes the City Administrator or designee to execute all documents necessary to complete the service on behalf of the City of Chowchilla.

4. The Finance Director is authorized to make such other revisions, individual appropriation line-items, changes in summaries, fund totals, grand totals, and other portions of the budget document as necessary to reflect and implement the changes specified in this resolution.

5. City Council accepts the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project.

6. Authorization to record the Notice of Completion.

7. The Finance Department is authorized to release retention to Diede Construction, Inc.

8. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 14th day of March, 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor Ray Barragan
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.4

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Chowchilla, California, Amending Council Resolution #32-20, Giving Authorization to File A Financial Assistance Application Financing Agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board for the Planning, Design, and Construction of the Chowchilla-Fairmead Sewer Consolidation Project, To Define the Project as the “Fairmead - Chowchilla Wastewater Treatment Facility Connection Project”
PREPARED BY: Jason Rogers, Director of Public Works
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

Approve amendment of Resolution #32.20 as requested by the CA State Water Resources Control Board.

BACKGROUND:

In April 2020, City Council approved the submittal of a grant application to the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) to fund a collection system to convey the effluent from the Community of Fairmead septic systems to the City of Chowchilla’s Waste Water Treatment Plant and improvements to the plant once the Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) was completed. The IS/MND was completed and accepted by Council on March 9, 2021 and the funding application was completed with Self-Help Enterprises and submitted to the SWRCB on August 11, 2021.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

In March, 2023, SWRCB informed the City that their Legal Unit had completed a preliminary due diligence review of the project. One issue they brought up is that the Project Title in the Authorizing Resolution (City of Chowchilla Sewer Consolidation Project), Council Resolution #32-20, does not match up with the Project Title on the application and Environmental Document (Fairmead - Chowchilla Wastewater Treatment Facility Connection Project). The Resolution grants authority for the construction of the “City of Chowchilla Sewer Consolidation Project”, not the “Fairmead - Chowchilla Wastewater Treatment Facility Connection Project”. As a result, the SWRCB has requested an amended resolution to match the project title.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact to this action as it is a correction to a previously approved resolution.

ALTERNATIVES:

None.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

City will send the amended resolution to the SWRCB.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA AMENDING COUNCIL RESOLUTION #32-20, GIVING AUTHORIZATION TO FILE A FINANCIAL

ASSISTANCE APPLICATION FINANCING AGREEMENT FROM THE STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD FOR THE PLANNING, DESIGN, AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE CHOWCHILLAFAIRMEAD SEWER CONSOLIDATION PROJECT, TO DEFINE THE PROJECT AS THE “FAIRMEAD - CHOWCHILLA WASTEWATER TREATMENT FACILITY CONNECTION PROJECT” WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla completed the Assessment of Existing Wastewater Treatment Plant and Collection System (Assessment), and
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla is currently carrying out the Clean Water State Revolving Fund (CWSRF) planning grant to explore the possibility of the City of Chowchilla providing wastewater collection and treatment services to Madera County Maintenance District 33 (MD-33), and WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla would like to apply for construction grant funding to implement the Capital Improvement Plans recommended by the Assessment prepared by the City of Chowchilla, therefore;
WHEREAS, the Chowchilla City Administrator (the “Authorized Representative”) or designee is hereby authorized and directed to sign and file, for and on behalf of the City, a Financial Assistance Application for a financing agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board for the planning, design, and construction of the Fairmead - Chowchilla Wastewater Treatment Facility Connection Project (the “Project”); and
WHEREAS, the Authorized Representative, or his/her designee, is designated to provide the assurances, certifications, and commitments required for the financial assistance application, including executing a financial assistance agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board and any amendments or changes thereto; and
WHEREAS, the Authorized Representative, or his/her designee, is designated to represent the City of Chowchilla in carrying out Chowchilla’s responsibilities under the financing agreement, including certifying disbursement requests on behalf of Chowchilla and compliance with applicable state and federal laws.

RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA (the “Entity”), AS FOLLOWS:

The City Administrator (the “Authorized Representative”) or designee is hereby authorized and directed to sign and file, for and on behalf of the Entity, a Financial Assistance Application for a financing agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board for the planning, design, and construction of Fairmead - Chowchilla Wastewater Treatment Facility Connection Project (the “Project”).

This Authorized Representative, or his/her designee, is designated to provide the assurances, certifications, and commitments required for the financial assistance application, including executing a financial assistance agreement from the State Water Resources Control Board and any amendments or changes thereto.

The Authorized Representative, or his/her designee, is designated to represent the Entity in carrying out the Entity’s responsibilities under the financing agreement, including certifying disbursement requests on behalf of the Entity and compliance with applicable state and federal laws.

CERTIFICATION
I do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution duly and regularly adopted at a meeting of the City Council of the City of Chowchilla held on the 14th day of March 2023.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 14th day of March, 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor Ray Barragan
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.5

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: Resolution Accepting the Improvements and Authorizing Filing of the Notice of Completion for the Chowchilla Police Department Domestic Water Piping Retrofit Project
PREPARED BY: Noel Azevedo, Administrative Analyst
APPROVED BY: Jason Rogers, Public Works Director
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

City Council adopt a resolution accepting the improvements and authorizing filing of the Notice of Completion for the Chowchilla Police Department Domestic Water Piping Retrofit Project.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Chowchilla’s Police Department has experienced numerous plumbing issues and failures related to the age and condition of the water pipe plumbing throughout the building. These issues have led to numerous water leaks throughout the building. While staff has addressed these issues with temporary fixes, staff determined that there was a clear need to repair/replace the aging plumbing system serving the Police Department due to the threat to health and safety of the building’s occupants and the potential to damage essential emergency services equipment, which would impair public safety services. As authorized by City Council, Staff advertised for bids in August 2022 and bids were opened in September 2022. The construction contract was awarded to Diede Construction, Inc. on September 27, 2022.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The Contractor, Diede Construction, Inc., has completed the work required for the Project. The City’s Public Works Department has inspected the improvements required by the Project and all of the improvements have been completed. The City must accept the improvements and file the Notice of Completion in order to closeout the Project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The Project is funded with Measure N and General Funds. The approved construction contract was in the amount of $510,000, and City Council approved a total construction budget of $510,000 for all engineering, inspection and construction costs. The final construction cost for the Project was $536,000, or $26,000 over the approved construction budget. This overage was due to unforeseen issues encountered during construction and additions to the project. Tabulated below are the funding and costs related to the project.

WORK DESCRIPTION CONTRACT AMOUNT
Original Bid Contract Amount of Funding>>>>> $ 510,000.00

Total Funding Amount>>>>> $ 510,000 .00
• Final Construction Cost with Change Orders $ 536,000.00 Total Construction Amount >>>>> $ 536,000.00
ALTERNATIVES:

None.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

1. Filing of Notice of Completion with Madera County Recorder.

2. Release of 5% retention in the amount of $25,500.00 to Diede Construction, Inc.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO # -22

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA

ACCEPTING IMPROVEMENTS AND AUTHORIZING FILING OF THE NOTICE OF COMPLETION

FOR THE CHOWCHILLA POLICE DEPARTMENT DOMESTIC WATER PIPING RETROFIT PROJECT WHEREAS, Diede Construction, Inc., has completed the work for the Chowchilla Police Department Domestic Water Piping Retrofit Project; and
WHEREAS, the City’s Public Works Inspector has inspected the improvements required by the City and all improvements required by the City have been completed; and WHEREAS, the Director of Public Works recommends acceptance of the Chowchilla Police Department Domestic Water Piping Retrofit Project and requests City Council to authorize the Director of Public Works to record the Notice of Completion for the Project.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby finds, determines and declares the following:

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

2. The City Council accepts the Chowchilla Police Department Domestic Water Piping Retrofit Project.

3. The Director of Public Works is authorized to record the Notice of Completion.

4. The Finance Department is authorized to release retention to Diede Construction, Inc.

5. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 14th day of March, 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor Ray Barragan
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.6

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar
SUBJECT: Weed Abatement
PREPARED BY: Fred Gaumnitz, Fire Chief
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution and Time Line

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

Approval of a Resolution declaring the existence of a public nuisance by virtue of certain weed growth per Consent Calendar minute order by roll call vote.

BACKGROUND:

The need for weed abatement is a seasonal and recurring nuisance, which poses a fire, safety, and public health risk. The accumulation of weed growth also has a negative visual effect to the public within the City limits, which is a priority goal of the City Council. The timeline and activity summary are included in your supplements. This notice of abatement will be public noticed over the next few weeks in the Madera tribune and the City’s social media site(s).

This is an annual program of the City. The Chowchilla Municipal Code, Section 8.12 allows for the authority of this activity.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

This program in the past has been shown to help expedite the removal of weeds, which in turn reduces the fire and safety hazards due to their uncontrolled growth and gives Chowchilla and its neighbors a more appealing landscape. Community Pride is a City Council goal.

FISCAL IMPACT:

Initial costs for abatement of non-compliant properties incurred through planned budget expenditures.

Unpaid abatement costs will be recorded and a lien placed on such properties.

ALTERNATIVES:

Not perform annual weed abatement, notices and abatement of non-compliant properties.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

Administrative Services office to forward a copy of the executed resolution to the Community & Economic Development Department to process.

Community & Economic Development Department to arrange for publication in local newspaper.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA

DECLARING THE EXISTENCE OF A PUBLIC NUISANCE BY VIRTUE OF CERTAIN WEED GROWTH
WHEREAS, the Chowchilla Municipal Code, Section 8.12, All weeds growing upon the streets or sidewalks or upon or in front of private property within the city which bear seeds of a wingy or downy nature or attain such a large growth as to become a fire menace when dry, or at full natural growth will attain such a large growth as to become a fire menace when dry, or which are otherwise noxious or dangerous, may be declared to be a public nuisance by the city council, and may thereafter be abated as provided in this chapter.

WHEREAS, "Weeds", as used in this chapter, means and includes weeds, grass, ferns, vines and other similar natural growth other than growth ordinarily and customarily planted for decorative purposes and which has been planted for decorative purposes and is under continuing cultivation; and
WHEREAS, Weeds in excess of approximately four to six inches tall as determined by the Code Enforcement Officer will be determined to be a public nuisance; and WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council to effect timely removal of all weeds so described through the City’s Weed Abatement Program, and in manner provided by law; and WHEREAS, if abatement does not occur during time frame prescribed, the City may choose to follow Chowchilla Municipal Code Section 8.12 lien process and/or seek Administrative fines per Ordinance 444-08.

NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby declares that certain weeds, as determined by the Code Enforcement Official, constitute that a public nuisance exists and the Exhibit “A” time line schedule for 2023 is attached.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 14th day of March, 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor Ray Barragan
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk
Community & Economic Development Department
Weed Abatement Timeline
2023
3/14/2023 Council – Resolution per CMC Chapter 8.12 – Declaring Weeds a Public Nuisance
3/15/2023 Send Council Resolution to Newspaper for Advertising (Post on City social media site)
3/15/2023
Abatement Declaration Advertised for 2 weeks 3/15 and 3/22 (Resolution needs to be submitted Wednesday before 10:00 am to be published in the following weeks newspaper)
3/15/2023 Begin creating list of potential properties in violation 4/3/2023 Owners of Record Notified by LETTERS VIA MAIL
4/19/2023 Properties Posted with Red “TO DESTROY WEEDS” (Staff to take pictures of all properties with address written on the notice) 5/9/2023 Property Owners to abate by May 9th – Cutoff date 5/10/2023 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE May 14th EDITION of MADERA

TRIBUNE
5/23/2023 Public Protest Hearing to Council – Authorization to Abate Weeds 6/6/2023 Non-Compliant PROPERTIES cited – Need to send out citations next day 6/13/2023 City Council to approve cost of bid from contractor if city purchase policy mandates.
6/14/2023 Coordinate ABATEMENT WITH CONTRACTOR
6/30/2023 PROPTERY ABATEMENT in progress to be complete by JUNE 30th 7/5/2023 LIST OF ABATED PROPERTIES TO FINANCE FOR BILLING 7/19/2023 LIENS CREATED
*Note: These dates are tentative due to weather and time restraints in processing. The dates may vary as much as 30 days.

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 3.7

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: Consent
SUBJECT: Consideration of Monthly Financial Statements
PREPARED BY: Kerri Williams, Finance Director
ATTACHMENTS: January 2023 Budget vs Actual and Balance Sheet

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

Approve the January 2023 Financial Statements shown in the attachment.

BACKGROUND:

Staff provides Council with monthly financial information as an ongoing financial status update.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The monthly financial statements consist of a Budget vs Actual and a Balance Sheet for the General Fund. The Budget vs Actual shows the current Month (Period Activity) and current Year (Fiscal Activity) Revenues and Expenses by Department in summary form compared to the current year Original and Current budgets. The Balance Sheet shows the Assets, Liabilities and Fund Balance at the time the report is generated. This provides an overview of cash, amounts owed to the City, amounts the City owes and the fund balance at a specific point in time.

The financial statements are being presented as an overview of the City’s finances and are not meant to be a comprehensive in-depth review. As a reference to compare to the percent remaining column in the report, the percentage of the year remaining 41.67%.

If the percent remaining column for Revenues is higher than the above-mentioned percentage, that is an unfavorable variance and should be explained if significant. If the percent remaining column for Expenses is lower than the above-mentioned percentage, that is an unfavorable variance and should be explained if significant.

If there are questions regarding the actual amounts or budget vs actual variances, please forward your questions to me in enough time before the meeting for staff to research them

FISCAL IMPACT: Revenues
General Administration- Property tax and VLF, which are 2 of our biggest revenues, are only received 2 times a year in February and May, we have yet to receive a distribution. We are teetered which means we do not have to worry about delinquencies, because the County pays us and goes after the delinquencies themselves. Sales tax payments run a couple months behind and we have yet to receive November’s payment. Sales tax is our second largest revenue.

Police Sworn/Net- Budgeted revenue is from school reimbursements for SRO services, SIU from the County and from grants that are billed periodically. We have not billed the schools or the County yet as we usually bill quarterly. Also, it has $323k Transfer-in from Measure N for the RIMS Software and recruitment and retention of employees. Also, the Madnet program is reimbursed through the County and as of right now we do not have any officers in this program.

Fire Services- This revenue is from transfers-in from Measure N and Fire Impact Fees for the fire station expansion project Phase 1 & Phase 2.

Community & Economic Development- This will fluctuate as building permits are pulled. We budgeted for some growth which includes projects like Oleander, Rancho Calera, Montgomery Farms and miscellaneous lots within Greenhills. So far, we have Century Communities building their part of the Montgomery Farms lots. Oleander Terrace has pulled all of their permits, but other projects have not pulled their permits yet. We still have other miscellaneous permits for other items that are happening as well.

There is also $185k of grant revenues that we have not received as of now.

Parks and Recreation- $200k of this is from a grant that we have not spent yet so we have not requested reimbursements. The rest is overhead allocations from the LLMD that happen at the end of the year.

Community Relations- Revenues are from sports program reimbursements, park pavilion rentals and donations.

Expenses
All departments expenses are within the normal range or better right now ALTERNATIVES:

Pull the item for further discussion.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

None.
3/1/2023 1:15:36 PM Page 1 of 3
Budget Report
Chowchilla, CA Group Summary
For Fiscal: 2022-2023 Period Ending: 01/31/2023
Fiscal
Activity
Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Period
Account Typ… Activity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
Percent
Remaining
Dept: 1600 - General Administration
Revenue 8,680,958.00 8,680,958.00 2,638,555.98 3,623,265.74 -5,057,692.26 58.26% Expense 316,453.00 316,453.00 0.00 9,572.51 306,880.49 96.98% Dept: 1600 - General Administration Surplus (Deficit): 8,364,505.00 8,364,505.00 2,638,555.98 3,613,693.23 -4,750,811.77 56.80% Dept: 1605 - City Council
Expense 74,990.00 80,228.00 5,095.71 31,213.22 49,014.78 61.09% Dept: 1605 - City Council Total: 74,990.00 80,228.00 5,095.71 31,213.22 49,014.78 61.09% Dept: 1610 - City Clerk
Expense 290,284.00 290,284.00 18,636.66 150,563.02 139,720.98 48.13% Dept: 1610 - City Clerk Total: 290,284.00 290,284.00 18,636.66 150,563.02 139,720.98 48.13% Dept: 1615 - City Attorney
Expense 190,000.00 190,000.00 10,382.20 81,703.88 108,296.12 57.00% Dept: 1615 - City Attorney Total: 190,000.00 190,000.00 10,382.20 81,703.88 108,296.12 57.00% Dept: 1705 - General Services
Revenue 0.00 15,834.00 0.00 0.00 -15,834.00 100.00%
Expense 1,580,405.00 1,556,469.00 145,129.57 726,553.25 829,915.75 53.32% Dept: 1705 - General Services Surplus (Deficit): -1,580,405.00 -1,540,635.00 -145,129.57 -726,553.25 814,081.75 52.84% Dept: 1710 - City Administration
Expense 402,438.00 402,200.00 22,480.07 172,264.34 229,935.66 57.17% Dept: 1710 - City Administration Total: 402,438.00 402,200.00 22,480.07 172,264.34 229,935.66 57.17% Dept: 1712 - City Property - Rents
Revenue 161,945.00 161,945.00 300.00 82,509.96 -79,435.04 49.05% Expense 53,690.00 53,690.00 1,159.56 36,637.03 17,052.97 31.76% Dept: 1712 - City Property - Rents Surplus (Deficit): 108,255.00 108,255.00 -859.56 45,872.93 -62,382.07 57.63% Dept: 1720 - Finance Department
Revenue 0.00 1,000.00 28.00 708.75 -291.25 29.13%
Expense 829,616.00 829,616.00 54,736.86 407,453.27 422,162.73 50.89% Dept: 1720 - Finance Department Surplus (Deficit): -829,616.00 -828,616.00 -54,708.86 -406,744.52 421,871.48 50.91% Dept: 2610 - Police Department
Revenue 731,420.00 1,290,078.00 122,952.30 294,218.92 -995,859.08 77.19% Expense 4,524,606.00 5,167,264.00 897,314.96 2,859,158.72 2,308,105.28 44.67% Dept: 2610 - Police Department Surplus (Deficit): -3,793,186.00 -3,877,186.00 -774,362.66 -2,564,939.80 1,312,246.20 33.85% Dept: 2615 - Police - Mad Net
Revenue 192,000.00 192,000.00 0.00 0.00 -192,000.00 100.00% Expense 227,266.00 227,266.00 0.00 0.00 227,266.00 100.00% Dept: 2615 - Police - Mad Net Surplus (Deficit): -35,266.00 -35,266.00 0.00 0.00 35,266.00 100.00% Dept: 2705 - Fire Department
Revenue 1,812,500.00 1,812,500.00 0.00 500.00 -1,812,000.00 99.97% Expense 2,158,480.00 2,167,309.00 120,200.31 1,234,714.78 932,594.22 43.03% Dept: 2705 - Fire Department Surplus (Deficit): -345,980.00 -354,809.00 -120,200.31 -1,234,214.78 -879,405.78 -247.85% Dept: 4705 - Community & Economic Development
Revenue 875,750.00 875,750.00 26,787.99 250,117.27 -625,632.73 71.44% Expense 1,096,369.00 1,096,369.00 58,060.62 411,923.37 684,445.63 62.43% Dept: 4705 - Community & Economic Development Surplus (Deficit): -220,619.00 -220,619.00 -31,272.63 -161,806.10 58,812.90 26.66% Dept: 6610 - Community Pool (OLD)
Revenue 1,200.00 1,200.00 0.00 1,033.01 -166.99 13.92%
Expense 23,177.00 23,177.00 0.00 11,225.43 11,951.57 51.57% Dept: 6610 - Community Pool (OLD) Surplus (Deficit): -21,977.00 -21,977.00 0.00 -10,192.42 11,784.58 53.62% Budget Report For Fiscal: 2022-2023 Period Ending: 01/31/2023 3/1/2023 1:15:36 PM Page 2 of 3
Fiscal
Activity
Variance
Favorable
(Unfavorable)
Period
Account Typ… Activity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
Percent
Remaining
Dept: 6615 - Senior Services
Expense 39,000.00 39,000.00 15,069.36 18,131.86 20,868.14 53.51% Dept: 6615 - Senior Services Total: 39,000.00 39,000.00 15,069.36 18,131.86 20,868.14 53.51% Dept: 6620 - Parks & Facilities
Revenue 259,597.00 259,597.00 133.00 148.00 -259,449.00 99.94% Expense 701,109.00 701,109.00 20,783.84 187,098.98 514,010.02 73.31% Dept: 6620 - Parks & Facilities Surplus (Deficit): -441,512.00 -441,512.00 -20,650.84 -186,950.98 254,561.02 57.66% Dept: 6625 - Community Relations
Revenue 21,200.00 45,328.00 305.00 7,399.56 -37,928.44 83.68% Expense 255,438.00 321,326.00 14,305.82 181,087.21 140,238.79 43.64% Dept: 6625 - Community Relations Surplus (Deficit): -234,238.00 -275,998.00 -14,000.82 -173,687.65 102,310.35 37.07% Report Surplus (Deficit): -26,751.00 -125,570.00 1,405,706.73 -2,259,399.66 -2,133,829.66 -1,699.31% Budget Report For Fiscal: 2022-2023 Period Ending: 01/31/2023 3/1/2023 1:15:36 PM Page 3 of 3
Fund Summary
Fiscal
Activity
Variance
Favorable
Fund (Unfavorable)
Period
Activity
Current
Total Budget
Original
Total Budget
100 - General Fund -26,751.00 -125,570.00 1,405,706.73 -2,259,399.66 -2,133,829.66 Report Surplus (Deficit): -26,751.00 -125,570.00 1,405,706.73 -2,259,399.66 -2,133,829.66 3/1/2023 1:14:08 PM Page 1 of 1
Balance Sheet
Chowchilla, CA Account Summary
As Of 01/31/2023
Account Name Balance
Fund: 100 - General Fund
Assets
100-0100-0201 Petty Cash 500.00
100-0100-0202 Pre-Paid Postage Account 174.05
100-0100-0206 Cash Drawer 1,700.00
100-0100-0220 Accounts Receivable-Clients 33,865.16
100-0100-0221 A/R - Non Governmental -854.71
100-0100-0222 A/R - Intergovernmental 11,024.52
100-0100-0224 A/R MODULE ONLY RECEIVALBLES 200,934.00
100-0100-0226 Advance to Other Funds 477,909.90
100-0100-0227 Liens Receivables General Fund 162,584.76 100-0100-0228 Pending Charges or Refunds 11.55
100-0100-0229 A/R Business License 5,761.94
100-0100-0230 Accounts Receivable-Utilities 147.77
100-0100-0231 Allowance for Doubtful A/C 67,200.00
100-0100-0291 Prepaid Expenses 1,732.51
100-0100-1900 Claim On Cash 6,336,724.95
Total Assets: 7,299,416.40 7,299,416.40
Liability
100-0200-0418 Deposits on Hold-PR Signs 2.00
100-0200-0422 Bonds for Work-Refundable 17,500.00
100-0200-0425 Use Sale Tax 8,278.75
100-0200-0428 Prepaid Deposits 138,000.00
100-0200-0480 Deferred Revenue 169,467.02
100-0200-0499 Payroll Correction -0.93
100-0200-2901 Accounts Payable Pending 700,664.62
Total Liability: 1,033,911.46
Equity
100-0300-0601 Fund Balance 7,114,859.43
100-0300-0602 Designated Restricted Donation 5,934.55
100-0300-0604 Reserve for Contingencies 910,223.00
100-0300-0605 Designated for Prepaid Items 239.50
100-0300-0611 Reserve for L/T A/R 486,672.93
100-0300-0615 SB1186 6,975.19
Total Beginning Equity: 8,524,904.60
Total Revenue 4,259,901.21
Total Expense 6,519,300.87
Revenues Over/Under Expenses -2,259,399.66
Total Liabilities, Equity and Current Surplus (Deficit): 7,299,416.40 Total Equity and Current Surplus (Deficit): 6,265,504.94

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 4.1

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: Public Hearing
SUBJECT: Introduction of an Ordinance Deleting Title 17.40 and Adopting Title 17.42 of the City of Chowchilla Municipal Code; and,
Adopt a Resolution Approving Implementation of Proposed Development Impact Fees per CMC Section 17.76; and,
Adopt a Resolution Temporarily Reducing Single-Family and Multi-Family Residential Development Fees for a Period of 24 months Beginning July 1, 2023 and Ending June 30, 2025
PREPARED BY: Mark Hamilton, Community and Economic Development Director ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution – Implementing Development Impact Fees

2. Resolution – Incentive Program

3. Resolution from Planning Commission

4. Current Ordinance

5. Proposed Ordinance – Redlined

6. Notice of Exemption

7. Public Hearing Notice

8. May 2022 Development Impact Fee Study

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council introduce an ordinance deleting Title 17.40 and adopting Title 17.42 of the Chowchilla Municipal Code; approve the proposed Development Impact Fees and related incentive program, Storm Drainage Improvement Costs, and Quimby Act Fees as identified in the Development Impact Fee Study; and approve a Resolution to temporarily reduce residential and industrial Development Impact Fees incentivizing the construction of new homes and new industrial facilities within the City of Chowchilla.

BACKGROUND:

Development Impact Fee Structure and Quimby Act
The current Quimby Act, Storm Drainage, and Development Impact Fee structures were implemented nearly 18 years ago, in 2004, by consultant Giersch & Associates. Staff was tasked with reviewing the Development Impact Fees and present any necessary adjustments to the City’s Development Fees basis and program for consideration. The City hired NBS who completed an updated Development Impact Fee study in May of 2022. (“2022 Study”.)
Since the inception of the previous Development Impact Fee program, the City created nine separate impact fee zones with impact fees varying from zone to zone. The impact fees are very similar in several zones with minor adjustments to certain categories. Additionally, the City currently charges the same impact fees per unit for development in the single-family and multi-family residential categories, which essentially gives no incentive to builders to construct multi-family units within the community. The City’s Municipal Code Section 17.76.010 describes Council’s authority to create and establish a separate development impact fee for the City and outlines the process for staff to follow when either creating, establishing, or updating the City’s Development Impact Fee Structure.

In addition, State law requires local agencies to conduct a Development Impact Fee study which: (1) identifies the purpose of the fee; (2) identifies the use to which the fee is to be put; (3) determines that there is a reasonable relationship between the fee’s use and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed; and (4) determines that there is a reasonable relationship between the need for the public facilities to be funded by the fee and they type of development projects on which the fee is imposed. (Gov. Code, § 66001, subd. (a).)
Part of the 2022 Study was to review the City’s Park Master Plan and subsequently the City current Quimby Act Ordinance CMC 17.40.010. The existing Park Master Plan contains a statement that in-lieu fees “should be based on a formula that considers both land acquisition and construction costs.” That statement is inconsistent with the intent of an in-lieu fee. A fee in lieu of park land dedication should be based on the value of the land that would otherwise be dedicated. Such a fee should not include construction costs. In the 2022 Study, park improvement costs are covered by a separate impact fee.

The City’s existing Quimby Act ordinance bases dedication and in-lieu fee acreage requirements on the density (units per acre) of a development project. The Quimby Act requires dedications and in-lieu fees to be based upon population. There is no way to compare the effect of that density formula with the acresper-1,000 population standards contained in the Quimby Act.

Incentive Program
The incentive program is intended to provide a temporary reduction to assist with spurring residential development within the City of Chowchilla. The City of Chowchilla itself has been challenged trying to stimulate the construction of new residential units within the community. Over the past couple years, new residential growth was due to either a reduction of development impact fees, or a standing agreement between a developer and school district.

Even though the total development fees collected will likely be reduced, many of the residential projects that have remained idle for the past decade will receive a financial motivation to move forward. Some of the projects that were not able to take advantage of the previous infill program, will be able to take advantage of this program. These developments include Sessions Development, Woodcrest Development, Legacy Ranch, Montgomery Farms, and possibly 224 units within Rancho Calera.

Project Anticipated # Units
John Sessions Development 200 Units
Woodcrest Development 176 Units
Legacy Ranch 605 Units
Rancho Calera 224 Units
Total 1,205 Units
A temporary reduction of impact fees for period of time has the potent to result in new revenues to assist with replacing the City’s aging infrastructures and revenues to assist with funding for city services. Over the duration of time the infill program was available (April 2016 to June 30, 2021), 90% of the properties eligible have seen new units constructed. The Infill program was a 100% reduction of development impact fees. This program supported new construction within existing neighborhoods in the community.

Additionally, Century Communities built over 125 new Single-Family Dwellings within the community, as part of the soon to expire residential incentive program available (July 1, 2021 to June 30, 2023), Temporarily reducing the residential and industrial development impact fees will help the City to remain competitive in the region and attract new industrial developers into the community. For a community like Chowchilla, a new larger industrial development not only creates jobs, but also creates a ripple effect by creating a demand for new residential homes to be constructed and disposable income from the new employees.

Industrial jobs generally pay higher than average wages and therefore contribute more to growing the local economy. The taxable value of industrial projects is also higher than most other construction, and, therefore, contribute higher levels of property tax back to the City. The primary purpose for offering incentives to industry is to be competitive with other cities and counties located within our region. For example, AutoZone took advantage of the recently expired Job Incentive Program and has started construction of a 560,000 square foot. facility valued at over $150 million in the community. In the case of AutoZone, staff reduced the development impact fees by approximately 50% to reflect the number of jobs the project will create.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Effective January 1, 2022, municipalities are required to update their Development Impact Fee studies every 8 years. (Gov. Code, § 66016.5.). Prior to May 2022, the City hadn’t completed a comprehensive review of its Development Impact Fee Structure since 2004. The recently completed fee study demonstrates there is a funding need due to the impacts being created by the proposed developments.

If the capacity of facilities is not increased to satisfy the additional demand, the quality or availability of public services for the entire community will deteriorate. The various fee structure updates proposed will be used to recover a percentage of the cost of development-related facilities. However, the fees are only able to cover the need related to the future developments.

The purpose of this study is to analyze the impacts of future developments they may have on existing public facilities. The study presents the data and methodology used to calculate impact fees and park land dedication requirements. The methods used to calculate impact and in-lieu fees in this report are intended to satisfy all legal requirements governing such fees, including provisions of the U. S.

Constitution, the California Constitution, the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000-66025), and, where applicable, the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477).

Historically, the City increased the Impact fees based annually or semi-annually per the CPI index. The increases were presented for council consideration during the annual budget process (CMC – 17.76.100 - Annual findings). Additionally, the account balances were presented as part of the AB1600 report. The impact fees are based on capital costs for facilities and other capital assets needed to mitigate the impacts of additional development. Impact fees may not be used for maintenance or operating costs.

Summary of Proposed Citywide Impact Fees (without Incentive) Summary of Existing Impact Fees
Difference Between Existing and Proposed Citywide Impact Fees Proposed Storm Drainage Improvement Cost Per Acre:

The proposed Storm Drainage Improvement Cost were originally calculated in 2004 by Giersch & Associates as part of a storm drainage master plan. The proposed improvement costs were based upon the original fees presented in the 2004 study, the proposed costs were increased to 2022 levels using the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI).

Proposed Quimby Act Park Land In-Lieu Fee per Unit (Subdivisions):

Proposed Quimby Act Park Land In-Lieu Fee per Unit (Non-Subdivision Projects):

Proposed Development Impact Fee Incentive Program Reduction:

Development Impact Fee Zone
Single
Family
Residential
(Per Unit)
Multi-Family
Residential
(Per Unit)
Industrial
(Per 1,000 Sf. Ft.)
Total Impact Fees (per unit) $17,036 $11,588 $4,153
50% Reduction (July 1, 2023 - June 30, 2025) $8,518 $5,794 $2,076.50 FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no impact to the City’s General Fund. The revenues received would be held in reserve accounts until such time needed to fund the eligible activity.

