April 30, 2025
Subject: Water Major Facilities Development Impact Fee Nexus Memorandum The City of Clovis (City) is located in the Central Valley of California, with the City of Fresno to the west, and unincorporated Fresno County to the south and east. The City’s water system currently services approximately 126,133 residents within the City and an additional 3,997 residents in the unincorporated Tarpey Village, as well as various commercial, industrial, and institutional accounts. As part of its annual development fee program assessment, the City of Clovis evaluated their water system major facility fees in 2022 to determine the appropriateness of the fee in relation to the cost of materials and construction. Subsequently, City Council adopted an updated fee of $12,246 per equivalent dwelling unit (EDU) on June 10, 2024. The Building Industry Association (BIA) issued a challenge to this adopted fee, and sta6 have been working with the BIA since that time to evaluate the fee. This report documents the need for a new fee, the calculation, and financial impact of the fee, including a cash flow analysis.
Existing and Future Development Projections
The City established 2024 as the baseline for evaluating existing development. The development community, including the BIA were approached for planned development, and City historical data was evaluated for reasonable future projections of development.
For the development of the Fee, the City limited the scope of the evaluation to 2033 to provide a better estimate of the infrastructure needs and timing, known development projects, and financial planning. Development projections vary yearly, but are estimated at approximately 993 units per year through 2033 for this analysis. Development projections are included in more detail on Table 1 .
Planning Horizon Facilities and Cost Sharing
The City of Clovis worked with their Water Master Planning consultant, Provost and Pritchard, to complete a timing study identifying water system improvements expected in the near-term planning horizon. Provost and Pritchard, in conjunction with City sta6, identified the need for new significant water treatment capacity in the year 2033. Due to the 1 0 3 3 F I F T H S T R E E T • C L O V I S , C A 9 3 6 1 2 Attachment 2
227
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
costly nature of this project, and the other necessary improvements needed to accommodate growth and the new capacity, 2033 was selected as the planning horizon.
Other facilities planned include tanks, wells, and significant water transmission capacity improvements meant to serve the various areas of growth in the City. After completion of the timing study, City sta6 worked with BIA to refine timing based on the growth expectations of the industry. Improvements within the 2033 planning horizon are documented on Table 2 .
Additionally, City sta6 evaluated improvements for their potential benefit to the existing system. Accordingly, sta6 identified improvements that provided redundant capacity that would enhance the existing system reliability, as well as improvements that would provide the potential for a 12-month reliable supply. Sta6 assigned a percent-benefit to these improvements for existing users contributions. This is also included in Table 2 .
Fee Calculation and Methodology
The baseline fee was calculated using the incremental methodology, which follows a relatively simple calculation as outlined below:
=Cost of Growth − Related Infrastructure to 2033, dollars Capacity Created, in EDUs
The core components of the formula are described as follows:
Cost of Infrastructure: The cost of infrastructure is defined as the cumulative cost of water infrastructure needed by the year 2033 to serve new development. This includes pipelines, tanks, pump stations, major valves, and treatment plants.
Capacity Created: The Capacity Created reflects the water supply capacity created by improvements within the planning horizon, and which are intended to serve a specific amount of units. This is calculated by determining the overall supply capacity of the improvement, which is measured at the peak hour demand.
The Capacity Created and the Cost of Infrastructure are included in Table 3 . This table documents the maximum water major fee per EDU as $9,625.
Fee Assessment
Fee’s for the water major facilities will be assessed based on the land use of the map. Fee’s will vary depending on the density of residential development, with less dense development generally paying a higher cost per EDU, while multi-family type developments will generally pay a lower fee per unit.
228
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Commercial, industrial, institutional and other miscellaneous land use types pay separate fees depending on their use. These fees are generally assessed in a per square foot charge or a gross acre charge in the case of schools. The fees based land use type and density are shown on Table 4 .
In accordance with existing city policies and practices, the City does not assess fees on a per square foot basis for residential development. The City’s current development fee program has assessed the impacts of AB602 and has found that the current methodology for assessing fees is based on empirical data developed over years of implementation within the fee program. If the City were to assess fees based on a proportional square footage, it is estimated that this would be less likely to comply with the Mitigation Fee Act.
Fee Impacts
The City of Clovis submitted the revised Water Major Facility Fee calculation to the development community through a series of stakeholders meetings starting in January 2025. The City conducted 10 stakeholder meetings with both working groups within the Building Industry Association as well as the larger community of developers. In accordance with the City’s standard practices, and upon determining the fee per EDU, the City prepared standard calculation scenarios for single family, multi-family, and non-residential construction to document the cost impacts of changing the fee from $12,246 to $9,625 per EDU. These impacts are documented in Tables 5, 6, and 7 , respectively. In general, the reduction in water major facility fees result in an approximate 5% to 7% reduction in overall fees paid to develop.
