1 Agenda
City Council Regular Meeting
Folsom City Hall | City Council Chambers, First Floor
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
March 12, 2024, 6:30 PM
Welcome to Your City Council Meeting
We welcome your interest and involvement in the city’s legislative process. This agenda includes information about topics coming before the City Council and the action recommended by city staff. You can read about each topic in the staff reports, which are available on the city website and in the Office of the City Clerk. The City Clerk is also available to answer any questions you have about City Council meeting procedures.
Participation
If you would like to provide comments to the City Council, please:
Fill out a blue speaker request form, located at the back table. Submit the form to the City Clerk before the item begins. When it’s your turn, the City Clerk will call your name and invite you to the podium. Speakers generally have three minutes, unless the presiding officer (usually the mayor) changes that time.
Reasonable Accommodations
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a person with a disability and you need a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (916) 461-6035, (916) 355-7328 (fax) or [email protected]. Requests must be made as early as possible and at least two full business days before the start of the meeting.
How to Watch
The City of Folsom provides three ways to watch a City Council meeting:
In Person Online On TV
City Council meetings take place at
City Hall, 50 Natoma Street
Watch the livestream and replay past
meetings on the city website,
www.folsom.ca.us
Watch live and replays of meetings on
Sac Metro Cable TV, Channel 14
More information about City Council meetings is available at the end of this agenda
2 City Council Regular Meeting
Folsom City Hall | City Council Chambers, First Floor
50 Natoma Street, Folsom, CA 95630
www.folsom.ca.us
Tuesday, March 12, 2024 6:30 PM
Mike Kozlowski, Mayor
Sarah Aquino, Vice Mayor YK Chalamcherla, Councilmember Rosario Rodriguez, Councilmember Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember
AGENDA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers: Aquino, Chalamcherla, Rodriguez, Rohrbough, Kozlowski The City Council has adopted a policy that no new item will begin after 10:30 p.m. Therefore, if you are here for an item that has not been heard by 10:30 p.m., you may leave, as th e item will be continued to a future Council meeting.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
AGENDA UPDATE
SCHEDULED PRESENTATIONS:
1. River District Master Plan Citizens Advisory Committee Report Out
2. City Manager’s Fiscal Year 2023-24 Second Quarter Financial Report BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR:
Members of the public are entitled to address the City Council concerning any item within the Folsom City Council's subject matter jurisdiction. Public comments are generally limited to no more than three minutes. Except for certain specific exceptions, the City Council is prohibited from discussing or taking action on any item not appearing on the posted agenda.
3 CONSENT CALENDAR:
Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion.
Councilmembers may pull an item for discussion.
3. Approval of February 27, 2024 Special and Regular Meeting Minutes
4. Resolution No. 11177 - A Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of Completed Annual State Mandated Fire Inspections
NEW BUSINESS:
5. Community Development Department Fee Study Workshop
COUNCIL REQUESTS FOR FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
COUNCIL COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
NOTICE: Members of the public are entitled to directly address the City Council concerning any item that is described in the notice of this meeting, before or during consideration of that item. If you wish to address Council on an issue, which is on this agenda, please complete a blue speaker request card, and deliver it to a staff member at the table on the left side of the Council Chambers prior to discussion of the item. When your name is called, stand to be recognized by the Mayor and then proceed to the podium. If you wish to address the City Council on any other item of interest to the public, when the Mayor asks if there is any “Business from the Floor,” follow the same procedure described above. Please limit your comments to three minutes or less.
NOTICE REGARDING CHALLENGES TO DECISIONS: Pursuant to all applicable laws and regulations, including without limitation, California Government Code Section 65009 and or California Public Resources Code Section 21177, if you wish to challenge in court any of the above decisions (regarding planning, zoning and/or environmental decisions), you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing(s) described in this notice/agenda, or in written correspondence delivered to the City at, or prior to, the public hearing.
As presiding officer, the Mayor has the authority to preserve order at all City Council meetings, to remove or cause the removal of any person from any such meeting for disorderly conduct, or for making personal, impertinent, or slanderous remarks, using profanity, or becoming boisterous, threatening or personally abusive while addressing said Council, and to enforce the rules of the Council.
PERSONS INTERESTED IN PROPOSING AN ITEM FOR THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA S HOULD CONTACT A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
The meeting of the Folsom City Council is being telecast on Metro Cable TV, Channel 14, the Government Affairs Channel, and will be shown in its entirety on the Friday and Saturday following the meeting, both at 9 a.m. The City does not control scheduling of this telecast and persons interested in watching the televised meeting should confirm this schedule with Metro Cable TV, Channel 14. The City of Folsom provides live and archived webcasts of regular City Coun cil meetings. The webcasts can be found on the online services page of the City's website www.folsom.ca.us.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you are a person with a disability and you need a disability-related modification or accommodation to participate in this meeting, please contact the City
4 Clerk’s Office at (916) 461-6035, (916) 355-7328 (fax) or [email protected]. Requests must be made as early as possible and at least two full business days before the start of the meeting.
Any documents produced by the City and distributed to the City Council regarding any item on this agenda will be made available at the City Clerk’s Counter at City Hall located at 50 Natoma Street, Folsom, California and at the Folsom Public Librar y located at 411 Stafford Street, Folsom, California during normal business hours.
Folsom City Council
Staff Re ort
RECOMMENDATION / CITY COUNCIL ACTION
No action is requested of the City Council at this time.
BACKGROUND / ISSUE
The River District Master Plan Project Manager and Citizens Advisory Committee Chair will provide an update on the committee and consultant work to date. They will also outline the project plan moving forward for the River District Master Plan document preparation, review, and adoption by the end ofthe 2024 calendar year.
Submitted,
Pam Johns, Community Development Director
1 MEETING DATE: 3t1212024
AGENDA SECTION: Scheduled Presentations
SUBJECT: River District Master Plan Citizens Advisory Committee Report Out
FROM: Community Development Department
03/12/2024 Item No.1.
This page is intentiono"IlA Ieft blank
t o fo-cilitqte double - side d printing
qnd minimize poper use.
CITY OF
DISTINCTIVE BY NATURE
FOLSON{
03/12/2024 Item No.1.
Folsom City Council
Staff ort
MEETING DATE: 31t212024
AGENDA SECTION: Scheduled Presentations
SUBJECT City Manager's Fiscal Year 2023-24 Second Quarter Financial Report
F'ROM: Finance Department
RECOMMENDATION / COUNCIL ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council receive a presentation from the Finance Director for the City Manager's Fiscal Year 2023-24 Second Quarter Financial Report.
POLICY / RULE
Section 5.05R of the Charter of the City of Folsom requires the City Manager submit to the City Council a financial and management report showing the relationship between budgeted and actual revenues, and expenditures and encumbrances on a quarterly basis.
Section 3.02.050 (b) of the Folsom Municipal Code states ". ... within 30 days after the end of each quarter during the fiscal year, and more often if required by the City Council, the City Manager shall submit to the City Council a financial and management report." Submitted,
U^d'*
Elaine Andersen
City Manager
ATTACHMENT:
1. Second Quarter Financial Report Fiscal Year2023-24
Tamagni
Finance Director/CFO
1
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
ATTACHMENT 1
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
F"(}r-s{}sd
CITY OF
DISTINCTIVE BY I{ATURE
City of Folsom
Quarterly Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2023-24 Second Quarter
March 1202024
Prepared by the Office of Management and Budget
Financial Analysis and Reporting Division
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
Table of Contents
Section
Introduction.
Executive Summary.
Financial Results
a) General Fund........
b) Enterprise Funds
c) Other Funds
City Housing Fund..
Risk Management
Lighting and Landscape Districts
Plan Area Impact Fees........
Appendix
Combined General Fund Revenue & Expenditure Statement.
General Fund Departmental Expenditure Summary
Housing Fund Revenue & Expenditure Statement
Lighting and Landscaping District Statement
Water Fund Revenue & Expense Statement............
Wastewater Fund Revenue & Expense Statement
Solid Waste Fund Revenue & Expense Statement
Page No.
1 1
2 5
6 6
6 7
7 ..............8
........,.....9
............10
11 T4
.........15
.........16
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
Second Quarter Financial Report
Fiscal Year 2023-24 F@U.,S@ne
iI {A!UfiE
Introduction
This financial report provides an overview ofthe City's unaudited financial position through the second quarter ofFiscal Year (FY) 2023-24 (July I , 2023, tltrolgh December 31, 2023) for ( I ) the General Fund, (2) Housing Special Revenue Fund and L&L Districts, (3) the major enterprise operating funds, and (4) the Risk Management Internal Service Fund.
Notable cumulative second quarter to second quarter and budget to actual comparisons are included in this report in addition to year-end projections.
Executive Summarv
The City's audited General Fund unassigned firnd balance at the end of FY 2022-23 was 52296 million, or 27.36% of expenditt.res.
As of the second quarter of FY 2023-24, the General Fund is projected to end the year with revenues at $111.44 million and expenditures at $1 1 1.47 million, resulting in a slight decrease in unassigned fund balance ($28k) by the end of the fiscal year. It's important to note that these projections include $509k of ARPA expenditures and corresponding revenue.
It is projected that the General Fund's unassigned fund balance will decrease from $22.96 million to $22.93 million by the fiscal year end, a decrease from 21.360/o to 20.57Yo as a percentage of expenditures. Below is a chart of the unassigned fund balance over the last ten years and displays the projected change from FY 2022-23 toFY 2023-24. $30,000,000
$28,000,000
$26,000,000
$24,000,000
$22,000,000
$20,000,000
$ 1 8,000,000
$ l 6,000,000
$14,000,000
$12,000,000
$10,000,000
$8,000,000
$6,000,000
$4,000,000
$2,000,000
$-
Unassigned General Fund Balance
FY17 FY18 FY19 FY2O FY21 FY22
Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual Actual
IUnassigned Fund Balance *Yo of Expenditures
30.00o/o
25.00%
20.00%
t5.00%
10.00%
5.00%
0.00%
FY15
Actual
FY16
Actual
FY23
Actual
FY24
Projected
$19,200,703
913,176,114
ll.54V"
20.57Vo
14. $8,157,227
$10,950,323
s15,529,576 $17,397,043
t9.90oh $15,699,123 20,09o/o
$23,260,484
23,690 $22,961,9t9
21,360
1
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
FY22-23 Actual
Dec.31,2022
Property Tax S 14,970,0M
Sales Tax 9,048,948
Transient Occupancy Tax 635,808
Charges for Services 7,076,225
License, Permits & Intergov't 2,589,935
Transfers In 2,277,559
All Other 1,088,148
FV23-24 Actual
Dec.31,2023
$ r6,s52,427
9,027,902
4'73,705
7,855,627
3,346,884
2,949,10'7
1.428.836
FY23-24
Budget
s 40,094,946
29,257,969
2,375,000
t2,673,834
13,683,821
1,484,724
3,934,000
Fv23-24
Projected
40,094,946
28,097,329
2,375,000
t4,047,466
t4,87't,821
7,484,724
4,466,366
Over/Under
Budget
b-
(1,160,640)
1,373,633
1,194,000
532,365
oh of
Bu{et
100%s
1 Total $ J $41 s 111
tlt%
t09%
100%
1t4%
r01.77%$ $1
General Fund: Operating Revenues
The following table includes cumulative revenue comparisons through the second quarter of FY 2022-23 andFY 2023- 24 and a revenue budget comparison for FY 2023-24 with year-end projections.
General Fund operating revenues through the second quarter are $41.6 million, which is 10.50% more than the same period inFY 2022-23. Revenues are at 38.02% of the budget through the second quarter of the current year, primarily due to the timing associated with receiving some of the larger revenue sources. For instance, property tax is the largest General Fund revenue source, but funding is received in two unequal installments, of which one has been received. The second installment will be received during the fourth quafter of the fiscal year.
The following is an explanation of the notable variances:
. Property tax revenues exceeded last year's cumulative second quafier by 10.57% or $1.58 million. A comparison of home sales during the second quarter of FY 2023-24 andFY 2022-23 shows the number of homes sold decrease dby 6, or L7 6Yo. The average median sales price through the second quarler of FY 2023- 24was$746,48l,whichisanincrease of0.7l%ooverFY2022-23.PropertytaxrevenueforFY2023-24year- end is projected to meet the budgeted amount of $40.1 million, an increase over the prior year of $2.87 million or 7 .'7lo/o.
. Sales tax revenues through the second quarter decreased from last year' s cumulative second quarter by 0 .23% or $2|k. The most recent sales tax data shows the categories of food products and transportation increasing while general retail, construction, and business to business transactions experienced declines. Based on the latest sales tax forecast provided by the City's sales tax consultants, Avenu Insights, sales tax is trending to end the year below budget, at $28.10 million. This would result in a decrease from the prior year's collections by $5,000 or 0.02o/o. Below is a graph showing sales tax revenue for the current fiscal year (budget and year- end projection) and the past five fiscal years.
2
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
Sales Tax
35,000,000
30,0oo,ooo
25,000,000
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
$25,359,293
Actual
FY19
$22,616,404
Actual
FY2O
Actual
FY2I
Actual
FY22
Actual
FY23
Budget
Fv24
,329
Projection
RY24
. Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) collections are at$474,000 through the second quarter and are projected to end the fiscal year at the budgeted amount of $2.38 million. . Charges for services, including Community Development building and engineering fees, Parks and Recreation user fees, and ambulance fees are at $7.86 million through the second quarter and are projected to end the fiscal year at $ 14.05 million. The Parks and Recreation charges through the second quarter were $2.49 million and a comparison to the same quarter in the prior fiscal year shows an increase of $245,000. Ambulance fee revenue through the second quartff was $2.32 million and compared to the prior fiscal year this is an increase of $378,000 or 19.49Yo, mostly due to new rates adopted by the City Council. The projection for ambulance fees at fiscal year-end is $4.70 million. Community Development charges are at $L92 million through the second quarter and are currently projected to end the fiscal year at $2,78 million or $510k over budget.
Compared to the prior fiscal year this would be a decrease of $331,000 or 10.64oh. . License and permit fees and intergovemmental revenue increased $757,000 compared to the same quarter in the prior fiscal year and are projected to end the fiscal year at $ 14.9 million (including $509k of ARPA funds) which would be an increase of $1.2 million compared to the budget. $750k of the increase over budget is related to increased building permit revenue that is offset by increased Community Development contract expenses. $442kis related to state grants that were received and spent but not included in the original budget. . Miscellaneous revenues increased $341,000 through the second quarter when compared to the same period in the prior fiscal year. This is mostly related to interest income, and roughly half is interest earned on restricted SPIF fee funds and is not available for general fund purposes.
General Fund: Department Operating Expenditures
The following table includes cumulative second quarter actual expenditure comparisons for FY 2022-23 andFY 2023- 24 and an expenditure budget-to-actual comparison for FY 2023-24. 5
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
Salaries
Benefits
o&M
Capital Outlay
Debt Service
Total
FY 22-23 Acttl,al
Dec,31,2022
$ 2t,295,139
t3,7 6l,799
t4,822,679
1,87 5,777
130.346
5 740
FY23-24 Actual
Dec.31,2023
$ 23,046,818
14,561,273
t4,437,440
1 ,545,',7 56
130,347
FY 23-24
Budget
$ 47,7s8,143
30,681 ,059
27 ,469,301
3,247 ,\60
348.63t
FY 23-24
Projected
$ 4s,448,832
29,600,4t5
32,7 58,025
3,316,1,60
348,631
Over/Under
Budget
$ (2,30e,311)
( 1,080,644)
5,288,724
69,000
'h of
Budget
95.2%
965%
t193%
\02.1%
100.0%
101.8%5 I 11 72
Overall, cumulative second quarter General Fund expenditures increased 3.54o/o compared to the second quarter of the prior year and are coming inat49.06Yo percent of the budget through the second quarter of FY 2023-24. Based on activiiy during the first half of the year, the projection for the end of the fiscal year is for expenditures to be at $ I 1 1 .47 million,whichwouldbe$1.97millionor1.80%overbudget. Theprojectedincreaseinexpendituresisprimarilydueto increases in services and supplies such as utility costs, supply costs, emergency repair or replacement of equipment, and increased contracted service costs in Community Development covered by additional revenue.
The table below shows a comparison for FY 2022-23 and FY 2023-24 for each General Fund Department.
The following is an explanation of significant variances ofyear-end projections as compared to the budget:
. The Fire department is projected to end the year under budget by $562k due to savings from vacant positions for the first half of the year.
. The Parks & Recreation department, based on activity through the first half of the year, is projected to end the fiscal year $1.35 million(7.83%) over the budgeted amount. A portion of the projected expenditures over budget are related to prior year encumbrances and funding for those previously approved purchases was reserved in assigned fund balance in the prior year. Additional amounts over budget are mostly due to increases in categories such as utility costs, printing costs, credit cards service fees, supply costs, and emergency repairs or replacement of equipment. This increase is spread across most of the Parks and Recreation divisions and is partially offset by increased program revenues mentioned in the revenue section above. In addition, about $200k of this increase is related to expenses for the approved ladder fuel grant and will be reimbursed. . The Community Development department is projected to end the fiscal year $ I .39 million (I9 .96%) over the budgeted amount, which is due to increases in contracted selvice costs that are paid for by increased revenues in the Charges for Services and Licenses and Permits categories with the Community Development depafiment.
Overall, General Fund departments' expenditures are trending at budget (in line with the 50Yo expectalion) at this point in the fiscal year.
4 General Government
Police
Fire
Community Development
Pmks & Recreation
Library
Public Works
Non-Departmental
BY 22-23 Actual
Dec.31,2022
$ 4,783,818
13,r18,7 59
73,137,438
4,121,807
8,633,83 8
905,491
3,777 ,808
3,406,779
5l 740
FY23-24 Actual
Dec.31,2023
$ 5,280,278
13,951 ,',|27
13,7 76,636
4,187,143
8,931,081
I,QI4,48I
4,233,136
2,401,152
FY23-24
Budget
s 10,422,797
27,311,097
28,040,5 10
6,983,854
17,246,9t9
2,127,267
8,801,075
8,504,776
FY23-24
Projected
$ 10,271,162
2l,356,038
27,478,215
9,377,915
18,597,88 8
2,034,746
8,485,700
Over/Under
Budget
$ (151,635)
(2t,059)
(s62,295)
l,3g3,96l
1,350,969
(92,521)
(315,37 5)
365,724
ohof
Budget
98.s%
99.9%
98.0%
120.0%
107.8%
9s.7%
96.4%
104.3%
101.8%
8,8 70.500
1 109 I 67 69
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
Enterprise Funds:
Water Fund
The Water Fund is reported on a combined basis and includes the following funds: Water Impact, Water Operating, Water Capital and Water Meters.
The table below includes cumulative second quarter actual revenue and expense comparisons for FY 2022-23 and FY 2023-24 and a budget to actual comparison for FY 2023-24 for the Water Operating Fund.
The Water Fund is projected to end the year with program revenues of $19.93 million. Total operating expenses, including transfers out are projected to end the year at$17 .46 million, or 92.71o/o of budget. This reduction from budgeted amounts is mostly due to savings due to vacant positions for part of the fiscal year. Total expenditures for capital projects are estimated to be $6. l0 million at year-end. The fund will end the year with projected working capital of $21 .09 million.
Wastewater Fund
The Wastewater Fund is reported on a combined basis and includes the Wastewater and Wastewater Capital Funds.
FY 22-23 Actual
Dec,31,2022
1,645,506
1,165,681
2,978,393
451,454
FY 23-24 Actual
Dec.31,2023
FY23-24
Budget
3,7 85,497
2,599,95 8
9,286,009
7,332,209
1,842,428
s 18,835,101
$ 16,146,174
FY23-24
Projected
Over/Under
Budget
o/o of
Budget
ProgramRevenues $ 9,624,069 S 10,598,747 $ 19,278,300 $ 19,930,100 $ 651,800 103.4% Salaries
Benefits
Operating Expenses
Tiansfers Out
Debt Service
Capital Expenses
$ 6,247,534
$ 1,07 6,107
$ 6,375,147
s 697,210
$ 17,461,780
s 6,096,174
21 54
$ (1,373,321)
s (1o,o5o,ooo)
_5006
| ,7 19,584
1,2r3,802
2,967,244
47 I,5t8
3,000
3,508,724
2,564,603
9,391,816
1,164,209
r.842,428
(276,773)
(24,355)
(904,193)
(1 68,000)
92.7%
99.1%
90.3%
87.4%
100.0%
92.7r%
37.76%
1 FY22-23 Actual
Dec.3L,2022
FY 23-24 Actual
Dec.3\,2023
FY23-24
Budget
FY23-24
Projected
Over/Under
Budget
Yo of
Budget
ProgramRevenues S 6,457,273 $ 7,0L9,246 $11,963,700 $12,963,700 $ 1,000,000 108.36% Salaries
Benefits
Operating Expenses
Tiansfers Out
Debt Service
879,558
662,629
678,098
362,298
917,539
667,994
538,358
353,721
1,979,351
1,435,294
2,251,372
7 43,616
2,005,436
1,391,003
1,936,372
743,616
26,085
(44,291)
(315,000)
10r.32%
96.9t%
86.01%
100.00%
$ 2,582,583
$ 394,316
$ 2,417,617
$ 3,828,001
s 6,409,633
$ 21,153,061
s 6,076,427
$ 11,903,061
$ (333,206)
$ (9,250,000)
94j0%
21 I 5
Capital Expenses
t6 8
s6.27%
5
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
The Wastewater Fund is projected to end the year with program revenues of $12.96 million. Total operating expenses, including transfers out, are projected to end the year at $6.08 million, or 94.80Yo of budget. This reduction from budgeted amounts is mostly due to less expenses in contracts than anticipated. Total expenditures for capital projects are estimated to be $11.90 million at year-end. The fund will end the year with projected working capital of $16.75 million.
Solid Waste Fund
The Solid Waste Fund is reporled on a combined basis and includes the Solid Waste Operating, Solid Waste Capital, and Solid Waste Plan Area Capital.
The Solid Waste Fund is projected to end the year with program revenues of $27.87 million. Total operating expenses, including transfers out, are projected to end the year aI $ 18.97 million, or 96.7Yo of budget. This reduction from budgeted amounts is mostly due to vacant positions for part of the fiscal year. Total expenditures for capital outlay costs are estimated to be $9.26 million at year-end. The fund will end the year with projected working capital of $14.75 million' Other Funds
City Housing Fund
The City Housing Fund as of December 31,2023 had a cash balance of $14,440,979. The City Council had also previously approved housing project loans in an amount up to $3.5 million for the Scholar Way project of which $2.75 million has now been expended.
Risk Management Internal Service Fund
The Risk Management Fund captures the activity associated with ernployee and retiree health, dental and visron insurance, workers' compensation, and liability insurance expense.
As of December 3I,2023, the City has paid $3.61 million for health, vision, and dental insurance for active employees and $2.29 million for retired employees and $1.34 million for workers' compensation. Liability insurance payments were 94.34 million. The total expenditures for FY 2023-24 are projected at $21,65 million, which is an increase from the prior fiscal year of $1.85 million, which is mostly seen in health insurance and liability insurance costs.
The projected ending unrestricted net position is $3.51 million, a $1.18 million decrease from FY 2022-23. 6 FY22-23 Actual
Dec.31,2022
FY23-24 Actual
Dec.31,2023
FY 23-24
Budget
FY23-24
Projected
Over/Under
Budget
Yo of
Budget
ProgramRevenues $ 12,983,214 s 15,343,171 s 25,973,000 $ 27,873,000 $ 1,900,000 107.3% Salaries
Benefits
Operating Expenses
Transfers Out
Debt Service
1,961,580
1,538,893
3,736,728
819,214
2,1t8,205
1,626,101
3,569,256
804,774
4,731,876
3,512,580
9,702,783
1,663,916
4,397,715
3,494,315
9,470,793
1,663,916
(334,161)
(18,265)
(292,000)
92.9%
99.s%
97.0%
100.0%
0.0%
96.7%$
$
8,05 6,415 $ 8,1i7,336
$ 5,802,009
$ 19,611,155
$ 9,760,616
$ 18,966,729
$ 9,260,616
$ (644,426)
$ (50o,ooo)Capital Expenses 94.9%
l5 103 l4 749
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
Lighting and Landscape Funds
There are 30 Lighting and Landscape (L&L) Districts in the City of Folsom. Each District has its own budget and maintenance requirements to maintain various types of assets ranging from shrub beds, mini parks, walls, fences, monument signs, streetlights, bollards, landscape lighting, irrigation systems, artwork, a waterfall, walkways/trails, open space, trees, and electrical services.
