Agenda packet, regular meeting, first session — Gilroy City Council, June 20, 2022 (part 2 of 3)

Section 3. That the vote requirement for the measure to pass is a majority (50% +1) of the votes cast.

Section 4. The City Council hereby requests the Board of Supervisors of the County of Santa Clara, California to permit the Registrar of Voters of Santa Clara County to render to the City of Gilroy such services as the City Clerk of the City of Gilroy may request relating to the conduct of the above-described Special Municipal Election with respect to the following matters:

Coordination of election precincts, polling places, voting booths, voting systems and election officers; printing and mailing of voter pamphlets; preparation of the tabulation of the results of votes cast and all other services necessary to conduct an election.

Section 5. The City Council hereby requests, consents to, and orders that the Registrar of Voters of the County of Santa Clara consolidate the Special Municipal Election called and ordered to be held on November 8, 2022 with any other election that may be held on that date.

Section 6. The City Council hereby authorized the Board of Supervisors of Santa Clara County, California to canvass the returns of the Special Municipal Election.

Section 7. The City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to reimburse the County of Santa Clara in full for any of the above-mentioned services which may be performed by the Registrar of Voters, upon presentation of a bill to the City, with funds already appropriated to the City Clerk for election purposes.

Section 8. The City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to take all actions necessary to facilitate the Special Municipal Election in the time frame specified herein and comply with provisions of the Elections Code of the State of California, City Charter, Ordinances, Resolutions and Policies regarding the conduct of the Special Municipal Election.

Section 9. Pursuant to Section 12111 of the California Elections Code, the City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to: (a) cause a synopsis of the proposed measure to be published at least one time not later than one week before the election in the Gilroy Dispatch, a newspaper of general circulation within the City of Gilroy; (b) consolidate the Notice of Measure to be Voted with the Notice of Election into a single notice; (c) cause copies of the full text of the proposed measure set forth in the attached Exhibit A to be printed in the Voter Information Portion of the Sample Ballot; (d) cause copies of the Sample Ballot to be mailed to each of the qualified electors of the City of Gilroy; and (e) do all other things required by law to submit the specified measure above to the electors of the City of Gilroy at the Special Municipal Election, including causing the full text of the proposed measure to be made available in the Office of the City Clerk at no cost and posted on the City Clerk's website.

11.1.a
Packet Pg. 155 Attachment: DRAFT Resolution - Charter Amendment (2022) (3821 : Charter Amendment 2022)

Resolution No. 2022-XX
Charter Amendment
City Council Regular Meeting | June 20, 2022

Page 3 of 3 ends

Section 10. Pursuant to Sections 9282 and 9285 of the California Elections Code, the City Council hereby approves the submittal of direct arguments for and against the ballot measure, if any, [and authorizes the City Council or any member or members of the Council to author and submit a ballot measure argument in favor of the ballot measure] [but determines that rebuttal arguments will not be allowed] OR [and approves the submittal of rebuttal arguments in response to arguments for and against the ballot measure and authorizes the City Council or any member or members of the City Council to author and submit a rebuttal, if any.]

Section 11. The City Council hereby directs the City Clerk to transmit a copy of the measure qualifying for placement on the ballot to the City Attorney for preparation of an impartial analysis.

Section 12. The City Council hereby acknowledges that the consolidated election will be held and conducted in the manner prescribed in California Elections Code Section 10418.

Section 13. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of June, 2022 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:

Marie Blankley, Mayor

ATTEST:

_______________________
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk

11.1.a
Packet Pg. 156 Attachment: DRAFT Resolution - Charter Amendment (2022) (3821 : Charter Amendment 2022)

EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX

4890-7867-2418v1
NON-BC\04706083
That the citizens of the City of Gilroy do hereby enact the following amendment to the City Charter:

1. That Section 1109 of the City Charter be amended to read as follows:

Section 1109. Contracts for Public Projects.

Every public project involving an expenditure of City monies of more than Thirty-Five Thousand Dollars ($35,000) greater than the amount allowed for informal bidding pursuant to Section 22032 of the California Public Contract Code, or successor statute, as the same may be amended from time to time, for the construction or improvement of public buildings, works, drains, sewers, utilities, parks and streets (exclusive of projects for maintenance and repair of streets) shall be let by contract to the lowest responsive and responsible bidder, or through best value contracting, after notice by one or more of the following methods:

A. pPublication in athe official newspaper of general circulation in the City by one or more insertions, the first of which shall be at least seven (7) days before the time for opening bids;
B. Publication electronically so that the notice is publicly available to the general community of potential bidders;
C. Publication in a trade journal specified by the Uniform Cost Accounting Act Commission by one or more insertions, the first of which shall be at least seven (7) days before the time for opening bids; or
A.D. By using a list of qualified contractors, which includes responsible contractors who have bid in the past and qualified contractors who ask to be included on the list..

The Council may reject any and all bids, if deemed excessive or unsatisfactory and readvertise for bids, or provide for the work to be procured in the open market, but in no case of open market procurements shall the price paid be higher than the responsible low bid rejected.

The Council, without advertising for bids, following the adoption of a resolution declaring that the project can be performed more economically by day labor, or the materials or supplies furnished at a lower price in the open market, may have the project done in the manner stated without further complying with the provisions of this section.

For contracts equal to or in excess of One Million Dollars ($1,000,000) the Council may negotiate and award a Design-Build Contract without formal public bidding if the Council finds that such a contract would save money or result in faster project completion. The process for competitively selecting a design-build contractor shall be consistent with the California Public Contract Code.

2. That Section 1111 of the City Charter be amended to read as follows:

11.1.b
Packet Pg. 157 Attachment: DRAFT Resolution - Charter Amendment (2022) - Exhibit A (3821 : Charter Amendment 2022)

EXHIBIT A TO RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX

4890-7867-2418v1
NON-BC\04706083
Section 1111. Contracts for Official Advertising.

The Cityouncil shall procure services contract annually for the official advertising in a newspaper of general circulation in of the City in accordance with the California Government Code and the City’s purchasing policyfor the ensuing fiscal year. In the event there is more than one daily newspaper of general circulation in the City, the Council shall advertise for sealed bids for the work. The advertisement shall set forth distinctly and specifically the work contemplated to be done. The Council shall let the contract for such official advertising to the lowest responsible bidder publishing a daily newspaper of general circulation in the City which has been in existence at least one year at the time of awarding the contract; provided, however, that the Council may reject any and all bids and re-advertise in its discretion.

3. That Section 1503(h) of the City Charter be amended to read as follows:
(h) “Newspaper of general circulation within the City” is as defined by the Government Code of the State of California.

11.1.b
Packet Pg. 158 Attachment: DRAFT Resolution - Charter Amendment (2022) - Exhibit A (3821 : Charter Amendment 2022)

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Approval of Third Extension to the Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Sharks Sports & Entertainment, LLC to Fully Assess the Potential of Having the Sharks Organization
Operate a New Indoor Recreational Facility
Meeting Date: June 20, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Adam Henig, Recreation Manager
Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Strategic Plan Goals

☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization

☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
 Promote Economic
Development
Activities

☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All

☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION

Approve the Third Amendment to Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement with the Sharks Sports & Entertainment, LLC, and authorize the City Administrator to execute the Amendment

DISCUSSION
The City of Gilroy has an opportunity to continue its exclusivity agreement with a private firm, Sharks Sports & Entertainment, LLC (“SSE”). At this time, before the City can continue in business discussions, it is necessary to extend the exclusivity period.

11.2 Packet Pg. 159

Exclusivity is the condition in which each party grants the other party sole rights regarding a particular business function or product sale and/or purchase. Put another way, exclusivity is an arrangement between two parties wherein neither will explore entering a similar deal with other parties for a certain period.

The original ENA with SSE is dated as of May 6, 2019 and Council has twice approved extensions of the ENA, which currently will expire on July 1, 2022 . Approval of extending the exclusivity agreement (six additional months) would give both parties the opportunity to conduct additional due diligence. During this time staff would continue to take a close look at the details of the proposal and determine if it is advantageous for the community, or not, and how best to proceed.

Both the City and SSE have already allocated resources towards a potential facility agreement. Further talks would enable the City and SSE to finalize a potential project, identify financing and determine the ongoing operational relationship. The final agreement would be presented to Council for consideration of app roval.

While project details are still under discussion, the facility would likely include opportunities for a variety of sporting programs and events to include ice hockey and would be located off Monterey Road, as part of the Gilroy Sports Park. The project would provide recreational opportunities for all Gilroy residents and those travelling to Gilroy for tournaments, competitions, and other events.

Having the proposed facility operated by a national brand with a proven track record of operating recreational ice facilities would be a great opportunity for economic development and has the potential to heighten our position in the region as a destination location and increase travel and tourism to Gilroy. The development of the Gilroy Sports Center is consistent with the Council goals related to making Gilroy a Recreation Destination.

Discussions during this preliminary period are non -binding and provide the opportunity to fully assess the potential of the proposed facility in Gilroy.

ALTERNATIVES
Do not approve the Third Amendment to the ENA. This is not recommended because it would necessarily stop any further business discussions.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
No fiscal impacts are expected from the extension of the exclusivity period. Any recommendations for future Council actions that necessitate expenditures will be discussed as part of those staff reports.

NEXT STEPS

11.2 Packet Pg. 160

If approved, the City will continue to work with the SSE on the development of a financing plan and other documentation for the development of the project, all of which would ultimately be submitted to the City Council for consideration.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
If terms are reached, during project design work the City will conduct public outreach sessions to gain public input.

Attachments:

1. Third Amendment to ENA Between Gilroy and SSE

2. Public Comment - Beauchamp, Marc

3. Public Comment - Squatritto, Lorrin

11.2 Packet Pg. 161

11.2.a
Packet Pg. 162 Attachment: Third Amendment to ENA Between Gilroy and SSE (3842 : Sharks Exclusivity Agreement)

11.2.a
Packet Pg. 163 Attachment: Third Amendment to ENA Between Gilroy and SSE (3842 : Sharks Exclusivity Agreement)

From:Marc Beauchamp
To:City Clerk
Subject:EXTERNAL - Gilroy City Council Meeting 06/20/2022 agenda item 11.2 and 11.3 regarding Sharks Ice Date:Wednesday, June 15, 2022 2:36:37 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

City Clerk, Council City Members and Mayor:

I am writing to encourage the city to approve the non-binding term sheet to bring a Shark's Ice to Gilroy. I have been a Gilroy resident for 10 years. I'm originally from Canada and have played hockey most of my life. I have played in the Shark's Ice adult league in San Jose from 2000 to 2020. I would definitely take on the sport again if a facility in Gilroy was opened. I'm also father to 2 teenage boys who have always wanted to play hockey. The distance to the facility in San Jose has been a deterrent to joining the sport. Having this in our city would absolutely make that dream possible for them.

Respectfully,
Marc Beauchamp

11.2.b
Packet Pg. 164 Attachment: Public Comment - Beauchamp, Marc (3842 : Sharks Exclusivity Agreement)

From:Lorrin Squatritto
To:City Clerk
Subject:EXTERNAL - Comment for June 20th Meeting re: potential ice rink Date:Thursday, June 16, 2022 9:05:31 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.

Dear Council Members,
I am ecstatic to see that the city is working hard to make the ice rink at the Gilroy Sports Park a reality. My family and I have longed for opportunities such as skating and ice hockey close to home for a long time now.

It also pleases me that the city is being mindful of the financial risks associated with such a large project. However, the level of risk aversion shown thus far has me concerned that the city is limiting our opportunity for a world-class facility. As it is currently outlined, does the plan for facility allow for future expansion of the facility and what it offers, should the ice rinks prove very popular and city budgets allow? In addition to wanting a high quality indoor pool, it would be great to have other indoor recreation facilities that accommodate things like soccer, futsal, or even an American Ninja Warrior style gym. Such a facility would not only add incredible value to our community for local families, but it would be able to draw groups for tournaments that would help support local hotels and restaurants. When considering the financial impacts of this project, please make sure you are not limiting important possibilities for the community at large. Thank you.

Sincerely,
Lorrin Squatritto
Sent from my iPhone

11.2.c
Packet Pg. 165 Attachment: Public Comment - Squatritto, Lorrin (3842 : Sharks Exclusivity Agreement)

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Gilroy Ice Center Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval Meeting Date: June 20, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Strategic Plan Goals

☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization

 Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
 Promote Economic
Development
Activities

☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All

 Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION

Approve a non-binding term sheet with Sharks Sports & Entertainment, LLC (SSE) for the development of a two sheet ice facility at the Gilroy Sports Park.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
After nearly three years of discussion the City of Gilroy (“City”) and Sharks Sports & Entertainment, LLC (SSE) have reached a mutual agreement for the framework to negotiate an operating agreement for the Gilroy Ice Center. Council is requested to approve the Term Sheet, which is a non-binding document that describes basic agreed upon deal points that could be included in the final operating agreement.

POLICY DISCUSSION

11.3 Packet Pg. 166

Should the City and SSE agree to the non -binding term sheet for the development of the Gilroy Ice Center?

BACKGROUND
The City and SSE entered into the first exclusivity agreement on May 6, 2019, to expire in May of 2020. This was a requirement to proceed with business discussions and for each party to conduct their due diligence concerning the Gilroy Ice Center.

The intent was to reach deal-points of a viable framework to proceed towards an agreement. At the November 4, 2019 Council meeting, Council adopted a budget amendment of $1.842 million for the planning and environmental analysis of Gilroy Sports Park Phase 3, with the majority of funding for an agriculture easement for agriculture impact mitigation of future development of Phase 3 at the Gilroy Sports Park, including the potential ice rink facility with SSE. That agriculture easement was approved on January 6, 2020, with the easement ultimately emplaced at the Van Dyke Ranch on Crews Road near Gilroy.

The City Council created on February 3, 2020, the Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee – Sharks Sports and Entertainment. This Ad Hoc Committee discuss ed the conceptual facility to potentially include opportunities for a variety of sporting programs and events to include ice hockey and would be located off Monterey Road, as part of the Gilroy Sports Park. The purpose of the Ad Hoc Committee was to enable Council Members to participate in an official capacity in preliminary negotiations with SSE with the Committee terminating with the culmination of the one-year exclusivity period.

At the Planning Commission Meeting of May 21, 2020, the Commission held a public hearing for the amendment of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for Gilroy Sports Park Phase III, and recommended adoption to the City Council. The recommended amendment to the EIR was approved by the City Council on June 15, 2020, at its regular meeting.

In the intervening time since the initial exclusivity period, the City and SSE have continued to negotiate in good faith. The Council has approved two prior extensions of the negotiating period, with the latest extension expiring on July 1, 2022. An extension request to the exclusivity period/agreement is also being considered at the June 20, 2022, City Council meeting.

The development of the Gilroy Ice Center has been identified as one of the three recreational economic development initiatives for the City and the Gilroy Economic Development Partnership.

ANALYSIS
The City and SSE have worked diligently over the last few years to develop a non- binding term sheet that allows both entities to continue efforts to bring an ice facility to the Gilroy Sports Park. The term sheet (attachment) serves as a basis for more

11.3 Packet Pg. 167

detailed, legally binding documents. As the City and SSE have reach ed an agreement on the framework of a potential deal in the term sheet, normally a binding agreement would be drawn up, incorporating any changes in the term sheet in the final negotiations. However, efforts towards that final agreement will be paused due to two significant milestones that must be achieved beforehand: consideration by the City Council to place on the November 2022 General Election Ballot a measure that would permit “design-build” projects and the completion of the Surplus Lands Act (SLA) process with the California Housing and Community Development Department (HCD).