229
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Table 1. Development Projections
Water Developer
Funding Scenario
Developer Units
(Estimated)
2024/25 844
2025/26 954
2026/27 1,075
2027/28 1,075
2028/29 1,075
2029/30 1,075
2030/31 974
2031/32 972
2032/33 974
2033/34 974
2034/35 949
2035/36 1,054
2036/37 1,056
2037/38 1,056
2038/39 1,056
2039/40 1,056
2040/41 1,133
230
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Table 2. Improvement Timing
Constructed by Year
CIP ID Area Existing
Share Cost Constructed
Previous 2024/25 2025/26 2026/27 2027/28 2028/29 2029/30 2030/31 2031/32 2032/33 2033/34
PIPELINES
P-2 Clovis 1,153,700$ $1,153,700
P-3 Clovis 1,147,100$ $1,147,100
P-4 Clovis 424,000$ $424,000
P-6a Clovis 294,100$ $294,100
P-6b Clovis 1,175,500$ $1,175,500
P-18 Northwest Village 857,385$ $857,385
P-23 Northwest Village 1,741,100$ $1,741,100
P-38 Northwest Village 385,000$ $385,000
P-38 Northwest Village 742,410$ $742,410
P-38 Northwest Village 919,800$ $919,800
P-39a Northwest Village 643,900$ $643,900
P-39b Northwest Village 673,425$ $673,425
P-40 Northwest Village 1,724,899$ $1,724,899
P-40b Northwest Village 262,526$ $262,526
P-49 Northeast Village 5,506,200$ $5,506,200
P-50 Northeast Village 912,000$ $912,000
RWL Raw Water Pipeline 10% 32,760,270$ $32,760,270
WELLS
W-44 Northwest Village 2,618,000$ $2,618,000
W-45 Northwest Village 2,618,000$ $2,618,000
TANKS
T-6 Clovis Design 25% 750,000$ $750,000
T-6 Clovis Construction 25% 11,647,500$ $11,647,500
T-9 Northwest Village - Phase 1 9,482,000$ $9,482,000
PUMP STATION
PS-T9 Northwest Village - Phase 1 1,221,000$ $1,221,000
OTHER IMPROVEMENTS
WTPPR-1 Pre-Treatment - Design 790,270$ $790,270 WTPPR-2 Pre-Treatment - Construction 5,288,730$ $5,288,730 WTPPR-3 Process Addition - Design 697,710$ $697,710 WTPPR-4 Process Addition - Construction 4,669,290$ $4,669,290 PSV6 Clovis 268,000$ $268,000
PSV7 Clovis 160,000$ $160,000
SWTP-2a Northeast Village - Design 10% 11,700,000$ $11,700,000 SWTP-2b Northeast Village - Construction 10% 70,300,000$ $70,300,000 SWTP-2c Northeast Village - Land Acq 10% 8,000,000$ $8,000,000
RECHARGE BASIN IMPROVEMENTS
RC-1 Clovis
RC-2 Northwest Village - LVRB 25% 2,985,000$ $394,000 $3,000,000 231
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Table 3. Incremental Methodology
Description Incremental
Method
Net Cash on Hand ($15,477,125)
Capital Expenditures $184,767,815
Near-Term Financing Not Included
Total Capital Required $169,290,690
Well Capacity Added 1,440,000
SWTP Capacity Added 23,400,000
Storage Capacity Credit 1,531,250
Total New Supply Capacity 26,371,250
dollars per gal $6.42
gpd/EDU 500
Peak Hour Demand
Factor 3.0
gpd/EDU PHD 1,499
Capacity Fee, $/EDU $9,625
Horizon 2033
Notes:
1) Includes 20 years of interest expenses, not discounted on $23m loan.
Removed per BIA Request 4/10/25
232
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Residential (Units per Acre)
Residential 2.0 or less $17,568 $13,795 per unit
Residential 2.1 to 2.5 $17,568 $13,795 per unit Residential 2.6 to 3.0 $17,568 $13,795 per unit Residential 3.1 to 3.5 $17,568 $13,795 per unit Residential 3.6 to 4.0 $17,568 $13,795 per unit Residential 4.1 to 4.5 $17,568 $13,795 per unit Residential 4.6 to 5.0 $14,912 $11,710 per unit Residential 5.1 to 5.5 $12,256 $9,625 per unit Residential 5.6 to 6.0 $11,977 $9,406 per unit Residential 6.1 to 6.5 $11,698 $9,187 per unit Residential 6.6 to 7.0 $11,419 $8,968 per unit Residential 7.1 to 7.5 $11,140 $8,749 per unit Residential 7.6 to 8.0 $10,861 $8,530 per unit Residential 8.1 to 8.5 $10,582 $8,311 per unit Residential 8.6 to 9.0 $10,303 $8,092 per unit Residential 9.1 to 9.5 $10,024 $7,873 per unit Residential 9.6 to 10.0 $9,745 $7,654 per unit Residential 10.1 to 10.5 $9,466 $7,435 per unit Residential 10.6 to 11.0 $9,192 $7,219 per unit Residential 11.1 to 11.5 $9,081 $7,132 per unit Residential 11.6 to 12.0 $8,970 $7,045 per unit Residential 12.1 to 12.5 $8,859 $6,958 per unit Residential 12.6 to 13.0 $8,748 $6,871 per unit Residential 13.1 to 13.5 $8,637 $6,784 per unit Residential 13.6 to 14.0 $8,526 $6,697 per unit Residential 14.1 to 14.5 $8,415 $6,610 per unit Residential 14.6 to 15.0 $8,304 $6,523 per unit Residential 15.1 to 15.5 $8,193 $6,436 per unit Residential 15.6 to 16.0 $8,082 $6,349 per unit Residential 16.1 to 16.5 $7,971 $6,262 per unit Residential 16.6 to 17.0 $7,860 $6,175 per unit Residential 17.1 to 17.5 $7,749 $6,088 per unit Residential 17.6 to 18.0 $7,638 $6,001 per unit Residential 18.1 to 18.5 $7,527 $5,914 per unit Residential 18.6 to 19.0 $7,416 $5,827 per unit Residential 19.1 to 19.5 $7,305 $5,740 per unit Residential 19.6 to 20.0 $7,201 $5,655 per unit Commercial Retail $8.78 $6.90 per bldg sf
Professional Office $8.78 $6.90 per bldg sf
Industrial $2.36 $1.85 per bldg sf
Schools $18,384 $14,438 per gross acre
Public Facilities $4.77 $3.74 per bldg sf
FMFCD Basins Exempt Exempt per gross acre
Parks Exempt Exempt
Assisted Living $8.33 $6.55 per bldg sf
Table 4. PROPOSED MASTER DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE 25-26 Current Rate Proposed Rate
Water Major Facilities
233
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Existing Fees Proposed Fees Difference Existing Fees Proposed Fees Difference Existing Fees Proposed Fees Difference Existing Fees Proposed Fees Difference Existing Fees Proposed Fees Difference Total $9,295,845 $8,683,110 ($612,735) $12,835,623 $12,172,970 ($662,653) $13,299,164 $12,571,104 ($728,060) $22,963,560 $21,900,957 ($1,062,604) $24,638,483 $23,532,803 ($1,105,680) Per Unit $58,099 $54,269 ($3,830) $49,368 $46,819 ($2,549) $44,331 $41,904 ($2,427) $39,592 $37,760 ($1,832) $39,739 $37,956 ($1,783) % Change -6.6% -5.2% -5.5% -4.6% -4.5%
Total $7,461,537 $6,848,802 ($612,735) $9,855,136 $9,192,483 ($662,653) $11,235,567 $10,507,508 ($728,060) $18,973,940 $17,911,337 ($1,062,604) $20,373,717 $19,268,037 ($1,105,680) Per Unit $46,635 $42,805 ($3,830) $37,904 $35,356 ($2,549) $37,452 $35,025 ($2,427) $32,714 $30,882 ($1,832) $32,861 $31,077 ($1,783) % Change -8.2% -6.7% -6.5% -5.6% -5.4%
Total $7,028,781 $6,416,046 ($612,735) $9,381,476 $8,718,823 ($662,653) $10,794,874 $10,066,815 ($728,060) $18,464,756 $17,402,152 ($1,062,604) $19,854,748 $18,749,068 ($1,105,680) Per Unit $43,930 $40,100 ($3,830) $36,083 $33,534 ($2,549) $35,983 $33,556 ($2,427) $31,836 $30,004 ($1,832) $32,024 $30,240 ($1,783) % Change -8.7% -7.1% -6.7% -5.8% -5.6%
Total $9,246,962 $8,634,227 ($612,735) $12,767,049 $12,104,397 ($662,653) $13,246,160 $12,518,101 ($728,060) $22,877,306 $21,814,702 ($1,062,604) $24,547,478 $23,441,798 ($1,105,680) Per Unit $57,794 $53,964 ($3,830) $49,104 $46,555 ($2,549) $44,154 $41,727 ($2,427) $39,444 $37,612 ($1,832) $39,593 $37,809 ($1,783) % Change -6.6% -5.2% -5.5% -4.6% -4.5%
Total $8,335,492 $7,722,757 ($612,735) $11,290,833 $10,628,181 ($662,653) $12,221,863 $11,493,803 ($728,060) $20,904,349 $19,841,745 ($1,062,604) $22,438,999 $21,333,319 ($1,105,680) Per Unit $52,097 $48,267 ($3,830) $43,426 $40,878 ($2,549) $40,740 $38,313 ($2,427) $36,042 $34,210 ($1,832) $36,192 $34,409 ($1,783) % Change -7.4% -5.9% -6.0% -5.1% -4.9%
Note: Water Supply Fee (Base Rate) will increase the development cost by $191,000.00 for Areas 1 through 5, as well as for all 40 acre residential developments.
Area 1
.