Some activities that have taken place in the L&L's during this time period include:
District Project Date Cost
Prairie Oaks Ranch Grover Entry Renovation t2/2712023 $168,839.58 Briggs Ranch Fence Replacement 1011812023 $4,198.21
American River Canyon
North Cobble Drain Repair 1112212023 $6,732.08
Sierra Estates Tree and shrub planting / mulch
install r113012023 $5,494.76
Other activities that have taken place in the L&L's this quarter include:
. High level of tree removals and replacements.
o Working to get landscape beds topped off with mulch'
r Drainage improvements and clearing for winter weather Plan Area Impact Fees
Total Plan Area Impact Fees received through the second quarter of FY 2023-24 were $9.87 million. Expenditures during the second quarter totaled approximately $6.04 million in all Plan Area Impact Fee funds. Expenditures were for Fire Station 34 construction, Prospector Park construction, and reimbursement for the Russell Ranch Bike Trail. 7
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDIXA
City of Folsom, California
Combined General Fund
Revenue and Expense Statement
Quarter Ended D ecember 3l , 2023
REVENUES:
Tdes:
Propeny
Sales And Use
Tmsi€nt Occupancy
Real Propefiy Transfer
Fmchise Fees
Other
Licenses Atrd Pemits
Iotergovemetrtal
Charg€s For Curent S€ryices
Fines And ForGitures
Int€rcst
Miscellaneous
Operating Tmsfors In
TOTALREVENUES
EXPENDITURXS:
Cuftent Operating:
Geneml Govement
Public Safety
?ublic Ways and Facilities
Comunity Sewics
culture md R€creation
Non-Departmental
Opemting Tresf€$ Out
FY 2023
As of
lu3tn022
Fv 2024
As of FY2023
ACTTJAL
VARIANCE VARIANCBFY24 Forecmt
As of Foaeoast vs Budget Acutal vs Budset
t4,970,044
9,048,948
635,808
316,915
2,202,588
387,347
1,016,225
t8,421
360,926
391,885
2,27'1,ssg
3'7,686,661
16,552,427
9,021,902
413,105
225,517
3,053,748
293,136
7,855,627
12,369
666,0s7
524,832
7,532,002
27,502430
4,233,t36
4,t87,t43
7,865,'t'12
2,401,t52
3'1,224,284
28,102,3'18
2496,365
r,027,l2s
83t,235
1,236,529
3,944,073
12,665,805
ts,423,489
134,751
894,691
1,242,559
$ 40,094,946
29,257,969
2,37s,000
900,000
817,000
1,1 87,500
3,293,325
t0,390,496
12,673,834
106,000
250,000
673,s00
1,484,124
Fv 2024
BUDGET
t09,s04,294
$ 15,l'12,006
55,046,'143
8,801,075
6,983,854
t4,99s,840
8,404,7'76
100,000
___10r,50429!_
30,764,357
30,764,35'l
t,380,323
40,094,946
28,09'7,329
2,3'ts,000
900,000
8 17,000
1,187,500
4,038,325
10,839,496
14,047,466
1 13,500
774,a6s
673,s00
(1,160,640)
'14s,000
449,000
1,373,631
7,500
s24,865
14,1tl
(565,859)
(315,375)
1,393,961
1,014,607
365,724
(23,s42,519)
(20,230,067)
(t,90t2e5)
(900,000)
(8r7,000)
(961,923)
(239,s'17)
00,097,360)
(4,8r8.207)
(93,631)
416,051
(r48,668)
%
t00%
96%
t00%
t00%
t00%
t00%
123%
t04%
tlt%
100%
99%
96%
l20Yo
107%
104%
t00%
101.8%
'1,640,004
27,544,313
4,567,938
2,796,711
7,130,069
6,003,624
4t%
3t%
20%
0%
00/o
t90/o
93%
3%
62%
120/o
266%
78%
39%
38%
50%
50%
48%
60%
52%
29%
0%
t5,t86,'7 l'7
54,480,884
8,485,700
8,37't,8t5
t6,070447
8,770,s00
(28,4r 1)
(r,s07,764)
$
6,'102,570 $
26,244,756
3,'77'1,808
4,12t,807
'7J32,0t9
3,306,779
t3,986,26s
5t,602,106
8,30E,069
9,175,089
16,8s2,994
7,s88,332
$
51,885,740
(t4,t99 ,073)
26,9t9,048
t2,7t9,976
(24'1,159)
(92s,796)
$ 11,547,021
(12,087,141') 3,845309
(1,507,164)
490/.TOTAL EXPENDTTURES
APPROPRIATION OF FT'ND BALAI\CE
FT'ND BALANCE, JULY 1
FUND BALANC-E
NONSP-DNDABLf, FUND BALAI\CE
RESTRICTED FUND SALAI\CD
COMMITTED FUND BALAI\C-E
ASSIGNED FUI\D BALANCE
T'NRESTRICTED FUND BALANCE $ 32,144,680
8
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDIX B
City of Folsom, California
Expenditure Summary - General Fund Departments
Quarter Ended December 37,2023
Fv 2023
As of
12t3t/2022
Fv 2024
As of
12/312023
Fv 2023
ACTUAL
YY 2024
BUDGET
FY24 Forecast
As of
12Rv2023
VARIANCE
Forecst vs Budset
VARIANCE
Actual vs. Budset
$$
EXPENDITURES:
CityComcil
CityMmager
City Clerk
Office of Mgmt & Budget
City Attomey
Human Resowces
Police
Fire
Community Developmflt
Paks & Recreation
Libr"ry
Public Works
Other
Non Departrnenial
Operating Tresfes Out
TOTAL EXPENDITURES:
$$ 48,609
580,820
377,481
2,870,668
622,090
284,ts0
t3,2r8Js9
13,13',1,438
4,121,807
8,633,839
905,491
3,777,848
56,893
621,026
334,782
3,276,269
s73,776
417,532
t3,9s7,727
13,'716,636
4,187,143
8,93 1,081
1,014,481
4,233,136
118,539
1,207,940
694,280
5,s56,187
1,307,443
673,714
26,259,847
25,620,154
9,r75,090
18,810,497
2,192,763
8,308,069
7,588,332
ll7,437
t,2s6,732
681,049
6,246,759
t,234,309
886,51 I
27,377,097
28,040,510
6,983,854
l7,246,919
2,127,267
8,801,075
3,807
31,450
(89,1 81)
(e8,71 1)
1,000
(2t,0se)
(s62,29s)
1,393,961
1,350,969
(e2,s21)
(315,375)
365,724
%
48%
49%
49%
52%
46%
47%
5t%
49%
60%
s2%
48%
48%
29%
0%
$ $ 121,244
1,288,182
s91,868
6,148,048
1,235,309
886,51 I
27,356,038
2'1,4',18,215
8,377,815
18,597,888
?,034,'146
8,485,700
103.24% $
t02j0%
8691%
98.42%
100.08%
100.00%
9992%
97.99%
119.96%
107.83%
9s.6s%
96.42yo
r04.35%
100.00%
(60,s44)
(635,706)
(346,267)
(2,970,490)
(660,533)
(468,979)
(13Are,36e)
(14,323,874)
(2,796,7rr)
(8,315,837)
(t,112,786)
(4,s67,938)
$
3,306,779 2,40t,ts2 8,404,776
100 000
8,770,500
100,000
(6,003,624)
n00.000)
s 51,885,740 S s3,721,634 $ 107,s12,85s $ 109,504,294 $ 111,472,063 g 1,967,769 101.80% $ (ss,782,659) 49% 9
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDD( C
City of Folsom, California
Housing Fund
Revenue and Expense Statement
Quarter Ended December 31,2023
REVENUES:
Tues
lntergovemental
Chtrges for Cwent Seruics
Impact Fee Revenue
Interest Revenue
Other Revenue
Operating Transfen In
TOTALRNVENUES
EXPENDITURES:
Salary & Benefits
Sewices & Supplies
Contracts
Insumce
Other Operating Exp€nscs
Capital Outlay
Extrordinary Loss on Dissolution of RDAs
Opmting TransfeN Out
TOTAL E)CENDITURES
APPROPRIATION OF FUND BALANCE
FUND BALANCE, JULY 1
FUND BALANCE
NONSPENDABLE FUND BALANCE
RESTRICTED FUND BALANCE
COMMITTED FUND BALANCE
ASSIGNED FTJND BALANCE
TJNR"ESTRICTED FUND BALANCE (DEFICIT) $
FY 2024
As of
5,491
2,939;155
308,63 I
263,810
$ 45,016,',182
(30,s'13,328)
14,'130
4,1'76,929
385,276
(r29,762)
75,909
t2,509
105 5
4,700,000
200,000
439,703
(1s,000)
703 952%
VARIANCE
Actual vs
(14,509)
2,639,755
58,631
(s6,402\
3 l 1,190
40,300
357
FY24Forecast VARIANCE
As of Forecast vs BudgetFv 2023
ACTUAL
w 2024
BUDCET
$ $
$ $
ll5
100%
63r/o
100%
98%
27%
980o/o
l23o/o
0%
20,000
300,000
250,000
56402
'13 626,402
s7s,000
40,300
20,000
5,000,000
450,000
496,10s
100%
r66't%
t80%
880%
$ $
st9%
460/o
0%
50%
43%203
2,984,5t6 4,243,226
ll,l02
626402
42,032,261
$ 42,032,26',7
(42,032,26't)
575,000
25,300
611
5,354,703
$ 47,386,970
(4'1,386,9',70)
42,032,267
(30,574,82t)
$
't0
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDIXI)
City of Folsom, California
Lighting and Landscaping Districts
Revenue and Expenditure Statement
Quarter Ended Decenber 31,2023
Revenues:
Special Assessment
Interest
Other Revenue
Expenditures:
Communications
Utilities
Contracts
Maintenance
Supplies
Transfers Out
Los Cerros Ranch
121
2,490
Fund 204 Fund 205 Fund 207 Fund 208 Fund 209 Funrl 210 Fund 212 Fund 213 Fund 214 Fund215 Fund 231 Fund 232 Fund 234 Bnggs Natome
Station
413
37,658
t7,2t0
51,503
Folsom
Ileishts
Broadstone
Unit 3 Broadstone
Prairie
Oaks #2
Sierra
Estetes
Natoma
Vallev
Cobble
Ridge
Hannaford Lake Natoma Cobble Hills
Cross Shores Reflect
6,753
3,254
t5,521
245
10,548
7,773
15,789
5,304
1,034
667
816
517
4,480
2,582
100,518
28,364
2,417
2,79',7
7,884
1,808
2,654
? ??o
9,s66
226
'7,330
5,485
16,t39
942
5,470
5t7
260,873
364
400
s87
1,481
9,0s3
2,406
4,627
28,424
1,1 l8
1,424
3,449
42879989
453_
7l
*t: 5,t34 2,480
TotalRevenue $ 2,611 $ 245 $ 413 $ 952 g 542 $ 3,381 $ $ 1,808 $ 226 S 6,412 g 764 $ 5,562 $ 2,480 606 I.l6l 2.708 234 391 2.504 256 245 713 601 87 641 154 TotalExpenditures$25,534$.55,271$109,0799'1,239$6,204$131,386$13,354$14,804$29,667$261,991$11,208$36,098$6,145 11
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDIXD
City of Folsom, California
Lighting and Landscaping Districts
Revenue and Expenditure Statement
Quarter Ended December 31,2023
Revenues:
Special Assessment
Interest
Other Revenue
Expenditures:
Communications
Utilities
Contracts
Maintenance
Supplies
Transfers Out
Fund236 Fund23? Fund249 Fund250 Fund251 Fund252 Fund253 Fund260 Fund262 Fund266 Fund267 Fund270 Praire Oaks Willow Creek Blue Ravine Willow Am River Willow Ranch Silverbrook East Oaks Steeplechase CreekSo. CanvonNo. Springs Willow Broadstone 3 ARC No.2
Snrss CFD#ll CFD#12 CFD #13
ARC
No.2
641
46,490
30,651
22,121
3,r'72
1,643
42',7
1,48i
2,724
l5l
20r
I 1,985
2,863
7,753
5t7
309
70 208
,) qsq
517
780
5,178
10,907
6,812
94,375
3,t84
26,838
5'7,233
34,484
204,465
t,494
322
14,641
13,351
43,789
194
3,701
927 1,029
896 10,229 13
TotalRevenue $ 641 $ 1,643 $ 201 $ 2,863 $ 396 $ 11,1s6 $ 1,042 S 278 $ 5,178 g 30'022 $ 1'816 $3'89s 2,801
2,919
6,240
38,309
3,563
52,105
30,736
517
111,991
t46
517517
752
566 324 348 2.600 1,717 165 1,724 8,059 1,106
1,025_
190
TotalExpenditures$ 102,434$ 4,783 $ 13,820 $.8,903 $ 12,308 $96,s77 $144,961 $4,42r $ 113,818 $ 304,241 $72,887 $1,878 12
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDIXD
City of Folsom, California
Lighting and Landscaping Districts
Revenue and Expenditure Statement
Quarter Ended December 31,2023
Revenues:
Special Assessment
Interest
Other Revenue
Expenditures:
Communications
Utilities
Contracts
Maintenance
Supplies
Transfers Out
t,r70
837
208
s,613
3_184
674 38,6s4 14,227 4,M4 3,660
Fund 271 Fund 275 Fund 278 Fund 281 Fund 282 Fund 283 Fund 284 Fund 285 Fund 288 Fund 289 Fund 291 Fund 293 Residences
ATARC
ARC
North #3
Blue Ravine
Oaks No.2
Folsom
Hts #2
Broadstone Islands Willow Creek Prospect
#4 CFD #16 Estates #2 Ridse
Maint Dist Maint Dist Maint Dist Maint Dist
cFD#18 CFD#19 CFD#23A1 CFD#23IA3
TotalRevenue $ 2,007 $24,339 $ 2,986 $ 9,005 $ 164 512,784 $ 1,701 g 674 $ 38,654 514,227 $ 4,M4 $ 3,660 $ 199,672 2,315
22,024
176
8,585
38,630
2,986
2,949
17,769
430
2,945
37,568
164
4,409
145,493
72,784
6,797
'7,064
40,126
2s9
1,442
'7,804
26,391
1.528
98,210
35,874
208,985
5,433
460
13,307_
709
TOTAL
15,554
180,934
3,184
517,140
254,289
1,s29,935
46,837
s 2,348,201
2,t98
2,9t5
6,2t3
1,080
3,519
7,262
1,350
5,097
4,t67
132304 2,003 74t 3,188 1,318 322 5.739
TotalExpenditures$ 11,630 $ 49,394 g 21,148 $ 41,254 $ 153,090 $ s5,305 $ 3s,723 $ 12,183 $348,808 $ 19,909 $ 10,746 $ 13
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDIX E
City of Folsom, California
Combined Water Funds*
Revenue and Expense Statement
Quarter Ended Decernber 31, 2023
OPERATING REWNUES:
charges Fo! Senices
TOTAL OPERATINC REVENUES
OPERATING EXPENSESI
Salaies
Benelits
Utilities
Supplies
Mamtenuce and Operatiotr
Contractual Serice$
Dep!eciation
Other Operatiry Expenss
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
OPERATINGINCOME
NONOPERATINC REVENUE (E'(P ENSES):
lmpaot Fes
Other
lnvestment Income
ldergovemental
Proceeds ofFinancing
Debt Sefrice Expense
Other Reimbursements
Capital Outlay - Prcjects
TOTAL NONOPERATING REVENUE
(EXPENSE)
INCOME (LOSS) Bf,FORE CAPITAL
CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS
CHANGE IN NET ASSETS
NET ASSETS, JULY 1
FY 2023
As of
FY 2024
As of
t2t3t/2023
F\ 2024
BUDGET
FY24 Forecast
As of
VARIANCE
65 (n6,773)
(24,3ss)
150,000
(70,000)
(984,193)
VARIANCE
Actual vs
t2t3v2022
9,624,069
t,64s,s06
I,165,681
492,653
546,868
496,641
917,20r
2,321,078
525,029
8,1 10,658
1,513,41 I
1,719,584
t,213,802
444,114
709,918
451,986
755,585
499,'117
28,821
511,468
3,785,497
2,588,958
912,500
l,?03,100
1,t43,430
4,049,965
t00
3,508,724
2,564,603
1,062,500
1,633,100
I,143,430
3,065,772
(2,06s,9t3)
(1,3?s,1s6)
(468,386)
(993,182)
(69t,44s)
(3,294,380)
u7,207
(14,588,081)
212,468
1,839,428
w 2023
3,302,t0t
2,692,580
985,271
r,401,65r
822,075
2,079,t14
4,19t,015
353,900
5,605,847
654,734
t5,256
19,278,300
19,278,300
103%
t030/.
s5%
55%
I,4'77,014
rs,660,464
3,617,836
252,510
14,616,908
365,000
(t,842,48)
(t6,t46,174)
(2,754,r84)
863,652
468,s57
(t,332,209)
(863,652)
100%
92%
t5t% (2,2t0,029\
93%
99%
116%
96%
t00%
76%
100%
38%
t5%
4s%
4't%
49%
42%
400/0
t9%
4t%
38%
t98%
0%
t58%
282,278
51,304
293,774
6,156
904,805
5,768,866
862,000
6s2,295 3s8%
(8,848,042) 3e%
491,000 236%
(6,5-00)
(1,0'16,107)
(448,495)
(4s1,454)
(451,4s4)
613,462
112,989,848
113,603,310
(4,166,t31\
_!_19983?,r?e_
(3,000) (437,t48)
75,557 207,163
4,707,960 7,982,'119
125,680,527
(r,842,4281
468,557
0%
4%
t5%
CAPITAL CONTRIf,UTIONS AND TRAIIISFf,RSI
Timsfers In
Trrufers Out
TOTAL CAPITAL CONTRJBUTIONS
AND TRANSTf,RS
4,376,374
120,972,s67
120,972,561 t20,912,567 12s,348,941
_g___t20972,s67_
t00%
8'7%
l6%
35%
(393,000)
NETASSETS
RESTRICTED NET ASSETS
UNRESTRICTED NET ASSETS $l
* Includq the followirg funds: Water Impaat Fge, Water Operatilg, Water Capital and Water Meters Piior yee includes prior period adjustment for GASB 68
14
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDIXF'
City of Folsom, California
Combined Wastewater Funds*
Revenue and Expense Statement
Quarter Ended December 31,2023
OPERATING REVENUES:
Charges For Senices
Prison Services
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Salarie$
Benefits
Utilities
Supplies
Maintenance and Operation
Contractual Seryices
Depreciatiotr
Other Operatitrg Expenses
TOTAL OPERATTNG EXPENSES
oPERATING INCOME (LOSS)
NONOFDRATING REVENUE (EXPENSES)!
lmpact Fees
Investnent Income
Other
Debt Seryice
Capital Outlay - Prcjects
TOT,A.L NONOPERATING REVENUE
(EXPENSE)
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAT
coNTRIBUTIONS .A.T*O t*Ona""^a
CHANGE IN NET ASSETS
NET ASSETS, Jt,ILY T
w 2023
As of
1213il2022
Fy 2024
As of
t2t3112023
w 2023
6,985,646 t1,63t,67'7
t,'138,619
r,49s,264
109,956
336,500
228,565
331,313
2,2'79,803
Forecast vs
12,896,500 1,000,000
FY24 Forecast
As of
VARIANCE VARIANCE
FY 2024
BIJDGET
l 1,896,500
67,200
1 1,963,700
t,979,351
t,435,294
95,000
535,512
298,t90
838,194
484,476
5,666,0t7
6,297,683
'19,950
215,000
17,888,964
Qt,ts3,06t)
(2,969,14'7)
3,328,536
(743,616)
('t43,616)
2,s84,920
'19,283,653
81,868,573
Actual vs Budget
6,423,673
33,600
6,457,273
879,558
662,629
37,708
155,124
130,383
t63,247
1,t26,893
191,036
3,347,118
3,1 10,095
t33,366
245,t15
6,236
(394,316\
(e,598)
3,t00,497
(362,298)
(362,298)
2,738,200
70,888,708
73,626,908
(8,234;732)
$ 65,392,175
%
(4,910,854) 59%
(1,061,812)
(767,300',)
(s9,798)
(424,4'10)
(176,285)
('169,0'79)
420/.
(250,000)
20,000
495,000
(r4,020,98't)
108%
t00%
108%
50%
59%
9t'7,539
66't,994
35,202
111,042
t2r,905
69, I l5
t0l%
91%
Il%
86%
100%
70%
46%
41%
37%
21%
4t%
8%
2,005,436
1,391,003
105,000
460,512
298,190
588,194
26,085
(44,29t)
10,000
(75,000)
100%
94%
t2l%
37%
53,002
504,148
48,831
2t9,485
426,409
3,499,935
(486)
I 0l,100
r,3t9,6t4 8,394,945
708
80,603,266 '19,783,653
t250/"
330%
22%
66.3%
234%
0%
99,950
710,000
3,867,977
755
(331,861)
'18,945,792
(t,223,288)
(26,948)
289,148
(17,840,134)
56%
243%
t8%
109%
9ty.
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS!
Transfers ln
Transfers Out
TOTAL CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
AND TRANSFERS
0%
NET ASSETS
RESTRICTED NET ASSETS
UNRESTRICTED NET ASSETS $ 81,868,573
Includes the lollowing funds: Sewer Operating and Sewer Capital Prior yer includes prior period adjustment for GASB 68
15
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
APPENDIX G
City of Folsom, California
Combined Solid Waste Funds*
Revenue and Expense Statement
Quarter Ended December 31,2023
OPERATING REVENUES:
Charges For Seryices
TOTAL OPERATINC REVENUES
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Sahies
Benefits
Utilities
Supplies
Maintenance md Operation
Contractual Seflices
Depreciation
Other Operating Expenses
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES
oPERATTNG TNCOME (LOSS)
NONOPERATING REVENUf, (EXPENSE):
Impact Fees
Investment Income
Inlergovemental Revenues
Other
Debt Seilice-Expense
Capitsl Outlay
TOTAL NONOPERATING REVENUE
(EXPENSE)
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE CAPITAI
CONTRJBUTIONS ANO'*O"{SUUO.
CHAI\GE IN NET ASSETS
FY 2024
As of
1213112023
Fv 2023
ACTUAL
w 2024
BUDGET
F\ 2023
As of
t2/3!2022
12,983,214
12,983,214
1,961,580
1,538,893
2t,6'17
732,844
63t,572
t,966,531
422,872
384,105
2t9,273
t55,740
40,474
179,401
(819,2t4)
(819,214)
5,098,816
1,003,668
6,102,484
I'n
2,t18,20s
1,626,101
22,263
57 t,65'1
4't4,107
2,094,3s2
226,118
3,9t2,198
3,358,053
46,542
1,924,59t
1,284,29O
s,267,427
t,037,04'7
s73,568
242,789
t2t,546
31 1,488
(2,367)
25,973,000
25,9'13,000
4,73t,876
3,512,580
48,500
2,008,868
5,766,084
526,066
138,000
120,4t5
10,996,790
10,046,416
(1,663,916)
(1,663,916)
8,382,500
7,042,199
15,424,699
4,39',t;7ts
3,494,3t5
56,500
1,833,868
944,533
s,641,084
1,164,636
199
8,206,835
(10,696,190)
Actual w
Q,613,671)
(1,886,479)
(26,23'tt
(t,437,ztr)
(470,426)
(1,61r,732)
(347,511)
(2r9,903)
218,015
(120,415)
(t0,110,612)
FY24 Forecast
As of
VARIANCE
(334,t61)
o8,265)
8,000
(17s,000)
(125,000)
68,000
366,500
VARIANCE
%
l'71 t07%
107%
59%
59%
93%
990/0
fi60/0
9t%
t00%
986/0
4s%
46%
46%
28%
500/o
'707 934,'198
739 '761
t'l
100%
96%
950/.
-383%
00/o
36%
43%
4t%
306,163
356,015
594,066
504,500
t20Ats
300,000
1t29%
366%
t00%
3%
258%
0%
58%
-94%
59%
-243%
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS AND TRANSFERS:
Tmnsfe6 In
Trmsfere Out
TOTAL CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS
AND TRANSFERS
2,312,181 6,038,53 1
NET ASSETS, JIJLY 1
NET ASSETS
RESTRICTED NET ASSETS
9,354,380 7,042,t99
UNR.ESTRICTED NET ASSETS $ 6,102,484
* Includes the following funds: Solid Waste opemting, solid waste capital, and solid waste Plan Arca capital Pdo! yed includes prior period adjustment lbr GASB 68
7 _$ 15,4U,699
16
03/12/2024 Item No.2.
File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
February 27,2024
Gity Council Special Meeting
MINUTES
Tuesday, February 27,2024 6:00 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The special City Council meeting was called to order at 6:00 pm with Vice Mayor Sarah Aquino presiding.
ROLL GALL:
Councilmembers Present YK Chalamcherla, Councilmember
Rosario Rodriguez, Councilmember
Sarah Aquino, Vice Mayor
Councilmembers Absent: Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember (arrived 6:02 pm) Mike Kozlowski, Mayor (arrived 6:08 pm)
ADJOURNMENT TO CLOSED SESSI FOR THE FOLLOWING PURPOSES:
1. Conference with Legal Counsel Anticipated Litigation, lnitiation of Litigation Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(d)(4): One Potential Case, State of California Motion by Gouncilmember Rodriguez, second by Councilmember Ghalamcherla to adjourn to closed session. Motion passed by the following roll-call vote:
AYES: Ghalamcherla, Aquinon Rodriguez
NOES: None
ABSENT: Rohrbough, Kozlowski
ABSTAIN: None
RECONVENE
City Attorney Steven Wang announced that no final action was taken during closed session Draft - Not Officiol Until Approved by the City Council Page 1Page 27 03/12/2024 Item No.3.
File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
February 27 ,2024
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned at 6:34 pm.
SUBMITTED BY
Jennifer Jimenez, Deputy City Clerk
ATTEST:
Mike Kozlowski, Mayor
Draft - Not Officiol lJntil Approved by the City Council Page 2Page 28 03/12/2024 Item No.3.