ALTERNATIVES:

To leave the Development Impact Fee and Storm Drain Fee Structures ‘as-is’ with no modifications; and, not consider the Quimby Act Ordinance which would not allow staff to properly implement within the community. This is not recommended as the current development impact fees are based upon an outdated fee study and the existing Quimby Act Ordinance does not comply with State law. And to reject the proposed Residential and Industrial Incentive program and keep the fees as originally presented to Council for consideration.

Attachment 1 – Resolution – Title 17
COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA

APPROVING IMPLEMENTATION OF UPDATED DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES WHEREAS, the existing City of Chowchilla Development Impact Fee study was drafted in 2004; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla completed an updated Development Impact Fee study in May of 2022; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla Planning Commission recommends the City Council Development Impact Fees proposed in the May 2022 Development Impact Fee Study; and, WHEREAS, the purpose of the Development Impact Fees, Storm Drainage Improvement Costs, and Quimby Act Fees, hereby enacted are to protect the public health, safety and welfare by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of public facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development.; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla finds that revenue from the Development Impact Fees, Storm Drainage Improvement Costs, and Quimby Act Fees hereby enacted will be used to provide public facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development in the City as identified in the 2022 City of Chowchilla Development Impact Fee Study; and,
WHEREAS, based on analysis presented in the 2022 City of Chowchilla Development Impact Fee Study, the City Council finds that there is a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fees and the purpose for which the fees are imposed; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully considered the staff report, recommendations and all oral and written evidence presented during the public hearing; and, WHEREAS, the City Council was able to make all of the findings required to be made as identified in section 17.40.010 of the City’s Municipal Code in order to recommend City Council consideration of Ordinance Amendment No. 23-0002; and,
WHEREAS, the City as the Lead Agency, reviewed the Project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines and it was determined that this Project qualifies as being statutorily exempt per Section 15262 – Feasibility and Planning Studies of Article 18 – Statutory Exemptions of the California Code of Regulations (the CEQA Guidelines).

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby approves application Ordinance Amendment No. 23-0002.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 14th day of March, 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor Ray Barragan
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk
Attachment 2 – Incentive Program
COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA,

TEMPORILY REDUCUING ALL RESIDENTIAL AND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES BY 50% FOR A PERIOD OF 24 MONTHS BEGINNING JULY 1, 2023, AND ENDING JUNE 30, 2025.

WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla has numerous previously approved tentative subdivision maps that have not been recorded and existing residentially and industrially zoned vacant lots within the community; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla's construction activity within all neighborhoods is virtually nonexistent; and,
WHEREAS, a temporary 2-year reduction of Development Impact fees will assist development of new residential units and industrial facilities and will have a positive impact on the quality of life in the community; and,
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla desires to provide an incentive that will revive industrial construction for a limited period of time, thereby providing additional local construction jobs; and, WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla desires to provide an incentive that will revive residential construction for a limited period of time, thereby providing additional local construction jobs while infill development is used to improve the quality of neighborhoods; NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla, State of California that, for a period of 24 months beginning July 1, 2023, and ending June 30, 2025, all residential and industrial development impact fees within the City of Chowchilla shall be reduced by 50% as outlined within this resolution.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 14th day of March, 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor Ray Barragan
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk
Attachment 3 – Executed Planning Commission Resolution

Attachment 4 – Current Ordinance

Attachment 5 – Proposed Ordinance – Redlined

Attachment 6 – Notice of Exemption
Attachment 7 – Planning Commission Public Hearing Notice Attachment 8 – Development Impact Fee Study
Final Report
Citywide Development Impact Fee Study
Final Report
May 11, 2022

nbsgov.com
Prepared by:

Corporate Headquarters
32605 Temecula Parkway, Suite 100
Temecula, CA 92592
Toll free: 800.676.7516
Table of Contents
Executive Summary.........................................................................................................................S-1 Organization of the Report....................................................................................................................S-1 Development Projections ......................................................................................................................S-1 Impact Fee Analysis................................................................................................................................S-2 Impact Fee Summary .............................................................................................................................S-5 Chapter 1. Introduction...................................................................................................................1-1 Purpose ..................................................................................................................................................1-1 Legal Framework for Developer Fees....................................................................................................1-1 Recent Legislation..................................................................................................................................1-6 Impact Fee Calculation Methodology....................................................................................................1-8 Facilities Addressed in this Study...........................................................................................................1-9 Chapter 2. Development Data .........................................................................................................2-1 Setting ....................................................................................................................................................2-1 Study Area and Time Frame...................................................................................................................2-1 Development Types...............................................................................................................................2-1 Residential Development and Population .............................................................................................2-2 Units of Development............................................................................................................................2-3 Demand Variables..................................................................................................................................2-3 Existing and Future Development..........................................................................................................2-8 Growth Potential..................................................................................................................................2-11 Chapter 3. Park Land and Park Improvements..................................................................................3-1 In-Lieu Fees and Impact Fees for Park Land Acquisition........................................................................3-1 Impact Fees for Park Improvements......................................................................................................3-1 The Quimby Act......................................................................................................................................3-2 Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................3-2 Methodology..........................................................................................................................................3-2 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................3-2 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................3-3 Cost Per Capita.......................................................................................................................................3-5 In-Lieu Fees and Impact Fees per Unit...................................................................................................3-6 Projected Revenue.................................................................................................................................3-7 Updating the Fees..................................................................................................................................3-9 Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................3-9 Chapter 4. Fire Facilities..................................................................................................................4-1 Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................4-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................4-1 Methodology..........................................................................................................................................4-1 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................4-1 Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment .....................................................................................................4-2 Cost per Call for Service .........................................................................................................................4-3 Impact Fees per Unit..............................................................................................................................4-3 Projected Revenue.................................................................................................................................4-4 Updating the Fees..................................................................................................................................4-5 Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................4-5 Chapter 5. Police Facilities...............................................................................................................5-1 Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................5-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................5-1 Methodology..........................................................................................................................................5-1 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................5-1 Existing Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment ...........................................................................................5-2 Cost per Call for Service .........................................................................................................................5-4 Impact Fees per Unit..............................................................................................................................5-4 Projected Revenue.................................................................................................................................5-5 Updating the Fees..................................................................................................................................5-6 Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................5-6 Chapter 6. Street System Impact Fees..............................................................................................6-1 Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................6-1 Methodology..........................................................................................................................................6-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................6-1 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................6-1 Improvement Costs................................................................................................................................6-1 Cost per Peak Hour Trip.........................................................................................................................6-2 Impact Fees per Unit of Development...................................................................................................6-2 Projected Revenue.................................................................................................................................6-3 Updating the Fees..................................................................................................................................6-4 Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................6-4 Chapter 7. Traffic Signal Impact Fees ...............................................................................................7-1 Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................7-1 Methodology..........................................................................................................................................7-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................7-1 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................7-1 Traffic Signal Costs.................................................................................................................................7-1 Cost per Peak Hour Trip.........................................................................................................................7-2 Impact Fees per Unit of Development...................................................................................................7-2 Projected Revenue.................................................................................................................................7-3 Updating the Fees..................................................................................................................................7-4 Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................7-4 Chapter 8. Public Buildings..............................................................................................................8-1 Methodology..........................................................................................................................................8-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................8-1 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................8-1 Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................8-1 Existing Facilities and Vehicles...............................................................................................................8-1 Cost per Capita of Service Population....................................................................................................8-3 Impact Fees per Unit of Development...................................................................................................8-4 Projected Revenue.................................................................................................................................8-4 Updating the Fees..................................................................................................................................8-5 Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................8-5 Chapter 9. Community and Recreation Centers................................................................................9-1 Service Area ...........................................................................................................................................9-1 Demand Variable ...................................................................................................................................9-1 Methodology..........................................................................................................................................9-1 Existing Facilities....................................................................................................................................9-1 Level of Service ......................................................................................................................................9-2 Impact Fees per Unit..............................................................................................................................9-3 Projected Revenue.................................................................................................................................9-3 Updating the Fees..................................................................................................................................9-3 Nexus Summary .....................................................................................................................................9-4 Chapter 10. Storm Drainage Improvements...................................................................................10-1 Service Area .........................................................................................................................................10-1 Methodology........................................................................................................................................10-1 Level of Service ....................................................................................................................................10-1 Impact Fees per Acre ...........................................................................................................................10-1 Projected Revenue...............................................................................................................................10-2 Updating the Fees................................................................................................................................10-2 Nexus Summary ...................................................................................................................................10-3 Chapter 11. Water System Improvements .....................................................................................11-1 Service Area .........................................................................................................................................11-1 Demand Variable .................................................................................................................................11-1 Methodology........................................................................................................................................11-1 Level of Service ....................................................................................................................................11-1 System Improvement Needs................................................................................................................11-1 Cost per Gallon per Day .......................................................................................................................11-2 Capacity Charge per Unit .....................................................................................................................11-2 Projected Revenue...............................................................................................................................11-3 Updating the Capacity Charges............................................................................................................11-4 Nexus Summary ...................................................................................................................................11-4 Chapter 12. Sewer System Improvements......................................................................................12-1 Service Area .........................................................................................................................................12-1 Demand Variable .................................................................................................................................12-1 Methodology........................................................................................................................................12-1 Level of Service ....................................................................................................................................12-1 System Improvement Needs................................................................................................................12-1 Cost per Gallon per Day .......................................................................................................................12-2 Sewer System Capacity Charge per Unit..............................................................................................12-3 Projected Revenue...............................................................................................................................12-3 Updating the Sewer Capacity Charges.................................................................................................12-4 Nexus Summary ...................................................................................................................................12-4 Chapter 13. Administrative Fee .....................................................................................................13-1 Chapter 14. Implementation .........................................................................................................14-1 Adoption ..............................................................................................................................................14-1 Administration .....................................................................................................................................14-2 Requirements Imposed by AB 602.......................................................................................................14-7 Training and Public Information ..........................................................................................................14-8 Recovery of Administrative Costs........................................................................................................14-8 Appendices
Fee Comparison Appendix A
City of Chowchilla Page S-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Executive Summary
The City of Chowchilla has retained NBS Government Finance Group to prepare this study to analyze the impacts of new development on many types of City capital facilities and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis. The methods used in this study are intended to satisfy all legal requirements of the U. S. Constitution, the California Constitution and the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.) and the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477) where applicable.

Organization of the Report
Chapter 1 of this report provides an overview of the legal requirements for establishing and imposing such fees, and methods that can be used to calculate impact fees.

Chapter 2 contains data on existing and future development used in this report.

Chapters 3 through 12 analyze the impacts of development on specific types of facilities and calculate impact fees for those facilities. The facilities addressed in this report are listed by chapter below:

Chapter 3. Parks Land and Improvements
Chapter 4. Fire Protection Facilities
Chapter 5. Police Facilities
Chapter 6. Street Improvements
Chapter 7. Traffic Signals
Chapter 8. Public Buildings
Chapter 9. Community and Recreation Centers
Chapter 10. Storm Drainage Improvements
Chapter 11. Water System
Chapter 12. Sewer System
Chapter 13 provides the basis for the City’s administrative fee which recovers for the costs of performing routine impact fee study updates, as well as ongoing annual administration, reporting, accounting, and other services required to facilitate the impact fee program.

Chapter 14 contains recommendations for adopting and implementing impact fees, including suggested findings to satisfy the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act.

Development Projections
Chapter 2 of this report presents estimates of existing development in Chowchilla and a forecast of future development out to 2040. Future development shown in Chapter 2 indicates that the City’s population could increase by about 160% to around 34,000 by 2040. Other measures of City of Chowchilla Page S-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
development such as employment and peak hour traffic are also projected to increase by 160% to 175%.

There may be some disagreement as to whether that 2040 forecast is realistic. However, the timing of that development does not affect the impact fee calculations in this study. The methods used to calculate impact fees in this report do not depend on assumptions about the rate or timing of future development. The future development projected in Chapter 2 may occur sooner or later than 2040 without affecting the validity of the impact fee calculations.

Chapter 2 also establishes values for factors such as population per unit, service population per unit, and peak hour trips per unit that are used in the impact fee calculations.

Impact Fee Analysis
The impact fee analysis for each type of facility addressed in this report is presented in a separate chapter. In each case, the relationship, or nexus, between development and the need for a particular type of facility is defined in a way that allows the impact of additional development on facility needs to be quantified.

The impact fees are based on capital costs for facilities and other capital assets needed to mitigate the impacts of additional development. Impact fees may not be used for maintenance or operating costs. Impact fees calculated in this report are shown on page S-6 of this Executive Summary.

The following paragraphs briefly discuss the methods used to calculate impact fees for the facilities addressed in this study.

Parks and Recreation Facilities. Chapter 3 of this report calculates impact fees for park land acquisition and park improvements. Three types of fees are calculated in that chapter: (1) Quimby Act fees in lieu of park land dedication which apply only to development that involves a subdivision; (2) park land impact fees which apply to residential development not involving a subdivision; and (3) park improvement impact fees which apply to all residential development.

Of the first two fees, a project would be subject to one or the other, not both.

With respect to Quimby Act in-lieu fees, this study calculates a schedule of in-lieu fees based on an estimated average cost per acre of land in the City. The alternative is to establish in-lieu fees case-by-case based on an appraisal of land value for each project. That is the method prescribed in Chowchilla’s current Quimby Act ordinance [Chowchilla Municipal Code Section 17.040.010 (E)]. However, another part of the ordinance, the method specified for determining the acreage of park land to be dedicated by a developer, does not appear to satisfy the requirements of the Quimby Act. We recommend that the existing ordinance be amended to establish park land dedication requirements consistent with the statute, using the population per unit factors shown in Table 2.1 in Chapter 2 of this report
The impact fees calculated in Chapter 3 are based on the City’s existing level of service in terms of improved park acreage per capita. The estimated cost per acre for park land and improvements is used to determine a cost per capita which is then converted into fees per unit of residential City of Chowchilla Page S-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
development based on the estimated average population per unit for each type of residential development defined in this report. Because parks and recreation facilities are intended to serve residents of the City, these fees apply only to residential development.

Fire Protection Facilities. Chapter 4 calculates impact fees for fire protection facilities, including apparatus and vehicles, based on the existing level of service in the City. The existing level of service is defined as the relationship between the replacement value of existing Fire Department capital assets and the number of calls for service per year received by the Fire Department. That relationship is stated as a cost per call for service per year.

As part of this study, NBS analyzed the distribution of Fire Department calls for service for a full year to determine the average number of calls per unit per year generated by different types of development. The impact fee per unit for each type of development is calculated by multiplying the cost per call and the number of calls per unit for that type of development. Fire protection impact fees are intended to apply to all types of new development in the City.

Police Facilities. Chapter 5 calculates impact fees for Police Department facilities and vehicles based on the existing level of service in the City. The existing level of service is defined as the relationship between the replacement value of existing Police Department capital assets and the number of calls for service per year received by the Department. That relationship is stated as a cost per call for service per year.

As part of this study, NBS analyzed the distribution of Police Department calls for service for a full year to determine the average number of calls per unit per year generated by different types of development. The impact fee per unit for each type of development is calculated by multiplying the cost per call and the number of calls per unit for that type of development. Police impact fees are intended to apply to all types of new development in the City.

Street Improvements. Chapter 6 calculates impact fees for street system improvements based on new development’s share of the estimated costs for a set of needed improvements identified by the Director of Public Works Director consistent with the Circulation Element of the City’s General Plan. Costs to be funded by Measure T revenue are excluded from the cost basis used in the impact fee calculations. New development’s proportionate share of the cost of those improvements is divided by the projected increase in peak hour trips generated by new development to get a cost per peak hour trip.

The cost per peak hour trip is converted into fees per unit of development using the number of peak hour trips per unit generated by each type of development defined in this report. Peak hour trips per unit are based on rates for the p.m. peak hour of the adjacent street from 10th edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual, Trip Generation. Street impact fees are intended to apply to all types of new development in the City.

Traffic Signals. Chapter 7 calculates impact fees for new traffic signals needed to mitigate the impacts additional traffic generated by new development forecasted in this study. The total estimated cost of planned new traffic signals is divided by the projected increase in peak hour trips generated by new development to get a cost per peak hour trip.

City of Chowchilla Page S-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
The cost per peak hour trip is converted into fees per unit of development using the number of peak hour trips per unit generated by each type of development defined in this report. Peak hour trips per unit are based on rates for the p.m. peak hour of the adjacent street from 10th edition of the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual, Trip Generation. Traffic signal impact fees are intended to apply to all types of new development in the City.

Public Buildings. Chapter 8 calculates impact fees for Chowchilla’s public buildings including the Civic Center and Corporation Yard facilities as well as a small number of general government vehicles and equipment. The impact of development on the need for those facilities is represented by a service population, which is a weighted composite of resident population and employees of businesses in the City. See Chapter 2 for a more detailed discussion of service population.

Impact fees for public buildings are based on the existing level of service, defined as the asset replacement cost per capita of service population. That per-capita cost represents the amount needed from each added unit of service population to maintain the existing level of service as the City grows. The cost per capita is converted into fees per unit of development based on the estimated average service population per unit for each type of development defined in this report. Impact fees for public buildings are intended to apply all types of new development in the City.

Community and Recreation Centers. Chapter 9 calculates impact fees for community and recreation centers based on the existing level of service for those facilities in the City. The impact of development on the need for those facilities is represented by the added population associated with new residential development. The existing level of service is defined as the replacement cost of existing facilities per capita of existing population.

The cost per capita is converted into fees per unit of development based on the estimated average population per unit for each type of residential development defined in this report.

Impact fees for community and recreation centers are intended to apply only to new residential development in the City.

Storm Drainage Impact Fees. In Chapter 10, this report updates storm drainage impact fees from a 2004 Storm Drainage Master Plan by escalating them to reflect current construction costs.

Those fees are escalated using the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). That index has increased by a factor of 1.813 since 2004, so that the Storm Drainage Impact Fees updated in this study show an increase of 81.3% from the 2004 fees. Because the land use categories used to define those impact fees are not consistent with the development types used for other impact fees in this study, the Storm Drainage impact fees are shown in a separate schedule from other impact fees later in this Executive Summary.

Water System Capacity Charges. Chapter 11 calculates capacity charges for water system improvements needed to serve new development in Chowchilla. The capacity charge calculations are based on the cost of three types of water system improvements: distribution system expansion, new wells, and new reservoir storage. The impact of development on the need for City of Chowchilla Page S-5
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
those improvements is based on added water system demand in terms of average day demand in gallons per day (GPD).

Added demand per acre for various types of development is taken from water demand projections prepared for the Water Master Plan by Yamabe and Horn Engineering, Inc. Demand per acre is converted into demand per unit using residential densities and non-residential floor area ratios consistent with the Land Use Element of the Chowchilla General Plan. Water system capacity charges are intended to apply to all new development in Chowchilla.

Sewer Capacity Charges. Chapter 12 calculates capacity charges for sewer system improvements needed to serve new development in Chowchilla. The capacity charge calculations are based on the cost of improvements needed to expand the collection system and the wastewater treatment plant. The impact of development on the need for those improvements is based on added wastewater flows in gallons per day (GPD) generated by new development.

Added wastewater flows per acre for various types of development is taken from wastewater generation projections prepared for the Sewer Master Plan by Yamabe and Horn Engineering, Inc. Wastewater generation per acre is converted into generation per unit using residential densities and non-residential floor area ratios consistent with the Land Use Element of the Chowchilla General Plan. Sewer system capacity charges are intended to apply to all new development in Chowchilla.

Impact Fee Summary
Table S.1 shows the impact fees calculated in this report, except for storm drainage fees which are shown in Table S.5. Blank areas in the table indicate that some impact fees are not calculated for non-residential development. Please note that Table S.1 shows impact fees for Public Facilities and Institutions. It is necessary to calculate those fees to account for the costs associated with those types of development. However, we understand that that City may not have the authority to charge those fees to public schools and other government facilities.

This study calculates impact fees for both park improvements and park land acquisition, as well as a fee in lieu of park land dedication as provided in the Quimby Act. The tables in this Executive Summary do not show fees for park land acquisition because the City currently calculates fees in Table S.1: Summary of Proposed Citywide Impact Fees
Development
Type
Unit
Type 1
Park
Imprv Fire Police Streets
Traffic
Signals
Public
Bldgs
Com/Rec
Centers Water Sewer Total
Residential, Single-Family DU 3,821 1,018 1,056 3,120 404 2,185 566 2,498 2,282 $16,951 Residential, Multi-Family DU 2,866 819 832 1,765 229 1,639 425 1,407 1,549 $11,530 Retail/Service Commercial KSF 2,148 6,220 12,009 1,556 849 1,110 823 $24,716 Professional Office KSF 660 1,429 3,625 470 683 925 549 $ 8,340 Skilled Nursing Facility Bed 420 425 693 90 734 1,031 1,120 $ 4,513 Industrial KSF 481 216 1,671 216 243 739 567 $ 4,133
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF 2,413 6,558 2,963 384 683 505 549 $14,053 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed City of Chowchilla Page S-6
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
lieu of park land acquisition on a case-by-case basis which means there is no way to compare existing fees with the proposed fees.

Table S.2 shows the proposed impact fees from Table S.1 with the addition of a 0.5% administrative fee to cover the cost of complying with the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act for accounting, capital budgeting, fee adjustments, mandated annual reports and 5-year reviews of the impact fee program, as well as periodic impact fee update studies.

Table S.3 shows the City’s existing impact fees. The existing impact fee schedule differs from the proposed schedule in a few ways. This study calculates an impact fee for community and recreation centers, while the City does not have an existing impact fee for that purpose. The existing impact fee schedule does not have a separate fee for the professional office (Medical Arts) category. We have assumed that the City currently applies the commercial impact fees to that type of development. Also, the proposed schedule includes impact fees for Skilled Nursing facilities and for Public Facilities and Institutions, while the existing schedule does not.

It should also be noted that the City currently charges the same impact fees per unit for development in the single-family and multi-family residential categories. This study calculates separate impact fees per unit for those development types, so that the proposed impact fees for multi-family residential development are substantially lower overall than the existing fees.

Showing the City’s existing impact fees is complicated by the fact that the City has nine separate impact fee zones with impact fees that can vary from zone to zone. However, the impact fees are the same in several zones and the fees shown in Table S.3 are those that apply to the most zones.

Table S.2: Summary of Proposed Citywide Impact Fees Including Administration Fee Development
Type
Unit
Type 1
Park
Imprv Fire Police Streets
Traffic
Signals
Public
Bldgs
Com/Rec
Centers Water Sewer Total
Residential, Single-Family DU 3,841 1,023 1,061 3,136 406 2,196 569 2,511 2,293 17,036 Residential, Multi-Family DU 2,880 823 836 1,774 230 1,647 427 1,414 1,557 11,588 Retail/Service Commercial KSF - 2,159 6,251 12,069 1,564 854 1,116 827 24,840 Professional Office KSF 663 1,436 3,643 472 686 930 551 8,381 Skilled Nursing Facility Bed 422 428 697 90 737 1,036 1,126 4,536 Industrial KSF 484 217 1,679 218 244 743 570 4,153
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF 2,425 6,591 2,978 386 686 507 551 14,124 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed City of Chowchilla Page S-7
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Table S.4 shows the difference between the existing impact fees in Table S.3 and the proposed fees including the administrative fee from Table S.2. Numbers in parentheses indicate that the proposed fees are lower than the existing fees.

Table S.5 shows existing and proposed storm drainage impact fees. Unlike the other impact fees calculated in this study, those fees are per-acre rather than per-unit. The land use categories for those fees also differ from the development types used for other impact fees in this study, because this study simply updates the storm drainage impact fees originally calculated in 2004 by Giersch & Associates. As with the other impact fees shown above, a 2% administrative fee is added to those fees.

Table S.3: Summary of Existing Impact Fees
Development
Type
Unit
Type 1
Park
Imprv Fire Police Streets
Traffic
Signals
Public
Bldgs
Com/Rec
Centers Water Sewer Total
Residential, Single-Family DU 2,276 1,751 946 3,938 238 961 0 2,282 6,267 $18,659 Residential, Multi-Family DU 2,276 1,751 946 3,938 238 961 0 2,282 6,267 $18,659 Retail/Service Commercial KSF 740 400 1,311 190 420 0 480 1,330 $4,871 Professional Office KSF 740 400 1,311 190 420 0 480 1,330 $4,871 Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $0
Industrial KSF 420 230 750 80 230 0 230 510 $2,450
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed No Fee
Table S.4: Difference Between Existing and Proposed Citywide Impact Fees Development
Type
Unit
Type 1
Park
Imprv Fire Police Streets
Traffic
Signals
Public
Bldgs
Com/Rec
Centers Water Sewer Total
Residential, Single-Family DU 1,565 (728) 115 (802) 168 1,235 569 229 (3,974) $ (1,623) Residential, Multi-Family DU 604 (928) (110) (2,164) (8) 686 427 (868) (4,710) $ (7,071) Retail/Service Commercial KSF - 1,419 5,851 10,758 1,374 434 636 (503) $19,969 Professional Office KSF - (77) 1,036 2,332 282 266 450 (779) $ 3,510 Skilled Nursing Facility Bed -
Industrial KSF - 64 (13) 929 138 14 513 60 $ 1,703
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed No Existing Fee for Comparison
City of Chowchilla Page
S-8
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Table S.5: Proposed Storm Drainage Impact Fees
Land Use Proposed Impact Impact Fee +
Category Fee per Acre Admin Fee 1
Residential - Low Density $ 7,259 $ 7,296
Residential - Medium Density $ 9,661 $ 9,710
Residential - High Density $ 13,472 $ 13,540
Community Commercial $ 13,971 $ 14,041
Downtown Commercial $ 14,232 $ 14,303
Neighborhood Commercial $ 19,626 $ 19,724
Service Commercial $ 17,247 $ 17,333
Professional Office (Medical Arts) $ 11,106 $ 11,162
Light Industrial $ 22,093 $ 22,204
Heavy Industrial $ 22,131 $ 22,242
Public Facility $ 11,177 $ 11,233
Elementary School $ 5,212 $ 5,238
High School $ 20,014 $ 20,114 2
Proposed impact fees including the 0.5% administrative fee City of Chowchilla Page 1-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 1. Introduction
Purpose
The purpose of this study is to analyze the impacts of development on the need for several types of public facilities provided by the City of Chowchilla and to calculate impact fees based on that analysis. This report documents the approach, data and methodology used in this study to calculate impact fees as well as Quimby Act park land dedication requirements and in lieu fees.

The methods used to calculate impact fees and in-lieu fees in this report are intended to satisfy all legal requirements governing such fees, including provisions of the U. S. Constitution, the California Constitution, the California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000- 66025), and, where applicable, the Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477).

Legal Framework for Developer Fees
This brief summary of the legal framework for development fees is intended as a general overview. It was not prepared by an attorney and should not be treated as legal advice.

U. S. Constitution. Like all land use regulations, development exactions, including impact fees, are subject to the 5th Amendment prohibition on taking of private property for public use without just compensation. Both state and federal courts have recognized the imposition of impact fees on development as a legitimate form of land use regulation, provided the fees meet standards intended to protect against “regulatory takings.” A regulatory taking occurs when regulations unreasonably deprive landowners of property rights protected by the Constitution.

In two landmark cases dealing with exactions, the U. S. Supreme Court has held that when a government agency requires the dedication of land or an interest in land as a condition of development approval or imposes ad hoc exactions as a condition of approval on a single development project that do not apply to development generally, a higher standard of judicial scrutiny applies. To meet that standard, the agency must demonstrate an "essential nexus" between such exactions and the interest being protected (See Nollan v. California Coastal Commission, 1987) and make an” individualized determination” that the exaction imposed is "roughly proportional" to the burden created by development (See Dolan v. City of Tigard, 1994).

Until recently, it was widely accepted that legislatively enacted impact fees that apply to all development in a jurisdiction are not subject to the higher standard of judicial scrutiny flowing from the Nollan and Dolan decisions. But after the U. S. Supreme Court decision in Koontz v. St.

Johns Water Management District (2013), state courts have reached conflicting conclusions on that issue.

In light of that uncertainty, any agency enacting or imposing impact fees would be wise to demonstrate a nexus and ensure proportionality in the calculation of those fees.

Defining the “Nexus.” While courts have not been entirely consistent in defining the nexus required to justify exactions and impact fees, that term can be thought of as having the three City of Chowchilla Page 1-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
elements discussed below. We think proportionality is logically included as one element of that nexus, even though it was discussed separately in Dolan v. Tigard. The elements of the nexus discussed below mirror the three “reasonable relationship” findings required by the Mitigation Fee Act for establishment and imposition of impact fees.

Need or Impact. Development must create a need for the facilities to be funded by impact fees.

All new development in a community creates additional demands on some or all public facilities provided by local government. If the capacity of facilities is not increased to satisfy the additional demand, the quality or availability of public services for the entire community will deteriorate.

Impact fees may be used to recover the cost of development-related facilities, but only to the extent that the need for facilities is related to the development project subject to the fees.

The Nollan decision reinforced the principle that development exactions may be used only to mitigate impacts created by the development projects upon which they are imposed. In this study, the impact of development on facility needs is analyzed in terms of quantifiable relationships between various types of development and the demand for public facilities based on applicable level-of-service standards. This report contains all of the information needed to demonstrate compliance with this element of the nexus.

Benefit. Development must benefit from facilities funded by impact fees. With respect to the benefit relationship, the most basic requirement is that facilities funded by impact fees be available to serve the development paying the fees. A sufficient benefit relationship also requires that impact fee revenues be segregated from other funds and expended in a timely manner on the facilities for which the fees were charged. Nothing in the U.S. Constitution or California law requires that facilities paid for with impact fee revenues be available exclusively to development projects paying the fees.

Procedures for earmarking and expenditure of fee revenues are mandated by the Mitigation Fee Act, as are procedures to ensure that the fees are either expended expeditiously or refunded.

Those requirements are intended to ensure that developments benefit from the impact fees they are required to pay. Thus, over time, procedural issues as well as substantive issues can come into play with respect to the benefit element of the nexus.

Proportionality. Impact fees must be proportional to the impact created by a particular development project. Proportionality in impact fees depends on properly identifying development-related facility costs and calculating the fees in such a way that those costs are allocated in proportion to the facility needs created by different types and amounts of development. The section on impact fee methodology, below, describes methods used to allocate facility costs and calculate impact fees that meet the proportionality standard.

California Constitution. The California Constitution grants broad police power to local governments, including the authority to regulate land use and development. That police power is the source of authority for local governments in California to impose impact fees on development. Some impact fees have been challenged on grounds that they are special taxes imposed without voter approval in violation of Article XIIIA. However, that objection is valid only City of Chowchilla Page 1-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
if the fees charged to a project exceed the cost of providing facilities needed to serve the project.

In that case, the fees would also run afoul of the U. S. Constitution and the Mitigation Fee Act.

Articles XIIIC and XIIID, added to the California Constitution by Proposition 218 in 1996, require voter approval for some “property-related fees,” but exempt “the imposition of fees or charges as a condition of property development.”
The Mitigation Fee Act. California’s impact fee statute originated in Assembly Bill 1600 during the 1987 session of the Legislature, and took effect in January, 1989. AB 1600 added several sections to the Government Code, beginning with Section 66000. Since that time, the impact fee statute has been amended from time to time, and in 1997 was officially titled the “Mitigation Fee Act.” Unless otherwise noted, code sections referenced in this report are from the Government Code.