Area 3
Area 4
Area 2
Table 5. Single-Family Fee Calculation Scenarios
2025-2026 Proposed Fee rates
Area 5
15.5 DU/AC (SFR) - 40 acre development 4 DU/AC (SFR) - 40 acre development 6.5 DU/AC (SFR) - 40 acre development 7.5 DU/AC (SFR) - 40 acre development 14.5 DU/AC (SFR) - 40 acre development 234
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Existing Fees Proposed
Fees Difference Existing Fees Proposed
Fees Difference Existing Fees Proposed
Fees Difference Existing Fees Proposed
Fees Difference
Total $12,666,108 $11,938,049 ($728,060) $21,739,653 $20,677,050 ($1,062,604) $23,330,169 $22,224,489 ($1,105,680) $28,850,517 $27,595,165 ($1,255,352) Per Unit $42,220 $39,794 ($2,427) $37,482 $35,650 ($1,832) $37,629 $35,846 ($1,783) $36,063 $34,494 ($1,569) % Change -5.7% -4.9% -4.7% -4.4%
Total $10,602,512 $9,874,452 ($728,060) $17,750,033 $16,687,430 ($1,062,604) $19,065,403 $17,959,722 ($1,105,680) $23,347,593 $22,092,241 ($1,255,352) Per Unit $35,342 $32,915 ($2,427) $30,604 $28,771 ($1,832) $30,751 $28,967 ($1,783) $29,184 $27,615 ($1,569) % Change -6.9% -6.0% -5.8% -5.4%
Total $10,161,819 $9,433,759 ($728,060) $17,240,848 $16,178,245 ($1,062,604) $18,546,433 $17,440,753 ($1,105,680) $22,784,593 $21,529,241 ($1,255,352) Per Unit $33,873 $31,446 ($2,427) $29,726 $27,894 ($1,832) $29,914 $28,130 ($1,783) $28,481 $26,912 ($1,569) % Change -7.2% -6.2% -6.0% -5.5%
Total $12,613,105 $11,885,045 ($728,060) $21,653,398 $20,590,795 ($1,062,604) $23,239,164 $22,133,484 ($1,105,680) $28,738,136 $27,482,784 ($1,255,352) Per Unit $42,044 $39,617 ($2,427) $37,333 $35,501 ($1,832) $37,483 $35,699 ($1,783) $35,923 $34,353 ($1,569) % Change -5.8% -4.9% -4.8% -4.4%
Total $11,588,807 $10,860,748 ($728,060) $19,680,441 $18,617,838 ($1,062,604) $21,130,684 $20,025,004 ($1,105,680) $26,019,804 $24,764,452 ($1,255,352) Per Unit $38,629 $36,202 ($2,427) $33,932 $32,100 ($1,832) $34,082 $32,298 ($1,783) $32,525 $30,956 ($1,569) % Change -6.3% -5.4% -5.2% -4.8%
Note: Water Supply Fee (Base Rate) will increase the development cost by $191,000.00 for Areas 1 through 5, as well as for all 40 acre residential developments.
Area 5
Area 4
Area 1
Area 2
Area 3
Table 6. Multi-Family Fee Calculation Scenarios
7.5 DU/AC (MFR) - 40 acre development 14.5 DU/AC (MFR) - 40 acre development 15.5 DU/AC (MFR) - 40 acre development 20 DU/AC (MFR) - 40 acre development 2025-2026 Proposed Fee rates
235
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Existing
Fees
Proposed
Fees Difference Existing
Fees
Proposed
Fees Difference Existing
Fees
Proposed
Fees Difference
Total $362,560 $345,913 ($16,646) $155,980 $149,268 ($6,712) $271,759 $255,113 ($16,646) % Change -4.6% -4.3% -6.1%
Total $204,948 $188,301 ($16,646) $126,998 $120,286 ($6,712) $199,877 $183,231 ($16,646) % Change -8.1% -5.3% -8.3%
Total $190,168 $173,521 ($16,646) $116,781 $110,069 ($6,712) $188,130 $171,484 ($16,646) % Change -8.8% -5.7% -8.8%
Total $359,446 $342,800 ($16,646) $155,082 $148,369 ($6,712) $270,096 $253,449 ($16,646) % Change -4.6% -4.3% -6.2%
Total $281,628 $264,982 ($16,646) $140,586 $133,874 ($6,712) $234,502 $217,855 ($16,646) % Change -5.9% -4.8% -7.1%
Note: Water Supply Fee (Base Rate) will increase the development cost by $4,780.00 per Acre for Areas 1 through 5.
Area 5
Office (1 acre site)
Area 2
Area 4
Area 3
(Core)
2025-2026 Proposed Fee rates
Table 7. Non-Residential Fee Calculation Scenarios
Area 1
Retail (1 acre site) Industrial (1 acre site)
236
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
Findings in Support of the Continuation of City Policies to Impose Residential Development Impact Fees on a Per Unit or Per Acreage Basis
AB602 was signed by California Governor Gavin Newsom in September 2021. It became part of the State’s Government Code and it includes several requirements for agencies which are intended to:
1. Promote new Statewide standards for Development Impact Fee Nexus Studies.
2. Provide improved transparency by the publishing of information on an agency’s website.
3. Support smaller and multi-family developments.
A portion of AB602 specific to Development Impact Fees states to following:
Government Code, Section 66016.5(a)(5)
(A) 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 of the development. A local agency that imposes a fee proportionately to the square footage of the proposed units of 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. (B) A nexus study is not required to comply with subparagraph (A) if the local agency makes a finding that includes all of the following:
(i) An explanation as to why square footage is not appropriate metric to calculate fees imposed on housing development project.
(ii) An explanation that an alternative basis of calculating the fee bears a reasonable relationship between the fee charged and the burden posed by the development. (iii) That other policies in the fee structure support smaller developments, or otherwise ensure that smaller developments are not charged disproportionate fees.
Stated another way , the City must either calculate the Development Impact Fees imposed on housing developments proportional to the square footage of the proposed units or make specific findings as to why they are based on another metric.
There is no requirement for the City to include a financial element within its General Plan. Therefore, a well-defined Development Impact Fee program and associated nexus studies function as the de -facto financial plan in support of the City’s General Plan. They identify the anticipated service demands by type of infrastructure and establish a fair, reasonable method to finance the required capital projects and acquisitions to accommodate the anticipated service demands from development.
The City of Clovis has expressed a desire to continue imposing Development Impact Fees on housing development projects in their current manner, which is not based on the square footage of the proposed units. The unit of assessment is currently a per unit basis and in some instances a per acreage basis. The current fee methodology and unit of assessment provides greater accuracy for planning than a square footage basis.
The requirement of AB602 to impose Development Impact Fees on based on the dwelling unit size assumes that anticipated service demands are lower for small er dwelling units and higher for larger dwelling units. The City’s current methodology is supported by years of data and peer reviews, which contrasts with the unsubstantiated assumption of AB602.
