Duarte City Council
January 27, 2026

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 153 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes Hazardous Materials
HZMT-1 Coordinate with the Los
Angeles County Department of
Environmental Health Services,
on enforcement of State and local
statutes and regulations
pertaining to hazardous
materials/waste storage, use, and
disposal.

Public Safety
Department;
Community
Development
Department: Public
Works Division;
LACoFD; LASD
OngoingXX GF GF
YLLL Deleted
HZMT-2 Support staff training and
education requirements regarding
emergency response procedures
associated with transportation-
based hazardous materials
releases.

Public Safety
Department;
Community
Development
Department: Public
Works Division;
LACoFD; LASD
OngoingXXX GF GF
YLHL Deleted
Land Subsidence
LS-1 Evaluate the stability of the
roadways surrounding the Rancho
Duarte Golf Course to ensure that
they meet current engineering
standards and are constructed
Community
Development
Department: Public
Works Division;
LACoFD; LASD
OngoingXX GR, GF GR
YLMM Deleted

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 154 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes with an adequate factor of safety
to provide emergency
access/evacuation during a
disaster event.

Landslide
LM-1 Continue to require that
geologic/engineering reports be
prepared for any proposed
construction near landslide
subsidence area and require
mitigation of landslide hazards
before issuing any building or
grading permits, in accordance
with the seismic guidelines
provided in the City’s Seismic
Hazards Report (July 2013).

Community
Development
Department:

Building and
Safety, Public
Works Divisions
OngoingXXXX GF GF
YMML Deleted
Dam Failure Mitigation Action
Items
DAM-1 Prepare a Dam Failure
evacuation plan that can be
incorporated into the City’s
Emergency Operations Plan.

Public Safety
Department;
LACoFD
1 year P, AXX HMGP, GF HMGP, GFLML Revised

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies
- 155 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program –CIP, HMGP=Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC –Municipal Code
Buildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised,
Deleted, New, and Notes
DAM-2 Acquire Dam Inundation
Maps from Cal OES.

Public Safety
Department 1 year P, A X X X X GF GF H H L Revised
Flood Mitigation Action Items
FLD-1 Continually monitor and
review FEMA’s National Flood
Insurance Program (NFIP)
requirements to ensure that Title

16.40, Floodplain Management
Regulations, of the City’s
Municipal Code is in compliance.

Participate in the FEMA NFIP
Community Rating System (CRS).

Community
Development
Department: Public
Works Division
Ongoing – as
new
standards
become
available
P, A X X X GF GF L M L Revised
FLD-2 Work in coordination with
the Los Angeles County Flood
Control District to develop and
disseminate public education
materials on flood protection and
mitigation by working
collaboratively with community
groups, non-governmental
organizations and the local media.

Community
Development
Department
Annual P, A X X X GF GF Y M L L Revised

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 156 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes FLD-3 Review and update Title

16.40, Floodplain Management
Regulations, of the City’s
Municipal Code as it relates to
storm/flooding hazards, consistent
with the risks identified in this
LHMP.

Community
Development
Department
1-5 years P, AXXX GR, GF GP
YLML Revised
FLD-4 Utilize land acquisition in
situations where land with
structures could be purchased by
and titled in the name of the City.

The City would then remove
structures and enforce permanent
restrictions on development.

Community
Development
Department: Public
Works Division
1-3 years P, AXX GR GR
YHLH New
FLD-5 Review and update Zoning
Ordinance to ensure utilization of
methods that mitigate against
flooding including: 1) adopting
ordinances that limit development
in the floodplain; 2) limiting the
density of developments in the
floodplain; and 3) requiring that
Community
Development
Department
5 years P, AXX GR GR
YMMM New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 157 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes floodplains be maintained as open
space.

FLD-6 Conduct review of existing
storm drain system. Flood
mitigation can involve installing,
re-routing, or increasing the
capacity of a storm drainage
system that may involve detention
and retention ponds, drainage
easements, or creeks and
streams. It can include separation
of storm and sanitary sewerage
systems as well as higher
engineering standards for drain
and sewer capacity.

Community
Development
Department
5 years P, AXX GR GR
YMLM New
FLD-7 Consider drainage
easements for planned and
regulated public use of privately-
owned land for temporary water
retention and drainage.

Community
Development
Department
5 years P, AXX GR GR
YMLM New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 158 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes FLD-8 Properly designed and
maintained roads are needed to
get people and goods from place
to place. In addition to planning
for traffic control during floods,
there are various construction and
placement factors to consider
when building roads. To maintain
dry access, roads should be
elevated above the base flood
elevation. However, if a road
creates a barrier it can cause
water to pond. Where ponding is
problematic, drainage and flow
may be addressed by making
changes to culvert size and
placement. In situations where
flood waters tend to wash roads
out, construction, reconstruction,
or repair can include not only
attention to drainage but also
stabilization or armoring of
Community
Development
Department
5 years P, AXX GR GR
YMMM New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 159 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes vulnerable shoulders or
embankments.

FLD-9 Structural flood control
measures (e.g., dams, floodwalls)
should be examined as means to
channel water away from people
and property. Structural measures
may also increase drainage or
absorption capacities (e.g.,
detention and retention basins,
relief drains, spillways, drain
widening/dredging or rerouting,
logjam and debris removal, extra
culverts, bridge modification, dike
setbacks, flood gates and pumps,
or channel redirection). However,
structural measures may cause
an increase in the base flood
elevation. History has shown that
structures that channel water may
create a false sense of security
and result in greater damage to
Community
Development
Department
10 years P, AXX GR GR
YMLL New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 160 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes nearby properties if the structures
fail.

FLD-10 Consider back-up
generators for pumping and lift
stations in sanitary sewer
systems, along with other
measures (e.g., alarms, meters,
remote controls, and switchgear
upgrades).

Community
Development
Department
5 years P, A, EXX GR GR
YHLM New
FLD-11 Dry well installation plan
or storm water drain extension of
areas considered at risk due to
urban flooding: 1) Huntington
Drive – north side, with Buena
Vista; 2) Encanto Parkway- north
of Huntington; 3) Encanto
Parkway near Fish Canyon; 4)
Central Avenue – northside, east
of Santo Domingo; 5) Buena Vista
Street – east side, south of Galen
Street; 6) Vineyard Avenue south
of Royal Oaks.

Community
Development
Department / Public
Works
5 years P, A, EXXX GR, GF GR, GF
YMMM New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 161 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes FLD-12 Update Title 16.40,
Floodplain Management
Regulations, of the City’s
Municipal Code as it relates to
protocols to implement the
substantial improvement and
substantial damage as required
of all NFIP participants.

Public Works 1 year R, A

XXXX GF GF
YHML New
Multi-Hazard Mitigation Action
Items
MH-1 Coordinate hazard
mitigation progress/efforts with the
Los Angeles County Office of
Emergency Management and
other agencies and cities within
Los Angeles County.

Public Safety
Department;
Community
Development
Department;
LACoFD; LASD;
City Manager’s
Office
Annual P, AXXX GF GF
YMLL Revised
MH-2 Continue to work with Los
Angeles 911 and other relevant
agencies to maintain a
coordinated and effective
Public Safety
Department;
Community
Development
Annual P, AXXX GF GF
YMML Revised

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies
- 162 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program –CIP, HMGP=Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC –Municipal Code
Buildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised,
Deleted, New, and Notes
emergency communication
system.

Department;
LACoFD; LASD
MH-3 Continue to update and
enhance mapping data and the
City’s GIS for all hazards.

Community
Development
Department
Annual P, A X X X GF GF Y M L L Revised
MH-4 Work with the appropriate
cellular phone service providers to
ensure there is always adequate
cellular services to critical facilities
within the city and that a
contingency plan is available to
provide cellular services to City
and Public Safety personnel
during emergencies.

Public Safety &
Community
Development
Departments
As needed P, A X X X GF GF Y M M L Revised
MH-5 Review and update the
city’s existing ordinances as they
relate to hazards and risks
identified in this LHMP.

Community
Development
Department
Ongoing – as
needed P, A X X X GF GF N L H M Revised
MH-6 Replace generator for EOC
and Civic Center Complex.

Parks & Recreation
Department and
Community
Development
Completed
3/24 P, A X X HMGP HMGP Y M H L Completed

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies
- 163 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program –CIP, HMGP=Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC –Municipal Code
Buildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised,
Deleted, New, and Notes
Department – Field
Services Division
MH-7 Update Emergency
Operations Plan.

Public Safety
Department
Within 5-year
planning
period

P, A X X X X
GF,
HMGP
GF,

HMGP N L M M
Revised,
EOP is in
the process
of being
updated
MH-8 Continue to encourage
community involvement in
disaster preparedness, including
CERT.

Public Safety
Department Annual X X X GF, HMGP GF, HMGP N M M M Revised MH-9 Emergency response
personnel need to be trained for
various contingencies and
response activities, such as
evacuation, traffic control, search
and rescue.

Public Safety
Department As needed X X X HMGP HMGP N H M H Revised
MH-10 Expand and intensify
precautionary measures in highrisk areas, including in disadvantaged communities, to
reduce loss from natural or manPublic Safety &
Community
Development
Departments
As needed
throughout
the five-year
HMP period

P, A X X GF, HMGP GF, GP,
HMGP N M H L New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 164 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes made disasters and investigate
ways of reducing the likelihood of
their occurrence. (Source: Safety
Element)
MH-11 Consider climate change
vulnerability and safety
implications during the review
process for all development
proposals, including those
involving City-owned facilities and
infrastructure. (Source: Safety
Element)
Community
Development
Department
As needed
throughout
the five-year
HMP period

P, AXX GF GF, GP
YMML New
MH-12 Coordinate with the Los
Angeles County Sheriff’s
Department, Los Angeles County
Fire Department, and neighboring
cities to ensure that adequate
services are ready and available
to serve the community in the
event of natural or man-made
disasters. (Source: Safety
Element)
Public Safety
Department Annual P, A

XXX GF GF
NMHL New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies
- 165 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program –CIP, HMGP=Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC –Municipal Code
Buildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised,
Deleted, New, and Notes
MH-13 Maintain hazard mitigation
plans, disaster preparedness and
emergency response plans, and
update plans at regular intervals
and when new information is
available. (Source: Safety
Element)
Community
Development &
Public Safety
Departments
As needed
throughout
the five-year
HMP period

P, A X X X GF, HMGP GP, GF,
HMGP N M H M New
MH-14 Establish designated
emergency response and
evacuation routes throughout the
City, for each climate hazard (e.g.,
wildfire, storm flooding, etc.),
prioritizing the most high-risk and
disadvantaged populations.
(Source: Safety Element)
Public Safety &
Community
Development
Departments;
LACoSD; LACoFD
Within 1-5
years
P, A X X X GF, HMGP GF, HMGP Y M M L New
MH-15 Update emergency and
disaster response measures to
account for increased heat days
with a focus on reducing health
risks for the highest-risk
individuals and disadvantaged
Public Safety
Departments;
LACoFD; LACoSD
Annual P, A X X X GF, HMGP GF, HMGP N M H L New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies
- 166 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program –CIP, HMGP=Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC –Municipal Code
Buildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised,
Deleted, New, and Notes
communities. (Source: Safety
Element)
MH-16 Ensure that adequate
provisions are made to supply
drinking water for an extended
period in the event of a major
disaster. (Source: Safety Element)
Public Safety
Department; City
Manager’s Office,
Cal-American
Water
Within 1-5
years
P, A X U, HMGP U, HMGP N M M M New
MH-17 Establish and support all
appropriate media for reaching all
segments of the community
(English-speaking and nonEnglish speaking) to educate
residents concerning
emergency preparedness and
safety, focusing on the most
vulnerable communities such as
those in the Very High Fire
Hazard Severity Zone. (Source:

Safety Element)
City Manager’s
Office
As needed
throughout
the five-year
HMP period
P, A X X GF GF N H H L New
MH-18 Present or support an ongoing series of community meetings or seminars, and a
Public Safety &
Community
Development
Annual P, A X X X GF, HGMP GF, HGMP N L M L New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 202
6 Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies - 167 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program–CIP, HMGP=Hazard Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC–Municipal CodeBuildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised, Deleted, New, and Notes community handbook on disaster
preparedness and procedures.

The program should be about
minimizing hazards in the home,
wildfire mitigation and disaster
planning, and developing disaster
preparedness and evacuation
plans. (Source: Safety Element)
Departments; City
Manager’s Office,
MH-19 Increase public awareness
of City emergency response
plans, evacuation routes, and
emergency shelters, with a focus
on populations at greatest risk
and disadvantaged communities.
(Source: Safety Element)
Public Safety &
Department; City
Manager’s Office,
5 Years P, AXXX GF GF
NLML New
MH-20 Maintain a citizens
notification system regarding
natural, man-made, or climate
change hazards that reaches all
populations in the community with
a focus on reaching
Public Safety &
Department; City
Manager’s Office,
Annual P, AXXX GF, HGMP GF, HGMP
NHHM New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies
- 168 -
Mitigation Action ItemLead DepartmentTimelineExpanding & Improving Capabilities: P-Planning & Regulatory, A-Administrative & Technical, F-Finance, E-Education & OutreachGoal: Protect Life and PropertyGoal: Increase Public AwarenessGoal: Protect Natural SystemsGoal: Strengthen Emergency ServicesFunding Source: GF-General Fund, Capital Improvement Program –CIP, HMGP=Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program, U-UtilitiesPlanning Mechanism: GP-General Plan, CIP, GF- General Fund, HMGP-Hazard Mitigation Grant Program MC –Municipal Code
Buildings & Infrastructure: Does the Action Item impact New and/or Existing Buildings and/or Infrastructure? Yes (Y), No (N)Priority: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighBenefit: L-Low, M-Medium, H-HighCost: L-Low, M-Medium, H-High2026 Comments and Status – Completed, Revised,
Deleted, New, and Notes
disadvantaged communities.
(Source: Safety Element)
MH-21 Incorporate information for
potential health threats due to
climate change hazards, such as
heat-illness, illnesses complicated
by low air quality, and risks during
heavy precipitation events, into
early warning systems. (Source:

Safety Element)
Public Safety &
Department; City
Manager’s Office;
Parks & Recreation
Department
Annual P, A X X X GF GF Y M M L New

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 6: Plan Maintenance
- 169 -
Chapter 6: Plan Maintenance
The plan maintenance process includes a schedule for monitoring and evaluating the Plan annually and producing a plan revision every five-years. This section describes how the City of Duarte will integrate public participation throughout the plan maintenance process.

Q&A | ELEMENT D: PLAN MAINTENANCE | D2-a.

Q: Does the plan describe the process that will be followed to track the progress/status of the mitigation actions identified within the Mitigation Strategy, along with when this process will occur and who will be responsible for the process? (Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(c)(4)(i)) A: See Local Mitigation Officer, Method and Scheduling of Plan Implementation, Monitoring and Implementing the Plan, Annual Implementation Matrix below.

Local Mitigation Officer
The Planning Team involved in research and writing of the Plan will also be responsible for implementation. The Planning Team will be led by the Planning Team Chair Jason Golding who will be referred to as the Local Mitigation Officer. Under the direction of the Local Mitigation Officer, the Planning Team will take responsibility for plan maintenance and implementation. The Local Mitigation Officer will facilitate the Planning Team meetings and will assign tasks such as updating and presenting the Plan to the members of the Planning Team. Plan implementation and evaluation will be a shared responsibility among all of the Planning Team members. The Local Mitigation Officer will coordinate with the City of Duarte leadership to ensure funding for 5- year updates to Plan as required by FEMA. The Planning Team will be responsible for coordinating the implementation of plan action items and undertaking the formal review process.

The Local Mitigation Officer will be authorized to make changes in assignments to the current Planning Team.

The Planning Team will meet no less than annually. Meeting dates will be scheduled once the final Planning Team has been established. These meetings will provide an opportunity to discuss the progress of the action items and maintain the partnerships that are essential for the sustainability of the mitigation plan. The Local Mitigation Officer (or designee) will be responsible for contacting the Planning Team members and organizing the annual meetings.

Plan updates will need to be approved by FEMA every 5 years. However, adequate time should be allowed to secure grant funding (if necessary), allow adequate time for a thorough planning process, and time for the formal review by Cal OES and FEMA. All said, if grant funding is going to be needed, the update timeline should begin 3 years prior to the plan’s due date to FEMA.

Method and Scheduling of Plan Implementation
Year 1 Year 2 Year 3 Year 4 Year 5
Monitoring X X X X X
Evaluating
Internal Planning Team Evaluation X X X X X
Cal OES and FEMA Evaluation X
Updating X

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 6: Plan Maintenance
- 170 -
Monitoring and Implementing the Plan
Monitoring the Plan
The Local Mitigation Officer will hold annual meetings with representatives from the coordinating agencies (as identified in the Mitigation Actions Matrix) in order to gather status updates on the mitigation action items. These meetings will provide an opportunity to discuss the progress of the action items and maintain the partnerships that are essential for the sustainability of the mitigation plan. See the Annual Implementation Report (discussed below) which will be a valuable tool for the Planning Team to measure the success of the Hazard Mitigation Plan. The focus of the annual meeting will be on the progress and changes to the Mitigation Action Items.

Q&A | ELEMENT D: PLAN MAINTENANCE | D3-a.

Q: Does the plan describe each community will follow to integrate the ideas, information and strategy of the mitigation plan into other planning mechanisms? (Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(c)(4)(ii)) A: See Integration into Other Planning Mechanisms below.

Integration into Other Planning Mechanisms
The City of Duarte addresses statewide planning goals and legislative requirements through the General Fund, Capital Projects, and Grants. The mitigation plan provides a series of recommendations - many of which are closely related to the goals and objectives of existing planning programs. The City will implement recommended mitigation action items through existing programs and procedures.

The City is responsible for adhering to the State of California’s Building and Safety Codes. In addition, the city may work with other agencies at the state level to review, develop and ensure Building and Safety Codes are adequate to mitigate or present damage by hazards. This is to ensure that life-safety criteria are met for new construction.