Design-Build
The current standard bidding process requires separate contracts for different elements of the project. This is considered an antiquate approach and typical of charters of that era (1940s). In the development of a public works project over $35,000 in costs, the City would have to procure a designer to design engineered drawings and plans of a project. Once the design is complete, the City then must competitively bid for a contractor to conduct the construction. The additional bid time can add three to six months, possibly more, to the timeframe to complete construction. Additionally, as the project is constructed, there can be conflicts between the designer and the contractor regarding construction and design, which can lead to administrative and operational challenges in completing the project, which can drive up costs and delay the project.

Design-Build is a form of contract where the City would only have to bid a project with a contractor, which would form a team including a designer, and manage all subcontractors for design and construction. This technique is used extensively in the private sector and is now allowed by State law in the public sector. Other cities including San Jose and Santa Cruz with similar provisions have amended their charters to include design-build.

Design-build could potentially save money and significant time on a project. A Design - Build contract may not be useful in all projects but having the option for the right projects can be essential to delivering a timely and cost -efficient project. In a separate Council action, City staff is proposing charter amendment language that would allow for Design-Build contracting for public projects that cost $1 million or more and follow the California Public Contract Code for Design-Build competitive bidding.

Surplus Lands Act
The State Surplus Land Act (Government Code Section 54220 et seq) applies generally to any “disposition” of city-owned property. It has various exceptions, but generally requires a city to notify housing developers and public agencies that may be int erested in open-space uses of the land prior to any disposition of city-owned property – this is the process that the City completed for the Hecker Pass Tourism Gateway (also known as the land adjacent to Gilroy Gardens).

11.3 Packet Pg. 168

The recipients of the notice of surplus land declaration have 60 days to indicate their interest in the property; if legitimate responses are received, then the city must negotiate with them (but is not required to reach a deal) in a 90-day period.

The enforcement agency is State HCD, and they have recently been given expanded powers to interpret and enforce the SLA. The penalty for a first violation is a fine equal to 30% of the price received for the land. HCD's interpretations of the scope of the SLA tend to be very expansive as they have determined that a property lease of more than five years is a "disposition" under the SLA. This determination is relevant to the Term Sheet as it outlines a potential operating agreement of more than five years.

As the Term Sheet outlines, the project is to receive funding through a bond issuance and in order to sell bonds, it will be necessary to conclude that compliance with the SLA has been met. To date, the City and SSE have been proceeding on the basis that the parties would be under an exemption that applies to Exclusive Negotiating Agreements entered prior to Sept. 30, 2019. However, to use this exemption, the disposition must occur by Dec. 31, 2022.

In order to shorten project timeline and save on costs, both the City and SSE are considering the advantages of using a Design-Build process for the ice facility, a process that would require a Gilroy City Charter amendment which, pending City Council approval, could potentially go on the Nov. 8, 2022 ballot.

As the results of the ballot measure would not be known until November 2022 and the results of the election not certified until December 2022 , it is not realistic to expect that the final agreement would be in place prior to the Dec. 31, 2022 cutoff date . SSE has requested instead that the City go through the full SLA process outlined above, to ensure that there will not be an issue of SLA compliance.

The process would require that the City and SSE pause any further discussions concerning the development of the ice facility and that the Cou ncil declare the land surplus on July 5, 2022, then start the notification process (during which the City would suspend any negotiations with the Sharks). The City would likely know by mid- September whether any qualifying responses to the surplus declaration are received.

Due Diligence
Over the course of exploring the viability of the Gilroy Ice Center, both the City and SSE utilized the expertise of outside consultants to evaluate the financial viability, analyze risk, and identify potential challenges for such a large project.

Initially, the City and SSE discussed the potential of the project including additional amenities such as an indoor pool and recreational facility, however the analysis did not support such facilities for several reasons. The primary reason being the location of the facility.

11.3 Packet Pg. 169

Furthermore, operation of such facilities is not within the core function of SSE and thus SSE and City staff agreed that in order to increase the opportunity for success, efforts and resources should be focused on an ice facility.

The Term Sheet is not binding, and the City is under no legal obligation to eventually enter into an operating agreement with SSE. The Term Sheet is an informal method to establish basic parameters of the final agreement as the Gilroy version of this transaction is similar to one entered between the City of San Jose and SSE (Solar4America Ice Rink).

The City utilized a team of outside economic analyst s, the City’s independent financial advisor, and bond counsel to help the City through the due diligence process and make sure that any recommendations were/are based on solid information that minimizes the risk to the City while providing a unique recreational opportunity for the Gilroy community.

Financially, SSE is inheriting the risk as they are responsible for debt service payments on behalf of the City and have conducted their own market analysis to determine if revenues from the facility will be adequate to support the debt service. SSE is also being required to provide a letter of credit as insurance for two-years’ worth of debt service payments.

In any transaction, there are no absolute guarantees, but given the provisions in the term-sheet, the past performance of SSE in other locations and the reputation of the entire SSE organization, City staff has found what it believes is a good financial partner with a history of being a good community servant.

As part of the due diligence, City staff also worked with a City Council Ad Hoc Committee and visited a similar facility in Southern California. Staff has checked references and discussed this opportunity with other ice facility operators all of which spoke positively of their relationship with SSE.

Non-Binding Term Sheet
The Term Sheet includes 25 different provisions for development of an Operating Agreement for the Gilroy Ice Center. Below is a summary of each provision, however greater detail is provided in the attached draft Term Sheet.

1. Description of Project and Facility
• Gilroy Sports Park (5925 Monterey Frontage Road)
• Two NHL-sized ice rinks
• 387 parking spaces

2. Scope of Term Sheet

11.3 Packet Pg. 170

• Addresses the construction of the proposed Project and SSEs long term operation of the facility

3. Owner – the City of Gilroy

4. Operator – Sharks Sports and Entertainment LLC

5. Construction Financing Plan (in greater detail in the Financial Impact section) • Developed at City expense through taxable municipal revenue bonds • City fully reimbursed through payments from SSE
• “Project” cost not to exceed $30 million
• Finance Costs description
• Support Services description which includes the City’s obligation to fund/finance fees, permits, public improvements required by the mitigation monitoring report costs (MMRP), survey work, habit conservation plan fees, off-site utility main lines and installation of two traffic signals which is expected to cost approximately $4 million, funded with accumulated impact fees, not the General Fund

6. Design Build Charter Amendment, Selection of Architect/Contractor, Consulting/Operating Agreements
• City may determine to proceed with Charter amendment
• SSE Consulting fee of $270,000 for design and operational matters • $225,000 Design fees split between City/SSE. City/SSE reimbursed if project is constructed. If project is not constructed City reimburses SSE for their portion - not through the General Fund.

7. Term of agreement equal to the bond repayment period (30-35 years)

8. Annual Base Payments
• SSE makes base payments equal to debt service on the bonds • SSE pays City “spread” of 50 basis points over the interest rate on the principal balance to offset financing-related expenses
• Additional payments are made to Capital Reserve Account

9. Operating Revenues - SSE is entitled to all revenues generated by the facility • Operating Expenses – SSE is responsible for costs associated with the orderly operation of the facility

11.3 Packet Pg. 171

10. Permitted use – SSE has the right to operate the facility as an ice rink with ancillary uses

11. Programming/Use of Facility

12. Ordinary Maintenance and Repairs are the responsibility of SSE

13. Capital Repairs/Replacements/Enhancements are the responsibility of SSE

14. Extraordinary Repair Work – responsibility of the City to include structural elements of the building (disbursed through the Capital Reserve Account)

15. Employee Requirements – SSE required to comply with all applicable City ordinances

16. Community Benefit – SSE to schedule programs at appropriate/convenient times for the public including free general admission for up to 5,000 at -risk youth annually

17. Fee Schedule – commensurate with fees at other SSE locations

18. Building Naming Rights – SSE may sell naming rights but must include “Gilroy” in in the name

19. Expansion Potential – SSE seeks the potential to expand the facility with two additional ice rinks. City to notify SSE if land is to be utilized for other purposes.

20. Letter of Credit – SSE to provide a two-year letter of credit (approximately $4 million) as security for the debt service. Letter may eventually be returned should debt service coverage provisions be met.

21. Transfer/Assignment of agreement to another party requires City approval

22. Parking
• 387 cost-free parking spaces
• SSE permitted to charge for parking (with City approval) for scheduled tournaments and special events

23. Property Insurance – City responsible for property insurance, approximately $40,000 annually

24. Waiver of Subrogation – SSE responsible for insurance for operations; both parties release the other party to recover damages for certain provisions

25. Damage and Destruction – provisions should the Ice Center become damaged or destroyed
As previously stated, the City and SSE are not entering a legally binding agreement, however the general parameters of the final negotiated operating agreement are expected to encompass those listed above. Some modifications will be required, and

11.3 Packet Pg. 172

the City Council will have final approval of all terms and con ditions of the agreement. It is not until that time that the City will make a legal commitment to the project.

ALTERNATIVES
Council could decide to not approve the Term Sheet and thus the project would cease to be considered. Council could also make adjustments and revisions to the Term Sheet; however, those amendments would be subject to the approval of SSE.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
At this time, it is anticipated that the facility will cost approximately $25 million to construct ($31 million with debt interest) which will be funded by revenues generated by the facility.

The City will contribute off-site improvements which will be funded through the City’s Public Facilities Impact and Traffic Impact Funds which both have adequate fund balance to support the approximately $4 million of anticipated improvements needed for the project.

The City’s General Fund will not be required to provide funding during this project as improvements required to be constructed by the City will be funded by the impact f unds mentioned above. All General Fund contributions will be in the form of staff time and waived permit fees which is typically of projects developed by the City, constructed on City land, and owned by the City. In total, these costs are expected to amount to approximately $500,000.

The municipal bonds for the project will be secured by payments from SSE with a two- year letter of credit equal to two-years of debt service payments utilized as collateral.

As the City will be the owner of the facility, it is issuing municipal bonds for financing the project and is thus required to provide its own security for the payment, thus the City would pledge the Gilroy Sports Park as collateral. This practice is similar to other financing structures like the Gilroy Police station and Corporation Yard that at one time or another have been used as collateral for the City’s various bond issuances.

It is important to note that under the conditions of the non-binding Term Sheet, the Sharks would be under a legal obligation to make the debt service payments on behalf of the City. This arrangement is similar to others that SSE has previously entered into in their other facilities.

To date, this project has never been described as “economically -driven” as neither City nor SSE expect make significant financial gains with this project. The funding is designed for cost-recovery and capital reserves. The City does not expect to receive a significant direct economic impact; however it can be assumed that indirect econ omic impact will be gained due to increase hotels stays and other travel -related revenues that the City is expected to receive.

11.3 Packet Pg. 173

For the City, this is an opportunity to provide a recreational facility for not only for the Gilroy community but also serve as a regional recreational destination. For SSE, this is an opportunity to also invest in the community and fulfill a core value of their organization which is to “grow the game.”

CONCLUSION
This is a unique opportunity for the City to enter into an agreement with a national brand willing to invest their time and expertise into the Community. There are many steps left in this process, but the approval of the draft Term Sheet would be the first official declaration of support for the project by the City Council.

NEXT STEPS
Should Council approve the staff recommendation, all negotiations and development with SSE would pause until the completion of the Surplus Lands Act process and the successful passage of a potential City Charter amendment to permit a “design-build” procurement process.

PUBLIC OUTREACH

City staff has previously conducted a Town Hall with residents to discuss th is project.

Should the City and SSE continue negotiations after completion of the SLA process, an extensive public outreach campaign will be conducted.

Attachments:

1. Non Binding Term Sheet

2. Exhibit A to Term Sheet

3. Ice Center Project Description

4. Public Comment - Beauchamp, Marc

5. Public Comment - Squatritto, Lorrin

6. Public Comment - Welka, Paul

11.3 Packet Pg. 174

Page 1 ends

NON-BINDING TERM SHEET FOR AN

OPERATING AGREEMENT FOR GILROY ICE CENTER

Ver. June 10, 2022

1. Description of
Project and
Facility
The “Project” consists of City’s construction of the following improvements in the Phase III area of the Gilroy Sports Park located at 5925 Monterey Frontage Road, Gilroy CA 95020:
(a) a building (“Building”)of approximately 100,000 square feet on two levels, containing (i) two NHL-sized ice rinks and ancillary uses including spectator seating, training rooms and conditioning area, multi-purpose rooms, offices, and support areas, as well as a restaurant, snack bar and pro shop (the “Ice Center”)and (ii) all furnishings, trade fixtures, and equipment located within the Building and necessary for the operation or use of the Ice Center (“FF&E”), including scoreboards, dasher boards and netting, lighting and sound equipment, and storage systems for the Ice Center (but excluding any personal property owned by SSE, including pro shop merchandise and business office furniture and proprietary software, computer hardware, and telecommunications systems that are interconnected or integrated with SSE’s operations in other facilities), and (b) a parking area of approximately 387 spaces (“Parking Area”) . The Ice Center, FF&E and Parking Area as constructed or installed by City are collectively referred to herein as the “Facility”. A description and site plan of the Facility are attached as Exhibit A hereto.

2. Scope of Term
Sheet
This document (“Term Sheet”) addresses the construction and financing of the proposed Project and, following completion thereof, SSE’s proposed long term operation of the Facility, including right to use overflow parking at other adjacent City-owned parking lots.

Approval of this Term Sheet does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). Before the Facility can be approved or permitted for construction, the City as lead agency will undertake appropriate CEQA review, as well as all other appropriate City processes, the fulfillment of which shall be in the City’s sole and absolute discretion. The Parties expressly disclaim any duty to reach formal agreement upon the documents mentioned in Section 6 hereof imposed upon them by approval of this Term Sheet or by their past or future conduct. The Parties continue to be bound by the terms of the existing Exclusive Negotiating Rights Agreement between the parties dated May 6, 2019, as amended.

3. Owner The City of Gilroy, a municipal corporation (“City”)

4. Operator Sharks Sports & Entertainment LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, or its designated subsidiary (“SSE”)

5. Construction
Financing Plan

The Project would be developed by the City at its expense. City would issue taxable municipal revenue bonds to finance the costs of the Project (“Project Costs”) and the costs of issuing the revenue bonds (“Finance Costs”). The Project Costs and the Finance Costs would be fully reimbursed to the City, with interest, through the Annual Base Payments to be made by SSE under the Operating Agreement, as described in Section 8 below. In order for the Project to be economically feasible, the parties have determined that the Project Costs and the Finance Costs together should not exceed $30.0 Million and that the interest rate on the revenue bonds should not exceed 6.0%. SSE and City will work together in good faith to

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 175 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 2 ends

refine the budgets for the Project Costs and the Finance Costs to the mutual satisfaction of both parties.

In addition, the City would separately fund and/or provide (through its own workforce) the following services in support of the Project (the “Support Services”), without reimbursement via the bond financing or otherwise:

Definitions:

The term “Project Costs” includes the following costs for the design, permitting and construction/installation of the Ice Center, FF&E, and Parking Area improvements (all of which are public improvements benefitting the City):
(i) Design, engineering, LEED consulting, and other consulting services, including the Consulting Fee to be paid to SSE and the Design Fees to be funded by City and SSE as described in Section 6;
(ii) Compliance with applicable MMRP conditions set forth in the EIR (air quality control measures for construction activities; LEED Silver building standards; on-site landscaping within stream setback buffer; and storm drainage plan);
(iii) Water, sanitary sewer and other utility connection fees; (iv) Third party special testing and inspection services; (v) Grading, utility trenching and installation of utility facilities;

(vi) Landscaping and arborist services;
(vii) Project management services;
(viii) Premiums for insurance and bonds required by the Contract Documents; (ix) Labor, supervision, materials, supplies, hauling, and temporary facilities; (x) Purchasing and installing furniture, fixtures, and equipment; and (i) Building and site signage.