File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
February 27,2024
Gity Council Regular Meeting
MINUTES
Tuesday, February 27,20246:30 PM
CALL TO ORDER
The regular City Council meeting was called to order at 6:34 pm with Mayor Mike Kozlowski presiding ROLL CALL:
Councilmembers Present: YK Chalamcherla, Councilmember
Rosario Rodriguez, Councilmember
Anna Rohrbough, Councilmember
Sarah Aquino, Vice Mayor
Mike Kozlowski, Mayor
Councilmembers Absent: None
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
The pledge of allegiance was recited.
AGENDA UPDATE
None
SCHEDU LED PRESENTATIONS:
1. Sacramento Regional Transit Presentation on Proposed Folsom Bus Route Changes Regional Transit representative James Drake made a presentation and responded to questions from the City Council.
The following speakers addressed the City Council regarding this item:
Robert Holderness
Margie Donovan
2. Presentation by the Public Works Department Regarding Fleet Conversion to Electric Vehicles Public Works Director Mark Rackovan made a presentation and responded to questions from the City Council.
Droft - Not Official Until Approved by the City Council Poge 7
03/12/2024 Item No.3.
File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
February 27,2024
The following speaker addressed the City Council regarding this item John Lane
BUSINESS F THE FLOOR:
The following speakers addressed the City Council:
Barbara Leary regarding developmenVannexation proposal for south of Highway 50 GONSENT GALENDAR:
Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine and may be approved by one motion.
Councilmembers may pull an item for discussion.
3. Approval of February 13,2024 Special and Regular Meeting Minutes
4. pulled for discussion
5. Resolution No. 11169 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement (Contract No. 173-21 23-017) with Water Works Engineers, LLC for Design and Engineering Services During Construction for the Basin 4 Phase 2 Sewer Rehabilitation Project and the Water System Rehabilitation Project No. 4 and Appropriation of Funds
6. Resolution No. '11 170- A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute an Amendment to the Agreement for Fire Station 34 Construction Management Services with FDC Consultants and Appropriation of Funds
7. pulled for discussion
8. Resolution No. 11172 - A Resolution Amending Resolution No. 10913 and approving the updated City lmpact and Connection Fee schedule for Law Enforcement, Fire Suppression, General Facilities, Vehicles and Equipment, Park lmprovement, Humbug-Willow Creek, Housing Trust, Water, Sanitary Sewer, Solid Waste, Transportation lmprovement, Drainage, and Light Rail lmpact Fees
9. Resolution No. 11 173 - A Resolution Directing the Preparation Of Engineer's Report for the Following Landscaping and Lighting Districts for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 American River Canyon North, American River Canyon North No. 2, American River Canyon North No. 3, Blue Ravine Oaks, Blue Ravine Oaks No. 2, Briggs Ranch, Broadstone, Broadstone No. 4, Broadstone Unit No. 3, Cobble Ridge, Cobble Hills Ridge ll/Reflections ll, Folsom Heights, Folsom Heights No.2, Hannaford Cross, Lake Natoma Shores, Los Cerros, Natoma Station, Natoma Valley, Prairie Oaks Ranch, Prairie Oaks Ranch No. 2, Prospect Ridge, Sierra Estates, Silverbrook, Steeplechase, The Residences at American River Canyon, The Residences at American River Canyon ll, Willow Creek Estates East, Willow Creek Estates East No. 2, Willow Creek Estates South, and Willow Springs
Droft - Not Officiol Until Approved by the City Council Page 2
03/12/2024 Item No.3.
File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
February 27,2024
10. Resolution No. 11174 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Construction Agreement with MCM Roofing Company, lnc. for the Emergency Replacement of 79 Skylights at the Andy Morin Sports Complex and Appropriation of Contingency Funds
11. Resolution No. 11175 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 2 to the Agreement (Contract No. 046-21 21-005) with Badger Meter, lnc. to Purchase Badger Cellular Endpoints for a Three Year Pilot Automated Metering lnfrastructure Network for the City of Folsom Water Meter Division
12. Resolution No. 11176 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute Amendment No. 1 to the Agreement (Contract No. 046-21 21-007) with Badger Meter, lnc. for the Purchase of 1- lnch Water Meters and Appropriation of Funds
Motion by Gouncilmember Rodriguez, second by Councilmember Ghalamcherla to approve the Consent Galendar, with the exception of items 4 and 7. Motion passed by the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN
G halamcherla, Rod ri g uez, Roh rboug h, Aq ui no, Kozlowski None
None
None
CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM PULLED FOR DISCUSSION:
4. Resolution No. 1 1 168 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Program Supplement Agreement with Caltrans for the Roundabout Policy and Feasibility Study, Project No. PW2403, Federal Project No. 5288(054)
Speaker Margie Donovan pulled this item to inquire about pedestrian and ADA access; Public Works Director Mark Rackovan responded.
Motion by Councilmember Rodriguez, second by Vice Mayor Aquino to approve Resolution No. 11168. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:
AYES: Ghalamcherla, Rodriguez, Rohrbough, Aquino, Kozlowski NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
7, Resolution No. 11 171 - A Resolution Authorizing the City Manager to Execute a Design and Consulting Services Contract with Kimley Horn and Associates, lnc. for the Roundabout Policy and Feasibility Study, Project No. PW2403, Federal Project No. 5288(054) Councilmember Chalamcherla pulled this item to inquire about the proposal scoring process. Public Works Director Mark Rackovan responded.
Motion by Gouncilmember Rodriguezn second by Vice Mayor Aquino to approve Resolution No. 11171. Motion passed by the following roll-callvote:
Draft - Not Officiol IJntil Approved by the City Council Poge 3
03/12/2024 Item No.3.
File 034-21 24-001
Folsom City Council Minutes
February 27,2024
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Rodriguez, Aquino, Kozlowski
Ghalamcherla, Rohrbough
None
None
COUNCIL REOUESTS FO FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
Councilmember Rodriguez suggested another program to recognize individuals (in addition to the recently approved program for annual recognition of individuals).
Councilmember Rohrbough suggested items related to unfunded liability, strategic plan implementation, and Police Department actions/proposals related to homelessness/crime.
CITY MANAGER REPORTS
City Manager Andersen spoke about traffic projects, book sale, Central Business District, and Fun Factory preschool.
COUNCIL COMMENTS
Councilmember Chalamcherla spoke about water vision workshops, Fire Department CERT recognition.
Councilmember Rohbrough spoke about the Library's Lego competition and local school bus driver Marina Gable.
Councilmember Rodriguez spoke about budget season
Mayor Kozlowski spoke about Regional Transit meetings, meetings with residents, the Library's Lego competition, Murer House, election, and spring sports.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to come before the City Council, the meeting was adjourned in memory of Michelle Cagney at 8:11 pm.
SUBMITTED BY
Jennifer Jimenez, Deputy City Clerk
ATTEST
Mike Kozlowski, Mayor
Droft - Not Official lJntil Approved by the City Council Page 4
03/12/2024 Item No.3.
Folsom City Council
Staff ort
RECOMMENDATION / COIINCII, ACTION
The Fire Department recommends that the City Council pass and adopt Resolution No. 11177 - A Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of Completed Annual State Mandated Fire Inspections
BACKGROUND / ISSUE
Existing law (CA Health & Safety Code $ 131463) requires the Chief of Folsom Fire Department andlor their authorized representatives to inspect every building used as a public or private school within the City of Folsom not less than once each year, for the purpose of enforcing California fire code building standards.
Existing law (CA Health & Safety Code $ 13146.2) requires the City of Folsom Fire Department to annually inspect certain structutes, including hotels, motels, lodging houses, and apartment houses, for compliance with fire code building standards.
Senate Bill 1205 requires that the mandated annual inspections be reported to the "administering authority" (City of Folsom City Council).
POLICY / RULE
Section 13146.4 has been added to the California Health & Safety Code requiring the City of Folsom Fire Department to report its compliance with Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 arnually to the City Council.
1 MEETING DATE: 311212024
AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar
SUBJECT: Resolution No. 11177 - A Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of Completed Annual State Mandated Fire Inspections
F'ROM: Fire Department
ANALYSIS
03/12/2024 Item No.4.
Fire Department Prevention Division has completed all initial inspections pursuant to Sections 13146.2 and 13146.3 of the California Health and Safety Code as outlined in Attachment2.
Those occupancies found to be in violation of the Folsom Fire Code have either made the necessary corrections or are in the process of correcting applicable Fire Code violations; re- inspections will continue until all Fire Code violations are corrected.
F'INANCIAL IMPACT
There is nominal fiscal impact as fire prevention staff are required, through state mandates, to inspect the specified buildings as described.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
This action is not considered a project under Section 15061(b)(3) of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, and as such is exempt from environmental review.
ResolutionNo. I Il77 - A Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of Completed Annual State Mandated Fire Inspections
2. 2023 Completed State Mandated Inspections List
Submitted,
Ken Cusano, Fire Chief
I
2 Page 34
03/12/2024 Item No.4.
Attachment 1
Resolution No. 1 ll77 - A Resolution Acknowledging Receipt of Completed Annual State Mandated Fire Inspections
03/12/2024 Item No.4.
RESOLUTION NO. IIL77
A RESOLUTION ACKNOWLEDGING RE,CEIPT OF'
COMPLETED ANNUAL STATE MANDATED FIRE INSPECTIONS
WHEREAS' CA Health & Safety Code $ 131463 requires the Chief of Folsom Fire Department andlor their authorized representatives to inspect every building used as a public or private school within the City of Folsom not less than once eachyear, for the pu{pose of enforcing California fire code building standards; and
WHEREAS, CA Health & Safety Code $ 13146.2 requires the City of Folsom Fire Department to annually inspect certain structures, including hotels, motels, lodging houses, and apartment houses, for compliance with fire code building standards; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Senate Bill 1205, Section 13146.4 of the Health & Safety Code requires the City of Folsom Fire Department to report its compliance with Sections 13146'2 and 13146.3 annually to the City Council; and
WHEREAS' City of Folsom Fire Department Prevention Division completed all State mandated fire inspections including hotels, motels, lodging houses, apartment houses, and public or private schools; and
WHEREAS, the City of Folsom Fire Department annual report of compliance with inspection requirements is submitted to City Council,
NOW' THEREFORE' BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council acknowledges receipt of this report from the Fire Chief.
pASSED AND ADOPTED this 12ft day of March2024,by the following roll-call vote:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Councilmember(s):
Councilmember(s):
Councilmember(s):
Councilmember(s):
Michael D. Kozlowski, MAYOR
ATTEST:
Christa Freemantle, CITY CLERK
ResolutionNo. 11177
Page I ofl Page 36
03/12/2024 Item No.4.
Attacl'nnent2
2023 Cornpleted State Mandated Inspections List
03/12/2024 Item No.4.
FOLSOM FIRE
DEPARTMENT
5gS Glenn Drive.Folsom, CA 95630
Office (gt6) +6t-6Soo Fax (g16) 984-7o8r
lF fr)ll.sr0N{t
cltv 6F
OISTI{CTIVE EY NATURE
2023 Completed State Mandated lnspections List:
RESI DENTIAL FACI LITI ES
Name Address
Lake Natoma lnn 702 Gold Lake Dr
Hilton Garden lnn 221 lron Point Rd
Courtyard by Marriott 2575lron Point Rd
Staybridge Suites 1745 Cavitt Dr
Larkspur Landing 121 lron Point Rd
Hampton lnn and Suites 155 Placerville Rd.
Folsom Hotel 703 Sutter St.
Fairfield lnn and Suites 1755 Cavitt Dr
Residence lnn 2555 lron Point Rd
Folsom Care Center 510 Mill st.
Empire Ranch Alzheimer's Special Care 1801 E Natoma St.
Oakmont of Folsom 1574 Creekside Dr.
Prairie City Landing 645 Willard Dr
Brookdale Folsom 780 Harrington Wy
Park Folsom 255 Wales Dr
Creekside Oaks 1715 Creekside Dr
Falls at Willow Creek 1870 Creekside Dr
Folsom Ranch Apartments 1000 Folsom Ranch Rd
Forestwood Apartments 9483 Greenback Ln
Regan Trust Apartments 270 Montrose Dr
lron Point at Prairie Oaks Apartments 1550 lron Point Rd.
Dabkoski Apartments 262Montrose Dr.
Montrose artments 264Monlrose Dr
Montrose artments 268 Montrose Dr
Montrose Apartments 266 Montrose Dr
Garrett Apartments 2T2Monlrose Dr
Overlook at Blue Ravine 1200 Creekside Dr
Preserve at Blue Ravine 1005 Blue Ravine Rd
Talisman Apartment Building 200 Talisman Dr.
Talisman Apartment Building 202 Talisman Dr
03/12/2024 Item No.4.
RESI DENTIAL FACI LITI ES
Name Address
Lake Natoma lnn 702 Gold Lake Dr
Talisman artment Buildi 204 Talisman Dr
Talisman Apartment Building 205 Talismian Dr
Talisman Apartment Building 203 Talisman Dr
Talisman Apartment Building 201 Talisman Dr
Talisman Apartment Building 207 Talisman Dr.
Talisman Apartment Building 209 Talisman Dr.
Talisman Apartment Buildi ng 211 Talisman Dr
Sherwood Apartments 2300 lron Point Rd
Willow n rtments 250 McAdoo Dr
Legends at Willow Creek 180 S. Lexington Dr
Ca nyon Terrace Apartments 1600 Canyon Terrace Ln
The Park on Riley Apartments 99 Cable Cir.
Waterford Place 240 Natoma Station Dr.
Fairmont Apartments 200 S. Lexington Dr
1212 Bidwell rtments 1212Bidwell St.
Bidwell Apartments 705 Bidwell St
Bidwell Apartments 707 Bidwell St,
Bidwell Apartments 709 Bidwell St.
Court Yard Apartments 4l2Figueroa St.
Folsom Garden Apartments 713 Stafford St
Folsom Oaks Apartments 809 Bidwell St.
Garrett Apartments Building 2T2Monlrose Dr
Gas Light Apartments 51 Dean Way
Marshal Apartments 612 Stafford St.
Mercy Vil lage Apartments 1110 Duchow Way
Mercy Village Apartments 1 130 Duchow Way
Mercy Vi I lage Apartments 1160 Duchow Way
Lake Point Apartments 7550 Folsom Auburn Rd.
Natoma Arms APartments 101 Natoma St.
Raintree Apartments 1000 Sibley St.
Montecito Commons 6700 Oak Ave
Hub Apartments 525 Willard Dr
Bidwell Poi nt Apartments 125 E. Bidwell St.
Talavera Ridge Apartments 1550 Broadstone Pkwy.
Pique at lron Point 101 Pique Loop.
Granite City Apartments 1 150 Sibley Street
Creekview Manor 1720 Creekside Drive
Vintage Willow Creek 1701 Creekside Drive
2lPage
03/12/2024 Item No.4.
scHooLs
Name Address
Blanche Sprentz 249 Flower Dr
Carl Sundahl 9932 lnwood Rd.
Empire Oaks 1830 Bonhill Dr.
Folsom Hills 106 Manseau Dr
Gold R 735 Halidon Way
Natoma Station 500 Turn Pike
Oak Chan 101 Prewett Dr
Russell Ranch 375 Dry Creek Rd.
Sandra Gallardo 775 Russi Rd.
Theodore udah 101 Dean Way
Folsom Middle 500 Blue Ravine Way
Sutter Middle 715 Riley St.
Folsom High 1655 lron Point Rd
Vista del Lago 1970 Broadstone Pkwy.
St.John Notre Dame 309 Montrose Dr.
HOSPITALS
Name Address
Mercy Folsom Hospital 1650 Creekside Dr
Vibra 300 Montrose Dr
DETENTION FACILITIES
Name Address
Folsom Police Department 46 Natoma St.
3lPage
03/12/2024 Item No.4.
m
Folsom City Council
Staff Re ort
RECO TION / CITY COUN , ACTION
Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions
1. Conduct a workshop with Community Development Department (CDD) staff and the public to discuss the CDD Development Processing Fee Study and proposed changes to the CDD fee schedule.
2. Consider public and staff input regarding the proposed development processing fees and provide staff with direction on challenges, concerns or modifications. Staff will review, potentially revise, and return to City Council with an updated fee study and a resolution to adopt an updated CDD Development Processing Fee Schedule at the April23,2024 City Council meeting.
BACKGROI ]ND / ISSTIE
Generally, issues with the existing Community Development Department (CDD) development processing fee schedule include the following:
1. Staff was unable to fully determine the basis by which the current development processing fees were established.
2. Current fees do not accurately reflect actual staff time and effort spent on the various processes.
3. Over the course of the study, it was determined that the City of Folsom development processing fees are on the low end of what is charged for similar processes regionally. 1 MEETING DATE: 3t1212024
AGENDA SECTION: New Business
SUBJECT: Community Development Department Fee Study Workshop FROM: Community Development Department
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
4. As a new service since the last fee study and update, permit intake, tracking, and plan review are now done electronically, but staff does not have a long-term funding source for necessary equipment and software upgrades as part of the electronic review service.
Reasons for Fee Study
Recognizing the City's goals for Financial Stability and Sustainability through heightened efficiency, increased revenue, and cost recovery (Strategic Goal A, Strategy 1), CDD recognizes the opportunity in doing a comprehensive fee study for processes and services sought by individual parties. In review of the current processing fees, originally adopted by resolution in 2006 and adjusted for inflationrn2020, it was determined that current CDD staff does not have full access to or knowledge of previous formal studies of said fees. Based on that information, it appears a formal study of development processing user and regulatory fees for CDD has not occurred in approximately 17 years. Within that timeframe, significant organizational and industry changes have occurred with profound effects on justifiable fee amounts and structure, as well as cost recovery needs of the City, particularly the General Fund.
Not only have underlying cost drivers changed, but the way in which service is provided has also changed with improved efficiency to streamline practices, technology availability, the regulatory snvironment, and customer expectations, to name only a few (Strategic Plan Goal B, Strategy 9).
Furthermore, the fiscal realities of the City have shifted to a position where many services are expected to fully recover costs to avoid subsidy by constrained general resources needed for uses of broader public benefit. While the City has endeavored to maintain fees annually along the pace of cost inflation, these underlying contributors to cost of service and cost recovery are material to the overall effectiveness of the current fee structure, both in terms of service categories and fee and financial impacts.
As such, CDD retained Clearsource Financial Consulting to perform a comprehensive Development Processing Fee Study. ClearSource has performed several similar studies around the state for jurisdictions of comparable size, including local studies in Lincoln and Roseville. Staff funded this study using Local Early Action Plan (LEAP) grant funding from the California Department of Housing and Community Development via Senate Blll2 (2017).
Development Processing Fee Issues
CDD consists of three divisions: Planning, Engineering (including the City ArboristAJrban Forester), and Building. The current fee schedule used by CDD does not reflect the time and cost that staff incur in processing permits and projects. For example, as shown in the Cost of Service Analysis included in Appendix B of the attached fee study, Planning fees for appeals, Single- Family Design Reviews and Special Event Permits only cover between 2 to 15 percent of staff time spent on average for each of these processes. On the other hand, new Multi-Family Commercial Design Reviews, Planned Development Permit Modifications and Tentative Map Amendments over-recover costs by between I72 and249 percent Similarly, Engineering's fees for Wet Utilities/Service Connections, Dry Utility Annual Permits, Long-Term/Revocable Encroachments and Commercial Landscape Plan Review only recover between 2 to 23 percent of staff time, while short-term encroachment permits and active work zone permit extensions over- recover by 270 percent. In Building, current fees and cost recovery vary depending on project 2
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
valuation, but do not reflect average staff time to review plans and process permits. For example, accessory dwelling units only take in a fraction of the fees of a new single-family residence but take a similar amount of staff effort to review, and production home permits take in a low flat fee but are subject to review by several different staff members and departments.
The fee study determined that aggregate cost recovery level for fee-collecting processes is currently 55o/o for Planning, 83Yo for Engineering and 84o/o for Building. The mismatch in fees charged and staff expenditures taken on to review and process permits and projects results in an estimated $1.3 million deficit in the form of annual General Fund subsidies needed to operate the CDD at full staffing. With limited resources available from the General Fund, CDD is not currently able to retain enough in-house or contract staff to operate at these levels. This results in staff not being able to meet all expected turnaround times, thereby delaying the start of development activities and business operations.
Regionally, the fee study looked at other mid-sized cities in the area (Elk Grove, Rancho Cordova, Rocklin and Roseville) and found that Folsom's existing Planning fees were consistently on the low-end of what is charged in these other jurisdictions. The regional comparison found that existing Building and Engineering plan check and inspections fees were within the mid-range of what is seen in these jurisdictions.
Finally, CDD staff has transitioned to a fully electronic plan check and permit tracking system (currently ComDev/eTrakit and ProjectDox). While the initial costs of implementing these systems and some annual maintenance costs have been previously accounted for, there are currently no long-term funding sources for major periodic maintenance, software updates, or replacement of these systems, nor is there long-term funding to purchase equipment to support these systems as they are upgraded and replaced. In recent budget analysis, it was determined that the costs of these programs for continuing at the current level of service are anticipated to potentially increase significantly and staff notes that it has been common practice in surrounding jurisdictions (including the cities of Roseville and Sacramento) to charge a technology fee as a percentage of the overall building permit fees to help support these technologies long-term. Furthermore, while staff collects a General Plan fee on building permits to help fund major periodic updates to the General Plan, no such fee exists to help fund major periodic Zoning Code updates.
POLICY / RULE
The objectives of the fee study, the methodology used to complete the study, and the formulation of outcomes and recommendations for future consideration were significantly influenced by Article XIIIC of the California Constitution, Propositions 218 (1996) and26 (2010), and Section 66014 of the California Government Code.
Article XIIIC states that, "the local government bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a levy, charge, or other exaction is not a tax, that the amount is no more than necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental activity, and that the manner inwhich those costs are allocated to a payor bear afair or reqsonable relationship to the payer's burdens on, or benefits received from, the governmental activity. " Additionally, Article XIIIC identifies the following development processing fees as items that are not defined as taxes:
aJ
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
o
a
A charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payer that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege [Art. XIII,C , 1(e)(1)1.
. A charge imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payor that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of providing the service or product [Art. XIII,C, 1(e)(2)].
A charge imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to a local government for issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof [Art. XI[,C, 1(e)(3)].
Section 660Ia@) of the California Government Code includes the following, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when a local agency charges fees for zoning veriances; zoning changes; use permits; building inspections; building permits; ...the processing of maps under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act...; or planning services...; thosefees may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of the estimated reasonable cost of providing the services or materials is submitted to, and approved by, a popular vote of f,vo+hirds of those electors voting on the issue".
The outcomes and recommendations of the fee study are intended to comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws including providing confirmation that the proposed fees ("charges") recommended as a result of the fee study are not taxes as defined in Article XIIIC of the California Constitution and that the proposed fees are no more than necessary to the cover the reasonable costs ofthe City's activities and services addressed in the fees. Additionally, the fee study intended to show that the manner in which the costs are allocated to a payor bear a fair and reasonable relationship to the payor's burdens on, or benefits received from the activities and services provided by the City.
ANALYSIS
Key points of the analysis prepared for a modified fee schedule include the following:
1. Most fees are based on an hourly rate for each division of CDD multiplied by the average amount of hours it takes staff to complete the processing and review of the tasks with which the fees are associated.
2. Full recovery of staff time is the baseline goal for development processing fees collected, though some fees have been strategically lowered to less than full cost recovery due to potential long-term benefits encouraging permit compliance and economic development purposss.
4
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
3. Flat fees that reflect the costs associated with an "average" permit or project are generally used rather than deposit-based fees given current staffing resources.
4. Staff has provided additional fee types and sub-categories to better capture types of work and costs associated with specific permit and project types, thereby more accurately charging for larger projects and permits while not overcharging for smaller ones.
5. Staff has provided a new technology fee and an updated General Plan/Zoning Code update fee on building permits to help better fund updates to these resources in the long-term.
6. New fee rates were found to be in the range of what is charged by surrounding and comparably sized j urisdictions.
7. Staff reached out to several groups and individuals who could be impacted by the new fee schedule to make them aware of staff s plan to update fees and invite them to participate in the process, including the presented workshop under this agenda item.
8. Staff is seeking input and direction from Council for any modifications to the proposed fee schedule.
Determining Full Cost of Service
The fee study calculated the estimated reasonable cost of providing various fee-related services across the City organization. Generally, this can be calculated as the product of the composite fully burdened hourly labor rate of the division responsible for providing services and the estimated labor time required to process a typical request for service. The composite fully burdened hourly rates calculated in the fee study are based on the estimated annual hours spent providing fee related services, which include estimated labor, services and supplies, and citywide allocated overhead expenditures, sourced as follows:
Labor expenditures for in-house personnel were based on budgeted salary and benefits expenditures.
Contract service personnel and other services and supplies related costs were based on Fiscal Year 2023124 adopted budgets and anticipated costs.
Citywide overhead cost allocations were based on the City's current overhead cost allocation plan.