Some of the goals and action items in the mitigation plan will be achieved through activities recommended in the strategic and other budget documents. The various departments involved in developing the plan will review it on an annual basis. Upon annual review, the Planning Team will work with the departments to identify areas in the plan’s action items that are consistent with the strategic and budget documents. This will ensure the mitigation plan goals and action items are implemented in a timely fashion.

Upon FEMA approval, the Planning Team will begin the process of incorporating risk information and mitigation action items into existing planning mechanisms including the General Fund (Operating Budget and Capital Projects - see Mitigation Actions Matrix for links between individual action items and associated planning mechanisms). The annual meetings of the Planning Team will provide an opportunity for Planning Team members to report back on the progress made on the integration of mitigation planning elements into the City’s planning documents and procedures. The timing of integration will depend on the cycles of the various planning mechanisms. As an example, state regulations require the Emergency Operations Plan to be updated every 3 years while the General Plan may not be updated for another 20 years. The department representatives should be mindful of opportunities to update or implement action items assigned to their departments.

The 2020 HMP was integrated into the 2021 General Plan Safety Element and Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment with numerous references to hazard-related content.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 6: Plan Maintenance
- 171 -
Specifically, the Planning Team will utilize the updates of the following documents to implement the mitigation plan:
✓ HMP Risk Assessment, Community Profile, Planning Process (stakeholders) into Emergency Operations Plan, General Plan, Climate Change Vulnerability Assessment.
✓ HMP Mitigation Actions Matrix into General Fund, Capital Projects, Grants Annual Implementation Matrix
The Annual Implementation Matrix is the same as the Mitigation Actions Matrix but with a column added to track the annual status of each Action Item. Upon approval and adoption of the Plan, the Annual Implementation Reports will be added to the Plan’s Attachments. Following is a view of the Annual Implementation Matrix:

Annual Implementation Matrix will be inserted here following FEMA approval An equal part of the monitoring process is the need to maintain a strategic planning process which needs to include funding and organizational support. In that light, at least one year in advance of the FEMA-mandated 5-year submission of an update, the Local Mitigation Officer will convene the Planning Team (as well as any other departments with responsibilities on the Mitigation Actions Matrix) to discuss funding and timing of the update planning process. On the fifth year of the planning cycles, the Planning Team will broaden its scope to include discussions and research on all of the sections within the Plan with particular attention given to goal achievement and public participation.

Economic Analysis of Mitigation Projects
FEMA's approach to identifying the costs and benefits associated with hazard mitigation strategies, measures, or projects fall into two general categories: benefit/cost analysis and costeffectiveness analysis.

Conducting benefit/cost analysis for a mitigation activity can assist communities in determining whether a project is worth undertaking now, in order to avoid disaster-related damage later. Costeffectiveness analysis evaluates how best to spend a given amount of money to achieve a specific goal. Determining the economic feasibility of mitigating hazards can provide decision-makers with an understanding of the potential benefits and costs of an activity, as well as a basis upon which to compare alternative projects.

Given federal funding, the Planning Team will use a FEMA-approved benefit/cost analysis approach to identify and prioritize mitigation action items. For other projects and funding sources, the Planning Team will use other approaches to understand the costs and benefits of each action item and develop a prioritized list.

The “benefit”, “cost”, and overall “priority” of each mitigation action item was included in the Mitigation Actions Matrix located in Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies. A more technical assessment will be required in the event grant funding is pursued through the Hazard Mitigation Grant Program. FEMA Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidelines are discussed below.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 6: Plan Maintenance
- 172 -
FEMA Benefit-Cost Analysis Guidelines
The Stafford Act authorizes the President to establish a program to provide technical and financial assistance to state and local governments to assist in the implementation of hazard mitigation measures that are cost effective and designed to substantially reduce injuries, loss of life, hardship, or the risk of future damage and destruction of property. To evaluate proposed hazard mitigation projects prior to funding FEMA requires a Benefit-Cost Analysis (BCA) to validate cost effectiveness. BCA is the method by which the future benefits of a mitigation project are estimated and compared to its cost. The end result is a benefit-cost ratio (BCR), which is derived from a project’s total net benefits divided by its total project cost. The BCR is a numerical expression of the cost effectiveness of a project. A project is considered to be cost effective when the BCR is 1.0 or greater, indicating the benefits of a prospective hazard mitigation project are sufficient to justify the costs.

Although the preparation of a BCA is a technical process, FEMA has developed software, written materials, and training to support the effort and assist with estimating the expected future benefits over the useful life of a retrofit project. It is imperative to conduct a BCA early in the project development process to ensure the likelihood of meeting the cost-effective eligibility requirement in the Stafford Act.

The BCA program consists of guidelines, methodologies, and software modules for a range of major natural hazards including:
✓ Flood (Riverine, Coastal Zone A, Coastal Zone V)
✓ Hurricane Wind
✓ Hurricane Safe Room
✓ Damage-Frequency Assessment
✓ Tornado Safe Room
✓ Earthquake
✓ Wildfire
The BCA program provides up to date program data, up to date default and standard values, user manuals and training. Overall, the program makes it easier for users and evaluators to conduct and review BCAs and to address multiple buildings and hazards in a single BCA module run.

Evaluating and Updating the Plan
Q&A | ELEMENT D: PLAN MAINTENANCE | D2-b.

Q: Does the plan describe the process that will be followed to evaluate the plan for effectiveness? This process must identify the criteria that will be used to evaluate the information in the plan, along with when this process will occur and who will be responsible. (Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(c)(4)(i)) A: See Evaluation below.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 6: Plan Maintenance
- 173 -
Evaluation
As discussed at the beginning of this section, the representatives from the coordinating agencies (as identified in the Mitigation Actions Matrix) will meet annually to gather status updates on the mitigation action items. During that meeting, the Local Mitigation Officer will lead a discussion with the coordinating agencies on the success (or failure) of the Mitigation Plan to be effective and to meet the plan goals. Examples of measuring the plan’s effective will include assessing effectiveness include evaluating whether new hazards have emerged, whether community vulnerability has shifted, and whether stated mitigation strategies are still appropriate for the community’s circumstances. The plan goals are defined in the beginning of Chapter 5: Mitigation Strategies and each of the mitigation action items is aligned with a goal or goals.

The results of that discussion will be added to the Evaluation portion of the Annual Implementation Report and inclusion in the 5-year update to the Plan. Efforts will be made immediately by the Local Mitigation Officer to address any failed plan goals.

Q&A | ELEMENT D: PLAN MAINTENANCE | D2-c.

Q: Does the plan describe the process that will be followed to update the plan, along with when this process will occur and who will be responsible for the process? (Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(c)(4)(i)) A: See Formal Update Process below.

Formal Update Process
As identified above, the Mitigation Actions Matrix will be monitored for status on an annual basis as well as an evaluation of the plan’s goals. The Local Mitigation Officer or designee will be responsible for contacting the coordinating agency members and organizing the annual meeting which will take place based on the month of the plan’s approval. Planning Team members will also be responsible for participating in the formal update to the Plan every fifth year of the planning cycle. In the event the city desires to seek grant funding for the update, the application process should begin 2 years in advance of the plan’s expiration. Even without grant funding, the planning process should begin at least 1.5 years ahead of the plan’s expiration.

The Planning Team will begin the update process by reviewing the goals and mitigation action items to determine their relevance to changing situations within the City as well as changes in state or federal policy, and to ensure they are addressing current and expected conditions. The Planning Team will also review the Plan’s Risk Assessment portion of the Plan to determine if this information should be updated or modified, given any new available data. The lead departments responsible for the various action items will report on the status of their projects, including the success of various implementation processes, difficulties encountered, success of coordination efforts, and which strategies should be revised. Amendments will be made to the Mitigation Actions Matrix and other sections in the Plan as deemed necessary by the Planning Team.

Q&A | ELEMENT D: PLAN MAINTENANCE | D1-a.

Q: Does the plan describe how communities will continue to seek future public participation after the plan has been approved? (Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(c)(4)(iii)) A: See Continued Public Involvement below.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 6: Plan Maintenance
- 174 -
Continued Public Involvement
The city is dedicated to involving the public and stakeholders throughout the plan maintenance cycle. Copies of the plan will be made available at City Hall and on the City’s website. The existence and location of these copies will be publicized in the City’s newsletter and on the website. This site will also contain an email address and phone number where people can direct their comments and concerns.

At the discretion of the Local Mitigation Officer, a public meeting may be held after the Annual Implementation Meeting. The meeting would provide a public forum in which interested individuals and/or agencies could express their concerns, opinions, or ideas about the plan.

Whether or not an annual meeting is held, the results of the meeting will be posted and announced via social media and other community notifications. The Planning Team will be especially interested in sharing progress reports on the status of the various mitigation action items.

Additionally, the Local Mitigation Officer will share the annual progress reports with the City Council during a public meeting.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Chapter 7: Plan Review, Adoption, and Approval
- 175 -
Chapter 7: Plan Review, Adoption and
Approval
Q&A | ELEMENT F: PLAN ADOPTION | F1-a.

Q: Does the participant include documentation of adoption? (Requirement 44 CFR § 201.6(c)(5)) A: See Plan Adoption Process below.

Plan Adoption Process
Adoption of the plan by the local governing body demonstrates the City of Duarte’s commitment to meeting mitigation goals and objectives. Governing body approval legitimizes the plan and authorizes responsible agencies to execute their responsibilities.

The Second Draft Plan will be submitted to Cal OES and FEMA for review and approval. When Cal OES determines the plan to be compliant, the document will be forwarded to FEMA. Upon receipt of FEMA’s Approvable Pending Adoption, the Planning Team will schedule an adoption meeting with the City Council where the Planning Team Chair will recommend adoption of the Final Draft Plan. Assuming adoption by the City Council, the signed resolution will be forwarded to FEMA along with a request for a FEMA Letter of Approval.

In preparation for the public meeting with the City Council, the Planning Team will post the Final Draft Plan on the City’s website. Notification of the Plan’s availability will also be announced via the mediums utilized during the community outreach activities. Also, the Team will prepare a staff report including an overview of the Planning Process, Risk Assessment, Plan Goals, and Mitigation Actions. The Planning Team’s presentation will include a summary of the input received during the community outreach activities. The meeting participants will be encouraged to present their views and make suggestions on possible mitigation actions.

The City Council will hear the item on _____. The City Council voted to adopt the Final Draft of the Local Hazard Mitigation Plan. The Resolution of adoption by the City Council is below:

Insert
Plan Approval
Upon adoption by the City Council, the resolution will be forwarded to FEMA and Cal OES. The FEMA Letter of Approval was issued on __________ and is below:
insert

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 176 -
Attachments
First Community Outreach (August 2024)
The first Community Outreach preceded the first Planning Team meeting. Great effort was made to create a robust Stakeholder List and outreach campaign that would encourage participation by the public and stakeholders. The following is a summary of the outreach activities along with the supporting documentation.

Community Outreach Activities
Date Community Outreach Activities
Public Forums
8/8/2024 Educational booth at National Night Out Event informing residents about the plan update process and passing out flyers with QR codes to learn more on website. (200 copies). 8/13/2024 Announced start of planning process and placed flyers at the City Council meeting. Placed 20 copies of flyers in back of room.
8/26/2024 Announced to Duarte Community Coordinating Council start of planning process. DCCC is a group of non-profit organizations in Duarte that coordinate to better serve Duarte. 9/3/2024 Announced start of planning process and placed flyers at Public Works and Traffic Safety Commission meeting. Placed copies of flyers in back of room. 1/15/2025 The Public Utilities, Communication and Technology Commission received a presentation by staff regarding the LHMP planning process. Video was shown to the commissioners. 1/21/2025 The Public Safety Commission received a presentation by staff regarding the LHMP planning process. The video was shown to commissioners.
2/18/2025 The Planning and Economic Development Commission received a presentation by staff regarding the LHMP planning process. The video was shown to the commissioners.

Press Releases
8/7/2024 Press Release was drafted and published.

Social Media
8/8/2024 Start of LHMP update posted on all social media accounts with QR code directing to resource HUB to receive updates/engagement opportunities.

Requests for Distribution
8/8/2024 Emailed press release to the Duarte Unified School District along with a request to share the messaging via their e-blasts and monthly newsletter.
8/8/2024 Emailed press release to Chamber of Commerce along with a request to share the messaging via their e-blasts and monthly newsletter
8/12/2024 DUSD posted on their notification system for parents. 8/28/2024 Posted in Chamber of Commerce weekly e-newsletter. 9/4/2024 Posted in Chamber of Commerce weekly e-newsletter. 9/6/2024 Shared announcement in City's monthly e-newsletter.

Newsletter/Local Newspaper
Placed announcement on quarterly city news magazine. Delivered citywide directly to homes and placed at city facilities. 10,000 copies were produced and distributed. .

Website
8/7/2024 Home Page article on website. Dedicated a webpage to serve as the hub to receive updates and learn about engagement opportunities. Open throughout the whole planning process. Placed banner on top of the website homepage to better access the hub page.

Stakeholder Email or Mail

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 177 -
9/12/2024 Sent LHMP Announcement email to stakeholder list.

Flyers
8/8/2024 Placed Flyers at County Library, 100 copies.
8/8/2024 Placed Flyers at City Hall, 100 copies.
8/8/2024 Placed Flyers at Chamber of Commerce, 100 copies. 8/12/2024 Placed Flyers at Senior Center, 100 copies.

Flyer (August 2024)

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 178 -
City Website – Landing Page and Content Page

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 179 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 180 -
Public Forums

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 181 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 182 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 183 -
Press Release

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 184 -
Social Media

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 185 -
Duarte Chamber Newsletter
City Monthly E-Newsletter

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 186 -
Quarterly City Newsletter (home delivery)

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 187 -
Survey Results

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 188 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 189 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 190 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 191 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 192 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 193 -

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 194 -
Stakeholder Invitation
Stakeholders listed above were invited via email or mail using the letter below:

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 195 -
Video/PPT: Hazard Mitigation Overview
Note: Can be used as a video (includes voiceover) or as a PowerPoint (script included).

On behalf of the City of Duarte, it’s my pleasure to welcome you to the overview of the planning process to prepare the City’s 2024 Hazard Mitigation Plan.

As a bit of background, the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 was passed by Congress “to reduce the loss of life and property, human suffering, economic disruption, and disaster assistance costs resulting from natural disasters”.

Disasters can cause loss of life; damage to buildings and infrastructure; and have devastating consequences on a community’s economic, social, and environmental well-being.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 196 -

Hazard mitigation reduces disaster damage and is defined by FEMA as “sustained action taken to reduce or eliminate the long-term risk to human life and property from hazards”.

Examples of mitigation actions include outreach programs that increase risk awareness, projects to protect critical facilities, and the removal of structures from flood hazard areas.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 197 -

In 2019, the National Institute of Building Sciences issued an update to its landmark report “Natural Hazard Mitigation Saves”. The study analyzed the benefit cost ratio of a range of mitigation activities including mitigation planning and building retrofits.

The findings revealed a dramatic return on investment.
❖ For mitigation activities, every dollar spent yielded a six dollar return on avoided losses in the future.
❖ For building retrofits, every dollar spent yielded a four dollar return on avoided losses in the future.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 198 -

According to the National Institute of Building Sciences report, the benefits of mitigation include reductions in:
❖ Deaths, injuries, and post-traumatic stress disorder. ❖ Property repair costs for damaged buildings and contents. ❖ Additional living expenses including sheltering costs for displaced households.
❖ Direct business interruption: loss of revenue and other businessinterruption costs to businesses whose property is damaged. ❖ Indirect business interruption: loss of economic activity in the broader community.
❖ Urban search and rescue costs.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 199 -

In 2023, FEMA issued new standards regarding preparation of hazard mitigation plans. In addition to the previous regulations from 2011, jurisdictions are now required to discuss climate change and the impacts on natural hazards. Also, now there are standards requiring focused outreach to disadvantaged communities and socially vulnerable populations.

Mitigation plans are key to breaking the cycle of disaster damage and reconstruction.

Mitigation planning begins with state, local, tribal nation, and territorial governments identifying natural disaster vulnerabilities and risks that are common in their area.

After identifying risks, they develop long-term strategies for protecting people and property from similar events.

Local governments are eligible to prepare a mitigation plan and receive mitigation funds through federal and state grants as well as funds following a major disaster.

The purpose of today’s overview is to introduce the planning process used by the City of Duarte to prepare the Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 200 -

Many studies have shown that segments of the population are more vulnerable to the impacts of disaster than the rest of the community.

The U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention developed a Social Vulnerability Index which measures a community’s overall vulnerability. There are a total of 16 categories under the headings of socioeconomic status, household characteristics, racial and ethnic minority status, and housing type and transportation.

The CDC’s Social Vulnerability Index was designed to help emergency managers identify and map communities that will most likely need support before, during, and after a disaster.

The SVI map for the City of Duarte shows a range of low to high vulnerability with the “highest” social vulnerability in the southwest corner of the community.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 201 -

FEMA’s 2023 Local Mitigation Planning Handbook identifies a planning process with four steps:

Step #1 is to organize the planning process and resources which includes creation of a Planning Team to assist with research and writing of the plan. Also, a Community Outreach Strategy is developed and begun even before the first Planning Team meeting.

Step #2 is to assess risks and capabilities including a Risk and Vulnerability Assessment as well as a review of the City’s capability to respond and recover from a major disaster.

Step #3 is to develop a Mitigation Strategy which includes a comprehensive list of mitigation actions and projects.

Step #4 is to Adopt and Implement the Plan which includes a formal review by Cal OES and FEMA and adoption by the City Council.

Each Step includes Community Outreach activities.

This is the 4-step planning process followed by the City’s Planning Team.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 202 -

The Community Outreach Strategy consists of three phases:

The first phase is “Developing Outreach Methods” which includes identifying methods of reaching the public and stakeholders.

FEMA-mandated stakeholders include:
❖ Local and Regional Regulatory Agencies
❖ Neighboring Jurisdictions
❖ Businesses, Academia, and Community Lifelines (more on Community Lifelines in the next slide).
❖ Nonprofit and Community-Based Organizations
Project announcements will be made via a range of postings including Press Release, Social Media, Website, and Public Forums and Events
The second phase is “Sharing Planning Team Activities”. The Planning Team will meet a total of five times to assist with data gathering, writing and community outreach. The Team includes representatives from the City Manager’s Office, Planning, Public Works, Public Safety, and the Los Angeles Area D Coordinator. In an effort to inform and engage the public and stakeholders, Planning Team agendas, minutes, PowerPoints, and handouts will be posted on the dedicated website. Also, when materials or briefings are scheduled for public forums or events, that information will also be posted.