The Mitigation Fee Act does not limit the types of capital improvements for which impact fees may be charged. It defines public facilities very broadly to include "public improvements, public services and community amenities." Although the issue is not specifically addressed in the Mitigation Fee Act, it is clear both in case law and statute (see Government Code Section 65913.8) that impact fees may not be used to pay for maintenance or operating costs. Consequently, the fees calculated in this report are based on the cost of capital assets only.

The Mitigation Fee Act does not use the term “mitigation fee” except in its official title. Nor does it use the more common term “impact fee.” The Act simply uses the word “fee,” which is defined as “a monetary exaction, other than a tax or special assessment…that is charged by a local agency to the applicant in connection with approval of a development project for the purpose of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities related to the development project ….” To avoid confusion with other types of fees, this report uses the widely-accepted terms “impact fee” and “development impact fee” which both should be understood to mean “fee” as defined in the Mitigation Fee Act.

The Mitigation Fee Act contains requirements for establishing, increasing and imposing impact fees. They are summarized below. It also contains provisions that govern the collection and expenditure of fees and requires annual reports and periodic re-evaluation of impact fee programs. Those administrative requirements are discussed in the implementation chapter of this report.

Required Findings. Section 66001 requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee;

2. Identify the use of the fee; and,

3. Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; City of Chowchilla Page 1-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project. (Applies when fees are imposed on a specific project.)
Each of those requirements is discussed in more detail below.

Identifying the Purpose of the Fees. The broad purpose of impact fees is to protect public health, safety and general welfare by providing for adequate public facilities. The specific purpose of the fees calculated in this study is to fund construction of certain capital improvements that will be needed to mitigate the impacts of planned new development on City facilities, and to maintain an acceptable level of public services as the City grows.

This report recommends that findings regarding the purpose of an impact fee should define the purpose broadly, as providing for the funding of adequate public facilities to serve additional development.

Identifying the Use of the Fees. According to Section 66001, if a fee is used to finance public facilities, those facilities must be identified. A capital improvement plan may be used for that purpose but is not mandatory if the facilities are identified in a General Plan, a Specific Plan, or in other public documents. In this case, we recommend that the City Council adopt this report as the public document that identifies the facilities to be funded by the fees.

Reasonable Relationship Requirement. As discussed above, Section 66001 requires that, for fees subject to its provisions, a "reasonable relationship" must be demonstrated between:

1. the use of the fee and the type of development on which it is imposed;

2. the need for a public facility and the type of development on which a fee is imposed; and,

3. the amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed.

These three reasonable relationship requirements, as defined in the statute, mirror the nexus and proportionality requirements often cited in court decisions as the standard for defensible impact fees. The term “dual rational nexus” is often used to characterize the standard used by courts in evaluating the legitimacy of impact fees. The “duality” of the nexus refers to (1) an impact or need created by a development project subject to impact fees, and (2) a benefit to the project from the expenditure of the fees.

Although proportionality is reasonably implied in the dual rational nexus formulation, it was explicitly required by the Supreme Court in the Dolan case, and we prefer to list it as the third element of a complete nexus.

Development Agreements and Reimbursement Agreements. The requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act do not apply to fees collected under development agreements (see Govt. Code Section City of Chowchilla Page 1-5
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
66000) or reimbursement agreements (see Govt. Code Section 66003). The same is true of fees in lieu of park land dedication imposed under the Quimby Act (see Govt. Code Section 66477).

Existing Deficiencies. In 2006, Section 66001(g) was added to the Mitigation Fee Act (by AB 2751) to clarify that impact fees “shall not include costs attributable to existing deficiencies in public facilities,…” The legislature’s intent in adopting this amendment, as stated in the bill, was to codify the holdings of Bixel v. City of Los Angeles (1989), Rohn v. City of Visalia (1989), and Shapell Industries Inc. v. Governing Board (1991).

That amendment does not appear to be a substantive change. It is widely understood that other provisions of law make it improper for impact fees to include costs for correcting existing deficiencies.

However, Section 66001(g) also states that impact fees “may include the costs attributable to the increased demand for public facilities reasonably related to the development project in order to (1) refurbish existing facilities to maintain the existing level of service or (2) achieve an adopted level of service that is consistent with the general plan.” (Emphasis added.) Impact Fees for Existing Facilities. Impact fees may be used to recover costs for existing facilities to the extent that those facilities are needed to serve additional development and have the capacity to do so. In other words, it must be possible to show that fees used to pay for existing facilities meet the need and benefit elements of the nexus.

The Quimby Act. The Quimby Act (Government Code Section 66477), which pre-dates the Mitigation Fee Act, authorizes a city or county to require dedication of land, payment of fees inlieu of dedication, or a combination of both, for park and recreational purposes as a condition of approval of a residential subdivision. The city or county must adopt an ordinance that includes definite standards for determining the proportion of the subdivision to be dedicated and the amount of the in-lieu fees to be paid.

Under the Quimby Act, land dedication and in-lieu fee requirements are based on the ratio of park acres to population in the jurisdiction. That ratio may not exceed three acres per thousand residents unless the existing ratio is higher, but is limited to five acres per thousand. The population added by the subdivision is determined by the number of dwelling units and the average number of persons per household.

The population and average number of persons per household in the city or county are to be based on the most recent federal census. Park acreage is to be based on the area of neighborhood and community parks in the city or county at the time of that census.

The land, fees, or combination thereof are to be used only for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing neighborhood or community park or recreational facilities to serve the subdivision. A 2013 amendment to the Quimby Act added a provision that in-lieu fees may be used for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing park or recreational facilities in a neighborhood other than the neighborhood in which the subdivision paying the fees is located, if certain conditions are met (see paragraph (a)(3)(B) of Section 66477). “Neighborhood” is not defined in the statute.

City of Chowchilla Page 1-6
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
The Quimby Act requires that the legislative body adopt a general plan or specific plan containing policies and standards for parks and recreational facilities, and that the amount and location of land to be dedicated or the fees to be paid shall bear a reasonable relationship to the use of the park and recreational facilities by future inhabitants of the subdivision.

The Quimby Act provides that if park and recreational services and facilities are provided by a public agency other than a city or county, the amount and location of park land to be dedicated or fees to be paid shall be jointly determined by that other public agency and the city or county having jurisdiction. The land or fees shall be conveyed directly to the public agency that provides park and recreational services on a communitywide level if that agency elects to accept the land or fee.

Only payment of fees may be required for subdivisions containing 50 units or less, or for condominium, stock cooperative or community apartment projects.

Recent Legislation
Several new laws enacted by the State of California in 2019 to facilitate development of affordable housing will affect the implementation of in-lieu fees and impact fees calculated in this study. Below are brief overviews of some key bills passed in 2019.

SB 330 – The Housing Crisis Act of 2019. Amendments to existing law contained in SB 330 prohibit the imposition of new approval requirements on a housing development project once a preliminary application has been submitted. That provision applies to increases in impact fees and in-lieu fees, except when the resolution or ordinance establishing the fee authorizes automatic, inflationary adjustments to the fee or exaction.

AB 1483 – Housing Data: Collection and Reporting. AB 1483 requires that a city, county orspecial districts must post on its website a current schedule of its fees and exactions, as well as associated nexus studies and annual reports. Updates must be posted within 30 days.

SB 13 – Accessory Dwelling Units. SB 13 prohibits the imposition of impact fees on accessory dwelling units (ADUs) smaller than 750 square feet and provides that impact fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be proportional to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit. The proportionality requirement means that impact fees for ADUs of 750 square feet or more must be calculated on a case-by-case basis during the approval process.

Existing law requires a water or sewer connection fee or capacity charge for an accessory dwelling unit requiring a new or separate utility connection to be based on either the accessory dwelling unit’s size or the number of its plumbing fixtures. SB 13 revises the basis for calculating the connection fee or capacity charge to either the accessory dwelling unit’s square feet or the number of its drainage fixture units.

AB 602 – Amendments to the Planning and Land Use Law and the Mitigation Fee Act. AB 602, which was passed and signed in 2021, adds section 65940.1 to the Planning and Land Use Law requiring cities, counties and special districts that have internet websites to post schedules of City of Chowchilla Page 1-7
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
fees, exactions and affordability requirements, annual fee reports, and an archive of nexus studies on that website, and to update that information within 30 days after any changes.

AB 602 also adds Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act imposing several new requirements for impact fees that go into effect on January 1, 2022, including:
▪ A nexus study must identify the existing level of service for each facility, identify the proposed new level of service (if any), and explain why the new level of service is appropriate.
▪ If a nexus study supports an increase in an existing fee the local agency shall review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of the fees collected under the original fee.
▪ Large jurisdictions (counties over 250,000 and cities within those counties) must adopt a capital improvement plan as part of the nexus study.
▪ All impact fee nexus studies shall be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30 days’ notice, and the local agency shall notify any member of the public that requests notice of intent to begin and impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing. ▪ Nexus studies shall be updated at least every eight years, from the period beginning on January 1, 2022.
▪ A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of proposed units in the development. A nexus study is not required to comply with this requirement if the local agency makes certain findings specified in the law. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of units in the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development.
▪ Authorizes any member of the public, including an applicant for a development project, to submit evidence that impact fees proposed by an agency fail to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act, and requires the legislative body of the agency to consider such evidence and adjust the proposed fee if deemed necessary.

SB 9, the California Housing Opportunity and More Efficiency (“HOME”) Act. SB 9 facilitates the subdivision of existing residential lots and allows for ministerial approval (without discretionary review or hearings) of no more than two dwelling units, including duplexes, on parcels zoned for single-family dwellings if the property satisfies certain requirements. To qualify under SB 9 the property must be located within either an urbanized area or urban cluster, as designated by the United States Census Bureau, or for unincorporated areas, within the boundaries of an urbanized area or urban cluster.

The law allows for qualifying lot splits to be approved ministerially upon meeting certain requirements.

Each parcel may not be smaller than forty (40%) percent of the original parcel size and each parcel must be at least one thousand two hundred (1,200) square feet in size unless permitted by local ordinance. The parcel must be limited to residential use.

City of Chowchilla Page 1-8
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
The law does not allow demolition or alteration of certain types of dwellings, including: (a) housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to affordable levels; (b) housing subject to rent control; (c) housing that has been tenant-occupied in the last three years; or (d) housing located in a historic district. In addition, the proposed development may not demolish more than 25% of the exterior structural walls of an existing unit, unless expressly permitted by a local ordinance.

A local agency may impose objective zoning standards, subdivision standards, and design standards unless they would preclude either of the two units from being at least 800 square feet in floor area.

No setback may be required for an existing structure, or a structure constructed in the same location and dimensions as an existing structure. Otherwise, a local agency may require a setback of up to four feet from the side and rear lot lines. Off-street parking of up to one space per unit may be required by the local agency, unless the project is located within a half-mile walking distance of a high-quality transit corridor or a major transit stop, or if there is a car share vehicle within one block of the parcel. If a local agency makes a written finding that a project would create a specific, adverse impact upon public health and safety or the environment without a feasible way to mitigate such impact, the agency still may deny the project.

It is impossible to predict how much SB 9 will affect the number of future residential units constructed in the City. Unlike recent laws dealing with accessory dwelling units, SB 9 does not address the imposition of impact fees on the new dwelling units it allows, and it appears at this point that such units would be subject to the same impact fees as other new residential development.

Impact Fee Calculation Methodology
Any one of several legitimate methods may be used to calculate impact fees. The choice of a particular method depends primarily on the service characteristics of, and planning requirements for, the facility type being addressed. Each method has advantages and disadvantages in a particular situation. To some extent they are interchangeable, because they all allocate facility costs in proportion to the needs created by development.

Allocating facility costs to various types and amounts of development is central to all methods of impact fee calculation. Costs are allocated by means of formulas that quantify the relationship between development and the need for facilities. In a cost allocation formula, the impact of development is measured by some attribute of development such as added population or added vehicle trips that represent the impacts created by different types and amounts of development.

Plan-Based or Improvements-Driven Method. Plan-based impact fee calculations are based on the relationship between a specified set of improvements and a specified increment of development. The improvements are typically identified in a facility plan, while the development is identified in a land use plan that forecasts potential development by type and quantity.

Using this method, facility costs are allocated to various categories of development in proportion to the service demand created by each type of development. To calculate plan-based impact fees, it is necessary to determine what facilities will be needed to serve a particular increment of new development.

City of Chowchilla Page 1-9
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
With this method, the total cost of eligible facilities is divided by total units of additional demand to calculate a cost per unit of demand (e.g. a cost per capita for parks). Then, the cost per unit of demand is multiplied by factors representing the demand per unit of development (e.g. population per unit) to arrive at a cost per unit of development.

This method is somewhat inflexible in that it is based on the relationship between a specific facility plan and a specific land use plan. If either plan changes significantly the fees will have to be recalculated.

Capacity-Based or Consumption-Driven Method. This method calculates a cost per unit of capacity based on the relationship between total cost and total capacity of a system. It can be applied to any type of development, provided the capacity required to serve each increment of development can be estimated and the facility has adequate capacity available to serve the development. Since the cost per unit of demand does not depend on the particular type or quantity of development to be served, this method is flexible with respect to changing development plans.

In this method, the cost of unused capacity is not allocated to development. Capacity-based fees are most commonly used for water and wastewater systems, where the cost of a system component is divided by the capacity of that component to derive a unit cost. However, a similar analysis can be applied to other types of facilities. To produce a schedule of impact fees based on standardized units of development (e.g. dwelling units or square feet of non-residential building area), the cost per unit of capacity is multiplied by the amount of capacity required to serve a typical unit of development in each of several land use categories.

Standard-Based or Incremental Expansion Method. Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development. The standard can be established as a matter of policy or it can be based on the level of service being provided to existing development in the study area.

Using the standard-based method, costs are defined on a generic unit-cost basis and then applied to development according to a standard that sets the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development.

Park in-lieu and impact fees are commonly calculated this way. The level of service standard for parks is typically stated in terms of acres of parks per thousand residents. A cost-per-acre for park land or park improvements can usually be estimated without knowing the exact size or location of a particular park. The ratio of park acreage to population and the cost per acre for parks is used to calculate a cost per capita. The cost per capita can then be converted into a cost per unit of development based on the average population per dwelling unit for various types of residential development.

Facilities Addressed in this Study
Impact/in-lieu fees for the following types of facilities are addressed in this report:
▪ Park Land and Park Improvements
City of Chowchilla Page 1-10
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
▪ Fire Protection Facilities
▪ Police Facilities
▪ Street Improvements
▪ Traffic Signals
▪ Public Buildings
▪ Community and Recreation Centers
▪ Storm Drainage System
▪ Water System
▪ Sewer System
Each of those facilities is addressed in a separate chapter of this report, beginning with Chapter

3. Chapter 2 contains data on existing and future development used in the impact fee analysis.

City of Chowchilla Page 2-1
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Chapter 2. Development Data
This chapter presents data on existing and future development that will be used to calculate impact fees in subsequent chapters of this report.

The information in this chapter may be used to establish levels of service, analyze facility needs, and/or allocate the cost of capital facilities between existing and future development and among various types of new development.

Land use and development data in this chapter are based on data published by the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey, the California Department of Finance Demographic Research Unit, the City of Chowchilla 2040 General Plan and other sources noted in this chapter.

Setting
Chowchilla is located in southwestern Madera County near the junction of U. S. Highway 99 and State Route 152, approximately 20 miles southeast of Merced and 40 miles northwest of Fresno.

Chowchilla and Madera are the two incorporated cities in Madera County.

Study Area and Time Frame
The study area for the impact fee analysis is the Planning Area defined in Figure LU-1 in the General Plan Land Use Element. However, the future development identified in this chapter includes only that development that is expected to occur by 2040. See the Existing and Future Development section later in this chapter for more detail.

The timeframe for this study extends from the present time to buildout of the future development identified in this chapter. The time required for buildout will depend on the rate at which development occurs, and although future development projected in this chapter is projected to occur by 2040, the impact fee calculations do not depend on the rate or timing of development.

Development Types
The development types used in this study are listed below. ▪ Residential, Single-Family
▪ Residential, Multi-Family
▪ Retail/Service Commercial
▪ Professional Office
▪ Industrial
▪ Public Facilities/Institutions
Residential, Single-Family. Single-Family Residential includes development in the General Plan Low-Density Residential and Medium-Density Residential land use designations.

City of Chowchilla Page 2-2
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Residential, Multi-Family. Multi-Family Residential development includes development in the General Plan Medium-High Density and High-Density land use categories.

Retail/Service Commercial. Retail/Service Commercial includes development in the Downtown Commercial, Neighborhood Commercial, Service Commercial, Service Commercial-Highway, and commercial development in Mixed-Use land use categories.

Professional Office. The only General Plan land use category specifically addressing office uses is the Medical Arts category, which is intended to allow for medical offices near residential development. Other types of office uses are allowed in all commercial zones.

Industrial. Industrial development includes the General Plan Light Industrial and Heavy Industrial categories.

Public Facilities/Institutions. For purposes of the impact fee calculations, this category includes some, but not all uses allowed in the General Plan Public Facilities category. Uses such as government buildings, schools, libraries, fairgrounds and similar public or quasi-public uses have an impact on the need for some of the facilities and improvements covered by impact fees in this study, including street improvements and police and fire facilities. Other public facilities such as parks, cemeteries, and storm drainage basins create little or no demand for the facilities covered by impact fees and need not be accounted for in this study.

Other Development Types. Certain types of development, such as churches, hospitals and charter schools, do not fall under any of the categories listed above. These developments are not legally exempt from impact fees, but no fee is calculated in this study for such uses. Fees for such developments can be calculated on an individual basis by considering factors such as peak hour trips or police and fire calls that will be generated by a proposed project and applying those factors to the cost per call or cost per trip shown in each impact fee chapter in this report.

Residential Development and Population
The chart on the next page shows the California Department of Finance (DOF) official January 1 population estimates for the City of Chowchilla for the years from 2012 through 2019 plus the official Census count for 2020 and estimates by NBS for 2021 and 2022 based on the 2020 Census population.

It is important to note that the official DOF population estimates for Chowchilla include inmates at the two state prisons located in the City. Those inmates are classified as population in group quarters and do not directly impact the need for City facilities. The impact fee analysis in this study excludes population in group quarters and uses only household population in assessing the impacts of development on City facilities. DOF estimated that Chowchilla’s January 1, 2021 population in group quarters at 4,825, so it more than one-quarter of the City’s total population.

City of Chowchilla Page 2-3
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

This population chart shows some fluctuations in the DOF estimates between 2012 and 2016 from year to year. The reasons for that fluctuation are not clear, but they may be caused by changes in the inmate population.

The most reliable data point for
our purposes is the 2020
population which is from the 2020
Census. NBS has estimated the
2021 and 2022 population figures
based on the 2020 Census
population and the City’s recent
growth rate.

According to the official 2010 and
2020 Census population counts,
Chowchilla has grown a total of

2.56% from 18,720 in 2010 to
19,200 in 2020.

This study uses data from the U. S. Census Bureau’s 2019 American Community Survey 5-year estimates to calculate the population per dwelling unit factors for each category of residential development defined in this study. Those factors are shown in Table 2.1.

Units of Development
In this study, quantities of existing and planned development are measured in terms of certain units of development. Those units are discussed below.

Dwelling Units. The dwelling unit (DU) is the most commonly used measure of residential development and is the standard unit for residential development in this study.

Building Area. For non-residential development, gross building area in thousands of square feet (KSF) is used as the standard unit of development.

Demand Variables
In calculating impact fees, the relationship between facility needs and development must be quantified in cost allocation formulas. Certain measurable attributes of development (e.g., population and vehicle trip generation) are used in those formulas to reflect the impact of different types and amounts of development on the demand for specific public services and the facilities that support those services.

Those attributes are referred to in this study as “demand variables.” Demand variables are selected either because they directly measure service demand created by various types of development, or because they are reasonably correlated with that demand.

For example, the service standard for parks in a community is typically defined as a ratio of park acreage to population. As population grows, more parks are needed to maintain the desired 0 4,000
8,000
12,000
16,000
20,000
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021 2022
Population
Year
Chowchilla Population
2012-2022
City of Chowchilla Page 2-4
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

standard. Logically, then, population is an appropriate yardstick or demand variable for measuring the impacts of development on the need for additional parks.

Similarly, the need for capacity in a street system depends on the volume of traffic the system must handle. So, the vehicle trip generation rate (the number of vehicle trips generated by each unit of development per day) is an appropriate demand variable to represent the impact of development on the street system.

Each demand variable has a specific value for each type of development. Those values may be referred to as demand factors. For example, in this study, P.M. peak hour trip volume is used as the demand factor for calculating impact fees for streets. The Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual (10th Edition) estimates that one single-family detached dwelling unit generates an average of 0.99 vehicle trips each weekday P.M. peak hour, so that number is used as the demand factor in calculating street improvement impact fees for singlefamily residential units.

Specific demand variables used in this study are discussed below. The values of demand factors used in this report are shown in Table 2.1 on page 2-5.

Population. Resident population is used as a demand variable to calculate impact fees for facilities like parks that are intended to serve residents of the City. Resident population is tied to residential development, so this variable reflects no demand from non-residential development.

Service Population. Population alone does not represent all of the impacts of development on facilities that serve both residential and non-residential development. A variable called service population is commonly used to represent the impact of development on facilities such as general government buildings that are impacted by both residential and non-residential development. Service population is used for that purpose in this study.

Service population is a composite variable that includes both residents of the City and employees of businesses in Chowchilla. Resident population is included to represent the impacts of residential development and employees of business in the City are included to represent the impacts of non-residential uses, such as commercial, office and industrial development.

Because the impact of one new resident is not necessarily the same as the impact of one new employee, various components of the service population are weighted to reflect their relative impacts on demand for certain types of facilities.

Service population is intended to approximate the number of people creating a demand for service on an average day. It is difficult to estimate that number precisely for several reasons.

Some residents work in the City, some residents commute to work outside the City, and some residents don’t work at paid jobs. Non-residents may be present in the City for work, shopping, recreation, or any number of other reasons.

In this study, a base weight of 1.0 would represent a resident who remains in the City at all times.

However, since that would not be a realistic assumption for most residents, the weighting of resident population is adjusted to reflect the fact that some people commute out of the City to City of Chowchilla Page 2-5
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

work, and many residents are likely to leave the City at times for shopping, recreation, or other reasons.

Our estimate of the average number of hours per week that residents spend in the City is based in part on an analysis of Census Bureau data on how many residents work in the city, how many commute to work outside the. We also assume the average resident spends eight hours a week outside the City for activities like shopping and recreation.

Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) data for 2019 (the most recent available year) show that 49.6% of Chowchilla residents between ages 16 and 64 are employed. That number is relatively low, most likely because the City’s total population includes inmates in State prisons who are not counted as employed. ACS data also indicate that about 65% of employed residents work outside the City.

Assuming that out-commuters spend 47.5 hours a week (9.5 hours per day) outside the City for work and commuting and that all residents spend an average of eight hours a week outside the City for shopping and recreation leads us to the conclusion that out-commuters spend an average of 112.5 (168 – 47.5 - 8 = 112.5) hours per week in the City. Assuming other residents spend 160 (168 – 8 = 160) hours per week in the City, the weighted average for all residents is 158.6 hours per week in the City. Dividing that number by 168 hours per week gives us a weight of 0.88452 for all residents (population) of the City.

Service population weights for employees associated with different types of development are based on estimates of the number of hours per week businesses of a certain type are in operation. This study assumes that retail and service commercial businesses operate 12 hours a day, 7 days a week (84 hours). For professional offices and public facilities, that number is estimated to be 45 hours (9 hours a day, 5 days a week), and for industrial uses, 48 hours (8 hours a day, 6 days a week). The weights assigned to employees of businesses associated with various types of non-residential development are based on the hours per week of operation divided by 168 total hours per week.

Finally, for simplicity, all of the service population weights are normalized by dividing them by

0.88542 so that the final population weight equals 1.0 (0.88542 / 0.88542 = 1.0) and weights for each of the non-residential components are increased proportionately. The service population weights used in this study are shown in Table 2.0 and the service population per unit factors are shown in Table 2.1.

City of Chowchilla Page 2-6
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Peak Hour Trips. The impact of development on the City’s street system is measured in this study by the number of weekday peak hour vehicle trips (PHT) generated by development. In this study, PHT is used to measure the impact of development on the City’s street system, including roadways, intersections, bridges and traffic signals. The PHT rates used in this study are for the p.m. peak hour of the adjacent street and are taken from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) publication, Trip Generation, 10th edition. The peak hour trip factors for each type of development defined in this study are shown in Table 2.1.

Police and Fire Calls for Service. The impact of development on the City’s police and fire facilities is measured by the number of calls for service per unit per year by development type. Those callsfor-service-per-unit factors are normally calculated using a random sample of calls for service for a one-year period to determine the distribution of calls by development type. Then the number of calls per year for each type of development is divided by the number of existing units for that type of development to arrive at calls per unit per year. In this study, police calls-for-service factors were analyzed using a random sample, but fire calls for service were analyzed for an entire year because the number was smaller than the sample size normally used for that that analysis.

The police and fire calls for service factors for each type of development defined in this study are shown in Table 2.1.

Note on Impact Fees for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs). Recent amendments to Section 65852.2 of the Government Code provide that impact fees may not be imposed on ADUs smaller than 750 square feet. It also establishes the following requirement for impact fees imposed on ADUs of 750 square feet or more:
“Any impact fees charged for an accessory dwelling unit of 750 square feet or more shall be charged proportionately in relation to the square footage of the primary dwelling unit.” Table 2.0: Service Population Weighting
Service Population Hrs per Total Hrs Base Normalized
Component Week 1
per Week Weight 2 Weight 3
Residents 148.6 168.0 0.88452 1.000
Retail/Service Comm Employees 84.0 168.0 0.50000 0.565
Professional Office Employees 45.0 168.0 0.26786 0.303
Skilled Nursing Facility 168.0 168.0 1.00000 1.131
Industrial Employees 48.0 168.0 0.28571 0.323
Public Facilities Employees 45.0 168.0 0.26786 0.303
1 For residents, average hours per week in the City; for employees, hours of business operation per week; see discussion in text
2 Base weight = hours of operation per week / total hours per week 3 Normalized weight = Base weight / 0.88452 so that normalized resident weight = 1.0
City of Chowchilla Page 2-7
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Although it is not spelled out in Section 65852.2, we think it is obvious that when calculating ADU impact fees in cases where the primary unit is a single-family detached unit, the starting point for the proportionality calculation is the fee that applies to the single-family unit. The law also allows for ADUs on lots or parcels where the primary unit is a multi-family unit. In that situation, it seems logical that the ADU impact fee should be proportional to the impact fee that applies to the multi-family unit, but we think ADUs within multi-family developments are likely to be rare and we don’t address them further.

The formula for calculating proportional ADU impact fees would be:

Primary unit impact fee X (ADU square feet / Primary unit square feet) One thing that becomes obvious in that formula is that, for an ADU of a particular size, a larger primary unit results in lower impact fees for the ADU.

For example, if the ADU is 1,000 square feet and the primary unit is 2,000 square feet, the proportional impact fee for the ADU would be 50% of the impact fee that would apply to the primary unit. But if the primary unit is 1,200 square feet, the impact fee for the same-sized ADU would be 83.33% of the primary unit fee.

It seems likely that discrepancy is an unintended consequence of language in Section 65852.2 that was not thoroughly considered before adoption. It is also worth noting that for impact fee studies adopted after July 1, 2022, AB 602 requires that impact fees for all types of residential units must be proportionate to the square footage of a unit. Impact fees based on square footage will tend to reduce the inequity created by the proportionality language of Section 65852.2 because the fees that apply to a smaller primary unit would be less than the fees that apply to a larger primary unit. However, it may be a number of years before most cities in California adopt residential impact fees based on square footage. The City could attempt to minimize the inequities created by the ADU impact fee proportionality requirement in Section 65852.2 by adopting a policy setting a lower limit on the primary unit square footage used to calculate impact fees for ADUs.

City of Chowchilla Page 2-8
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Existing and Future Development
Tables 2.2 through 2.4 on the following pages present data on existing and future development in the City of Chowchilla. Data from those tables will be used throughout this report. Table 2.2 shows existing development as of January 2022.

The City’s estimated vacancy rate in 2021 was 8.7%. The relationship between residential units and population in the following tables assumes a more normal 5% vacancy rate.

Table 2.1: Demand Factors
Development
Type
Unit
Type 1
Population
per Unit 2
Employees
per Unit 3
Svc Pop
per Unit 4
Pk Hr Trips
per Unit 5
Police Calls
per Unit 6
Fire Calls
per Unit 7
Residential, Single-Family DU 3.20 3.20 0.99 3.25 0.073 Residential, Multi-Family DU 2.40 2.40 0.56 2.56 0.058
Retail/Service Commercial KSF 2.20 1.24 3.81 19.15 0.153 Professional Office KSF 3.30 1.00 1.15 4.40 0.047
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed 0.95 1.07 0.22 1.31 0.030
Industrial KSF 1.10 0.36 0.53 0.66 0.034
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF 3.30 1.00 0.94 20.19 0.172 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross sq ft of building area; room = guest room or suite 2 Average household population per unit based on analysis of data from U. S. Census Bureau, 2019 American Community Survey (2019, 5-Year Estimate), Tables B25032 and B25033; factors adjusted for consistency with Department of Finance 2021 population estimates 3 Employees per unit estimated by NBS using data from multiple sources including a 2001 employment density study by the Natelson Co. for the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) and a summary of Census Bureau data from ESRI
4 Service population per unit; see the discussion of service population weighting in the text 5 Peak hour trips per unit based on p.m. peak hour trip generation rates for the adjacent street from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) manual, Trip Generation , 10th Edition 6 Police calls for service per unit per year; see discussion in text 7 Fire calls for service per unit per year; see discussion in text City of Chowchilla Page 2-9
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Table 2.3 presents a forecast of future development in the City. The numbers in this table represent the difference between existing development in Table 2.2 and buildout development in Table 2.4.

Table 2.2: Existing Development January 1, 2022 - City of Chowchilla Development
Type
Dev
Acres 1
Unit
Type 2
No. of
Units 3
Population 4Employees
5 Service
Pop 6
Pk Hour
Trips 7
PD Calls
per Year 8
Fire Calls
per Year 9
Residential, Single-Family 995 DU 3,604 10,956 10,956 3,568 11,719 262 Residential, Multi-Family 91 DU 906 2,066 2,066 507 2,320 53 Subtotal Residential 1,086 4,510 13,022 13,022 4,075 14,039 315 Retail/Service Commercial 60 KSF 489 1,075 1,337 1,862 9,359 75 Professional Office 7 KSF 64 210 210 73 280 3
Skilled Nursing Facilities 8 Bed 132 125 142 29 240 6
Industrial 62 KSF 844 928 330 447 560 29
Public Facilities/Institutions 19 KSF 162 536 536 153 3,280 28 Subtotal Non-residential 156 2,874 2,554 2,564 13,719 141 Totals 1,242 13,022 2,874 15,576 6,639 27,758 456
1 Existing developed acres estimated based on existing units of development 2 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross sq ft of building area; Bed = patient bed 3 Number of existing residential units based on the January 2021 CA Department of Finance E-5 report adjusted to 2022; existing non-residential units estimated using ESRI Business Summary employee data and employee density factors from Table 2.1
4 Existing household population adjusted to vacancy rate of 5% = existing residential units X 0.95 X population per unit from Table 2.1; Department of Finance January 2021 household population estimate = 12,505; see the discussion of vacancy rate adjustment in text
5 Existing employees = estimated by NBS based on data from ESRI 2021 Business Summary for the City; employees in Public Facilities/Institutions excludes staff at the two prisons in Chowchilla 6 Existing service population = existing units X service population per unit from Table 2.1 7 Existing peak hour trips = existing units X peak hour trips per unit from Table 2.1 8 Existing police calls per year based on analysis of a random sample of calls for service for FY 2020-21 9 Existing fire calls per year based on analysis of all calls for service for CY 2020 City of Chowchilla Page 2-10
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Table 2.4 shows development in the City projected to 2040, based on population growth projections from the Housing Element of the Chowchilla General Plan. Projections of future residential units reflect a General Plan assumption that 70% of residential units in the City in 2040 will be single-family detached units, down from about 80% in 2022. Non-residential development is projected on the basis of maintaining the overall 2022 jobs per dwelling unit ratio, as well as the percentage of jobs in each non-residential development category.