The term “Finance Costs” includes all costs related to the underwriting, issuance and sale of the revenue bonds, including costs for the following items:
(i) Bond Counsel/Disclosure Counsel fees and expenses;
(ii) Municipal advisor fees and expenses;
(iii) Rating agency fees;
(iv) Trustee fees and expenses;
(v) The establishment of a Capitalized Interest Fund;
(vi) The establishment of a Debt Service Reserve Fund, if required; and (vii) Underwriter’s discount, if applicable.

The term “Support Services” includes all other services and work paid for or provided by City related to the Project, such as the following:

(i) Planning applications and approvals, including necessary CEQA clearance;

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 176 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 3 ends

(ii) City Charter and Ordinance amendments to allow design-build Project delivery;
(iii) Habitat Conservation Plan fees, traffic mitigation fees, in-lieu fees, and other development fees or exactions;
(iv) Preparation and bidding of Construction Contract documents; (v) Building permit applications and inspections;
(vi) Construction of public improvements required by the MMRP, such as traffic signals, traffic lanes, and other street improvements; (vii) Improvements to off-site utility main lines, including any upsizing or extensions that may be needed;
(viii) Economic feasibility studies; and
(ix) Survey work to establish the boundary lines of the subject parcel and/or any required utility easements.

6. Design Build
Charter
Amendment;
Selection of
Architect and
Contractor;
Consulting
Services and
Operating
Agreements
In order to utilize a design build project delivery method, City has determined an amendment of the City Charter will be required. City may determine to prepare and present to the voters of the City for consideration of approval at the November 2022 election a proposed ballot measure amending applicable provisions of the City Charter to authorize the design build project delivery method.

If such a Charter amendment is passed, the Parties may determine to cooperate on using a design build process for the design, engineering and construction of the Project.

Subject to the approval of this Term Sheet, the parties will work together in good faith to negotiate and draft the following formal agreements. However, the Parties acknowledge that for compliance with the State Surplus Land Act, they may be obliged to cease negotiations until that Act has been fully complied with, at which time negotiations may resume and the Consulting Fee shall commence.

(a) A Consulting Agreement, pursuant to which City would pay SSE a flat fee of $270,000 (“Consulting Fee”) for consulting on design and operational matters during the pre- construction phase and providing Project management services during the construction phase. The Consulting Fee would be payable in 18 equal monthly installments of $15,000 each over the anticipated 18 month pre-construction and construction period. (b) Assuming the choice of a design build process, a Reimbursement Agreement, pursuant to which SSE would agree to advance a portion of the costs and fees (“Design Fees”) payable to the design professionals and other consultants and contractors that City will retain to prepare the basis of design documents which will be used for design/build contractors to bid upon a design build contract for design and construction of the Project.

The Design Fees which are estimated at $225,000 shall initially be funded 50% by City and 50% by SSE. If the Project is constructed the full amount of the Design Fees shall be included in the Project Costs and reimbursed to City and SSE out of the revenue bond proceeds. If the Project is not constructed, City shall reimburse SSE the full amount of the Design Fees advanced by SSE within the time and in the manner set forth in the Reimbursement Agreement.

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 177 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 4 ends

(c) An Operating Agreement (“Agreement”), pursuant to which SSE would have the certain rights and obligations pursuant to the Agreement to operate the Facility for the term, subject to the operating covenants and other terms and provisions thereof. The Agreement is expected to be generally consistent with the provisions below, but would include additional details, definitions and clarifications. 7. Initial Term; Extensions; Hold
Over
The initial term of the Agreement would commence upon City’s completion of the Project, and would continue for approximately 30 or 35 full fiscal years thereafter (the “Initial Term”). The Initial Term is anticipated to equal the repayment period of the City Debt Service obligation. SSE shall have successive options to extend the term in increments of three or more years, provided that the total term, including the Initial Term and all extension option terms, shall not exceed 55 years.

Upon the expiration of the term, as it may be extended by SSE through exercise of one or more extension options, the Agreement will automatically be renewed upon the same terms and conditions on a year-to-year basis unless terminated by either party upon not less than one year’s notice.

8. Annual Base
Payments and
Additional
Payments
SSE would make Annual Payments to City , as follows:

(a) Initial Term Base Payment: Annual Base Payments for the first 30 or 35 years of the Initial Term shall be payable to the City pursuant to a fixed payment schedule (“Payment Schedule”) to be attached to the Agreement. The aggregate of all Annual Base Payments will be equivalent to the aggregate of all of City’s Debt Service obligations on the revenue bonds (assuming a fixed interest rate and principal payments that will be fully amortized at the final maturity date), and will be paid in installments that are sufficient to timely fund City’s scheduled Debt Service payments under the revenue bonds.

The parties anticipate that repayment of the City Debt Service obligation will commence following the expected date of Project completion and gradually increase over a 5-year Project stabilization period, with the exact amounts and dates of each payment to be set forth in the Payment Schedule. Prior to Project completion, it is expected that City’s Debt Service will be paid from a “Capitalized Interest Fund” that will be funded by the bond issue as part of the Finance Costs.

(b) Extension Term Base Payment: The Annual Base Payments for the extension option terms shall be determined only as of the commencement of the 1st extended term, based on mutual agreement or appraisal of the fair market use value (“FMUV”) of the Ice Center, taking into consideration all of the following:

• The then-existing improvements will continue to be operated as a publicly-accessible ice rink facility.
• The Agreement obligates the operator to operate the Ice Center for the benefit of the public, including community-based programming and community benefit requirements.
• The Annual Base Payment for all extension option terms (approximately 20 or 25 years in total) would be established upon exercise of the first extension option, with

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 178 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 5 ends

specified market rate and/or inflation increases over the remaining as of yet unexercised option terms.
• No commissions, improvement allowances or other incentives or concessions would be provided by the City.
• The goodwill generated by SSE at the Facility would not be considered a factor in determining the FMUV of the Facility.
• Any Capital Enhancements (defined below) paid for exclusively by SSE would not be considered in determining the condition and quality of the Facility.

The City would commission the appraisal. If SSE disputes the determination of FMUV then SSE shall commission a second appraisal. If the FMUV determinations of the two appraisals are within 10% of the lower of the two appraisals, then the Annual Base Payment for the extension option terms shall be the average of the two. If the values are not within 10% of the lower of the two appraisals then the first two appraisers shall appoint a third appraiser who shall select one of their two appraisals as the final determination of FMUV.

(c) Additional Payments: In addition to the Annual Base Payments, during the Initial Term (but not any extended terms) SSE will pay City, in periodic installments (payable at the same time Annual Base Payments are due), an amount equal to a “spread” of 50 basis points (0.50%) over the interest rate on the principal balance of each installment of revenue bonds being paid by the City (“Additional Payments”). The exact amounts and dates of each installment of Additional Payments shall be set forth on the Payment Schedule to be attached to the Agreement.

Additional Payments shall first be used to pay costs and expenses associated with the ongoing administration of the revenue bonds, including rating agency fees, trustee fees, consulting fees, and other City administrative expenses associated with the Project. Any remaining Additional Payments shall be deposited into an interest-bearing special fund (“Capital Reserve Account”) and used only to pay for the following:

• Extraordinary Repair Work;
• Uninsured losses (including payment of deductibles or restoration costs) following a casualty;
• Capital Enhancements, to the extent the City Council approves a contribution to the cost thereof; or
• Any other alterations or FF&E for the Facility as authorized by the City Council.

Any funds remaining in the Capital Reserve Account at the end of the Initial Term shall be distributed to SSE to pay for Capital Repairs and Replacements (defined in Section 13 below) made by SSE during the last five years of the Initial Term, subject to City’s approval of a CapEx Plan for such Capital Repairs and Replacements.

Any funds remaining in the Capital Reserve Account following payment for such Capital Repairs and Replacements shall remain the sole property of the City.

9. Operating
Revenues;
SSE shall be entitled to all “Operating Revenues”, meaning all income, receipts, fees and other revenues generated by the operation of the Facility, including revenues from use or

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 179 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 6 ends

Operating
Expenses
license agreements, sub-operating agreements, concessions, food and beverage sales, retail sales, naming rights, advertising, image rights, signage, branding, broadcast or other media distribution rights, websites, social media platforms, mobile applications, special promotions, and the like. SSE shall be responsible for all expenses payable in connection with the orderly and efficient administration, management, and operation of the Facility (“Operating Expenses”), including the cost of water, gas, and electrical utility services, which shall be separately metered for the Facility.

10. Permitted Use Subject to the operating covenants and other provisions of the Operating Agreement, SSE would have the exclusive right to operate and use the Facility exclusively as an ice rink with ancillary uses, including pro shop, snack bar, party rooms, training rooms, skate rental etc., and parking in accordance with SSE’s customary practices at similar facilities.

SSE may conduct its operations through its own employees, or through affiliates, contractors, subtenants, licensees, concessionaires or other vendors, provided that in all cases SSE shall be primarily responsible for the operations of the Facility consistent with the requirements of the Agreement.

11. Programming;
Use of Facility
SSE will maintain a balanced and diverse schedule of programs of hockey, figure skating, public skating, ice dancing and other ice-related activities at the Ice Center, similar to its program at its other ice center facilities. Operating times would generally be between 5:30 am and 1:00 am twelve months a year, based on demand and economics. Upon reasonable request, SSE will meet with City to discuss any operational concerns or issues. The City understands that the Ice Center will need to be temporarily closed from time to time during the construction of certain Capital Repairs and Replacements and Capital Enhancements (defined in Section 13 below).

12. Ordinary
Maintenance and
Repairs
SSE will be responsible for Ordinary Maintenance and Repair of the Facility, including the Ice Center FF&E, as an Operating Expense of the Facility. “Ordinary Maintenance and Repair” means repairs, maintenance and other work necessary to keep the Facility (including the ice refrigeration system and all other Ice Center FF&E) functioning and in good order and repair.

Consistent with GAAP, Ordinary Maintenance and Repair includes: (A) routine maintenance and repair work that is typically performed at least once per year to maintain an asset in its current condition without substantially improving or extending the useful life of the asset; and (B) the purchase of parts and supplies that are typically used for one year or less, and are not expected to increase the useful life of an asset by more than one year.

13. Capital Repairs
and
Replacements;
Capital
Enhancements
SSE will be responsible for all Capital Repairs and Replacements to the Facility (excluding Extraordinary Repair Work as described in Section 14 below) in accordance with an annual Capital Expenditure Plan approved by the City following completion of the Project. The following terms have the definitions given below:

(a) “Capital Budget” means the budget for first year of the CapEx Plan, which when approved by the City shall constitute authorization for SSE to complete the Capital Repairs and Replacements described therein.

(b) “Capital Expenditure Plan” or “CapEx Plan” means a five-year itemized schedule of Capital Repairs and Replacements that SSE anticipates will need to be completed during

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 180 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 7 ends

the upcoming five Fiscal Years in order to maintain the Facility in the condition required by the Agreement.

(c) “Capital Repairs and Replacements” means all expenditures for renovation, repair, construction, acquisition or replacement of capital items included in the Facility which are subject to wearing out after a useful life and therefore typically can be forecasted and budgeted for. For example, Capital Repairs and Replacements would include replacement of roof coverings, carpeting, or mechanical equipment, or replacement of worn out Zambonis.

(d) “Capital Enhancements” means items of work that are not required to repair or replace worn out elements of the Ice Center, but are new improvements that are made to improve the quality, functioning, efficiency or competitiveness of the Ice Center.

Prior to each fiscal year, SSE would prepare and submit to City for its approval a 5-year CapEx Plan/Capital Budget. Following City’s approval, SSE shall make the Capital Repairs and Replacements identified in the Capital Budget, in accordance with the time frame indicated therein, subject to reasonable adjustments based upon unanticipated repairs and replacements and general business conditions.

SSE, at its option, may also make Capital Enhancements as identified in an approved Capital Budget, or as otherwise approved by the City.

SSE shall be responsible for all costs of making such Capital Repairs and Replacements and Capital Enhancements, without contribution by the City except as expressly stated in the Agreement.

All FF&E purchased by SSE that is essential to the operation of the Ice Center as a publicly- accessible ice rink facility shall immediately become the property of the City when installed within the Ice Center, subject to the rights of SSE to remove and replace the Ice Center FF&E as determined by SSE in its reasonable discretion consistent with good management practices.

14. Extraordinary
Repair Work
Except as otherwise provided in Section 13 with respect to SSE’s obligation to undertake Capital Repairs and Replacements, City, at its expense, will be solely responsible for repairs to structural elements of the Building or permanently installed, unexposed mechanical, electrical, and plumbing components that are not expected to wear out during the life of the Building (“Extraordinary Repair Work”). Except to the extent otherwise expressly provided in the Agreement, the costs of such Extraordinary Repair Work shall be paid through disbursements from the Capital Reserve Account (to be funded by SSE as described above) or, if there are insufficient funds in the Capital Reserve Account, from other City funding sources (without contribution by SSE).

15. City Employment
Programs and
Requirements
SSE will comply, at its cost, with all applicable City ordinances.

16. Community
Benefits
SSE shall schedule public skating at prime times convenient to the public and at other times as ice surfaces may be available.

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 181 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 8 ends

SSE will operate the Ice Center in such a manner as to encourage its use by all members of the public who are interested in recreational programs and activities on ice.

SSE will offer school-based programs for the benefit of the youth of Gilroy free general admission, skate rental and group instruction for up to 5,000 at-risk youth per year.

Consistent with the availability of and scheduling for the ice rinks, SSE will establish public skating periods and operate clinics for the public to learn how to skate on ice and to increase the ice-skating skills of interested people. SSE will offer programs to play ice hockey, figure skating, and speed skating as well as other ice oriented recreational activities.

As part of this ongoing scheduling and programming for the Ice Center, SSE shall provide regular time periods for practice sessions for youth engaged in figure skating and hockey.

SSE will establish youth ice hockey camps during the summer.

SSE, in its discretion, will provide equipment as needed and tuition waivers to programs and camps for youth that have demonstrated interest in and commitment to hockey and figure skating. SSE will coordinate its youth-oriented skating programs with the City’s Parks and Recreation Department.

Consistent with SSE’s rules and regulations regarding the use and scheduling of the Ice Center, City shall be entitled to non-exclusive use of the Ice Center or an individual room on an exclusive basis, without paying facility rental or admission fees, for up to fifty (50) hours per year, for any City purpose.

The Agreement will more specifically define and describe the above community benefit contributions.

17. Fee Schedules Fees will be commensurate with fees at other SSE locations. 18. Building Naming Rights and
Advertising Rights
SSE would be entitled to use the name “Sharks Ice at Gilroy” and the logo of the Sharks on Building and directional signage at the Ice Center, as well as in advertising, internal labeling of forms, certificates and paper products, digital uses, and general reference to the Ice Center.

Alternatively, SSE may sell the naming rights to the Building to a commercial sponsor, in which case SSE would have the right to utilize a name for the Building that incorporates the name of the sponsor, provided that SSE would continue to include “Gilroy” in the name.