The third phase is “Providing Opportunities for Input” for the public and stakeholders. The first announcement will introduce the start of the project. This will take place in advance of the Planning Team’s first meeting. Other opportunities for input will include participation in a hazard mitigation survey, viewing a mitigation overview video, and providing input on the First Draft Plan.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 203 -

Community Lifelines are the vital services in a community. When stabilized, they enable all other aspects of society to function.

The seven services include:
❖ Safety and Security
❖ Food, Water, and Shelter
❖ Health and Medical
❖ Energy (including Power and Fuel)
❖ Communications
❖ Transportation
❖ Hazardous Material

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 204 -

Identifying hazards with the potential for causing significant impacts involved reviewing a range of hazard mitigation-related documents.

The Hazard Identification Process included a review of:

FEMA’s National Risk Index which includes 18 hazards that are recommended for consideration throughout the US, the California State Hazard Mitigation Plan, the County’s All-Hazards Mitigation Plan, City’s General Plan Safety Element and the City’s 2020 Hazard Mitigation Plan.

Following that review, the Planning Team chose earthquake, dam inundation, wildfire, landslide (including mud and debris flow), windstorm, and hazardous materials (relating to City of Hope).

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 205 -

The City’s “capabilities” were mentioned in the previous slide.

One of the FEMA requirements is to identify existing capabilities to increase resilience.

Also, the mitigation plan is required to identify ways to expand existing capabilities.

The capability categories include Planning and Regulatory, Administrative and Technical, Financial, and Education and Outreach.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 206 -

The Mitigation Strategy section of the plan includes the plan goals as well as methods for coordinating with the City’s General Plan Elements and the Capital Improvement Plan.

Most importantly, the Mitigation Strategy includes a comprehensive range of actions and projects capturing ongoing activities along with ideas for the future. Although the lifespan of the plan is only 5-years, there’s no harm in identifying projects that will take 10- or even 20-years to complete.

Each action item identifies a lead department, timeline, plan goals met, projected funding source, and benefits, costs, and priority.

Here is an example of a mitigation action item: “Develop seismic inventory of at-risk City-owned buildings and infrastructure.”

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 207 -

Following drafting of the plan by the Planning Team and gathering input from the public and stakeholders, the document will be submitted to Cal OES for a formal review.

Utilizing FEMA’s Plan Review Tool and updated regulations, the Cal OES staff will review the City’s plan for conformance. Once Cal OES is satisfied that all the requirements have been met, the document is forwarded to FEMA. Altogether, the formal review typically lasts 4-6 months. Once FEMA is satisfied, a letter will be sent authorizing the City to take the document to the City Council for adoption.

When proof of adoption is received, FEMA will issue a Letter of Approval.

This concludes the Hazard Mitigation Overview. Please watch for the posting of the Draft Hazard Mitigation Plan. We look forward to hearing your questions, thoughts, and suggestions. On behalf of the City of Duarte, thank you for taking time to learn about the importance of increasing the community’s resilience through mitigation planning.

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 208 -
Community Outreach – First Draft Plan (August 27, 2025)

Local Hazard Mitigation Plan | 2026
Attachments
- 209 -
Floodplain Related Documents
The following is a link to the City of Duarte’s Floodplain Ordinance:
https://library.municode.com/ca/duarte/codes/code_of_ordinances?nodeId=TIT16BUCO_CH16. 40FLMARE

AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Craig Hensley, Community Development Director
BY: Scott Nash, Associate Planner
SUBJECT: Second Reading and Adoption of Ordinance No. 26-01 RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that City Council adopt Ordinance No. 26-01 FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item

STRATEGIC PLAN
IMPACT: There is no strategic plan impact associated with this item

BACKGROUND
The proposed project is to remove existing on-site improvements and construct eleven two-story attached townhomes in five buildings, at 1404-1414 Royal Oaks Drive. The property is currently two large single-family properties developed with single family homes each with a driveway with access to Royal Oaks Drive. Combining the two properties, the site is rectangular and roughly 40,540 square feet.

The townhomes will be two-stories with direct-access two-car garages on the ground floor and one floor of living area above. The project will consist of five Spanish-style structures each containing two to three dwelling units. These units range in size from 1,341 to 1,594 square feet. In addition to the townhome structures, the project will include site improvements to vehicle and pedestrian access, parking facilities, and landscaping. Vehicular access to the Project site will be maintained from Royal Oaks Drive via a driveway along the northern property line. Pedestrian access will be established from Royal Oaks Drive via a new interior walkway system connecting to each unit.

The Project proposes attached two-car garages for all 11 townhomes, totaling 22 enclosed spaces, as well as six guest parking spaces
The proposed General Plan amendment will change the designation of the project site (both parcels) from Low Density Residential (LDR) to Medium Density Residential (MDR), which is consistent with the current designation of the neighboring properties to the south and west. The proposed Zone Change will modify the current zoning designation of the project site (both parcels) from R-1 Single-Family Residential to R-3 Multiple Family Residential Medium Density in direct correlation with the proposed General Plan Amendment. This project also involves a Site Plan Design Review, which addresses the architectural design and compatibility of the project.

Agenda Item: 13.J.

2 The City hired De Novo Planning Group to prepare an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) pursuant to CEQA. The result of the Initial Study indicated the project will not have any significant environmental impacts with adopted mitigations. The MND process has been completed. The public comment period started on September 17, 2025 and ended on November 12, 2025.

On September 22, 2025 the Site Plan and Design Review application was reviewed by the Architectural Review Board (ARB) and the ARB provided a recommendation of approval for the Planning Commission’s consideration.

The Planning and Economic Development Commission held a public hearing at its November 17, 2025 meeting. At the meeting, the Commission heard a detailed Staff presentation, held a public hearing, considered all the available information and public comment and recommended that the City Council approve the proposed Mitigated Declaration and development project. The Planning Commission vote was unanimous.

The proposed project provides for the redevelopment of two large underutilized single-family properties into a high-quality residential development along Royal Oaks Drive. The medium density residential land use designation is consistent with the neighboring properties to the west and south and provides a smooth transition to the single-family property to the east.

At its meeting on January 13, 2026 the City Council conducted a first reading of this Ordinance.

If adopted by the City Council, Ordinance No. 26-01 will go into effect in thirty (30) days.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Ordinance No. 26-01
Fiscal Review: Reviewed and Approved:

Kristen Petersen Brian Villalobos
Assistant City Manager/ City Manager
Director of Administrative Services

ORDINANCE NO. 26-01

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUARTE
ADOPTING ZONE CHANGE 24-03, CHANGING THE ZONING OF THE
PROPERTIES AT 1404 AND 1414 ROYAL OAKS DRIVE FROM SINGLEFAMILY RESIDENTIAL (R-1) TO MULTIPLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY (R-3), AND TO AMEND THE OFFICIAL ZONING
MAP
WHEREAS, the applicant has submitted an application requesting approval of a Zone Change to change the zoning from Single-Family Residential (R-1) to Multiple Family Residential Medium Density (R-3) for the project site, shown in Exhibit A, and located at 1404 and 1414 Royal Oaks Drive; and
WHEREAS, the zone change will also change the official Zoning Map, Chapter

19.06.020, to show the Zone Change as shown in Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, on November 17, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed Project, whereupon the Planning Commission received additional public testimony and made recommendation to the City Council; and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on January 13, 2026, the proposed amendment was given in accordance with applicable law; and
WHEREAS, on January 13, 2026 the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the proposed General Plan Amendment, whereupon the City Council received additional public testimony; and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUARTE, CALIFORNIA, DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. RECITALS
All of the facts set forth in the Recitals of this Resolution are true and correct and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 2. FINDINGS
Per Section 19.142.060.B, the City Council finds and determines as follows:

1. The amendment is internally consistent with all other provisions of the General Plan.

The project conforms to the goals and objectives on the General Plan by re-designating underutilized residential properties into higher-density residential sites. The land use of Medium Density Residential is consistent with the R-3 zoning designation, allowing a medium density residential project consisting of multi-family housing.

2. The proposed amendment will not be detrimental to the public interest, health, safety, convenience, or welfare of the City.

The project will amend an existing residential zoning designation to R-3 Multiple Family Medium Density Residential, which typically allows for a multi-family attached housing developments.

The zoning designation is consistent with the adjacent properties to the west and south and is complementary to the remaining surrounding properties. The amendment will establish a designation that will facilitate an improvement to an underutilized property and the surrounding community.

3. The affected site is physically suitable in terms of design, location, operating characteristics, shape, size, topography, and the provision of public and emergency vehicle access, and public services and utilities and is served by highways and streets adequate in width and improvement to carry the kind and quantity of traffic the proposed use would likely generate, to ensure that the proposed use(s) and/or development will not endanger, jeopardize, or otherwise constitute a hazard to the property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.

The zone change will modify the current zoning designation of the project site from R-1 Singlefamily Residential to R-3 Multiple Family Residential Medium Density. The site is adequate to accommodate a multi-family residential project. The site is adjacent to Royal Oaks Drive, an arterial road in the city. The project will be designed to accommodate proper public and emergency personnel and will be adequately served by utilities. A traffic analysis was conducted as part of the project review and it was determined that impacts to traffic will be below significant through mitigation measures. The zone change will allow the development of multi-family project that will accommodate a density around 11 units. It is not anticipated that the project will endanger or jeopardize the property or improvements in the vicinity. The project will allow the improvement of underutilized properties with a development that is compatible to its surroundings and with minimal impacts to the adjacent neighborhood.

SECTION 3. SIGNATURE
The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify as to the adoption of this Ordinance.

SECTION 4.

This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause this Ordinance to be posted in the manner provided for in the Duarte Municipal Code.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED after second reading at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Duarte this 27th day of January 2026. ________________________________
Tera Martin Del Campo, Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM: City of Duarte
________________________________
Thai Viet Phan
City Attorney

ATTEST:
________________________________
Frances Jimenez
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.

CITY OF DUARTE )
I, Frances Jimenez, City Clerk of the City of Duarte, County of Los Angeles, State of California, hereby attest to the above signature and certify that Ordinance No. 26-01 was adopted by the City Council of said City of Duarte at a regular meeting of said Council held on the 27th day of January 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
________________________________
Frances Jimenez
City Clerk

Exhibit A

AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Larry Breceda, Director of Public Safety
BY: Bryan Ariizumi, Public Safety Manager
SUBJECT: Adoption of Resolution No. 26-10, Authorizing Select Public Safety Personnel to Perform Law Enforcement Related Functions
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt Resolution No. 26-10, authorizing select public safety personnel to perform law enforcement-related functions
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item

STRATEGIC PLAN
IMPACT: There is no strategic impact associated with this item

BACKGROUND
In the course of their duties, Duarte Public Safety personnel often need to access the California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System (CLETS) to obtain information while conducting their investigations. CLETS allows law enforcement and non-criminal justice agencies (i.e., Duarte Public Safety Department) with the capability to obtain information directly from federal and state computerized information files.

The California Department of Justice (DOJ) recently advised that the City does not have an agreement on file that provides authorized access to CLETS. The City of Duarte must enter into an agreement with the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department to receive information from CLETS on behalf of the Sheriff’s Department. The delegation must be authorized pursuant to statute, regulation, or interagency agreement.

As part of the agreement, the City must provide a statute, ordinance or regulation that requires the governmental agency to perform a law enforcement-related function that necessitates receiving information from CLETS.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
To ensure that Duarte Public Safety personnel maintain authorized access to CLETS, Resolution No. 26-10 identifies specific positions within the City that authorizes the City Manager, Director of Public Safety Services, Public Safety Manager, Senior Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer, Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer, Community Service Officer, Animal Control Officer, Public Safety Secretary, and Crime Prevention Specialist positions to perform law enforcement-related functions.

Agenda Item: 13.K.

2 Resolution No. 26-10 will meet the requirement of providing a regulation that requires Duarte Public Safety to perform a law enforcement-related function that necessitates receiving information from CLETS.

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the City Council adopt Resolution No. 26-10, authorizing select public safety personnel to perform law enforcement-related functions.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution No. 26-10
Fiscal Review: Reviewed and Approved:

Kristen Petersen Brian Villalobos
Assistant City Manager/ City Manager
Director of Administrative Services

RESOLUTION NO. 26-10

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUARTE

AUTHORIZING CITY EMPLOYED CITY MANAGER, DIRECTOR OF

PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICES, PUBLIC SAFETY MANAGER, SENIOR

CODE COMPLIANCE/ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER, CODE

COMPLIANCE/ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER, COMMUNITY SERVICE

OFFICER, ANIMAL CONTROL OFFICER, PUBLIC SAFETY

SECRETARY, AND CRIME PREVENTION SPECIALIST POSITIONS TO

PERFORM IN A LAW ENFORCEMENT RELATED FUNCTION, WHICH

NECESSITATES ACCESS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE (DOJ)

CALIFORNIA LAW ENFORCEMENT TELECOMMUNICATIONS

SYSTEMS (CLETS) PROVIDED INFORMATION
WHEREAS, the City Manager, Director of Public Safety Services, Public Safety Manager, Senior Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer, Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer, Community Service Officer, Animal Control Officer, Public Safety Secretary, and Crime Prevention Specialist employed by the City of Duarte will be required to perform law enforcement related functions; and
WHEREAS, there will be a need for the City Manager, Director of Public Safety Services, Public Safety Manager, Senior Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer, Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer, Community Service Officer, Animal Control Officer, Public Safety Secretary, and Crime Prevention Specialist to access information contained in the Department of Justice California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System on a daily basis; and
WHERAS, Section 1.5.2 of the Department of Justice California Law Enforcement Telecommunications System Policies, Practices, and Procedures requires that access to DOJ/CLETS systems will only be considered after the governmental agency enacts a statute, ordinance, or a regulation that authorizes its employees to perform law enforcement related functions.

NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Duarte does herby resolve, declare, determine, and order as follows:

SECTION 1. The City Manager, Director of Public Safety Services, Public Safety Manager, Senior Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer, Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer, Community Service Officer, Animal Control Officer, Public Safety Secretary, and Crime Prevention Specialist are hereby authorized to perform law enforcement related functions.

SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution.

PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of January 2026.

________________________________
Tera Martin Del Campo
Mayor
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Thai Viet Phan
City Attorney
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Frances Jimenez
City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.

CITY OF DUARTE )
I, Frances Jimenez, City Clerk of the City of Duarte, County of Los Angeles, State of California, hereby attest to the above signature and certify that Resolution No. 26-10 was adopted by the City Council of the City of Duarte at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 27th day of January 2026, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:
________________________________
Frances Jimenez
City Clerk

AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brian Villalobos, City Manager
SUBJECT: Letter of Support for the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Rivers and Mountains Conservancy Consolidated Grant Program Application
RECOMMENDATION: Authorize the Mayor to Sign the Letter of Support for the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Rivers and Mountains Conservancy Consolidated Grant Program Application
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item

STRATEGIC PLAN
IMPACT: Goal C - C3.1 Community Safety

BACKGROUND
The urgency for regional wildfire mitigation, coordination, and public education in the San Gabriel Valley has only intensified following the 2025 Eaton Fire. This incident underscored what many agencies across the San Gabriel Valley have long recognized: wildfire risk is increasing, and timely, accurate, and unified coordination, mitigation, and public education are essential to protecting lives, property, and critical infrastructure. In order to fund these endeavors, the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG) is looking for a letter of support for their application to the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy (RMC) Proposition 4 funding.

The RMC manages portions of California’s Proposition 4 Climate Bond that was passed by voters specifically for watershed, wildfire, and nature based projects.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The SGVCOG is well positioned to lead the effort to reduce fire risk across the San Gabriel Valley.

Since 2021, the SGVCOG has implemented multiple regional wildfire preparedness programs, including FirePrep SGV, a regional education and outreach program launched in partnership with the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy; development of a Regional Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) for the San Gabriel Valley; and a home ignition zone assessment program serving residents in high fire hazard severity zone areas.

However, additional resources are needed to continue and expand these programs. Through the Agenda Item: 13.L.

2 recently completed Regional CWPP process, stakeholders across the San Gabriel Valley collaboratively identified key regional priorities to reduce wildfire risk, including, but not limited to, fuels mitigation projects, wildfire preparedness education and outreach, and home hardening and defensible space implementation. RMC funding is critical to ensure that the CWPP’s regionally supported priorities are realized.

RECOMMENDATION
Authorize the Mayor to Sign the Letter of Support for the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments Rivers and Mountains Conservancy Consolidated Grant Program Application.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Letter of Support for SGVCOG’s RMC Consolidated Grant Program Application Fiscal Review: Reviewed and Approved:

Kristen Petersen Brian Villalobos
Assistant City Manager/ City Manager
Director of Administrative Services

January 27, 2026
San Gabriel & Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy 100 N. Old San Gabriel Canyon Road
Azusa, CA 91702
Subject: Letter of Support for SGVCOG’s RMC Consolidated Grant Program Application To Whom It May Concern,
On behalf of the City of Duarte, I am pleased to offer this letter of strong support for the San Gabriel Valley Wildfire Preparedness Program application, facilitated by the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments (SGVCOG), as part of the San Gabriel and Lower Los Angeles Rivers and Mountains Conservancy (RMC) Consolidated Grant Program.

The urgency for regional wildfire mitigation, coordination, and public education in the San Gabriel Valley has only intensified following the 2025 Eaton Fire. This incident underscored what many agencies across the San Gabriel Valley have long recognized: wildfire risk is increasing, and timely, accurate, and unified coordination, mitigation, and public education are essential to protecting lives, property, and critical infrastructure.

The SGVCOG is well positioned to meet the moment to lead this effort to reduce fire risk across the Valley.

Since 2021, the SGVCOG has implemented multiple regional wildfire preparedness programs, including FirePrep SGV, a regional education and outreach program launched in partnership with the Rivers and Mountains Conservancy; development of a Regional Community Wildfire Protection Plan (CWPP) for the San Gabriel Valley; and a home ignition zone assessment program serving residents in high fire hazard severity zone areas.