Attachment 3
237
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
The City’s development code describes a maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) that limits the building sizes for non-residential development projects, but there is not a size limitation placed upon residential projects.
There are height restrictions and setback restrictions from the property lines that vary somewhat between density ranges, but otherwise the square footage of the dwelling unit is largel y based upon what the developer has determined is marketable. Given this flexibility, a project will frequently see a wide range of dwelling sizes within each density range.
The Mitigation Fee Act (Government Code, Sections 66000 - 66024) requires certain findings by agencies that establish, increase, or impose fees as a condition of approval of a development project. These requirements are:
1. Identify the purpose of the fee.
2. Identify the use to which the fee is to be put (identify the public facilities to be constructed).
3. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship (nexus) between the fee’s and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
4. Determine how there is a reasonable relationship (nexus) between the need for the public facility and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed.
Items 1 and 2 are clearly identified in the City’s Municipal Code. Items 3 and 4 are met through multiple actions taken by the City Council such as:
1. The General Plan
2. Specific Plans
3. Master Plans for Sewer, Water, Recycled Water, etc.
The method by which fee rates are established which evaluates the cost of improvements identified in the various adopted plans and distributes that cost among the developable properties within the respective service areas in rough proportion to their impact on, or need for, the public facilities.
The City’s Development Impact Fee program has years of empirical data to define the average impacts of residential developments to services based on land uses and density; this proof is in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act . The data produces average impacts on a basis of acreage or dwelling unit, but the data does not provide a correlation to the square footage of the dwelling units. The collection of fees for development-based demands is a one-time fee that represents the service needs of that dwelling unit as long as the structure exists. The assumption that smaller units generate less service demand than larger units does not consider the reality that any dwelling may have different occupants and therefore different demands over its 50-year life, nor does the assumption consider the fact that a duplicate dwelling may be home to a different number of residents in each of its instances. An example of this is that the number of occupants may change as the dwelling changes owners or the needs of the owner and their family changes. Another example would be that identical dwellings may house a single occupant or multiple occupants.
Description of City Development Impact Fee categories
• Sewer and Water - The City has data related to measured sewage flow generation and water usage specific to land uses and density ranges of residential developments. The Master Plans for pipe sizes and treatment capacity are based upon the average service demands of existing land, which in turn is used to predict future demands for residential and non -residential development. The Master Plans identify the need for additional infrastructure based upon the number of residential dwelling units and the financing should be on the same basis, not based on dwelling size. 238
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
• Non-Potable Water - The costs of the City system are prorated on an acreage basis, allowing for a lower cost per unit as density increases. The non-potable water is used for irrigation purposes in place of potable water which helps the City reduce its dependence on ground water. The benefit is more directly connected to a dwelling unit than its size. The current method provides a strong nexus in compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act while also meeting the intent of AB602 to impose lower fees on smaller dwellings that are typical of higher density developments. • Major Streets - ITE provides a nationally accepted methodology for estimating trips generated from residential land uses. The estimate of trips is not based on dwelling size as that data does not exist in the ITE database. The major street fees are prorated based on impact (trip generation) per unit and is therefore best estimated according to land use instead of dwelling size. • Undergrounding of Overhead Utilities – Similar to non-potable water, the costs are prorated on an acreage basis and allow for a lower cost per unit as density increases. The current method meets the intent of AB602 to impose lower fe es on smaller dwellings that are typical of higher density developments.
• Community Sanitation – Residential service is once a week per dwelling unit with no variation for dwelling size. The current method is unit based which is a more direct connection to the service provided.
• Parks – The need for additional open park space is identified in the Quimby Act as one (1) acre per 1000 residents. The Census data provides an average population per dwelling unit but does not connect population to dwelling size. Therefore, an average fee based on dwelling units is more empirical and accurate than basing the fee on dwelling sizes. • Fire and Police – There is no data to support an assumption that smaller dwelling units generate fewer calls for service than larger dwelling units. There is, however, generally accepted national practice correlating the number of stations to population. Using Census data for average population per dwelling unit provides the nexus to base the fees on dwelling units more accurately than basing the fee on dwelling sizes.
The City’s current Development Impact Fee program neither favors nor penalizes one lan d use over another. The fees are based upon the fair share impact of each development and their land use. The type of dwelling unit for residential, whether it is single -family or multi -family, is the main factor that changes the demand for services. T he City’s data does not indicate that the main factor for service demand is dwelling size.
The City is mindful of the State’s intentions to encourage residential construction of higher densities and they are assuming higher density development creates a lower demand due to their generally smaller sized dwelling units. However, given a lack of empirical data to support this, the City feels obligated to keep their current basis of imposing Development Impact Fees instead of charging based on dwelling sizes.
The City of Clovis was identified as the 12th fastest growing city in the State in 2022 indicating that the current level of fees imposed is not a deterrent to development. The increases in property values and rents are an indicator of a thoughtful plan for City growth and a well-developed collection of development impact fees for funding the required services.
In conclusion, the current method in which Development Impact Fees are imposed either on a per unit basis or a per acreage basis has proven to be a fair means for housing developments. To charge based on a square footage basis would be unsupported by empirical data and less compliant with the Mitigation Fee Act.
239
AGENDA ITEM NO. 14.