Both the naming rights sponsor and the name of the Building would be subject to approval by the City not to be unreasonably withheld.

The Agreement would set forth specific requirements and procedures for obtaining approval of the naming rights sponsor and related exterior signage.

SSE would also have the right to sell advertising and branding opportunities within the Ice Center to SSE sponsors, provided such advertising is in good taste and consistent with good community standards, subject to approval by the City in its reasonable discretion.

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 182 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 9 ends

19. Expansion
Potential
SSE would like to have the potential to expand the Facility to include a phase 2 ice center with two or more additional NHL-sized ice rinks and ancillary uses including spectator seating, multi-purpose rooms, offices, support areas and/or snack bars, together with a sufficient number of additional parking spaces to support the added rinks. Such expansion is not part of this Term Sheet or the Agreement and would not be analyzed as part of the Project for CEQA purposes. The City will notify and consult with the Sharks regarding any improvements contemplated to the Sports Park that might affect such expansion potential.

The City would reserve full and complete discretion with respect to approval of any such future expansion.

20. Letter of Credit or
Security Deposit
As security for SSE’s payment obligations under the Agreement, SSE shall deliver to City either an irrevocable letter of credit in favor of City as the beneficiary thereof or a cash security deposit (or any combination of the two) (collectively, “Letter of Credit”) as described below.

As used herein, the following definitions shall apply:

“Two Year Letter of Credit” shall mean a Letter of Credit in an amount equal to the lesser of (i) approximately two years of Annual Base Payments at the fully stabilized Annual Base Payment amount, or (ii) $4.0 Million.

“One Year Letter of Credit” shall mean a Letter of Credit in an amount equal to the lesser of (i) approximately one year of Annual Base Payments at the fully stabilized Annual Base Payment amount, or (ii) $2.0 Million.

Initially, SSE shall deliver a Two Year Letter of Credit to the City. However, the Two Year Letter of Credit shall be reduced to a One Year Letter of Credit at such time as the Debt Service Coverage Ratio for the prior two (2) Fiscal Years is at least 1.25, as confirmed in writing by the City Administrator.

Furthermore, the One Year Letter of Credit shall be returned by City to SSE and SSE shall have no further obligation to maintain any Letter of Credit at such time as the Debt Service Coverage Ratio for the prior three (3) Fiscal Years is at least 1.50, as confirmed in writing by the City Administrator.

“Debt Service Coverage Ratio” means Qualified Net Operating Revenues (defined below) divided by the Annual Base Payment payable at the fully stabilized Base Payment amount, which formula can be depicted as follows:

Qualified Net Operating Revenues ÷ Annual Base Payment

“Qualified Net Operating Revenues” means the following difference: (i) all Operating Revenues for a Fiscal Year; less (ii) all Operating Expenses for a Fiscal Year, excluding only: (x) the Annual Base Payment and Additional Payment, (y) fees for the Letter of Credit, and (z) expenditures for Capital Repairs and Replacements and Capital Enhancements.

The Letter of Credit may be reduced or eliminated, as applicable, when the above conditions have been met; provided, however, the City Administrator may, by written notice to SSE, require that SSE increase or reinstate, as applicable, (i) the One Year Letter of Credit if the

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 183 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 10 ends

average annual Debt Service Coverage Ratio over the prior consecutive two Fiscal Years has been more than 1.25 but less than 1.50, or (ii) the Two Year Letter of Credit if the average annual Debt Service Coverage Ratio over the prior consecutive three Fiscal Years has been less than 1.25.

21. Transfers and
Assignments
At any time after completion of the Project, SSE shall have the right, subject to City’s approval which shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned or delayed, to assign the Agreement to another person or entity who has the experience, reputation and financial ability to perform the SSE’s duties under the Agreement.

City may consider any or all of the following in providing or withholding its consent: (i) financial capacity, (ii) reputation as to integrity, (iii) record and experience and qualifications in managing commercial ice centers meeting the applicable standard, and (iv) record and reputation in dealings with local government and community concerns.

22. Parking The Project would have approximately 387 parking spaces, with overflow parking at adjacent City facilities on a space available basis. During scheduled tournaments and other special events City shall cooperate with SSE to ensure that extra parking is available in overflow parking lots at no additional charge to SSE. SSE would be responsible for all costs of repairing, maintaining and operating the 387 parking spaces, as an Operating Expense of the Facility. Subject to City’s approval not to be unreasonably withheld, SSE may charge parking fees for scheduled tournaments and special events. Except as otherwise provided above, all parking would be free to customers of the Ice Center.

23. Property
Insurance
The City shall maintain a property insurance policy (or participate in an equivalent property risk management program) insuring the Facility, including the Ice Center (including FF&E) against all risks of physical loss (“Covered Loss”) including wind and flood, boiler, sprinkler leakage, terrorism, and hazardous materials contamination, but excluding earthquake. (a) Such policy or program (“Property Insurance”) shall provide that in the event of a Covered Loss, adjustment and payment of proceeds shall be based on Full Replacement Cost valuation. Deductibles shall be in such amounts as may be determined by the City in its discretion (but the City, and not SSE, shall be responsible for payment of all deductible amounts).
(b) The City’s Property Insurance will be primary with respect to the Facility, including Ice Center, and any policies of insurance that SSE may carry shall not contribute with the City’s policies. The City shall not be required to insure any personal property owned by SSE (which property is not included in FF&E as defined above). (c) On an annual basis, the City shall provide SSE with certificates of insurance (or equivalent documentation) evidencing the City’s compliance with its insurance obligations under the Agreement.
(d) If a Covered Loss occurs, the City shall take all commercially reasonable actions to collect all available proceeds as soon as is reasonably practicable, and to apply those proceeds for the repair of the Building, including Ice Center, unless the Agreement is terminated in accordance with the provisions under “Damage and Destruction” below

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 184 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Page 11 ends

24. Waiver of
Subrogation;
Indemnity and
limitation on
damages
SSE and the City shall agree to release the other party and waive their entire right to recover damages against the other party for loss or damage to the releasing party’s property arising out of or incident to the types of perils covered by the Property Insurance described above, notwithstanding the fact that such loss or damage may have resulted from the negligence of the released party’s employees or agents. Each party agrees to obtain from its insurance carriers or programs an appropriate “waiver of subrogation” provision as may be necessary to effectuate the intent of this provision.

SSE would agree to indemnify, defend and hold City harmless from and against any and all liabilities, claims, damages and costs arising out of operation of the Facilities by SSE; provided, however the foregoing indemnity would not apply to claims to the extent arising from the active negligence or intentional misconduct of City.

Neither party would have the right to recover any consequential or punitive damages in the event of a default by the other party.

25. Damage and
Destruction
If the Ice Center (including FF&E) is damaged or destroyed, then subject to the following terms and conditions, the City shall be required to repair the damaged Ice Center (including FF&E), unless there is a Shortfall.

As used herein, “Shortfall” means either (i) the amount by which the estimated cost of repair exceeds the sum of (A) the proceeds payable under the City’s Property Insurance (for a Covered Loss); plus (B) the applicable deductible amount payable by the City; or (ii) the entire cost of repair in the event of an earthquake or other loss that is not covered by the City’s Property Insurance.
(a) If City is required to repair the Ice Center (e.g., where the loss is covered by the Property Insurance), the City shall commence repair work as soon as reasonably practicable (but in all cases within 12 months after the Covered Loss) and shall diligently prosecute such work to completion.

(b) If the City is not required to repair the Ice Center (e.g., in the event of a Shortfall), then the City shall elect, within 30 days following receipt of an estimate of the repair costs, to either: (i) repair the Ice Center (in which case any Shortfall would be paid by the City from its own funds and the Agreement would continue), or (ii) terminate the Agreement.

However, the City’s election to terminate may be cancelled by SSE if SSE agrees to pay any Shortfall to repair the Ice Center, or agrees to continue to occupy the undamaged portions of the Ice Center.

(c) If SSE elects to pay the Shortfall to have City repair the Ice Center, the City shall be required to repair the Ice Center as soon as is reasonably practicable. The City shall use all available insurance proceeds for the cost of rebuilding and related work (such as clean up, project management, demolition, environmental mitigation, etc.), and SSE shall pay any Shortfall from its own funds.

11.3.a
Packet Pg. 185 Attachment: Non Binding Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

11.3.b
Packet Pg. 186 Attachment: Exhibit A to Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

11.3.bPacket Pg. 187Attachment: Exhibit A to Term Sheet (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

11.3.cPacket Pg. 188Attachment: Ice Center Project Description (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

11.3.cPacket Pg. 189Attachment: Ice Center Project Description (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

11.3.c
Packet Pg. 190 Attachment: Ice Center Project Description (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

11.3.c
Packet Pg. 191 Attachment: Ice Center Project Description (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

11.3.cPacket Pg. 192Attachment: Ice Center Project Description (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

City Clerk, Council City Members and Mayor:

Respectfully,
Marc Beauchamp

11.3.d
Packet Pg. 193 Attachment: Public Comment - Beauchamp, Marc (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

Sincerely,
Lorrin Squatritto
Sent from my iPhone

11.3.e
Packet Pg. 194 Attachment: Public Comment - Squatritto, Lorrin (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

11.3.f
Packet Pg. 195 Attachment: Public Comment - Welka, Paul (3852 : Sharks Ice Non-Binding Term Sheet Approval)

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Introduction of the Comprehensive User Fee Study and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Sections of Chapter 7 of the Gilroy City Code Entitled "Cost Comparison System for Fee and Service Charge Revenue"
Meeting Date: June 20, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Finance Department
Submitted By: Harjot Sangha, Finance Director
Prepared By: Harjot Sangha, Finance Director
Strategic Plan Goals

 Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization

☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities

☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All

☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION

1. Receive 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study report;

2. After the City Clerk reads the title of the ordinance, motion to waive further reading of the ordinance; and
b) Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy amending sections 7.3, 7.4, and 7.5 of Chapter 7 of the Gilroy City Code entitled "Cost Comparison System for Fee and Service Charge Revenue".

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

11.4 Packet Pg. 196

As part of its FY22 and FY23 workplan, staff has completed an update to the City’s Comprehensive User Fee Schedule. The City’s current fee schedule was last updated and adopted in 2014. The fee schedule establishes user fees charged for services rendered by various departments. The User Fee Study (“Study”) was made available to the community and frequent users of City services, such as developers and contr actors.

Staff conducted two community meetings, on June 9 th and June 16th, to solicit feedback.

In addition to adjusting the fees, staff is introducing an ordinance to amend sections of Chapter 7 of the Gilroy City Code, entitled “Cost Comparison System for Fee and Service Charge Revenue” for items outlined in the policy discussion below.

POLICY DISCUSSION
Should the City Council adopt an ordinance amending section of Chapter 7 of the Gilroy City Code, entitled “Cost Comparison System for Fee and Service Charge Revenue” to:

1. Annually adjust the fee schedule based on a consumer price index (CPI) to keep pace with the increases in cost of providing services and require a comprehensive fee to be conducted at least every five years.

2. Provide flexibility to exclude certain types of expenses not directly attributable to the cost of providing services when performing user fee calculations.

3. Update language pertaining to types of regulation, product, and service the City provides and related percentage of costs to be recovered for such services.

BACKGROUND
The City’s current fee schedule was last updated and adopted in 2014. In 2019, the City initiated a Study as part of its workplan. However, in 2020 the project was paused due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic which shifted the City’s priorities to addressing the challenges brought on by the pandemic. As part of the current biennial budget development process, staff included the completion of the user fee study project in its workplan. Over the last 10 months, staff re-engaged with the consultant (Willdan Financial Services), reviewed the 2019 draft fee study schedules, and worked with various departments to adjust the calculations based on budget and level of effort. This was needed as the 2019 update was based on p re-pandemic levels of staffing and service budgets.

ANALYSIS
The study’s objective is to help determine the full cost of the services the City provides.

The total cost of each service included in the analysis is based on the full cost of providing the service, including direct salaries and benefits, direct departmental costs, and indirect costs from central support services. The scope of the study encompasse d a review and calculation of fees charged by the following departments and fee groups:

General Administration, Finance, Wastewater, Community Development, Public Works, Recreation, Police, and Fire.

11.4 Packet Pg. 197

At the May 16th City Council meeting, Council received an update regarding the study which included information regarding the process and methodology utilized for the study, as well as what the Council and community can expect the recommendations to include: removal and addition of fees across departments, an inflationary factor to annually adjust the fees based on a consumer price index, and related amendment s to Chapter 7 of Gilroy City Code. A link to the May 16 th report is provided as an attachment.

The User Fee Study
The recommended fee schedules within the Study, Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis, include the description of the service/fee, the current fee, the full cost of providing the service related to that fee, the current subsidy, the recommended fee, and the net change in fee amount from the current fee. The recommended fees are set at 100% cost recovery for all service areas as required by the Gilroy City Code, with the exception of certain facility and park rental fees which are recommended to follow the current categorical subsidy based on whether the user is a Gilroy resident, a non -profit organization, or if the use is for a City/school event.

The table below provides a summary of the number of fees that were adjusted or remain unchanged by service area. Details of the adjustments are within the Appendix C of the Study.

Service Area
# of Fees
Increased
# of Fees
Decreased
# of New
Fees
Added
# of Fees
Unchanged
General
Administration 1 - 2 13
Finance 33 5 4 40
Wastewater 3 - 1 9
Public Works 5 1 8 96
Recreation 70 3 12 30
Fire 56 2 8 18
Police 20 6 - 28
Community
Development –
Building
114 38 50 16
Community
Development -
Planning
42 6 12 10
Average 38 9 12 29

11.4 Packet Pg. 198

The following analysis provides a summary of the results by Service Area on types of fees collected and any new fees proposed. The User Fee Study and the fee schedules included in Appendix C should be reviewed for additional information and details.

General Administration
The fees within the General Administration services includes general governance functions such as City Administrator, City Attorney, City Clerk, and Administrative Services. The fees within this service group are mostly related to document reproduction and miscellaneous fees related to special services/research requested.

Two new fees are recommended to be added, a document reproduction , and a notary fee set to the maximum amount as allowed by the Government Code 8211, current at $15. The majority of existing fees are recommended to follow current fee methodology of assessing the Department/Division’s hourly rate for the service.

Finance
The fees within the Finance services primarily include business license processing, water and wastewater utility services, and other miscellaneous fees such as returned check and/or delinquency charges. Four new fees are recommended to be added to the schedule which are pass-through costs from merchant processor for credit card and ACH/e-check type payments. The City currently absorbs the merchant processing fees and is recommending passing the cost onto the user of service s. The fee is 2.95% for non-utility payments, $3.50 for utility payments, and $0.75 per e-check/ACH transaction.

The implementation of the pass-through costs will coincide with the Tyler Munis (Enterprise Resource Planning-ERP) and Tyler EnerGov (permitting) systems being fully live and operational.

Wastewater
The fees within the Wastewater services relate primarily to the South County Regional Wastewater Authority (SCRWA) and include services related to pretreatment plan checks and other related inspections to regulate the wastewater discharge of specific commercial and industrial users of the plant as required by law. One new fee, re- inspection fee, is recommended to be added, established at $214 with a ½ hour minimum.