Estimated labor time spent providing fee related services were developed based on information from CDD staff and are in-line with typical direct service ratios experienced by the consultant via studies of similar municipalities throughout Califomia. Commonly used industry data also aided in the development of time estimates and proposed fee structures.
a
a
a
a
5
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
ClearSource looked at direct services eligible for user fee methodology, as well as identification during the study of any relevant additions for services performed that are currently without a fee or for under-quantified or ineffectively structured fees. ClearSource then developed a "fullcost of service" to represent the maximum limit for fees and cost recovery, inclusive of direct and indirect costs of services from participating agency divisions and centralized agency services.
Modifications to Fee Schedule
Using the full cost of service fees as a baseline, staff identified specific fees to strategically lower below full cost recovery. Almost all of the fees recommended to not obtain full cost recovery come from Planning. While the majority of the Planning fees are still significantly higher than what is currently being charged for the same processes, staff believes that there is value in reducing certain fees to below full cost recovery for a variety of reasons. There are also some additional considerations to be made for potential revisions to current processes that may improve the proposed cost recovery in the future through ministerial changes if deemed appropriate by the City Council. These fees, and the reasoning behind not seeking fulI cost recovery, include the following:
Single-family variances and owner-occupied appeals: Less than full cost recovery to not burden a property owner with overly exorbitant costs associated with unique situations on the property on which they reside or are impacted by.
Minor Design Reviews: Less than full cost recovery to encourage code compliance for property improvements that require these processes. Some minor projects that are subject to these processes could be moved down to staff-level review as part of the Zoning Code update, since a large percentage of these fees is related to staff report preparation and review, public noticing, and staff attendance at meetings related to projects that go before Commission for review.
Preliminary Project Review and Opinion on a Planning Matter: Less than full cost recovery to encourage early staff involvement in proposed projects and save additional staff and applicant time in the long run by laying out potential project issues early in the process. a
o
O
a
o
a Minor permits for small businesses and neighborhood events: Less than full cost recovery to incentivize compliance with regulations regarding these permits. Only a handful of these permit applications come in each year.
Landmark Tree classification: Less than full cost recovery to incentivize nominations of eligible trees.
Special Event Permits: Less than full cost recovery due to the commumty and economic benefit of events. Staff also added several new fees for larger andlor more time-intensive events to capture typical additional uses of staff time that goes into review of these events. 6
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
Even with the proposed reductions from full cost recovery for certain fees, staff recognizes that many of the proposed Planning fees are considerably higher than what is currently being charged for the same process. Staff attributes these significant fee increases to modifications in what is required to go through these Planning processes, including new local, state, and federal laws that complicate and lengthen these processes and a shift in priorities for what processes should be subsidized since the last time the fee schedule was updated in 2006. As mentioned previously, staff recommends that Council take this into consideration during the Zoning Code Update process to determine if certain smaller projects could be moved to a staff-level review, thereby streamlining processes for improved efficiency while reducing the amount of staff time and applicant fees associated with such projects.
The Building Division's modified fee schedule includes restructuring and new tiers and sub- types so fees could more accurately reflect the level of effort that is expected as projects grow in scale and detail. The restructuring and modifications included:
Introducing flatrate fees for common residential permit types to be more straightforward and easier for staff to provide to the applicant. Staff found this to be consistent with other jurisdictions in the area.
o
a
a
Proposing lower cost recovery for residential HVAC and water heater change-out permits to promote code compliance. These have been identified as projects for which people often avoid getting a permit. As such, lowering the cost of these types of projects encourages contractors and homeowners to obtain a permit to ensure the work is completed in accordance with the Building Code.
Restructuring the fees related to subdivision development to align with the amount of staff time utilized for each permit type. Production permits are reviewed by all divisions in Community Development, though the current fee covers less than I hour of staff time. o Revising the current valuation-based portion of the fee schedule to reflect estimated staff time. The cost recovery for valuation-based fees now estimates the same cost recovery percentage for all valuations rather than the existing sliding scale of cost recovery percentage based on valuation.
The Engineering Division also made several specific modifications to the fee schedule to reflect tracked costs associated with the permits and plan checks that they perform. Major proposed modifi cations include the following:
Encroachment permits were restructured with the intent to encourage applicants to obtain permits and get the work done as quickly and efficiently as possible. Subcategories of encroachment permits were also added based on length of time and nature of the work which the encroachment will occur.
a
7
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
Annual permits for general maintenance are proposed to be billed on a time and materials basis, with the initial deposit determined by the City Engineer, based on anticipated scope of work. This is due to the inconsistent level of staff effort for this type of work since it is difficult to predict without knowing the scope of work. a Landscape review for production homes was changed from being based on valuation of the project to a fixed fee, as the existing valuation method was found to not reflect the detailed tasks and level of effortthat goes into reviewing the plans. a Fees that are primarily for work performed by the Contract City Surveyor were modified to reflect the actual billable rate of the Surveyor plus the overhead taken on for contract administration.
o Currently , a flat rate of $3 8 is used for all tree work/removal permits, regardless of the number of trees being removed. The tree removal permit fee structure was completely revamped to ensure that when tree work or minor removal (up to two trees or any "in- decline" tree) on occupied properties is proposed, the fees are kept relatively low, as this does not take a significant amount of staff time to review and code compliance is encouraged. However, for either three or more trees being removed, any tree removal for new construction, or tree work/removal done without a permit, the fees have gone up significantly to reflect the level of staff time it takes to process and review these tasks.
Flat Fees vs. Deposit-Based Fees
Staff considered using mostly deposit-based fees that would reflect the actual staff time spent on each project or permit for Planning and Engineering fees. There are several jurisdictions in the area that :utihze deposit-based fees, including Rancho Cordova, Elk Grove and Roseville.
However, CDD is not currently set up with the staffing, accounting bookkeeping, and monitoring resoruces to track both departmental hours and hours from other departments and process the refunds and invoices for the volume of permits and projects that are seen annually. As such, the majority of fees proposed are flat fees. These flat fees were developed based on the estimated time it takes to process an"average" project or permit of that type. Furthernore, the additional fee sub- types and fee schedule restructuring described above help provide a more realistic set of fees that better capture staff time spent processing and reviewing permits and projects.
While deposit-based fees were not deemed feasible for most permits and projects, staff did identi$ certain more complex projects to be administered using a"time and materials" billing approach.
For these fees, staff would collect an initial deposit and bill against that deposit for the costs of outside consultant review and support, and in-house labor efforts, and either request replenishment of funds or refund the unused deposit amount as appropriate. Examples of deposit-based fees include annexation and development agreement processing, environmental (CEQA) review, and annual Engineering permits. Staff has also included "time and materials" fees for costs associated with outside agency reviedservices, outside expertise related to appeals, and special events that require additional resources beyond those covered in the scope of the fee schedule. These are 8
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
considered pass through fees with administrative oversight. If it's the Council's desire to pursue implementing a deposit-based fee structure, additional staffing would be needed to support that effort.
Technology and GeneralPlanlZoning Code Fees
CDD is proposing a new technology fee to be applied to all building permits. This fee is based on the estimated long-term costs of software and licensing fees, hardware upgrades, implementation, and a ten percent contingency. While a six percent permit fee would recover 100 percent of the estimated cost allocation of the technology updates and maintenance, staff ultimately chose arate of five percent, which would recover approximately 90 percent of cost allocation. Since Building Permit rates would also increase as part of the updated fee schedules, staff concluded that lowering the technology fee slightly below fuIl cost recovery would be warranted to limit the fee burden of applicants and to be more in alignment with other regional cities of similar size.
CDD is also proposing a modified General Plan and Zoning Code fee to be applied to all building permits. Currently, a fee of three percent of building permit and plan check fees is collected as a General Plan Update fee. However, there is no fee collected for Zonitg Code updates or maintenance. The new proposed fee would help fund major periodic General Plan, Housing Element andZoning Code updates as well as in-house maintenance of these documents. While a nine percent permit fee would recover 100 percent of the estimated cost allocation, staff ultimately chose a rate of five percent, which would rscover approximately 55 percent of cost allocation.
Staff again chose a lower rate with the intent of not overburdening applicants with additional costs and to stay in line with what is being charged in the region for similar fees.
Comparison to Surrounding Communities
In order to provide the City Council with additional information as it considers potential adjustments to fees, current and proposed fees were compared to amounts collected by other agencies within the region. City policymakers often consider fees established by other regional agencies for similar services when evaluating proposed fees. ClearSource provided comparison information for several fee categories commonly seen from agency to agency in order to give the City Council a reasonable sense of changes expected. These comparisons are included in the tables starting on page 11 of the fee study (provided in Attachment 1). The comparison found that the majority of the proposed fees for Planning and Engineering would put Folsom in the mid-range of comparably sized cities in the region, with only Minor Conditional Use Permits and owner- occupied appeals being in the low range and Major Conditional Use Permits and non-owner- occupied appeals being in the high range. However, because three ofthese four jurisdictions utilize deposit-based fees, the applicants in those jurisdictions often incur more costs than the number shown on the fee schedule. Since most of the fees proposed in CDD's fee schedule are not deposit- based, applicants would not incur many of these additional costs they can expect to incur in other deposit-based jurisdictions. Staff ultimately determined that the proposed fees were within the range of similar fees charged in the region.
9
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
Public Outreach
To ensure that the applicants most likely to be impacted by the modified fee schedule were part of the process, staff reached out to the North State Building Industry Association (BIA), the Folsom Chamber of Commerce and Folsom Historic District Association and presented the proposed fee changes to these groups. Staff also reached out to the CDD's General Plan and Zoning Code Update groups and users of CDD's online systems to inform them of the proposed fee updates.
Staff also invited each of these groups and individuals to workshop under this agenda item in the event that they wished to participate in the process and provide public comment.
Conclusions and Next Steps
The fee study concluded that the proposed new fees would result in an estimated additional $1.3 million dollars annually for the General Fund. ClearSource performed a reasonableness test on the proposed fees using historical permit volume to forecast anticipated revenue from the fees. This test confirmed that the forecasted revenue from the fees did not exceed program costs and should therefore be in line with State law. The study recommends monitoring permit and application volume and applicant feedback to determine if any of the fee modifications are resulting in any unanticipated changes in project frequency and to increase the level ofdetail available for revenue forecasting. The study also recommends that fees should continue to be updated on an annual basis using the Consumer Price Index (CPD representative of the region, similar to how other fees are administered within the City, and that a comprehensive fee study should be conducted periodically to ensure fee levels remain at or below legal limits and are consistent with evolving practices and local conditions.
In terms of the fee study workshop itself, staff invites City Council and the public to provide input and seeks City Council direction for any modifications to the proposed fee schedule, including whether any fees should be adjusted (as long as adjustments do not result in more than full cost recovery), and if any of the proposed new fee types should be modified or eliminated. CDD staff from each division and ClearSource staff will be available to discuss the details of the fee study and the proposed fee schedule. Staff will then bring forward to Council a resolution to adopt an updated CDD Development Processing Fee Schedule at the April23,2024 CiIy Council meeting.
If passed, the updated fee schedule will go into effect by July I,2024.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Development Processing Fee Study, dated February 2024 Submitted,
(:--
PAM JOHNS
Community Development Director
10
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
ATTACHMENT 1
DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING FBE STUDYO DATED
FEBRUARY 2024
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
CITY OF FOLSOM
leorD
CU TCC
FINANCIAL CONSUTTING
C
S
FEBRUARY 2024
DEVELOPM E NT PFIOCESSI NG
FEE STUDY
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
CONTENTS
REPORTING
Section
L
APPENDICES
Appendix
Descri otion
TRANSMITTAL
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I Overall Findings
PROJECT OVERVIEW I Scope and Guidance
IMPLEMENTATION I Considerations for lmplementation
Description
REGIONAL FEE COMPARISON
COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
PROPOSED FEES
Page #
1 2
3 4
2 6
10 A
B
c
CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO CITY OF FOLSOM
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
C eorEs CU TCC
FINANCIAL CONSULTING
February 2024
CITY OF FOLSOM
Attn: Pam Johns, Community Development Director
50 Natoma Street
Folsom, CA 95630
DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING FEE STUDY
Dear Ms. Johns:
ClearSource Financial Consulting submits the following report describing the findings of our preparation of a User and Regulatory Fee Study for the City of Folsom.
Please refer to the Executive Summary for the key findings of the analysis and estimated impacts to City funds, The balance of the report and its appendices provide the necessary documentation to support those outcomes.
Thank you for the opportunity to serve the City on this topic. We are happy to continue discussion on this study as the need arises or consult with you on additional topics.
Sincerely,
-)
--lltt
-!*(
TERRY MADSEN, PRESIDENT I CLEARSOURCE FINANCIAL CONSULTING PHONE: 831.288.O608
EMAIL: TMADSEN@CLEARSOURCEFINANCIAL'COM
796O B Soquel Drive, Suite 363, Aptos, California 95oO3 831.288.O6O8 CLEARSOU RCEFINANCIAL.COMPage 54
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
STUDY OVERVIEW
The City of Folsom provides many services to ensure safe, orderly and aesthetically pleasing development and construction within the City. The broad categories of these services include, but are not limited to, project entitlement review, improvement plan check, map check, permits (building, grading, encroachment and driveway), and land action review (i.e. dedications, parcel mergers and lot line adjustments). User fees and regulatory fees are the mechanism by which the City may recoup a portion of or all of the costs associated with these services'
The City of Folsom has completed a User and Regulatory Fee Study. California cities regularly conduct these studies to justify fee amounts imposed and to optimize the overall portfolio of revenues available to the municipality to fund its services.
lndustry practice and fiscal conditions in the state have led most cities to link cost recovery for services of individual action, cause, or benefit to that same individual through user fee revenue, relieving the agency's general revenues as much as possible for use toward services of broader community benefit.
USER AND REGULATORY FEES
Cities derive annual revenue from a number of sources. These include, but are not limited to, property taxes, sales taxes, license fees, franchise fees, fines, rents, and user and regulatory fees. User and regulatory fees are intended to cover all, or a portion of, the costs incurred by the City for providing fee-related services and activities that are not otherwise provided to those not paying the fee.
California law provides guidance regarding the amounts the City may charge for fee-related services and activities. Specifically, in order to avoid being considered taxes, the fees charged shall not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the services, activities, or materials for which fees are charged.
COST RECOVERY POLICY AND PRACTICE
Recovering the costs of providing fee-related services directly influences the City's fiscal health and increases the City's ability to meet the service level expectations of fee payers.
The services for which the City imposes a user or regulatory fee typically derive from an individual person or entity's action, request, or behavior. Therefore, except in cases where there is an overwhelming public benefit generated by the City's involvement in the individual action, a fee for service ensures that the individual bears most, if not all, of the cost incurred by the City to provide that service. When a fee targets "tOO% or full cost recovery," the individual bears the entirety of the cost. When a fee targets less than full cost recovery, another City revenue source - in most cases, the General Fund - subsidizes the individualized activity.
2CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
FINDINGS AND PROPOSED ACTION
During the course of study, information and analysis was generated and is discussed substantively throughout this report and its technical appendices. However, summarized in the following findings statements by broad fee category, are outcomes and proposals of particular interest to City policymakers, Buil Fees
Current fees recover less than the City's full cost of providing fee-related services. o The Division collects approximately 52,845,000 annually in fee revenues. Fee-related expenditures are anticipated to be approximately S3,385,000. This results in an aggregate cost recovery level of 84% and a General Fund subsidy of approximately 5540,000. o Full cost recovery is targeted for most building fees with exceptions for minor permits for residential HVAC change-out and water heater change-outs. a
Plannins Fees
o Current fees recover less than the City's full cost of providing fee-related services. o The Division collects approximately 5435,000 annually in fee revenues. Fee-related expenditures are approximately 5785,000. This results in an aggregate cost recovery level of 55% and a General Fund subsidy of approximately 5350,000' o Staff is recommending adjustments to most fees to target full cost recovery. Exceptions to full cost recovery include certain appeals, minor reviews, permitting for certain temporary uses, etc.:
o Owner-occupiedAPPeal
o Minor Design Review
o EntertainmentPermitting
o Landmark Tree Classification
o Opinion on a Planning Matter
o Sidewalk Vendor Permit
o Special Event Permitting
o TemPorarY Outdoor Dining Permit
o Variance for Single Family Dwelling
3CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Land Development Engineering Fees and Encroachment Permit Fees o Current fees recover less than the City's full cost of providing fee-related services. Many of the City's current fees are fixed at amounts that reflect less than the City's cost of providing services (examples include, but are not limited to, tree permitting and landscape plan review). o The Division collects approximately 52,400,000 annually in fee revenues. Fee-related expenditures are approximately 52,880,000, This results in an aggregate cost recovery level of 83% and a General Fund subsidy of approximately 5480,000. o Recalibrate fees to encourage cost recovery of City staff and outside service provider costs. o Full cost recovery is targeted from engineering and encroachment permit fees.
Deposit-Based Plannine and Engineering Fees (i.e., Time & Materials Billinss) o Fees for some of the City's more complex planning and land development review projects are proposed to be administered using a "time and materials" billing approach. The City will collect an initial deposit and bill against that deposit for the costs of outside consultant review and support, and in-house labor efforts. lf the deposit is drawn down before project completion, staff contacts the applicant to request replenishment of funds. lf deposit amounts remain at the completion of the project, the applicant is refunded the unused deposit amount. Comprehensive tracking and billing for deposit-based projects should billing for project time such as:
o lntake and lnitial Processing and Review
o lnitial Meetings
o ProjectCorresPondence
o Multiple Rounds of Review
o RePort PreParation
o Decision Making, Meeting Preparation
o Project Close-Out and Documentation Actions
Regional Fee Comparison
o Similar fees are collected by communities throughout the region and the State. The proposed fee amounts do not exceed the City's cost of service and are in-range of amounts charged by other jurisdictions. Regional fee comparison information is included in Appendix A of this report. 4CTEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITV OF FOLSOM
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
AdditionalCost Recovervfrom Proposed nts to Fees
a The enhanced cost recovery anticipated from the proposed changes included in the fee schedule update is 51,300,000.
Fairly allocating costs to the services provided and recovering some, or all, of these costs from service recipients creates value and predictability for City customers and reimburses the City for services provided to a single party, as compared to the public at large. Collecting fees for services:
3 lncreases the availability of General Fund revenues to be used for services and activities available to all residents and businesses, such as public safety and public works services. 3 Helps meet fee-payer service level expectations by collecting fees to fund the existing level of services provided.
Please continue to the following technical report and appendices for further discussion of this User and Regulatory Fee Study.
5CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOTSOM Page 58
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
PROJECT ORIENTATION
SCOPE OF STUDY
The City of Folsom has completed a User and Regulatory Fee Study, which represents an external review of prevailing practices and development of an updated Schedule of User Fees and Charges. ClearSource Financial Consulting has prepared this analysis during FiscalYear 2023124 and will be available to answer questions as the City proceeds in implementing findings as it chooses.
Key tasks expected by the City from this study included the following:
3 Review eligible fee-related services citywide to establish the reasonable relationship between current fees for service and the underlying costs of service'
3 Calculate the full cost of service, including estimated citywide overhead costs.
I Recommend fees to be charged for each service.
C Recommend cost recovery strategies and best practices in setting fees, while considering the complexities and demands of responsible programs or departments' C ldentify underlying billable rates for cost recovery opportunities and as the basis for user fees.
C Maintain a thoroughly documented analysis to ensure compliance with Proposition 26, and other statutes, as applicable.
DIRECT SERVICES UNDER REVIEW
Fee Categories
City fees under review in this project focused on direct services eligible for user fee methodology, as listed in the City's published fee schedules, Additionally, the project was ta6ked with identifying any relevant additions for services performed without a fee or for under-quantified or ineffectively structured fees, Current services shown in the City's various prevailing fee schedules and addressed in this study are summarized as follows:
3 Planning - Services include entitlement review and permitting. 3 Engineering - Services include encroachment permitting, development plan review and inspection. 3 Building - Building plan review, permitting, and inspection for construction and sub-trades. 6CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
PROJECT ORIENTATION
REASON FOR STUDY
Cities derive annual revenue from a number of sources. These include, but are not limited to, property taxes, sales taxes, franchise fees, fines, rents, and user and regulatory fees. User and regulatory fees are intended to cover all, or a portion of, the costs incurred by a city for providing fee-related services and activities that are not otherwise provided to those not paying the fee' California cities regularly conduct fee studies to justify fee amounts imposed and to optimize the overall body of revenues available to the municipality to fund its services. Widespread industry practice and fiscal conditions in the state have led most cities to link cost recoveryfor services of individual action, cause, or benefit to that individual through user fee revenue, relieving the agency's general revenues for services of broader community benefit.
PREVAILING GUIDANCE
The objectives of this study, the methodology used to complete the study, and the formulation of outcomes and recommendations for future consideration were significantly influenced by Article 13C of the California Constitution and Section 66014 of the California Government Code.
Article L3C states that the local government bears the burden of proving by a preponderance of the evidence that a levy, charge, or other exaction is not a tax, that the amount is no more than necessary to cover the reasonable costs of the governmental activity, and that the manner in which those costs are allocated to a payer bear a fair or reasonable relationship to the payer's burdens on, or benefits received from, the governmental activity. Additionally, Article 13C identifies the following as items that are not defined as taxes:
3 A charge imposed for a specific benefit conferred or privilege granted directly to the payer that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of conferring the benefit or granting the privilege' 3 A charge imposed for a specific government service or product provided directly to the payer that is not provided to those not charged, and which does not exceed the reasonable costs to the local government of providing the service or product.
C A charge imposed for the reasonable regulatory costs to a local government for issuing licenses and permits, performing investigations, inspections, and audits, enforcing agricultural marketing orders, and the administrative enforcement and adjudication thereof' C A charge imposed for entrance to or use of local government property, or the purchase, rental, or lease of local government property.
3 A fine, penalty, or other monetary charge imposed by the judicial branch of government or a local government, as a result of a violation of law.
C A charge imposed as a condition of property development' 7CTEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
PROJECT ORIENTATION
C Assessments and property-related fees imposed in accordance with the provisions of Article Xlll D.
Section 5601a(a) of the California Government Code includes the following, "Notwithstanding any other provision of law, when a local agency charges fees for zoning variances; zoning changes; use permits; building inspections; building permits; ...the processing of maps under the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act..,; or planning services...; those fees may not exceed the estimated reasonable cost of providing the service for which the fee is charged, unless a question regarding the amount of the fee charged in excess of the estimated reasonable cost of providing the services or materials is submitted to, and approved by, a popular vote of two-thirds of those electors voting on the issue.
The outcomes and recommendations of the study are intended to comply with applicable federal, state, and local laws including providing confirmation that the proposed fees ("charges") recommended as a result of this study are not taxes as defined in Article 13C of the California Constitution and that the proposed fees are no more than necessary to the cover the reasonable costs of the City's activities and services addressed in the fees. Additionally, this report is intended to show that the manner in which the costs are allocated to a payer bear a fair and reasonable relationship to the payer's burdens on, or benefits received from the activities and services provided by the City'
METHODOLOGY AND DATA SOURCES
This study calculated the estimated reasonable cost of providing various fee-related services across the City organization. Generally, the estimated reasonable cost of providing the fee-related services and activities examined in this study can be calculated as the product of the composite fully-burdened hourly labor rate of the division responsible for providing services and the estimated labor time required to process a typical request for service.
The composite fully-burdened hourly rates calculated in this study are based on the estimated annual hours spent providing fee related services, and estimated labor, services and supplies, and citywide overhead expenditures, sourced as followsl
C Labor expenditures for in-house personnel were based on budgeted salary and benefits expenditures. 3 Contract service personnel and other services and supplies related costs were based on Fiscal Year 2023/24 adopted budgets and anticipated costs.
3 Citywide overhead cost allocations were based on the City's current overhead cost allocation plan.
C Estimated labor time spent providing fee related services were developed based on interviews with City staff and are in-line with typical direct service ratios experienced by the consultant via studies of similar municipalities throughout California. Commonly used industry data also aided in the development of time estimates and proposed fee structures' Once cost of service levels are identified, the City may use this information to inform targeted cost recovery from fees. Fees set at the cost-of-service target full cost recovery. Fees set at any amount less than the cost-of-service target less than full cost recovery. 8CTEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
PROJECT ORIENTATION
An illustration of the methods used in this analysis is shown in Exhibit 2.
EXH|B|T 2 | STEPS lN ANALYZING COSTS OF SERVICE AND USER FEES 3 CALCULATE CURRENT COST RECOVERY LEVEL FOR A SPECIFIC SERVICE 8 TEST FOR
REASONABLENESS
E USE LAWS, INDUSTRY STANDARDS, GOALS AND POLICIE' AND HISTORICALTRENDS
TO DETERMINE TARGETED COST RECOVERY
3 TESTTO CONFIRM FORECAST REVENUE FROM FEES WILL NOT EXCEED PROGRAM COSTS
3 USE HISTORICAL PERMIT VOLUME AND PROPOSED FEES TO FORECAST ANTICIPATED
REVINUE FROM FEES
3 FORECASTED REVENUES SHOULD NOT EXCEED PROGRAM COSTS
3 IDENTIFY ANNUAL HOURS SPENT PROVIDING FEE SERVICES FOR EACH
PARTICIPATING DIVISION
3 INFORMATION IS DEVELOPED AND TESTED USING A COMBINATION OF INTERVIEWS,
QUESTIONNAIRES, HISTORICAL PROJECT INFORMATION, AND HISTORICAL REVENUE
INFORMATION
1 ANNUAL LABOR TIME
3 IDENTIFY ANNUAL COST OF PROVIDING FEE SERVICES FOR EACH PARTICIPATING DtvlsloN
3 INFORMATION IS DEVELOPED AND TESTED USING A COMBINATION OF
INFORMATION FOUND IN THE CITY'S ADOPTED BUDGET, EXPENDITURE HISTORY, AND THE OVERHEAD COST PLAN.