TO: Mayor and City Council
FROM: Finance Department
DATE: May 12, 2025
SUBJECT: Consider Actions related to Annexation of Territory (Annexation #7 5, MFRDR 2023-1 – Northeast Corner Alluvial/Sunnyside, SPR 2021 -001 – Northeast Corner Shaw/DeWolf ) to the City of Clovis Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 (Police and Fire Services).
a. Consider Approval - Res. 2 5-___, A Resolution annexing territory (Annexation #7 5) ( MFRDR 2023 -1 – Northeast Corner
Alluvial/Sunnyside, SPR 2021-001 – Northeast Corner Shaw/DeWolf) to the City of Clovis Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 (Police and Fire Services) and calling a special landowner election to annex territory (Annexation #75) to City of Clovis Community Facilities District No. 2004- 1 (Police and Fire Services).
b. Consider Approval - Res. 25-___, A Resolution of the City of Clovis declaring the results of a special landowner election and directing recording of the Notice of Special Tax Lien for City of Clovis Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 (Police and Fire Services).
Staff: Jay Schengel, Finance Director
Recommendation: Approve
ATTACHMENTS: 1. Resolution of Qualified Electors
2. Resolution Declaring Results
RECOMMENDATION
That the Council hold a public hearing and approve actions related to the Annexation of Territory (Annexation #75) to Community Facilities District No. 2004-1.
Consider Approval – Res. 25-___, A Resolution of annexation of territory (Annexation #75) to the Community Facilities District (City of Clovis Community Facilities District No. 2004-1) and to authorize the levy of Special Taxes therein and submitting Levy of Special Taxes to Qualified Electors.
240
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
Call for Special Election and have Clerk announce the vote.
Consider Approval – Res. 25-___, A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Clovis Declaring the Results of the Special Annexation Election, Determining Validity of Prior Proceedings and Directing Recording of the Notice of Special Tax Lien (City of Clovis Community Facilities District No. 2004-1) (Police and Fire Services).
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Since the condition to establish a CFD was imposed on the developments being processed by the City, developments proceeding after March 8, 2004, must petition to be annexed to the existing CFD. Several property owners have submitted petitions to annex territory to the Community Facilities District 2004-1 and to include their property within the District as provided by the conditions of approval of the development entitlements.
To initiate the process for annexation of territory to a CFD, the Council approved a Resolution of Intention-Annexation #75 (ROI) to annex territory to the CFD on April 7, 2025. The ROI set a public hearing for May 12, 2025. The action today finalizes the annexation to the CFD.
BACKGROUND
Since the condition to establish a CFD was imposed on the developments being processed by the City, developments proceeding after March 8, 200 4, must petition to be annexed to the existing CFD. Several property owners have submitted petitions to annex territory to the Community Facilities District 2004-1 and to include their property within the District as provided by the conditions of approval of the development entitlements.
To initiate the process for annexation of territory to a CFD, the Council approved a Resolution of Intention-Annexation #75 (ROI) to annex territory to the CFD. The ROI set a public hearing for May 12, 2025. The Rate and Method of Apportionment (RMA) referred to in the ROI is the same as adopted by the Council with the Resolution of Formation adopted March 8, 2004. RMA provides, among other things, definitions, identifies what properties will be taxed, and the maximum special tax.
The conditions as provided in the Rate and Method of Apportionment will apply to territory annexed to the Community Facilities Districts to provide funding for public safety operations in new growth areas. The major conditions include:
1. The maximum annual tax will be $2 93.55 for single family residential and $2 53.46 for multi-family residential.
2. The maximum tax will be increased by the Escalator Factor, which is the greater of the change in CPI or percentage change in population.
3. There will be a review not later than five years of inception of the CFD.
4. The annual tax will not apply to commercially zoned property.
5. The tax will apply only to that property for which a building permit is issued after January 1, 2004.
6. The costs of salary and benef it increases funded by the CFD will be limited to the Escalator Factor.
241
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
The purpose of the hearing is to take public comment on the annexation of territory to the CFD and to accept protests from any interested person within the proposed boundaries. If no property owner protests are received, the Council may take the initial actions to annex the territory to the CFD by approving a resolution on the annexation to the CFD and calling a special property owner election. Once the election is called, the City Cl erk tabulates the ballots. If the property owners of two -thirds (2/3) of the property within the proposed boundaries vote in favor of the CFD, then the Council can take action to direct the recording of Notice of Special Tax Lien. A unanimous vote is required to have the election the same night as approval of the resolution of annexation. The recording of the Tax Lien is contingent upon the property being annexed to the City. The property included within the CFD is being processed for annexation to the City and the Local Agency Formation Commission has approved the annexations.
After the annexation is complete and the Notice of Tax Lien has been recorded, any final maps within the CFD may be recorded and construction permits for homes can be issued. One of the conditions of the CFD is that the tax will only be collected on those properties where a building permit for a residence has been issued.
FISCAL IMPACT
If approved, residential units built within the boundaries of the CFD will be assessed annual ly according to the conditions of the CFD formation and those assessments will be utilized to fund police and fire services.
REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION
All requirements for the annexation of territory to the CFD have been completed and the Council may take action to annex territory to the CFD.
ACTIONS FOLLOWING APPROVAL
After approval of the resolution directing the recordation of the Notice of Tax Lien, the lien will be recorded.
CONFLICT OF INTEREST
None.