Public Works
The fees within the Public Works services primarily include subdivision map and improvement plan check and inspection, encroachment permits, oversize transportation permits, stormwater compliance, special staff analysis and reimbursement rates for storm, sewer, and water main pipes. Eight new fees are recommended to be added, five of which relate to Stormwater post construction Best Management Practice (BMP) as required by State law. The fees, ranging from $31 to $504, cover initial costs to accept

11.4 Packet Pg. 199

and enter postconstruction BMP information from new development to the State database, and to annually solicit, accept, review, monitor and report on the semi-annual inspections required. The City of Gilroy contracts with the City of Morgan Hill for such environmental services and these fees would help recover a portion of the stormwater compliance service costs paid to the City of Morgan Hill. Other new fees include miscellaneous services such as curb paining ($467) and driveway red tipping ($357).

Recreation
The fees within Recreation services primarily include facilities and park rental fees. Most of the fees are time-based and thus are increasing due to higher personnel costs. The current facilities and park rental fees are subsidized based on a 4 -tier scale, Categories A through D, where category D is 100% cost recovery, and categories A through C are subsidized for Gilroy residents, non-profit organizations, and City/School events. No change to the current methodology is recommended at this time, other than increases to the fees. Twelve new fees are recommended to be added, which cover two new park facilities currently not on the fee schedule (Christmas Hill - Park Side, and San Ysidro Picnic Pavilion), and a new fee for cancellation of park and field reservation is also recommended to be added at $64.

In 2020 a new approach was established for the recreation services where the General Fund contributes $1.5 million annually to be expended on programs that serve the needs of the City’s vulnerable population(s) including adaptive, special needs, senior center, youth center and volunteer programs. Any new programs identified by the division requires City Administrator approval to be accommodated within the existing $1.5 million funding or the program must demonstrate 100% cost recovery for consideration.

Fees for seasonal recreation classes and programs are recommended to follow the current practice where program offerings and related fees are adjusted seasona lly based on market analysis and consider fluctuations and trends in participation rates to attain cost recovery. A related ordinance amendment is also recommended, as discussed further below, to bring the City Code in line with current practice.

Fire
The fees within the Fire services primarily include fire prevention and hazardous materials permits, plan checks and inspections. Eight new fees are recommended to be added related to false alarms, additional permits and inspections for hazardous materials and above ground petroleum storage sites, with fees ranging from $193 up to $562.

Police
The fees within the Police services primarily include annual operational permits for certain types of businesses, animal control, vehicle impound/release, graffiti abatement, and other cost recovery items such as call backs, crime analysis services , and DUI

11.4 Packet Pg. 200

related cost recovery. No new fees are recommended to be added within Police services.

Community Development – Building
The fees within Community Development’s Building Division primarily include plan checks and permits related to building, roofing, electrical, mechanical, plumbing, grading, and other miscellaneous structures. A total of 50 new fees, ranging from $30 up to $2,426, are recommended to be added across various permits categories:
including solar and energy storage system permits, sign and monument, reproduction of documents, pool demolition, electrical permits related to electric vehicle charging, HVAC replacement, and permits related water and sewer re-piping.

For building permits, the valuation-based method is utilized, using the International Code Council (ICC) building valuation data table, adjusted regionally, to provide the average construction cost per square foot. The Building permits value table is recommended to increase by 3.8%, to achieve 100% cost recovery.

Community Development – Planning
The fees within Community Development’s Planning Division primarily include architectural and site reviews, conditional use permits, general plan and zoning review and amendments, environmental review, urban service area amendments, tentative maps, and other miscellaneous review and permits. Twelve new fees , ranging from $126 up to $5,712, are recommended to be added to include historic site demolition/alternation permit, signage permits, additional temporary and conditional use permits, zoning verification, Murray Las Animas overlay, and public noticing.

Ordinance
As mentioned in the policy consideration above, staff is recommending that the City Council introduce an ordinance amending sections of Chapter 7 of the Gilroy City Code, entitled “Cost Comparison System for Fee and Service Charge Revenue” to:

1. Annually adjust the fee schedule based on a consumer price index to keep pace with the increases in cost of provide services and require a comprehensive fee study to be conducted at least every five years.

2. Provide flexibility to exclude certain types of expenses not directly attributable to the cost of providing service when performing user fee calculations.

3. Update language pertaining to types of regulation, product, and service the City provides and related percentage of costs to be recovered for such services.

To effectuate the above, three sections of the code are recommended to be updated:

Section 7.3 –outlines the various expenditure elements to be included in the calculation of the fee and service charge . Staff is recommending adding the following text at the end of the section to allow for certain exclusions:

11.4 Packet Pg. 201

“When developing the cost allocation plan or service charge model which establishes the said fees and service charges, certain expenses may be considered for exclusion from the calculation which may not be directly attributable to a service being provided.”
Section 7.4 – outlines the adjustment of the fee schedule and provides a table of regulations, products, or services with their respective percentage of cost to be recovered. The recommended changes in this section include the following:

1. Replacing current language that requires annual fee studies to annual adjust the fees based on CPI and requiring comprehensive fee stud ies to be conducted not less than every five years.

2. Updating the fee table to:
o Categorize the fees in correct Service Areas
▪ For example: Existing code had various business permits (massage, cardroom, taxicab etc.) as a Finance service, which is now a Police service.
o Removal of fee descriptions that are outdated
▪ For example: The residential development ordinance (RDO) and related housing exemption fee are no longer service categories, thus are removed.
o Updating cost recovery language for Recreation services ▪ For example: Under the current code, facilities and park rentals are required to be 100% cost recovery. In actuality the current fees adopted in 2014 are tiered in categories A - D, where category D is 100% cost recovery and A through C are subsidized at various percentages for Gilroy residents, non-profit organizations, and the City/School events. This change will bring the code in line with current practice.

It is important to note that the table, while it is being replaced in its entirety, maintains the same cost recovery percentages established in the existing code, with certain adjustments as outlined above.

Section 7.5 – Current code requires the fee analysis to be conducted annually and be presented to Council annually via public hearing. This is not the current practice. As a best practice, comprehensive fee studies are recommended to be conducted not less than every five years. As such, this section is being amended to remove the word “annual” from public hearing requirement to adjust the fees.

Any future adoption of comprehensive fee analysis and any related adjustments would still be conducted via public hearing as required by law, just not annually.

11.4 Packet Pg. 202

This also does not prevent the City from adopting one-off fees as may be required.

ALTERNATIVES

1. City Council could direct staff to not adjust select fees or adjust at a lower cost recovery level. This is not recommended as it is the Council’s strategic priority to be fiscally resilient and sustainable. As such, updating the City’s fees and charges periodically to ensure 100% cost recovery is critical.

2. City Council could decide to forgo one or more of the proposed amendments to Chapter 7 of the Gilroy City Code. This is not recommended, especially as the adjustments bring the code in line with current practice and include an annual inflationary factor to adjust the fees to keep up with the rising costs.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There is no fiscal impact to receiving this report. The cost for the user fee study to update the 2019 study is $7,500 and is included in the Finance Department’s adopted FY22 budget. Various departments have contributed efforts to review a nd update the fee calculation models and the work was accommodated within their respective department’s workplan.

The fees will be brought back to City Council for adoption via formal Public Hearing on July 5th. The adjusted fees are projected to recover the cost of providing the various City services.

NEXT STEPS
Staff will return to Council on July 5th for formal adoption of the resolution setting the new fee schedule, with target implementation effective date of August 1, 2022 and formal adoption of the ordinance with amendments to Chapter 7.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
The Study was released to the community on June 3, 2022 and communicated via the weekly Email Express, and via email to the development community, with links to the City’s webpage, online comment form, and an invite to two community meetings conducted on June 9th (virtual) and June 16th (Council Chambers).

Only one attendee from the community was present for the June 9th virtual town hall meeting and had no comments or questions.

No attendees from the community were present for the June 16th in person meeting hosted at the Council Chambers for the development and business community.

As of writing this staff report, no comments have been received via the online form either.

11.4 Packet Pg. 203

Attachments:

1. 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study

2. Draft Ordinance

3. May 16th, 2022 Staff Report

11.4 Packet Pg. 204

City of Gilroy
User Fee Study
June 20, 2022

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 205 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

i Comprehensive User Fee Study

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Executive Summary ................................................................................................................................ 1 User Fee Background .............................................................................................................................. 2 Background .................................................................................................................................................. 2 California User Fee History .......................................................................................................................... 2 Additional Policy Considerations ................................................................................................................. 3 Study Objective....................................................................................................................................... 4 Scope of the Study ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Aim of the Report ......................................................................................................................................... 5 Project Approach and Methodology ........................................................................................................ 6 Conceptual Approach ................................................................................................................................... 6 Fully Burdened Hourly Rates ........................................................................................................................ 6 Summary Steps of the Study ........................................................................................................................ 7 Allowable Costs ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Quality Control/Quality Assurance .............................................................................................................. 8 Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current fees............................................................................. 9 City Staff Contributions ................................................................................................................................ 9 Gilroy User Fees .................................................................................................................................... 10 Cost Recovery............................................................................................................................................. 10 Subsidization .............................................................................................................................................. 10 Impact on Demand (Elasticity) ................................................................................................................... 11 Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 11 General Administration ......................................................................................................................... 12 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 Finance ................................................................................................................................................. 13 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Wastewater .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Public Works ......................................................................................................................................... 15 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 Recreation ............................................................................................................................................ 16

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 206 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

ii Comprehensive User Fee Study

Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Fire ....................................................................................................................................................... 17 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Police .................................................................................................................................................... 18 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 Community Development ..................................................................................................................... 19 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered ............................................................................. 21 Appendix B – Fully Burdened Hourly Rates ............................................................................................ 22 Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis .................................................................................................... 26

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 207 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

1 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Executive Summary
The City of Gilroy engaged Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to determine the full costs incurred by the City to support the various activities for which the City charges user fees. Due to the complexity and the breadth of performing a comprehensive review of fees, Willdan employed a variety of fee methodologies to identify the full costs of individual fee and program activities. This report and the appendices herein identifies 100% full cost recovery for City services and the recommended level of recovery as determined through discussion with departmental staff.

The reality of the local government fee environment is that significant increases to achieve 100% cost recovery can often not be feasible, desirable, or appropriate depending on policy direction —particularly in a single year. The recommended fees identified herein are either at or less than full cost recovery.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 208 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

2 Comprehensive User Fee Study

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

Fees in California are required to conform to the statutory requirements of the California Consti tution, Proposition 218, and the California Code of Regulations. The Code also requires that the City Council adopt fees by either ordinance or resolution, and that any fees in excess of the estimated total cost of rendering the related services must be approved by a popular vote of two-thirds of those electors voting because the charge would be considered a tax and not a fee.

California User Fee History
Before Proposition 13, California cities were less concerned with potential subsidies and recovering the cost of their services from individual fee payers. In times of fiscal shortages, cities simply raised property taxes, which funded everything from police and recreation to development-related services. However, this situation changed with the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978.

Proposition 13 established the era of revenue limitation in California local government. In subsequent years, the State saw a series of additional limitations to local government revenues. Proposition 4 (1979) defined the difference between a tax and a fee: a fee can be no greater than the cost of providing the service; and Proposition 218 (1996) further limited the imposition of taxes for certain classes of fees. As a result, cities were required to secure a supermajority vote in order to enact or increase taxes. Since the public continues to resist efforts to raise local government taxes, cities have little control and very few successful options for new revenues. Compounding this limitation, the State of California took a series of actions in the 1990’s and 2000’s to improve the State’s fiscal situation—at the expense of local governments. As an example, in 2004-05, the Educational Revenue Augmentation Funds (“ERAF”) take-away of property taxes and the reduction of Vehicle License Fees have severely reduced local tax revenues.

In addition, on November 2, 2010, California voters approved Proposition 26, the “Stop Hidden Taxes Initiative”, which is aimed at defining “regulatory fees” as a special tax rather than a fee, thus requiring approval by two-thirds vote of local voters. These regulatory fees are typically intended to mitigate the societal and environmental impacts of a business or person’s activities. Proposition 26 contains seven categories of exceptions. The vast majority of fees that cities would seek to adopt will most likely fall into one or more of these exemptions.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 209 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

3 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Additional Policy Considerations
The recent trend for municipalities is to update their fee schedules to reflect the actual costs of certain public services primarily benefitting users. User Fees recover costs associated with the provision of specific services benefiting the user, thereby reducing the use of General Fund monies for such purposes.

In addition to collecting the direct cost of labor and materials associated with processing and administering user services, it is common for local governments to recover support costs. Support costs are those costs relating to a local government’s central service departments that are properly allocable to the local government’s operating departments. Central services support cost allocations were incorporated using the resulting indirect overhead percentages determined through the Cost Allocation Plan. This plan was developed prior to the User Fee study to determine the burden placed upon central services by the operating departments in order to allocate a proportionate share of central service cost.

As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services fluctuate over time, a significant element in the development of any fee schedule is that it has the flexibility to remain current. Therefore, it is recommended that the City include an inflationary factor in the resolution adopting the fee schedule to allow the City Council, by resolution, to annually increase or decrease the fees.

The City may employ many different inflationary factors. The most commonly used inflator is some form of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) as it is widely well known and accepted. A similar inflator is the implicit price deflator for Gross Domestic Product (GDP), which is much like the CPI except that while the CPI is based on the same “basket” of goods and services every year, the price deflators’ “basket” can change year to year.

Since the primary factor for the cost of a City’s services is usually the costs of the personnel involved, tying an inflationary factor that connects more directly to the personnel costs can be suitable if there is a clear method, or current practice of obtaining said factor.

Each City should use an inflator that they believe works the best for their specific situation and needs. It is also recommended that the City perform this internal review annually with a comprehensive review of services and fees performed every three to five years, which would include adding or removing fees for any new or eliminated programs/services, as well as updating the underlying cost and personnel data.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 210 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

4 Comprehensive User Fee Study

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

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

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

Scope of the Study
The scope of this study encompasses a review and calculation of the user fees charged by the following Gilroy departments and fee groups:
• General Administration
• Finance
• Wastewater
• Public Works
• Recreation
• Fire
• Police
• Community Development

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 211 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

5 Comprehensive User Fee Study

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

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

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 212 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

6 Comprehensive User Fee Study

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

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

F ully Burdened Hourly Rat es
The total cost of each service included in this analysis is primarily based on the Fully Burdened Hourly Rates (FBHRs) that were determined for City personnel directly involved in providing services. The FBHRs include not only personnel salary and benefits, but also any costs that are reasonably ascribable to personnel. The cost elements that are included in the calculation of fully burdened rates are:
• Salaries & benefits of personnel involved
• Operating costs applicable to fee operations
• Departmental support, supervision, and administration overhead • Internal Service Costs charged to each department
• Indirect City-wide overhead costs
An important factor in determining the fully burdened rate is in the calculation of productive hours for personnel. This calculation takes the available workable hours in a year of 2,080 and adjusts this figure to account for calculated or anticipated hours’ employees are involved in non‐billable activities such as paid vacation, sick leave, emergency leave, holidays, and other considerations, as necessary. Dividing the full cost by the number of productive hours provides the FBHR.

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

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 213 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

7 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Summary Steps of the Study
The methodology to evaluate most User Fee levels is straightforward and simple in concept. The following list provides a summary of the study process steps:

Allowable Costs
This report identifies three types of costs that, when combined, constitute the fully burdened cost of a service (Appendix A). Costs are defined as
direct labor, including salary and benefits,
departmental overhead costs, and the City’s
central services overhead, where
departmental and central service overhead
costs constitute support costs. These cost
types are defined as follows:
• Direct Labor (Personnel Costs): The
costs related to staff salaries for
time spent directly on fee-related
services.
• Departmental Overhead: A
proportional allocation of
departmental overhead costs, including operation costs such as supplies and materials that are necessary for the department to function.
• Central Services Overhead: These costs, represent services provided by those Central Services Departments whose primary function is to support other City departments. The calculations utilized the de minimus rate of 10% proscribed by 2 CFR Part 200 Cost Principles for use in organizations that do not have a cost allocation plan.