However, additional resources are needed to continue and expand these programs. Through the recently completed Regional CWPP process, stakeholders across the San Gabriel Valley collaboratively identified key regional priorities to reduce wildfire risk, including, but not limited to, fuels mitigation projects, wildfire preparedness education and outreach, and home hardening and defensible space implementation.

RMC funding is critical to ensure that the CWPP’s regionally supported priorities are realized.

With funding awarded through the RMC’s Proposition 4 program, the City of Duarte is looking forward to supporting the SGVCOG in the implementation of these regional priorities. We recognize the importance of a unified and regional approach to wildfire prevention and preparedness and remain committed to working collaboratively to strengthen wildfire resilience throughout the San Gabriel Valley.

Sincerely,
Tera Martin Del Campo
Mayor
City of Duarte

AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Kristen Petersen, Assistant City Manager/Director of Administrative Services
SUBJECT: Public Hearing to consider and approve a resolution to approve the full cost analysis of User Fees prepared by Willdan Financial Services and amend and augment the City of Duarte Fee Schedule RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution No. 26- 07 (Attachment A) approving the full cost analysis of user fees prepared by Willdan Financial Services and amend and augment the City of Duarte Fee Schedule effective February 2, 2026, except for fees related to the filing, accepting, reviewing, approving, or issuing of a land use application, permit, or entitlement to use, which shall not take effect until at least sixty (60) days from the adoption or increase of the fees and specifically will go into effect March 30, 2026
FISCAL IMPACT: The City will be reimbursed for more of its costs in providing municipal services

STRATEGIC PLAN
IMPACT: Goal D - D2.1 Financial Sustainability

BACKGROUND
State law allows cities to establish charges for services through the adoption of either ordinances or resolutions. Over time, it has become common practice for cities to gather service charges into a master schedule and to adopt them as part of a single resolution. This approach allows charges to be established and updated in a less cumbersome fashion than would individual ordinances or resolutions. It also gives the general public a single source for reference.

Although a handful of adjustments have been made to City service charges over the past few years, Duarte’s last comprehensive update was completed in 2017. While State law requires that service charges not exceed the actual cost of providing services, it is also important that they do not fall too far below actual cost. As a result, on January 28, 2025, the City Council authorized staff to contract with Willdan Financial Services (“WFS”) for the purpose of examining and updating the City’s existing user fee schedule. The intent of the exercise was to determine the full cost of providing certain municipal services and has resulted in the creation of an updated Comprehensive Fee Schedule, which includes, but is not limited to the following department and fee groups: City Agenda Item: 15.A.

2 Manager, Public Safety, Parks and Recreation, Administrative Services, Business License, Building, Planning and Public Works.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
Fees in California are required to conform to the statutory requirements of the California Constitution, Proposition 218, and the California Code of Regulations (“Code”). The Code requires that the City Council adopt fees by either Ordinance or Resolution.

The last time the City performed a comprehensive fee study was in 2017. In order to determine the full cost of providing various City services and determine the appropriate fee level and recovery rates, WFS was awarded a contract. The study was a coordinated effort between all City departments. Throughout the process, several meetings were held between Willdan, City staff, and City management to review status updates and provide direction.

Updating the City’s Comprehensive Fee Schedule was essentially a two-phase process. The first phase was to prepare an updated Cost Allocation Plan for the City. The Cost Allocation Plan’s primary objective is to allocate costs from departments that provide services internally to operating departments that conduct the day-to-day operations necessary to serve the community. The function of this plan is to establish “Indirect Cost Rates” that can then be used to assign the reasonable allocation of central service overhead that should be assigned to different City services.

This is used in the calculation of the fully burdened cost for City personnel involved in providing certain services. The second phase was to conduct a Comprehensive User Fee Study. By taking the fully burdened salary and benefit costs for employees in each department and then determining the amount of time it typically takes to provide certain services, WFS was able to use a standard unit cost build-up approach to determine the appropriate cost for certain user services. For other fees WFS used a programmatic approach such as the valuation-based fees, recreation program fees, and instances where a program cost is divided over the user base to obtain a per applicant cost for shared cost services. The resulting cost is shown in the User Fee Study as the Full Cost.

As mentioned above, WFS coordinated with each Department to review each user fee in detail in order to calculate the full cost of providing the service. This full cost is the legal maximum that the City can charge. Then City staff assumed the responsibility of developing specific fee level recommendations to present to the City Council. City staff took into consideration City and departmental goals, priorities, policy initiatives, past performance, implementation issues, surrounding communities’ fees and other internal and external factors in recommending the suggested fees shown in the schedule. A summary of the changes to user fees by department and fee group is listed below.

City Manager
• No changes to fees
Public Safety
• 104 fees/fines increase
• 3 fees/fines decrease
• 5 new fines added
• 4 fines would change from passthrough or no charge to percentage based • 3 fees have no change

3 Parks and Recreation
• 48 fees increase
• 11 fees decrease
• 3 fees variably adjusted
• 1 new fee added
• 19 fees have no change
Administrative Services
• 3 fees increase
• Returned check fee will align with the Gov Code
• 4 fees have no change
Business License
• 16 fees increase
• 2 fees decrease
• 2 new fees added
• 31 fees have no change
Building
• Building fees align with the LA County Building Fee Schedule • No fee increases included at this time
Planning
• 38 fees increase
• 5 fees decrease
• 1 new fee added
• 1 fee variably adjusted
• 30 fees have no change
Public Works
• 5 fees increase
• 1 fee decreases
• 2 new fees added
• 2 fees changed to “fee set by State”
• 11 fees have no change
As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services fluctuate over time, a significant element in the development of the fee schedule is that the City have the flexibility to remain current.

Therefore, an inflationary factor is included in the resolution adopting the fee schedule to allow the City to annually increase or decrease the fees by the changes in the Consumer Price Index.

This annual change to fees shall not exceed the reasonable estimated cost of providing services each year.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution No. 26-07 approving the full cost analysis of user fees prepared by Willdan Financial Services and amend and augment the City of Duarte Fee Schedule effective February 2, 2026, except for fees related to the filing, accepting, reviewing, approving, or issuing of a land use application, permit, or entitlement to use, which shall not take effect until at least sixty (60) days since the final action on the adoption or increase of the fee and specifically will go into effect March 30, 2026

4 FISCAL IMPACT
The City will be reimbursed for more of its costs in providing municipal services.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Resolution No. 26-07
Fiscal Review: Reviewed and Approved:

Kristen Petersen Brian Villalobos
Assistant City Manager/ City Manager
Director of Administrative Services

RESOLUTION NO. 26-07

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

DUARTE TO APPROVE THE FULL COST ANALYSIS OF USER FEES

PREPARED BY WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES AND AMEND

AND AUGMENT THE CITY OF DUARTE FEE SCHEDULE
WHEREAS, the City has the authority to impose fees, charges, and rates under its police powers pursuant to California Constitution Article XI section 7.

WHEREAS, user fees are a charge for services provided by a governmental agency to a public citizen or group, and
WHEREAS, the City of Duarte has established user fees for various departmentrelated services, and WHEREAS, the City of Duarte engaged Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to conduct a cost-of-service study for user fees in order to determine the estimated and reasonable costs borne by the City to provide these services, and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Duarte has determined that the cost of providing certain services is not of general benefit but of benefit to the individual and, therefore, fees should be required to pay for materials and special services performed by City staff, and
WHEREAS, the City Council has found it necessary to adjust fees for services, and to maintain a comprehensive document which incorporates fees for services provided by the City into one schedule, however, for Planning services requested of City staff which have no fee listed in this fee schedule, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall determine the appropriate fee based on the established hourly rates for the department/division. Additionally, the City will pass through any discrete costs incurred from the use of external service providers, including, but not limited to, legal counsel, consultants, and contractors, if required to process a specific application, and WHEREAS, the user fees described in Exhibit “A” are hereby determined to be reasonable in that the amount thereof does not exceed the estimated reasonable costs of providing the services for which the user fees are proposed to be rendered, and WHEREAS, notice of a public hearing on the changes to the user fees was published in accordance with Government Code sections 66018 and 6062a, and WHEREAS, a duly noticed public hearing before the City Council was held on January 27, 2026, at which public testimony was received and duly considered on the proposed changes to the user fee, and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code sections 66016 and 66019, fees adopted pursuant to those sections, hereby shall take, and be in, effect on February 2, 2026, except for fees related to the filing, accepting, reviewing, approving, or issuing of a land use application, permit, or entitlement to use, which shall not take effect until at least sixty (60) days since the final action on the adoption or increase of the fee and specifically will go into effect March 30, 2026, and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUARTE, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE, DECLARE, DETERMINE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and adopted as the findings of the City Council and after consideration of the staff report, the study and public comment and correspondence received, the City Council hereby approves and adopts the user fees set forth in Exhibit “A.”
SECTION 2. The adoption of this Resolution is not subject to CEQA review pursuant to CEQA Guideline 15378(b)(4), which provides that the creation of government funding mechanisms or other government fiscal activities that do not involve any commitment to any

specific project which may result in a potentially significant physical impact on the environment.

SECTION 3. The fees set forth in this Resolution shall be separately imposed for each service described under Exhibit “A” to which the fees pertain; additional fees shall be required for each additional service that is requested or required. Where fees are indicated on a per unit of measurement basis, the fees are for each identified unit or portion thereof within the indicated ranges of such units.

SECTION 4. It is the intention of the City Council to review the user fees as determined and set out herein on a periodic basis as well as the City’s costs reasonably borne as established and, as and if warranted, to revise such fees based thereon.

SECTION 5. The adopted fees for services set forth in Exhibit “A” shall be adjusted for inflation by the City Council annually by the percent change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). “Consumer Price Index” means the average of the percent change in Consumer Price Index for Urban Clerical and Wage Earners, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics or successor agency, from the December of the preceding calendar year over the preceding December, for the Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, CA area. Increases or decreases shall be rounded off to the nearest dollar. In no event shall the fee collected exceed the actual cost of providing the service by the City.

SECTION 6. The fees shown in the Comprehensive User Fee Study Schedule as Exhibit “A,” are approved and adopted for Fiscal Year 2025-26 effective February 2, 2026, except for fees related to the filing, accepting, reviewing, approving, or issuing of a land use application, permit, or entitlement to use, which shall not take effect until at least sixty (60) days since the final action on the adoption or increase of the fee and specifically will go into effect March 30, 2026.

SECTION 7. If any action, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Resolution or the fees levied by this Resolution shall be held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this Resolution or the fees levied by this Resolution that can be given effect without the invalid provisions.

SECTION 8. All other resolutions in conflict herewith are hereby repealed.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 27th day of January 2026. ____________________________________
Terra Martin Del Campo, Mayor

APPROVED AS TO FORM:

_____________________________
Thai Viet Phan, City Attorney
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Frances Jimenez, City Clerk

STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) ss.

CITY OF DUARTE )
I, Frances Jimenez, City Clerk of the City of Duarte, California, do hereby certify that Resolution No. 26-07 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Duarte California, at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the 27th day of January 2026, and thereafter signed and approved by the Mayor and attested by the City Clerk, and that said resolution was adopted by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

Frances Jimenez, City Clerk

City of Duarte, CA
User Fee Study
January 15, 2026
Exhibit A

i Comprehensive User Fee Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. i Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 1 User Fee Background ............................................................................................... 2 Background .................................................................................................................................................. 2 California User Fee History .......................................................................................................................... 2 Additional Policy Considerations ................................................................................................................. 3 Study Objective ....................................................................................................... 4 Scope of the Study ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Aim of the Report......................................................................................................................................... 5 Project Approach and Methodology ........................................................................... 6 Conceptual Approach................................................................................................................................... 6 Fully Burdened Hourly Rates........................................................................................................................ 6 Summary Steps of the Study ........................................................................................................................ 7 Allowable Costs ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Quality Control/Quality Assurance .............................................................................................................. 8 Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current fees............................................................................. 8 City Staff Contributions ................................................................................................................................ 9 Duarte User Fees ................................................................................................... 10 Cost Recovery............................................................................................................................................. 10 Subsidization .............................................................................................................................................. 10 Impact on Demand (Elasticity) ................................................................................................................... 11 Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 11 City Manager ........................................................................................................ 12 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 Public Safety ......................................................................................................... 13 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Parks and Recreation ............................................................................................. 14 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Administrative Services .......................................................................................... 15

ii Comprehensive User Fee Study
Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 Business License .................................................................................................... 16 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Building ................................................................................................................ 17 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Planning ............................................................................................................... 18 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 Public Works ......................................................................................................... 19 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered .................................................. 20 Appendix B –Fully Burdened Hourly Rates ................................................................ 21 Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis ....................................................................... 23

1 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Executive Summary
The City of Duarte engaged Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to determine the full costs incurred by the City to support the various activities for which the City charges user fees. Due to the complexity and the breadth of performing a comprehensive review of fees, Willdan employed a variety of fee methodologies to identify the full costs of individual fee and program activities. This report and the appendices herein identify 100% full cost recovery for City services. Appendix C details the full cost and suggested fees as determined through discussion with departmental staff. The recommended fees identified herein are either at or less than full cost recovery.

2 Comprehensive User Fee Study
User Fee Background
Background
As part of a general cost recovery strategy, local governments adopt user fees to fund programs and services that provide limited or no direct benefit to the community as a whole (“User Fees”). As cities struggle to maintain levels of service and variability of demand, they have become increasingly aware of subsidies provided by the General Fund and have implemented cost-recovery targets. To the extent that governments use general tax monies to provide individuals with private benefits, and not require them to pay the full cost of the service (and, therefore, receive a subsidy), the government is limiting funds that may be available to provide other community-wide benefits. In effect, the government is using community funds to pay for private benefits. Unlike most revenue sources, cities have more control over the level of user fees they charge to recover costs, or the subsidies they can institute.

Fees in California are required to conform to the statutory requirements of the California Constitution, Proposition 218, Proposition 26, and the California Code of Regulations. The Code also requires that the City Council adopt fees by either ordinance or resolution, and that any fees in excess of the estimated total cost of rendering the related services must be approved by a popular vote of two-thirds of those electors voting because the charge would be considered a tax and not a fee. There are no fees suggested to be set above the cost of service and as such a public vote is not required.

California User Fee History
Before Proposition 13, in times of fiscal shortages, California cities were able to raise property taxes, which funded everything from police and recreation to development-related services. However, this situation changed with the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978.

Proposition 13 established the era of revenue limitation in California local government. In subsequent years, the state saw a series of additional limitations to local government revenues. Proposition 4 (1979) defined the difference between a tax and a fee: a fee can be no greater than the cost of providing the service; and Proposition 218 (1996) further limited the imposition of taxes for certain classes of fees. As a result, cities were required to secure a supermajority vote in order to enact or increase taxes. Due to the thresholds needed to increase local taxes, cities have less control and very few successful options for new revenues.

The State of California took a series of actions in the 1990’s and 2000’s to improve the State’s fiscal situation, at the expense of local governments. In 2004-05, the Educational Revenue Augmentation Funds (“ERAF”) take-away of property taxes and the reduction of Vehicle License Fees further reduced local tax revenues.

In addition, on November 2, 2010, California voters approved Proposition 26, the “Stop Hidden Taxes Initiative”, which is aimed at defining “regulatory fees” as a special tax rather than a fee, thus requiring approval by two-thirds vote of local voters. These regulatory fees are typically intended to mitigate the societal and environmental impacts of a business or person’s activities. Proposition 26 contains seven categories of exceptions. The fees analyzed as part of a User Fee study typically fall under categories one through five consisting of charges for specific benefits, government service, regulatory need, for use of government property, or a fine/penalty.

3 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Additional Policy Considerations
State regulations require that municipalities update their fee schedules to reflect the actual costs of certain public services primarily benefiting users. User Fees recover costs associated with the provision of specific services benefiting the user, thereby typically reducing the use of General Fund monies for such purposes.

In addition to collecting the direct cost of labor and materials associated with processing and administering user services, it is common for local governments to recover reasonable support costs. Support costs are those costs relating to a local government’s central service departments that are allocable to the local government’s operating departments. Central services support cost allocations were incorporated using the resulting indirect overhead percentages determined through the City’s Cost Allocation Plan. A Cost Allocation Plan identifies the central service functions of the City such as Finance, City Manager, and Human Resources and allocates their cost to the departments and funds of the City that they support. This plan was used in the User Fee study to account for the burden placed upon central services by the operating departments in order to allocate a proportionate share of central service cost through the study.

As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services fluctuate over time, a significant element in the development of any fee schedule is that it has the flexibility to remain current. Therefore, it is recommended that the City include an inflationary factor in the resolution adopting the fee schedule to allow the City to annually increase or decrease the fees by changes in a pre-approved inflationary index, as described below. However, such inflationary increases shall not exceed the reasonable estimated cost of providing the services each year.

The City may employ many different inflationary factors. The most commonly used inflator is some form of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as it is widely well known and accepted. A similar inflator is the implicit price deflator for GDP, which is much like the CPI except that while the CPI is based on the same “basket” of goods and services every year, the price deflators’ “basket” can change year to year. Since the primary factor for the cost of a City’s services is usually the costs of the personnel involved, tying an inflationary factor that connects more directly to the personnel costs can also be suitable if there is a clear method, or current practice of obtaining said factor.

Each City should use an inflator that they believe works the best for their specific situation and needs but cannot rely solely on the CPI increase as it is incumbent upon each agency to ensure the amount of the fees charged does not exceeds the reasonable estimated costs of providing the services. It is also recommended that the City perform this internal review annually with a comprehensive review of services and fees performed every five years, which would include adding, amending, or removing fees for programs/services.

4 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Study Objective
As the City of Duarte seeks to efficiently manage limited resources and adequately respond to increased service demands, it needs a variety of tools. A User Fee Study provides assurance that the City has the best information and the best resources available to make sound decisions, fairly and legitimately set fees, maintain compliance with state law and local policies, and meet the needs of the City administration and its constituency. Given the limitations on raising revenue in local government, the City recognizes that a User Fee Study is a very cost-effective way to understand the total cost of services and identify potential fee deficiencies. Essentially, a User Fee is a payment for a requested service provided by a local government that primarily benefits an individual or group.