Prepared by: Steve Nourian, Senior Accounting Systems Technician
Reviewed by: City Manager AH
242
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION 25-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS APPROVING
ANNEXATION OF TERRITORY TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND TO
AUTHORIZE THE LEVY OF SPECIAL TAXES THEREIN AND SUBMITTING LEVY OF
SPECIAL TAXES TO QUALIFIED ELECTORS
CITY OF CLOVIS
Community Services District No. 2004-1
(Police and Fire Services)
Annexation No. 75
WHEREAS, this Council, on April 7, 2025, adopted A Resolution of Intention to Annex Territory to the Community Services District and to Authorize the Levy of Special Taxes Therein (the “Resolution of Intention”) stating its intention to annex the territory to the City’s Community Services District 2004-1 (the “District”), pursuant to Mello Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, Sections 53311 and following of the California Government Code (the “Act”); and
WHEREAS, a copy of the Resolution of Intention, incorporating a description and map (Attachment A) of the proposed boundaries of the territory to be annexed to the District and stating the services to be provided and the rate and method of apportionment of the special tax to be levied within the District to pay for the services for the District, is on file with the Clerk of the Council and the provisions thereof are fully incorporated herein by this reference as if fully set forth herein; and
WHEREAS, on the date hereof, this Council held a noticed public hearing as required by the Act and the Resolution of Intention relative to the pro posed annexation of territory to the District; and
WHEREAS, at such hearing all interested persons desiring to be heard on all matters pertaining to the annexation of territory to the District and the levy of said special taxes within the area proposed to be annexed were heard and a full and fair hearing was held; and
WHEREAS, prior to the time fixed for said hearing, written protests had not been filed against the proposed annexation of territory to the District by (i) 50% or more of the registered voters, or six registered voters, whichever is more, residing in the existing District, or (ii) 50% or more of the registered voters, or six registered voters, whichever is more, residing in the territory proposed to be annexed to the District, or (iii) ow ners of one-half or more of the area of land in the territory proposed to be annexed to the District; and
WHEREAS, Annexation Map No. 75 to the District, has been filed with the City Clerk, which map shows the territory to be annexed in these proceedings, and a copy thereof is on file with the City Clerk.
243
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of Clovis as follows:
1. All prior proceedings taken by this Council with respect to the District and the proposed annexation of territory thereto have been duly considered and are hereby determined to be valid and in conformity with the Act, and the District has been validly established pursuant to the Act.
2. The description and map of the boundaries of the territory to be annexed to District, as described in said Annexation Map No. 75 to the District on file with the Clerk are hereby finally approved, are incorporated herein by reference, and shall be included within the boundaries of the District, and said territory is hereby ordered annexed to the District, subject to voter approval of the levy of the special taxes therein as hereinafter provided.
3. The provisions of the Resolution of Intention and Resolution No. 25- adopted by this Council for the District on April 7, 2025, each as heretofore adopted by this Council are by this reference incorporated herein, as if fully set forth herein.
4. Pursuant to the provisions of the Act, the proposition of the levy of the special tax within the territory to be annexed to the District shall be submitted to the voters of the area to be annexed to the District at an election called therefore as hereinafter provided.
5. This Council hereby finds that fewer than 12 persons have been registered to vote within the territory proposed to be annexed to the Distr ict for each of the 90 days preceding the close of the hearing heretofore conducted and concluded by this Council for the purposes of these annexation proceedings. Accordingly, and pursuant to the Act, this Council finds that for purposes of these proceed ings the qualified electors are the landowners within the territory proposed to be annexed to the District and that the vote shall be by said landowners, each having one vote for each acre or portion thereof such landowner owns in the territory proposed to be annexed to the District.
6. Pursuant to the Act, the election shall be conducted by mail ballot under Section 4000 of the California Elections Code. This Council hereby determines that paragraphs (a), (b), (c)(1), and (c)(3) of said Section 4000 are applicable to this election.
7. The Council hereby calls a special election to consider the measure described in the ballot referred to below, which election shall be held on May 12, 2025, in the regular meeting place of this Council, City Council Chamber s, City Hall, 1033 5 th Street, Clovis, California. This Council hereby further finds that the provision of the Act requiring a minimum of 90 days to elapse before said election is for the protection of voters and that the voters have waived such requiremen t and the date for the election herein specified is established accordingly.
8. The City Clerk is hereby appointed as the election official to conduct the election and shall cause to be provided to each landowner in the territory to be annexed to the District. The City Clerk shall accept the ballots of the qualified electors received prior to 5:00 o’clock p.m. on May 12, 2025, whether received by mail or by personal delivery.
* * * * *
244
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on May 12, 2025, by the following vote, to wit.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DATED: May 12, 2025
______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk
245
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
t
I r---------�
,-1
_J__ __J ���
�
� =�==:_LL ����I
o�[rrJ-RRi
■W � 11 □ 1
SR 168
,-
VI I[)� i I� Il_______,_J----
fi_J
0 a::
<(
z
0 w ...J
N
'vJ
s
LEGEND
PARCEL
- ANNEXATION BOUNDARY
@ APN 563-142-35
@ APN 554-053-41
BY: DEPUTY COUNTY RECORDER
FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK THIS 7th DAY OF
APRIL 2025. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THE
WITHIN MAP SHOWING PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF
ANNEXATION NO. 75 TO COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO.