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

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 214 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

8 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Methodology
The three methods of analysis for calculating fees used in this report are the:

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

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

Valuation Based Fees: This manner of collection is used when the valuation of the improvement can be used as a proxy for the amount of effort it would take for City staff to complete the service provided. More specifically, this approach is commonly used for certain User Fees in the Building Division. It is generally accepted that as a project’s size scales up, the cost of the project increases, and the amount of effort needed to review and inspect also increases. It is also generally true that the more complex the type of construction, the more the cost, and time needed to review and inspect. Using a valuation-based fees provides for a system that can adjust as project sizes scale. Land is not included in valuation determination.

Quality Control/Quality Assurance
All study components are interrelated, thus flawed data at any step in the process will cause the ultimate results to be inconsistent and unsound. The elements of our Quality Control process for User Fee calculations include:
• Involvement of knowledgeable City staff
• Clear instructions and guidance to City staff
• Reasonableness tests and validation
• Normalcy/expectation ranges
• FTE balancing
• Internal and external reviews
• Cross-checking

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 215 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

9 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Reasons for cost inc reases/decreases over current fees Within the fee tables in Appendix C, the differences are identified between the full costs calculated through the study and the fee levels currently in effect. The reasons for differences between the two can arise from a number of possible factors including:
• Previous fee levels may have been set at levels less than full cost intentionally, based on policy decisions
• Staffing levels and the positions that complete fee and service activity may vary from when the previous costs were calculated
• Personnel and materials costs could have increased at levels that differed from any inflationary factors used to increase fees since the last study
• Costs that this study has identified as part of the full cost of services may not have been accounted for in a previous study
o Departmental overhead and administration costs
o Vehicle and Facility Maintenance support costs
o Indirect overhead from central service support
• Changes in processes and procedures within a department, or the City as a whole City Staff Contributions
As part of the study process, Willdan received tremendous support and cooperation from City staff, which contributed and reviewed a variety of components to the study, including:
• Budget and other cost data
• Staffing structures
• Fee and service structures, organization, and descriptions • Direct and indirect work hours (billable/non-billable) • Time estimates to complete work tasks
• Frequency and current fee levels
• Review of draft results and other documentation
A User Fee Study requires significant involvement of the managers and line staff from the departments— on top of their existing workloads and competing priorities. The contributions from City staff were critical to this study. We would like to express our appreciation to the City and its staff for their assistance, professionalism, positive attitudes, helpful suggestions, responsiveness, and overall cooperation.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 216 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

10 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Gilroy U ser Fees
Cost Recovery
The cost recovery models, by department/division fee type, are presented in detail in Appendix C. Full cost recovery is determined by summing the estimated amount of time each position (in increments of minutes or hours) spends to render a service. Time estimates for each service rendered were predominately determined by Willdan and City Staff through a time and materials survey conducted for each department/division fee included in the study. The resulting cost recovery amount represents the total cost of providing each service. The City’s current fee being charged for each service, if applicable, is provided in this section, as well, for reference.

It is important to note that the time and materials survey used to determine the amount of time each employee spends assisting in the provision of the services listed on the fee schedule is essential in identifying the total cost of providing each service. Specifically, in providing services, a number of employees are often involved in various aspects of the process, spending anywhere from a few minutes to several hours on the service.

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

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

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

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

Further complicating the decision, opponents of fees often assert that the activities subject to the fees provide economic, cultural, “quality of life,” or other community benefits that exceed the costs to the City.

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

Of course, subsidization can be an effective public policy tool since it can be used to reduce fees to encourage certain activities (such as compliance inspections to ensure public safety) or allow some people to be able to afford to receive services they otherwise could not at the full cost. In addition, subsidies can

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 217 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

11 Comprehensive User Fee Study

be an appropriate and justifiable action, such as to allow citizens to rightfully access services, without burdensome costs.

Despite the intent, it is important for the City and public to understand that subsidies must be covered by another revenue source, such as the General Fund. Therefore, the general taxpayer will potentially help to fund private benefits, and/or other City services will not receive funds that are otherwise directed to cover subsidies.

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

Summary
If the City’s principal goal of this study were to maximize revenues from user fees, Willdan would recommend setting user fees at 100% of the full cost identified in this study. However, we understand that revenue enhancement is not the only goal of a cost of service study, and sometimes full-cost recovery is not needed, desired, or appropriate. Other City and departmental goals, City Council priorities, policy initiatives, past experience, implementation issues, and other internal and external factors may influence staff recommendations and City Council decisions. City staff has reviewed the full costs and identified the “recommended fee levels” for consideration by City Council. The attached appendices exhibit these unit fees individually.

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

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 218 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

12 Comprehensive User Fee Study

General Administration
The Administration Department is a central services department that provides oversight and guidance to all departments within the City of Gilroy. Operational oversight of the Department is provided by the City Administrator through general direction provided to the offices contained within. These offices include the following: City Administrator’s Office, City Attorney’s Office (Contracted), Administrative Services (Human Resources, Fleet, Facilities and Information Technology), City Clerk’s Office, Communications and Engagement Office, Economic Development, and Emergency Services.

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

The analysis of the General Administration services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that services are currently being provided below full cost. As a result of the fee recommendations, there would be:
• An increase to the Subpoena Duces Tecum – personnel cost to $15.85, • 2 new fees would be added and;
• The remaining fees would remain as currently set as detailed in Appendix C.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 219 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

13 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Finance
The Finance Department provides timely and accurate financial information to City management, the City Council and the public, and administers the City’s assets including cash and investments in a prudent and responsible manner. Within the Finance Department, there are various function s including: accounts payable/receivable, payroll, investments, debt service, general accounting, budget, and utility billing.

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

The analysis of the Finance services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to reco ver the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. It is recommended that the City set Finance fees at the at or near 100% cost recovery for most fees as detailed in Appendix C. As a result of the suggested fees in total for the Finance schedule there would be:
• An increase to 33 fees;
• 40 fees would remain as currently set;
• 4 new fees would be added, and;
• 5 fees would decrease as detailed in Appendix C.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 220 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

14 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Wastewater
The Public Works Department oversee the capital budget and operations of the South County Regional Wastewater Authority (SCRWA). SCRWA treats the wastewater for the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill and produces recycled water for South Santa Clara County.

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

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

Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most of the services being provided are currently set below their full cost. It is recommended that the City set Water Billing fees at the levels detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
• An increase to 3 fees;
• 9 fees would remain as currently set;
• 1 new fee would be added, and;
• The average fee change would be 52% as detailed in Appendix C.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 221 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

15 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Public Works
Public Works designs, builds and maintains the City’s water, wastewater, storm drain, street, sidewalk, park, landscape, urban forest and related infrastructure. The department is also responsible for managing various City facilities including buildings, building systems, parking lots, shelters as well as the entire fleet for the City of Gilroy. The department prepares and coordinates the capital budget for facilities and the capital and maintenance budgets for all City infrastructure. The Public Works Department is comprised of two divisions; the Engineering Division and the Operations Division. The Engineering Division oversees the functions related to the Capital Improvement Program, Traffic Engineering and Land Development. The Operations Division is made up of Street, Sewer and Urban Forest Maintenance, Park Maintenance, and Water Operations. Public Works Engineering reviews new developments to ensure that all new public infrastructure is in compliance with City, State and Federal codes, regulations and standards.

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

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

Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that current fee levels are subsidizing the cost of service. It is recommended that the City set most Engineering Services fees at or near 100% cost recovery for most fees as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
• an increase to 5 fees;
• 1 fee would decrease;
• 8 new fees would be added;
• 5 fees would change from flat to deposit based;
• 96 fees would remain as currently set, and;
• the average estimated fee increase would be around 15% for flat fee services.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 222 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

16 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Recreation
Housed with the City Administrator’s office, the Recreation Division offers programming geared for all ages and interests. From preschoolers to youth theater actors to active baby boomers and beyond, there are many diversified program options offered annually to residents. The Recreation Division comprises of a Recreation Manager, 2 Recreation Coordinators, a Community Coordinator, and a Management Analyst.

Focused program areas are senior services, adaptive, at-risk youth, general recreation services, and facility/park rentals.

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

The analysis of Recreation Division mainly encompassed facility rentals. The fee for use for government owned facilities and property can be set discretionally by the City, typically based on past usage characteristics, policy goals, and surrounding jurisdiction comparison. The cost of capital acquisition, maintenance, repair, and upgrade to the City and subsequently the public is offset through rental or use fees. As such these fees should be set using the knowledge of activity use for the facilities, policy desires of the City, and market factors when desirable. It is generally accepted that some Recreation programs provide a measure of public benefit to the residents and City as a whole, and as such is it common for services to bear significant subsidies. In addition, cities generally want to ensure that their programs and services remain affordable to the community at large, and that the programs remain competitive with surrounding jurisdictions. As such, the Recreation Division has established facility and park rental fees as part of this analysis, and any programmatic fees are established seasonally taking various market factors into consideration. The suggested fees detailed in Appendix C would result in:
• An increase for 70 fees;
• 3 fees would decrease;
• 12 new fees will be added, and;
• 30 fees would remain as currently set as detailed in Appendix C.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 223 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

17 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Fire
The Gilroy Fire Department is a multi-risk community service provider and is comprised of two divisions:

Administration and Operations. Administration provides leadership direction and oversight necessary to deliver services in a cost-effective manner. They are also responsible for managing the department’s business transactions. Administration ensures that they adhere to state and federal mandates and standards of practice. They strive to meet or exceed the City Council’s established performance objectives.

The Operations Division is comprised of three sub-divisions: Field Operations, Training, and Emergency Medical Services (EMS). Each sub-division is managed by a Division Chief who provides direction and oversight. The department currently deploys its response resources from three fire stations within the City of Gilroy. The department relies on boundary drop, auto-aid and mutual-aid agreements with the South Santa Clara County Fire Protection District, CalFire and other fire departments within the County to obtain additional and specialized resources when needed. Without these agreements, the department could not safely extinguish large wildland and structure fires or mitigate hazardous materials events. When requested, these agencies will also respond to City incidents when all three Gilroy fire stations are committed to other emergency incidents. In addition to response, the Fire Department also performs proactive community services.

Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with the Fire Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule. Most of the fees within the Fire services relate to fire prevention and hazardous materials handling and are utilized by the Fire Prevention and Hazardous Materials Division which is strategically housed within the Community Development Department to provide enhanced service delivery complimenting the Building and Planning services. The Division works collaboratively with the Fire Department on inspections and hazmat response activities.

The analysis of services in Fire relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that current fee levels are subsidizing the cost of service. It is recommended that the City set most Fire Services fees at or near 100% cost recovery for most fees as detailed in Appendix C, with some specific fees set to retain subsidies. As a result, there would be:
• An increase for 56 fees;
• 2 fees would decrease;
• 8 new fees will be added, and;
• 18 fees would remain as currently set as detailed in Appendix C.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 224 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

18 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Police
The Police Department is divided into three divisions; Field Operations (Patrol), Special Operations (Investigations & Specialty Units/Teams/Policy/Training/Hiring/Legal Issues), and Administration (Records/Communications/Budget) each managed by a Police Captain. The overall mission of the department is to provide public safety services in partnership with the community. Community generated calls for service including emergency and nonemergency requests comprise Department activity. When not actively engaged in community requests for service, Department personnel engage in proactive or self - generated activities to further department and community goals for public safety. The Department also maintains an Investigations component to include Detectives, the Anti-Crime Team and participation in regional crime task forces. Non-sworn staff provide communications/dispatch services, records processing, property/evidence management, animal control, and several other ancillary duties in support of the Department’s mission.

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

The services included in Police are a mixture of fines and user fees. The fines are set to deter the listed and the analysis of the user fees relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build -up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cos t of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that all services are currently under recovering the cost of providing them. Based on the suggested fees for the penalties and services listed under Police, there would be:
• An increase to 20 fees;
• 6 fees would decrease;
• 28 fees would remain as currently set, and;
• The average fee change would be 8% as detailed in Appendix C.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 225 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

19 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Community Development
The Community Development Department works with the public, development community, and community partners to protect and enhance the quality of life in the community by facilitating development activity across the City. This facilitation is conducted through the entitlement and permitting process, where the Department ensures safe, orderly and quality development that adheres to the local zoning ordinance, 2040 General Plan, building and fire codes, and other applicable local and state laws and policies. Our attention to the safety and well-being of the community is balanced with fostering the pursuit of economic growth and opportunity

The Building Division ensures that the City’s adopted building codes are adhered to during the plan review and building permit process. By collaborating with our customers, we are able to assist them with the application, plan review, and inspection process. Providing a good building inspection program enhances and encourages a solid and safer housing stock and further promotes code compliant commercial and industrial buildings within our community.

The Planning Division provides current and long-term community planning services in conformance with the Gilroy General Plan and Zoning Ordinance. Development shall be consistent with City Council direction to enhance the design and livability of residential neighborhoods, commercial areas and industrial zones within the City’s urban sphere while promoting sustainable development.

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

The analysis of Community Development services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach (except for fees related to the Building Permit program), whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and pro -rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. The analysis found that services are currently set below the full cost of providing them. For unit fees under Mechanical, Plumbing, and Electrical sections the services listed are not typically provided on a single use basis, but often combi ne multitudes within those sections. As such the suggested fees in those sections were limited in the cost recovery recommended. It is recommended that the City increase cost recovery for Community Development services to the levels shown for each fee as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
• an increase to 114 fees;
• 38 fees would decrease;
• 50 new fees will be added, and;
• 16 fees would remain as currently set.

In addition to the above referenced fees listed under Community Development, the Building Permit fees are also provided by this division. For the Building Permit fees, valuation is used as a proxy for measuring the amount of effort needed to provide services on a case by case basis. This method is an industry standard

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 226 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

20 Comprehensive User Fee Study

widely used by other California cities and counties to evaluate the cost of providing service. It is generally understood that the larger and more complex a project is, more time and effort that is required to provide the service. Project valuation also follows that trend where additional square footage for a building type increase the total valuation. At the same time difference construction projects carry different costs of construction per square foot that correspond to more complex construction needs and would also correspond to additional plan review and inspection time needed by staff. So, by using a combination of project valuation and historical revenue figures to calculate a cost multiplier and a cost recovery analysis for historical and anticipated future construction trends, current cost recovery along with variability in charges due to project type and scale is determined. The result of the cost analysis completed using fee activity going back to fiscal year 2008 for Building Permits and found that the program is currently operating at 96% cost recovery. It is recommended that the fees be increased to raise cost recovery to 100%, which would require a 3.8% increase. Current and new fees are detailed in Appendix C.

The analysis of Planning Services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby we determined the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence using staff time to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that flat rate fees were regularly set below the full cost of providing the service. It is recommended that the City set most Planning Division fees at 100% cost recovery for most fees as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
• an increase to 42 fees;
• 6 fees would decrease;
• 12 new fees will be added;
• 10 fees would remain as currently set, and;
• The average fee change would be 24% for flat fee services as detailed in Appendix C.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 227 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

21 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered
Below are the total department costs for those departments included in the fee study. However, only a percentage of the total cost is realized as staff does not just work on services related to User Fees, but also works on an array of other City functions during the operational hours of the City. The amounts listed below will not reconcile to City budgets as costs that should not be included in overhead for personnel in the application of determining fully burdened hourly rates were excluded. Examples of these costs are capital, debt, monetary transfers, passthrough contract costs, and any other costs that are charged directly to the service requestor.