Table 2.3: Added Development to 2040 - City of Chowchilla Planning Area Development
Type
Dev
Acres
Unit
Type
No. of
Units
Population Employees Service
Pop
Pk Hour
Trips
PD Calls
per Year 8
Fire Calls
per Year
Residential, Single-Family 750 DU 4,248 12,914 14,170 4,206 13,813 309 Residential, Multi-Family 374 DU 3,581 8,164 8,703 2,005 9,170 209 Subtotal Residential 1,124 7,829 21,078 22,873 6,211 22,983 518 Retail/Service Commercial 65 KSF 873 1,920 2,387 3,325 16,713 134 Professional Office 7 KSF 119 394 393 137 525 6
Skilled Nursing Facilities 13 Bed 214 203 229 47 213 4
Industrial 91 KSF 1,489 1,638 582 789 988 51
Public Facilities/Institutions 15 KSF 282 930 930 265 5,692 49 Subtotal Non-residential 191 5,085 4,522 4,563 24,132 244 Totals 1,315 21,078 5,085 27,395 10,774 47,115 762
Note: the numbers in Table 2.3 represent the difference between 2040 development in Table 2.4 and existing development in Table 2.2
City of Chowchilla Page 2-11
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Growth Potential
The numbers in the foregoing tables indicate that all measures of development in Chowchilla could more than double between 2021 and 2040. However, the impact fee calculations in this report do not depend on whether development occurs at a particular rate, or whether the amount of future development projected in the report occurs by 2040.

The fees calculated in subsequent chapters of this report are intended to pay for the capital facilities needed to serve the additional demand created by future development forecasted in this chapter, whenever it occurs.

Table 2.4: Total 2040 Development - City of Chowchilla Planning Area Development
Type
Dev
Acres 1
Unit
Type 2
No. of
Units 3
Population 4Employees
5 Service
Pop 6
Pk Hour
Trips 7
PD Calls
per Year 8
Fire Calls
per Year 8
Residential, Single-Family 1,745 DU 7,852 23,870 25,126 7,773 25,532 571 Residential, Multi-Family 374 DU 4,487 10,230 10,769 2,513 11,490 262 Subtotal Residential 2,119 12,339 34,100 35,895 10,286 37,022 833 Retail/Service Commercial 125 KSF 1,361 2,995 3,724 5,186 26,072 209 Professional Office 14 KSF 183 604 603 210 805 9
Skilled Nursing Facilities 21 Bed 346 328 371 76 453 10 Industrial 153 KSF 2,333 2,566 912 1,236 1,548 80
Public Facilities/Institutions 34 KSF 444 1,466 1,465 418 8,972 77 Subtotal Non-residential 347 7,959 7,076 7,127 37,851 385 Totals 2,466 34,100 7,959 42,971 17,413 74,873 1,218
1 2040 developed acres estimated based on projected 2040 units of development and residential densities and non-residential floor area ratios
2 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross sq ft of building area; Bed = patient bed 3 2040 units estimated by NBS using data inputs from the General Plan 4 2040 population = residential units X population per unit from Table 2.1 5 2040 employees = non-residential units X employees per unit from Table 2.1 6 2040 service population = 2040 units X service pop. per unit from Table 2.1 7 2040 peak hour trips = 2040 units X peak hour trips per unit from Table 2.1 8 2040 police calls per year = 2040 units X calls per unit per year from Table 2.1 9 2040 fire calls per year = 2040 units X calls per unit per year from Table 2.1 City of Chowchilla Page 3-1
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Chapter 3. Park Land and Park Improvements
This chapter calculates three types of park development fees, all of which apply only to residential development. Two of those fees are for park land acquisition. One applies to subdivisions, and the other applies to projects that do not involve a subdivision. Only one of the two land acquisition fees would apply to any one development project. The third fee funds park improvements and park maintenance vehicles and equipment. That fee, in addition to one of the two park land acquisition fees, applies to all residential development projects.

In-Lieu Fees and Impact Fees for Park Land Acquisition
The type of fee that may be imposed on a development project for park land acquisition depends on whether that project involves a subdivision of land.

Projects Involving a Subdivision or Parcel Map. Residential subdivisions and parcel maps are subject to the Quimby Act (Govt. Code Section 66477) which is part of the Subdivision Map Act.

The Quimby Act authorizes cities and counties in California to require subdividers to dedicate land for parks or pay fees in lieu of dedication. As detailed below, the Quimby in-lieu fees are subject to different standards and limitations than park impact fees imposed under the Mitigation Fee Act.

The Chowchilla Park Master Plan contains a statement that in-lieu fees “should be based on a formula that considers both land acquisition and construction costs.” That statement is inconsistent with the intent of an in-lieu fee. A fee in lieu of park land dedication should be based on the value of the land that would otherwise be dedicated. Such a fee should not include construction costs. In this study, park improvement costs are covered by a separate impact fee.

The City’s existing Quimby Act ordinance bases dedication and in-lieu fee acreage requirements on the density (units per acre) of a development project rather than its population. There is no way to compare the effect of that density formula with the acres-per-1,000 population standards contained in the Quimby Act.

The Quimby in-lieu fees calculated in this chapter are standardized fees based on an estimated average cost per acre for park land in the City. We propose these fees as an alternative to the approach embodied in the City’s existing Quimby Act ordinance. The City may choose not to implement the proposed in-lieu fees.

Projects Not Involving a Subdivision or Parcel Map. Residential development projects not involving a subdivision or parcel map are not subject to the Quimby Act but may instead be required to pay impact fees for park land acquisition as calculated in this chapter. Impact fees for park land acquisition are governed by the Mitigation Fee Act (Govt. Code Sections 66000 et seq.).

Impact Fees for Park Improvements
Since in-lieu fees and impact fees for park land acquisition are based only on the cost of land and do not cover the cost of park improvements, this chapter calculates a separate impact fee for City of Chowchilla Page 3-2
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

park improvements. The cost of park maintenance vehicles and equipment is also included in the park improvement impact fees. Impact fees for park improvements are governed by the Mitigation Fee Act.

The Quimby Act
The Quimby Act contains a number of provisions that differ from the requirements for impact fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act. Under the Quimby Act, a city or county may, by ordinance, “require the dedication of land or impose a requirement for the payment of fees in lieu thereof, or a combination of both, for park or recreational purposes as a condition of approval of a tentative map or parcel map….” An ordinance imposing dedication and fee requirements under the Quimby Act must contain “definite standards for determining the proportion of a subdivision to be dedicated and the amount of any fee to be paid in lieu thereof.” Before imposing these requirements, the City must have adopted a general plan or specific plan containing policies and standards for parks and recreation facilities. The dedicated land and/or in-lieu fees “are to be used only for the purpose of developing new or rehabilitating existing neighborhood or community parks or recreational facilities to serve the subdivision (paying the fees).”
The Quimby Act provides that only in-lieu fees, not land dedication, may be required for subdivisions of less than 50 parcels. For larger projects, the City may choose to require either land dedication or payment of in-lieu fees or a combination of the two. The Quimby Act also specifies the manner in which dedication requirements and in-lieu fees are to be calculated. See the Level of Service section below for additional detail.

Service Area
All park in-lieu fees and impact fees calculated in this chapter are intended to apply to all residential development in the City.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the standard-based method discussed in Chapter 1.

Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development. Both in-lieu and impact fees are calculated using per-capita costs discussed later in this chapter.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in impact fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate park in-lieu fees and impact fees in this chapter is population.

Population is used here because the need for parks is typically defined in terms of the relationship between park acreage and population. In addition, the Quimby Act specifies that standards for City of Chowchilla Page 3-3
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

park land dedication and in-lieu fees must be based on the relationship between park acreage and population.

Population per dwelling unit varies by development type, so the average population per unit is estimated for each type of residential development defined in this study. Those individual population-per-unit factors are shown in Table 2.1 in Chapter 2.

Because added population is associated with residential development, the in-lieu fees and impact fees calculated in this chapter apply only to residential development.

Level of Service
The Open Space and Conservation Element of the Chowchilla General Plan adopts a standard of

3.0 acres per 1,000 population for neighborhood parks and 2.0 acres per 1,000 for community parks. However, those standards exceed the level of service allowed by current California law as explained below.

Quimby Act Standard. Park land dedication requirements and fees in lieu of dedication for residential subdivisions under the Quimby Act may be based on the existing ratio of park acres to population up to a cap of 5,0 acres per 1,000, except that the 3.0 acres per 1,000 standard may be applied if the existing level is lower. Since Chowchilla’s existing level of service, as shown in Table 3.2 is slightly less than that level, Quimby Act park land dedication requirements calculated in this chapter will be based on 3.0 acres per 1,000.

Impact Fee Standard. The level of service used to calculate park improvement impact fees and park land impact fees in this chapter is the existing level of service, defined as the existing ratio of park acres to population.

In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. That section requires, after January 1, 2022, that the level of service used in an impact fee study must be compared with the existing level of service. If the level used in the impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, an explanation is required. We believe that provision would require the City to justify using a level of service higher than the existing level to calculate impact fees. The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the existing level of service as shown in Table 3.2 on the next page.

Table 3.1 lists the City’s existing parks and shows both City-owned park acres and acres of improved parks.

City of Chowchilla Page 3-4
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Table 3.2 calculates the existing level of service in terms of acres per capita and acres per 1,000 population for improved park land in the City. The level of service used in this chapter is based on improved park acres, not City-owned acres, because a 2019 decision by the California Court of Appeal in Boatworks, LLC v. City of Alameda found that parks not yet open to the public could not be used as the basis for establishing the existing level of service used to calculate park impact fees.

Level-of-Service Standard for Park Land In-Lieu Fees (Applies to Subdivisions). The Quimby Act provides that park land dedication and in-lieu fee requirements may be based on a minimum ratio of 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents and may be increased up to 5.0 acres per 1,000 to match the existing ratio. Because the City’s existing ratio is below 3.0 acres per 1,000, the standard used to calculate park land acquisition in-lieu fees in this study is 3.0 acres per 1,000 residents.

Level-of-Service Standard for Park Land Impact Fees (Applies to Projects Not Involving a Subdivision of Land). The standard used to calculate park land acquisition impact fees for nonsubdivision projects in this study is the existing ratio of improved park land to population as shown in Table 3.2.

Level-of-Service Standard for Park Improvement Impact Fees (Applies to All Residential Development). The standard used to calculate impact fees for park improvements in this study is the existing ratio of improved park land to population as shown in Table 3.2.

Table 3.1: Existing Parks
Park Park City-Owned Improved
Name Type Park Acres Park Acres
Edward Ray Park Community 24.00 24.00
R. C. Wisener Park Neighborhood 4.50 4.50
Veteran's Memorial Park Neighborhood 2.10 2.10
Legacy Ranch Park Site Neighborhood 6.50 0.00
Total 37.10 30.60
Source: City of Chowchilla General Plan, Open Space and Conservation Element with additional information provided by City staff Table 3.2: Existing Level of Service
Total Improved
Park Acres 1
Existing
Population 2
Improved Acres
per Capita 3
Improved Acres
per 1,000 4

30.60 13,022 0.00235 2.35
1 See Table 3.1
2 See Table 2.2
3 Acres per capita = existing acres / existing population 4 Acres per 1,000 population = acres per capita X 1,000 City of Chowchilla Page 3-5
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Level of Service Standard for Park Maintenance Vehicles and Equipment. The park improvement impact fees also include the cost of park maintenance vehicles and equipment. The standard used to calculate impact fees for park maintenance vehicles and equipment in this study is the existing replacement cost per capita. Table 3.3 lists the City’s existing park maintenance vehicles and equipment less than twenty years old with the estimated replacement cost for each item. Replacement cost is used here to represent the cost of acquiring additional vehicles and equipment needed to maintain additional park acreage as the City grows.

Cost Per Capita
Table 3.4 calculates the existing level of service for park maintenance vehicles and equipment as a cost per capita using the total replacement cost from Table 3.3 and the existing population from Table 2.2.

Table 3.3: Existing Park Maintenance Vehicles & Equipment Description
Model
Year 1
Replacement
Cost 2
9N Tractor, Ford 1959 $ 25,000.00
Chevy Colorado Pick Up Truck 2006 $ 25,000.00
Chevy Silverado 2017 $ 35,000.00
Global Electric Car 2017 $ 20,000.00
Mower, Grasshopper 2017 $ 25,000.00
Chevy Silverado 1500 LD 2019 $ 35,000.00
Chevy Silverado 1500 LD 2019 $ 35,000.00
Dump Trailer 2019 $ 10,000.00
Tractor, Kubota 2020 $ 25,000.00
Backhoe Bucket, Kabuto 2020 $ 10,000.00
Loader Bucket, Kubota 2020 $ 5,000.00
Total $ 250,000.00
1 This table excludes vehicles and equipment over 20 years old 2 Replacement cost estimated by the City of Chowchilla Public Works Department
Table 3.4: Cost per Capita - Vehicles and Equipment
Total Replacement
Cost 1
Existing
Population 2
Cost per
Capita 3
$250,000.00 13,022 $19.20
1 See Table 3.3
2 See Table 2.2
3 Cost per capita = total replacement cost / existing population City of Chowchilla Page 3-6
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Table 3.5 shows per-capita costs for park land in-lieu fees, park land impact fees and park improvement impact fees, based on the acres-per-capita standard for each type of fee and the estimated cost per acre for park land and park improvements. Because different standards are used for park land in-lieu fees for subdivisions and park land impact fees for non-subdivision projects, the cost per capita is calculated separately for those fee components.

In the next section, the per-capita costs from Tables 3.4 and 3.5 are used to calculate in-lieu fees and impact fees per unit of development.

In-Lieu Fees and Impact Fees per Unit
Park Land Acquisition In-Lieu Fees (Subdivisions). Table 3.6 shows the calculation of Quimby Act park land in-lieu fees per unit of development by development type. Those fees are calculated using per-capita costs from Table 3.5 and average population per dwelling unit from Table 2.1.

Park Land Acquisition Impact Fees (Non-Subdivision Projects). Table 3.7 shows the calculation of park land impact fees per unit of development, by development type. Those fees are calculated using per-capita costs from Table 3.5 and average population per dwelling unit from Table 2.1.

Table 3.5: Cost per Capita - Park Land and Park Improvements Fee Type
Acres per
Capita 1
Cost per
Acre2
Cost per
Capita3
Park Land In-Lieu Fees 0.00300 $ 242,000 $ 726.00
Park Land Impact Fees 0.00235 $ 242,000 $ 568.70
Park Improvement Impact Fees 0.00235 $ 500,000 $ 1,175.00 1 Acres per capita for park land in-lieu fees based on 3.0 acres per 1,000 population (0.003 acres per capita) as provided in the Quimby Act; acres per capita for other fees based on the existing level of service; see Table 3.2 2 Park land acquisition cost per acre based on recent sales of residentially zoned parcels in the City; improvement cost per acre estimated by the City 3 Cost per capita = acres per capita X cost per acre
Table 3.6: Quimby Act Park Land In-Lieu Fees per Unit (Subdivisions) Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Population
per DU 3
In-Lieu Fee
per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $726.00 3.20 $2,323.20
Residential, Multi-Family DU $726.00 2.40 $1,742.40
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.5
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit City of Chowchilla Page 3-7
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Park Improvement Impact Fees (All Residential Development). Table 3.8 shows the calculation of impact fees per unit of development, by development type, for park improvements. The park improvement impact fees also include the cost of park maintenance vehicles and equipment.

The park improvement impact fees are calculated using the combined per-capita costs for park improvements from Table 3.5 and park maintenance vehicles and equipment from Table 3.3.

Projected Revenue
Estimating potential revenue from the park land acquisition in-lieu and impact fees is complicated by the fact that there is no way of accurately forecasting how many future residential units will be in subdivisions, which are subject to the Quimby Act in-lieu fee, and how many will be in non-subdivision projects that pay the park land acquisition impact fee. The revenue projections in Table 3.9 assume that the City will adopt the Quimby Act in-lieu fees calculated in this chapter. Chowchilla currently charges Park land in-lieu fees based on density.

For simplicity, the revenue projected in Table 3.9 assumes that all future single-family detached units will be constructed in subdivisions and that 50% of future multi-family residential units will be townhouses and condominiums that involve subdivisions.

Table 3.7: Park Land Impact Fees per Unit (Non-Subdivision Projects) Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Population
per DU 3
Impact Fee
per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $568.70 3.20 $1,819.84
Residential, Multi-Family DU $568.70 2.40 $1,364.88
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.5
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit Table 3.8: Park Improvement Impact Fees per Unit
Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Population
per DU 3
Impact Fee
per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $1,194.20 3.20 $3,821.43
Residential, Multi-Family DU $1,194.20 2.40 $2,866.08
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 Includes combined cost per capita for park improvements and park maintenance vehicles and equipment; see Tables 3.3 and 3.5 3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit City of Chowchilla Page 3-8
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

These revenue projections also assume that future development in the City will occur as forecasted in Chapter 2 and that the fees calculated in this chapter will be adjusted periodically to keep pace with changes in costs for park land and improvements.

Table 3.10 shows projected revenue from park land acquisition impact fees. This table assumes that the park land acquisition impact fees will apply to 50% of future multi-family residential units.

Table 3.11 shows projected revenue from park improvement impact fees, including the cost of park maintenance vehicles and equipment.

Table 3.9: Projected Revenue from Park Land In-Lieu Fees Development In-Lieu Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $2,323.20 4,248 $ 9,868,954 Residential, Multi-Family DU $1,742.40 1,791 $ 3,119,767 Total $ 12,988,721
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.6
3 See Table 2.3; this table assumes that 100% of new single-family units and 50% of new multi-family units will be constructed in subdivisions 4 Projected revenue = fee per unit X future units
Table 3.10: Projected Revenue from Park Land Impact Fees Development Impact Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $1,819.84 0 $ 0
Residential, Multi-Family DU $1,364.88 1,791 $ 2,443,818 Total $ 2,443,818
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.7
3 See Table 2.3; this table assumes that no new single-family units and 50% of new multi-family units will be constructed in non-subdivision projects 4 Projected revenue = fee per unit X future units
City of Chowchilla Page 3-9
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Updating the Fees
The in-lieu fees and impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated cost of park land and improvements. We recommend that the fees be reviewed annually and adjusted as needed using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for parks in Chowchilla.

Table 3.11: Projected Revenue from Park Improvement Impact Fees Development Impact Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $3,821.43 4,248 $ 16,233,454 Residential, Multi-Family DU $2,866.08 3,581 $ 10,263,418 Total $ 26,496,871
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 3.8
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = fee per unit X future units
City of Chowchilla Page 3-10
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional parks to mitigate the impacts of new development in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional parks to serve the needs of added population associated with new residential development in Chowchilla.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New residential development increases the need for parksto maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter. Without additional parks, the increase in population associated with new residential development would result in a reduction in the level of service provided to all residents of the City.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the park impact fees charged to a residential development project will depend on the increase in population associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of residential development are based on the estimated average population per unit for that type of development in Chowchilla. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for parks in the City.

City of Chowchilla Page 4-1
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Chapter 4. Fire Facilities
This chapter calculates impact fees for fire protection and emergency response facilities, apparatus and equipment needed to serve future development in the area served by the City of Chowchilla (City). Where the general term “facilities” is used in this chapter, it is intended to include all types of capital assets needed by the City to carry out its mission.

At present, the City operates one fire station. The station is owned by the City has recently been expanded to include sleeping quarters, training space, and extra bays for equipment. The City anticipates that three additional stations will be needed to serve future development at buildout.

Service Area
The service area for impact fees calculated in this chapter is the Planning Area shown in the City of Chowchilla General Plan. Those fees are intended to apply to all future development in the City.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development on a certain type of capital facilities. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for fire facilities in this report is calls for service per year.

As part of this study, NBS analyzed the 456 Fire Department calls for service logged by the City in calendar year 2020 to estimate the number of calls per unit per year generated by each type of development defined in this study. Table 2.1 in Chapter 2 shows the calls per unit per year factors derived from that analysis. Those factors are used to calculate impact fees per unit later in this chapter.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the standard-based method discussed in Chapter

1. Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development.

Level of Service
In this case, the standard used to calculate impact fees is the existing level of service, defined as the replacement cost of existing fire protection facilities, apparatus and equipment divided by the total 2020 calls for service to get a cost per call for service per year.

In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. Among other things, after January 1, 2022, that section requires that if the level of service used in an impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, the higher level of service must be justified. Using the existing level of service as the basis for the impact fees calculated in this chapter is consistent with the requirements of AB 602.

City of Chowchilla Page 4-2
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Facilities, Apparatus and Equipment
Table 4.1 lists the estimated replacement cost of the City’s existing fire station, including its recent expansion.

Table 4.2 lists the City’s existing firefighting apparatus and other vehicles and equipment. Costs for all vehicles and equipment reflect the estimated current dollar replacement costs as provided by City staff.

Table 4.3 summarizes the costs from the preceding tables and adds the existing cash balance of the Fire Impact Fee Fund.

Table 4.1: Existing Fire Stations
Constr Building Site Bldg Repl Est Land Impact Fee
Facility Date Sq Ft 1
Acres 2Cost 3 Cost 4Cost Basis 5
Fire Station 1 1999 5,710 0.60 $ 1,461,078 $145,200 $ 1,606,278 Fire Station 1 Expansion 2021 4,500 0.00 $ 1,166,000 $ 0 $ 1,166,000 Total $ 2,772,278
1 Existing station sourced from City asset records
2 Provided by City staff
3 Replacement cost for existing station sourced from City insured property schedule; expansion cost provided by City staff.
4 Land acquisition cost per acre based on recent sales of land in the City at $242,000 per acre 5 Impact fee cost basis = sum of building replacement cost and site cost or value Table 4.2: Existing Fire Apparatus and Vehicles
Model Replacement
Year Description Cost 1
1936 Ford Fire Engine #2 $ 0
1991 IH Navistar Fire Engine #6 $ 700,000
1995 MQ Power 125 KVA Generator $ 80,000
1999 Ford F-150 Pickup Truck $ 60,000
2000 Forklift $ 30,000
2005 Int Fire Engine #7 $ 700,000
2009 Ford F-550 4 X 4 (Mini Pumper) $ 400,000
2009 Scotty Fire Prevention Trailer $ 60,000
2016 Freightliner Water Truck $ 400,000
2017 Rosenbauer Fire Engine #4 $ 700,000
2019 Chevy Silverado Pick Up $ 60,000
2019 Dodge Ram 1500 $ 60,000
Total $ 3,250,000
1 Replacement cost provided by the City of Chowchilla
City of Chowchilla Page 4-3
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Cost per Call for Service
Table 4.4 calculates the cost per call for service for City fire facilities, apparatus and equipment using the total cost from Table 4.3 and the existing number of calls for service per year.

Impact Fees per Unit
Table 4.5 shows the calculation of fire facilities impact fees per unit of development, by development type. Those fees are calculated using the cost per call for service from Table 4.4 and the calls-per-unit-per-year factors from Table 2.1.

Table 4.3: Impact Fee Cost Basis - Existing Assets
Total
Component Cost Basis 1
Existing Fire Stations $ 2,772,278
Existing Fire Apparatus and Vehicles $ 3,250,000
Fire Impact Fee Fund Balance $ 360,188
Total Cost $ 6,382,466
1 See Tables 4.1, and 4.2; DIF fund balance as of 6/30/21 Table 4.4: Cost per Call for Service
Total Existing Calls Cost per Call
Cost Basis1
for Service 2for Service 3
$6,382,466 456 $13,996.64
1 Total cost basis; see Table 4.3
2 Existing Fire calls for service per year ; see Table 2.2 3 Cost per call for service = total facility cost / existing calls for service per year
City of Chowchilla Page 4-4
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Projected Revenue
Potential revenue from the fire facilities impact fees can be estimated by applying the fees per unit from Table 4.5 to forecasted future units from Table 2.3. Table 4.6 shows the projected revenue to buildout from the fire facilities impact fees calculated in this chapter. This projection assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2.

Table 4.5 Impact Fee per Unit
Development Cost per CFS Impact Fee
Type Units 1
CFS 2
per Unit 3per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $13,996.64 0.073 $ 1,017.51 Residential, Multi-Family DU $13,996.64 0.058 $ 818.79
Retail/Service Commercial KSF $13,996.64 0.153 $ 2,148.32 Professional Office KSF $13,996.64 0.047 $ 659.84
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $13,996.64 0.030 $ 419.90
Industrial KSF $13,996.64 0.034 $ 481.13
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $13,996.64 0.172 $ 2,412.85 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area 2 Cost per call for service; see Table 4.4
3 Calls for service per unit; see Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per call for service X calls for service per unit Table 4.6 Projected Revenue
Development Impact Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $ 1,017.51 4,248 $ 4,322,397 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 818.79 3,581 $ 2,932,079 Retail/Service Commercial KSF $ 2,148.32 873 $ 1,874,654 Professional Office KSF $ 659.84 119 $ 78,729
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $ 419.90 214 $ 89,716
Industrial KSF $ 481.13 1,489 $ 716,410
Total $ 10,013,986
1 DU=dwelling unit; KSF=1,000 gross squre feet of building area 2 Impact fee per unit see Table 4.5
3 Future units see Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = future units X impact fee per unit City of Chowchilla Page 4-5
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Although Table 4.5 establishes an impact fee for Public Facilities and Institutions, the City either may not have authority, or may not be likely to charge impact fees to other governmental agencies. Consequently, no projected revenue is attributed to public facilities in Table 4.6.

Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated replacement costs for fire facilities, with depreciation as shown in this chapter. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for fire facilities, apparatus and vehicles provided by the City of Chowchilla.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional fire facilities, apparatus and vehicles to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for those capital assets in the City. As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional fire facilities, apparatus and vehicles and to serve the added demand for fire protection and other emergency services associated with new development in Chowchilla.

City of Chowchilla Page 4-6
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development increases the demand for fire protection and other emergency services provided by the City. Without additional facilities, apparatus and equipment, the increase in demand associated with new development would negatively impact the ability of the City of Chowchilla to provide services efficiently and effectively to all development in the City.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the fire facilities impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in calls for service associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated calls for service per unit per year for that type of development in the City’s service area. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the overall need for facilities, apparatus and equipment used by the City to serve development in the City.

City of Chowchilla Page 5-1
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Chapter 5. Police Facilities
This chapter calculates impact fees for police facilities needed to serve future development in the area served by the City of Chowchilla (City).

At present, the City operates one police station. The station is owned by the City has recently been improved to include a security fence around the perimeter. The City expects that future police facilities needed to serve future development will include a sub-station on the east side of State Route 99. Much of the City’s planned future development is east of SR 99, which divides the City.

As discussed in more detail below, the police facilities impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on the existing level of service, defined as the relationship between the replacement cost of the City’s existing police facilities and equipment and the number of calls for service generated by existing development in the City.

Service Area
The service area for impact fees calculated in this chapter is the Planning Area shown in the City of Chowchilla General Plan. Those fees are intended to apply to all future development in the City.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development on a certain type of capital facilities. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for police facilities in this report is calls for service per year.

As part of this study, NBS analyzed a random sample of the 27,757 calls for service logged by the City between June 30, 2020 and June 30, 2021 to estimate the number of calls per unit per year generated by each type of development defined in this study. Table 2.1 in Chapter 2 shows the calls per unit per year factors derived from that analysis. Those factors are used to calculate impact fees per unit later in this chapter.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the standard-based method discussed in Chapter

1. Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development.

Level of Service
In this case, the standard used to calculate impact fees is the existing level of service, defined as the replacement cost of existing police facilities equipment divided by the total calls for service per year to get a cost per call for service per year.

City of Chowchilla Page 5-2
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. Among other things, after January 1, 2022, that section requires that if the level of service used in an impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, the higher level of service must be justified. Using the existing level of service as the basis for the impact fees calculated in this chapter is consistent with the requirements of AB 602.

Existing Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment
Table 5.1 lists the replacement cost of the City’s existing police station, including its recent security fence improvement, and the cost basis used in the impact fee calculations.

Table 5.2 on the following page lists the City’s existing police vehicles and equipment. Costs for all vehicles and equipment reflect the estimated current dollar replacement costs as provided by City staff.

Table 5.1: Existing Police Station
Constr Building Site Bldg Repl Est Land Impact Fee
Facility Date Sq Ft 1
Acres 2Cost 3 Value 4Cost Basis 5
Police Station 1977 12,312 0.964 $ 5,421,817 $ 252,472 $5,674,289 Police Parking 1977 3,072 included $ 140,250 $ - $ 140,250 Security Fence 2021 - included $ 1,532,925 $ - $1,532,925 Total $7,347,464
1 Sourced from City asset records
2 Provided by City staff
3 Replacment cost sourced from current City insured property schedule; security fence cost provided by the City
4 Land acquisition cost per acre based on recent sales of land in the City at $242,000/acre 5 Impact fee cost basis = sum of building replacement cost and site value City of Chowchilla Page 5-3
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Table 5.3 summarizes the costs from the preceding tables and adds the existing cash balance of the Police Impact Fee Fund.

Table 5.2: Existing Police Vehicles and Equipment
Model Replacement
Year Description Cost 1
2004 Olympian 200KW Generator $ 46,000
2014 Cameras $ 15,980
2014 Ford Explorer $ 71,478
2014 Ford Taurus Sedan $ 42,207
2014 Ford Explorer $ 71,478
2014 Ford Explorer $ 71,478
2015 911 system $ 137,985
2015 Evidence Refrigerator $ 9,422
2016 Ford Explorer $ 71,478
2017 Ford SUV Interceptor $ 71,478
2017 Ford Interceptor Utility $ 71,478
2017 Kawasaki Pro 6 Passenger $ 18,689
2018 Ford Fusion $ 22,167
2018 Ford Fusion $ 22,894
2018 Global Electric Car $ 23,212
2018 Global Electric Car $ 23,212
2019 Ford Explorer $ 57,968
2019 F-250 Super Cab $ 53,909
2020 Ford Explorer $ 71,478
2020 Ford Explorer $ 71,478
2020 Ford Explorer $ 71,478
2020 Ford Interceptor $ 71,478
2021 Dodge Charger $ 71,478
2020 Ford Explorer SUV $ 71,478
2021 Chevrolet Silverado 1500 $ 35,200
2022 CAD RMS Computer System $ 300,297
Total $ 1,666,880
1 Replacement cost provided by the City of Chowchilla
City of Chowchilla Page 5-4
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Cost per Call for Service
Table 5.4 calculates the cost per call for service for City police facilities using the total cost from Table 5.3 and the number of calls for service per year for existing development.

Impact Fees per Unit
Table 5.5 shows the calculation of police facilities impact fees per unit of development, by development type. Those fees are calculated using the cost per call for service from Table 5.4 and the calls-per-unit-per-year factors from Table 2.1.