2004-1 (POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES), CITY OF CLOVIS,
COUNTY OF FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, WAS APPROVED
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS AT A
REGULAR MEETING THEREOF, HELD ON THE .2!!L DAY OF
__ APRIL ___ , 2025, BY ITS RESOLUTION NO. 1:§.-__ .
BRIANA PARRA
CITY CLERK
CITY OF CLOVIS
FILED THIS ____ DAY OF ______ _ 2025,
AT THE HOUR OF ____ O'CLOCK�M. IN THE
BOOK _____ PAGE ____ OF MAPS OF
ASSESSMENT AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS AND AS
INSTRUMENT NO. ___________ IN THE
OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER IN THE COUNTY OF
FRESNO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA.
PAUL A. DICTOS, C.P.A.
COUNTY ASSESSOR-RECORDER
COUNTY OF FRESNO
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
REFERENCE IS MADE TO THAT BOUNDARY MAP OF
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO 2004-1 (POLICE AND
FIRE SERVICES) OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS RECORDED WITH THE
FRESNO COUNTY RECORDER'S OFFICE ON FEBRUARY 19,
2004, IN BOOK 40 OF MAPS OF ASSESSMENT AND
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICTS, PAGE 57.
THE LINES AND DIMENSIONS OF EACH LOT OR PARCEL
SHOWN ON THIS DIAGRAM SHALL BE THOSE LINES AND
DIMENSIONS AS SHOWN ON THE FRESNO COUNTY ASSESSORS
MAPS FOR THOSE PARCELS LISTED.
THE FRESNO COUNTY ASSESSORS MAPS SHALL GOVERN FOR
ALL DETAILS CONCERNING THE LINES AND DIMENSIONS OF
SUCH LOTS OF PARCELS.
ANNEXATION MAP NO. 75
COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-1
250'
(POLICE AND FIRE SERVICES)
CITY OF CLOVIS
COUNTY OF FRESNO
STA TE OF CALIFORNIA
Attachment A
246
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION 25-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CLOVIS DECLARING
RESULTS OF SPECIAL ANNEXATION ELECTION, DETERMINING VALIDITY OF
PRIOR PROCEEDINGS, AND DIRECTING RECORDING OF AMENDED NOTICE OF
SPECIAL TAX LIEN
CITY OF CLOVIS
Community Facilities District No. 2004-1
(Police and Fire Services)
Annexation No. 75
WHEREAS, in proceedings heretofore conducted by the Council pursuant to the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, as amended (the “Act”), this Council has heretofore adopt ed a resolution calling a special election of the qualified landowner electors in the territory of land proposed to be annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2004-1 (Police and Fire Services) (the “CFD”); and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the terms of the re solution which is hereby incorporated herein by this reference, the special election has been held and the City Clerk has filed a Canvass of Votes Cast in Special Election, a copy of which is attached hereto as Attachment A; and
WHEREAS, this Council has reviewed the Canvass and hereby approves it.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City of Clovis as follows:
1. The issue presented at the special election was the levy of a special tax within the territory annexed to the CFD, to be levied in accordance with the formula heretofore approved by this Council as described in Resolution No. 25- , a Resolution of Annexation of Territory to Community Facilities District, authorizing the Levy of a Special Tax and Submitting Levy of Tax to Qualified Electors, adopted May 12, 2025.
2. Pursuant to the Canvass on file with the City Clerk, the issue presented at the special election was approved by the landowners of the territory annexed to the CFD by more than two-thirds (2/3) of the landowners voting at the special election.
3. Pursuant to the voter approval, said annexed territory to the CFD is hereby declared to be fully an nexed to and part of the CFD and this Council may levy special taxes therein as heretofore provided in these proceedings.
4. It is hereby found that all prior proceedings and actions taken by this Council pursuant to the CFD and the territory annexed ther eto were valid and in conformity with the Act.
247
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
Within 15 days of the date hereof, the City Clerk shall execute and cause to be recorded in the office of the County Recorder of the County of Fresno, an amendment to the Notice of Special Tax Lien as required by Section 3117.5 of the California Streets and Highways Code.
* * * * *
The foregoing resolution was introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Clovis held on May 12, 2025, by the following vote, to wit.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
DATED: May 12, 2025
______________________________ ______________________________ Mayor City Clerk
248
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CLOVIS
Community Facilities District No. 2004-1
(Police and Fire Services)
Annexation No. 75
CANVASS AND STATEMENT OF RESULT OF ELECTION
I hereby certify that on this date, I canvassed the returns of the election held on this date, in the territory annexed to Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 (Police and Fire Services) of the City of Clovis which election is designated as the Special Tax Annexation Election, and the total number of ballots cast in the territory to be annexed and the total number of votes cast for and against the measure are as follows and the totals as shown for and against the measure are full, true and correct:
Qualified
Landowner
Votes
Votes
Cast
YES NO
City of Clovis
Community Facilities District No. 2004-1
(Police and Fire Services), Annexation No. 75
Special Tax Annexation Election,
May 12, 2025.
BALLOT MEASURE: Shall the City of Clovis, by and for its Community Facilities District No. 2004 -1 (Police and Fire Services) (the “CFD”), be authorized to levy special taxes within the territory annexed to the CFD pursuant to and as described in Resolution No. 25-___ of the City of Clovis, adopted by its Council on May 12, 2025?
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I HAVE HEREUNTO SET MY HAND this ____ day of 2025.
CITY OF CLOVIS
By:
City Clerk
249
AGENDA ITEM NO. 15.