City of Gilroy - User Fee
Overhead Rate Calculations
Department
Salary and
Benefits
Department
Operations &
Administration
Direct
Overhead %
Indirect
Allocation %
100: CITY CLERK 221,948 54,287 24.5%0.0% 100: COMMUNICATIONS & ENGAGEMENT 169,493 18,500 10.9%0.0% 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT 3,105,012 66,046 2.1%7.5% 100: COUNCIL 210,303 11,684 5.6%0.0% 100: FINANCE 669,039 32,087 4.8%0.0% 100: FIRE 10,570,948 418,200 4.0%6.8% 100: HUMAN RESOURCES 872,866 401,810 46.0%0.0% 100: POLICE 20,103,405 538,077 2.7%7.4% 100: PUBLIC WORKS 2,559,761 296,340 11.6%6.1% 254: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT 81,337 118,433 145.6%3.6% 259: HOUSING TRUST FUND 256,581 4,350 1.7%5.1% 268: REACT TASK FORCE 257,455 - 0.0%6.8% 290: COMMUNITY RECREATION 865,854 120,245 13.9%7.2% 600: FLEET INTERNAL SERVICE FUND 602,298 98,715 16.4%6.9% 651: FACILITIES INTERNAL SERVICE FUND 718,637 787,098 109.5%3.9% 690: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTERNAL SERVICE FUND 674,387 794,523 117.8%4.5% 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND 3,425,441 150,114 4.4%9.5% 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND 3,554,536 442,550 12.5%5.7%

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 228 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

22 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Appendix B – Fully Burdened Hou rly Rates
Below are fully burdened hourly rates (FBHR’s) of staff positions that provide for the services detailed in Appendix C. The FBHR’s were used to determine the full cost of each service. They include the salary and benefit costs for each position as well as all applicable overhead amounts for each position as determined by the department they are assigned to. Positions of the same title will have different fully burdened hourly rates due to the different overhead factors of the departments. Refer previously to Appendix A for identifying the percentage overheads for each department. For any user fee service request that is outside the scope of the fees detailed in Appendix C, or for services for which there is no fee currently set, the City can notify and charge up to the full cost of the personnel, third party, or material cost involved to the service requestor.

City of Gilroy - User Fee
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Department Position
Fully Burdened Hourly
Rate
Position Rates
100: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Administator - CITY ADMINISTRATOR 224.90 100: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Administator - ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT MANAGER 133.95 100: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Administator - MANAGEMENT ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)100.10 100: CITY ADMINISTRATOR Administator - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR 150.19 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - BUILDING INSPECTOR 1 103.33 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - BUILDING INSPECTOR 2 121.11 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - BUILDING OFFICIAL 135.03 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - CODE ENFORCEMENT OFFICER 116.20 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR 193.73 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - CUSTOMER SERVICE MANAGER 155.77 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - DEPUTY FIRE MARSHAL/HAZ MAT SUPERVISOR 149.39 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - GIS COORDINATOR 109.18
100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INSPECTOR 1 97.30 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS INSPECTOR 2 120.97 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - MANAGEMENT ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)84.06 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 93.48 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - OFFICE ASSISTANT 2 56.26 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - PERMIT TECHNICIAN 77.61 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - PLANNER 2 107.28
100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - PLANNING TECHNICIAN 78.58 100: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CD - SENIOR PLANNER 150.27
100: CITY CLERK Clerk - CITY CLERK 140.65
100: COMMUNICATIONS & ENGAGEMENT Communications - COMMUNICATION & ENGAGEMENT MANAGER 123.91 100: COUNCIL Council - COUNCIL MEMBER 19.05
100: COUNCIL Counil - MAYOR 21.90
100: FINANCE Finance - ACCOUNTANT 2 99.45
100: FINANCE Finance - ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 2 89.19
100: FINANCE Finance - ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 2 - PAYROLL 98.17 100: FINANCE Finance - BUDGET/FINANCE ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)104.49 100: FINANCE Finance - FINANCE DIRECTOR 201.55

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 229 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

23 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Gilroy - User Fee
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Department Position
Fully Burdened Hourly
Rate
Position Rates
100: FINANCE Finance - FINANCE MANAGER 127.20
100: FINANCE Finance - SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST (CONFIDENTIAL)114.42 100: FIRE Fire - FIRE ADMINISTRATION TECHNICIAN 56.71
100: FIRE Fire - FIRE CAPTAIN 177.39
100: FIRE Fire - FIRE CHIEF 217.57
100: FIRE Fire - FIRE DIVISION CHIEF 213.29
100: FIRE Fire - FIRE ENGINEER 159.49
100: FIRE Fire - FIREFIGHTER 1 128.62
100: FIRE Fire - FIREFIGHTER 2 151.92
100: FIRE Fire - MANAGEMENT ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)100.32 100: HUMAN RESOURCES HR - HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST 130.73 100: HUMAN RESOURCES HR - HUMAN RESOURCES ASSISTANT 2 117.46 100: HUMAN RESOURCES HR - HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR/RISK MANAGER 278.73 100: HUMAN RESOURCES HR - HUMAN RESOURCES TECHNICIAN 1 131.36 100: HUMAN RESOURCES HR - SENIOR HUMAN RESOURCES ANALYST 155.72 100: POLICE Police - COMMUNITY SERVICES OFFICER 77.02
100: POLICE Police - CRIME ANALYSIS/RECORDS/PROP&EVIDENCE MGR 152.81 100: POLICE Police - DETENTION SERVICES OFFICER 118.40
100: POLICE Police - MANAGEMENT ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)96.35 100: POLICE Police - MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 77.15
100: POLICE Police - MULTI-SERVICE OFFICER 125.05
100: POLICE Police - OFFICE ASSISTANT 2 82.27
100: POLICE Police - POLICE CAPTAIN 209.17
100: POLICE Police - POLICE CHIEF 254.17
100: POLICE Police - POLICE CORPORAL 167.89
100: POLICE Police - POLICE OFFICER 153.53
100: POLICE Police - POLICE RECORDS TECHNICIAN 1 70.97
100: POLICE Police - POLICE RECORDS TECHNICIAN 2 74.70
100: POLICE Police - POLICE SERGEANT 187.14
100: POLICE Police - PROPERTY AND EVIDENCE TECHNICIAN 88.14 100: POLICE Police - PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATIONS SUPERVISOR 137.94 100: POLICE Police - PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATOR 110.44
100: POLICE Police - PUBLIC SAFETY COMMUNICATOR TRAINEE 78.89 100: POLICE Police - SENIOR POLICE RECORDS TECHNICIAN 96.07 100: POLICE Police - YOUTH TASK FORCE COORDINATOR 100.66 100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - CITY ENGINEER/TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER 199.86 100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS - OPS 186.17 100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - ENGINEER 2 134.48
100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN/INSPECTOR 2 95.67 100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN/INSPECTOR 3 96.86 100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - MAINTENANCE WORKER 1 86.61
100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - MAINTENANCE WORKER 2 92.84
100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - MANAGEMENT ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)114.67 100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 98.36
100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - OPERATIONS SERVICES SUPERVISOR 115.18 100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER 215.83

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 230 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

24 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Gilroy - User Fee
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Department Position
Fully Burdened Hourly
Rate
Position Rates
100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER 162.68
100: PUBLIC WORKS PW - SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST 136.42 254: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT Fund 254 - HCD TECHNICIAN 2 208.64 254: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT BLOCK GRANT Fund 254 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR 361.59 259: HOUSING TRUST FUND Fund 259 - HCD TECHNICIAN 2 87.59 259: HOUSING TRUST FUND Fund 259 - PROGRAM ADMINISTRATOR 151.81 268: REACT TASK FORCE Fund 268 - POLICE OFFICER 160.56
290: COMMUNITY RECREATION Fund 290 - COMMUNITY COORDINATOR 82.57 290: COMMUNITY RECREATION Fund 290 - RECREATION COORDINATOR 98.98 290: COMMUNITY RECREATION Fund 290 - RECREATION MANAGER 152.78 290: COMMUNITY RECREATION Fund 290 - SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST (CONFIDENTIAL)133.26 600: FLEET INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 600 - EQUIPMENT MECHANIC 95.55 600: FLEET INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 600 - FLEET SUPERINTENDENT 118.53 600: FLEET INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 600 - SENIOR EQUIPMENT MECHANIC 104.70 651: FACILITIES INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 651 - FACILITIES MAINTENANCE SPECIALIST 165.59 651: FACILITIES INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 651 - FACILITIES SUPERINTENDENT 248.34 651: FACILITIES INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 651 - SENIOR CUSTODIAN 171.34 690: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 690 - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY APPLICATIONS ANALYST 203.84 690: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 690 - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY MANAGER 337.55 690: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 690 - INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY TECHNICIAN 1 141.84 690: INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY INTERNAL SERVICE FUND Fund 690 - PUBLIC SAFETY SYSTEMS ADMINISTRATOR 260.20 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - ACCOUNTANT 2 108.46 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 1 80.44 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 2 89.67 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 2 109.65 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 2 - PAYROLL 107.06 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - BUDGET/FINANCE ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)113.96 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - CITY ENGINEER/TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER 192.86 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS - OPS 179.65 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - ENGINEER 1 110.21 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - ENGINEER 2 137.09 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN/INSPECTOR 3 93.46 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - FINANCE DIRECTOR 219.81 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - FINANCE MANAGER 138.72 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - GIS COORDINATOR 113.68 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - MAINTENANCE WORKER 1 74.43 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - MAINTENANCE WORKER 2 87.29 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - MANAGEMENT ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)113.96 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 93.71 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - OPERATIONS SERVICES SUPERVISOR 112.69 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER 208.27 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER 156.98 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEER 156.98 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - SENIOR MAINTENANCE WORKER - STREETS 107.02 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST 131.64 700: SEWER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 700 - SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST (CONFIDENTIAL)124.79 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - ACCOUNTANT 2 112.84 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 1 83.68 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - ACCOUNTING ASSISTANT 2 93.28 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 2 114.07 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - ACCOUNTING TECHNICIAN 2 - PAYROLL 111.38 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - BUDGET/FINANCE ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)118.55

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 231 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

25 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Gilroy - User Fee
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Department Position
Fully Burdened Hourly
Rate
Position Rates
720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - CITY ENGINEER/TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER 200.64 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS - OPS 186.89 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - ENGINEER 1 114.65 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - ENGINEER 2 142.61 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - ENGINEERING TECHNICIAN/INSPECTOR 3 97.23 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - FINANCE DIRECTOR 228.67 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - FINANCE MANAGER 144.32 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - GIS COORDINATOR 118.26 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - MAINTENANCE WORKER 1 77.27 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - MAINTENANCE WORKER 2 90.92 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - MANAGEMENT ANALYST (NON-CONFIDENTIAL)118.55 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - MANAGEMENT ASSISTANT 97.49 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - OPERATIONS SERVICES SUPERVISOR 125.35 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR/CITY ENGINEER 216.67 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - SENIOR CIVIL ENGINEER 163.31 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - SENIOR MAINTENANCE WORKER - WATER 109.91 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST 136.95 720: WATER ENTERPRISE FUND Fund 720 - SENIOR MANAGEMENT ANALYST (CONFIDENTIAL)129.82

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 232 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

26 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis
The following tables provide the results of the analysis, resulting full cost recovery amount, and recommended fees. For fees in which the full cost, existing fee and suggested fee is listed as “NA,” the amount or percentage was not calculable based on cost data or variable fee structure. This is most common when either the current or the suggested fee includes a variable component that is not c omparable on a one to one basis, a full cost was not calculated (for penalties, fines, and facility use), or when there is not a current fee amount to compare against.

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 233 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