Table 5.3: Impact Fee Cost Basis - Existing Assets
Total
Component Cost Basis 1
Existing Police Station $ 7,347,464
Existing Police Vehicles and Equipment $ 1,666,880
Total Cost $ 9,014,344
1 See Tables 5.1 and 5.2
2 Impact Fee Fund cash balance provided by City Finance Department as of 6/30/21
Table 5.4 Cost per Call for Service
Total Existing Calls Cost per Call
Cost Basis1
for Service 2for Service 3
$9,014,344 27,758 $324.75
1 Total cost basis; see Table 5.3
2 Existing calls for service per year; see Table 2.2
3 Cost per call for service = total cost basis / existing calls for service per year
City of Chowchilla Page 5-5
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Projected Revenue
Potential revenue from the police facilities impact fees can be estimated by applying the fees per unit from Table 5.5 to forecasted future units from Table 2.3. Table 5.6 shows the projected revenue to buildout from the police facilities impact fees calculated in this chapter. This projection assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2.

Although Table 5.5 establishes an impact fee for Public Facilities and Institutions, the City either may not have authority, or may not be likely to charge impact fees to other governmental agencies. Consequently, no revenue is projected for public facilities.

Table 5.5 Impact Fee per Unit
Development Cost per CFS Impact Fee
Type Units 1
CFS 2per Unit 3per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $324.75 3.25 $ 1,055.97
Residential, Multi-Family DU $324.75 2.56 $ 831.58
Retail/Service Commercial KSF $324.75 19.15 $ 6,219.99
Professional Office KSF $324.75 4.40 $ 1,428.89
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $324.75 1.31 $ 425.42
Industrial KSF $324.75 0.66 $ 215.57
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $324.75 20.19 $ 6,557.96 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area 2 Cost per call for service; see Table 5.4
3 Calls for service per unit; see Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X calls for service per unit Table 5.6 Projected Revenue
Development Impact Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $ 1,055.97 4,248 $ 4,485,762 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 831.58 3,581 $ 2,977,900 Retail/Service Commercial KSF $ 6,219.99 873 $ 5,427,647 Professional Office KSF $ 1,428.89 119 $ 170,489
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $ 425.42 214 $ 90,896
Industrial KSF $ 215.57 1,489 $ 320,977
Total $ 13,473,671
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross sq. ft. of building area; Bed = patient bed 2 Impact fee per unit see Table 5.5
3 Future units see Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units City of Chowchilla Page 5-6
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated replacement costs for police facilities, with depreciation as shown in this chapter. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for police facilities provided by the City of Chowchilla.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional police facilities to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for those facilities in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional police facilities and to serve the added demand for police protection associated with new development in Chowchilla.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development increases the demand for police protection provided by the City. Without additional facilities, the increase in demand associated with new development would negatively impact the ability of the City of Chowchilla to provide services efficiently and effectively to all development in the City.

City of Chowchilla Page 5-7
Development Impact Fee Study
April 26, 2022

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the police facilities impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in calls for service associated with that project.

The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated calls for service per unit per year for that type of development in the City’s service area. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the overall need for facilities used by the City to serve development in the City.

City of Chowchilla Page 6-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 6. Street System Impact Fees
This chapter calculates impact fees for street system improvements including street widening, intersections or roundabouts, bridges and interchanges needed to serve future development.

Service Area
The service area for impact fees calculated in this chapter is the Planning Area shown in the City of Chowchilla General Plan. Those fees are intended to apply to all future development in the study area.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the plan-based method discussed in Chapter 1. Planbased fees are calculated by allocating costs for a defined set of improvements to a defined set of land uses that will be served by the improvements. The costs used to calculate impact fees in this chapter are for improvements needed to serve future development identified in this report.

Demand Variable
In this analysis, the impact of new development on the need for street improvements is represented by new P.M. Peak Hour Trips (PHT) associated with future development. Peak hour trip generation rates are from the Institution of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, 10th edition and are based on the P.M. peak hour of the adjacent street.

Level of Service
The improvements listed in this chapter are based on the level of service standard established in the Chowchilla General Plan Circulation Element. Specifically, the Circulation Element establishes an overall Level of Service (LOS) C standard but allows LOS D for peak traffic in some instances.

AB 602, adopted in 2021, requires that impact fees based on a level of service higher than the existing level of service be justified. The street system improvements on which impact fees are calculated in this chapter are based on level of service standard adopted in the General Plan Circulation Element, which has not changed since 2010.

Improvement Costs
Table 6.1 summarizes estimated costs for street, intersection, bridge and interchange improvements needed to serve future development in the City of Chowchilla. The improvements listed in Table 6.1 have been identified by the City of Chowchilla Public Works Director. The costs used in the impact fee calculations do not include costs that will be funded by Measure T.

New development’s percentage share of the City’s share of the project costs shown in Table 6.1 reflects the fact that 61.9% of projected 2040 peak hour trips will be generated by new development forecasted in this report. The remaining costs must be funded from revenue sources other than impact fees.

City of Chowchilla Page 6-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Cost per Peak Hour Trip
In Table 6.2, the total impact fee cost basis from Table 6.1 is divided by the projected number of peak hour trips to be added by new development out to 2040 to get a cost per peak hour trip.

That cost per peak hour trip will be used in the next section to calculate impact fees per unit, by development type.

Impact Fees per Unit of Development
Impact fees per unit of development are calculated in Table 6.3 for each type of development defined in this study. The cost per peak hour trip from Table 6.2 is multiplied by the number of peak hour trips per unit for each type of development to arrive at an impact fee per unit.

Table 6.1: Street Improvements
Improvement Estimated Measure T City Share of New Dev Impact Fee Type Project Cost 1Funding Project Cost 2 % Share 3
Cost Basis 4
SR 99/233 Interchange (Roundabouts) $ 19,000,000 $ 12,500,000 $ 6,500,000 61.9% $ 4,021,739 East-West SR 99 Overcrossing $ 26,000,000 $ 26,000,000 61.9% $ 16,086,957 Fig Tree Road (Widen to 4 lanes) $ 1,950,000 $ 1,950,000 100.0% $ 1,950,000 Montgomery Lake Way (Widen to 4 lanes) $ 1,800,000 $ 1,800,000 100.0% $ 1,800,000 Chowchilla Blvd (Widen to 4 lanes) $ 7,500,000 $ 7,500,000 100.0% $ 7,500,000 Washington Ave Widen (to 4 lanes) $ 2,600,000 $ 2,600,000 100.0% $ 2,600,000 Total Street Improvements $ 58,850,000 $ 46,350,000 73.3% $ 33,958,696 1 Project costs estimated costs by the City of Chowchilla Public Works Director; details available from the Public Works Department
2 City share of project cost = estimated project cost less Measure T funding 3 Where project costs are shared between existing and new development, the percentage of cost attributed to new development is based on the percentage of total projected 2040 generated by new development 4 Impact fee cost basis = City share of project cost X new development % share Table 6.2: Cost per Peak Hour Trip
Impact Fee Added Peak Cost per Peak
Cost Basis 1
Hour Trips 2Hour Trip 3
$33,958,696 10,774 $3,151.94
1 See Table 6.1
2 See Table 2.3
3 Cost per peak hour trip = impact fee cost basis / added peak hour trips from Table 2.3
City of Chowchilla Page 6-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Projected Revenue
Potential revenue from the road impact fees calculated in this chapter can be projected by applying the impact fees per unit of development from Table 6.3 to forecasted future units as shown in Table 2.3. The results are shown in Table 6.4.

It is important to note that, although an impact fee for Public Facilities and Institutions is calculated in Table 6.3, the City has limited authority to impose impact fees on county or state facilities or public schools. Consequently, no revenue is shown for that development type in Table Table 6.3: Street Impact Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Pk Pk Hr Trips Impact Fee
Type Units 1
Hr Trip 2
per Unit 3per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $3,151.94 0.99 $ 3,120.42 Residential, Multi-Family DU $3,151.94 0.56 $ 1,765.09
Retail/Service Commercial KSF $3,151.94 3.81 $ 12,008.89 Professional Office KSF $3,151.94 1.15 $ 3,624.73
Skilled Nursing Facilities Bed $3,151.94 0.22 $ 693.43
Industrial KSF $3,151.94 0.53 $ 1,670.53
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $3,151.94 0.94 $ 2,962.82 1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross sq. feet of building area; Bed = patient bed
2 See Table 6.2
3 Peak hour trips per unit; see Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per peak hour trip X peak hour trips per unit Table 6.4: Street Impact Fees - Projected Revenue
Development Impact Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $ 3,120.42 4,248 $ 13,255,548 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 1,765.09 3,581 $ 6,320,775 Retail/Service Commercial KSF $ 12,008.89 873 $ 10,479,124 Professional Office KSF $ 3,624.73 119 $ 432,487
Skilled Nursing Facilities Bed $ 693.43 214 $ 148,158
Industrial KSF $ 1,670.53 1,489 $ 2,487,420
Total $ 33,123,512
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross sq ft of building area; Bed = patient bed
2 Impact fee per unit; see Table 6.3
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units City of Chowchilla Page 6-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022

6.4. The costs allocated to Public Facilities and Institutions amount to about 2.5% of the total impact fee cost basis shown in Table 6.1
Assuming that development occurs, and improvements are constructed, as anticipated in this study, the revenue projected in Table 6.4 would cover approximately 60% of the City’s share of improvement costs shown in Table 6.1.

Updating the Fees
Impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated costs for street system improvements. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for street system improvements needed to serve new development in Chowchilla.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for street system improvements in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

City of Chowchilla Page 6-5
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to construct improvements to the City’s street system to accommodate additional traffic associated with new development in Chowchilla.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development increases traffic volumes and creates a need for street system improvements to maintain an adequate level of service on the City’s street system.

Without those improvements, the increase in traffic associated with new development would subject the City to increased traffic congestion and a reduction in air quality.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the street system impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in peak hour vehicle trips associated generated by that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the P. M. Peak Hour Trip generation rate per unit for that type of development. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the City’s street system.

City of Chowchilla Page 7-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 7. Traffic Signal Impact Fees
This chapter calculates impact fees for traffic signals needed to serve additional traffic that will be generated by future development.

Service Area
The service area for impact fees calculated in this chapter is the Planning Area shown in the City of Chowchilla General Plan. Those fees are intended to apply to all future development in the study area.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the plan-based method discussed in Chapter 1. Planbased fees are calculated by allocating costs for a defined set of improvements to a defined set of land uses that will be served by the improvements. The costs used to calculate impact fees in this chapter are estimated costs for traffic signals needed to serve future development.

Demand Variable
In this analysis, the impact of new development on the need for traffic signals is represented by new P.M. Peak Hour Trips (PHT) associated with future development. Peak hour trip generation rates are from the Institution of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation manual, 10th edition and are based on the P.M. peak hour of the adjacent street.

Level of Service
The improvements listed in this chapter are based on the level of service standard established in the Chowchilla General Plan Circulation Element. Specifically, the Circulation Element establishes an overall Level of Service (LOS) C standard but allows LOS D for peak traffic in some instances.

AB 602 requires that impact fees based on a level of service higher than the existing level of service be justified. The traffic signals needed to serve future development are needed to maintain the level of service standard adopted in the General Plan Circulation Element, which has not changed since 2010.

Traffic Signal Costs
Table 7.1 summarizes estimated costs for traffic signals needed to serve new development in the City of Chowchilla. The need for traffic signals listed in Table 7.1 has been identified by the City of Chowchilla Public Works Director. The entire cost of planned new traffic signals shown in Table

7.1 is included in the impact fee calculations because the need for those signals is created by new development.

City of Chowchilla Page 7-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Cost per Peak Hour Trip
In Table 7.2, the total impact fee cost basis from Table 7.1 is divided by the number of peak hour trips forecasted to be added by new development out to 2040 to get a cost per peak hour trip.

That cost per peak hour trip will be used in the next section to calculate impact fees per unit, by development type.

Impact Fees per Unit of Development
Impact fees per unit of development are calculated in Table 7.3 for each type of development defined in this study. The cost per peak hour trip from Table 7.2 is multiplied by the number of peak hour trips per unit for each type of development to arrive at an impact fee per unit.

Table 7.1: Summary of Traffic Signals Costs
Traffic Signal Estimated New Dev Impact Fee
Location Cost 1 % Share 2
Cost Basis 3
West Robertson/Avenue 24 $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000
West Robertson/Palm Parkway $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000
West Robertson/Washington Ave. $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000 West Robertson/11th St $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000
Ave 24/Future N/S Collector $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000
Ave 24/Chowchilla Blvd. $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000
Ave 24 1/2/Road 16 $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000
Washington Ave/Future N/S Collector $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000 East Robertson Blvd/Future N/S Collector $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000 East Robertson Blvd/Fig Tree Road $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000 East Robertson Blvd/Club House Dr. $ 400,000 100.0% $ 400,000 Total Street Improvements $ 4,400,000 100.0% $ 4,400,000 1 Traffic signal costs estimated costs by the City of Chowchilla Public Works Director; details available from the Public Works Department
2 100% of the costs for future traffic signals are attributed to new development because the need for those signals is created by new development 3 Impact fee cost basis = estimated cost X new development % share Table 7.2: Cost per Peak Hour Trip
Impact Fee Added Peak Cost per Peak
Cost Basis 1Hour Trips 2Hour Trip 3
$4,400,000 10,774 $408.39
1 See Table 7.1
2 See Table 2.3
3 Cost per peak hour trip = impact fee cost basis / added peak hour trips
City of Chowchilla Page 7-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Projected Revenue
Potential revenue from the traffic signal impact fees calculated in this chapter can be projected by applying the impact fees per unit of development from Table 7.3 to forecasted future units as shown in Table 2.3. The results are shown in Table 7.4.

It is important to note that, although an impact fee for Public Facilities and Institutions is calculated in Table 7.3, the City has limited authority to impose impact fees on county or state facilities or public schools. Consequently, no revenue is shown for that development type in Table Table 7.3: Traffic Signals Impact Fees per Unit
Development Cost per Pk Pk Hr Trips Impact Fee
Type Units 1
Hr Trip 2
per Unit 3per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $408.39 0.99 $ 404.31
Residential, Multi-Family DU $408.39 0.56 $ 228.70
Retail/Service Commercial KSF $408.39 3.81 $ 1,555.98
Professional Office KSF $408.39 1.15 $ 469.65
Skilled Nursing Facilities Bed $408.39 0.22 $ 89.85
Industrial KSF $408.39 0.53 $ 216.45
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $408.39 0.94 $ 383.89 1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed
2 See Table 7.2
3 Peak hour trips per unit; see Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per peak hour trip X peak hour trips per unit Table 7.4: Traffic Signals Impact Fees - Projected Revenue Development Adj Impact Future Projected
Type Units 1
Fee per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $ 404.31 4,248 $ 1,717,510 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 228.70 3,581 $ 818,978
Retail/Service Commercial KSF $ 1,555.98 873 $ 1,357,771 Professional Office KSF $ 469.65 119 $ 56,037
Skilled Nursing Facilities Bed $ 89.85 214 $ 19,197
Industrial KSF $ 216.45 1,489 $ 322,293
Total $ 4,291,786
1 Units of development; DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area
2 See Table 7.3
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units City of Chowchilla Page 7-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022

7.4. The costs allocated to Public Facilities and Institutions amount to about 2.5% of the new development’s share of improvement costs shown in Table 6.1 Assuming that development occurs, and improvements are constructed, as anticipated in this study, the revenue projected in Table 7.4 would cover approximately 97.5% of the estimated traffic signal costs shown in Table 7.1.

Updating the Fees
Impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated cost for traffic signals. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data, vendor cost estimates or an index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for traffic signals necessary to serve new development in Chowchilla.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for traffic signals in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

City of Chowchilla Page 7-5
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to construct new traffic signals to accommodate additional traffic associated with new development in Chowchilla.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New development increases traffic volumes and creates a need for additional traffic signals to maintain an adequate level of service on the City’s street system.

Without those additional signals, the City would not be able to manage the increased volumes of traffic generated by new development.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the traffic signal impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the increase in peak hour vehicle trips associated generated by that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the P. M. Peak Hour Trip generation rate per unit for that type of development.

Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for traffic signals to manage the flow of traffic in the City.

City of Chowchilla Page 8-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 8. Public Buildings
This chapter calculates impact fees for Chowchilla’s public buildings, including the Civic Center and Corporation Yard, as well as general government vehicles.

Methodology
The method used to calculate impact feesin this chapter is the standard-based method discussed in Chapter 1. The standard used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the existing level of service defined below.

Demand Variable
A demand variable is an attribute of development that is used to represent the impact of development on a particular type of facility. See Chapter 2 for a general discussion of demand variables and demand factors.

Chowchilla’s public buildings and vehicles provide services to both residential and non-residential development in the City, so the demand variable used to calculate impact fees for those facilities is service population, which represents both residential and non-residential development. See Chapter 2 for a detailed explanation of service population.

Level of Service
The standard used to calculate impact fees in this chapter is the existing level of service defined as the relationship between the replacement cost of Chowchilla’s existing public buildings and vehicles and the City’s existing service population. Table 8.3 later in this chapter shows that standard as a cost per capita of service population.

In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. Among other things, after January 1, 2022, that section requires that if the level of service used in an impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, the higher level of service must be justified. Using the existing level of service as the basis for the impact fees calculated in this chapter is consistent with the requirements of AB 602.

Service Area
The service area for impact fees calculated in this chapter is the Planning Area shown in the City of Chowchilla General Plan. Those fees are intended to apply to all future development in the City.

Existing Facilities and Vehicles
Table 8.1 on the next page lists the City’s existing public buildings with their estimated replacement cost and land value. Building replacement cost is used here because it will be necessary for the City to build additional public buildings to maintain the existing level of service as the City grows. The per-capita replacement cost of existing public buildings and vehicles (see City of Chowchilla Page 8-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Table 8.3) is used here as an indication of the cost of constructing additional facilities to maintain the existing level of service as the City grows.

Note that in Table 8.1 the impact fee cost basis for the Civic Center is only 75% of the total cost because that facility is not at capacity. Only 75% of the existing building is currently occupied by the City. In addition, the replacement cost of the building has been reduced to account for the principal on outstanding bond debt ($3,565,000) and a loan from the General Fund ($524,552) and increased by the present value ($4,570,651) of interest cost to date on bonds used to fund construction of the Civic Center. The net effect of those adjustments is an increase of $481,099.

Table 8.2 lists the City’s existing general government vehicles with their replacement cost. As with public buildings, the per-capita replacement cost of existing vehicles is used here as an indication of the cost of maintaining the existing level of service as the City grows.

Table 8.1: Existing Public Buildings
Constr Building Site Building Est Land Existing Dev Impact Fee Facility Date Sq Ft 1
Acres 2Repl Cost 3 Value 4
Cost Share Cost Basis 5
Corp Yard Office 360 N 1st 1960 3,468 7.5 $ 715,513 $1,815,000 100% $ 2,530,513 Corp Yard Repair Shop 1950 1,598 0.0 $ 219,193 100% $ 219,193 Corp Yard Storage Shed 1950 576 0.0 $ 48,721 100% $ 48,721 Corp Yard Parks Shop 1950 1,739 0.0 $ 381,179 100% $ 381,179 Corp Yard Vehicle Shelter 2009 3,000 0.0 $ 166,724 100% $ 166,724 Corp Yard Parking Canopy 2000 1,400 0.0 $ 70,069 100% $ 70,069 Civic Center 130 S 2nd 2006 20,027 1.0 $9,155,953 $ 232,320 75% $ 7,041,205 Old Library (Surplus) 1940 7,000 0% $ 0
Total $ 10,457,604
1 Sourced from City asset records
2 Provided by City staff
3 Replacment cost sourced from current City Insured Property Schedule; Civic Center building replacement cost adjusted for outstanding debt and past interest paid on bond debt; see discussion in text 4 Land acquisition cost per acre based on recent sales of land in the City at $242,000 per acre 5 Impact fee cost basis = (building replacement cost + estimated land value) X existing development cost share City of Chowchilla Page 8-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Table 8.3 summarizes the costs from the preceding tables and adds the existing cash balance of the General City Facilities Impact Fee Fund. That balance is currently negative because of a loan from the City’s General Facilities Impact Fee Fund to the General Fund.

Cost per Capita of Service Population
Table 8.4 shows the existing cost per capita of service population for public buildings and general government vehicles and equipment based on the impact fee cost basis from Table 8.3 and the existing service population from Table 2.2. The total cost per capita shown in Table 8.4 is the overall existing level of service for the assets addressed in this chapter and is the standard used to calculate impact fees for those assets.

Table 8.2: Existing General Vehicles and Equipment
Model Replacement
Year Description Dept./Location Cost 1
2002 Ford F-250 Animal Shelter $ 40,000
2006 Ford F-250 Fleet Services $ 40,000
2014 Toyota Prius General Services $ 30,000
2014 Toyota Prius General Services $ 30,000
2001 Chevrolet Venture Van Information Services $ 25,000 150 HP Motor Corp Yard $ 15,000
Total $ 180,000
1 Replacement cost provided by the City of Chowchilla
Table 8.3: Impact Fee Cost Basis - Existing Assets
Total
Component Cost Basis 1
Existing Buildings $ 10,457,604
Existing Vehicles and Equipment $ 180,000
Total Cost $ 10,637,604
1 See Tables 8.1 and 8.2
Table 8.4 Cost per Capita
Total Existing Cost per
Cost Basis1Service Pop 2Capita 3
$10,637,604 15,576 $682.96
1 Total cost basis; see Table 8.3
2 Existing service population; see Table 2.2
3 Cost per capita = total cost basis / existing service population
City of Chowchilla Page 8-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Impact Fees per Unit of Development
Impact fees per unit of development, by development type, are calculated in Table 8.5, using the cost per capita of service population from Table 8.4 and the service population per unit from Table 2.1.

Projected Revenue
Table 8.6 projects the total revenue from the impact fees calculated in this chapter. That projection assumes that future development occurs as forecasted in this study. Revenue is projected by applying the impact fees per unit from Table 8.5 to added units from Table 2.3 in Chapter 2.

Table 8.5 Impact Fee per Unit
Development Cost per Svc Pop Impact Fee
Type Units 1
Capita 2per Unit 3per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $682.96 3.20 $ 2,185.47
Residential, Multi-Family DU $682.96 2.40 $ 1,639.10
Retail/Service Commercial KSF $682.96 1.24 $ 849.34
Professional Office KSF $682.96 1.00 $ 682.50
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $682.96 1.07 $ 733.52
Industrial KSF $682.96 0.36 $ 242.67
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $682.96 1.00 $ 682.50 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed
2 Cost per capita; see Table 8.4
3 Service population per unit; see Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X service population per unit City of Chowchilla Page 8-5
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Although Table 8.5 calculates an impact fee for Public Facilities and Institutions, the City either may not have authority or may choose not to charge impact fees to other governmental agencies. Consequently, no projected revenue is attributed to public facilities.

Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated replacement costs for existing general government facilities, vehicles, and equipment. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Table 8.6 Projected Revenue
Development Impact Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $ 2,185.47 4,248 $ 9,283,887 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 1,639.10 3,581 $ 5,869,633 Retail/Service Commercial KSF $ 849.34 873 $ 741,144
Professional Office KSF $ 682.50 119 $ 81,433
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $ 733.52 214 $ 156,725
Industrial KSF $ 242.67 1,489 $ 361,333
Total $ 16,494,155
1 DU=dwelling unit; KSF=1,000 gross squre feet of building area 2 Impact fee per unit see Table 8.5
3 Future units see Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = impact fee per unit X future units City of Chowchilla Page 8-6
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to pay for the cost of public buildings and general government vehicles needed to mitigate the impact of new development in Chowchilla.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for future public buildings and general government vehicles needed to serve additional development in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for the cost of public buildings and general government vehicles needed to maintain the existing level of service in Chowchilla as the City grows.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. All development creates a need for additional public buildings and general government vehicles. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will pay for additional assets needed to maintain the existing level of service in the City.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the public buildings and vehicles impact fees charged to a development project will depend on the amount of added service population associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are based on the estimated service population per unit for that type of development in Chowchilla. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects that project’s proportionate share of the cost of the City’s public buildings and general government vehicles.

City of Chowchilla Page 9-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 9. Community and Recreation Centers
This chapter calculates impact fees for community and recreation center facilities needed to serve future development in the City.

Service Area
Chowchilla’s community and recreation centers serve the entire City. The service area for impact fees calculated in this chapter is the Planning Area shown in the City of Chowchilla General Plan.

Those fees are intended to apply to all future development in the study area.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate impact fees for community and recreation centers is population.

Population is used as the demand variable for these fees because the need for community and recreation centers is commonly defined in terms of the size of the population to be served. Added population is used in this chapter to measure the impact of new development on the need for community and recreation center facilities.

Because population per dwelling unit varies by development type, the average population per unit is estimated for each type of residential development defined in this study. Those individual “demand factors” are shown in Table 2.1 in Chapter 2.

Methodology
This chapter calculates impact fees using the standard-based method discussed in Chapter 1.

Standard-based fees are calculated using a specified relationship or standard that determines the number of service units to be provided for each unit of development.

In this case, the standard is the existing level of service as discussed in the next section. This approach is used so that the community and recreation center impact fees paid by new development are based on the cost of maintaining the current level of service as the City grows.

Existing Facilities
Table 9.1 on the next page lists the City’s existing community and recreation centers with their square footage, building replacement cost and the site value for facilities not located in parks.

City of Chowchilla Page 9-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Level of Service
The City has not adopted a formal level of service standard for community and recreation centers.

Consequently, the level of service standard used to calculate impact fees for those facilities in this chapter is the existing level of service, that is, the relationship between the City’s existing population and the replacement cost of Chowchilla’s existing community and recreation centers.

That relationship is represented by a cost per capita, which is calculated in Table 9.2 using the impact fee cost basis from Table 9.1 and the existing population from Table 2.2 in Chapter 2.

In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. Among other things, after January 1, 2022, that section requires that if the level of service used in an impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, the higher level of service must be justified. Using the existing level of service as the basis for the impact fees calculated in this chapter is consistent with the requirements of AB 602.

In the next section, the cost per-capita from Table 9.2 is used to calculate community and recreation center impact fees per unit of development, by development type.

Table 9.1: Existing Recreation Centers
Constr Building Site Bldg Repl Est Site Impact Fee
Facility Date Sq Ft 1
Acres 2
Cost 3 Value 4Cost Basis 5
Ed Ray S&L Park Community Center 1977 2,412 In Park $ 774,759 $ 0 $ 774,759 Senior Center 1950 5,081 0.802 $1,335,594 $194,084 $1,529,678 Total $2,304,437
1 Sourced from City asset records
2 Provided by City staff
3 Building replacement cost sourced from current City insured property schedule 4 Land value per acre based on recent sales of land in the City 5 Impact fee cost basis = sum of building replacement cost and site value Table 9.2 Cost per Capita
Impact Fee Existing Cost per
Cost Basis1
Population 2Capita 3
$2,304,437 13,022 $176.96
1 Total asset cost; see Table 9.1
2 Existing Population; see Table 2.2
3 Cost per Capita = total facility cost / existing population City of Chowchilla Page 9-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Impact Fees per Unit
Table 9.3 shows the calculation of community and recreation center impact fees per unit of development, by development type. Those fees are calculated using the cost per capita from Table 9.2 and average population per dwelling unit from Table 2.1.

Projected Revenue
Potential revenue from the community and recreation center impact fees can be estimated by applying the fees per unit from Table 9.3 to forecasted future units from Table 2.3. Because population is used as the demand variable in calculating these impact fees and population is a function of residential development, the fees apply only to residential development.

Table 9.4 shows the projected revenue from the community and recreation center impact fees calculated in this chapter. This projection assumes that future development occurs as shown in Chapter 2
Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated replacement costs for community and recreation center facilities. We recommend that the fees be reviewed and Table 9.3: Recreation Center Impact Fees per Unit
Development
Type Units 1
Cost per
Capita 2
Population
per DU 3
Impact Fee
per Unit 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $176.96 3.20 $566.29
Residential, Multi-Family DU $176.96 2.40 $424.72
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 Cost per capita see Table 9.2
3 See Table 2.1
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit Table 9.4: Projected Revenue from Recreation Center Impact Fees Development Impact Fee Future Projected
Type Units 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $566.29 4,248 $ 2,405,590 Residential, Multi-Family DU $424.72 3,581 $ 1,520,907
Total $ 3,926,497
1 Units of development: DU = dwelling unit
2 See Table 9.3
3 See Table 2.3
4 Impact fee per unit = cost per capita X population per dwelling unit City of Chowchilla Page 9-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees to make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for community and recreation center facilities in Chowchilla.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional community and recreation center facilities to mitigate the impact of new development on the need for those facilities in the City.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to provide additional community and recreation center facilities to serve the needs of added population associated with new residential development in Chowchilla.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. New residential development increases the need for community and recreation centers to maintain the existing level of service, as described earlier in this chapter.

Without additional community and recreation centers, the increase in population associated with new residential development would result in a reduction in the level of service provided to all residents of the City.

City of Chowchilla Page 9-5
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the community and recreation center impact fees charged to a residential development project will depend on the increase in population associated with that project. The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of residential development are based on the estimated average population per unit for that type of development in Chowchilla. Thus, the fee charged to a development project reflects the impact of that project on the need for community and recreation center facilities in the City.

City of Chowchilla Page 10-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 10. Storm Drainage Improvements
This chapter updates storm drainage impact fees originally calculated in 2004 by Giersch & Associates as part of a storm drainage master plan. The impact fees calculated by Giersch Associates are escalated to 2022 levels using the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI).

The 2004 storm drainage impact fees used in this update are from Table 5 in a report titled “Drainage – Supplemental Report to the Findings of Compliance” by Giersch & Associates.

Service Area
The service area for impact fees calculated in this chapter is the area shown on the Master Plan – Storm Drainage System Map which is Plate 1 in the Giersch & Associates report cited above.

Methodology
The method used to calculate impact fees updated in this chapter is outlined in the Giersch & Associates report cited above
Level of Service
The level of service for storm drainage facilities used as a basis for the impact fees being updated in this chapter is explained in the Giersch & Associates report cited above. Because the master planned level of service has been in effect since 2004, it represents the existing level of service.

In 2021, AB 602 added Section 66016.5 to the Mitigation Fee Act. Among other things, after January 1, 2022, that section requires that if the level of service used in an impact fee study exceeds the existing level of service, the higher level of service must be justified. Using the existing level of service as the basis for the impact fees calculated in this chapter is consistent with the requirements of AB 602.

Impact Fees per Acre
Table 10.1 shows storm drainage improvement cost per acre by land use category as shown in Table 5 in the Giersch & Associates report. Table 10.1 also shows those costs escalated to 2022 levels using the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI).

City of Chowchilla Page 10-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
In the report cited above, Giersch & Associates recommended that the City adopt impact fees that differed from the 2004 cost of improvements shown in Table 10.1. For some land use categories the recommended impact fees per acre were substantially lower than the cost per acre. For others they were higher. No explanation was given for the recommended fees. The City may choose to adopt impact fees that are lower than the 2022 cost per acre shown in Table 10.1, but fees above that level would not be justified.

Projected Revenue
This chapter does not project revenue from storm drainage impact fees because the land use categories used for the storm drainage improvement costs shown in Table 10.1 does not match the categories used in this report to forecast future development.

Updating the Fees
The impact fees calculated in this chapter are based on cost estimates updated to 2022. We recommend that these fees be reviewed periodically and adjusted if necessary to reflect changes in costs. An index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index can be used for that purpose.