2 ANNUAL EXPENDITURES
FULLY BURDENED
HOURLY RATES
3 CALCULATE THE ESTIMATED FULLY BURDENED HOURLY RATE USING INFORMATION FROM STEPS 1 AND 2
3 4 ESTIMATE LABOR TIME REqUIRED TO PROCESS INDIVIDUAL REQUEST FOR SERVICE
INFORMATION IS DEVELOPED AND TESTED USING A COMBINATION OF INTERVIEWS,
QUESTIONNAIRES, COMMONLY USED MEASURES, AND INFORMATION DEVELOPED IN STEP 1
3 CALCULATE THE ESTIMATED COST OF SERVICE USING INFORMATION FROM STEPS 3 AND 4
5 SERVICE/ACTIVITY LABOR
TIME
UNIT COST OF SERVICE
6 7
CURRENT COST RECOVERY
TARGETED COST
RECOVERY
COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS - PROCESS AND METHODS
9CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOTSOM
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
IMPLEMENTATION
CONSI DERATIONS FOR I M PLEM ENTATION
lf the City decides to adopt or otherwise utilize outcomes generated through this study, it should:
3 Update Systems for Fee Outcomes - Ensure that City staff begin using updated fees and associated outcomes once the updated schedule of fees becomes effective. Values should be included in all officialfee schedules used throughout the City (e.g., departmental pamphlets, counter schedules, and online information). Additionally, ensure collections processes are updated, which may include coding in billing systems and training for personnel who handle fees directly with the public. 3 Actively Monitor the Use of Fees - ln order to recover accurate and eligible amounts expected, the City should be diligent about tracking time to projects for time and materials billings and ensuring fees are applied in the correct amount and using the correct and intended basis for fixed fee billings.
O Monitor Feedback and Permit Statistics - Monitor permit and application volume and applicant feedback to determine if fee modifications are resulting in any unanticipated changes in project frequency and to increase the level of detail available for revenue forecasting.
C Annually Review and Adjust Fee Values - l.n order to generally maintain pace with regional cost inflation and/or the City's salary cost inflation, the City should adjust its fees on an annual basis. A commonly used, reasonable inflation index is the annual change in the all-urban Consumer Price lndex (CPl) representative of the region.
C Periodically Perform Comprehensive Analysis - A comprehensive fee study should be conducted periodically (e.g., every three to five years) to ensure fee levels remain at or below legal limits and are consistent with evolving service practices and local conditions.
CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOTSOM 10Page 63
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
APPENDIX A
REGIONAL FEE COMPARISON
ln order to provide the City Council with additional information as it considers potential adjustments to fees, current and proposed fees were compared to amounts collected by other agencies within the region.
City policymakers often consider fees established by other regional agencies for similar services when evaluating proposed fees.
The City of Folsom, consistent with other cities throughout the State, has an existing fee schedule that contemplates hundreds of potential unique requests for service. This can result in thousands of fee scenarios when comparing among multiple agencies. Consequently, an exhaustive comparison of the hundreds, and potentially thousands of scenarios is unrealistic. lnstead, comparison information for several fee categories commonly seen from agency to agency are provided in order to provide City Council with a reasonable sense of changes expected.
For Folsom, outcomes will show that new fees may range from low, mid, to upper end of regional fee spectrum depending on the service provided. This is common among municipalities due to differing levels of service and review included among various fee categories.
Planning Fee Comparison
$2o,ooo DepositS1&8oo $17,s4sMU-Range Ss,641 s17,000 DepositAnnexation low End s2,o8o - 9s,s3os2,s00 - ss,000
Deposit
s2,590 - $4,383 54,257 - 54,902Lowto Upper
Range
s2s1 - sso2 Sr,7oo - 56,800Appeal Low End
s1,s3056,000 Deposit S10,000 Deposit $2,578Mld-Range s1,643 s2,s00Low ErdVariance-SFR/Admin Sto,ooo Deposh 56,948 Ss,124s1,643 Ss,1oo S6,000 Depositl"ow End Mid-Rangovariance - All other S15,ooo Deposit s13,573 slo,ooo - sl7,ooo
Deposit
s2,928 - s5,847 $ro,ooo- S13,ooo 91,o,oo DepositLow End Mid-Ran8ezone change S15,0O0 Oeposlt s14209 slo,ooo - $17,ooo
DePosit
94,272 - 58,s44 slo,ooo - sl3,ooo S1,000 DeposttLow End Mld-Range 56,480 - $13,940 S9,ooo Deposit52,5oo - Ss,1oo s5,000 - s10,000 Oeposit
s10,000 DepositLow End Low-Mld Rang€
Dependlhg on
cup
92,149 - 55,798Conditional Use Permit
CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM 11Page 64
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
APPENDIX A
7% 27% 5%6%-?% a% Lo.5/6 - lA%Mld-Range Mld-RangeEnglheerint Plan check and lnspection
lmprovementValue Up to
s100K
a.s% - 70% 5% 1\% s%Mid-R.nge s% 6.40%Engineering
Plan check and lnspection
lmprovement value S1001(
5200K
Mld-Rang€
5/o3.60/. - 4.A% 6%-A5% 2v" - APA 6% - aVoMld-Rang€ Mld-Range 2%-4%Engineeting Plan Check and lnspection
lmprovement Value 5200K
$1M
Folson -
Cu.rent Fee
Folsom -
Proposed Fee Elk Grove Rancho cordova RocklinFolsom - Curreht Folsom
RosevilleFee
Engineering Fee ComParison
Building Fee Comparison
* Fee amounts shown orc Jot illustrotive purposes. Acludl fees collected will vory depending on seruices reviewed (e.9,, new @nstrudion, plumbing' mechonicdl, electricdl, sttuctutol, generol plan update, technologyfees, etc.). Amounts ore intended to illustrdte potiems dnd ordet ol magnitude. srsss360 s37s s4s6Mld-Range Mid-Range s33oBuilding Permit for S25,000 Project
57s7$630 S6oo $7s1Mid-Range Mid-Range ss30Buildint Permit for 550,000 Prcject
S1,162$1,080 s1,0so s1,1s8Mid-Range Mid-Range $880Building Permit for $1oo,ooo Proiect
varies
(res v. non-res)
53,960
(res v. non-res)
vanes s3,697Mid-Range s3,280Building Permit
for S5oo,oo0 Proiect
Mid-Range
S6,180s7,200 s7,511 $6,4L7Mid-Range 56,03oBuilding Permit for S1,000,000 Proiect
Mid-Range
Folsom -
Current Fee
FolsomFolsom
RosevilleFee Fee Rancho cordova RocklinFolsom - Current CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM L2Page 65
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
APPENDIX B
COST OF SERVICE ANALYSIS
CLEARSOURCE REPORTTO THE CITY OF FOLSOM 13Page 66
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
r.()LFI()nf,
CITY OF
DISTIIICTIVE EY NATURE
User dnd Reaulatorv Fees
Fee-Related Cost ol Service Analysis
DRAFT
Appendix B: p. 'l
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
Cost of Service Analysis
Cost of Service Allocation - Community Development Administration Cost of Service Calculations
Planning
Engineering and Encroachment Permits
Building
General Plan / Zoning Code Update
Development Specific Technology Enhancements / Land Management Tracking Cost Allocation - Citywide Overhead
5 18
27 37
39 47
Description Page
3 Appendix B: p. 2
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
User and Reaulatoru Fees
Cost of Service Cqlculotions
Community Development - Administrqtion
DRAFT
Appendix B: p. 3
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
Ia]
lal
rooo/.
24 2L%
5 25%
6 8%
2 46%
11 Allocation of ln-House Labor
F]E
Code
Enforcement NotesTotalBulldingDescription Englneering Planning City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - Community Development - Administration Allocation of ln-House Labor
Recurring Expenditures
lal Based on feedback received from Community Development Department. Amounts intended to serve as reasonable estimates. Allocated based on divisional FTE. [b] Source: FY 23/24 adopted budget.
[c] Adjustment to exclude non-fee related expenses.
s 813,803
s
s
5 )
s
)
5 s
s
5 s
5 s
5 s
)
5 5
)
s
5 s
s
s
5 )
s
s
s
360,290
5,797
29,6sO
139,520
16,095
6,000
55,O22
4,000
5,500
7,500
55,500
L7,500
358
2,500
10,000
5,500
2,000
500
200
4,000
17,000
5,000
22,674
5,000
11,000
7,533
18,824
s (15,000)
5 5
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 s
5 5
5 s
s
5 s
s
s
5 s
s
s
s
s
)
)
(s,000)
(10,000)
s 828.803
s
5 s
5 s
5 s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 5
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 5
5 5
s
5 s
360,290
5,797
29,650
139,s20
16,095
6,000
s5,o22
4,000
5,500
7,500
55,500
17,500
358
2,500
10,000
5,500
2,O00
5,000
s00
4,000
200
10,000
L7,OOO
5,000
22,6L4
5,000
11,000
7,533
ta,a24
subtota I
Salaries - Permanent
Annual Leave Account
FICA
PERS
Deferred Comp - City Paid
Automobile Allowance
Combined Benefits
Printing
Dues & Publications
Advertising
Rents
Training & Education
Postage
Telephone
Ce llu lar
lnternet
Travel and Meetings
Contracts
Contracts - Pre Employment
Vehicle Maintenance
Equipment Maintenance
Advisory
Computer - Hardware
Computer - Software
Computer - License & Mtnc
office Supplies
Departmental Supplies
I Petroleum Supplies
llnsurance / Liability
TctalDescription Adjustments Total
tb1
lbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tb1
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbl
tb1
tbl
tbl
lbl;Ic]
tbl
tb1
tbl
tbl;Ic]
tbl
tbl
tbj
tbl
tbl
tb1
tb1
S 813,803
LOOo/o
360,290
5,197
29,650
t39,520
16,095
6,000
55,O22
4,000
5,500
7,500
55,500
17,500
358
2,500
10,000
5,500
2,000
5 5
s
5 5
s
s
5 s
s
s
s
5 s
s
s
)
5 s
s
5 s
s
5 )
s
s
s
17,000
5,000
22,674
5,000
11,000
7,533
L8,824
s00
200
4,000
s 169.542
2r%
75,060
1,083
6,t77
29,067
3,353
1,2s0
1,L,463
833
7,t46
1,563
1r.,563
3,646
75 52r
2,O83
T,L46
4r7
s
)
s
s
s
s
s
5 5
s
5 5
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 s
5 5
5 s
$
LO4
833
42 3,542
r,o42
4,7tt
r,042
2,292
1,569
3,922
s 203,451
25%
90,073
7,299
7,413
34,880
4,O24
1,500
L3,756
1,000
L,375
r,875
13,875
4,375
90 625
2,500
L,375
s00
s
5 s
5 s
)
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
)
s
s
s
s
)
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 s
s
s
50 L25
1,000
4,250
1,250
5,654
r,250
2,750
1,883
4,706
5 67,8L7
8%
I
s
s
s
5 s
s
5 s
5 s
s
s
s
s
)
)
s
s
s
)
s
s
s
5 5
5 2,471
tL,627
t,34L
500
4,585
333
458
625
4,625
1,458
30 208
833
458
167
42 333
17 L,4L7
4t7
1,885
477
917
628
7,569
433
30,o24
s 372.993
46%
5 )
s
5 s
s
)
s
5 5
s
s
s
s
s
s
5 s
s
5 s
s
s
5 5
5 s
s
s
165,133
2,382
13,590
63,947
7,377
2,750
25,218
1,833
2,52L
3,438
25,438
8,Ozt
L64
1,,L46
4,583
2,52L
917
229
1,833
92 7,792
2,292
10,365
2,292
5,O42
3,453
8,628
Buildi ng NotesPlanning Total
Code
Enforcement Engirreering
Appendix B: p. 4
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
User ond Reaulotorv Fees
Cost of Service Colculations
Planning
DRAFT
Appendix B: p. 5
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Annual Labor Effort - Planning
Authorized Staffing
lal Staffing based on FY 23124 adopted budget'
[blAllocationofhoursintendedtoserveasreasonableestimate. Amountmayvaryfromyear-to-yearandpositiontoposition lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
3,728
L,A64
t,864
1,864
I,Sm
t0,J95
6,990
75%
2,982
1,118
1,398
L,497
2,330
25%
746
746
466
372
10O'/'
700%
LOO%
LOOo/o
80o/o
60%
75%
ao%
20%
40%
2s%
20%
9,320
3,728
r,864
t,864
1,864
1,864
L,a64
7,464
1,864
2t6
216
216
216
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
5.00 2.00
1.00 1.00
1.O0
Planner I (Assistant) / Planner ll (Associate)
Planning Manager
Principal Planner
senior Planner
Total
Total
lcial Hours
Per FTE
Less: Hc idaV
& Leave
Hours Per
FTF
Prod uctive
hou rs
I nd i rect
l-louTS
Total Direct
Hou rsI nd rectPc sl tio I TotalDirect9T! Tota Ho-rs Notes Appendix B: p. 6
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
city of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - Planning
Recurring Divisional Expenditures [a]
Allocation of Department and Citywide Overhead
Total
Fully-Eurdened Hourly Rate
[a] Source: FY 23124 adopted budget.
[b] Adjustment to exclude non-fee related amounts or amounts not used to inform hourly rate. [c] see separate worksheets in this model. Amounts intended to serve as reasonable estimates. tbl
s 1.032.967
5 s
5 5
s
s
s
) 37,648
598,437
8,513
47,447
237,225
13,200
90,503
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
s
(12s,000)
s (12s,000)S L,7s7,967
s
s
s
s
5 s
s
s
598,437
8,513
47,441
237,225
13,200
90,503
125,000
37,648
subtotal
Salaries - Permanent
Annual Leave Account
FICA
PERS
Deferred Comp - city Paid
Combined Benefits
Contracts
lnsurance / Liability
Descri ption N otesTotal Ad.justments Total
lcl
Ic]
s 478,872
)
s
L69,542
309,329
s
s
s
5 s
t69,542
309.329
s 478.872
Department Overhead
Citvwide Overhead
subtotal
NotesDescription Total Adjustments Total
S 1,s11,839
s r,032,967
S 769,s42
S 309,329
Subtotal
Recurring Divisional Expenditures
Department Overhead
citywide Overhead
TotalDe scri ptio n Notes
lcl
5 1,s11,839
5,990
2L6s
Costs
Direct Hours
Fullv-Burdened Hourlv Rate
N oteTotalDescription
Appendix B: p. 7
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Planning Fees
Calculation of Estimated Cost of Seruice
Appeal
a) Appeal of staff Decision - owirer occupied
b) Appeal of Staff Decision - by Developer/Other
c) Appeal of Commission Decision - Owner Occupied
d) Appeal of commission Decision - by Developer/other
Design Review/Architectural Review
a) New Multi-Family/Commercial (Commission Level)
b) Minor Multi-Family/Commercial (Staff Level)
c) New Single and Two Family Dwelling
d) Minor Single and Two Family Dwelling
e) Historic District New Multi-Family/commercial
f) Historic District Minor Multi-Family/commercial
g) Historic District New Single Family, Two-Family Dwelling and ADU >800 sq. ft. and/or 16 ft. tall
h) Historic District Minor Single and Two Family Dwelling Development Agreement Processing
Environmental Review
a) Environmental lmpact Review & Report
b) Environmental Mitigation Program Monitoring
c) lnitial Environmental Study/Assessment
d) Notice of CEQA Determination
condominium Conversion Fee
Entertainment Permit
Annexation Processing
Code Amendment
conditional Use Permit (cUP)
a) CUP Review (Ma.ior)
b) CUP Review (Minor)
c) CUP Modification
7 8
9 5
6 3
4 1
2 Fee Description
5L7,28O
ss,184
52,s92
s2,592
517,28O
Ss,re+
5864
s1,2e6
S864
Ss,r.84
51,728
53,4s6
sr,728
510,368
5432
$10,3G8
s7,776
57,776
s324
s3,4s6
53,4s6
s6,9L2
s6,912
s8,640
tst. Lost ol
Svc
5216
s216
9zre
52L6
s216
s216
s216
s216
52r.6
s216
s216
S216
s216
s216
S216
s216
s216
s216
52t6
s216
s216
52L6
52L6
s216
HourlV Rate
24.O
4.O
6.0 4.O
24.O
8.0 16.0
8.0 48.O
2.O
80.0 40.0
48.0 36.0
36.0 1.5
24.O
12,0
L2.O
80.0 16.0
16.0 32.O
32.O
Est. Labor
Hours
x
42%
249%
50/o
7%
42%
725%
2%
4%
510/.
fi%
33%
7%
75%
4%
7%
26%
826,4
ar%
82%
970/.
L12%
106%
62%
66%
S5,7e8
52,749
s1,6os
S11,410
52,ls4
52,rs4
S61
)bt
Sz,ts4
52,Is4
9or
Sor
ss,267
s4s
52,238
s8,s2s
56,284
s6,346
s296
s2s1
Sso2
s2s1
5so2
Current Cost
Current Fee Recoverv
Deposit
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Deposit
Fixed Fee
Deposit
Deposit
Deposit
Fixed Fee
98%
96%
90%
90%
93%
98%
58%
62%
29o/o
98%
L4%
98%
L4%
960/0
46%
98%
96%
96%
98%
49%
98%
49%
98%
98%
s17,ooo
ss,1oo
S2,soo
s2,soo
517,ooo
ss,100
ssoo
5800
s2so
ss,100
s2s0
S3,4oo
S2so
s10,000
s200
s1o,oo0
s7,000
s7,000
s3oo
s8,s00
s1,70o
s3,400
53,400
s6,8oo
P ro pose d
Fee
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
RecoverV
s11,3s9
52,946
(S1,6s4)
5739
S189
52,946
{91,e04)
s3,339
s18e
s4,733
slss
S5,s90
s6,262
s7,47s
57L6
S6s4
Sa
(S6s8)
(S24e)
58es
5r,449
s2,898
$r,rag
S6,298
Fee change
x
x
x
x
X
lal,[c]
lal,Ic]
lal,[c]
lal
lal
tbl
tbl
Ibl
tb1
Appendix B: p. 8
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Planning Fees
calculation of Estimated Cost of Seruice
General Plan
a) General Plan Amendment < 5 acres
b) General Plan Amendment 5 or more acres
Home Occupation Permit Fee
lndoor Marijuana Cultivation Permit
Landmark Tree Classification
Landmark Tree Declassification
Large Family Day Care Home
Lot Line Adjustment/Parcel Merger - Planning
Non-Residential Plan Check Fee
Planned Development
a) Planned Development Review
i) Base Fee
ii) Plus, Per Acre Fee
b) Planned Development Extension Review
c) Planned Development Modification Review
Rezoning Request
a) Rezoning Request Review - 5 acres or less
b) Rezoning Request Review - 5+ acres
lsidewalk Vendor Permit
I
Opinion on a Planning Matter
Preliminary Project Review
7L
72 13
t4
15 16
t7
18 19
20 27
22 10
Fee Description
s10,368
s13,824
S6s
ss40
s1,404
s1,836
s108
s1,o8o
s10,368
ss40
53,4s6
ss,184
s10,368
s13,824
5432
s432
52,se2
Est. Cost of
Svc
521.6
s215
5216
s216
s215
s216
s216
Sz16
5216
52L6
s215
s216
s216
s216
s216
S216
s216
Hour y Rate
48.0 64.0
0.3 2.5
6.5 8.5
0.s
5.0 to.oo/"
2.0 t2,o
48.0 54.0
2.O
48.0 2.5
16.0 24.O
Est. Labor
Hours
x
4L%
62%
460/0
470/o
zo%
76%
240/0
92%
58%
25%
86%
83%
91%
772%
28"/.
42%
12%
s4,272
S8,s44
530
52s3
5287
s287
S26
Se89
70%of
building
permit fee
S2s1
s639
s2,928
5s,847
ss0
s8,941
5447
s3,13s
s8,928
Current Cost
Current Fee Recovery
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
96%
94%
93%
93%
25%
980/o
93%
930/.
96%
93%
87%
96%
96%
94%
12%
46%
39%
s1o,oo0
s13,ooo
560
ssoo
s3so
S1,8oo
5100
s1,000
IO% ol
building
permit fee
S2oo
slo,ooo
ss00
S3,ooo
ss,ooo
slo,ooo
sL3,ooo
Sso
s1,ooo
Fee
StructureFee
P roposed
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
ss,728
s4,4s5
S3o
5247
5oa
s1,s13
574
S11
s1,os9
5s3
(Sras1
(S3,s28)
(Sst1
Sser
$7,072
57,1s3
so
Fee Change
lel
td1
x
Appendix B: p. 9
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
city of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee study
Planning Fees
Calculation of Estimated Cost of Service
Signs
a) Sign Permit - Staff
b) Sign Permit Extension
c) Special Event Sign Permit
d) Historic District sign Review (staff Level)
e) Historic District Sign Review (Commission Level)
f) Planned Development Sign Permit
g) Temporary Sign Permit
h) on-Site Subdivision Signs
i) Off-Site Subdivision Signs
i) base fee
ii) refundable deposit - per sign
j) off-Site Weekend Directional Signs
i) base fee
ii) refundable deposit
k) Uniform sign Program
Site Design Review
a) Site Design Review
b) Site Design Review - Planning Commission
Special Event Permit
a) Special Event Permit
b) Over 1,000 People Per Day (charged per thousand)
c) Consultation Meeting for Events over 1,000 People Per Day d) Traffic Control Plan or Street Closure for New Event e) Traffic Control Plan or Street closure for Repeated Event (No Substantial Changes from Previous Year)
f) Alcohol/ABC Permit
g) Fire lnspections
h) Block Party Permit
24 z5
23 Fee Description
s1s1
s108
s1o8
s1s1
S864
s2,s92
543
S216
5432
s324
S3z4
s864
S43z
S864
S864
s432
S324
s432
s648
5432
ss,184
Est. Cost of
5vc
s215
s216
s2r.6
S216
s2L6
s216
s216
s216
s216
5216
s216
s215
5216
s216
s216
s216
s216
s216
S216
52L6
s215
Szro
s216
Hourly Rate
4.0 2.O
4.0 4.0
2.O
1.5 2.O
3.0 1.5
n/a
1.5 n/a
2.0 2.O
24.O
o.7
0.5 0.5
0.7 4.0
12.O
o.2
1.0 Est. Labor
Hours
x
x
53%
s3%
66%
68%
90%
7%
o%
ook
o%
o%
o%
o%
9%
83%
540/o
s6%
40%
7%
48%
23%
58%
5126
5se
Seo
S61
5or
s1,2s3
s10
s126
Srzr
ss00
Sel
so
5o
9o
5o
So
So
Ser
sLTt
s2oo
5287
5294
s4,672
Current Cost
Current Fee Recoverv
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Deposit
Fixed Fee
Deposit
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
93%
93%
93%
580/0
700%
23%
8r%
93%
LOO%
93%
t5%
93%
9A%
99%
93%
93%
990/0
93%
96%
93%
93%
s1s0
sloo
sloo
slso
ssoo
S2,soo
s40
s2oo
ssoo
S432
S2oo
s700
s400
s324
s4oo
sloo
S3oo
5200
s400
s4oo
S5,1oo
S3oo
ss00
Proposed
Fee
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
524
542
S+o
s8s
5739
5i.,247
Sso
574
So
s129
5L29
So
$113
S1o6
s428
s439
5432
s2o0
s70o
5400
5324
s4oo
Ssg
Fee Change
X
x
X
tfl
Appendix B:p.10
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
city of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Planning Fees
Calculation of Estimated Cost of Seruice
1.5 0.5
24.O
24.O
2.0 1.0
4.0 2.O
2.0 36.0
24.O
20.o
40.0 0.5
72.O
48.0 4.0
Est. Labor
Hours
91s,ss2
510,368
S864
S8,640
s1o8
5324
s108
9ge+
s432
5432
ss,184
ss,184
s432
s216
57,776
ss,184
$+,szo
Est. Cost of
5vc
s216
5216
5216
s216
S216
s216
5216
S216
S216
s216
s216
s216
s215
Szrs
5276
5216
s216
Hourly Rate
76%
37%
60%
44%
32%
32%
70%
470/.
32"/"
65%
150/0
720/o
179%
920/0
40%
67%
742%
s196
S+s
s1,643
57,643
S3o2
5101
S280
S28o
Ses
ss,s64
59,272
$3,e83
56,s47
Sss
S6,268
s6,89s
51.,224
Current Cost
Current Fee Recoverv
Specific Plan
a) Specific Plan Review
b) Specific Plan Amendment Review
Street Name Review/change
Temporary Outdoor Dining
a) lnitial Permit (Additional Revocable Permit Fees Apply) b) Renewal
Temporary Use Permit
Tentative Map/Parcel/Subdivision Map
a) Tentative Parcel Map Review
b) Tentative Map Amendment Review
c) Tentative Map Extension Review
d) Tentative Subdivision Map Review
i) Base Fee
ii) Plus, Per Lot Fee
Unattended Donation Box
a) lnitial Permit
b) Renewal
Variance
a) Variance Review - Single Family Dwelling
b) Variance Review - other
Zoning Verification Review
For Seruices Requested of City Staff which have no fee listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time involved in the service or activity (per hour)
30 31
26 32
33 1a
28 28
29 Fee Description
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
93%
930/.