The total cost of each service included in this analysis is based on the full cost of providing City services, including direct salaries and benefits of City staff, direct departmental costs, and indirect costs from central service support. This study determines the full cost recovery fee for the City to provide each service; however, each fee is set at the City’s discretion, up to 100% of the total cost, as specified in this report.

The principal goal of the study was to help the City determine the full cost of the services that the City provides. In addition, Willdan established a series of additional objectives including:
 Developing a rational basis for setting fees
 Identifying subsidy amount, if applicable, of each fee in the model  Ensuring compliance with State law
 Developing an updatable and comprehensive list of fees  Maintaining accordance with City policies and goals
The study results will help the City better understand its true costs of providing services and may serve as a basis for making informed policy decisions regarding the most appropriate fees, if any, to collect from individuals and organizations that require individualized services from the City.

Scope of the Study
The scope of this study encompasses a review and calculation of the user fees charged by the following Duarte departments and fee groups:
 City Manager
 Public Safety
 Parks and Recreation
 Administrative Services
 Business License
 Building
 Planning
 Public Works

5 Comprehensive User Fee Study
The study involved the identification of existing and potential new fees, fee schedule restructuring, data collection and analysis, orientation and consultation, quality control, communication and presentations, and calculation of individual service costs (fees) or program cost recovery levels.

Aim of the Report
The User Fee Study focused on the cost of City services, as City staff currently provide them at existing, known, or reasonably anticipated service and staff level needs. This report provides a summary of the study results, and a general description of the approach and methods Willdan and City staff used to determine the recommended fee schedule. The report is not intended to document all of the numerous discussions throughout the process, nor is it intended to provide an influential dissertation on the qualities of the utilized tools, techniques, or alternative approaches.

6 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Project Approach and Methodology
Conceptual Approach
The basic concept of a User Fee Study is to determine the “reasonable cost” of each service provided by the City for which it charges a user fee. The full cost of providing a service may not necessarily become the City’s fee, but it serves as the objective basis as to the maximum amount that may be collected.

The standard fee limitation established in California law for such fees is the “estimated, reasonable cost” principle. In order to maintain compliance with the letter and spirit of this standard, every component of the fee study process included a related review. The use of budget figures, time estimates, and improvement valuation clearly indicates reliance upon estimates for some data.

Fully Burdened Hourly Rates
The total cost of each service included in this analysis is primarily based on the Fully Burdened Hourly Rates (FBHRs) that were determined for City personnel directly involved in providing services. The FBHRs include not only personnel salary and benefits (see Appendix B), but also any costs that are reasonably ascribable to personnel. The cost elements that are included in the calculation of fully burdened rates are:
 Salaries & benefits of personnel involved
 Operating costs applicable to fee operations
 Departmental support, supervision, and administration overhead  Indirect City-wide overhead costs calculated through the Cost Allocation Plan An important factor in determining the fully burdened rate is in the calculation of productive hours for personnel. This calculation takes the available workable hours in a year of 2,080 and adjusts this figure to 1,650 productive or billable hours to account for calculated or anticipated hours’ employees are involved in non-billable activities such as paid vacation, sick leave, holidays, and other considerations as necessary.

Dividing the full cost, including overhead, of a position by the number of productive hours provides the FBHR.

The FBHRs are then used in conjunction with time estimates, when appropriate for how a service is provided, to calculate a fee’s cost based on the personnel and the amount of their time that is involved in providing each service.

7 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Summary Steps of the Study
The process of the study is straightforward and simple in concept. The following list provides a summary of the study process steps:

Allowable Costs
This report identifies three types of costs that, when combined, constitute the fully burdened cost of a service (Appendix A). Costs are defined as
direct labor, including salary and benefits,
departmental overhead costs, and the City’s
central services overhead, where
departmental and central service overhead
costs constitute support costs. These cost
types are defined as follows:
 Direct Labor (Personnel Costs): The
costs related to staff salaries for
time spent directly on fee-related
services.
 Departmental Overhead: A
proportional allocation of
departmental overhead costs,
including operation costs such as
supplies and materials that are necessary for the department to function.  Central Services Overhead: These costs represent services provided by those Central Services Departments whose primary function is to support other City departments.

Data Analysis
Department Interviews
Time Estimates
Labor Costs
Indirect Support
Building Cost Layers
Direct Services
Indirect Services
Department Overhead
City-Wide Overhead
Set Fees
Define the Full Cost of
Services
Set Cost Recovery Policy

8 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Methodology
The two methods of analysis for calculating fees used in this report are the:

Case Study Method (Standard Unit Cost Build-Up Approach): This approach estimates the actual labor and material costs associated with providing a unit of service to a single user. This analysis is suitable when City staff time requirements do not vary dramatically for a service, or for special projects where the time and cost requirements are easy to identify at the project’s outset. Further, the method is effective in instances when a staff member from one department assists on an application, service or permit for another department on an as-needed basis. Costs are estimated based upon interviews with City staff regarding the time typically spent on tasks, a review of available records, and a time and materials analysis.

Program Cost Approach: In some instances, the underlying data is not available or varies widely, leaving a standard unit cost build-up approach impractical. In addition, market factors and policy concerns (as opposed to actual costs) tend to influence rental based fee levels more than other types of services. Willdan employed a different methodology where appropriate to fit a program’s needs and goals. Typical programmatic approach cases are valuation-based fees, Recreation programs, and instances where a program cost is divided over the user base to obtain a per applicant cost for shared cost services.

Quality Control/Quality Assurance
All study components are interrelated, thus flawed data at any step in the process will cause the ultimate results to be inconsistent and unsound. The elements of our Quality Control process for User Fee calculations include:
 Involvement of knowledgeable City staff
 Clear instructions and guidance to City staff
 Reasonableness tests and validation
 Internal and external reviews
 Cross-checking
Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current fees
Within the fee tables in Appendix C, the differences are identified between the full costs calculated through the study and the fee levels currently in effect. The reasons for differences between the two can arise from a number of possible factors including:
 Previous fee levels may have been set at levels less than full cost intentionally, based on policy decisions
 Position staffing levels, seniority, and the positions that complete fee and service activity may vary from when the previous costs were calculated
 Personnel and materials costs could have increased at levels that differed from any inflationary factors used to increase fees since the last study
 Changes in processes and procedures within a department, or the City as a whole

9 Comprehensive User Fee Study
 Changes in the demand for services in a City may have also changed the staffing or cost structure of departments over time
City Staff Contributions
As part of the study process, Willdan received tremendous support and cooperation from City staff, which contributed and reviewed a variety of components to the study, including:
 Budget and other cost data
 Staffing structures
 Fee and service structures, organization, and descriptions  Direct work hours (billable/non-billable)
 Time estimates to complete work tasks
 Review of draft results and other documentation
A User Fee Study requires significant involvement of the managers and line staff from the departments on top of their existing workloads and competing priorities. The contributions from City staff were critical to this study. We would like to express our appreciation to the City and its staff for their assistance, professionalism, positive attitudes, helpful suggestions, responsiveness, and overall cooperation.

10 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Duarte User Fees
Cost Recovery
The cost recovery models, by department/division fee type, are presented in detail in Appendix C. Full cost recovery is determined by summing the estimated amount of time each position (in increments of minutes or hours) spends to render a service. Time estimates for each service rendered were obtained through interviews conducted with City staff for each department/division fee included in the study. The resulting cost recovery amount represents the total cost of providing each service. The City’s current fee being charged for each service, if applicable, is provided in this section, as well, for reference.

It is important to note that the time data used to determine the amount of time each employee spends assisting in the provision of the services listed on the fee schedule is essential in identifying the total cost of providing each service and will differ from City to City depending on staffing, positions involved, experience of staff, the use of consultants, and the policies and procedures in place for each City.

Specifically, in providing services, a number of employees are often involved in various aspects of the process, spending anywhere from a few minutes to several hours on the service.

The primary goal of this study was to identify the cost of City services, to provide information to help the City make informed decisions regarding the actual fee levels and charges. The responsibility of determining the final fee levels is a complicated task. City staff must consider many issues in formulating recommendations, and the City Council must consider those same issues and more in making the final decisions.

City staff assumes the responsibility to develop specific fee level recommendations to present to the City Council. Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules to guide the City, since many of the considerations are based on the unique characteristics of the City of Duarte, and administrative and political discretion.

However, in setting the level of full cost recovery for each fee, one should consider whether the service solely benefits one end user or the general community.

Subsidization
Recalling the definition of a user fee helps guide decisions regarding subsidization. The general standard is that individuals (or groups) who receive a wholly private benefit should pay 100% of the full cost of the services. In contrast, services that are simply public benefit should be funded entirely by the general fund’s tax dollars. Unfortunately, for the decision makers, some services fall into the range between these two extremes.

Further complicating the decision, opponents of fees often assert that the activities subject to the fees provide economic, cultural, “quality of life,” or other community benefits that exceed the costs to the City, but it is important to distinguish the difference between any purported possible benefits that may be conveyed through the result of activities of the service receiver and the direct benefit being conveyed through the City providing the service to the requestor.

It is recommended the City consider such factors during its deliberations regarding appropriate fee levels.

11 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Of course, subsidization can be an effective public policy tool since it can be used to reduce fees to encourage certain activities (such as to ensure public safety) or allow some people to be able to afford to receive services they otherwise could not at the full cost. In addition, subsidies can be an appropriate and justifiable action, such as to allow citizens to rightfully access services, without overburdensome costs.

Despite the intent, it is important for the City and public to understand that subsidies must be covered by another revenue source, typically the General Fund’s other unrestricted funds.

Impact on Demand (Elasticity)
Economic principles of elasticity suggest that increased costs for services (higher fees) will eventually curtail the demand for the services; whereas lower fees may spark an incentive to utilize the services and encourage certain actions. Either of these conditions may be a desirable effect to the City. However, the level of the fees that would cause demand changes is largely unknown. The cost of service study did not attempt to evaluate the economic or behavioral impacts of higher or lower fees; nevertheless, the City should consider the potential impacts of these issues when deciding on fee levels.

Summary
City staff is recommending setting user fees at suggested fee amounts as detailed in Appendix C. City and departmental goals, City Council priorities, policy initiatives, past performance, implementation issues, and other internal and external factors should influence staff recommendations and City Council decisions. In this case, the proper identification of additional services (new or existing services) and the update to a consistent and comprehensive fee schedule were the primary objectives of this study. City staff has reviewed the full costs and identified the recommended fee levels for consideration by City Council.

The following sections provide background for each department, division, and fee group and the results of this study’s analysis of their fees. For the full list of each fee’s analysis, refer to Appendix C of this report.

12 Comprehensive User Fee Study
City Manager
The City Manager, appointed by the City Council, is responsible for implementing the policies and directives of both the City Council and the Housing Authority, and for overseeing the activities of the City's various Departments and programs. Tasks include identifying community problems and appropriate solutions, making policy recommendations to the City Council, facilitating public participation in the governmental process, and representing the City in legislative actions, environmental issues, emergency management, public information, and interactions with other governmental entities. The City Manager also serves as the Executive Director and Secretary of the Housing Authority. Additional staff within the City Manager's office include an Assistant to the City Manager/Public Information Officer, City Clerk, a Deputy City Clerk, and a Management Aide.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the City Manager. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of the City Manager’s services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach for fees, excluding fees set by the State, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that current fees are not in line with the full cost of providing service. Staff is recommending the fees remain as currently set as detailed in Appendix C.

13 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Public Safety
The Public Safety Department oversees a variety of traditional police services including patrol, traffic enforcement, investigations, and special enforcement provided by the Los Angeles County Sheriff’s Department. In addition, the Department also monitors a juvenile Prevention Intervention Program provided by the Los Angeles County Probation Department.

Other services provided by the Department include animal control, residential and business municipal code compliance, parking enforcement, school crossing guards, crime prevention, and emergency preparedness.

Adult (Community Emergency Response Team - CERT) and youth (Duarte Area Resource Team - DART) volunteer groups assist with a variety of activities, which complement the Department.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Public Safety Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of the Public Safety services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach for fees, excluding parking citations, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that current fees are currently below the full cost of providing services. Staff is recommending the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 32 fees and 72 parking citation fines;  1 fee and 2 parking citation fines will decrease ;
 5 new parking citation fines will be added;
 4 penalties would change to a percentage base fine from a passthrough or no charge fee;  3 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 94% for current fees, excluding parking citation fines.

14 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Parks and Recreation
The Parks and Recreation Department is responsible for the operation of the City’s recreation programs and select community services conducted throughout its eleven neighborhood parks, two sports parks, skate park, fitness center, pools, senior center, teen center, and two recreational trails. The Department also coordinates various city-wide special events, and the scheduling of all City facilities and athletic fields.

In addition to organizing a wide range of programs and events, the Department is responsible for securing and administrating Federal, State, County, and private grants for future park and program development.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Parks and Recreation Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of most Parks and Recreation programs encompassed facility rentals, sports, programs, and other community services. The fee for use for government owned facilities and property can be set discretionally by the City, typically based on past usage characteristics, policy goals, and surrounding jurisdiction comparison. The cost of capital acquisition, maintenance, repair, and upgrade to the City and subsequently the public is offset through rental or use fees. As such these fees should be set using the knowledge of activity use for the facilities, policy desires of the City, and market factors when desirable. It is generally accepted that some Recreation programs provide a measure of public benefit to the residents and City as a whole, and as such is it common for services to bear significant subsidies. In addition, cities generally want to ensure that their programs and services remain affordable to the community at large, and that the programs remain competitive with surrounding jurisdictions. For a few of the fees in Parks and Recreation a standard cost of service approach was used, but some of the additional cost considerations above were not included as this is an operational cost analysis study that does not include considerations for capital. The analysis found that the current fees for facility use and services are below the cost of providing them. The analysis also included a cost recovery analysis for Community Services as a whole and it was determined to be operating at around 10% cost recovery. Staff is recommending the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 48 fees;
 11 fees would decrease;
 3 fees would be variably adjusted, and;
 the remaining fees would remain as currently set.

 1 new fee would be added;

15 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Administrative Services
The Administrative Services Department is responsible for a number of the City’s administrative functions, including finance, human resources, information technology, transportation, and risk management. The Department’s financial activities consist of budget preparation, accounting, investments, cashiering, purchasing, and auditing. Its human resources activities entail recruitments, union negotiation, training, evaluation, discipline, employee benefits, and payroll processing.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Administrative Services Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of Administrative services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City central services.

Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that services are currently set below the full cost of providing them. The analysis found that most of the current fees are underfunding the cost of most of the services. Staff is recommending the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 3 fees;
 the returned check fee will align to the Government Code 1719;  4 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 6% for current fees.

16 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Business License
The Business License Division is responsible for administering and enforcing the City’s business license ordinance. This includes processing new business license applications, renewals, and collecting associated fees. The Division ensures compliance through outreach and enforcement activities, working closely with other City departments to verify zoning and operational requirements. It also serves as a key point of contact for business owners seeking guidance on licensing processes and requirements, thereby supporting economic activity and maintaining regulatory standards within the City.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Business License Division. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of Business License services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach for fees, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that current fees are currently below and above the full cost of providing services. Staff is recommending the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 16 fees;
 2 fees would decrease;
 2 news fees will be added;
 31 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 11%.

17 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Building
The Building Division is responsible for ensuring that all construction within the City complies with applicable building codes, regulations, and safety standards. The Division performs plan checks, issues building permits, and conducts field inspections to enforce code compliance. It plays a critical role in safeguarding public health and safety through structural integrity, fire safety, and energy efficiency requirements. The Division also provides guidance and information to residents, developers, and contractors to support successful project completion.

Analysis
The City of Duarte Building Department utilizes the Los Angeles County Building Fee Schedule which is updated on a biannual basis. The City applies a multiplier of 2.0 to the LA County schedule to recover the full cost of services. A program analysis was performed to determine existing cost recovery for services based on the cost for providing services along with historical revenue and fee activity. The analysis found that the current 2.0 multiplier is achieving full cost recovery for services. The Building fees are detailed in Appendix C. This report does not include fees based on valuation tables.

18 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Planning
The Planning Division manages the City’s land use and development activities to ensure they align with the General Plan and zoning ordinances. This includes reviewing development proposals, processing planning entitlements, conducting environmental reviews, and working with developers, residents, and other stakeholders to guide sustainable and compatible growth. The Division also oversees long-range planning initiatives, updates to planning documents, and coordination with regional agencies on housing and transportation planning efforts.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Planning Division. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of Planning services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved in providing services to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City central services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most of the current fees are underfunding the cost of most of the services.

Staff is recommending the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase for 38 fees;
 5 fees would decrease;
 1 new General Agreements and Contracts fee will be added;  1 fee would be variably adjusted;
 30 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 35%

19 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Public Works
infrastructure, including streets, sidewalks, storm drains, traffic signals, and public facilities. The Department manages capital improvement projects, oversees street sweeping and graffiti removal, and ensures the cleanliness and functionality of the City’s public right-of-way. It also coordinates waste collection and environmental programs, and provides engineering services related to private development and public infrastructure projects.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Public Works Division. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.

The analysis of Public Works services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved in providing services to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City central services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most of the current fees are underfunding the cost of most of the services.

Staff is recommending the fees be adjusted as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 5 fees;
 1 fee would decrease;
 2 new fees will be added;
 2 fees would change to “Fee Set by State” from a flat fee;  11 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 6%.

The Public Works Division is responsible for the maintenance, repair, and improvement of the City’s

20 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered
Below are the total allowable costs that may be recovered through User Fees; however, only a portion of the total allowable cost is recovered as staff not only works on services related to User Fees, but also works on an array of other City functions during the operational hours of the City. The amounts listed below will not reconcile to City budgets as costs that should not be included in overhead for personnel in the application of determining fully burdened hourly rates were excluded. Examples of these costs are capital, debt, monetary transfers, contract costs, and any other costs that are charged directly to the service requestor.