Table 10.1: Storm Drainage Improvement Cost per Acre
Land Use 2004 Improvement 2022 Improvement
Designation Cost per Acre 1
Cost per Acre 2
Residential - Low Density $ 4,004.00 $ 7,259.25
Residential - Medium Density $ 5,329.00 $ 9,661.48
Residential - High Density $ 7,431.00 $ 13,472.40
Community Commercial $ 7,706.00 $ 13,970.98
Downtown Commercial $ 7,850.00 $ 14,232.05
Neighborhood Commercial $ 10,825.00 $ 19,625.73
Service Commercial $ 9,513.00 $ 17,247.07
Professional Office (Medical Arts) $ 6,126.00 $ 11,106.44 Light Industrial $ 12,186.00 $ 22,093.22
Heavy Industrial $ 12,207.00 $ 22,131.29
Public Facility $ 6,165.00 $ 11,177.15
Elementary School $ 2,875.00 $ 5,212.38
High School $ 11,039.00 $ 20,013.71
1 Improvement cost per acre from Table 5 in the "Drainage - Supplemental Report to the Findings of Compliance," November 2004, by Giersch & Assoc. 2 2022 improvement cost per acre escalated from 2004 improvement cost per acre using the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI); 2004 Average CCI = 7115; April 2022 CCI = 12899; The factor used to escalate improvement costs from 2004 to 2022 = 12899 / 7115 = 1.813 City of Chowchilla Page 10-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Nexus Summary
As discussed in Chapter 1 of this report, Section 66001 of the Mitigation Fee Act requires that an agency establishing, increasing or imposing impact fees, must make findings to:

Identify the purpose of the fee;
Identify the use of the fee; and,
Determine that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the development type on which it is imposed; b. The need for the facility and the type of development on which the fee is imposed; and
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project.

Satisfying those requirements also ensures that the fees meet the “rational nexus” and “rough proportionality” standards enunciated in leading court decisions bearing on impact fees and other exactions. (For more detail, see “Legal Framework for Impact Fees” in Chapter 1.) The following paragraphs explain how the impact fees calculated in this chapter satisfy those requirements.

Purpose of the Fee: The purpose of the impact fees calculated in this chapter is to pay for new development’s proportionate share of the cost of providing drainage system improvements to serve new development in Chowchilla.

Use of the Fee. Impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for future drainage system improvements needed to serve future development in Chowchilla.

As provided by the Mitigation Fee Act, revenue from impact fees may also be used for temporary loans from one impact fee fund or account to another.

Reasonable Relationship between the Use of the Fee and the Development Type on Which It Is Imposed. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will be used to pay for the cost of drainage system improvements needed to serve new development in Chowchilla.

Reasonable Relationship between the Need for the Facilities and the Type of Development on Which the Fee Is Imposed. All development generates storm water runoff in proportion to the amount of impervious surface area added by development. The impact fees calculated in this chapter will pay for drainage system improvements needed to serve new development in Chowchilla as projected in Chapter 2 of this report.

Reasonable Relationship between the Amount of the Fee and the Facility Cost Attributable to the Development Project. The amount of the storm drainage impact fees charged to a development project is related to the amount of impervious cover associated with that project.

The fees per unit of development calculated in this chapter for each type of development are City of Chowchilla Page 10-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
based on the engineer’s estimates of the amount of storm water runoff per acre associated with that type of development.

City of Chowchilla Page 11-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 11. Water System Improvements
This chapter calculates capacity charges for water system improvements needed by the City of Chowchilla to serve future development. System improvements include water distribution pipelines, ground water wells, reservoir storage and related facilities.

Service Area
The service area addressed by improvements identified in this chapter is the Planning Area identified in the Chowchilla General Plan.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate capacity charges for water system improvements in this chapter is average day demand (ADD) in gallons per day.

Methodology
This chapter calculates water system capacity charges using the plan-based method discussed in Chapter 1. Plan-based fees are calculated by allocating costs for specific improvements to new development served by those improvements.

Level of Service
Level of service for a water system involves a number of considerations related to water supply, water quality, storage capacity, water pressure and reliability. The improvements identified in this chapter are needed to maintain an adequate level of service as the City’s water system is expanded to serve additional development.

Government Code Section 66016.5, added by AB 602 in 2021, states that, when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate.

However, that requirement does not apply to the water system capacity charges calculated in this chapter because it excludes fees or charges pursuant to Section 66013, which governs capacity charges for water and sewer systems.

System Improvement Needs
The water system improvements needed to serve future development projected in the City’s draft Water System Master Plan are listed in Table 11.1.

City of Chowchilla Page 11-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Cost per Gallon per Day
Table 11.2 converts the total cost of water system improvements from Table 11.1 into a cost per gallon per day of average day demand using the projected increase in system capacity provided by these improvements.

Capacity Charge per Unit
Table 11.3 calculates the water capacity charge per unit for each type of development defined in this study using the cost per GPD from Table 11.2 and the GPD per unit which is based on GPD per acre from the Water Master Plan demand projections and estimated units per acre based on the Land Use Element of the Chowchilla General Plan.

Table 11.1: Water System Improvements
Cost Unit Cost per Total
Component Type Units Unit Est Cost
8" Water Main LF 210,541 $ 60.00 $ 12,632,460
8" Gate Valve EA 316 3,500.00 $ $ 1,106,000
12" Water Main LF 424,505 $ 80.00 $ 33,960,400
12" Gate Valve EA 637 4,000.00 $ $ 2,548,000
10% Contingency $ 5,024,686
Subtotal Water Distribution $ 55,271,546
Groundwater Well EA 1,750,000 38 $ $ 66,500,000
Water Storage Tank (0.75 MG) EA 2,250,000 1 $ $ 2,250,000 Water Storage Tank (1.00 MG) EA 2,500,000 2 $ $ 5,000,000 Water Storage Tank (1.25 MG) EA 2,750,000 1 $ $ 2,750,000 Pressure Sustaining Valve Station EA 150,000 16 $ $ 2,400,000 10% Contingency $ 7,890,000
Subtotal Major Water Facilities $ 86,790,000
Total $ 142,061,546
Note: Water System Master Plan and cost estimates by Yamabe & Horn Engineering Table 11.2: Cost per Gallon per Day
Water System Added System Cost per Gallon
Improvement Cost 1Capacity (GPD) 2per Day (GPD) 3
$142,061,546 25,846,327 $5.496
1 See Table 11.1
2 Added demand to be served by Water Master Plan improvements based on demand projections by Yamabe & Horn Engineering 3 Cost per gallon per day (GPD) = water system improvement costs / added system capacity in gallons per day
City of Chowchilla Page 11-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Projected Revenue
Table 11.4 on the next page projects potential revenue from the water system capacity charge using the capacity charge per unit from Table 11.3 and added units from Table 2.3 in Chapter 2.

These projections are in current dollars and are based only on future development forecasted in Chapter 2 of this report.

Table 11.3: Water Capacity Charge per Unit
Development Unit Cost per GPD per Units per GPD per Cap Charge Type Type 1
GPD 2Acre 3Acre 4Unit 5per Unit 6
Residential, Single-Family DU $5.496 2,500 5.50 454.55 $ 2,498.36 Residential, Multi-Family DU $5.496 3,200 12.50 256.00 $ 1,407.08 Retail/Service Commercial KSF $5.496 2,200 10.89 202.02 $ 1,110.38 Professional Office KSF $5.496 2,200 13.07 168.35 $ 925.32 Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $5.496 3,000 16.00 187.50 $ 1,030.57 Industrial KSF $5.496 2,050 15.25 134.46 $ 739.05
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $5.496 1,200 13.07 91.83 $ 504.72 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed 2 See Table 11.2
3 Water demand in gallons per day per acre from Water Master Plan demand projections by Yamabe & Horn Engineering; GPD per acre for Multi-Family Residential based on a weighted average of the estimated demand from a mix of 80% Medium-High Density residential at 3,000 GPD per acre and 20% high density residential at 4,000 GPD per acre; GPD per acre for Indus- trial based on a weighted average of the estimated demand from a mix of 45% Light Industrial at 1,500 GPD per acre and 55% Heavy Industrial at 2,500 GPD per acre; GPD per acre for a Skilled Nursing Facility is assumed to be equivalent to Medium-High Density residential development 4 Units per acre estimated by NBS based on data from the General Plan Land Use Element 5 GPD per unit = GPD per acre / units per acre
6 Water capacity charge per unit = cost per GPD X GPD per Unit City of Chowchilla Page 11-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
The total revenue projected in Table 11.4 represents only about 12.5% of the total improvement cost shown in Table 11.1 because those improvements are designed to serve substantially more development than is forecasted in this study to occur by 2040.

Updating the Capacity Charges
The water system capacity charges calculated in this chapter are based the current estimated costs for water system improvements identified in this chapter. We recommend that the charges be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
Government Code Section 66013 exempts water capacity charges from the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act Sections 66000 through 66008, including the requirement that the governing body make findings regarding the purpose and use of the charges and to establish that there is a reasonable relationship between those charges and the impacts of development subject to the charges.

However, these capacity charges have been calculated in such a way as to establish a defensible nexus in terms of the relationship between the capacity charges and the burden imposed by development on the water system.

Table 11.4: Projected Revenue - Water Capacity Charges
Development Unit Cap Charge Future Projected
Type Type 1
per Unit 2Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $ 2,498.36 4,248 $ 10,613,033 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 1,407.08 3,581 $ 5,038,740 Retail/Service Commercial KSF $ 1,110.38 873 $ 968,935
Professional Office KSF $ 925.32 119 $ 110,405
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $ 1,030.57 214 $ 220,194
Industrial KSF $ 739.05 1,489 $ 1,100,451
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $ 504.72 282 $ 142,274 Total $ 18,194,032
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed 2 Capacity charge per unit; see Table 12.3
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = capacity charge per unit X future units City of Chowchilla Page 12-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 12. Sewer System Improvements
This chapter calculates capacity charges for sewer system improvements needed by the City of Chowchilla to serve future development. System improvements include expansion of the sewer collection system and the wastewater treatment plant (WWTP).

Service Area
The service area addressed by improvements identified in this chapter is the area covered by the draft Sewer Master Plan.

Demand Variable
A “demand variable” is a quantifiable attribute of development that is used in fee calculation formulas to represent the impact of development. The demand variable used to calculate capacity charges for sewer system improvements in this chapter is average day wastewater generation in gallons per day (GPD).

Methodology
This chapter calculates sewer system capacity charges using the plan-based method discussed in Chapter 1. Plan-based fees are calculated by allocating costs for specific improvements to new development served by those improvements.

Level of Service
Level of service for a sewer system involves a number of considerations related to collection system capacity, treatment capacity and effluent quality. The improvements identified in this chapter are needed to maintain an acceptable level of service as the City’s sewer system is expanded to serve additional development.

Government Code Section 66016.5, added by AB 602 in 2021, states that, when applicable, a nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service, and include an explanation of why the new level of service is appropriate.

However, that requirement does not apply to the sewer system capacity charges calculated in this chapter because it excludes fees or charges pursuant to Section 66013, which governs capacity charges for water and sewer systems.

System Improvement Needs
The sewer system improvements needed to serve future development projected in the City’s draft Sewer System Master Plan are listed in Table 12.1.

City of Chowchilla Page 12-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Cost per Gallon per Day
Table 12.2 converts the total cost of sewer system improvements from Table 12.1 into a cost per gallon per day of average wastewater generation using the projected increase in sewer system capacity provided by these improvements. It should be noted that the improvements shown in Table 12.1 and the associated improvement costs shown in Table 12.2 are designed to serve substantially more future development than is shown in Chapter 2 of this report. The potential revenue projected later in this chapter is based only on the future development forecast shown in Chapter 2 and represents only a small percentage of the total improvement cost shown in Table 12.2.

Table 12.1: Sewer System Improvements
Cost Unit Cost per Total
Component Type Units Unit Est Cost
10" Gravity Main LF 33,150 $ 80.00 $ 2,652,000
12" Gravity Main LF 22,312 $ 100.00 $ 2,231,200
15" Gravity Main LF 15,251 $ 120.00 $ 1,830,120
18" Gravity Main LF 19,410 $ 130.00 $ 2,523,300
21" Gravity Main LF 15,258 $ 140.00 $ 2,136,120
24" Gravity Main LF 26,799 $ 150.00 $ 4,019,850
27" Gravity Main LF 5,577 $ 160.00 $ 892,320
36" Gravity Main LF 9,220 $ 200.00 $ 1,844,000
Sewer Manhole EA 6,000.00 294 $ $ 1,764,000
10% Contingency $ 1,989,291
Subtotal Collection System $ 21,882,201
Lift/Pump Station Incl. Force Main EA 600,000 5 $ $ 3,000,000 WWTP Expansion EA 7,500,000 11.866 $ $ 88,995,000
10% Contingency $ 9,199,500
Subtotal Major Sewer Facilities $ 101,194,500
Total $ 123,076,701
Table 12.2: Cost per Gallon per Day
Sewer System Added System Cost per Gallon
Improvement Cost 1Capacity (GPD) 2per Day (GPD) 3
$123,076,701 13,731,000 $8.963
1 See Table 12.1
2 Added demand to be served by Sewer Master Plan improvements based on demand projections by Yamabe & Horn Engineering 3 Cost per gallon per day (GPD) = sewer system improvement costs / added system capacity in gallons per day
City of Chowchilla Page 12-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Sewer System Capacity Charge per Unit
Table 12.3 calculates a sewer capacity charge per unit for planned sewer system improvements using the cost-per-gallon-per-day from Table 12.2 and estimated average day wastewater generation per unit in gallons per day.

Projected Revenue
Table 12.4 projects potential revenue from the sewer system capacity charge using the capacity charge per unit from 12.3 and added units from Table 2.3 in Chapter 2. These projections are in current dollars and are based only on future development forecasted in Chapter 2 of this report.

Table 12.3: Sewer Capacity Charge per Unit
Development Unit Cost per GPD per Units per GPD per Cap Charge Type Type 1
GPD 2Acre 3Acre 4Unit 5per Unit 6
Residential, Single-Family DU $8.963 1,400 5.50 254.55 $ 2,281.60 Residential, Multi-Family DU $8.963 2,160 12.50 172.80 $ 1,548.88 Retail/Service Commercial KSF $8.963 1,000 10.89 91.83 $ 823.09 Professional Office KSF $8.963 800 13.07 61.22 $ 548.72 Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $8.963 2,000 16.00 125.00 $ 1,120.43 Industrial KSF $8.963 965 15.25 63.30 $ 567.34
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $8.963 800 13.07 61.22 $ 548.72 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed 2 See Table 12.2
3 Wastewater flow in gallons per day per acre from Sewer Master Plan demand projections by Yamabe & Horn Engineering; GPD per acre for Multi-Family Residential based on a weighted average of the estimated flows from a mix of 80% Medium-High Density residential at 2,000 GPD per acre and 20% high density residential at 2,800 GPD per acre; GPD per acre for Indus- trial based on a weighted average of the estimated flows from a mix of 45% Light Industrial at 800 GPD per day per acre and 55% Heavy Industrial at 1,100 GPD per acre; GPD per acre for a Skilled Nursing Facility is assumed to be equivalent to Medium-High Density residential development
4 Residential units per acre estimated by NBS based on data from the General Plan Land Use Element; non-residential units per acre based on the following floor area ratios (FARs):
retail/service commercial FAR = 0.25; professional office and public facilities/institutions FAR =

0.30; industrial FAR = 0.35
5 GPD per unit = GPD per acre / units per acre
6 Sewer capacity charge per unit = cost per GPD X GPD per Unit City of Chowchilla Page 12-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
The total revenue projected in Table 12.4 amounts to only about 14% of the system improvement cost shown in Table 12.1, because those improvements are designed to serve substantially more development than is forecasted in this study to occur by 2040.

Updating the Sewer Capacity Charges
The sewer system capacity charges calculated in this chapter are based on the current estimated costs for sewer system improvements identified in this chapter. We recommend that the charges be reviewed and adjusted annually using local cost data or an index such as the Engineering News Record Construction Cost Index (CCI). See the Implementation Chapter for more on indexing of fees.

Nexus Summary
Government Code Section 66013 exempts sewer capacity charges from the requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act Sections 66000 through 66008, including the requirement that the governing body make findings regarding the purpose and use of the charges and to establish that there is a reasonable relationship between those charges and the impacts of development subject to the charges.

However, these capacity charges have been calculated in such a way as to establish a defensible nexus in terms of the relationship between the capacity charges and the burden imposed by development on the sewer system.

Table 12.4: Projected Revenue
Development Unit Cap Charge Future Projected
Type Type 1
per Unit 2
Units 3Revenue 4
Residential, Single-Family DU $ 2,281.60 4,248 $ 9,692,236.80 Residential, Multi-Family DU $ 1,548.88 3,581 $ 5,546,539.28 Retail/Service Commercial KSF $ 823.09 873 $ 718,239.56 Professional Office KSF $ 548.72 119 $ 65,470.88
Skilled Nursing Facility Bed $ 1,120.43 214 $ 239,392.41 Industrial KSF $ 567.34 1,489 $ 844,770.19
Public Facilities/Institutions KSF $ 548.72 282 $ 154,677.45 $ 17,261,326.56
1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 square feet of building area; Bed = patient bed 2 Capacity charge per unit; see Table 12.3
3 See Table 2.3
4 Projected revenue = capacity charge per unit X future units City of Chowchilla Page 13-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 13. Administrative Fee
This chapter provides a cost-of-service analysis to substantiate an administrative fee that is added to each impact fee (see Executive Summary). This charge recovers the cost of accounting, reporting and other administrative activities required by the Mitigation Fee Act, as well as the cost of periodic updates to the impact fee study.

The following table establishes an Administration Fee for the impact fee program.

The table above includes the allocated costs of program administration as established by estimated annual costs required, and the annualized costs of completing a comprehensive impact fee analysis every five years. The projected and annualized revenue assumptions were developed throughout the various chapters included in the body of this report. Two percent of the impact fee amount is a widely implemented administrative fee in California for impact fee programs.

Comparatively, the fee calculated above for the City of Chowchilla’s program is well within the range of similar fees charged for other California local government agencies.

Administrative Costs of the Impact Fee Program
Annual Administration and Reporting $ 30,250 [1]
Annual Fee Analysis and Updates $ 10,000 [2]
Total Annual Costs $ 40,250
Projected Revenue $ 168,401,691 [3]
Annualized Revenue $ 8,420,085 [4]
Fee Program Administration as Percent of Fees 0.50%
Notes:
[1] Annual staff cost provided by Chowchilla Finance Department [2] Estimated and amortized cost of fee/nexus every five years, [3] Estimated revenue collected from impact fees through 2040/buildout [4] 20 year annualized revenue for analysis purposes
City of Chowchilla Page 14-1
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Chapter 14. Implementation
This chapter of the report contains recommendations for adoption and administration of impact fees, and for the interpretation and application of the development impact fees and in-lieu fees calculated in this study. It was not prepared by an attorney and is not intended as legal advice.

Statutory requirements for the adoption and administration of fees imposed as a condition of development approval (impact fees) are found in the Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.). Requirements for park land dedication and fees in lieu of dedication are governed by the Quimby Act (Government Code 66477).

Adoption
The form in which development impact fees are enacted should be determined by the City attorney. The specific requirements are different for impact fees under the Mitigation Fee Act, and for park land dedication and in-lieu fees under the Quimby Act. The latter requirements must be adopted by ordinance and are subject to the same noticing and public hearing procedures as any ordinance.

Procedures for adoption of fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act, including notice and publichearing requirements, are specified in Government Code Sections 66016 and 66018. It should be noted that Section 66018 refers to Government Code Section 6062a, which requires that the public hearing notice be published at least twice during the 10-day notice period. However, Section 66016.5 added by AB 602 in 2021 requires that impact fee nexus studies be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30-days’ notice.

Government Code Section 66017 provides that fees subject to the Mitigation Fee Act do not become effective until 60 days after final action by the governing body.

Actions establishing or increasing fees subject to the Mitigation Act require certain findings, as set forth in Government Code Section 66001 and discussed below and in Chapter 1 of this report.

Establishment of Fees. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, Section 66001(a), when an agency establishes fees to be imposed as a condition of development approval, it must make findings to:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee;

2. Identify the use of the fee; and

3. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the type of development project on which it is imposed;
b. The need for the facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed
City of Chowchilla Page 14-2
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
Examples of findings that could be used for impact fees calculated in this study are shown below.

The specific language of such findings should be provided by the City Attorney. A more complete discussion of the nexus for each fee can be found in individual chapters of this report.

Sample Finding: Purpose of the Fee. The City Council finds that the purpose of the impact fees hereby enacted is to protect the public health, safety and welfare by requiring new development to contribute to the cost of public facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development.

Sample Finding: Use of the Fee. The City Council finds that revenue from the impact fees hereby enacted will be used to provide public facilities needed to mitigate the impacts of new development in the City and identified in the 2022 City of Chowchilla Development Impact Fee Study by NBS.
1 Sample Finding: Reasonable Relationship: Based on analysis presented in the 2022 City of Chowchilla Development Impact Fee Study by NBS, the City Council finds that there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fees and the types of development projects on which they are imposed; and,
b. The need for facilities and the types of development projects on which the fees are imposed.

Administration
The California Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.) mandates procedures for administration of impact fee programs, including collection and accounting, reporting, and refunds. References to code sections in the following paragraphs pertain to the California Government Code.

Imposition of Fees. Pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, Section 66001(a), when an agency imposes an impact fee upon a specific development project, it must make essentially the same findings adopted upon establishment of the fees to:

1. Identify the purpose of the fee;

2. Identify the use of the fee; and

3. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship between:
a. The use of the fee and the type of development project on which it is imposed;
1 According to Gov’t Code Section 66001 (a) (2), the use of the fee may be specified in a capital improvement plan, the General Plan, or other public documents that identify the public facilities for which the fee is charged. The findings recommended here identify this impact fee study as the source of that information. Also note that Section 66016.5 (a)(6) requires that large jurisdictions adopt a capital improvement plan as part of an impact fee nexus study. However, that requirement applies only in counties of 250,000 or more, so it does not apply to Chowchilla City of Chowchilla Page 14-3
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
b. The need for the facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed
Per Section 66001 (b), at the time when an impact fee is imposed on a specific development project, the City is also required to make a finding to determine how there is a reasonable relationship between:
c. The amount of the fee and the facility cost attributable to the development project on which it is imposed.

In addition, Section 66006 (f) provides that a local agency, at the time it imposes a fee for public improvements on a specific development project, "... shall identify the public improvement that the fee will be used to finance." The required notification could refer to the improvements identified in this study or to a capital improvement plan.

Section 66020 (d) (1) requires that the agency, at the time it imposes an impact fee, provide a written statement of the amount of the fee and written notice of a 90-day period during which the imposition of the fee can be protested. Failure to protest imposition of the fee during that period may deprive the fee payer of the right to subsequent legal challenge.

Section 66022 (a) provides a separate procedure for challenging the establishment of an impact fee. Such challenges must be filed within 120 days of enactment.

Collection of Fees. Section 66007(a) provides that a local agency shall not require payment of fees by developers of residential projects prior to the date of final inspection, or issuance of a certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first.

However, "utility service fees" (not defined, but likely referring to water and sewer connections) may be collected upon application for utility service. In a residential development project of more than one dwelling unit, Section 66007 (a) allows the agency to choose to collect fees either for individual units or for phases upon final inspection, or for the entire project upon final inspection of the first dwelling unit completed.

Section 66007 (b) provides two exceptions when the local agency may require the payment of fees from developers of residential projects at an earlier time: (1) when the local agency determines that the fees “will be collected for public improvements or facilities for which an account has been established and funds appropriated and for which the local agency has adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to final inspection or issuance of the certificate of occupancy” or (2) the fees are “to reimburse the local agency for expenditures previously made.”
Statutory restrictions on the time at which fees may be collected do not apply to non-residential development.

Notwithstanding the foregoing restrictions, some cities collect impact fees for all facilities at the time building or grading permits are issued, and builders may find it convenient to pay the fees at that time.

City of Chowchilla Page 14-4
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
In cases where the fees are not collected upon issuance of building permits, Sections 66007 (c) (1) and (2) provide that the City may require the property owner to execute a contract to pay the fee, and to record that contract as a lien against the property until the fees are paid.

Earmarking and Expenditure of Fee Revenue. Section 66006 (a) mandates that fees be deposited “with other fees for the improvement in a separate capital facilities account or fund in a manner to avoid any commingling of the fees with other revenues and funds of the local agency, except for temporary investments, and expend those fees solely for the purpose for which the fee was collected.” Section 66006 (a) also requires that interest earned on the fee revenues be placed in the capital account and used for the same purpose.

The language of the law is not clear as to whether depositing fees "with other fees for the improvement" refers to a specific capital improvement or a class of improvements (e.g., street improvements).

We are not aware of any municipality that has interpreted that language to mean that funds must be segregated by individual projects. And, as a practical matter, that approach would be unworkable because it would mean that no pay-as-you-go project could be constructed until all benefiting development had paid the fees. Common practice is to maintain separate funds or accounts for impact fee revenues by facility category (i.e., streets, park improvements), but not for individual projects.

Impact Fee Exemptions, Reductions, and Waivers. In the event that a development project is found to have no impact on facilities for which impact fees are charged, such project must be exempted from the fees.

If a project has characteristics that will make its impacts on a particular public facility or infrastructure system significantly and permanently smaller than the average impact used to calculate impact fees in this study, the fees should be reduced accordingly. Per Section 66001 (b), there must be a reasonable relationship between the amount of the fee and the cost of the public facility attributable to the development on which the fee is imposed. The fee reduction is required if the fee is not proportional to the impact of the development on relevant public facilities.

In some cases, the agency may desire to voluntarily waive or reduce impact fees that would otherwise apply to a project as a way of promoting goals such as affordable housing or economic development. Such a waiver or reduction is within the discretion of the governing body but may not result in increased costs to other development projects. So, the effect of such policies is that the lost revenue must be made up from sources other than impact fees.

Credit for Improvements Provided by Developers. If the City requires a developer, as a condition of project approval, to dedicate land or construct facilities or improvements for which impact fees are charged, the City should ensure that the impact fees are adjusted so that the overall contribution by the developer does not exceed the impact created by the development.

City of Chowchilla Page 14-5
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
In the event that a developer voluntarily offers to dedicate land, or construct facilities or improvements in lieu of paying impact fees, the City may accept or reject such offers, and may negotiate the terms under which such an offer would be accepted. Excess contributions by a developer may be offset by reimbursement agreements.

Credit for Existing Development. If a project involves replacement, redevelopment or intensification of previously existing development, impact fees should be applied only to the portion of the project that represents a net increase in demand for relevant City facilities, applying the measure of demand used in this study to calculate that impact fee.

Annual Report. Section 66006 (b) (1) requires that once each year, within 180 days of the close of the fiscal year, the local agency must make available to the public the following information for each separate account established to receive impact fee revenues:

1. A brief description of the type of fee in the account or fund;

2. The amount of the fee;

3. The beginning and ending balance of the account or fund;

4. The amount of the fees collected and interest earned;

5. Identification of each public improvement on which fees were expended and the amount of the expenditures on each improvement, including the percentage of the cost of the public improvement that was funded with fees;

6. Identification of the approximate date by which the construction of a public improvement will commence, if the City determines sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing of an incomplete public improvement;

7. A description of each inter-fund transfer or loan made from the account or fund, including interest rates, repayment dates, and a description of the improvement on which the transfer or loan will be expended;

8. The amount of any refunds or allocations made pursuant to Section 66001, paragraphs (e) and (f).

The annual report must be reviewed by the City Council at its next regularly scheduled public meeting, but not less than 15 days after the statements are made public, per Section 66006 (b) (2).

Refunds under the Mitigation Fee Act. Prior to 1996, The Mitigation Fee Act required that a local agency collecting impact fees was required to expend or commit impact fee revenue within five years or make findings to justify a continued need for the money. Otherwise, those funds had to be refunded. SB 1693, adopted in 1996 as an amendment to the Mitigation Fee Act, changed that requirement in material ways.

Now, Section 66001 (d) requires that, for the fifth fiscal year following the first deposit of any impact fee revenue into an account or fund as required by Section 66006 (b), and every five years City of Chowchilla Page 14-6
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
thereafter, the local agency shall make all of the following findings for any fee revenue that remains unexpended, whether committed or uncommitted:

1. Identify the purpose to which the fee will be put;

2. Demonstrate the reasonable relationship between the fee and the purpose for which it is charged;

3. Identify all sources and amounts of funding anticipated to complete financing of incomplete improvements for which impact fees are to be used;

4. Designate the approximate dates on which the funding necessary to complete financing of those improvements will be deposited into the appropriate account or fund.

Those findings are to be made in conjunction with the annual reports discussed above. If such findings are not made as required by Section 66001, the local agency could be required to refund the moneys in the account or fund, per Section 66001 (d).

Once the agency determines that sufficient funds have been collected to complete financing on incomplete improvements for which impact fee revenue is to be used, it must, within 180 days of that determination, identify an approximate date by which construction of the public improvement will be commenced (Section 66001 (e)). If the agency fails to comply with that requirement, it must refund impact fee revenue in the account according to procedures specified in Section 66001 (d).

Refunds under the Quimby Act. The Quimby Act, Section a.(6)(A) requires that a City, County or other agency to which park land or in-lieu fees are conveyed or paid shall develop a schedule “specifying how, when and where it will use the land or fees or both to develop park or recreational facilities to serve residents of the subdivision…. Any fees collected under the ordinance shall be committed within five years after the payment of the fees or the issuance of building permits on one-half of the lots created by the subdivision, whichever occurs later. Any fees not committed within five years must be refunded.

Annual Update of the Capital Improvement Plan. Section 66002 (b) of the Mitigation Fee Act provides that if a local agency adopts a capital improvement plan to identify the use of impact fees, that plan must be adopted and annually updated by a resolution of the governing body at a noticed public hearing. The alternative, per Section 66001 (a) (2) is to identify improvements by applicable general or specific plans or in other public documents. This study identifies improvements to be funded by impact fees any may qualify as the type of public document addressed in Section 66001 (a) (2).

Indexing of In-Lieu/Impact Fees. In-lieu fees and impact fees calculated in this report are based on current costs and should be adjusted periodically to account for changes in the cost of facilities or other capital assets that will be funded by those fees. That adjustment is intended to account for escalation in costs for land, construction, vehicles and other relevant capital assets. The Engineering News Record Building Cost Index (BCI) and Construction Cost Index (CCI) are useful City of Chowchilla Page 14-7
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
for indexing construction costs. Where land costs are covered by an impact fee or in-lieu fee, land costs should be adjusted based on changes in local land prices.

Requirements Imposed by AB 602
In 2021, the California Legislature passed AB 602 and the Governor signed it into law. AB 602 creates some new requirements for impact fees that will go into effect in 2022. The new law amends Government Code Section 65940.1 and adds Section 66016.5 to impose the following requirements:
1) A city, county or special district that has an internet website shall post on its website:
a) A current written schedule of fees, exactions and affordability requirements applicable to a proposed housing development project, and shall present that information in a manner that identifies the fees, exactions and affordability requirements that apply to each parcel and the fees that apply to each new water and sewer utility connection b) All zoning ordinances and development standards and specifying the zoning, design and development standards that apply to each parcel
c) A list of the information that will be required from any applicant for a development project, as specified in Government Code Section 69540
d) The current and five previous annual fee reports required by Government Code Section 66006 and Subsection 66013 (d).
e) An archive of impact fee nexus studies, cost of service studies or equivalent conducted on or after January 1, 2018.
2) The above information shall be updated within 30 days of any changes 3) A City or County shall request from a development proponent, upon issuance of a certificate of occupancy or final inspection, the total amount fees and exactions associated with the project for which the certificate it issued. That information must be posted on the website and updated at least twice a year.
4) Before adoption of an impact fee, an impact fee nexus study shall be adopted. 5) When applicable, the nexus study shall identify the existing level of service for each public facility, identify the proposed new level of service and explain why the new level of service is appropriate
6) If a nexus study supports the increase of an existing fee, the local agency shall review the assumptions of the nexus study supporting the original fee and evaluate the amount of the fees collected under the original fee.
7) A nexus study adopted after July 1, 2022, shall calculate a fee imposed on a housing development project proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of the development. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage if the proposed units of the development shall be deemed to have used a valid method to establish City of Chowchilla Page 14-8
Development Impact Fee Study
May 11, 2022
a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development. The law outlines some possible exceptions to this requirement. 8) Large jurisdictions as defined in Section 53559.1 (d) of the Health and Safety Code (counties of 250,000 or more and cities in those counties) shall adopt a capital improvement plan as part of a nexus study.
9) All studies shall be adopted at a public hearing with at least 30-days’ notice, and the local agency shall notify any member of the public that requests notice of intent to begin an impact fee nexus study of the date of the hearing.
10) Studies shall be updated at least every eight years, beginning on January 1, 2022.