48%
98%
93%
93%
32%
32%
69%
990/0
980/0
tooo/"
L00%
46%
100%
99%
93%
$15,soo
s1o,3o0
S8oo
S3oo
sloo
s28o
S14o
s3oo
S8,50o
Sso
s2,s00
$s,roo
s40o
s2oo
57,7OO
ss,1oo
54,300
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
P ro posed
Fee
Sz,136
$4,172l|
5317
s2,os3
Srz
s1o4
Ssz
$g,ztz
S3,40s
lS424l
9o
(s140)
s237
s8s7
s3,4s7
Sge
Sgs
Fee Change
x
x
x
Note
Appendix B: p. 11
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Planning Fees
Calculation of Estimated Cost of Seruice
t
* ln addition to amounts shown above, applicant is responsible for all costs of outside agency review/services, including but not limited to, LAFCO, Board of Equalization Fees, Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees, etc. lal The amount shown represents the initial deposit
be supported by time & materials billings.
andminimumfeepayable. Thecityreservestherighttocollectadditionalamountswhencostsexceedminimumfee/initialdeposit. Anyrequestsforadditionalamountsduewill lcl Applicant shall 6e responsible for additional costs of preparation of the required environment document. related declassifications, fee is amount shown.
[e]AdditionalfeesapplyforEngineeringreview. SeeEngineeringfeeschedule. lil Special events that require additional resources beyond those covered the scope of these fees will be charged on an hourly basis.
Fee Descriptlon
Current Cost
Current Fee Recovery
Proposed Fee
StructureFee
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p.12
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
Planning Fees
lllustration of Current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees Deposit Ss,641 5t7,280 lal98%1 AnnexationProcessing
Appeal
a) Appeal of Staff Decision - owner Occupied
b) Appeal of Staff Decision - by Developer/other
c) Appeal of Commission Decision - Owner Occupied
d) Appeal ofCommission Decision - by Developer/Other
3 Code Amendment
4 Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
a) CUP Review (Major)
b) CUP Review (Minor)
c) CUP Modification
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s2s1
sso2
s2s1
sso2
$2,238
ss,798
s2,749
$r,eos
53,4s6
s3,4s6
s6,9t2
s6,912
S8,640
5s,184
52,s92
$z,sgz
tL2%
IUb-/o
620/6
s17,000
s1,7oo
s3,400
53,400
S6,8oo
S8,soo
ss,100
s2,s00
52,soo
33%
7%
15%
4%
7%
tbl
tbl
tb1
tbl
49%
98%
49%
980/0
98%
96%
96%
26% 98%
Proposed
Fee Structure
Current
Fee (Max. Fee)
Cost of Seruice
Proposed Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Proposed Cost
Recovery$ Desfiiption
Fixed Fee s11,410 s17,280
5s,184
S854
s7,296
S864
ss,184
5L,728
s3,4s6
5L,728
,000
ss,1oo
ssoo
Ssoo
52s0
ss,100
$2so
s3,4oo
52so
660/0 9a%
6 5 Condominium Conversion Fee
Design RevievArchitectural Review
a) New Multi-Family/commercial (commission Level)
b) Minor Multi-Family/commercial (Staff Level)
c) New Single and Two Family Dwelling
d) Minor Single and Two Family Dwelling
e) Historic District New Multi-Family/Commercial
f) Historic District Minor Multi-Family/Commercial
g) Historic District New Single Family, Two-Family Dwelling and ADU >800 sq. ft. and/or 16 ft. tall
h) Historic District Minor Single and Two Family Dwelling Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
42%
249%
5%
420/6
725%
2%
4%
52,1s4
52,Ls4
Ser
561
s2,Ls4
52,1.s4
S61
5or
98%
s80/o
62%
29o/o
98%
t4o/6
98%
14%
Deposit S10,368 5r% 96%
46%
lal7 DevelopmentAgreementProcessing
s4328 Entertainment Permit Fixed Fee <aq 5200 L0%
Appendix B: p. 13
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
CitY of Folsom
Planning Fees
lllustration of Current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees 9 Environmental Review
a) Environmental Impact Review & Report
b) Environmental Mitigation Program Monitoring
c) lnitial Environmental Study/Assessment
d) Notice of CEQA Determination
10 General Plan
a) General Plan Amendment < 5 acres
b) General Plan Amendment 5 or more acres
E
82%
870/0
82%
9r%
96%
90%
90%
930/.
lal,Ic]
lal,Ic]
lal,Ic]
4to/o
62%
Deposit
Deposit
Deposit
Fixed Fee
S8,s2s
s6,284
S6,346
s296
94,272
S8,s44
S10,368
s7,776
57,776
5324
s10,368
s13,824
Slo,ooo
s7,ooo
s7,oo0
S3oo
slo,ooo
513,ooo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
96%
94%
Fee Structure
Proposed
(Max. Fee)
Cost of Seruice
Proposed Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Proposed Cost
RecoveryS Description
Fixed Fee s30 93%Seo 46%11 Home Occupation Permit Fee
L2 lndoor Marijuana cultivation Permit
13 Landmark Tree classification
1,4 LandmarkTree Declassification
15 Large Family Day Care Home
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s2s3
s287
s287
S1,404
s1,836
s1o8
ssoo
s3so
sr.,800
Sloo
760/0
930/.
25"/"
98%
47%
20%
td1
Sze 24% 93%
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s989
10% of building
permit fee
s2s1
s639
s8,941
5447
s3,13s
s8,928
S1,ooo
10% of building
permit fee
S2oo
s1,000
slo,ooo
ssoo
s3,ooo
Ss,ooo
86%
83%
970/6
172%
96%
934/0
87%
96%
lel92% 93%
00/6
16 Lot Line Adjustment/Parcel Merger - Planning
77 Non-Residential Plan Check Fee
18 Opinion on a Planning Matter
19 Preliminary Project Review
20 Planned Development
a) Planned Development Review
i) Base Fee
ii) Plus, Per Acre Fee
b) Planned Development EKtension Review
c) Planned Development Modification Review
5o
s432 5a%
250/.
46%
39%52,s92
s10,358
ss40
s3,4s6
Ss,184
Appendix B: p. 14
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
CitV of Folsom
Planning Fees
lllustration of Current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees 21 Rezoning Request
a) Rezoning Request Review - 5 acres or less
b) Rezoning Request Review - 5+ acres
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
52,s28
5s,847
S10,368
S13,824
Slo,ooo
s13,000
28%
42%
96%
94%
Fee Structure
Proposed
Fee
Current Cost of seruice
(Max. Fee) Proposed Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Proposed Cost
Recovery# Description
22 sidewalk Vendor Permit
23 Signs
a) Sign Permit - staff
b) Sign Permit Extension
c) Special Event Sign Permit
d) Historic District Sign Review (Staff Level)
e) Historic District Sign Review (Commission Level)
f) Planned Development Sign Permit
g) Temporary Sign Permit
h) On-Site Subdivision Signs
i) off-Site Subdivision Signs
i) base fee
ii) refundable deposit - per sign
j) Off-Site Weekend Directional Signs
i) base fee
ii) refundable deposit
k) Uniform Sign Program
24 Site Design Review
a) Site Design Review
bl Site Design Review - Planning Commission
Fixed Fee Sso
s171
Ssoo
s17L
s200
5287
s294
54,672
s432
S1sr.
s1o8
5108
s1s1
9864
Sz,s92
5a:
5216
5324
s432
5432
ss,184
$1s0
sloo
sloo
s1s0
$8oo
S2,soo
S+o
s2oo
s3oo
Ssoo
S3oo
s4o0
$4oo
5s,1oo
L2%
530/,
66%
12%
93%
93%
93%
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Deposit
Fixed Fee
Deposit
Fixed Fee
s126
Sse
9oo
s61
Sel
s1,2s3
5ro
s126
83o/o
s4%
56%
40%
7%
480/0
23%
580/0
99%
93%
93%
99%
930/0
96%
93%
93%
53o/"5324
s2oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
6A%
900/.
93%
98%
Appendix B: p. '15
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
25 Special Event Permit
a) Special Event Permit
b) over 1,000 People Per Day (charged per thousand)
c) Consultation Meeting for Events Over 1,000 People Per Day d) Traffic Control Plan or Street Closure for New Event e) Traffic Control Plan or Street Closure for Repeated Event (No Substantial Changes from Previous Year)
f)AlcohoUABC Permit
g) Fire lnspections
h) Block Party Permit
26 Specific Plan
a) Specific Plan Review
b) Specific Plan Amendment Review
27 Street Name Review/Change
28 Temporary Outdoor Dining
a) lnitial Permit (Additional Revocable Permit Fees Apply) b) Renewal
City of Folsom
Planning Fees
lllustration of Current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees S864
s432
S864
s864
5432
$324
5432
5548
s6,268
s5,89s
51s,ss2
s10,368
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s8%
rooo/"
23%
a1%
93%
100%
93%
15%
7%
o%
0%
o%
o%
o%
o%
9%
s61
5o
So
5o
$o
so
So
S61
ssoo
$432
s20o
5700
$+oo
$324
s400
s100
tfl
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
5L,224
s280
s28o
S864
s864
$432
Sls,soo
s1o,3oo
ssoo
s280
S14o
I42%
40%
67%
too%
99%
Fixed Fee 93%
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
320/0
6s%
32%
32%
Proposed
Fee Structure
Current
Fee (Max. Fee)
Cost of Seruice
Proposed Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Proposed Cost
Recovery$ Description
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Ss:
5s,s64
59,272
93,983
56,s47
5le5
S+e
s432
s7,776
ss,184
S4azo
S8,640
s108
5324
s1o8
75% 69%2a Temporary Use Permit
29 Tentative Map/Parcel/Subdivision Map
a) Tentative Parcel Map Review
b) Tentative Map Amendment Review
c) Tentative Map Extension Review
d) Tentative Subdivision Map Review
i) Base Fee
ii) Plus, Per Lot Fee
Unattended Donation Box
a) lnitial Permit
b) Renewal
57,7oo
ss,1oo
s4,300
72%
779%
92%
98%
LOOo/.
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee Sso)55
s8,600 76%
3L%
LO00/.
460/0
s3oo
sloo
93%
30 Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
600/0
44% 93%
Appendix B: p. 16
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
city of Folsom
Planning Fees
lllustration of current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees 3I Variance
a) Variance Review - Single Family Dwelling
b) Variance Review - Other
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s1,643
s1,643
ss,184
ss,184
$z,soo
ss,1oo
32%
32%
48%
98%
Proposed
Fee Structure# Description
Cost of Seruice
(Max. Fee) Proposed Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Proposed Cost
Recovery
33 For Seruices Requested of City Staff which have no fee listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time involved in the seruice or activity (per hour)
32 zoningVerificationReview Fixed Fee s432 s400 700/o 93% Per Hour s101 s215 470/.
supported by time & materials billings.
[c] Applicant shall be responsible for additional costs of preparation of the required environment document. declassifications, fee is amount shown.
[e]AdditionalfeesapplyforEngineeringreview. SeeEngineeringfeeschedule. [f] Special events that require additional resources beyond those covered the scope of these fees will be charged on an hourly basis. 93%S2oo
Appendix B: p. 17
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
User dnd Reoulatorv Fees
Cost of Service Calculations
Engineering ond Encroochment Permits
DRAFT
Appendix B: p. 18
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
city of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Annual Labor Effort - Engineering
Authorized Staffing
Contract Selvices
Divisional Total
lal staffing based on FY 23124 adopted budget
[b]Allocationofhoursintendedtoserueasreasonableestimate. Amountmayvaryfromyear-to-yearandpositiontoposition [c] Source: Annual average FY 18/19 throughFY 2Ll2Z.
[d] Amounts intended to serve as reasonable estimates of market rates for contract seruice providers. [e] Average hourly rate for contract services received. lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
r,464
r,864
t,864
7,864
3,728
11,184
L0{JD6
1,,49r
652
L,49!
1,305
2,796
7,736
59%
373
1,212
373
559
932
3,48
SLOA
too%
too%
LOO%
r00o/o
700%
80%
35%
80%
700/o
75%
20%
6s%
20%
30%
25%
7,864
L,864
1,864
\464
3,728
tL,IStl
L,464
L,454
1,864
r,a64
1,864
216
2L6
2t6
216
276
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
2.00 6.00
Total
Urban Forestor
City Engineer
Senior Construction lnspector
Engineering Tech l/ll
Senior Civil Engineer
Total
Total Hours Less: Hc iday
Per F-'-E & Leave
Hours Per
FTF
Prod Jctive
Hours
I nd irect
Hours
Total Direct
HoursDi rectI ndirect TotalFIEPosltion Total Hours Notes lclS r,75L,255Annual Contrast Services
Tot:lDescription Notes
tdl
tdl
lel16s
s
s
r25
205
50%
50%
Loo%
lnspection
Plan Review
Total
Contract Services Share Est HriV Cost Notes
10,6149,5521,0619004100/610,614contract Seruice Hours
D rectlndl rectTotaDescription NotesTotalndirect Dlrect 11,t84
70,6t4
2L,798
LOOOA
7,736
9,552
77,288
7904
3,448
1,,061
4,510
2r%
Total
Total
Authorized staffing
Contract Seruices
Appendix B: p. 19
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - Engineering
Recurring Divisional Expenditures [al
Allocation of Department and Citywide Overhead
Total
Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate
[a] Source: FY 23124 adopted budget.
[b] Adiustment to align to FY 22/23 actual contract seruice expenditures. [c] 5ee separate worksheets in this model. Amounts intended to serue as reasonable estimates. tb1
S 3,029,532
s 740,794
s 10,730
s 67s
s s8,782
s 29s,014
S 16,200
s tL8,434
$ 7,7st,25s
s 37,648
s 1.061.255
s
s
s
5 s
s
5 s
s
t,06L,zss
s
)
s
s
s
)
s
s
5 740,794
1o,730
675
58,782
295,Ot4
16,200
118,434
690,000
37,648
5 L,968,277
Salaries - Permanent
Annual Leave Account
Uniform Allowance
FICA
PERS
combined Benefits
Contracts
lnsurance / Liability
Deferred comp - city Paid
subtotal
NotesDescription Total AClustments Total
Ic]
tcl
s
s
203,45L
220,949
$ 424,4OO
s
5 s
s
s
203,451
220,949
S 424,4oo
Department Overhead
Citvwide Overhead
subtotal
Description NotesTotal Adjustments Total
S 3,o29,s32
s 203,4s1
5 220,949
5 3,453,932
Recurring Divisional Expenditures
Department Overhead
Citywide Overhead
subtotal
De scri ptio n NotesTotal
lcl
s 3,4s3,932
!7,2a8
700s
Costs
Direct Hours
Fullv-Burdened Hourlv Rate
Descript on N oteTota
Appendix B: p. 20
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
Cost of seruice Calculation
Assessment District/CFD Payment Processing
a) Encroachment Contract for Parking/Staging
i. 0-6 calendar days
ii. 7-14 calendar days
iii. 14+days
b) Utility work/connections (lndividual Permits)
i. Wet Utilities/5eruice Connections
ii. Dry Utilities (per site/location)
iii. Misc. per LF of Trench in ROWCity Easement
iv. lnspections and Testing
c) Driveways/Minor Frontage lmprovements
i. Residential (per drivewaY)
ii. Commercial (per driveway)
d) Pools and Spas (in ground)
e) Traffi c Control/Equipment Staging
i. lsolated Site
ii. Multiple closures/staging
f) Permit Extensions
i. Active Work Zone
ii. lnactive Work Zone (4+ months inactivity)
g) Annual Permits
i. Wet Utilities
ii. Dry Utilities
iii. General Maintenance/Misc. (Not Wet or Dry
Utilities)
iv. Vegetation Management (Utilities)
v. Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (paid
annually)
h) Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (new
permits only)
Encroachment Permit
1 2
Fee Description
s6,ooo
s2o,8oo
5o,ooo
s20,800
S2oo
ss0
sloo
s200
s2,400
Sso
s2oo
s40o
5400
s400
S2oo
s1,ooo
Ssoo
S200
ss.oo
s40o
Est. Cost of
Svc
s2o0
s2oo
s2oo
52oo
S2oo
S20o
s2oo
S20o
s2oo
S2oo
s20o
s2oo
s200
s2oo
520o
s2oo
s2oo
S2oo
S2oo
s200
s2oo
Hour y Rate
1.00 o.25
24.OO
12.00 2.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 5.00
0.25 0.50
1.00 3.00
1.00 0.03
2.OO
30.00 104.00
30.00 104.00
1.OO
Est. Labor
Hou rs
X
54%
73%
68%
6%
68%
t4%
34%
34%
34%
270%
735%
68%
23%
68%
39%
270%
680/.
44%
13%
44%
s13s
S13s
s1.96
s13s
s13s
s13s
s13s
52,578
s13s
s13s
$13s
s13s
S13s
S13s
s135
52,6s1
s2,6st
s2,6s1
S2,6s1
s13s
Current Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
too%
7000/.
100%
LOO%
t000/o
100%
too%
LOOo/o
700%
100%
100%
700%
too%
10O6/o
700%
roo%
100%
700%
LOO%
r000/o
Sso
s2oo
s4oo
S4oo
s4oo
s4,800
Sso
s100
s2oo
s2,400
s20o
s1,ooo
55oo
s2oo
Ss.oo
s4oo
S6,ooo
S2o,8oo
T&M
s20,800
5200
Proposed Fee
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
s2,222
(Sesl
(S3s)
Ses
s45s
S5s
S3.04
$z6s
S25s
s26s
56s
S86s
(Sss1
Ses
53,349
s18,149
s18,149
5os
52,26s
Fee Change
lal
Ibl
x
x
Appendix B: p. 21
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
city of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
Cost of Seruice Calculation
s14,40o
$19,200
s11,s00
3.60%
s144
ssoo
s8oo
8.OO%
6.40%
4.800/.
s8,os0
S6,90o
s8,ooo
s2,100
s3,4s0
Ss,7so
ss,7so
s2oo
s1,1oo
s2,300
s1,400
S1,6oo
Est. Cost of
Svc
s2oo
s200
s2oo
s2oo
52oo
s2oo
s288
s288
s288
s288
S288
s288
s288
s200
s2oo
s2oo
s2oo
s2oo
Hou. V Rate
4.00 4.00
28.00 40.00
72.00 96.00
40.00 0.50
24.OO
12.oo
20.00 20.00
1.00 5.50
11.50 7.00
8.00 10.50
Est. Labor
Hcurs
varies
75%
880/0
86%
780/o
39%
43%
190/.
930/0
o%
42"/.
83%
83%
830/0
56%
790/0
38%
varies
varies
2%
2%
5s,742
7.OO%
56oo
6.OO%
s10,719
5o
s2,899
51s,900
2.O00/o
S38
54t4
Valuation
Valuation
s38
s38
So,soo
s.oo%
s11,9oo
4.O0%
S1,334
s2,4s1
S1,083
Current Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
5200
s2,308
s1,1oo
s2,soo
s3,3oo
s2,062
s781
s744
S4oo1
52,LL6
s3,299
54,667
5162
s686
Varies
Varies
s1,s62
Fee Change
Engineering and Landscape Plan Check and lnspection
(Fee lncludes Up to 3 Cycle Reviews - Hourly Billing
Applies for Reviews Required Beyond 3rd Cycle)
a) Project Value Up to 510,000
b) Project value S10,0o1 - S100,000
i. Ease Fee for First Slo,ooo
ii. Fee for Each Add'l S1 Up to 5100,000
c) S100,001 - S199,999
i. Base Fee for First 5100,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l S1 Up to 5200,000
d) 5200,001 - 5299,9ee
i. Base Fee for First 5200,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l S1 up to 5300,000
e) 5300,000 or more
i. Base Fee for First $300,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51
f) Landscape Plan Review
i. Non-Development
ii. Custom Home
iii. Production Home/Subdivision
iv. Model Home Complex
v. Commercial, Streetscape, other Development
Projects
vi. Development and Civil lmprovements -
Landscaping Review
Final Map and Parcel Map
a) Parcel Map Check
b) Final Map Check
i. Base Fee
ii. Plus, Per Lot Fee
c) Final Map Amendment/Certificate of Correction
Right of ways (RoW) and Easements
a) Review of ROWEasement Documents
b) ROWEasement Abandonment
Subdivision Agreement Processing
5 6
4 3
Fee Description
X
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
100yo
vanes
100%
too%
too%
t00%
700%
700%
700%
too%
100%
L000/o
1000
700%
700%
too%
LOOo/o
100%
100%
roo%
L00%
r00%
58oo
a.ooo/.
6.40%
8.00%
S8,oso
S8,ooo
s2,1oo
Sr.J.,soo
Sr44
s6,9oo
s19,2oo
3.600/.
514,400
4.80%
S3,4so
ss,7so
ss,7so
s2oo
s1,1oo
s2,300
S1,4oo
s1,600
Proposed Fee
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
X
x
Appendix B'.p.22
Note
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
€ity of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
EnBineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
Cost of Service Calculation
[a] Use time and materials with initial deposit to be determined by City Engineer, based on anticipated scope of work.
Ib] Encroachment agreement required in addition to insurance (e.g., parklets] x
x
X
X
x
s2o0
s2o0
S2oo
5200
52oo
S240
sloo
s100
Sloo
s1,200
sloo
s2oo
S2,40o
51,200
s1,400
Est. Cost of
5vc
S2oo
520o
S2oo
s2oo
s2oo
52oo
s2oo
s20o
s2oo
Szoo
s2oo
s200
s2oo
s200
52oo
Hourly Rate
1.00 n/a
n/a
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
'J..20
0.50 0.50
6.00 7.00
1.00 12.00
0.50 6.00
0.50 Est. Labor
Hou rs
Soz
57,162
Saz
s1,162
varies
5162
(q7
Sgz
(Sa1
S+
s137
Fee Change
Tree Removal/Work Permit
a) Permitted Removal/Work
i. Existing Occupied Structure
a.0-2Trees
b. 3+ Trees: See New Construction Rate Below
c. "ln Decline" Tree
ii. New construction (e.g. custom Home,
subdivision, Parcel Map, Multi-family, commercial,
etc.):
a.0-4Trees
b.5+Trees
iii. Misc.
b) w/o Permit (Does not include mitigation)
Double the Permit Rate
other Fees for Seruice
Research of Engineering Records
Mlscellaneous Engineering Seruices
Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent)
After Hours lnspection (per hour) (2-hour minimum)
Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
Missed lnspection Fee
Expedited Services Fee
Residential Landscape Review
Technical Assistance/Third Party Review or lnspection
Revisions
Transportation Permit
a) Permit
b) Annual Permit
9 10
11 12
13 L4
15 16
t7
18 7
8 Fee Description
43%
38%
3%
38%
30/,
3%
s2%
52%
79%
18%
5103
s1o3
n/a
n/a
s1o3
n/a
n/a
1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of
Arborist
Actual Cost
S38
S38
Sge
S38
$38
s38
s438
$le
5ae
Current Cost
Current Fee Recovery
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Each
Each
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
T&M
100%
700%
L00%
100%
100%
L00%
100%
tooo/.
tooo/o
varies
too%
100%
LOO%
s1,2oo
51,400 + 10% per
tree above 5 trees.
5200
2x permit amount
S2oo
s2oo
s200
s2oo
s24O
sloo
s100
1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of
Arborist
Actual Cost
5re
Sgo
s100
sr.,200
51oo
Proposed Fee
Fee
Structure
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p. 23
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
Proposed
Fee Structure
city of Folsom
Engineerint and Encroachment Permit Fees
lllustration of Current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees Fixed Fee 52,578 54,800 54o/o1 Assessment District/CFD Payment Processing 2 Encroachment Permit
a) Encroachment Contract for Parking/Staging
i. 0-6 calendar days
ii. 7-14 calendar days
iii. 14+days
b) Utility Work/Connections (lndividual Permits)
i. Wet Utilities/Service Connections
ii. Dry Utilities (per site/location)
iii. Misc. per LF of Trench in ROWcity Easement
iv. lnspections and Testing
c) Driveways/Minor Frontage lmprovements
i. Residential (per driveway)
ii. Commercial (per driveway)
d) Pools and Spas (in ground)
e) Traffic Control/Equipment Staging
i. lsolated Site
ii. Multiple closures/Staging
f) Permit Extensions
i- Active Work Zone
ii. lnactive Work Zone (4+ months inactivity)
g) Annual Permits
i. Wet Utilities
ii. Dry Utilities
iii. General Maintenance/Misc. (Not Wet or Dry Utilities) iv. Vegetation Management (Utilities)
v. Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (paid annually)
h) Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (new permits only) Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s13s
s13s
s13s
513s
s13s
52,6s7
s2,6s1
s2,6s1
52,6s1
s13s
s13s
5400
s400
s4oo
s1,ooo
S6,ooo
s20,800
s5,ooo
s20,800
52oo
s2,4oo
s4,80o
s40o
s400
s400
51,ooo
S6,ooo
s2o,80o
T&M
s20,800
s2oo
S2,40o
Sso
s100
s200
s6oo
s2o0
Ss.oo
54oo
5so
s100
S2oo
s6oo
s2oo
ss.00
s4oo
s13s
s13s
s13s
s135
s13s
s1.96
2700/o
!350/o
68%
L1io/o
n0%
700%
roo%
100%
r00%
roo%
LOO%
roo%
r00%
ro0%
ro00/a
270%
68%
100%
too%
to00/o
L000/o
roo%
roo%
700%
700%
s2ooS2oo
23%
68%
39%
34%
340/o
34%
68%
140/.