City of Duarte - User Fee Study
Overhead Rate Calculations
Department
Total Salaries &
Benefits
Department
Operating Cost
Direct
Overhead %
Indirect
Allocation %
100: City Manager 789,200 221,200 28% 0%
100: Community Development 1,903,400 610,300 32% 68%
100: Facilities Maintenance 376,800 130,300 35% 0%
100: Finance 912,200 193,700 21% 0%
100: Public Safety 6,882,900 827,200 12% 30%
100: Parks and Recreation 1,657,300 623,600 38% 91%
440: Proposition A Transit Fund 88,300 30,800 35% 48%

21 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix B –Fully Burdened Hourly Rates
Below are fully burdened hourly rates of staff positions that provide for the services detailed in Appendix C. The FBHRs were used to determine the full cost of each service. They include the salary and benefit costs for each position as well as all applicable overhead amounts for each position. For any user fee service request that is outside the scope of the fees detailed in Appendix C, or for services for which there is no fee currently set, the City can charge up to the full cost of the FBHR for personnel involved.

22 Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Duarte - User Fee Study
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Department Title
Fully Burdened
Hourly Rate
100: City Manager CM - Assistant to the City Manager $107.73 100: City Manager CM - City Clerk $110.97
100: City Manager CM - City Manager $235.42
100: City Manager CM - Deputy City Clerk $63.11
100: City Manager CM - Management Analyst - City Manager's Office $71.26 100: Community Development Dev - Administrative Secretary $100.87 100: Community Development Dev - Assistant Civil Engineer $165.91 100: Community Development Dev - Associate Planner $151.98 100: Community Development Dev - Building Permit Technician $120.70 100: Community Development Dev - Director of Community Development $326.37 100: Community Development Dev - Field Services Manager $248.58 100: Community Development Dev - Maintenance Lead Worker $140.37 100: Community Development Dev - Maintenance Technician $89.68 100: Community Development Dev - Planning Manager $266.86 100: Community Development Dev - Public Works Manager $241.02 100: Community Development Dev - Sr Maintenance Technician $120.23 100: Facilities Maintenance Facilities - Facilities Maintenance Supervisor $111.95 100: Finance Fin - Accountant $90.24
100: Finance Fin - Accounting Specialist $82.79
100: Finance Fin - Administrative Secretary $67.37
100: Finance Fin - Assistant City Manager $198.06
100: Finance Fin - Financial Services Manager $117.26
100: Finance Fin - Payroll Technician $60.70
100: Public Safety PS - Administrative Secretary $83.60 100: Public Safety PS - Code Compliance/ Animal Control $87.24 100: Public Safety PS - Crime Prevention Specialist (Part Time 3/4) $95.48 100: Public Safety PS - Director of Public Safety Services $188.57 100: Public Safety PS - Outreach Coordinator -Public Safety Office $77.97 100: Public Safety PS - Public Safety Manager $148.84
100: Public Safety PS - Receptionist Clerk/Typist $75.96 100: Public Safety PS - Senior Code Compliance/Animal Control Officer $101.27 100: Parks and Recreation Rec - Administrative Secretary $165.21 100: Parks and Recreation Rec - Director of Parks and Recreation $338.17 100: Parks and Recreation Rec - Recreation Coordinator $171.82 100: Parks and Recreation Rec - Recreation Manager $234.41 100: Parks and Recreation Rec - Recreation Supervisor $179.54 440: Proposition A Transit Fund Fund 440 - Transit Supervisor $179.58

23 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis
The following tables provide the results of the analysis, resulting full cost recovery amount, and recommended fees. For fees, services, and penalties in which the full cost, existing fee, and suggested fee is listed as “NA”, the amount or percentage was not calculable. This is most common when either the current or the suggested fee includes a variable component that is not comparable on a one-to-one basis, a full cost was not calculated (for penalties, fines, market-based fees, or items not included in the study), or when there is not a current fee amount to compare against.

City Manager
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Candidate Filing Fee $25.00 2.40.010 NA NA $25.00 $02 Banner Fee $50.00 $53.44 6% $50.00 $03 Construction and Demolition:4 Administrative Fee $125.00 6.10.130 $151.98 18% $125.00 $05 Initiative Petition Filing Fee $200.00 EC 9202-B NA NA $200.00 $0 Comprehensive User Fee Study
24

Public Safety
Item No. Title
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Dog License (Annual)2 Unaltered $60.00 8.04.210 (a) $99.85 20% $80.00 $203 Altered $25.00 8.04.210 (a) $99.85 70% $30.00 $54 Senior Altered $0.00 Senior discount limited to one dog per household

8.04.210 (a) $99.85 90% $10.00 $10
5 Dog License Delinquent Penalty $60.00 8.04.220 $119.25 33% $80.00 $206 Senior Dog License Delinquent Penalty $0.00 8.04.220 $119.25 83% $20.00 $20 7 Replacement Dog Tag $6.00 8.04.250 $23.90 16% $20.00 $148 Cat License (permanent)9 Unaltered $40.00 8.04.240 $45.00 0% $45.00 $5 10 Altered $20.00 8.04.240 $45.00 44% $25.00 $511 Animal Impound Fee12 1st $60.00 8.04.150 $172.81 54% $80.00 $2013 2nd $80.00 8.04.150 $172.81 36% $110.00 $3014 3rd $100.00 8.04.150 $172.81 13% $150.00 $5015 Daily Boarding $30.00 $75.95 34% $50.00 $2016 Deceased Dog Pick-Up Fee - Unlicensed 17 Small Dog (1-24 lbs.) $0.00 Includes cremation/disposal fee 8.04.760 $135.95 26% $100.00 $100 18 Medium Dog (25-59 lbs.) $0.00 Includes cremation/disposal fee 8.04.760 $223.45 22% $175.00 $175 19 Large Dog (60-100 lbs.) $0.00 Includes cremation/disposal fee 8.04.760 $401.91 38% $250.00 $250 20 Wild or Vicious Animal Permit:21 Application Fee (New & Renewal) $250.00 8.04.680 $457.73 24% $350.00 $10022 Application Appeal $290.00 8.04.610 (b) $401.64 25% $300.00 $1023 Parking Citation Fine $60.00 Fines will vary based on violation severity NA NA Separate Sheet Variable24 Parking Citation Delinquent Penalty 100% NA NA 100% of base bail (fine) $0 25 Vehicle Impound Fee $140.00 $344.43 52% $165.00 $2526 Vehicle Inspection Fee $0.00 $37.21 33% $25.00 $2527 Disabled Placard Administrative Fee $40.00 Fee cannot exceed $25 per 40226 CVC 40226 CVC $37.21 33% $25.00 -$15 28 Administrative Hearing Fee $50.00 $152.70 51% $75.00 $2529 Administrative Citation 1st Delinquent Penalty Passthrough fees NA NA 50% of base bail (fine) NA Comprehensive User Fee Study
25

Public Safety
Item No. Title
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 30 Administrative Citation 2nd Delinquent Penalty Passthrough fees NA NA 25% of base bail (fine) NA 31 Overnight Parking Fees32 Annual permit $100.00 11.13.060 $227.94 45% $125.00 $2533 Temporary permit $1.00 per day 11.13.080 $174.42 97% $5.00 $434 Recreational Vehicle (RV) Permit35 Resident $5.00 per day 11.16.020 (A) $20.90 52% $10.00 $536 Guest $10.00 per day 11.16.020 (A) $20.90 28% $15.00 $537 Senior Resident $5.00 per day First three days per month are free 11.16.020 (A) $20.90 76% $5.00 $0 38 Removal of Political Campaign
Signs $45.00 9.34.090 $101.27 41% $60.00 $15
39 Removal of Temporary Signs in the Public Right of Way $0.00 19.42.090 (C)(3) $101.27 41% $60.00 $60 40 Bicycle License (4 Years) $7.00 11.20.060 $21.90 54% $10.00 $341 Copy of Sheriff's Department Report $25.00 NA NA $25.00 $0
42 Deliquent Penalty for unpaid fees and assements $0.00 NA NA 10% of base fees and assements every 30 days up to 50% of total orginal Variable 43 Annual Cart Retrieval Program
Review $60.00 9.70.070 (E) $373.98 20% $300.00 $240
44 Cart Redemption Fee $60.00 per cart 9.70.100 (C) $267.97 44% $150.00 $9045 Cart Storage Fine (Day 4 - 10) $50.00 per cart, per day Fine escalates through duration of storage 9.70.100 (D) $342.39 78% $75.00 $25 46 Cart Storage Fine (Day 11 - 20) $0.00 per cart, per day Fine escalates through duration of storage 9.70.100 (D) $342.39 71% $100.00 $100 47 Cart Storage Fine (Day 21 - 30) $0.00 per cart, per day Fine escalates through duration of storage 9.70.100 (D) $342.39 56% $150.00 $150 Comprehensive User Fee Study
26

CODE
SECTION CODE CURRENT BAIL SUGGESTED BAIL DESCRIPTION Fee Δ

6.15.060(A)(1) DMC $60 $100 CONTROLLING SPILLS $40.009.46.010 DMC $60 $100 UNAUTHORIZED VEHICLE REPAIR $40.0011.08.010 DMC $60 $100 OVERWEIGHT ON RESTRICTED STREET $40.0011.12.021 DMC $60 $65 RESTRICTED PARKING ON CITY PROPERTY $5.0011.12.024(a) DMC $60 $100 VEH FOR SALE IN PKG LOT / COMM ZONE $40.0011.12.024(b) DMC $60 $100 VEH WASH/REPAIR IN PKG LOT / COMM ZONE $40.0011.12.030(a) DMC $60 $100 >80" WIDE/>10,000 LB ANY STREET-OVR 2 HR $40.0011.12.031 DMC $60 $100 OVER 10,000 LBS, OVER 2 HRS ANY STREET $40.0011.12.050 DMC $60 $65 PKD ON ST W/O CURB, OBSTRUCTING TRAFFIC $5.0011.13.010 DMC $60 $65 3 AM-6 AM WITHOUT A PERMIT $5.0011.13.120 DMC $60 $65 IMPROPER DISPLAY OF ALL-NIGHT PKG PERMIT $5.0011.15.030(a) DMC $60 $65 STREET SWEEPING RESTRICTION $5.0011.16.020(A) DMC $60 $85 RV PERMIT REQUIRED $25.0011.22.010 DMC $60 $65 PRIV PROP W/O OWNER CONSENT $5.0011.22.012(a) DMC $60 $100 >80" WIDE/>10,000 LB PRIV PROP-OVER 2 HR $40.0019.38.080(B) DDC $60 $65 LIVING/SLEEPING IN VEH PROHIBITED $5.0019.38080(C) DDC $60 $65 INOP/UNREG VEH PKD IN PKG LOT - PUB VIEW $5.0019.38.090(A) DDC $60 $100 COMM VEH OVER 6,000 LBS ON R-ZONED LOT $40.0019.38.120(C) DDC $60 $65 PARKING IN FRONT OR STREET SIDE YARD $5.0015.20.070 LACC $63 $65 FAILURE TO OBEY SIGNS/CURB MARKINGS $2.0015.20.130 LACC $48 $65 PKG SPACE MARKINGS (ON STREET) $17.0015.52.040(B) LACC $48 $65 NO PARKING IN BICYCLE LANE $17.0015.64.010 LACC $48 $65 PARKING TIME LIMITS $17.0015.64.040 LACC $48 $65 PARKING IN FRONT OF USPS MAIL BOX $17.0015.64.052 LACC $78 $100 NO PKG COMM VEH >10,000 LBS - RESID DIST $22.0015.64.100 LACC $53 $100 DISCONNECTED TRAILER $47.0015.64.110 LACC $263 $300 PARKING IN BUS ZONE $37.0015.64.120(A) LACC $53 $65 WHITE CURB-3 MIN PASSENGER LOADING ZONE $12.0015.64.130 LACC $53 $65 PARKING IN ALLEY $12.0015.64.140 LACC $53 $65 TEMPORARY NO PARKING $12.0015.64.210 LACC $48 $65 PARKING UNATTENDED VEH W/KEY IN IGNITION $17.001.64.240 LACC $48 $65 MARKED STALLS - ANGLED PKG ON STREET $17.0015.64.250(A) LACC $53 $65 DOUBLE PARKING - PRIVATE STREET $12.00 Parking Citation Fine
Comprehensive User Fee Study
27

CODE
SECTION CODE CURRENT BAIL SUGGESTED BAIL DESCRIPTION Fee Δ

15.64.260 LACC $53 $65 NO PARKING ANYTIME $12.0015.64.261 LACC New $65 >6 FT TALL WITHIN 100 FT OF INTERSECTION N/A15.64.270 LACC $53 $65 PKG ON PUBLIC/PRIV PROP W/O OWNER CONSENT $12.0015.64.280 LACC $53 $65 PARKING ON WRONG SIDE OF STREET $12.0015.64.290 LACC $53 $65 PARKING ON PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY $12.0015.64.310(B) LACC $363 $375 PARKED VEH TRANSPORTING HAZARDOUS WASTE $12.0015.64.320(A) LACC $53 $65 BLOCKING DRIVEWAY - PRIVATE STREET $12.0015.64.370(A) LACC $68 $100 WITHIN 15 FT OF FIRE HYDRANT - PRIV ST $32.0015.64.390 LACC $53 $65 RESERVED/ASSIGNED PARKING SPACE $12.0015.64.400 LACC $338 $355 DISABLED PARKING - ON-STREET PARKING $17.0015.64.410 LACC $338 $355 DISABLED PARKING - PARKING LOT $17.0015.76.120(A) LACC $53 $65 REPAIRING VEHICLE ON STREET $12.0015.76.130 LACC $53 $65 WASHING VEHICLE ON STREET $12.0017.04.370 LACC $53 $65 PARKING IN PARK AREAS $12.004000(a)(1) CVC $73 $85 EXPIRED REGISTRATION $12.005200(a) CVC $38 $65 DISPLAY OF LICENSE PLATE $27.005204(a)(1) CVC $73 $85 NO CURRENT REGISTRATION TABS $12.0021113(a)(1) CVC $53 $65 UNLAWFUL PARKING - PUBLIC PROPERTY $12.0022500(a) CVC $53 $65 PARKING WITHIN INTERSECTION $12.0022500(b) CVC $53 $65 PARKING ON CROSSWALK $12.0022500(d) CVC $68 $85 WITHIN 15 FT OF FIRE STATION DRIVEWAY $17.0022500(e) CVC $53 $65 BLOCKING DRIVEWAY $12.0022500(f) CVC $53 $65 BLOCKING SIDEWALK $12.0022500(g) CVC $53 $65 STREET EXCAVATION ZONE-BLKING TRAFFIC $12.0022500(h) CVC $53 $65 DOUBLE PARKING - PUBLIC STREET $12.0022500(i) CVC $263 $300 PARKING IN BUS ZONE $37.0022500(j) CVC $53 $65 PARKING IN A TUNNEL $12.0022500(k) CVC $53 $65 PARKING ON A BRIDGE $12.0022500(l) CVC $258 $300 BLOCKING DISABLED ACCESS RAMP $42.0022500(n)(1)(A) CVC New $65 PARKED WITHIN 20 FT OF CROSSWALK NA22500.1 CVC $78 $100 PARKING IN FIRE LANE $22.0022502(a) CVC $53 $65 PARKING 18 INCHES FROM CURB $12.0022507.8(a) CVC $338 $355 DISABLED PARKING-NO PLACARD OR PLATE $17.0022507.8(b) CVC $338 $355 DISABLED PARKING-BLOCKING PARKING SPACE $17.00 Comprehensive User Fee Study
28

CODE
SECTION CODE CURRENT BAIL SUGGESTED BAIL DESCRIPTION Fee Δ 22507.8(c) CVC $338 $355 DISABLED PARKING-CROSSHATCHED LINES $17.0022511.1(a) CVC New $65 PKD IN EV CHARGING SPACE W/O CHARGING NA22511.1(b) CVC New $65 BLOCKING EV CHARGING SPACE NA22514 CVC $68 $100 PARKED WITHIN 15 FT OF FIRE HYDRANT $32.0022515(a) CVC $53 $65 UNATTENDED VEHICLE $12.0022516 CVC $48 $65 PERSON LOCKED IN VEHICLE $17.0022517 CVC $68 $100 LEAVE VEHICLE DOOR OPEN TO TRAFFIC $32.0022519 CVC New $65 PROHIBITED / RESTRICTED PKG-CITY PKG LOT NA22521 CVC $43 $100 PKG WITHIN 7 1/2 FT OF RAILROAD TRACK $57.0022522 CVC $288 $300 WITHIN 3 FT OF SIDEWALK ACCESS RAMP $12.0022523(a) CVC $113 $100 ABANDONED VEHICLE ON PUBLIC STREET -$13.0022523(b) CVC $113 $100 ABANDONED VEHICLE ON PUBLIC/PRIV PROP -$13.00 Comprehensive User Fee Study
29

Parks and Recreation
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Vendor Booth Fees $75.00 Per booth NA NA Varies NA2 Classes & Camps3 Day Camp4 Res $125.00 NA NA $150.00 $255 Non Res $150.00 NA NA $175.00 $256 Recreation Classes Varies NA NA Varies NA7 Swim Lessons8 Res $45.00 NA NA $50.00 $59 Non Res $56.00 NA NA $65.00 $9 10 Swim Team11 Res $200.00 NA NA $225.00 $2512 Non Res $250.00 NA NA $250.00 $013 Private Swim Lessons14 Res $280.00 NA NA $300.00 $2015 Non Res $280.00 NA NA $340.00 $6016 Youth Sports17 Res $60.00 NA NA $60.00 $018 Non Res $70.00 NA NA $70.00 $019 Excursions20 Excursions (All ages) $45.00 NA NA Varies NA21 Fitness Center:22 Membership:23 Total Facility - Individual24 Res $200.00 NA NA $225.00 $2525 Non Res $275.00 NA NA $325.00 $5026 Total Facility - Individual Senior (60+)27 Res $120.00 NA NA $120.00 $028 Total Facility - Individual Senior & Spouse (60+)29 Res $220.00 NA NA $220.00 $0 Comprehensive User Fee Study
30