Training and Public Information
Effective administration of an impact fee program requires considerable preparation and training. It is important that those responsible for collecting the fees, and for explaining them to the public, understand both the details of the fee program and its supporting rationale.

It is also useful to pay close attention to handouts that provide information to the public regarding impact fees. Impact fees should be clearly distinguished from other fees, such as user feesfor application processing, and the purpose and use of particular impact fees should be made clear.

Finally, anyone responsible for accounting, capital budgeting, or project management for projects involving impact fees must be fully aware of the restrictions placed on the expenditure of impact fee revenues. Fees must be expended for the purposes identified in the impact fee nexus study in which they were calculated, and the City must be able to show that funds have been properly expended.

Recovery of Administrative Costs
To recover the cost of periodic impact fee update studies and ongoing staff costs for capital budgeting, annual reports, five-year updates and other requirements of the Mitigation Fee Act, an administrative charge may be added to the impact fees calculated in this report. The Executive Summary discusses inclusion of an administrative charge to recover costs involved in administration and updating of impact fees.

APPENDIX A
Prepared by NBS for the City of Chowchilla
Fee Comparison

APPENDIX A
City of Chowchilla 2022 Impact Fee Study - Fee Comparison Development Impact Fee Type Units 1
Current Fee 2Proposed Fee 3CLOVIS 4 MADERA 5 MERCED 6KINGSBURG 7TURLOCK 8COALINGA 9 Residential - Single-Family
Parks DU $ 3,841 $ 4,260 $ 4,335 $ 1,930
Recreation Facilities DU $ 569 No Fee $ 1,428 No Fee
Fire DU $262 - $1,751 $ 1,023 $ 1,568 $ 337 $ 567 $ 489 Police DU $895 - $945 $ 1,061 $ 759 $ 542 $ 760 $ 485
Streets/Signals DU $139 - $6,048 $ 3,542 $176 - $8,433 $ 2,970 $ 3,997 $ 1,517 $1,492-$1,767 Public Buildings DU $200 - $961 $ 2,196 $ 632 $ 555 No Fee $ 2,498 $ 335 Storm Drainage DU $894 - $1,473 Per-Acre No Fee $1,132 - $3,472 No Fee $ 665 $ 2,202 $1,227-$1,970 Water DU $1,992 - 2,282 $ 2,511 $ 5,206 $ 846 $ 9,199 $ 1,776 $ 6,241 $ 2,111 Sewer DU $1,486 - $6,267 $ 2,293 $ 8,109 $1,449 - $3,525 $ 6,866 $ 5,154 $ 8,147 $ 5,713 Total Residential Single-Family $7,036 - $22,476 $ 17,036 $21,145 - $29,402 $10,578 - $14,994 $ 22,003 $ 19,417 $32,624 - $35,720 $14,523-$15,541 Residential - Multi-Family
Parks DU $ 2,880 $ 4,260 $ 2,858 $ 1,930
Recreation Facilities DU $ 427 No Fee $ 400 No Fee
Fire DU $262 - $1,751 $ 823 $ 1,568 $ 247 $ 497 $ 489
Police DU $895 - $945 $ 836 $ 759 $ 399 $ 665 $ 485
Streets/Signals DU $139 - $6,048 $ 2,004 $348 - $5,059 $ 1,823 $ 2,406 $ 1,517 $1,028-$1,374 Public Buildings DU $200 - $961 $ 1,647 $ 517 $ 169 No Fee $ 1,998 $ 329 Storm Drainage DU $894 - $1,473 Per-Acre No Fee $546 - $1,454 No Fee $ 475 Based on Acres $460-$739 Water DU $1,992 - 2,282 $ 1,414 $ 3,765 $ 452 By Meter Size $ 817 By Meter Size $ 2,111 Sewer DU $1,486 - $6267 $ 1,557 $ 6,569 $94 - $1,093 $ 5,703 By Fixture Units By Fixture Units $ 5,713 Total Residential Multi-Family $7,036 - $22,476 $ 11,588 $18,139 - $22,850 $5,732 - $7,639 $ 9,808 $ 9,700 $12,709 - $14,340 $12,728-$12,353

CITY OF CHOWCHILLA COMPARISON AGENCIES
$ 2,276
$ 2,276
$ 2,653
$ 1,945
$ 614
$ 537
$ 1,635
$ 2,044
$ 2,113
$ 2,671
$14,104 - $17,210
$10,149 - $12,410
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com | Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2022 1 of 3

APPENDIX A
City of Chowchilla 2022 Impact Fee Study - Fee Comparison Development Impact Fee Type Units 1
Current Fee 2Proposed Fee 3CLOVIS 4 MADERA 5 MERCED 6KINGSBURG 7TURLOCK 8COALINGA 9

CITY OF CHOWCHILLA COMPARISON AGENCIES
Retail/Service Commercial
Parks KSF No Fee No Fee $ 580 No Fee No Fee No Fee
Recreation Facilities KSF No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee Fire KSF $730 - $740 $ 2,159 $ 648 $ 36 $ 444 $ 30
Police KSF $400 $ 6,251 $ 258 $ 72 $ 594 $ 30
Streets/Signals KSF $1,221 - 2,220 $ 13,633 $279 - $13,306 $ 985 $7787 - $10,717 $ 2,837 $1,830-$2,170 Public Buildings KSF $400 - $420 $ 854 No Fee $ 12 No Fee $ 1,694 $ 20 Storm Drainage KSF $640 Per-Acre No Fee $632 - $1,330 No Fee $ 280 Based on Acres Based on Acres Water KSF $460 - $510 $ 1,116 $ 3,730 $ 205 By Meter Size $ 1,079 By Meter Size $ 390 Sewer KSF $1,330 $ 827 $ 4,870 $60 - $363 $ 5,041 By EDUs By Fixture Units $ 380 Total Retail/Service Commercial $5,181 - $6,260 $ 24,840 $10,716 - $23,743 $2,026 - $3,027 $ 6,250 $ 7,276 $15,125 - $18,220 $2,860-$3,200 Professional Office Charged As
Commercial
Charged As
Commercial
Charged As
Commercial
Parks KSF No Fee No Fee $ 1,240 No Fee No Fee No Fee
Recreation Facilities KSF No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee Fire KSF $730 - $740 $ 663 $ 539 $ 36 $ 508 $ 30
Police KSF $400 $ 1,436 $ 261 $ 72 $ 678 $ 30
Streets/Signals KSF $1,221 - 2,220 $ 4,115 $126 - $6,067 $ 985 $ 6,429 $ 2,837 $1,830-$2,170 Public Buildings KSF $400 - $420 $ 686 No Fee $ 12 No Fee $ 1,694 $ 20 Storm Drainage KSF $640 Per-Acre No Fee $632 - $1,330 No Fee $ 280 Based on Acres Based on Acres Water KSF $460 - $510 $ 930 $ 3,730 $ 205 By Meter Size $ 1,079 By Meter Size $ 390 Sewer KSF $1,330 $ 551 $ 4,130 $60 - $363 $ 4,044 By EDUs By Fixture Units $ 380 Total Professional Office $5,181 - $6,260 $ 8,381 $10,265 - $16,206 $2,026 - $3,027 $ 11,854 $ 6,930 $7,958 - $9,672 $2,860-$3,200 $ 171
$ 195
$ 1,386
$ 1,040
$ 180
$ 180
$15,125 - $18,220
$7,958 - $9,672
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com | Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2022 2 of 3

APPENDIX A
City of Chowchilla 2022 Impact Fee Study - Fee Comparison Development Impact Fee Type Units 1
Current Fee 2Proposed Fee 3CLOVIS 4 MADERA 5 MERCED 6KINGSBURG 7TURLOCK 8COALINGA 9

CITY OF CHOWCHILLA COMPARISON AGENCIES
Industrial
Parks KSF No Fee No Fee $ 440 No Fee No Fee No Fee
Recreation Facilities KSF No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee No Fee Fire KSF $420 $ 484 $ 463 $ 24 $ 197 $ 10
Police KSF $230 $ 217 $ 224 $ 72 $ 263 $ 10
Streets/Signals KSF $830 - $1,250 $ 1,897 $111 - $1,632 $ 387 $ 1,697 $ 1,639 $280-$380 Public Buildings KSF $230 $ 244 No Fee No Fee No Fee $ 423 $ 10 Storm Drainage KSF On-Site Req'd Per-Acre No Fee $ 556 No Fee $ 240 Based on Acres Based on Acres Water KSF $180 $ 743 $ 1,010 Based on Usage By Meter Size $ 178 By Meter Size By EDU Sewer KSF $510 $ 570 $ 2,270 $ 1,515 $3,535 - $4,703 By Flow & Load By Fixture Units By EDU Total Industrial $2,400 - $2,820 $ 4,154 $4,602 - $6,123 $ 2,554 $5,768 - $6,936 $ 2,827 $1,978 - $3,110 $400-$500 Notes:

Totals shown in orange do not include fees for some components that cannot be converted into the units used in this table 1 DU = dwelling unit; KSF = 1,000 gross sq ft of building area 2 Chowchilla existing impact fees vary by Zone
3 Proposed fees from the NBS 2022 Impact Fee Study; includes impact fee and administrative charge 4 Clovis fees effective July 19, 2021
5 Madera fees in effect June 15, 2021
6 Merced fees effective January 1, 2022;
7 Kingsburg fees updated October 6, 2021
8 Turlock fees updated January 1, 2022; some plan area fees cannot be separated into individual components for specific facilities 9 Coalinga fees updated August 20, 2020
$ 76 $ 90
$ 347
$1,978 - $3,110
NBS - Local Government Solutions
Web: www.nbsgov.com | Toll-Free:800.676.7516 5/11/2022 3 of 3

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 6.1

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution to Approve the Purchase of the Opengov Procurement Software Platform for Online Bidding and Contract Management, for a First-Year Price of $33,365, Authorizing the City Administrator or Designee to Execute all Related documents Thereto and Amending the Fiscal Year 2022/23 City Budget
PREPARED BY: Jason Rogers, Director of Public Works
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, Quote

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

That the City Council

1. Approve the purchase of OpenGov Procurement software for a total first year cost of $33,365,

2. Authorize the City Administrator, or designee, to take any actions needed to effectuate the order and implementation of the software platform, comprised of the following costs, and

3. Amend the City of Chowchilla Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Budget.

BACKGROUND:

In December 2021 the City implemented electronic bidding using the UrbanLeap software platform, entering into a multi-year agreement which was set to expire in 2024. Unfortunately, the UrbanLeap platform discontinued operations on October 30, 2022. As such, it was no longer able to meet the needs of the City and resulted in staff using the City’s website and cold calling methods to manage bid advertisements.

Due to UrbanLeap’s discontinuation, staff began looking at various procurement processes with an eye towards increasing efficiency, collaboration, and transparency. This led us to look for other potential solutions. Staff was looking for a solution that would empower the City to manage and automate the complete process for developing and collaborating on all purchasing projects from request to award. In particular, a solution that includes:
• Collaboration
o Intake Management
o Request for Proposal/Qualifications & Invitation for Bid Authoring o Approvals Workflow
• Sourcing
o Online Evaluations
o Electronic Bidding
o Vendor Management
• Contract
o Contract Template Management
o Contract Clause Management
o Transparency Portal
One of the key drivers in this research was finding a firm that could provide a fully integrated procurement module that would be intuitive and easy to learn for internal users and our vendors. It was also extremely important to find a solution that has exemplary customer service that supported internal and external users, side-by-side support in building a smarter more automated procurement process, and agile enough to make changes to the software as requested by the customer without undue expenditures.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Over 110 California cities, school districts and counties leverage the OpenGov network. Numerous cities in California, such as Manhattan Beach and Palm Desert have recently selected OpenGov (formerly ProcureNow) through the request for proposals process.

After thorough evaluation of the information provided and reaching out to various cities that use the software, OpenGov Procurement was determined to be a best fit for the City for the following reasons:
• Cloud-based solution not priced by license.
• Have current customers on the same City web platform. • High level of encrypted security.
• Prior experience in government (procurement).
• Continuous group and individual training access.
• Update software with customer requests in a timely manner and at no additional cost. • Consistency of required compliance language within the solicitations by mandating the language that is necessary.
• Design the evaluation process language for RFP/RFQs and ITB – leveraging that to automate electronic scoring and solicitation tabulation.
• Create electronic solicitation table allowing vendors to easily understand how the City wants them to respond that is fair, objective and transparent resulting in finding the best value and/or lowest price.
• Live support and live collaboration tools for both the bidders and internal teams Staff recommends the City move to OpenGov Procurement, beginning in April 2023. OpenGov Procurement will replace the previous software at a comparable price. The previous software had no annual cap and was based on a percentage of awarded bid. For example, a $1,000,000 bid award would result in a cost of $10,000 for the software. OpenGov provides unlimited users, contract and RFP template management, and a more user-friendly interface for $18,000 annually. There is a one-time professional services fee of $15,265 for set-up and training, which includes setting up contract templates, alleviating the need to purchase a separate software product for this feature.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The first-year cost is $35,365, and $19,000 in year two and $19,845 in year three. Costs for the previous software were charged directly to projects once awarded. As OpenGov relies on an annual service cost and one-time set up cost, there is currently no budget allocated within the City’s current approved budget.

As such, the current Council approved budget within the Information Technology Software Department will need to be amended in order to move forward with the software.

In future budgets, funding for the software will be allocated to various departments based upon need as listed in the annual Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the City. Funds are available in the Information Technology Software and Maintenance Account 602-1715-3025.

ALTERNATIVES:

Not to enter into an agreement with OpenGov.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

The City Administrator will enter into an agreement with OpenGov.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA

APPROVING THE PURCHASE OF THE OPENGOV PROCUREMENT SOFTWARE PLATFORM FOR ONLINE BIDDING AND CONTRACT MANAGEMENT, FOR A FIRST-YEAR PRICE OF $33,365,

AUTHORIZING THE CITY ADMINISTRATOR OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE ALL RELATED DOCUMENTS THERETO AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2022/23 CITY BUDGET WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla does not currently have an eProcurement software system; and WHEREAS, OpenGov was determined to be a best fit for the City; and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2022, the Chowchilla City Council adopted fiscal year 2022-2023 Operating and Capital Budget with Resolution #52-21; and WHEREAS, Expenditure and transfer accounts will need to be amended within the Information Technology Services department budgets in the amount of $33,365 for the eProcurement software; and WHEREAS, An adequate fund balance is available in said Funds to allow for said increase of appropriations.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby finds, determines and declares the following:

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

2. Approve the purchase of OpenGov Procurement software for a total first year cost of $33,365.

3. Authorizes the City Administrator or designee to execute all documents necessary to complete the service on behalf of the City of Chowchilla.

4. The Finance Director is authorized to make such other revisions, individual appropriation lineitems, changes in summaries, fund totals, grand totals, and other portions of the budget document as necessary to reflect and implement the changes specified in this resolution.

5. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 14th day of March, 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor Ray Barragan
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk
OpenGov Inc.
6525 Crown Blvd #41340
San Jose, CA 95160
United States
https://opengov.com | 1
Order Number:

Created On:

Quote Expiration Date:

Subscription Start Date:

Subscription End Date:

Q006367
January 24, 2023
February 28, 2023
February 28, 2023
February 27, 2026
Prepared By:

Email:

Contract Term:

Nick Jin
[email protected]
36 Months
Customer Information
Customer:

Bill To/Ship To:

City of Chowchilla, CA
130 S 2nd St
Chowchilla, CA US
Contact Name:

Email:

Phone:

Jason Rogers
[email protected]
559-665-8615 x 789
Order Details
Billing Frequency: Annual Payment Terms: Net 30
SOFTWARE SERVICES:

Product / Service Start Date End Date SubscriptionFee
OpenGov Procurement February 28, 2023 February 27, 2024 $18,000.00 OpenGov Procurement February 28, 2024 February 27, 2025 $18,900.00 OpenGov Procurement February 28, 2025 February 27, 2026 $19,845.00 Total Amount See Billing Table
PROFESSIONAL SERVICES:

Product / Service Start Date Total Amount
Professional Services Deployment - Prepaid February 28, 2023 $15,265.00 Services Total Amount $15,265.00
Order Form Legal Terms
Welcome to OpenGov! Thanks for using our Software Services. This Order Form is entered into between OpenGov, Inc., with its principal place of business at PO Box 41340, San Jose, CA 95160 (“OpenGov”), and you, the entity identified above (“Customer”), as of the Effective Date. This Order Form includes and incorporates the OpenGov Software Services Agreement ("SSA") attached, or if no such SSA is attached, the SSA available at https://opengov.com/terms-of-service and the applicable Statement of Work ("SOW") incorporated herein in the event Professional Services are purchased. The Order Form, SSA and SOW shall hereafter be referred to as the "Agreement". Unless otherwise specified above, fees for the Software Services and Professional Services shall be due and payable, in advance, on the Effective Date. By signing this Agreement, Customer acknowledges that it has reviewed, and agrees to be legally bound by, the OpenGov Terms and Conditions. Each party’s acceptance of this Agreement is conditional upon the other’s acceptance of the terms in the Agreement to the exclusion of all other terms.

City of Chowchilla, CA
Signature: \s1\
OpenGov, Inc.

Signature: \s2\
Name: \n1\
Title: \t1\
Sign Date: \d1\
Name: \n2\
Title: \t2\
Countersign Date: \d2\
Billing Date: Billing Amount:
2/28/2023 $33,365.00 (Annual Software Fee + Professional Services) 2/28/2024 $19,000.00
2/28/2025 $19,845.00
Statement of Work
City of Chowchilla, CA
Creation Date: 2/2/2023
Document Number: PS-03592
Version Number: 1
Created by: Samuel Hernandez
2023 Statement of Work v2
1 Table of Contents

1. Overview and Approach 3

1.1. Agreement 3

2. Statement of Work 3

2.1. Project Scope 3

2.2. Facilities and Hours of Coverage 4

2.3. Key Assumptions 4

2.4. OpenGov Responsibilities 4

2.4.1. Activity 1 – Project Management 4

2.4.2. Activity 2 – Initialization 5

2.4.3. Activity 3 – OpenGov Use Cases 5

2.4.4. Activity 4 – Training 6

2.5. Your Responsibilities 6

2.5.1. Your Project Manager 7

2.6. Completion Criteria 7

2.7. Estimated Schedule 7

2.8. Illustrative Project Timelines 8

2.9. Charges 8

2.10. Offer Expiration Date 8
Appendix A: Engagement Charter 9
A-1: Communication and Escalation Procedure 9
A-2: Change Order Process 9
A-3: Deliverable Materials Acceptance Procedure 10
Appendix B: Implementation Activities 11
B-1: OpenGov Procurement Suite 11
Appendix C: Technical Requirements 15
C-1: OpenGov Procurement Suite 15

TABLE OF CONTENTS
2023 Statement of Work v2
2 1. Overview and Approach

1.1. Agreement
This Statement of Work (“SOW”) identifies services that OpenGov, Inc. (“OpenGov” or “we”) will perform for the City of Chowchilla, CA (“Customer” or “you”) pursuant to that order for Professional Services entered into between OpenGov and the Customer (“Order Form”) which references the Software Services Agreement or other applicable agreement entered into by the parties (the “Agreement”).
● Customer acknowledges and agrees that this Statement of Work is subject to the confidentiality obligations set forth in the Software Services Agreement between OpenGov and the City of Chowchilla, CA.
● The Deliverabled listed in Appendix B are the single source of the truth of the deliverables to be provided.
● Customer’s use of the Professional Services is governed by the Agreement and not this SOW.
● Upon execution of the Order Form or other documentation referencing the SOW, this SOW shall be incorporated by reference into the Agreement.
● In the event of any inconsistency or conflict between the terms and conditions of this SOW and the Agreement, the terms and conditions of this SOW shall govern with respect to the subject matter of this SOW only. Unless otherwise defined herein, capitalized terms used in this SOW shall have the meaning defined in the Agreement. ● This SOW may not be modified or amended except in a written agreement signed by a duly authorized representative of each party.
● OpenGov will be deployed as is, Customer has access to all functionality available in the current release.

2. Statement of Work
This SOW is limited to the Implementation of the OpenGov Procurement as defined in the OpenGov Responsibilities section of this document (Section 2.4). Any additional services or support will be considered out of scope.

2.1. Project Scope
Under this project, OpenGov will deliver cloud based Procurement solutions to help the City of Chowchilla, CA power a more effective and accountable government. OpenGov's estimated charges and schedule are based on performance of the activities listed in the “OpenGov Responsibilities” section below. Deviations that arise during the project will be managed through the procedure described in Appendix A-2: Project Change Control Procedure, and may result in adjustments to the Project Scope, Estimated Schedule, Charges and other terms. These adjustments may include charges on a time-and-materials or fixed-fee basis using OpenGov’s standard rates in effect from time to time for any resulting additional work or waiting time.
2023 Statement of Work v2
3 2.2. Facilities and Hours of Coverage
OpenGov will:

A. Perform the work under this SOW remotely, except for any project-related activity which OpenGov determines would be best performed at your facility in Chowchilla, CA in order to complete its responsibilities under this SOW.

B. Provide the Services under this SOW during normal business hours, 8:30am to 6:00pm local time, Monday through Friday, except holidays.

2.3. Key Assumptions
The SOW and OpenGov estimates are based on the following key assumptions. Deviations that arise during the proposed project will be managed through the Project Change Control Procedure (see Appendix A-2) , and may result in adjustments to the Project Scope, Estimated Schedule, Charges, and other terms.

Per
A. The OpenGov Suites are not customized beyond current capacities based on the latest release of the software.

B. Individual software modules are configured based on discussions between OpenGov and Customer.

C. Procurement Suite
i. Customer will provide complete and correct boilerplate language for solicitation and contract templates within two (2) weeks immediately following the kick-off meeting.
ii. OpenGov template configuration will include up to one (1) solicitation templates and up to one (1) contract templates (See Appendix B for list). iii. Customer will provide a complete and accurate contracts log and vendor list for import to OpenGov.

2.4. OpenGov Responsibilities

2.4.1. Activity 1 – Project Management
OpenGov will provide project management for the OpenGov responsibilities in this SOW.

The purpose of this activity is to provide direction to the OpenGov project personnel and to provide a framework for project planning, communications, reporting, procedural and contractual activity. This activity is composed of the following tasks:

Planning
OpenGov will:

A. review the SOW, contract and project plan with Customer’s Project Manager and key stakeholders to ensure alignment and agreed upon timelines; B. maintain project communications through your Project Manager; C. establish documentation and procedural standards for deliverable Materials; and 2023 Statement of Work v2
4 D. assist your Project Manager to prepare and maintain the project plan for the performance of this SOW which will include the activities, tasks, assignments, and project milestones.

Project Tracking and Reporting
OpenGov will:

A. review project tasks, schedules, and resources and make changes or additions, as appropriate. Measure and evaluate progress against the project plan with your Project Manager;
B. work with your Project Manager to address and resolve deviations from the project plan;
C. conduct regularly scheduled project status meetings; and D. administer the Project Change Control Procedure with your Project Manager.

Completion Criteria:

This is an on-going activity which will be considered complete at the end of the Services Deliverable Materials:
● Weekly status reports
● Project plan
● Project Charter
● Risk, Action, Issues and Decisions Register (RAID)

2.4.2. Activity 2 – Initialization
OpenGov will provide the following:

A. Customer Entity configuration
B. System Administrators creation
C. Solution Blueprint creation
D. Data Validation strategy confirmation
Completion Criteria:

This activity will be considered complete when:
● Customer Entity is created
● System Administrators have access to Customer Entity
● Solution Blueprint is presented to Customer
Deliverable Materials:
● Solution Blueprint
● Sign-off of Initial Draft Solution Blueprint

2.4.3. Activity 3 – OpenGov Use Cases
OpenGov will provide the following:
2023 Statement of Work v2
5 Procurement Use Cases
A. Automate Solicitation Development
B. Enhance Supplier Engagement and Collaboratively Evaluate + Award C. Make Contract Management Centralized and Proactive
Completion Criteria:

This activity will be considered complete when:

Procurement Use Cases
● Vendor Portal is configured
● Vendor List is imported
● Solicitation Templates are configured
● Intake Request Template and Workflow are configured
● Contracts Log is imported
● Contract Templates are configured
Deliverable Materials:
● Formal sign off document

2.4.4. Activity 4 – Training
Training will be provided in instructor-led virtual sessions or through OpenGov University Training courses. For any instructor-led virtual sessions, the class size is recommended to be 10, for class sizes larger than 10 it may be necessary to have more than one instructor.

Completion Criteria:
● Administrator training is provided
● Training on system functionality is provided
● End User training is provided
● Agency-wide intake training is provided
Deliverable Materials:
● Formal sign off document

2.5. Your Responsibilities
The completion of the proposed scope of work depends on the full commitment and participation of your management and personnel. The responsibilities listed in this section are in addition to those responsibilities specified in the Agreement and are to be provided at no charge to OpenGov. OpenGov's performance is predicated upon the following responsibilities being managed and fulfilled by you. Delays in performance of these responsibilities may result in delay of the completion of the project and will be handled in accordance with Appendix A-1: Project Change Control Procedure. 2023 Statement of Work v2
6 2.5.1. Your Project Manager
Prior to the start of this project, you will designate a person called your Project Manager who will be the focal point for OpenGov communications relative to this project and will have the authority to act on behalf of you in all matters regarding this project.

Your Project Manager's responsibilities include the following:

A. manage your personnel and responsibilities for this project (for example: ensure personnel complete any self-paced training sessions, configuration, validation or user acceptance testing);
B. serve as the interface between OpenGov and all your departments participating in the project;
C. administer the Project Change Control Procedure with the Project Manager; D. participate in project status meetings;
E. obtain and provide information, data, and decisions within five (5) business days of OpenGov’s request unless you and OpenGov agree in writing to a different response time;
F. resolve deviations from the estimated schedule, which may be caused by you; G. help resolve project issues and escalate issues within your organization, as necessary; and
H. create, with OpenGov’s assistance, the project plan for the performance of this SOW which will include the activities, tasks, assignments, milestones and estimates.

2.6. Completion Criteria
OpenGov will have fulfilled its obligations under this SOW when any of the following first occurs:

A. OpenGov accomplishes the activities set forth in “OpenGov responsibilities” section and delivers the Materials listed, if any; or
B. The End date is reached

2.7. Estimated Schedule
OpenGov will schedule resources for this project upon signature of the order form. Unless specifically noted, the OpenGov assigned project manager will work with Customer Project Manager to develop the project schedule for all requested deliverables under this SOW.

OpenGov reserves the right to adjust the schedule based on the availability of OpenGov resources and/or Customer resources, and the timeliness of deliverables provided by the Customer.
2023 Statement of Work v2
7 The Services are currently estimated to start within two (2) weeks but no later than four (4) weeks from signatures and have an estimated end date of June 30, 2022 (“End Date”) or on other dates mutually agreed to between you and OpenGov.

2.8. Illustrative Project Timelines
The typical project timelines are for illustrative purposes only and may not reflect your use cases.

2.9. Charges
The Services will be conducted on a Fixed Price basis. The fixed hours for performing the Services defined in the SOW will be 71 hours This fixed price is exclusive of any travel and living expenses and other reasonable expenses incurred in connection with the Services.

All charges are exclusive of any applicable taxes.

2.10. Offer Expiration Date
This offer will expire on April 3, 2023 unless extended by OpenGov in writing. 2023 Statement of Work v2
8 Appendix A: Engagement Charter
A-1: Communication and Escalation Procedure
Active engagement throughout the implementation process is the foundation of a successful deployment. To help assess progress, address questions, and minimize risk during the course of deployment both parties agree to the following:
● Regular communication aligned to the agreed upon project plan and timing. ○ OpenGov expects our customers to raise questions or concerns as soon as they arise. OpenGov will do the same, in order to be able to address items when known. ● Executive involvement
○ Executives may be called upon to clarify expectations and/or resolve confusion. ○ Executives may be needed to steer strategic items to maximize the value through the deployment.
● Escalation Process:
○ OpenGov and Customer agree to raise concerns and follow the escalation process, resource responsibility, and documentation in the event an escalation is needed to support issues raised
● Identification of an issue impeding deployment progress, outcome or capturing the value proposition, that is not acceptable. ● Customer or OpenGov Project Manager summarizes the problem statement and impasse.
● Customer and OpenGov Project Managers jointly will outline solution, acceptance or schedule Executive review.
● Resolution will be documented and signed off following Executive review. ● Phase Sign-Off
○ OpenGov requests sign-offs at various stages during the implementation of the project. Once the Customer has signed-off, any additional changes requested by Customer on that stage will require a paid change order for additional hours for OpenGov to complete the requested changes.

A-2: Change Order Process
This SOW and related efforts are based on the information provided and gathered by OpenGov.

Customers acknowledge that changes to the scope may require additional effort or time, resulting in additional cost. Any change to scope must be agreed to in writing or email, by both Customer and OpenGov, and documented as such via a:
● Change Order- Work that is added to or deleted from the original scope of this SOW.

Depending on the magnitude of the change, it may or may not alter the original contract amount or completion date and be paid for by Customer. Changes might include:
o Timeline for completion
o Sign off process
o Cost of change and Invoice timing
o Amending the SOW to correct an error.
2023 Statement of Work v2
9 o Extension of work as the complexity identified exceeds what was expected by Customer or OpenGov.
o Change in type of OpenGov resources to support the SOW.

A-3: Deliverable Materials Acceptance Procedure
Deliverable Materials as defined herein will be reviewed and accepted in accordance with the following procedure:
● The deliverable Material will be submitted to your Project Manager. ● Your Project Manager will have decision authority to approve/reject all project Criteria, Phase Acceptance and Engagement Acceptance.
● Within five (5) business days of receipt, your Project Manager will either accept the deliverable Material or provide OpenGov’s Project Manager a written list of requested revisions. If OpenGov receives no response from your Project Manager within five (5) business days, then the deliverable Material will be deemed accepted. The process will repeat for the requested revisions until acceptance.
● All acceptance milestones and associated review periods will be tracked on the project plan.
● Both OpenGov and Customer recognize that failure to complete tasks and respond to open issues may have a negative impact on the project.
● For any tasks not yet complete, OpenGov and/or Customer will provide sufficient resources to expedite completion of tasks to prevent negatively impacting the project. ● Any conflict arising from the deliverable Materials Acceptance Procedure will be addressed as specified in the Escalation Procedure set forth in Appendix A-1. As set forth in Section

6.1(e) of the Agreement, if there are extended delays (greater than 10 business days) in Customer’s response for requested information or deliverable; OpenGov may opt to put the project on an "On Hold" status. After the Customer has fulfilled its obligations, Professional Services can be resumed and the project will be taken off the "On-Hold" status. ● Putting a project “on Hold” may have several ramifications including, but not restricted, to the following:
○ Professional Services to the customer could be stopped; ○ Delay to any agreed timelines; or
○ Not having the same Professional Services team assigned. 2023 Statement of Work v2
10 Appendix B: Implementation Activities
B-1: OpenGov Procurement Suite
Instance Creation
Procurement Suite
Description OpenGov Responsibilities Customer Responsibilities Website Instance
Creation
OpenGov will:
● Build customer portal and
upload Customer’s logo.