Sso
s200
Sso
52oo
s13s
s13s
44%
73%
44%
L3%
68%
6%
lal
tbl
Current
Fee
Cost of Service
{Max. Fee) Proposed Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p.24
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
Fee Structure
Proposed
3 CitY of Folsom
Engineeting and Encroachment Permit Fees
lllustration of current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees Fixed Fee 6.OO% s8oo
Engineering and Landscape Plan Check and lnspection
a) Project Value Up to 510,000
b) Project value S10,o01 - S100,000
i. Base Fee for First 510,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l S1 Up to S100,000
c) S100,001 - 5199,999
i. Base Fee for First 5100,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to 5200,000
d) s200,001 - 52e9,s99
i. Base Fee for First 5200,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to 5300,000
e) 5300,000 or more
i. Base Fee for First 5300,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51
f) Landscape Plan Review
i. Non-Development
ii. custom Home
iii. Production Home/subdivision
iv. Model Home Compiex
v. Commercial, streetscape, other Development Projects
vi. Development and Civil lmprovements - Landscaping Review Final Map and Parcel Map
a) Parcel Map Check
b) Final Map Check
i. Base Fee
ii. Plus, Per Lot Fee
c) Final Map Amendment/Certificate of Correction
Right of Ways (ROW) and Easements
a) Review of ROW/Easement Documents
b) RoWEasement Abandonment
a.006/o
8.OO%
S8,ooo
6.400/0
S14,40o
4.80%
s19,200
3.60%
5200
S1,1oo
52,300
s1,40o
s1,6oo
S2,1oo
s8,oso
s11,s00
S144
S6,soo
s3,4s0
ss,75o
varies
7s%
88%
86%
78o/o
7L%
930/0
Oo/o
42%
vanes
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s60o
7.OOo/.
9o,goo
5.OO%
s11,900
4.OO%
s1s,900
2.OO%
S38
s414
Valuation
Valuation
Sse
Sss
55,742
s10,719
So
s2,899
s1,334
52,4sL
8.00%
58,ooo
6.40%
s14,4oo
4.AO%
s19,200
3.60%
s200
51,100
S2,3oo
s1,400
51,600
s2,1oo
s8,oso
$11,soo
St44
s5,eoo
93,450
s5,7so
ssooSsoo 1000/0
ro0%
L00%
700%
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
83o/o
a3%
rco%
too%
700%
83%
56%
100%
t00%
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
79%
38%
varies
varies
2%
20/o
IOOo/o
LOO%
too%
700%
tog%
too%
4 Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
too%
100%
100%
39%
43%
ro0%
700%
5 Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Proposed Fee
Current Cost
RecoveryS Description
6 SubdivisionAgreementProcessing Fixed Fee 51,083 7SO Ss,7so t9% Appendix B: p. 25
100%
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
Fee Structure
Proposed
City of Folsom
Engineering and Encroachment Permit Fees
lllustration of Current Fees, Maximum Fees, and Proposed Fees E
7 Transportation Permit
a) Permit
blAnnual Permit
Tree Removal/Work Permit
a) Permitted Removal/Work
i. Existing Occupied Strusture
a. 0-2 Trees
b- 3+ Trees: See New Construction Rate Below
c. "ln Decline" Tree
ii. New Construction {e.g. Custom Home; Subdivision, Parcel Map, a.0-4Trees
b. 5+ Trees
iii. Misc.
b) w/o Permit (Does not include mitigation)
Double the Permit Rate
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Srs
5go
Srg
586
8 Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
s38
s38
S38
S38
S38
S38
s438
sloo
S1,2oo
sloo
51,200
51,400
S2oo
52,4oO
s200
s2oo
S2oo
s20o
s240
sloo
s100
s200
t00%
too%
100%
sloo
Sr.,2oo
51oo
s1,200
91,400 + L0% per tree
S2oo
2x permit amount
s2oo
s2oo
s2oo
s2oo
s240
Sloo
Sloo
1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of Arborist
Actual Cost
38%
3%
38%
3%
3%
L9%
18%
too%Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Fixed Fee
too%
varies
other Fees for Seruice
9 Research of Engineering Records
10 MiscellaneousEngineeringSeruices
11 Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent)
12 Revisions
13 After Hours lnspection (per hour) (2-hour minimum)
74 Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
15 Missed lnspection Fee
16 Expedited Seruices Fee
77 Residential Landscape Review
18 Technical Assistance/Third Party Review or lnspection Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Each
Each
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
T&M
r00%
t00%
too%
roo%
IOO"/o
704%
too%
s1o3
s103
n/a
n/a
s103
n/a
n/a
1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate ofArborist
Actual Cost
52%
52%
43%
[a] Use time and materials with initial deposit to be determined by City Engineer, based on anticipated scope ofwork.
Ib] Encroachment agreement required in addition to insurance (e.g., parklets].
Current
Fee
Cost of Service
(Max. Fee) Proposed Fee
Current Cost
Recovery
Proposed Cost
Recovery$ Description
Appendix B: p. 26
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
User ond Requlatory Fees
Cost of Service Cdlculotions
Building
DRAFT
Appendix B:p.27
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Annual Labor Effort - Building
Authorized Staffing
Contract Seruices
Divisional Total
lal Staffing based on FY 23124 adopted budget
[blAllocationofhoursintendedtoserveasreasonableestimate. Amountmayvaryfromyear-to-yearandpositiontoposition. [c] Source: Annual average FY 18/19 thtough FY 21'/22
[d] Amounts intended to serve as reasonable estimates of market rates for contract service providers. [e] Average hourly rate for contract services received. tai;Ib]
lal; Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
tal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
5,592
3,728
3,728
1,864
1,864
r,864
t,864
20,5O4
tw%
4,474
2,982
7,864
!,497
1,118
932
1,,491
14353
70%
5,151
1Vo
1,1.18
746
L,a64
373
746
932
373
LOO%
LOO%
100%
roo%
L00%
100%
too%
ao%
80%
50%
80%
600/0
50%
ao%
20%
20%
50%
20%
40'/"
5Oo/.
20%
5,592
3,728
3,728
L,864
!,864
L,864
L,864
20,5U
'J.,a64
1,,864
L,864
L,464
1,864
t,864
t,864
2L6
216
216
2t6
2t6
216
216
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
2,080
3.00 2.00
2.O0
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
11.00Total
Total
Building lnspector l/ll
Building Plans Coordinator
Building Technician l/ll
Plan check Engineer
Building lnspection Supervisor
Principal Civil Engineer
Senior Civil Engineer
Total Hours Less: H0 iday !ours Per
Fer FTE & Leave FTE
Prod uctive
Ftours
lndirect
Hours
Total Direct
HoursTctalDi rectlnd irectFTEPosit ro n Total dours Notes 20,504
s,592
3,728
3,72&
L,864
1,864
1,864
L,864
4,474
2,982
1,864
1,497
1,118
932
t,49L
14353
1,118
746
t,864
373
746
932
373
6,151Total
Building lnspector l/ll
Building Plans Coordinator
Building Technician l/ll
Plan Check Engineer
Building lnspection Supervisor
Principal Civil Engineer
Senior Civil Engineer
TotalPos tion lndirect Direct
lclS Sso,oooAnnual Contract Services
NotesTotalDescription
lel
tdl
tdl
110
140
s
5:1:A
130100%l
lnspection
Plan Review
Total
Contract Services Share Est. Hrly Cost Notes
5,0005,000Contract Service Hours
20,504
5,000
25,504
100%
14,353
4,500
18,853
740/
6,651
26%
s00
6,1,5LAuthorized Staffing
Contract Seruices
Total
Total
Appendix B: p. 28
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - Building
Recurring Divisional Expenditures [a]
Allocation of Department and Citywide Overhead
Support trom Other Departments
Total
Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate
tbl
s 1,032,92s
s s0,000
s 1s,12s
s 2,02s
$ 82,72r
S 4t2,624
s 23,400
s 208,931
s 6s0,000
5 s6,472
s 2,533.523s 38s.000
5 s
s
5 5
5 s
s
s
5 38s,000
s 2.148.623
s L,032,925
5 so,ooo
s 1s,12s
s 2,02s
s 82,L2r
5 412,624
s 23,400
s 208,931
s 26s,000
$ s6,472
subtotal
salaries - Permanent
Salaries - Temporary
Annual Leave Account
Uniform Allowance
FICA
PERS
Deferred Comp - city Paid
combined Benefits
Cohtracts
lnsurance / Liability
NotesDescri,ltion Total Adjustments Total
lcl
Icl
5 s
372,993
147.300
s s20,293
s
s
5 s
s
372,993
747,300
s 520.293
Department Overhead
Citywide Overhead
Subtotal
NotesTotar Adjustments Total
Ic]
lcl
tcl
s
s
s
65,000
40,000
226.776
5 337,776s
65,000
40,000
226,776
s 337.776
Annual ln-House Maintenance of Zoning code, Plans ;
Plan Review and Permit Suppon from Other Depts
Annual ln-House Technology Licensing
subtotal
NotesDescripticn Tctni Adjustments Tota
s 2,s33,623
5 372,993
5 33L,776
S 147,300
S 3.385.691
Recurring Divisional Expenditures
Department Overhead
Support from Other Departments
citvwide Overhead
Subtotal
lcl
180s
s 3,38s,591
18,853
Costs
Direal Hours
Fullv-B!rdened Hourlv Rate
NoteDesc.iption Totai
Appendix B: p. 29
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee StudY
Allocation of Divisional Expenses - Building
Cost Recovery Overuiew
cost Recovery Analysis
lal source: FY 23124 adopted budget.
[b] Adjustment to align to FY 22/23 actual contract seryice expenditures. [c]Seeseparateworksheetsinthismodel. AmountsintendedtoseNeasreasonableestimates 100%
670,4
Oo/o
33%
oo,4
oo/o
s1,910,7s8
s1,6s2
s930,537
$1,696
s1,09s
52,845,83954.877.979
s3,632,168
S1,08o
s7,234,323
s7,O7O
S3.338
so
s0
S240
s3,143,495
sr,298,637
s4.M2.372
s2,2s9,054
s1,98s
S919,s17
s459
s331
s3.181.355
s2,022,669
s1,330
5899,484
52,4t3
S4,os1
52,929,947s2599.462
s1,7s7,983
s1,680
S839,076
s320
S4o3
57,27s,767
s2,40s
S988,989
s1,864
3698
92.209.123
s1,160,27s
S3,ooo
5966,2t3
s2,300
sss0
s2.132.338
S1,435,293
s2,400
5727,668
Ss15
s2,166,64252.260.737
s1,391,334
s1,080
S866,826
s8s9
s638
s1,090,143
s1,320
ss6s,542
5897
s430
s1.658-432
3224000
3440407
3444LOO
3444300
3444400
oto2320
0102320
0102320
0102320
0102320
Building Permit Fees
Building Reinspection Fee
Structure Plan Check Fees
Seismic Training Fee
State Blds Standards Fund
Total
Actua
2OL2l13
Aciua
2013/14
Actua I
203,41r5
Actual
2o1S/16
Actual
2016/1,7
Actual
201.1 118
Actual
2018/19
Actuai
2019/2O
Actua I
2A2Al2r
Actual
2021122 10 Year Avg PercentageOrg Key
N otesODjectDe!criptron
s2,84s,839
s3.385.691
a4%
Average Revenu€s
Annualized Costs
Cost Recovery
Total NcteDescflptior
Appendix B: p. 30
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
Cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate x
2.00 3.00
1.50 1.00
2.50 5.00
7.25 1.00
2.00 1.75
1.50 2.00
2.00 2.00
1.00 0.20
HVAC Change-Out - Residential
Water Heater Change-Out - Residential
Residential Re-Roof
Siding Replacement
Service Panel Upgrade - Residential
Battery Backup Storage
Electric Vehicle charger
Generator
Residential Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee for 15kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Additional kW above 15kW
b) Permit
commercial Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee 50kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kW above 50kW up to 250kW
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kw above 250kW
b) Permit
Swimming Pool Replaster / Equipment change-Out
Swimming Pool Remodel (e.g., Changing Pool shape,
Adding cabo Shelf, etc.l
Retaining Wall
a) One Type of Retaining Wall Type/Configuration
b) Each Additional Wall Type/Configuration
Window / Sliding Glass Door - Retrofit / Repair
a)Upto5
b) Per Window Over 5 windows
Pool solar
Requiring a Building Permii
L
2 3
4 5
5 7
8 9
15 16
10 n
72 13
74 Fee Descriptron
s22s
s18o
s350
53ls
527O
S350
S350
s360
s180
54s0
s9oo
Ss40
s270
s180
s36
s350
Cost of Svc
s18o
s180
S18o
s18o
s180
S180
S18o
$180
s18o
s18o
s18o
S18o
s18o
s180
s18o
s180
Hodrly Rate
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
vaneS
varies
vanes
vanes
vanes
varies
varies
varies
varies
vanes
vanes
varies
varies
varies
varies
vane5
varies
varies
vafle5
varies
varies
vaneS
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
varies
vanes
vanes
vafle5
varies
varies
varies
vanes
varies
varies
Cuffent Fee
Current Est
cost RecoverV
tal,tbl
lal,Ib]
tal,tbj
lal,Ib]
la1,Ib]
tal,tbl
tal,tbl
S22s
s18o
55bU
$31s
s27O
s360
s36o
s350
s200
s1s
s2s0
s444
5z
$s
S5s6
s18o
s4s0
s900
ss40
s27O
s180
)Jb
s35o
7000/"
roo%
700%
700%
700%
too%
7Oo:/.
700%
7000/"
7000/0
700%
700%
700%
Lo0o/6
700%
LOO%
Proposed Fee Note
Proposed
Cost Recovery
Appendix B: p. 31
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
Cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate [a] Total fees shall not exceed amounts outlined in California Government Code 66015(aX1).
Ib]TheCitywillnotcollectadditionalpermitprocessingfees. Amountsshownaretotalamountdueforpermitprocessing,planreview,andpermit.
1.50 25.00
12.OO
Toia
Electrical and lrrigation Pedestals per pedestal
Detached and Attached ADUs
Junior ADUs
L7
18 19
Fee Descr piiorl
s180
s18o
s180
Ho"fiy Rat-"
s27O
s4,s00
s2,150
varies
varies
varies
vafles
varies
varies
C!rreni Fee
Current att.
Cost Reccvery
527o
s4,s00
s2,160
LOO%
L00%
TDOo/o
NcteP.oposed Fee
P rc pos -"d
Cost Recovery
Appendix B: p. 32
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
LJser and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
Cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate
0.75 0.75
2.00 3.50
6.00 22.OO
40.00 160.00
260.00
Est. CitV
St:ft Labor
Hrs
S180
S18o
s18o
s180
s18o
s180
S18o
s180
s18o
Fu llV
Burdened
Hourly
s13s
s13s
s360
s630
51,080
s3,960
57,2oO
528,800
s46,800
[st. Cost of
Service trn t Notes
Permit Fee for New Buildings, Additions, Tenant lmprovements, Residential Remodels, and Combined Mechanical, Electrical, and/or Plumbing Permits
s1 - s2,ooo
s2,oo1 - s2s,ooo
s2s,001 - sso,oo0
sso,ool - s1oo,oo0
s1oo,oo1 - ssoo,ooo
$soo,oo1 - sl,ooo,ooo
s1.000,001 - ss,000,000
ss,ooo,001 - s10,o00,ooo
s10,000,001 - s10,000,0009
1 2
4 5
6 7
8 Fee Descr ptlon
x
X
x
74%
74%
920/.
84%
87%
83%
84./.
900/.
ro9%
Sloo
sloo
S33o
ss30
s880
S3,280
S6,o3o
s26,03o
ss1,o3o
Current Cost
Current Fee Recovery
LOO%
7OO'/.
LOO%
7000/0
LOO%
700%
toooA
7000/"
1000/.
s13s
s13s
S360
s63o
s1,080
S3,950
s7,2Oo
s28,800
s46,800
Proposed Fee
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
x
Appendix B: p. 33
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
Cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate [a] lncludes up to three plan checks. The city will bill hourly for additional plan review required. lbl For identical buildings built by the same builder on the same lot or in the same tract and for which building permits are issued at the same time.
X
X
x
x
s18o
5180
S180
s18o
s180
s180
Fully-
Bu rde ned
hourlV
s1,440
s4so
s180
s18o
s18o
s180
Est. Cost
of Serv ce
varies
700/.
330/"
s1s0
slso
Slso
Current Fee
Current
Cost
Recovery
lal
tbl
Building Plan Check Fees - Building
a) Plan Review Fee, if applicable
b) Expedited Plan Check - At Application Submittal (when applicable)
c) Tract Home / Master Plan Construction (Production Units) d) Production Permit for Multi-family permit
e) Production Permit for Fire permits and other misc. permits f) Alternate Materials and Methods Review (per hour)
g) Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent) (per hour) h) Revisions to an Approved Permit (per hour)
i) Deferred Submittal (per hour)
1 Fee Description
1.5x standard plan check fee
20%
8.00 2.50
1.00 1.00
1.00 1.00
ao%
Est CitV Staff labor Hrs
100%
7000/"
100%
700%
roo%
roo./.
100%
LOO%
7000/"
80%
1.5x standard plan check fee
20% of standard plan check fee
S1,440
$4s0
s180
s180
s180
s180
Proposed Fee
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p. 34
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
cost of Service calculation - At Fully-Burdened HourlY Rate
1.00 o.42
1.00 1.00
1.00 1,.20
1.00 3.00
0.50 Est. City
Staff Labor
Hrs
s180
s180
5180
s180
s180
s180
s18o
s180
S180
Fully-
Burdened
Houriv
9.k
9%
Ss40
Sso
S18o
S18o
S18o
s7s
s18o
s216
s180
Est. Cost
of servrce
oo/.
o%
oo/"
o%
Current Fee
Current
Cost
Recovery
lal
tbl
tb1
Permit Processing Fee
Strong Motion lnstrumentation {sMl) Fee Calculation
a) Residential
b) commercial
Building Standards (SB 1473) Fee calculation (Valuation) a) S1 - S2s,000
b) s2s,001 - sso,oo0
c) Ss0,001 - S7s,o00
d) s7s,oo1 - sloo,ooo
e) Each Add'l S25,000 or fraction thereof
General Plan and Zoning Code Update Fee (percent of building permit fee) Technology Fee (percent of permit fee)
Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (per 30 Days)
Permit Extension
Permit Reactivation Fee
a) Reactivation Fee if All lnspections Have Been Performed and Approved Up to But Not lncluding Final lnspection
b) Reactivation Fee - All Other Scenarios
i) Permit Expired Up to One Year
ii) Permit Expired More than One Year
Permit Reissuance Fee
Damaged Building suruey (Fire, Flood, Vehicle Damage, Etc.) (per hour) Other Fees
Phased lnspection Fee (per inspection)
After Hours lnspection (per hour) (4-hour minimuml
Re-inspection Fee (2nd lime or More) (each)
7 8
3 4
5 6
L
2 9
10 11
72 13
Fee Descflption
X
X 1000/o
7000/6
550/.
56%
700%
oo/o
700%
roo%
7000/"
100%
TOOo/o
S0.50 or valuation x .00013
50-50 or valuation x .00028
50% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
100% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
s180
S18o
s7s
s18o
$1
s2
(?
s4
Add s1
s180
s216
s18o
5%
5'/.
Ss40
So
Proposed Fee
Pfoposed
Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p. 35
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Building Fees
Cost of Service Calculation - At Fully-Burdened Hourly Rate [a] Reinspection fee applies after the first re-inspection.
Ib] Fee applies to new construction, additions, tenant improvements, and residential remodels requiring building permits. [c] Fee applies to all permits.
X1.00
o.42
o.42
0.50 Est. City
Staff Labor
Hrs
s18O
s180
s180
s18o
Fu I 1y-
Bu rde ned
Hourly
S18o
s7s
$7s
Seo
Est. Cost
of Service Current Fee
Current
Cost
Recovery Unit Notes
Missed lnspection Fee
Duplicate Copy of Permit
Duplicate copy of certificate of occupancy
Fees for services Not Listed in this Fee schedule (per 1/2 hour) Violation Fees
investigation Fee For Work Done Without Permits
(ln addition to applicable permit fees)
Refunds
Refunds
a) Fees Erroneously Paid or Collected by the City
b) Refund of Plan Review Fees - Prior to Plan Review commencing c) Refund of Permit Fees - Prior to lnspection Commencing d) 180 Days After Payment of Fees
18 19
!4
15 15
77 Fee Description
roo%
100%
IOO%
700%
5180
s7s
s7s
S9o
equal to
permit fee
100% refund
up to 80% refund
up to 80% refund
no refund
Propo5ed Fee
Proposed
Cost
Recovery
Appendix B: p. 36
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
User and Reaulatorv Fees
Cost of Service Cslculations
Generol Plon / Zoning Code Update
DRAFT
Appendix B:p.37
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
lal; Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;Ib]
lal;[c]
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
Annual
s
s
s
s
100,000
62,500
100,000
226,776
5 489,276
1 20
8 5
s 2,000,000
5 soo,ooo
s soo,000
5 226,776
5 3,226,nG
General Plan Update
Housing Element
zoning Code
ln-House Maintenance
Total
Amortization /
Update
Frequency NotesDescri ption Tota Annual Cost Cost TVPe
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
cost of Service Calculation - General Plan Update / Zoning Code Update Costs Estimated Expenditures
Cost Allocation
Allocation Base
Fee at Full Cost Recovery
Cost Recovery Alternative Scenarios
Notes:
[a] Source: Conservative estimates of update costs. Amounts will likely be higher. [b] Target recovery of periodic costs, or portion of periodic costs, via General Plan/Zoning Code Update Fee. [cj Recover annual costs, or portion of annual costs, via standard permit and plan review fees [d] Assumes portion of General Plan/Zoning Code Update costs will continue to be paid via General Fund resources. [e] Amounts represents multi-year average of building permit fee collection. lal;[d]s 17s,000262500Periodic Costs
Target
Share to Recover Cost Recovery NotesDescr ption iotal
lels 1,910,7s8Estimated Building Permit Fees
Descri ptron N otesTota l
904
s
)
175,000
t,910,758
Target Recovery
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Total
NotesTotalDescnptio n
s
s
5 9"/.
1,910,758
17s,000
175,000
100.0006
s
)
5 50/o
r,910,754
95,538
175,000
s4.590/.
175,000
oo/o
7,970,754
O.000/6
% of Permit Fee
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Forecast Revenue
Annual Revenue Requirement
Cost Recovery
TotalDescrlption NotesTotalTotal
Appendix B: p. 38
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
User and Resulatorv Fees
Cost of Service Colculdtions
Development Specific Technology Enhoncements / Land Monagement Trocking DRAFT
Appendix B: p. 39
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
lal;Ib]
lal;[c]
lal; lcj
lal;Ic]
An n ual
Periodic
Periodic
Periodic
S 21o,ooo
s
s
s
)
40,000
10,000
150,000
10,000
S4o,ooo
sso,ooo
s7s0,o0o
sso,oo0
5890,000Total
Software and Licensing
Hardware Upgrades
lmplementation
Contingency (10%)
Amortization /
Lipdate
Frequency NoteTotaiDescriptlon Annual Cost Cost TyPe
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Study
cost of service calculation - Technology Enhancement Fee Estimated Expenditures
Cost Allocation
Allocation Base
Fee at Full cost Recovery
Current Cost Recovery
[a] Useful life and ongoing licensing costs, and annual revenues estimated by ClearSource. Amounts are intended to represent reasonable estimates. [b] Recover annual costs, or portion of annual costs, via standard permit and plan review fees [c] Target recovery of periodic costs, or portion of periodic costs, via Technology Fee. [d] Amounts represents multi-year average of building permit fee collection. 1000/.s 170,000Periodic Costs
Target
Share to Recover Cost RecoveryDescrip lion NotesTotal
Permit FeesEstimated Bui
Descri p'!lon NotesTotal
5 s
170,000
t,gLO,758
904
Target Recovery
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Total
TotalDescriptron N otes
s
s
s
90/o
L,970,758
170,000
170,000
100.00%
5%
1,pto,758
95,538
170,000
s6.20Y.
o%
1,910,758
170,000
o-o0%
% of Permit Fee
Estimated Building Permit Fees
Forecast Revenue
Annual Revenue R€quirement
Cost Recovery
Appendix B: p. 40
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
User and Reaulatorv Fees
Cost of Service Calculations
Allocation ol Citywide Overheod
DRAFT
Appendix B: p. 41
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
User and Regulatory Fee Analysis
Estimated Citwide Overhead (for Cost of Seruice Calculation Purposes OnlV) Central Seruice Center - General Fund Allocation lal
city Staffing Position Total [al,[b]
Estimated Citywide Alloc to Community Oevelopment Direct Seruice Units * This represents a conseryative indirect cost rate calculation. This estimate was developed for purposes of user and regulatory fee cost of seruice analysis. As part of day-to-day ope.ations, staff may categorize, assign, or quantify indirect costs using different criteria and methods. [a] Source: FY 23/24 adopted budget.