Parks and Recreation
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 30 Total Facility - Family31 Res (Max of 4- ages 14+) $300.00 NA NA $450.00 $15032 Non Res (Max of 4- ages 14+) $400.00 NA NA $600.00 $20033 Lap Swim34 Res (Individual 14+) $2.00 NA NA $3.00 $135 Non Res (Individual 14+) $2.00 NA NA $5.00 $336 Res (Senior 60+) New NA NA $2.00 NA37 Open Swim38 Individual 12 & Under $1.00 NA NA $2.00 $139 Individtual 13+ $2.00 NA NA $3.00 $140 Rental - Community Center:41 Full Auditorium:42 Hourly Rate43 Res $300.00 NA NA $100.00 -$20044 Non Res $600.00 NA NA $150.00 -$45045 Half Auditorium:46 Hourly Rate47 Res $150.00 NA NA $60.00 -$9048 Non Res $300.00 NA NA $110.00 -$19049 Kitchen $100.00 NA NA $150.00 $5050 Audio/Visual Equipment $60.00 NA NA $60.00 $051 Cleaning/Damage Bond Full Auditorium $500.00 NA NA $500.00 $0 52 Cleaning/Damage Bond Half Auditorium $300.00 NA NA $300.00 $0 53 Rental - Courts (per hour)54 Basketball, Futsal, Tennis, Pickleball or Volleyball55 Res $25.00 NA NA $25.00 $056 Non Res $40.00 NA NA $40.00 $0 Comprehensive User Fee Study
31

Parks and Recreation
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 57 Duarte Youth Non Profit $0.00 NA NA $0.00 $058 Cleaning/Damage Deposit $100.00 NA NA $100.00 $059 Rental - Gazebos (Small) 8hr60 Res $50.00 NA NA $60.00 $1061 Non Res $75.00 NA NA $85.00 $1062 Rental - Gazebos (Large) 8hr63 Res $75.00 NA NA $85.00 $1064 Non Res $100.00 NA NA $110.00 $1065 Cleaning/Damage Deposit $50.00 NA NA $50.00 $066 Rental - Parks (No Lights) per hr67 Soccer/Open Field68 Res $10.00 NA NA $30.00 $2069 Non Res $30.00 NA NA $50.00 $2070 Duarte Youth Non Profit $0.00 NA NA $10.00 $1071 Cleaning/Damage Deposit $100.00 NA NA $100.00 $072 Rental - Royal Oaks Park Building:73 Hourly Rate74 Res $90.00 NA NA $60.00 -$3075 Non Res $180.00 NA NA $90.00 -$9076 Cleaning/Damage Bond $150.00 NA NA $250.00 $10077 Rental - Skate Park78 Res $30.00 NA NA $30.00 $079 Non Res $55.00 NA NA $55.00 $080 Duarte Youth Non Profit $0.00 NA NA $10.00 $1081 Cleaning/Damage Bond $100.00 NA NA $250.00 $15082 Rental - Sports Fields (per hour):83 With Lights84 Res $30.00 NA NA $50.00 $2085 Non Res $55.00 NA NA $80.00 $25 Comprehensive User Fee Study
32

Parks and Recreation
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 86 Duarte Youth Non Profit $15.00 NA NA $15.00 $087 Without Lights88 Res $10.00 NA NA $30.00 $2089 Non Res $20.00 NA NA $50.00 $3090 Duarte Youth Non Profit $0.00 NA NA $10.00 $1091 Cleaning/Damage Bond $100.00 NA NA $100.00 $092 Rental - Swimming Pool (per hour):93 Pool Party - 2 Hr Min94 50 Persons & Under (Trng or Comp)95 Res $60.00 NA NA $145.00 $8596 Non Res $120.00 NA NA $290.00 $17097 51 to 100 Persons (Comp Only)98 Res $75.00 NA NA $160.00 $8599 Non Res $150.00 NA NA $320.00 $170 100 101 to 150 Persons (Comp Only)101 Res $100.00 NA NA $205.00 $105102 Non Res $200.00 NA NA $410.00 $210103 151 to 200 Persons (Comp Only)104 Res $150.00 NA NA $255.00 $105105 Non Res $300.00 NA NA $510.00 $210106 Cleaning/Damage Bond $200.00 NA NA $500.00 $300107 Rental - Teen Center:108 Mtg/Patio109 Hourly Rate110 Res $125.00 NA NA $75.00 -$50111 Non Res $250.00 NA NA $125.00 -$125112 Gas BBQ Grill Rate $20.00 NA NA $50.00 $30113 Cleaning/Damage Bond $300.00 NA NA $500.00 $200114 Mtg Room Only Comprehensive User Fee Study
33

Parks and Recreation
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 115 Hourly Rate116 Res $50.00 NA NA $60.00 $10117 Non Res $100.00 NA NA $90.00 -$10118 Cleaning/Damage Bond $100.00 NA NA $250.00 $150119 Senior Center Dining Room120 Hourly Rate121 Res $300.00 NA NA $175.00 -$125122 Non Res $600.00 NA NA $225.00 -$375123 Cleaning/Damage Bond $500.00 NA NA $500.00 $0124 Boxing Membership125 Youth Res $10.00 NA NA $15.00 $5.00126 Youth Non Res $20.00 NA NA $25.00 $5.00127 Adult Res $10.00 NA NA $25.00 $15.00128 Adult Non Res $20.00 NA NA $40.00 $10.00 Comprehensive User Fee Study
34

Administrative Services
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Business License:2 Application Fee $35.00 $135.12 63% $50.00 $153 Copy Charge - Paper4 Res $0.35 $0.35 0% $0.35 $05 Non Res $0.45 $0.45 0% $0.45 $06 Garage & Lawn Sale Application Permit $0.00 NA NA $0.00 $0
7 Returned Check Charge $40.00 Civil Code 1719 NA NA First Check $25/Additional Check $35 -$15 8 Special Event Insurance:9 Application Fee $90.00 Per Application $149.30 33% $100.00 $10 10 Premium Actual Cost Actual Cost NA NA Actual Cost $011 Credit Card Convenience Fee 3.78% 10.07% 60% 4.00% 0.22% Comprehensive User Fee Study
35

Business License
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Business License Fees2 Business License Application Permit $35.00 Annual Fee also in Admin tab $379.23 87% $50.00 $153 Classification A- Manufacturing & Wholesaling $132.00 Annual Fee Plus $10 per EE 5.08.140 NA NA $132.00 $0 4 Classification B- Professional Services $132.00 Annual Fee Plus $10 per EE 5.08.150 NA NA $132.00 $05 Classification C- Retail Businesses $132.00 Annual Fee Plus $10 per EE 5.08.160 NA NA $132.00 $06 Classification D- Building Trades $306.00 Annual Fee 5.08.170 NA NA $306.00 $07 Classification D- Building Trades: 3 month $76.50 5.08.170 NA NA $76.50 $08 Classification D- Building Trades: 6 months $153.00 5.08.170 NA NA $153.00 $09 Classification D- Building Trades: 9 months $229.50 5.08.170 NA NA $229.50 $0 10 Poolhalls $175.00 Annual Fee Plus Per Table 5.08.180 NA NA $175.00 $011 Table Fee $47.00 Per Table 5.08.180 NA NA $47.00 $012 Bowling Alleys $175.00 Annual Fee Plus Per Lane 5.08.190 NA NA $175.00 $013 Lane Fee $37.00 Per Lane 5.08.190 NA NA $37.00 $014 Skating Rinks and Shooting Galleries $362.00 Annual Fee 5.08.200 NA NA $362.00 $015 Circuses, Tent Shows and Carnivals16 First Day $1,065.00 Annual Fee 5.08.210 NA NA $1,065.00 $017 Each Additional Day $337.00 Each 5.08.210 NA NA $337.00 $018 Swap Meets $716.00 Annual Fee Plus $14,180 in lieu of license tax on individual vendors 5.08.211 NA NA $716.00 $0 19 Coin-Operated Machines 5.08.22020 Vending Machines Based on Gross Receipts NA NA Based on Gross Receipts $021 Amusement Machines $132.00 Annual Fee Per Machine NA NA $132.00 $022 Arcade 10+ Machines $383.00 Annual Fee NA NA $383.00 $023 Dispensing Service24 For 1st 30 Machines $132.00 NA NA $132.00 $025 Per Machine over 30 $1.00 Per Machine NA NA $1.00 $026 Rentals27 First 4 Units $175.00 Annual Fee 5.08.230 NA NA $175.00 $028 Each Add'l Unit $37.00 Per Unit 5.08.230 NA NA $37.00 $029 Utilizing/Delivery Vehicles $170.00 Annual Fee 5.08.240 NA NA $170.00 $030 Mobile Sales of Commodities $236.00 Annual Fee 5.08.280 NA NA $236.00 $031 Salvage Trucks $542.00 Annual Fee 5.08.310 NA NA $542.00 $032 Taxis $95.00 Annual Fee Per Vehicle 5.08.320 NA NA $95.00 $033 Outdoor Advertising $768.00 Annual Fee Plus Advertising Space 5.08.330 NA NA $768.00 $034 Advertising Space $0.88 Per Sq Ft NA NA $0.88 $035 Distribution of Advertising Material $75.00 Annual Fee Plus $10 per badge 5.32.070 $83.56 4% $80.00 $536 Amusement and Entertainment 5.82.04037 Application Fee $500.00 $777.66 4% $750.00 $25038 Permit- Burlesque $3,700.00 Annual Fee $3,478.43 0% $3,470.00 -$23039 Permit- Other $500.00 Annual Fee $777.66 4% $750.00 $25040 Auctioneer License $500.00 Annual Fee 5.12.060 $744.22 1% $740.00 $240 Comprehensive User Fee Study
36

Business License
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 41 Bingo Permit $190.00 Annual Fee 9.13.040 $275.32 2% $270.00 $8042 Renewal $100.00 9.13.040 $99.63 10% $90.00 -$1043 Business on Vacant Lot $750.00 Annual Fee 5.36.040 $963.52 0% $960.00 $21044 Close out sale permit $230.00 Annual Fee 5.28.030 $432.57 21% $340.00 $11045 Fortune Telling Permit $1,600.00 Annual Fee 9.08.030 (f) 9.08.060 (d) $1,796.28 0% $1,790.00 $190 46 Massage Parlor $856.00 Annual Fee 5.08.010 $1,421.00 10% $1,280.00 $42447 Renewal $321.00 5.08.010 $358.11 2% $350.00 $2948 Massage Technicians $216.00 Annual Fee 5.56.140 $560.66 43% $320.00 $10449 Renewal $135.00 5.56.140 $275.32 0% $275.00 $14050 Filming Permit $1,300.00 Annual Fee Per Day 5.40.030 $1,572.83 0% $1,570.00 $27051 Public Dance $250.00 Annual Fee 5.76.080 $364.78 1% $360.00 $11052 Tobacco Retailer License Fee $125.00 Annual Fee 5.09.100 $558.12 51% $275.00 $15053 Auctions and Sales by Public Outcry $1,880.00 Annual Fee 5.12.020 NA NA $1,880.00 $054 Solicitors and Peddlers $287.00 Annual Fee Per Day 5.16.080 NA NA $287.00 $055 Secondhand Dealers, Pawnbrokers and Junk Dealers $1,419.00 Annual Fee 5.24.040 NA NA $1,419.00 $0 56 Home Occupation New Annual Fee 19.08.15 $443.00 70% $132.00 NA57 Large Family Daycare New Annual Fee 19.60.100 $142.71 100% $0.00 NA Comprehensive User Fee Study
37

Building
# Description Category Building Use Current Fee/Charge Unit Unit Tier Notes1 M1. Equipment Mechanical All $78.65 each ≥ 1 units2 M2. Equipment Mechanical All $151.52 each ≥ 1 units3 M3. Equipment Mechanical All $379.46 each ≥ 1 units4 M9. Air Inlets and Outlets Mechanical All $12.22 each ≥ 1 units5 M7. Appliance Vents Mechanical All $37.32 each ≥ 1 units6 M4. Air Handler Unit Mechanical All $37.32 each Up to 10 units Over 10 units: $11.55 per unit7 M5. Air Handler Unit Mechanical All $112.86 each ≥ 1 units8 M6. Air Handler Unit Mechanical All $189.73 each ≥ 1 units9 M8. Evaporative Cooler Mechanical All $63.54 each ≥ 1 units10 M11. Ventilation Fans Mechanical All $46.43 each Up to 10 units Over 10 units: $16.22 per unit11 M12. Ventilation System Mechanical All $98.20 each ≥ 1 units12 M15. Product Conveying Duct System Mechanical Commercial $189.73 each ≥ 1 units13 M14. Fire Damper Mechanical Commercial $30.66 each ≥ 1 units14 M13. Alteration of Existing Duct System Mechanical Commercial $78.65 each ≥ 1 units15 Fee for work done without required permit Mechanical Commercial $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
16 P1. Plumbing Fixtures Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units17 P5. Dishwasher Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units18 P22. Future stacks or branches Plumbing Commercial $25.77 each ≥ 1 units19 P3. Roof Drain Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units20 P19. Backwater Sewer Valve Plumbing Commercial $135.74 each ≥ 1 units21 P18. Industrial Waste Interceptor Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units22 P21. Swimming Pool Drainage Trap and Receptor Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units
23 P15. Low Pressure Gas Piping System Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each First 5 units > 5 units: $12.00 24 P17. Gas Meter Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units25 P2. Water Heater and/or Vent Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units26 E2. New Multifamily Residential Buildings Electrical Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $0.23 sq. ft. ≥ 1 sq. ft. 27 E1. New Single & Two-Family Residential Buildings Electrical Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $0.44 sq. ft. ≥ 1 sq. ft.28 Surcharge Mechanical Plan Check Fee Mechanical Commercial $487.88 sq. ft. ≥ 1 sq. ft.29 Surcharge Installation Mechanical Fee Mechanical Commercial $732.48 each ≥ 1 units30 Site Inspection Building Commercial $633.62 each ≥ 1 units31 Site Inspection Building Commercial $1,561.62 sq. ft. Up to 5,000 sq. ft. 5,001 – 10,000 sq. ft.: $1,879.30 | 10,001 – 100,000 sq. ft.: $3,124.34 | > 5000 sq. ft.: $4,735.48 32 Demolition Inspection Building Commercial $473.66 each ≥ 1 units33 Special Safety Provision Inspections Building Commercial $473.66 each Up to 1 unit Over 1 units: $76.20 per unit34 Inspections outside of normal business hours Building Commercial $284.38 hours ≥ 1 hours 35 Inspections Building Commercial $284.38 hours ≥ 1 hours36 Pool/Spa Barrier Inspection Pool Commercial $266.82 each ≥ 1 units37 Swimming Pool Refundable Deposit Pool Commercial $500.00 each ≥ 1 units Comprehensive User Fee Study
38

Building
# Description Category Building Use Current Fee/Charge Unit Unit Tier Notes38 Private Swimming Pool Electrical Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $235.05 each ≥ 1 units 39 Private Swimming Pool - Other Electrical Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $158.18 each ≥ 1 units40 E23. Carnivals and Circuses - Generators Electrical Commercial $112.86 each ≥ 1 units41 E24. Carnivals and Circuses - Rides Electrical Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units42 E24. Carnivals and Circuses - Booth Lighting Electrical Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units 43 E3. Temporary Power Service Electrical Commercial $126.41 each ≥ 1 units44 E4. Temporary Power Distribution Electrical Commercial $61.98 each ≥ 1 units45 E5. Branch Circuit (15 or 20 amp 120 volt) Electrical Commercial $50.21 each Up to 10 units 11 to 40 units: $41.77 | Over 40 units: $37.32 per unit 46 E6. Branch Circuit (15 or 20 amp 208-277 volt) Electrical Commercial $79.09 each ≥ 1 units 47 E7. Outlets Electrical Commercial $6.22 each Up to 20 units Over 20 units: $4.22 per unit 48 E8. Lighting Fixtures Electrical Commercial $6.22 each Up to 20 units Over 20: $4.22 per unit49 E9. Lighting Fixtures Electrical Commercial $7.33 each ≥ 1 units50 E10. Lighting Fixtures Electrical Commercial $7.33 each ≥ 1 units51 E11. Residential Appliances (3 HP or less) Electrical Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$30.88 each ≥ 1 units
52 E12. Non-Residential Appliances (3 HP or less) Electrical Commercial, Residential - MFR, Residential - SFR $44.88 each ≥ 1 units 53 E13. Power Apparatus (4-10 HP, KW, KVA) Electrical
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$57.76 each ≥ 1 units
54 E20. Signs, Outline Lighting or Marquees Electrical
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$112.86 each ≥ 1 units
55 E21. Signs, Outline Lighting or Marquees Electrical
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$37.32 each ≥ 1 units
56 E17. Service Panels (399 amps or less) Electrical
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$112.86 each ≥ 1 units
57 E18. Services Panels (400-1,000 amps) Electrical
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$221.06 each ≥ 1 units
58 E19. Services Panels (over 1,000 amps) Electrical
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$470.55 each ≥ 1 units
59 Other Mechanical Fee Mechanical
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
Comprehensive User Fee Study
39

Building
# Description Category Building Use Current Fee/Charge Unit Unit Tier Notes60 Other Building Fee Building Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
61 Other Electrical Fee Electrical
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
62 Other Plumbing Fee Plumbing
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
63 Plan Review Building
Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR, Commercial
$317.26 hours ≥ 1 hours
64 Issuance of Certificate of Occupancy Building Commercial $293.04 hours ≥ 1 hours65 Issuance of Temporary Certificate of Occupancy Building Commercial $440.11 each ≥ 1 units
66 Extension Temporary Certificate of
Occupancy Building Commercial $293.04 hours ≥ 1 hours
67 Investigation of alternate materials and methods of construction Building Commercial $634.50 hours ≥ 1 hours68 Fee for work done without required permit Building Commercial $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
69 E14. Power Apparatus (11-50 HP, KW, KVA) Electrical Commercial $133.52 each ≥ 1 units70 E15. Power Apparatus (51-100 HP, KW, KVA) Electrical Commercial $249.72 each ≥ 1 units71 E16. Power Apparatus (over 100 HP, KW, KVA) Electrical Commercial $412.79 each ≥ 1 units72 Fee for work done without required permit Electrical Commercial $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
73 P16. Med/High Gas Piping System With 1 Outlet Plumbing Commercial $194.62 each Up to 1 units Over 1 units: $12.00 per unit 74 P12. Gas Pressure Regulator Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units75 P6. Drainage and/or Vent Piping Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units76 P14. Water-Treating Equipment Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units77 P13. Water Pressure Regulator Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units78 P8. Water Piping Line Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units79 P9. Water Piping Line Plumbing Commercial $146.85 each ≥ 1 units80 P10. Water Piping Line Plumbing Commercial $317.25 each ≥ 1 units81 P7. Water Piping Replacement Plumbing Commercial $19.55 each ≥ 1 units82 P11. Sprinkler System Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units83 P23. Backflow Devices on Unprotected Water Supplies Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units 84 P4. Trap Primer Plumbing Commercial $47.32 each ≥ 1 units85 P20. Solar Water Heating System Plumbing Commercial $158.18 each ≥ 1 units86 S1. Public Sewer Connection Sewer Commercial $135.74 each ≥ 1 units Comprehensive User Fee Study
40