Customer will:
● Provide logo.
● Confirm access to the Portal.

Technical Project Review
Description OpenGov Responsibilities Customer Responsibilities Technical Project
Review
OpenGov will:
● Provide up to one (1) two-hour
working session at the
beginning of the project to:
o Finalize list of
templates
o Review technical
requirements
o Provide documentation
on requirements and
processes
OpenGov Assumptions:
● Boilerplate language will be
provided within two (2) weeks
immediately following the
kick-off meeting.

Customer will:
● Identify relevant participants
for attendance.
● Confirm deliverables.
● Gather and provide relevant
data for the project.

Supplier Engagement, Evaluation and Award Configuration Description OpenGov Responsibilities Customer Responsibilities Vendor Portal OpenGov will: Customer will:
● Allocate resources to create
the Vendor Portal.
2023 Statement of Work v2
11 ● Provide the Customer with
iframe code and documentation
to create the Vendor Portal.
● Import the list of vendors
provided by Customer.

OpenGov Assumptions:
● Customer will provide a
complete and accurate vendor
list for import to OpenGov.

OpenGov clean up/correction of
imported files are not included
in the scope of this project.
● Provide vendor email list and
send vendor email/letter.
● Ensure that Vendor Portal
will be active before
OpenGov begins
configuration of templates
or the Solicitation
Development phase.

Generic Template OpenGov will:
● Deploy generic templates
● Provide OpenGov's “Paper to
Paperless Language Transition
Guide” to assist transition from
paper to electronic.

Customer will:
● Provide a copy of the next
solicitation document.
● Provide information to
complete the generic
solicitation upload template
including forms and an
example recent solicitation.
● Provide the category code
set used by the agency
(NIGP, NAICS, or UNSPSC).

Solicitation Development Configuration
Description OpenGov Responsibilities Customer Responsibilities Solicitation
Development
Solution
OpenGov will:
● Review and confirm the
Solicitation Templates and
forms provided by Customer.
● Work with Customer to design
and get sign off on the first
template.
● Following the sign off of the
first template, configure the
remaining templates in the
system.

OpenGov Assumptions:

Customer will:
● Provide templates with
standard boilerplate
language.
● Provide forms associated
with solicitation templates.
● Provide admin documents.
● Select the first solicitation
type (usually ITB or RFP), to
work with OpenGov for the
design
● Sign off on the first
template before beginning
the subsequent templates.
2023 Statement of Work v2
12 ● OpenGov will configure up to
one (1) Solicitation Template(s)
with standard boilerplate
language.
● Validate and provide signoff
on Solicitation Templates.

Intake Configuration
Description OpenGov Responsibilities Customer Responsibilities Intake Process OpenGov will:
● Review current intake
Process.
● Perform basic intake
Training.
● Perform a gap analysis
● Configure “Review/
Approval” workflow
defaults for each
department.
● Build the Intake/Project
Request Template.

Customer will:
● Provide OpenGov with any
Intake/Project RequestForms
(templates) in current use.
● Validate and provide signoff on
Intake/ Project Request
template.

Contract Management Configuration
Description OpenGov Responsibilities Customer Responsibilities Create and Manage
Contracts
OpenGov will:
● Provide one (1) - one hour
Overview of the Contract
Management Solution to
Customer’s System
Administrator(s).
● Provide guidance and
instruction to System
Administrator on creating
and managing contracts.

Customer will:
● Attend scheduled System
Overview
● Create and manage contract
records in the system with
guidance from OpenGov.

Historical and/or
Active Contracts
OpenGov will:
● Provide a mapping
document for the metadata
of contracts to be uploaded
into the system.
● Import the contract
records listed in the
contract log.

Customer will
● Provide contract log per the
mapping document.
2023 Statement of Work v2
13 OpenGov Assumptions:
● Customer will provide a
complete and accurate
contracts log for import to
OpenGov. OpenGov clean
up/correction of imported
logs are not included in the
scope of this project.

Contract Template
Deployment
OpenGov will:
● Review & configure agreed
upon contract templates.

OpenGov Assumptions:
● OpenGov will configure up
to one (1) Contract
Template(s) with standard
boilerplate language.

Customer will:
● Provide templates with
standard boilerplate language.
● Validate and provide signoff on
Contract templates.

Working Sessions and Trainings
Description OpenGov Responsibilities Customer Responsibilities Procurement
Working Sessions
OpenGov will:
● Assign practice exercises
to Customer to gain
familiarization.
● Assist Customer during
first real-life solicitation
posting, and opening (if
during deployment).
● Respond to questions
regarding configured
system functionality.

Customer will:
● Complete practice exercises
to gain familiarization.
● Identify internal Admin Users
& security permissions for all
other users.

OpenGov University OpenGov will:
● Provide access to OpenGov
University online training
courses intended to teach
users on the basics of
OpenGov.

Customer will:
● Review training courses.

Procurement
Training
OpenGov will:
● Provide training on system
functionality. Topics
include:

Customer will:
● Attend training sessions as
scheduled by the Project
Manager and agreed to in the
Project Plan.
2023 Statement of Work v2
14 ○ Creating Bids with
Generic Templates
○ Live Bid
Management &
Vendor Experience
○ Evaluation and
Awarding
○ Writing
Solicitations using
templates
○ Contract Document
Developer Tools
○ Intake Training and
Workflow
Appendix C: Technical Requirements
C-1: OpenGov Procurement Suite
Procurement Suite
Description Technical Requirements
Logo ● .png or .jpg file
● At least 300KB but not larger than 500KB
Vendor List ● Single Flat file
● .csv or .xlsx format
Historical/Active
Contracts
● Single Flat file
● .csv or .xlsx format
Sample Documents
or Templates with
boilerplate
language
● PDF or Word format
Intake/Project
Request Templates
● PDF or Word format
Admin Documents ● PDF or Word format
2023 Statement of Work v2
15 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 6.2

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT: Adoption of a Resolution Awarding the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion Phase 2 to Diede Construction, Inc. in the Amount of $1,204,700, Authorizing the City Administrator or Designee to Execute all Related documents Thereto and Amending the Fiscal Year 2022/23 City Budget PREPARED BY: Noel Azevedo, Administrative Analyst
APPROVED BY: Fred Gaumnitz, Fire Chief
ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, RFP Response

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

That City Council approve a resolution to authorize the City Administrator or designee to execute an agreement with Diede Construction, Inc. for the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion Phase 2 Project and amend the City of Chowchilla Fiscal Year (FY) 2022/23 Budget.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Chowchilla recently requested proposals from qualified building contractors to design, expand and renovate the fire station located in Chowchilla, California. Phase 2 of this project will include the addition of a lighted 1,500 square feet covered reloading area off the east end of the original bays, three bedrooms, one office converted from the current training/kitchen area, the upstairs walled off and finished, and the parking area expanded.

The City Fire Department desires a metal building with a life span of more than twenty (20) years, constructed of materials that present a pleasing appearance yet require low levels of maintenance, and afford reasonable security for the occupants and the property contained therein.

The RFP pursued a best value proposal that includes every aspect of design, planning, construction and delivery of a fully expanded and functional fire station.

On Thursday, January 12, 2022 at 3:00 PM, RFP #2022-CFD-002 was closed at which time one (1) bid was received from:
• Diede Construction, Inc.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

The one proposal received was reviewed by the Director of Public Works, and Fire Chief. Upon analysis of the bid submitted, Diede Construction, was determined to be a responsive. The breakdown of costs from Diede Construction Inc. for the project is as follows:

DESCRIPTION DIEDE
Design $50,000
General Conditions $80,000
Construction – Base Bid $819,000
Contingency $50,000
Add/Alternates $205,700
TOTAL $1,204,700
The Engineer’s estimate for the base bid of the project was estimated at approximately $900,000. As such, Diede’s bid of $999,000 is within ten percent (10%) of the engineer’s estimate. staff is also recommending awarding the add/alternate items for construction of additional concrete pads around the new structure, valley gutters, heaters and fire sprinklers at a cost of $205,700. After a thorough evaluation by the Evaluation Team, staff recommends an award be made to Diede Construction, Inc. Based on their Proposal and experience, Diede Construction, Inc was deemed as a Responsive/Responsible bidder and offers the best value in support of the project.

FISCAL IMPACT:

A total of $1,810,000 of funding for phase 1 and 2 for this project is currently budgeted in the FY 2022/23 City Budget. The approved FY 2022/23 Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) shows a budget of $1,810,000 and comes from the following funds:

DESCRIPTION FY 2022/23 FY 2023/24
Measure N $1,322,000 $1,000,000
Fire Development Impact Fees (DIF) $488,000
TOTAL $1,810,000 $1,000,000
The bid proposal cost is $1,204,700. As a result of phase 1 costs of $1,254,386, the current Council approved budget for this project is $649,086 short and will need to be amended in order to move forward with the project. According to the CIP, as shown above, additional funding from the project comes solely from the Measure N, and DIF- Fire Fund balances
ALTERNATIVES:

Not to accept the bid results.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

1. The resolution and budget amendments will be sent to the Finance Department for inclusion into the FY 22/23 Budget.

2. The City Administrator will enter into an agreement with Diede Construction, Inc. once an agreement has been created and approved to form by the City’s legal counsel.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA AWARDING THE DESIGN/BUILD: FIRE STATION EXPANSION AND RENOVATION PROJECT TO DIEDE CONSTRUCTION, INC. IN THE AMOUNT OF $1,204,700, AUTHORIZING THE CITY

ADMINISTRATOR OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE ALL RELATED DOCUMENTS THERETO AND AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2021/22 CITY BUDGET
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla does not currently have a contractor for the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion Phase 2 Project; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla prepared a request for proposals for qualified building contractors to expand and renovate the fire station located in Chowchilla, California; and WHEREAS, one (1) bid was received; and
WHEREAS, Diede Construction, Inc. submitted the lowest responsible and responsive bid; and WHEREAS, on June 28, 2022, the Chowchilla City Council adopted fiscal year 2022-2023 Operating and Capital Budget with Resolution #52-21; and WHEREAS, per Resolution #70-16, Item #5 and Item #6 states, authority to increase appropriations within a fund by an amount not to exceed $50,000 shall rest with the City Administrator and Authority to transfer appropriations between funds will be represented by resolutions duly approved by the City Council; and
WHEREAS, the budget transfers between funds and the budget amendment exceeds $50,000 and requires City Council approval, and
WHEREAS, Expenditure and transfer accounts will need to be amended within the Fire Department, Fire DIF, Measure N or General Fund budgets in the amount of $649,086 for the Design/Build:

Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Project; and
WHEREAS, An adequate fund balance is available in said Funds to allow for said increase of appropriations.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby finds, determines and declares the following:

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

2. Award the Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion Phase 2 Contract to Diede Construction, Inc. in the amount of $1,204,700.

3. Authorizes the City Administrator or designee to execute all documents necessary to complete the service on behalf of the City of Chowchilla.

4. The Finance Director is authorized to make such other revisions, individual appropriation line-items, changes in summaries, fund totals, grand totals, and other portions of the budget document as necessary to reflect and implement the changes specified in this resolution.

5. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 24th day of January, 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Mayor Ray Barragan
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk

CITY OF CHOWCHILLA
DESIGN/BUILD: FIRE STATION EXPANSION AND RENOVATION AGREEMENT This Design/Build: Fire Station Expansion and Renovation Agreement ("Agreement") is entered into between the City of Chowchilla ("City") and Diede Construction, Inc. ("Contractor") with respect to the following recitals, which are a substantive part of this Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective on July 13, 2021 ("Effective Date").

RECITALS
A. City desires to obtain contractual services ("Services") as described in the Request for Proposals No. 2021- CFD-001, set forth in Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference (“Request for Proposals”).

B. Contractor is engaged in the business of furnishing the Services and hereby warrants and represents that it is qualified, licensed, and professionally capable of performing the Services.

C. Contractor submitted a complete proposal, including all required forms, bonds, certificates, and other documents, attached as Exhibit B (“Contractor’s Proposal”) and incorporated herein by reference, that was approved by City for award of contract for the Services.

D. City desires to retain Contractor, and Contractor desires to provide the City with the Services, on the terms and conditions as set forth in this Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the promises and mutual agreements herein, City and Contractor agree as follows:

AGREEMENT

1. Scope of Services. Contractor shall perform the Services described in the Request for Proposals set forth in Exhibit A. Contractor shall comply with all standards, specification, and other requirements expressed in the Request for Proposals. If there is a conflict between the Request for Proposals or the Contractor’s Proposal and this Agreement, this Agreement shall control. No contractual terms or conditions detailed in Contractor’s Proposal shall in any way waive, disclaim, or limit Contractor’s liability, indemnification obligations, warranties, damages for breach or delay, or any security, bonding, or insurance requirements, and any such provisions shall have no force or effect with respect to this Agreement and the Services or Work performed by Contractor.

2. Commencement of Services; Term of Agreement. The term of this Agreement shall commence on July 13, 2021. Contractor shall commence the Services upon City's issuance of a written "Notice to Proceed" and shall continue with the Services until the completion of the Agreement, or until such time as the Agreement is terminated by either party pursuant to Section 16 herein, whichever is earlier.

3. Payment for Services. City shall pay Contractor for the Services performed pursuant to this Agreement according to the rates stated in Contractor’s Proposal set forth in Exhibit B. The total amount of compensation paid to Contractor under this Agreement shall not exceed one million one hundred and sixty six thousand Dollars ($1,166,000.00) (“Contract Amount”).

Contractor shall submit monthly invoices to City containing detailed billing information regarding the Services provided and City shall tender payment to Contractor within thirty (30) days after receipt of invoice.

4. Independent Contractor Status. Contractor and its subcontractors shall perform the Services as independent contractors and not as officers, employees, agents or volunteers of City. Contractor is engaged in an independently established trade, occupation, or business to perform the services required by this Agreement and is hereby retained to perform work that is outside the usual course of City’s business. Contractor is free from the control and direction of City in connection with the manner of performance of the work. Nothing contained in this Agreement shall be deemed to create any contractual relationship between City and Contractor's employees or subcontractors, nor shall anything contained in this Agreement be deemed to give any third party, including but not limited to Contractor's employees or subcontractors, any claim or right of action against City.

5. Standard of Care. Contractor expressly represents it is qualified in the field for which Services are being provided under this Agreement and that to the extent Contractor utilizes subcontractors, such subcontractors are, and will be, qualified in their fields. Contractor also expressly represents that both Contractor and its subcontractors, if any, are now, and will be throughout their performance of the Services under this Agreement, properly licensed, bonded, and/or otherwise qualified and authorized to perform the Services required and contemplated by this Agreement, as may be required by law. Contractor and its subcontractors, if any, shall utilize the standard of care and skill customarily exercised by members of their profession, shall use reasonable diligence and best judgment while performing the Services, and shall comply with all applicable laws and regulations.

6. Identity of Subcontractors. Contractor shall, before commencing any work under this Agreement, provide to City in writing: (a) the identity of all subcontractors, if any, Contractor intends to utilize in Contractor's performance of this Agreement; and (b) a detailed description of the full scope of work to be provided by such subcontractors. Contractor shall only employ subcontractors pre-approved by City and in no event shall Contractor replace an approved subcontractor without the advance written permission of City, with the understanding that City's permission will not be unreasonably withheld. Notwithstanding any other provisions in this Agreement, Contractor shall be liable to City for the performance of Contractor's subcontractors.

7. Subcontractor Provisions. Contractor shall include in its written agreements with its subcontractors, if any, provisions which: (a) impose upon the subcontractors the obligation to provide to City the same insurance and indemnity obligations that Contractor owes to City; and (b) entitle City to impose upon subcontractors the assignment rights found elsewhere in this Agreement.

8. Power to Act on Behalf of City. Contractor shall not have any right, power, or authority to create any obligation, express or implied, or make representations on behalf of City except as may be expressly authorized in advance in writing from time to time by City and then only to the extent of such authorization.

9. Record Keeping; Reports. Contractor shall keep complete records showing the type of Services performed.

Contractor shall be responsible and shall require its subcontractors to keep similar records. City shall be given reasonable access to the records of Contractor and its subcontractors for inspection and audit purposes. Contractor shall provide City with a working draft of all reports and five (5) copies of all final reports prepared by Contractor under this Agreement.

10. Delay Damages. Time is of the essence with respect to this Agreement and the Services provided by Contractor. Contractor’s failure to timely and satisfactorily perform under this Agreement shall result in the assessment of delay damages at the rate of $50.00 per day for each calendar day that Contractor fails or refuses to perform the Services, fails to timely perform the Services, or performs the Services in an unsatisfactory manner and fails to correct. Contractor shall be provided written notice of any deficiency in performance and afforded fortyeight (48) hours, not including weekends, to correct the work. The actual occurrence of damages and the actual amount of the damages which City would suffer for such delayed performance of the Services are impracticable and extremely difficult to calculate. Damages which City would suffer in the event of such delay include, but are not limited to, loss of the use of the facilities, disruption of activities, costs of administration and supervision, and the incalculable inconvenience and loss suffered by the public. Accordingly, the parties agree that the amount set forth herein shall be presumed to be the amount of damages which City shall directly incur for each calendar day that satisfactory performance of the Services is delayed because of Contractor.

11. Performance Bond. Prior to commencing any work under this Agreement, Contractor shall apply for and furnish City a performance bond for the Services which shall cover 100% faithful performance of the Contract Amount, or in the amount of $100,000, whichever is greater. Only bonds executed by admitted Surety insurers as defined in Code of Civil Procedure section 995.120 shall be accepted. The surety insurers must, unless otherwise agreed to by City in writing, at the time of issuance of the bonds, have a rating not lower than “A-” as rated by A.M. Best Company, Inc. or other independent rating companies. City reserves the right to approve or reject the surety insurers selected by Contractor and to require Contractor to obtain bonds from surety insurers satisfactory to City.

12. City Name and Logo. Contractor shall not use City's name or insignia, photographs relating to the City projects for which Contractor's services are rendered, or any publicity pertaining to the Contractor's services under this Agreement in any magazine, trade paper, newspaper, television or radio production or other similar medium without the prior written consent of City.

13. Conflicts of Interest. Contractor warrants that neither Contractor nor any of its employees have an interest, present or contemplated, in the Services. Contractor further warrants that neither Contractor nor any of its employees have real property, business interests or income that will be affected by the Services. Contractor covenants that no person having any such interest, whether an employee or subcontractor shall perform the Services under this Agreement. During the performance of the Services, Contractor shall not employ or retain the services of any person who is employed by the City or a member of any City Board or Commission.

14. Non-liability of Officers and Employees. No officer or employee of City shall be personally liable to Contractor, or any successors in interest, in the event of a default or breach by City for any amount which may become due Contractor or its successor, or for any breach of any obligation under the terms of this Agreement.

15. Reserved.

16. Termination of Agreement. This Agreement shall terminate upon completion of term or any extension thereto, or earlier pursuant to the following.

a. Termination by City: Without Cause. This Agreement may be terminated by City at its discretion upon thirty (30) days prior written notice to Contractor. b. Termination by City or Contractor: For Cause. Either party may terminate this Agreement upon seven (7) days prior written notice to the other party of a material breach, and a failure to cure within that time period. Contractor’s failure or refusal to satisfactorily perform shall constitute a material breach. c. Compensation to Contractor Upon Termination. In the event termination is not due to fault attributable to Contractor, and provided all other conditions for payment have been met, Contractor shall be paid compensation for services satisfactorily performed prior to notice of termination. In the event termination is due to fault attributable to Contractor, Contractor shall be paid the reasonable value of its services provided. However, in no event shall such payment when added to any other payment due exceed the total compensation as specified in Section 3 herein. In the event of termination due to Contractor’s failure to perform in accordance with the terms of this Agreement through no fault of City, City may withhold an amount that would otherwise be payable as an offset to City's damages caused by such failure.
d. Effect of Termination. Upon receipt of a termination notice (or completion of this Agreement), Contractor shall: (i) promptly discontinue all Services affected (unless the notice directs otherwise); and (ii) deliver or otherwise make available to the City, without additional compensation, all data, documents, procedures, reports, estimates, summaries, and such other information and materials as may have been accumulated by the Contractor in performing this Agreement, whether completed or in process. Contractor may not refuse to provide such writings or materials for any reason whatsoever.

17. Insurance. Contractor shall furnish to City a Certificate of Insurance, in triplicate, demonstrating insurance coverage with minimum limits as follows:
a. Commercial General Liability (including operations, products and completed operations):
$1,000,000 per occurrence, $2,000,000 aggregate for bodily injury and property damage. If Commercial General Liability Insurance or other form with a general aggregate limit is used, either the general aggregate limit shall apply separately to this project/location or the general aggregate limit shall be twice the required occurrence limit.

Commercial General Liability Insurance shall include coverage for property damage caused by blasting, collapse, structural injuries or damage to underground utilities. The policy shall not contain the so-called "x", "c" or "u" exclusions. An Additional Insured Endorsement naming the City and all officers, volunteers, and employees shall also be furnished in triplicate.
b. Automobile Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and property damage. c. Employer’s Liability: $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury or disease.

The Certificate of Insurance shall further provide “Notice of Cancellation” or reduction in coverage to be given to the City at least ten (10) days in advance of such change.

18. Indemnity and Defense. Contractor hereby agrees to indemnify, defend and hold the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers harmless from and against all claims, demands, causes of action, actions, damages, losses, expenses, and other liabilities, (including without limitation reasonable attorney fees and costs of litigation) of every nature arising out of or in connection with the alleged or actual acts, errors, omissions or negligence of Contractor or its subcontractors relating to the performance of Services described herein, unless the injuries or damages are the result of City's sole negligence or willful misconduct. Contractor and City agree that said indemnity and defense obligations shall survive the expiration or termination of this Agreement for any items specified herein that arose or occurred during the term of this Agreement.

19. Taxes. Contractor agrees to pay all taxes, licenses, and fees levied or assessed by any governmental agency on Contractor incident to the performance of Services under this Agreement, and unemployment compensation insurance, social security, or any other taxes upon the wages of Contractor, its employees, agents, and representatives. Contractor agrees to obtain and renew an annual business tax certificate from City and pay the applicable annual business license fee to City during the term of this Agreement.

20. Assignment. Neither this Agreement nor any duties or obligations hereunder shall be assignable by Contractor without the prior written consent of City. In the event of an assignment to which City has consented, the assignee shall agree in writing to personally assume and perform the covenants, obligations, and agreements herein contained. In addition, Contractor shall not assign the payment of any monies due Contractor from City under the terms of this Agreement to any other individual, corporation or entity. City retains the right to pay any and all monies due Contractor directly to Contractor.

21. Form and Service of Notices. Any and all notices or other communications required or permitted by this Agreement or by law to be delivered to, served upon, or given to either party to this Agreement by the other party shall be in writing and shall be deemed properly delivered, served or given by one of the following methods:
a. Personally delivered to the party to whom it is directed. Service shall be deemed the date of delivery.
b. Delivered by e-mail to a known address of the party to whom it is directed provided the e-mail is accompanied by a written acknowledgment of receipt by the other party. Service shall be deemed the date of written acknowledgement.
c. Delivery by a reliable overnight delivery service, ex., Federal Express, receipted, addressed to the addressees set forth below the signatories to this Agreement. Service shall be deemed the date of delivery. d. Delivery by deposit in the United States mail, first class, postage prepaid. Service shall be deemed delivered seventy-two (72) hours after deposit.

22. Entire Agreement. This Agreement, including the attachments, represents the entire Agreement between City and Contractor and supersedes all prior negotiations, representations or agreements, either written or oral with respect to the subject matter herein. This Agreement may be amended only by written instrument signed by both City and Contractor.

23. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns.

24. Authority. The signatories to this Agreement warrant and represent that they have the legal right, power, and authority to execute this Agreement and bind their respective entities.

25. Severability. In the event any term or provision of this Agreement is declared to be invalid or illegal for any reason, this Agreement will remain in full force and effect and will be interpreted as though such invalid or illegal provision were not a part of this Agreement. The remaining provisions will be construed to preserve the intent and purpose of this Agreement and the parties will negotiate in good faith to modify any invalidated provisions to preserve each party’s anticipated benefits.

26. Applicable Law and Interpretation and Venue. This Agreement shall be interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The language of all parts of this Agreement shall, in all cases, be construed as a whole, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against either party. This Agreement is entered into by City and Contractor in the County of Fresno, California. Contractor shall perform the Services required under this Agreement in the County of Fresno, California. Thus, in the event of litigation, venue shall only lie with the appropriate state or federal court in Fresno County.

27. Amendments and Waiver. This Agreement shall not be modified or amended in any way, and no provision shall be waived, except in writing signed by the parties hereto. No waiver of any provision of this Agreement shall be deemed, or shall constitute, a waiver of any other provision, whether or not similar, nor shall any such waiver constitute a continuing or subsequent waiver of the same provision. Failure of either party to enforce any provision of this Agreement shall not constitute a waiver of the right to compel enforcement of the remaining provisions of this Agreement.

28. Third Party Beneficiaries. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to confer any rights upon any party not a signatory to this Agreement.

29. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts such that the signatures may appear on separate signature pages. A copy or an original, with all signatures appended together, shall be deemed a fully executed Agreement.

30. Alternative Dispute Resolution. If a dispute arises out of or relating to this Agreement, or the alleged breach thereof, and if said dispute cannot be settled through negotiation, the parties agree first to try in good faith to settle the dispute by non-binding mediation before resorting to litigation or some other dispute resolution procedure, unless the parties mutually agree otherwise. The mediator shall be mutually selected by the parties, but in case of disagreement, the mediator shall be selected by lot from among two nominations provided by each party.

All costs and fees required by the mediator shall be split equally by the parties, otherwise each party shall bear its own costs of mediation. If mediation fails to resolve the dispute within thirty (30) days, either party may pursue litigation to resolve the dispute.

Demand for mediation shall be in writing and delivered to the other party to this Agreement.

A demand for mediation shall be made within reasonable time after the claim, dispute or other matter in question has arisen. In no event shall the demand for mediation be made after the date when institution of legal or equitable proceedings based on such a claim, dispute or other matter in question would be barred by California statues of limitations.

31. Non-Discrimination. Contractor shall not discriminate on the basis of any protected class under federal or State law in the provision of the Services or with respect to any Contractor employees or applicants for employment. Contractor shall ensure that any subcontractors are bound to this provision. A protected class, includes, but is not necessarily limited to race, color, national origin, ancestry, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, and disability.

Now, therefore, the City and Contractor have executed this Agreement on the date(s) set forth below.

CONTRACTOR CITY OF Chowchilla
By: __________________________ By: ______________________________ Rod Pruett, City Administrator
Date: __________________ Date: ______________________
Party Identification and Contact Information:
[Contractor] City of Chowchilla
Attn: Name City Clerk
Address 130 S. Second Street
City, State Chowchilla, CA 93610
_________________ [E-Mail Address] [email protected] _________________ [Phone Number] (559) 665-8615 x102
J:\wdocs\03326\001\AGT\00870063.DOC

EXHIBIT A

REQUEST FOR PROPOSALS

EXHIBIT B
CONTRACTOR’S PROPOSAL

EXHIBIT C

RFP SCORE SHEET

REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL
Item 6.3

CLICK HERE

TO RETURN TO

THE AGENDA
Meeting of: March 14, 2023
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT: Consideration and Adoption of a Resolution to approve a donation request to the Chowchilla Union High School Class of 2023 to contribute towards senior graduation activities.

PREPARED BY: Stacy Wisener, Deputy Director of Recreation and Community Engagement ATTACHMENTS: Resolution, CCF Application

REVIEWED BY
ADMINISTRATOR ☒ REVIEWED BYATTORNEY ☒ REVIEWED BY FINANCE ☒ RECOMMENDATION:

The City Council approve a resolution approving a donation request to the Chowchilla Union High School Class of 2023 to contribute towards senior graduation activities.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Chowchilla encourages projects, events, and cultural opportunities that focus on the community's economic development, heritage, diversity, and character. In support of these activities, the Chowchilla City Council established the Council Contingency Fund (CCF), which offers grants to assist eligible organizations, including municipal programs, to provide new and continuing projects, events, and cultural experiences to benefit Chowchilla residents and visitors. The CCF Fund has $20,000 available for the program; no funds have been requested or approved.

At our City Council Meeting on February 14, 2023, Ms. Jordan Lasiter and a CUHS Senior presented a donation request to assist with the rising cost of end-of-year celebration activities for the senior graduates.

That evening, Ms. Lasiter submitted the CCF Fund Application Form as requested by the council. No specific dollar amount is asked for, listing "Any Donation" as their request.

REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION:

Chowchilla holds strong to its traditions, and being a graduate of CUHS has certain activities that have been celebrated for years. Staff believes that if the traditional grad activities cannot continue due to inflation costs, it would adversely affect the students, parents, and the community, bringing the morale down when it should be a time of celebration. Staff believes the Council Contingency Fund was developed for requests such as this, and if the City has funds available to contribute to the programs of the youth of our community, we should do so.

It is still recommended to continue to approve a donation request using the Council Contingency Fund to distribute the donation but forgo the grant aspect of the application process. Meeting the minimum requirements, applicants may apply for grants under $5,000 per project. Council can approve any amount within those parameters for this application.

FISCAL IMPACT:

The fiscal impact would be a charge to the council contingency fund, up to $5,000, depending on the amount the council approves.

ALTERNATIVES:

Do not approve the agreement, the CUHS Class of 2023 will have to seek other agencies and organizations to assist with their fundraising goals.

ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL:

If the donation request is approved, staff will request a check to be distributed to the Chowchilla Union High School for the Class of 2023 graduation activities.

COUNCIL RESOLUTION # -23

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHOWCHILLA, CALIFORNIA

APPROVING A DONATION REQUEST TO THE CHOWCHILLA UNION HIGH SCHOOL CLASS OF 2023 TO CONTRIBUTE TOWARDS SENIOR GRADUATION ACTIVITIES AND AUTHORIZING THE

CITY ADMINISTRATOR OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE RELATED DOCUMENTS THERETO WHEREAS, the City of Chowchilla has a Council Contingency Fund in place to provide requested assistance to projects and beneficial programs promoting health and general welfare activities for our community; and
WHEREAS, staff believes the rising cost of inflation has made it difficult for the CUHS Class of 2023 Graduates to achieve their fundraising goal to participate in traditional graduation activities; and WHEREAS, The Chowchilla Union High School Activities Director attended the City Council meeting and presented a formal request for a donation and submitted the proper paperwork as requested; and
WHEREAS, even though other entities and businesses have contributed towards the Class of 2023’s fundraising goal, additional funds are still in need to make up for the inflated costs; and WHEREAS, providing a monetary donation promotes the general welfare of the Chowchilla Union High School Graduating Class of 2023.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chowchilla hereby finds, determines, and declares the following:

1. The above recitals are true and correct.

2. The donation will support the Chowchilla Union High School Graduating Class of 2023.

3. Agrees to approve the singular contribution as requested for graduation activities, not to exceed $5000.

4. Authorizes the City Administrator or designee, upon City Attorney approval as to form, to execute all documents necessary to complete the services on behalf of the City of Chowchilla.

5. This resolution is effective immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chowchilla this 14th day of March 2023 by the following vote to wit:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

APPROVED:

Ray Barragan, Mayor
ATTEST:

Joann McClendon, CMC
City Clerk