Ibl lndirect cost allocation basis is staffing levels of direct seruice departments. [c] Based oh feedback received from Community Development Department. Amounts intended to serye as reasonable estimates. 5177,437
s7,2s6,732
5L,234,3o9
S681,049
$886,s11
56,246,759
s1,674,868
s12,097,66s
city Council
City Manager
City Attorney
City Clerk
Human Resources
Management and Budget
Fleet Management
Total
Department Annua Expenses Notes
5 $
s
s
s
5 s
s
5 s
)
5 5
s
736,494
2,454,994
1,336,608
3,095,020
7,582,L07
1,621,660
327,333
s 12,097,65stoo%
ooA
oo/o
o%
o%
60,4
2Oo/.
0%
3%
o%
77%
260,4
8%
73%
13%
443.50
49.00 113,50
34.55 58.00
59.45 12.00
27.00 90.00
(47.00)
{s.00)
(4.00)
(4.00)
(3.00)
(6.00)
(2s.00)
5.00 4.00
4.00 3.00
27.OO
90.00 6.00
12.00 25.00
49.00 113.50
58.00 59.45
490.50
City Council
City Manager
City Attorney
city clerk
Community Development
Fire Department
Human Resources
Library
Management and Budget
Parks and Recreation
Police Department
Public Works
Water Resources
Solid Waste
Total
Adjustment for
Direct Svc Depts Adjusted Staffing Share of Cwrde oH
Onlv for cwide oH Alloc Alloc Cwide OH Alloc NotesTotalDepJrtment lcl
lcl
lcl
lcl
1oo%f s 736,498
5 5
s
s
,,iA 747,300
58,920
220,949
309,329
Building
code Enforcement
Engineering
Planning
Total
NotesDept/Division
Share of
Allocatlon
Share of
Al ocatron
Appendix B:p.42
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
APPENDIX C
PROPOSED FEES
CLEARSOURCE REPORT TO THE CITY OF FOLSOM t4Page 109
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
PLANNING FEES
G
1 AnnexationProcessing s17,ooo Deposit lal
# Description Fee Fee Structure
2 Appeal
a) Appeal of Staff Decision - Owner Occupied
b) Appeal of Staff Decision - by Developer/Other
c) Appeal of Commission Decision - Owner Occupied
d) Appeal of Commission Decision - by Developer/Other
s1,700
s3,4oo
$9,+oo
s6,8oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
tbl
tbl
tbl
tbt
3 Code Amendment s8,s00 Fixed Fee
4 Conditional Use Permit (CUP)
a) CUP Review (Major)
b) CUP Review (Minor)
c) CUP Modification
5s,100
s2,so0
s2,soo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
5 Condominium Conversion Fee s17,000 Fixed Fee
6 Design Review/Architectural Review
a) New Multi-Family/Commercial (Commission Level)
b) Minor Multi-Family/Commercial (Staff Level)
c) New Single and Two Family Dwelling
d) Minor Single and Two Family Dwelling
e) Historic District New Multi-Family/Commercial
f) Historic District Minor Multi-Family/Commercial
g) Historic District New Single Family, Two-Family Dwelling and ADU >800 sq. ft. and/or 16 ft. tall
h) Historic District Minor Single and Two Family Dwelling ss,1oo
ssoo
s8o0
s2so
Ss,1oo
s2so
s3,400
s2so
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
7 DevelopmentAgreementProcessing s1o,o00 Deposit lal
8 Entertainment Permit s2oo Fixed Fee
9 Environmental Review
a) Environmental lmpact Review & Report
b) Environmental Mitigation Program Monitoring
c) lnitial Environmental Study/Assessment
d) Notice of CEQA Determination
$1o,ooo
s7,ooo
s7,000
s3oo
Deposit
Deposit
Deposit
Fixed Fee
lal,Ic]
lal, Ic]
lal, Ic]
Appendix C: p. 1Page 110
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
PLANNING FEES
General Plan
a) General Plan Amendment < 5 acres
b) General Plan Amendment 5 or more acres
10 $1o,ooo
513,000
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fee Structure# Description
t'J, Home Occupation Permit Fee s60 Fixed Fee
12 lndoor Marijuana Cultivation Permit ssoo Fixed Fee
13 Landmark Tree Classification s3s0 Fixed Fee
14 Landmark Tree Declassification s1,800 Fixed Fee Id1
15 Large Family DaY Care Home sloo Fixed Fee
15 Lot Line Adjustment/Parcel Merger - Planning s1,ooo Fixed Fee lel t7 Non-Residential Plan Check Fee 10% of building permit fee Fixed Fee 18 Opinion on a Planning Matter s200 Fixed Fee
19 Preliminary Project Review s1,ooo Fixed Fee
20 Planned Development
a) Planned DeveloPment Review
i) Base Fee
ii) Plus, Per Acre Fee
b) Planned Development Extension Review
c) Planned Development Modification Review
s10,oo0
ssoo
s3,000
ss,o00
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
2t Rezoning Request
a) Rezoning Request Review - 5 acres or less
b) Rezoning Request Review - 5+ acres
slo,ooo
$13,000
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
22 Sidewalk Vendor Permit ss0 Fixed Fee
Appendix C: p. 2Page 111
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
PLANNING FEES
23 G
Signs
a) Sign Permit - Staff
b) Sign Permit Extension
c) Special Event Sign Permit
d) Historic District Sign Review {Staff Level)
e) Historic District Sign Review (Commission Level)
f) Planned Development Sign Permit
g) Temporary Sign Permit
h) On-Site Subdivision Signs
i) Off-Site Subdivision Signs
i) base fee
ii) refundable deposit - Per sign
j) Off-Site Weekend Directional Signs
i) base fee
ii) refundable deposit
k) Uniform Sign Program
$1so
sloo
s100
51so
s8oo
s2,soo
s40
s2oo
s30o
ssoo
s3oo
s200
s4o0
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Deposit
Fixed Fee
Deposit
Fixed Fee
# Description Fee Fee Structure
24 Site Design Review
a) Site Design Review
b) Site Design Review - Planning Commission
s400
ss,1oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
25 Special Event Permit
a) Special Event Permit
b) Over 1,000 People Per Day (charged per thousand)
c) Consultation Meeting for Events Over 1,000 People Per Day d) Traffic Conffol Plan or Street Closure for New Event e) Traffic Control Plan or Street Closure for Repeated Event (No Substantial Changes from Previous Year)
f) AlcohoI/ABC Permit
g) Fire lnspections
h) Block Party Permit
ssoo
s432
s20o
$700
54oo
5324
s4oo
sloo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
tfl
Specific Plan
a) Specific Plan Review
b) Specific Plan Amendment Review
s1s,s00
s1o,3oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
26 Appendix C: p. 3Page 112
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
PLANNING FEES
27 Street Name Review/Change
G
Seoo Fixed Fee
# Description Fee Fee Structure
28 Temporary Outdoor Dining
a) lnitial Permit (Additional Revocable Permit Fees Apply) b) Renewal
s280
s140
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
28 Temporary Use Permit s3oo Fixed Fee
29 Tentative Map/Parcel/Subdivision Map
a)Tentative Parcel Map Review
b) Tentative Map Amendment Review
c) Tentative Map Extension Review
d) Tentative Subdivision Map Review
i) Base Fee
ii) Plus, Per Lot Fee
5t,too
ss,100
s4,3oo
s8,5oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Feess0
30 Unattended Donation Box
a) lnitial Permit
b) Renewal
Ssoo
s100
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
31 Variance
a) Variance Review - Single Family Dwelling
b) Variance Review - Other
s2,soo
ss,1oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
32 Zoning Verification Review s4oo Fixed Fee
33 s2oo Per Hour
* ln addition to amounts shown above, applicant is responsible for all costs of outside agency review/serviCes, including but not limited to, LAFCO, Board of Equalization Fees, Department of Fish and Wildlife Fees, etc' [a] The amount shown represents the initial deposit and minimum fee payable. The City reserves the ri8ht to collect additional amounts when costs exceed minimum fee/initial deposit. Any requests for additional amounts due will be supported by time & materials billings. [b] Depending on the subject of the appeal, specialized expertise may be solicited, at the expense of the applicant, for the purpose of providing input to the City Manager, Planning Commission, other Commission or Board, or City Council. [c] Applicant shall be responsible for additional costs of preparation of the required environment document. [d] For non-development related declassifications, the fee will be waived if the urban forester finds/agrees the tree is dead/dying with no reasonable expectation of recovery and poses a risk to persons/property. For development-related declassifications, fee is amount shown. [e] Additional fees apply for Engineering review. See Engineering fee schedule' [f] Special events that require additional resources beyond those covered the scope of these fees will be charged on an hourly basis.
Appendix C: p. 4
For Services Requested of City Staff which have no fee listed in this Master Fee Schedule, the City Manager or the City Manager's designee shall determine the appropriate fee based on the following hourly rates for staff time involved in the service or activity (per hour)
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
1 Assessment District/CFD Payment Processing
G
s4,800 Fixed Fee
Fee Fee Structure# Description
2 Encroachment Permit
a) Encroachment Contract for Parking/Staging
i. 0-5 calendar days
ii. 7-L4 calendar days
iii. 14+days
b) Utility Work/Connections (l ndividual Permits)
i. Wet Utilities/Service Connections
ii. Dry Utilities (per site/location)
iii. Misc. per LF of Trench in ROWCity Easement
iv. lnspections and Testing
c) Driveways/Minor Frontage lmprovements
i. Residential (per drivewaY)
ii. Commercial (Per drivewaY)
d) Pools and Spas (in ground)
e) Traffic Control/Equipment Staging
i. lsolated Site
ii. Multiple Closures/Staging
f) Permit Extensions
i. Active Work Zone
ii. lnactive Work Zone (4+ months inactivity)
g) Annual Permits
i. Wet Utilities
ii. Dry Utilities
iii. General Maintenance/Misc. (Not Wet or Dry Utilities) iv. Vegetation Management (Utilities)
v. Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (paid annually)
h) Long Term/Revocable Encroachments (new permits only) $400
s40o
ss0
s10o
s2o0
s5o0
s2oo
ss.o0
s4oo
s400
s2oo
s1,000
s2oo
s6,000
s20,800
T&M
s2o,8oo
s200
s2,4oo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
$so
lal
tbl
Appendix C: p. 5Page 114
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
Engineering and Landscape Plan Check and lnspection
a) Project Value Up to 510,000
b) Project Value 510,001 - 5100,000
i. Base Fee for First 510,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 5t Up to 5100,000
c) s100,001 - s1s9,999
i. Base Fee for First S100,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l 51 Up to 5200,000
d) s200,001 - s299,99e
i. Base Fee for First S200,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l $r Up to 5300,000
e) 5300,000 or more
i. Base Fee for First 5300,000
ii. Fee for Each Add'l S1
f) Landscape Plan Review
i. Non-Development
ii. Custom Home
iii. Production Home/Subdivision
iv. Model Home ComPlex
v. Commercial, Streetscape, Other Development Projects
vi. Development and Civil lmprovements - Landscaping
Review
G
3 8.00%
ssoo
8.OO%
s8,ooo
6.4Oo/o
s14,400
4.80%
s19,200
3.60%
s20o
s1,1oo
s2,3oo
s1,4oo
s1,6oo
s2,100
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fee Structure# Description
4 Final Map and Parcel MaP
a) Parcel Map Check
b) Final Map Check
i. Base Fee
ii. Plus, Per Lot Fee
c) Final Map Amendment/Certificate of Correction
s8,0s0
s11,soo
5t44
$6,soo
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
5 Right of Ways (ROW) and Easements
a) Review of ROWEasement Documents
b) ROWEasement Abandonment
s3,4s0
ss,7so
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
5 SubdivisionAgreementProcessing ss,7s0 Fixed Fee
7 Transportation Permit
a) Permit
b) Annual Permit
s16
5s0
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Appendix C: p. 6Page 115
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT PERMIT FEES
Tree Removal/Work Permit
a) Permitted Removal/Work
i. Existing Occupied Structure
a. 0-2 Trees
b. 3+ Trees: See New Construction Rate Below
c. "ln Decline" Tree
ii. New Construction (e.g, Custom Home, Subdivision, Parcel a.0-4Trees
b. 5+ Trees
iii. Misc.
b) w/o Permit (Does not include mitigation)
Double the Permit Rate
G
8 sLoo
sr.,2oo
sloo
s1,2oo
$t,+oo + 10% per tree
s200
2x permit amount
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
Fixed Fee
# Description Fee Fee Structure
9 10
11 12
13 t4
15 1"6
17 18
Other Fees for Service
Research of Engineering Records
Miscellaneous Engineering Services
Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent)
Revisions
After Hours lnspection (per hour) (2-hour minimum)
Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
Missed lnspection Fee
Expedited Services Fee
Residential Landscape Review
Technical Assistance/Third Party Review or lnspection
$2oo
s2oo
s2oo
s2oo
5240
sloo
s1o0
1.5x Regular Fee
Hourly Rate of Arborist
Actual Cost
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Per Hour
Each
Each
Fixed Fee
Per Hour
T&M
[a] Use time and materials with initial deposit to be determined by City Engineer, based on anticipated scope of work.
Ib] Encroachment agreement required in addition to insurance (e.g', parklets).
Appendix C: p. 7Page 116
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
BUILDING FEES
A. Fees for Commonly Requested Building Permit Types. Fees shown in this section (Section A.) include all applicable inspection, and plan review fees. Additional permit processing fees apply, Additional fees may apply for services provided by other City Departments (e.8' Planning Review), and Fees Collected on Behalf of Other Agencies le.g. State of California)' @r
1 HVAC Change-Out - Residential s22s per permit
Fee Description Fee Charge Basis
2 Water Heater Change-Out - Residential s180 per permit 3 Residential Re-Roof 5360 per permit
4 Siding Replacement s31s per permit
5 Service Panel Upgrade - Residential s270 per permit
6 Battery Backup Storage s360 per permit
7 Electric Vehicle Charger s360 per permit
8 Generator s36o per permit
9 Residential Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee for L5kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Additional kW above 15kW
b) Permit
s200
s1s
s2so
tal,tbl
tal,tbl
lal,Ib]
per permit
per permit
per permit
N
N
N
10 Commercial Solar Photovoltaic System - Solar Permit
a) Plan Review
i) Base Fee 50kW or Less
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kW above 50kW up to 250kW
ii) Fee for Each Add'l kW above 250kW
b) Permit
$444
57 Ss
ssss
Ial,tbl
lal,tbl
tal,tbl
Ial,tbl
per permit
per permit
per permit
per permit
N
N
N
N
tI Pool Solar s180 per permit
12 Swimming Pool Replaster / Equipment Change-Out s4so per permit 13 Swimming Pool Remodel (e.8., Changing Pool Shape,
Adding Cabo Shelf, etc.)
ssoo per permit
t4 Retaining Wall
a) One Type of Retaining Wall Type/Configuration
b) Each Additional Wall iype/Configuration
ss40
5270
per permit
per permit
15 Window / Sliding Glass Door - Retrofit / Repair
a) UptoS
b) Per Window Over 5 Windows
s180
$so
per permit
per permit
16 Fences Requiring a Building Permit s36o per permit
t7 Electrical and lrrigation Pedestals per pedestal s27o per permit 18 Detached and Attached ADUs s4,s00 per permit
19 Junior ADUs s2,160 per permit
[a] Total fees shall not exceed amounts outlined in California Government Code 66015(a)(1). [b] The City will not collect additional permit processing fees. Amounts shown are total amount due for permit processing, plan review, and permit.
Appendix C: p. 8Page 117
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
. Project valuations shall be based on the total value of all construction work, including all finish work, roofing, electrical, plumbing, heating, air conditioning,elevators,fire-extinguishingsystemsandanyotherpermanentequipment. lf,intheopinionoftheBuildingOfficial,thevaluationis underestimated on the application, the permitshatl be denied, unlessthe applicant can show detailed estimatesto meetthe approval ofthe Building Official. Final building permit valuation shall be set by the Building Official. For determining project valuations for new construction, the Building Official may use data published by the lnternational Code Council (lCC) (building valuation data table, typically updated in February and August of each year). The final building permit valuation shall be set at an amount that allows the City to recover its costs of applicant plan check, permit and inspection activities.
City of Folsom
BUILDING FEES
Determination of Valuation for Fee-Setting Purposes
Note: For construction projects with permit fees calculated using Section B, additional fees apply for permit issuance. Additional fees may apply for services provided by other City Departments (e.g, Planning Review), and Fees Collected on Behalf of Other Agencies 1e.8. State of California). Additional fees apply for plan review, when applicable.
B. permit Fee for New BuildinFs, Additions, Tenant lmprovements. Residential Remodels. and Combined Mechanical, Electrical' and/or Plumbins Permits
r
St to
5z,oot to
s2,ooo
52s,ooo
s13s.00
5135.00 for the first 52,000 plus
s2s,001 sso,ooo 5360.00 for the first 525,000
sso,ool Sloo,ooo 5530.00 for the first 550,000 plus
S1oo,oo1 SSoo,ooo 51,080.00 for the first 5100,000 plus $s00,001 $1,000,000 s3,960.00 for the first $500,000 plus 51,ooo,oo1 to Ss,ooo,ooo 57,200.00 for the first 51,000,000 plus S5,ooo,oo1 and up s28,800.00 for the first s5,000,000 plus for each add'l S1,000 or fraction thereof,
to and includine 525,000
for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof,
to and includinC 550,000
for each add'l S1,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including 5100,000
for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including 5500,000
for each add'l S1,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including 51,000,000
for each add'l 51,000 or fraction thereof,
to and including 55,000,000
for each additional S1,000 or fraction
thereof over S5,000,000
to
to
to
to
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
plus
s9.78
s10.80
se.oo
s7.2o
s6.48
ss.40
s4.11
Permit FeeTotal Valuation
Appendix C: p. 9Page 118
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
BUIIDIN6 FEES
D. Building Plan Review Fees
1 Building Plan Check Fees - Building
a) Plan Review Fee, if applicable
b) Expedited Plan Check - At Application Submittal (when applicable)
c) Tract Home / Master Plan Construction (Production Units) d) Production Permit for Multi-family permit
e) Production Permit for Fire permits and other misc. permits f) Alternate Materials and Methods Review (per hour)
g) Excess Plan Review Fee (4th and subsequent) (per hour) h) Revisions to an Approved Permit (per hour)
i) Deferred Submittal (per hour)
@E
80%
1.5x standard plan check fee
20% of standard plan check fee
S1,440
s4s0
S180
S18o
s180
S180
lal N
tbl
N
N
Activity Description Charge Basis
When applicable, plan check fees shall be paid at the time of application for a building permit.
The plan checking fee is in addition to the building permit fee [a] lncludes up to three plan checks. The City will bill hourly for additional plan review required' [b] For identical buildings built by the same builder on the same lot or in the same tract and for which building permits are issued at the same time.
Appendix C: p. 10Page 119
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
Activity Description
City of Folsom
BUILDING FEES
E. Other Fees
1 Permit Processing Fee
2 Strong Motion lnstrumentation (SMl) Fee Calculation
a) Residential
b) Commercial
3 Building Standards (SB 1473) Fee Calculation (Valuation) a) 51 - S2s,000
b) s2s,oo1 - sso,ooo
c) Sso,ool - STs,ooo
d) $7s,oo1 - $roo,ooo
e) Each Add'l $25,000 or fraction thereof
4 General Plan and Zoning Code Update Fee (percent of building permit fee) 5 Technology Fee (percent of permit fee)
6 Temporary Certificate of Occupancy (per 30 Days)
7 Permit Extension
8 Permit Reactivation Fee
a) Reactivation Fee if All lnspections Have Been Performed and Approved Up to But Not lncluding Final lnspection
b) Reactivation Fee - All other Scenarios
i) Permit Expired Up to One Year
ii) Permit Expired More than One Year
@r
57s
50.50 or valuation x ,00013
S0.50 or valuation x .00028
S180
50% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
100% of Original Base Building Permit Fee
N
N
51 s2
s3
s4
N
N
N
N
N
N
N
s1Add
s%
5%
tbl
tb1
Ss4o
So
N
N
9 Permit Reissuance Fee
10 Damaged Building Survey (Fire, Flood, Vehicle Damage, Etc.) (per hour) Other Fees
11 Phased lnspection Fee (per inspection)
12 After Hours lnspection (per hour) (4-hour minimum)
13 Re-inspection Fee (2nd Time or More) (each)
14 Missed lnspection Fee
15 Duplicate Copy of Permit
15 Duplicate Copy of Certificate of Occupancy
17 Fees for Services Not Listed in this Fee Schedule (per 1/2 hour) S180
Srso
$rso
s216
S180
S18o
S7s
57s
5e0
lal
Appendix G: p. 11Page 120
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
BUILDING FEES
E. Other Fees
Violation Fees
18 lnvestigation Fee For Work Done Without Permits
(ln addition to applicable permit fees)
Refunds
19 Refunds
a) Fees Erroneously Paid or Collected by the City
b) Refund of Plan Review Fees - Prior to Plan Review Commencing c) Refund of Permit Fees - Prior to lnspection Commencing d) 180 Days After Payment of Fees
equal to
permit fee
100% refund
up to 80% refund
up to 80% refund
no refund
N
N
N
N
N
[a] Reinspection fee applies after the first re-inspection.
Ib] Fee applies to new construction, additions, tenant improvements, and residential remodels requiring building permits. [c] Fee applies to all permits.
Activity Description
Appendix C: p. 12Page 121
03/12/2024 Item No.5.
City of Folsom
BUILDING FEES
Building Valuation Data Table
Group (2021 lnternational Building Code) IA IE ilA il! lilA Iil! IV VA VB A-1 Assembly, theaters, with stage
A-1 Assembly, theaters, without stage
A-2 Assembly, nightclubs
A-2 Assembly, restaurants, bars, banquet halls
A-3 Assembly, churches
A-3 Assembly, general, community halls, libraries, museums A-4 Assembly, arenas
B Business
E Educational
F-1 Factory and industrial, moderate hazard
F-2 Factory and industrial, low hazard
H-1 High Hazard, explosives
H234 High Hazard
H.5 HPM
l-1 lnstitutional, supervised environment
l-2 lnstitutional, hospitals
l-2 lnstitutional, nursing homes
l-3 lnstitutional, restrained
l-4 lnstitutional, day care facilities
M Mercantile
R-1 Residential, hotels
R-2 Residential, multiple family
R-3 Residential, one- and two-family
R-4 Residential, care/assisted living facilities
S-1 Storage, moderate hazard
S-2 Storage, Iow hazard
U Utility, miscellaneous
335.89
307.39
269.94
268.94
311.88
266.07
306.39
260.69
273.46
160.20
159.20
l49.46
749.46
260.69
262.22
434.t5
302.01
295.86
262.22
201.31
264.67
221.32
209.61
262.22
148.46
t47.48
tI4.09
324.58
296.08
261.93
260.93
300.57
254.76
295.08
251.13
263.96
L52.78
t5r.78
t42.04
L42.O4
251.13
252.95
424.59
292.45
286.31
252.95
193.36
255.4L
2r2.06
203.74
252.95
t4L.O4
r40.04
L07.37
315.94
284.44
254.48
252.44
292.93
246.12
286.44
241.86
253.62
r43.34
r43.34
133.60
133.60
241.86
244.37
4L5.32
283.18
277.O3
244.37
r84.97
246.7')
203.42
198.94
244.31
131.6C
131.5C
99.8S
304.93
276.42
245.85
244.85
280.91
235.10
275.42
231.65
245.04
138.64
137.64
r27.90
727.90
231.65
235.67
405.r2
272.97
266.83
235.67
177.28
238.13
194.78
195.r2
235.67
126.9A
r25.94
95.60 286.87
258.37
230.56
22a.56
263.30
216.33
256.37
2ro.99
22a.69
123.55
L23.55
Lt4.t2
rt4.t2
zlo.99
215.42
383.35
253.83
247.95
21-5.42
16t.72
218.35
175.96
188.41
215.42
Ltz.L2
ttz.I2
85.13 278.OO
249.50
223.99
222.99
254.43
208.46
248.50
202.73
2r7.00
L77.41
rt6.4r
106.97
!06.97
202,73
209.47
0.00 0.00
238.59
209.47
156.15
272.40
170.01
181.45
209.47
105.97
704.97
79.54 295.62
267.r2
237.O2
236.02
271.60
225.80
266.12
222.56
236.61
132.48
131.48
!2t.74
12t.74
222.56
235.71
395.02
263.88
257.74
235.77
168.45
23a.rt
794.82
t91.77
235.77
120.74
119.74
90.9S
266.02
237.5t
209,57
207.57
242.45
195.47
235,51
L86.27
200.35
702.44
t02.44
93.00 93.00
t86.27
193.82
358.57
229.05
223.L]
193.82
r40.73
196.75
154.36
175.86
193.82
91.0C
91.0C
67.39 257.55
229.05
202.79
201.79
233.98
188,01
224.O5
t77.8t
193.94
95.93 94.93
0.00 85.50
t77.87
787.73
0.0c
0.0c
212.77
787.73
134.95
190.67
L48.28
15s.57
t87.73
84.5C
83.5(
64.79 Appendix C: p. 13Page 122
03/12/2024 Item No.5.