Building
# Description Category Building Use Current Fee/Charge Unit Unit Tier Notes87 S5. House Sewer Manhole Sewer Commercial $135.74 each ≥ 1 units88 S8. Section of House Sewer Sewer Commercial $87.76 each ≥ 1 units89 S4. Connection of Additional Building Sewer Commercial $87.76 each ≥ 1 units90 S9. Connection of House Sewer to Private System Sewer Commercial $87.76 each ≥ 1 units
91 S3. Private Sewage Disposal System Sewer Commercial $278.82 each ≥ 1 units92 S6. Grey Water System Sewer Commercial $278.82 each ≥ 1 units93 S7. Cesspool, Overflow Seepage Pit, Percolation Test Pit Sewer Commercial $135.74 each ≥ 1 units94 S2. Disconnect, Abandon, Alter or Repair Sewer Sewer Commercial $87.76 each ≥ 1 units
95 Fee for work done without required
permit Sewer Commercial $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
96 Fee for work done without required
permit Plumbing Commercial $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars
97 Other Plan Check Fee Building Commercial $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars98 Grading Plan Check Fee Grading Commercial $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars99 Residential Solar Plan Check Solar Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $250.00 each ≥ 1 units 100 Investigation of alternate materials and methods of construction Building Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $317.25 each ≥ 1 units101 Other Grading Fee Grading Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars102 PW C&D Deposit Encroachment Permit Fees Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars103 Cash Bond Encroachment Permit Fees Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR $1.00 dollars ≥ 1 dollars104 Plumbing Plan Check Plumbing Commercial Fee is 40% of the fees in this category minus the Issuance Fee. dollars
105 Electrical Plan Check Electrical Residential - SFR, Residential - MFR Fee is 70% of the fees in this category minus the Issuance Fee. each Comprehensive User Fee Study
41

PLANNING
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Site Plan and Design Review2 Single Story Addition (up to 600 sf in R1, R2) $75.00 $370.68 60% $150.00 $75 3 Single Story Addition (over 600 sf in R1, R2) & (up to 250 sf in R1-D) $300.00 $848.18 53% $400.00 $100 4 Single Story Addition (over 250 sf in R1-D) $500.00 $513.39 3% $500.00 $0 5 Second Story Addition (less than 600 sf) $600.00 $848.18 17% $700.00 $100 6 Second Story Addition (over 250 sf) $750.00 $1,152.14 31% $800.00 $507 New Single Story House $1,400.00 $1,859.54 3% $1,800.00 $4008 New Two Story House $2,000.00 $2,600.90 4% $2,500.00 $5009 Addition to Multi-Family $1,000.00 $4,565.26 1% $4,500.00 $3,500 10 Major Multi-Family improvements (No Addition) $500.00 $1,975.10 4% $1,900.00 $1,400 11 Second Unit - ADU $1,000.00 $1,564.32 4% $1,500.00 $50012 Pools, single family façade changes, etc No Charge NA NA No Charge $0
13 Commercial Addition (up to 2,500 sf) $1,000.00 $1,307.80 1% $1,300.00 $300 14 Commercial Addition (over 2,500 sf) $2,500.00 $5,900.03 0% $5,900.00 $3,400 15 New Multi-Family and Mixed Use $5,000.00 $12,897.50 22% $10,000.00 $5,00016 New Commercial (less than 2,500 sf) $4,000.00 $5,000.00 0% $5,000.00 $1,000 17 New Commercial (2,500 sf and up to 20,000 sf) $5,000.00 $17,908.38 44% $10,000.00 $5,000 18 New Commercial (over 20,000 sf) $6,000.00 $24,168.73 38% $15,000.00 $9,00019 Minor parking & façade changes $100.00 $518.99 61% $200.00 $10020 Major Exterior Improvements Commercial (No Addition) $500.00 $4,402.08 9% $4,000.00 $3,500 21 Items Not Listed Requiring Director
Review $300.00 $515.31 3% $500.00 $200
Comprehensive User Fee Study
42

PLANNING
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 22 Items Not Listed Requiring ARB
Review $2,000.00 $2,563.80 2% $2,500.00 $500
23 Reasonable Accommodation $300.00 NA NA $300.00 $024 Determinations 25 Director Decision $250.00 $443.00 10% $400.00 $15026 Zoning Clearance No Charge NA NA No Charge $027 Landscape Plan Review28 No Water Efficient Requirements $100.00 $218.70 9% $200.00 $10029 Landscape Plan Review (Subject to Water Efficient Requirements) Consultant Cost+10% Staff Overhead (or $400 if not subject to consultant review) NA NA Consultant Cost+10% Staff Overhead (or $400 if not subject to consultant review) $0 30 Lighting Plan Review
Consultant Cost+10% Staff Overhead (or $400 if not subject to consultant review) NA NA
Consultant Cost+10% Staff Overhead (or $400 if not subject to consultant review) $0
31 Other
32 Appeal (to one hearing body) $250.00 $1,478.23 66% $500.00 $25033 CC&R, Covenant & Other Legal Review
Attorney Cost+15% Staff Overhead NA NA Attorney Cost+15% Staff Overhead $0 34 Development Agreement Attorney Cost+15% Staff Overhead NA NA Attorney Cost+15% Staff Overhead $0 35 General Agreements and Contracts New
Plus any Attorney Costs
NA NA Attorney Cost+15% Staff Overhead NA
36 Signs37 Walls and Other Signs (Per Sign) $100-$4,206 Per Sign $218.70 77% $50.00 Variable38 Monument Sign $525.00 $956.39 48% $500.00 -$2539 Freeway Sign $5,400.00 $2,938.87 5% $2,800.00 -$2,60040 Sign Program $1,400.00 $3,321.30 1% $3,300.00 $1,90041 Temporary Sign (annual fee for all requests in calendar year) $15.00 $30.40 34% $20.00 $5 42 Subdivision43 Certificate of Compliance $1,000.00 $417.44 4% $400.00 -$60044 Lot Line Adjustment $1,300.00 NA NA $1,300.00 $0 Comprehensive User Fee Study
43

PLANNING
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 45 Parcel Merger $1,200.00 NA NA $1,200.00 $046 Parcel Map $3,500.00 NA NA $3,500.00 $047 Tentative Tract Map $7,500.00 $8,405.01 0% $8,400.00 $90048 Other Subdivision Related Costly at hourly rate NA NA Costly at hourly rate $049 Land Use50 Administrative Variance $300.00 $544.21 8% $500.00 $20051 Conditional Use Permit $3,000.00 $4,452.52 10% $4,000.00 $1,00052 Development Code Amendment $5,000.00 $6,659.49 10% $6,000.00 $1,00053 General Plan Amendment $5,000.00 $7,233.89 3% $7,000.00 $2,00054 Minor Use Permit $800.00 $1,482.04 33% $1,000.00 $20055 Planned Development Permit $5,000.00 Deposit Cost at Hourly Rate NA NA $6,000.00 $1,00056 Specific Plan $5,000.00 Deposit Cost at Hourly Rate NA NA Cost at Hourly Rate $057 Specific Plan Amendment $5,000.00 Deposit Cost at Hourly Rate NA NA Cost at Hourly Rate or $5,000 $0 58 Use Classification $700.00 $1,026.09 3% $1,000.00 $30059 Variance $3,000.00 $4,452.52 10% $4,000.00 $1,00060 Zone Change $4,000.00 $7,233.89 3% $7,000.00 $3,00061 Environmental62 Categorical Exemption w/o Initial Study $100.00 $329.19 39% $200 plus filing fee $100 63 Negative Declaration $3,000.00 NA NA $3,000.00 $064 EIR Consultant Cost+10% Staff Overhead (overhead not to exceed $15,000) Third Party Cost +10%
NA NA
Consultant Cost+10% Staff
Overhead (overhead not to exceed $15,000)
$0
65 Miscellaneous66 Aerials $10.00 NA NA $10.00 $067 Address Change $150.00 $151.98 1% $150.00 $068 ABC Letter of Necessity $65.00 $177.20 4% $170.00 $10569 Hourly Research Fee - Planner Cost at Hourly Rate NA NA Cost at Hourly Rate $070 Hourly Research Fee - Clerical Cost at Hourly Rate NA NA Cost at Hourly Rate $071 Large Family Day Care $150.00 NA NA No Fee -$150 Comprehensive User Fee Study
44

PLANNING
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 72 Public Notice (in newspaper, per notice) $450.00 $25.22 1% $25 plus cost to publish -$425 73 Recordation Fee (in addition to County Recorder Fee) $15.00 $113.65 3% $110.00 $95 74 Re-inspection Fee Cost at Hourly Rate NA NA Cost at Hourly Rate $075 Special Event Permit $25.00 $462.62 95% $25.00 $076 Temporary Use Permit $100.00 $462.62 78% $100.00 $077 Zoning Conformance Letter $50.00 $101.21 1% $100.00 $5078 COPIES79 Large Copies (24" x 36") $5.00 NA NA $5.00 $0 80 Maps (General Plan, Zoning, Redevelopment, etc.) $5.00 NA NA $5.00 $081 General Plan Text $25.00 NA NA $25.00 $082 Zoning Ordinance Text $25.00 NA NA $25.00 $083 Copies (Color or Black & White) RESIDENT $0.35 each page $0.35 0% $0.35 $0
84 Copies (Color or Black & White)
NON RESIDENT $0.45 each page $0.45 0% $0.45 $0
85 Items Not Listed To Be Determined By Director NA NA To Be Determined By Director $0 For services requested of City staff which have no fee listed in this fee schedule, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall determine the appropriate fee based on the established hourly rates for the department/division. Additionally, the City will pass through any discrete costs incurred from the use of external service providers, including, but not limited to, legal counsel, consultants, and contractors, if required to process a specific application.

Comprehensive User Fee Study
45

Public Works
Item No. Title Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Public Works2 Curb & Gutter - up to 25 lf $125.00 NA NA $125.00 $03 Curb & Gutter - add'l per lf over 25 lf $4.80 NA NA $4.80 $04 Sidewalk - up to 100 sf $160.00 $150.00 0% $150.00 -$105 Sidewalk - add'l per sf over 100 sf $1.60 NA NA $1.60 $06 Driveway Approach - up to 120 sf $170.00 $200.03 0% $200.00 $307 Driveway Approach -add'l per sf over 120 sf $1.42 NA NA $1.42 $08 Curb - up to 25 lf $125.00 NA NA $125.00 $09 Curb - add'l per lf over 25 lf $5.00 NA NA $5.00 $0 10 Gutter - up to 25 lf $125.00 NA NA $125.00 $011 Gutter - add'l per lf over 25 lf $5.00 NA NA $5.00 $012 Curb Core $75.00 $108.18 8% $100.00 $2513 Sewer in Public ROW $200.00 $300.02 0% $300.00 $10014 Street Cut in Public ROW - up to 150 sf $180.00 $239.34 6% $225.00 $4515 Street Cut in Public ROW - add'l $1.20 per sf $1.50 NA NA $1.50 $016 Encroachment Permit (Minor) New $60.25 59% $25.00 NA17 Encroachment Permit (Traffic Control & other) New $311.64 20% $250.00 NA18 Transportation Permit (Annual), $100.00 NA NA Fee Set by State $0.0019 Transportation Permit (Daily, One Way), $15.00 NA NA Fee Set by State $0.0020 Engineering Fees,"Calculated on project improvement value"21 NPDES Inspection $200.00 $311.64 4% $300.00 $100 Comprehensive User Fee Study
46

27368 Via Industria, Suite 200
Temecula, California 92590-4856
800.755.6864 | Fax: 888.326.6864
951.587.3500 | Fax: 951.587.3510
www.willdan.com

AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brian Villalobos, City Manager
BY: Frances Jimenez, City Clerk
SUBJECT: Discussion Establishing the Date and Time of Regular City Council Meetings for the 2026 Calendar Year
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council discuss establishing the date and time of regular City Council meetings for the 2026 calendar year FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item

STRATEGIC PLAN
IMPACT: There is no strategic plan impact associated with this item

BACKGROUND
Section 2.04.020 of the Duarte Municipal Code allows the City Council to establish the time and date of its regular meetings.

At the January 13, 2026, City Council meeting the City Council directed staff to revisit this item after concerns were raised regarding potential schedule conflicts. Historically, the second City Council meeting in the month of November has fallen on the week of Thanksgiving. In both 2024 and 2025, three councilmembers were absent from said meetings.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
Given the recurring low attendance due to the Thanksgiving holiday, and in efforts to promote organizational efficiency, staff was directed to bring this item back for further discussion.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council discuss establishing the date and time of regular City Council meetings for the 2026 calendar year.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

ATTACHMENTS
None.

Agenda Item: 17.A.

2 Fiscal Review: Reviewed and Approved:

Kristen Petersen Brian Villalobos
Assistant City Manager/ City Manager
Director of Administrative Services

AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brian Villalobos, City Manager
BY: Andres Rangel, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: FY 25-26 Chamber of Commerce Update Presentation RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the Duarte Chamber of Commerce Update Report
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no fiscal impact associated with this item

STRATEGIC PLAN
IMPACT: Goal A - A2.3 Economic Development and Activation

BACKGROUND
On June 24, 2025, the City Council approved the FY 2025-26 Services agreement with the Duarte Chamber of Commerce (“Chamber”) in the amount of $73,600 through June 30, 2026.

Part of that agreement includes the Chamber presenting a progress report to Council, including progress made on the following performance metrics:
a. Active membership update
b. Number of interactions and types of inquiries with businesses c. Number of Chamber members reserving available rooms and office space d. Number and types of businesses promoted, and type(s) of promotion provided e. Number and types of workshops/trainings hosted
f. Events hosted and member turnout
The Chamber will be providing the City Council with another report toward the end of the 25-26 fiscal year.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
In addition to the Chamber presenting updates to the City Council, the Chamber provides staff with monthly progress reports. For the months of October through December, Chamber membership has grown to 153 members, an increase of two members from September 2025. In those three months, the Chamber has also offered 21 webinars, received 170 inquiries from businesses (in person, email, and over the phone), and used traditional (flyers, public events, newsletters) and digital promotions (eBlasts) 105 times. The Chamber also hosted a Lunch and Agenda Item: 17.B.

2 Learn as well as the Mayor’s Prayer Breakfast in November. Chamber staff will provide more detail regarding its work conducted thus far this fiscal year during its presentation.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the Duarte Chamber of Commerce Update Report.

FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.

ATTACHMENTS
None.

Fiscal Review: Reviewed and Approved:

Kristen Petersen Brian Villalobos
Assistant City Manager/ City Manager
Director of Administrative Services

AGENDA REPORT
MEETING DATE: January 27, 2026
TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council
FROM: Brian Villalobos, City Manager
BY: Andres Rangel, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: Budget Amendment for 2026 FIFA World Cup Viewing Party RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve a $20,000 budget amendment to account 100-1010-7980 to fund the 2026 FIFA World Cup Viewing Party
FISCAL IMPACT: The estimated cost to activate the City and host the event is $20,000, reflected in account number 100-1010-7980

STRATEGIC PLAN
IMPACT: Goal A - E3.1 Economic Development and Activation

BACKGROUND
At its November 11th Regular City Council Meeting, the City Council established an Ad Hoc Committee to activate the City for the upcoming Summer Olympics and World Cup. On December 17th, the Ad Hoc Committee convened and discussed, among other items, a budget to host a World Cup Viewing Party and install World Cup street banners on Buena Vista.

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS
The FIFA World Cup will kick off on June 11th. To generate excitement and public awareness to the tournament, the City plans to host a World Cup Viewing Party on Friday evening, June 12th, at Duarte Sports Park. In addition to sparking interest in the City, the City is also coordinating with the Los Angeles Sports and Entertainment Commission (LASEC) and Metro to make the event a regional attraction.

The estimated budget includes, among other items, renting the screen, entertainment, interactive fun zones for kids, staff and public safety time, as well as installing World Cup street banners, provided by LASEC, that would be installed leading up to the event, and kept throughout the tournament. Attachment A shows a detailed budget breakdown of the event.

Approval of the item would amend account number 100-1010-7980 of the City Manager’s Office department budget by $20,000.

RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council approve a $20,000 budget amendment to account number Agenda Item: 17.C.

2 100-1010-7980 to fund the 2026 FIFA World Cup Viewing Party.

FISCAL IMPACT
The estimated cost to activate the City and host the event is $20,000, reflected in account number 100-1010-7980.

ATTACHMENTS
A. Budget Breakdown
Fiscal Review: Reviewed and Approved:

Kristen Petersen Brian Villalobos
Assistant City Manager/ City Manager
Director of Administrative Services

Proposed Budget
FY 25-26
World Cup City Activation
World Cup Viewing Party
Description Unit Cost Quantity Estimated Cost
Music (DJ)
$
675.00
Generator
$
400.00
Interactive Fun
Zone
$
2,000.00
Jugglers
$
750.00
Signage
$
500.00
Staff Time
$
600.00
Décor
$
500.00
Video Production
$
600.00
Public Safety
$
3,680.00
Portable Restrooms
$
3,840.00
Street Decorations
$
1,455.00
LED Screen
$
5,000.00
Subtotal
$
20,000.00