General Administration# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔMiscellaneous City Code Section 7.1.(a)1 Letter of Verification, Certification & ClearanceDepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus direct costNA NADepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus direct cost$02 Notice of Intent to Circulate Filing Fee 200.00 (EC 9202(b)) NA NA $200.00$03 ResearchDepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus direct costminimum ½ hourNA NADepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus direct cost$04 Special Services/InspectionsDepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus direct costAfter Hours: Calculated Rate at time and a halfminimum 3 hours if called back after hoursNA NADepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus direct costAfter Hours: Calculated Rate at time and a half$05 Notary FeeNewMaximum fees established by GC 8211 NA NA Maximum NAReproduction Fees (City Code Section 7.1. (a), 17A.29 & Res. 2008‐55)6Agendas/Agenda Packet/Minutes of all Policy Body Meetings (City‐wide) 0.01Per page + postageNA NA $0.01$07Meeting Audio and Video Recordings (City‐wide)Direct Costs of Medium UsedNA NA Direct Costs of Medium Used $08Audio and Video Recording TranscriptionDepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus direct costNA NADepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus direct cost$09Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) Filings Copies0.10Per PageNA NA $0.10$010 Photo Copies (City‐wide)0.10Per page + postageNA NA $0.10$011Other reproductions onto USBDirect Costs of Medium UsedNA NA Direct Costs of Medium Used $012Microfilm ReproductionNewNA NA Actual Cost$0Subpoena13 Subpoena Duces Tecum ‐ standard page0.10per pageActual cost for oversize plus personnel costs and postageNA NA $0.10$014 Subpoena Duces Tecum ‐ microfilm0.20per microfilmActual cost for oversize plus personnel costs and postageVariable NA Actual CostNA15 Subpoena Duces Tecum ‐ personnel cost6.00per 1/4 hr plus postage costs$17.74 66% $15.85$1016 City Employees Subpoenaed as Witness 275.00per day minimum depositGovernment Code Sections 68096.1 and 68097.2. Actual cost to be determined. If less than min deposit, difference to be refunded, if more than min deposit, additional expense to be billedNA NA $275.00$0City of Gilroy27Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 234Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Finance# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesCodeFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔCity Code Section 7.1. (a)) (City Code Chapter 13, Article IV and City Code Section 16A.6)(City Code Section 13.39)1Change (other than location of ownership) Renewal/Reprint15.00$44.59 66%$44.00$29 2Commercial/Industrial ‐ No Fire/Bldg Inspections Required 120.00$183.61 35%$183.00$63 3 Commercial/Industrial ‐ Only Fire Inspection Required 250.00$439.90 43%$439.00$189 4Commercial/Industrial ‐ Fire & Building Inspections Required370.00$454.10 19%$454.00$84 5 Home Occupation70.00$161.53 57%$161.00$91 6 Salon Space/Out‐of‐town business service address 30.00$30.32 1%$30.00$0 7 Pretreatment/CUPA Review40.00$24.19 ‐65%$24.00($16)8 Police Regulated Business Review190.00If fee is not covered under the cost of permit$255.90 26%$255.00$65 9 a.New businesses will pay on esƟmated gross receipts for partial year and first full year's license. b.Fees for subsequent years will be based upon annual gross receipts as follows: (Each branch location will be reported separately)City Code Sections 13.43 and 13.44(a)$ 0 ‐ $ 40,000 40.00 AnnuallyNA NA $40.00 $0 $ 40,001 ‐ $ 140,00080.00AnnuallyNA NA$80.00$0 $140,001 ‐ $ 240,000120.00AnnuallyNA NA$120.00$0 $240,001 ‐ $ 340,000160.00AnnuallyNA NA$160.00$0 $340,001 ‐ $ 540,000200.00AnnuallyNA NA$200.00$0 $540,001 ‐ $ 740,000240.00AnnuallyNA NA$240.00$0 $740,001 ‐ $ 940,000280.00AnnuallyNA NA$280.00$0 $940,001 ‐ $1,140,000320.00AnnuallyAdditional $20 per year for each $200,000, or any portion thereof.NA NA$320.00$0 $ 17,740,001 or more2,000.00AnnuallyNA NA$2,000.00$0 100 ‐ 20.00AnnuallyNA NA$0.00$0 3 ‐ 540.00AnnuallyNA NA$40.00$0 6 ‐ 2080.00AnnuallyNA NA$80.00$0 21 ‐ 40120.00AnnuallyNA NA$120.00$0 41 ‐ 60160.00AnnuallyNA NA$160.00$0 61 ‐ 80200.00AnnuallyNA NA$200.00$0 81 ‐ 100240.00AnnuallyNA NA$240.00$0 101 ‐ Over280.00AnnuallyNA NA$280.00$0 Licenses due January 1st of each year Business License Regulatory Review/Inspection FeesBusiness Licenses ‐ New/moved/change in location or ownershipRetail, wholesale business, manufacturing, food processors with a fixed place of business within the city limits.Apartments (at one location or address)Number of UnitsCity of Gilroy28Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 235Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Finance# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesCodeFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ(City Code Section 13.40‐42)11Circus, Menagerie, Bullfight, Amusement Ride, Carnival, Fair, etc.200.00 For first Day$150.00 for each additional day(City Code Section 13.44(c)) NA NA $200.00 $0 12 Contractors/Sub‐Contractors 90.00 Semi‐Annual NA NA $90.00 $0 13 Contractors/Sub‐Contractors 150.00 AnnualNA NA $150.00 $0 14 Motor Vehicles 50.00 Annually(delivery trucks, taxicabs*, tow trucks*, ambulances, etc.)*Note: Also needs permit(City Code Section 13.42) NA NA $50.00 $0 15Non‐Professional business‐type services(primary service function)50.00AnnuallyNA NA$50.00$0 16 Seasonal Sales Stands 50.00(Christmas trees, fireworks, pumpkin patch, etc.) (City Code Section 13.44)NA NA$50.00$0 17 Transient Business License100.00Annually Also needs permitNA NA$100.00$0 18Transient Business License ‐ (Peddlers, Solicitors, Vendors, Vehicle, Wagon, Pushcart)50.00MonthlyNA NA$50.00$0 19 Vending/Music/Amusement Machines10.00per machine/ annually(City Code Section 13.40)NA NA$10.00$0 20 ACPP (Abandoned Cart Prevention Plan) Review Fee 125.00per plan(City Code Section 19A.20)$116.20 ‐8%$116.00($9)21 Abandoned Shopping Carts115.00per cart(City Code Section 19A.11)$153.49 25%$153.00$38 22 Downtown Vacant Building Registration120.00annual registration(Ordinance No. 2012‐02)$87.15 ‐38%$87.00($33)23 Delinquent Account ReceivablesFinance/Utility Division hourly rate + direct costs(City Code Section 7.1. (a))NA NAFinance/Utility Division hourly rate + direct costs$0 24 Interest Rate1.5%per month(City Code Section 2.43(f))NA NA$0.02$0 25 Refuse Collection Lien ProcessAdministration Fee based on total cost to City(City Code Section 12.23‐10)NA NAAdministration Fee based on total cost to City$0 26 Returned Check Fee25.00first check, $35.00 subsequent checkstriple the amount of check if under California Civil “mailed by certified mail.”(California Civil Code Section 1719(a)) NA NA$25.00$0 27 Garage Sale License0.00per event 1 event allowed per cal. Year(City Code Section 13.44 (d))$11.19 100% $0.00$0 # DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesCity CodeFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ28 Deposits ‐ Residential50.00(City Code Chapter 19, Article VI)NA NA$200.00$150 29 Deposits ‐ Commercial*75.00/250.00/Amount determined by Finance Dept.(City Code Chapter 19, Article VI)NA NA$175/$3,500/ Amount determined by Finance Dept.$100 30 Deposits ‐ Per Apartment Unit20.00(City Code Chapter 19, Article VI)NA NA$160.00$140 Licenses due July 1st of each year Miscellaneous FeesSanitary Sewer ServiceCity of Gilroy29Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 236Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Finance# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesCodeFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ31 Sewer Service Initiation Fee10.00(City Code Chapter 19, Article VI)$18.66 46%$18.00$8 # DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesCodeFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ32 Deposits ‐ Residential50.00(City Code Section 27.42)NA NA$200.00$150 33 Deposits ‐ Commercial*75.00/250.00/or higher amount determined by Finance Dept.(City Code Section 27.42)NA NA$175/$3,500/ Amount determined by Finance Dept.$100 34 Deposits ‐ Per Apartment Unit20.00(City Code Section 27.42)NA NA$160.00$140 35 Service Charge ‐ Backflow Inspection 37.00per device$58.51 37%$58.00$21 36 Service Charge ‐ Construction Water3.00f.f + $182.73/acreNA NA$3.00$0 37 Delinquent Services70.00NA NA$50.00($20)38 Delinquent Services ‐ Over‐time15.00additionalNA NA$15.00$0 39 Delinquent Services ‐ Call‐out130.00additionalNA NA$150.00$20 40 Delinquent Services ‐ Locking Services Required 45.00additionalNA NA$45.00$0 41 Delinquent Services ‐ Locking Services Broken 20.00additionalNA NA$20.00$0 42 Removal 60.00$77.52 23%$77.00$17 43 Test ‐ 1 ½” and over75.00$100.25 25%$100.00$25 44 Test ‐ ¾” to 1”140.00$181.83 23%$181.00$41 45 Deposit1,000.00per meterNA NA$1,000.00$0 46 Usage65.00 +$4.65/1,000 galsHillside Pressure Rate per 1,000 gals. Zone 2 $5.40 Zone 3 $6.16NA NA65.00 +$4.65/1,000 gals $0 47 Water Meter ‐ 5/8 x ¾ inch674.67Basic Cost ‐ $417.48 + Angle Stop ‐ $77.81 + Corporation Stop & Tap ‐ $179.38$714.55 6%$714.00$39 48 Water Meter ‐ 1 inch 744.50Basic Cost ‐ $487.31 + Angle Stop ‐ $77.81 + Corporation Stop & Tap ‐ $179.39$820.40 9%$820.00$76 49 Water Meter ‐ 1 ½ inch1,291.03Basic Cost ‐ $889.13 + Angle Stop ‐ $167.87 + Corporation Stop & Tap ‐ $234.03$1,436.04 10%$1,436.00$145 50 Water Meter ‐ 2 inch 1,626.11Basic Cost ‐ $1,111.42 + Angle Stop ‐ $213.97 + Corporation Stop & Tap ‐ $300.72$1,900.38 14%$1,900.00$274 51 Water Meter ‐ 2 inch Omni T21,386.34$1,434.26 3%$1,434.00$48 52 Water Meter ‐ 3 inch Omni T21,605.15$2,417.47 34%$2,417.00$812 53 Water Meter ‐ 4 inch Omni T22,823.49$2,806.84 ‐1%$2,806.00($17)54 Water Meter ‐ 3 inch Omni C22,074.64$2,417.47 14%$2,417.00$342 55 Water Meter ‐ 4 inch Omni C23,368.76$3,900.48 14%$3,900.00$531 56 Water Meter ‐ 6 inch Omni C25,587.26$6,467.10 14%$6,467.00$880 57 Water Meter ‐ 8 inch Omni C2New$10,293.02 NA$10,293.00NA58 Water Meter ‐ 3 inch Fire Hydrant Meter971.29$1,500.47 35%$1,500.00$529 59 Water Meter ‐ Flange to 1” Meter Adapter75.00$75.00 0%$75.00$0 60 Water Meter ‐ Special Order processing fee 40.00$54.95 27%$54.00$14 MeterPortable Fire Hydrant MeterWater Meters***Water ServiceCity of Gilroy30Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 237Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Finance# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesCodeFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ61 Water Tanker Truck20.00First 6,000 gals plus $4.65/1,000 gals afterNA NA$20.00$0 62 Water Service Initiation Fee ‐ Over‐time50.00$64.11 22%$64.00$14 63 Water Service Initiation Fee 15.00additional$22.73 34%$22.00$7 64 Water Service Initiation Fee ‐ Call‐out130.00additional$227.29 43%$227.00$97 65 Credit Card Processing Fee (pass‐through) Non‐Utility Newper transactionThis is a pass‐through cost from merchant processor.NA NA3%NA66 Credit Card Processing Fee (pass‐through) Utility Newper transactionThis is a pass‐through cost from merchant processor.NA NA$3.50NA67 ACH/e‐checkNewper transactionThis is a pass‐through cost from merchant processor.NA NA$0.75NA* Commercial accounts paying the higher sewer base amount will pay $250.00, or a higher amount determined by Finance Department.** If applications for both are submitted and processed at the same time, the fee will be $ 405.00 + 40.50 = $ 445.50.*** Rates for larger meters will be established by the Finance Department, as necessaryCity of Gilroy31Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 238Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

South County Regional Wastewater Authority# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended FeeFee Δ1 Board Agendas/Packet 0.01 per page plus mailing NA NA $0.01 $02 Pool Drain Inspection80.00$183.95 57% $183.00 $103(Authority City Code Section 19.106(b))3 Inspection FeeDivision hourly rateActivities shall include time for inspection, monitoring, travel, reports, research, plus actual cost consulting, paperwork and any office time that relates to the industrial user.NA NADivision hourly rate$04 Re‐Inspection FeeNewper hour 1/2 hour minimum$214.58 NA $214.00 NA5 Septage Hauler Treatment Service Fees 0.15per gal(Ord. 93‐2)NA NA $0.15 $06 Reproduction0.10per page$6.05 98% $0.10 $07 Special Event Fee‐ Plan Check Fee*125.00$149.39 16% $149.00 $248 Special Event Fee‐ Event Fee*125.00per hourwith 1 hour minimum + 50% after hours and travel time$195.67 36% $171.00 $469 Surcharge ‐ BOD in excess of 300 mg/l 0.95per lb of BODNA NA $0.95 $010 Surcharge ‐ TSS in excess of 300 mg/l 0.23per lb of TSSNA NA $0.23 $011 Pretreatment Final InspectionDivision hourly rate per hour$135.18 NA $135.00 NA12 Pretreatment Plan‐check Division hourly rate per hour$135.18 NA $135.00 NA13 Pretreatment re‐inspection Division hourly rate1/2 hour minimum$135.18 NA $135.00 NA*The number of inspectors necessary to monitor an event shall be determined by the Program Administrator. Factors to be considered shall be the number of vendors and area to be monitored.FeesPretreatment Fees City of Gilroy32Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 239Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Public Works# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ1Subdivision Map Check(A) ‐ Final Map1,755.00 +$15.70/lot NA NA$8,000 Deposit + $220/hrNA2Subdivision Map Check(A) ‐ Parcel Map2,035.00 +$630.00/lot NA NA$5,000 Deposit + $220/hrNA3Subdivision Map Check(A) ‐ Re‐assessment Map1,710.00+$630.00/lot plus customer assessment consultantNA NA$5,000 Deposit + $220/hrNA4 Certificate of Compliance (Lot Line Adjustment, Lot Merger) 500.00per certificateNA NA$2,500 Deposit + $220/hrNA5 Community Facilities District Formation Fee5,000.00NA NA$6,500 Deposit NA6Encroachment Permit *based on total cost of public right‐of‐way improvements360.00Plus % cost of the improvement constructed in ROW$401.13 10% $401.00$41 7 $0.00 ‐ $100,00012.60%NA NA12.60%$0 8 $100,001 ‐ $200,00010.50%NA NA10.50%$0 9 Over $200,0008.40%NA NA8.40%$0 10 Re‐submittal Review after 3 submittalsDivision(s) hourly rate2 hour minimumNA NADivision(s) hourly rate $0 11 Annual Utility Encroachment Permit5000 + 200 for each base permitAnnuallyAllows staff to issue one annual permit and then bill utility company monthly for additional individual permits$8,134.05 NA$7,500.00$2,500 12 Additional VisitNewNA NAFBHRNA13 Community Event Banner Fee200.00$657.85 70% $657.00$457 14 Oversize Transportation Permits ‐ Single Trip16.00NA NA$16.00$0 15 Oversize Transportation Permits ‐ Annual Permit90.00NA NA$90.00$0 16 Oversize Transportation Permits ‐ Repetitive Permit 90.00NA NA$90.00$0 17 Impact Fee Deferral 285.00+ $25.00/additional lotsame address plus Expungement Fee $180.00$411.87 31%$411 + $32.00/additional lotsame address plus Expungement Fee $234.00$126 Special Public Works ServicesCity of Gilroy33Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 240Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Public Works# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔSpecial Public Works Services18Special Cost Schedules, Agreements, Right of Way Reviews and other Misc Services185.00per hourNA NACity Attorney Hourly Rate$0 19Special Staff Analysis(A)Division(s) hourly rate for public works engineering review and inspection services on specified applications applicable in Resolution 2014‐14Deposit RequiredNA NADivision(s) hourly rate for public works engineering review and inspection services on specified applications applicable in Resolution 2014‐14$0 20 Special Legal ReviewCity Attorney Hourly RateDeposit RequiredNA NACity Attorney Hourly Rate$0 21 Curb Painting/Signage RequestNewRed/Green/Yellow/White Parking Restriction Upon Request by Property Owner$467.74 NA$467.00NA22 Driveway Red TippingNewRed Tipping Driveway for Visibility$357.53 NA$357.00NA# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ23Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to approved plans Division(s) hourly rate2 hour minimumNA NADivision(s) hourly rate $0 24 Re‐inspection fee and fee for inspections not shown 125.00per hour Minimum charge‐one half hour$162.68 23% $162.00$37 25Inspections outside of normal business hoursImprovement Plan Check and Inspection Fees475.00+ 160.00/hour after 3 hours$435.86 ‐9%$435.00($40)*At time of Improvement Plan/Final Map submittal 40% of fee is due for Plan Check. Remainder 60% due prior to submittal of Final Map for Council approval# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ26Stormwater Post Construction BMP Initial Setup Fee ‐ Base Fee and First BMPNew$504.30 NA$504.00NA27Stormwater Post Construction BMP Initial Setup Fee ‐ Additional BMPNew$100.86 NA$100.00NAImprovement Plan Check and Inspection Fees(A) StormwaterCity of Gilroy34Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 241Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Public Works# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔSpecial Public Works Services28Stormwater Postconstruction BMP Annual Administration and Monitoring Fee ‐ Base Fee and First BMPNew$413.98 NA$413.00NA29Stormwater Postconstruction BMP Annual Administration and Monitoring Fee ‐ Additional BMPNew$31.84 NA$31.00NA30Stormwater Postconstruction BMP Annual Administration and Monitoring Delinquent Fee (per month of delinquency)New$58.38 NA$58.00NA# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔSewer Mains ‐ including manhole and other pertinences Developer responsibility is up to and including 12" mains31 6" Main ‐ Full PipeN/Aper LFNA NANA$0 32 6" Main ‐ Half Pipe73.00per LFNA NA$73.00$0 33 8" Main ‐ Full PipeN/Aper LFNA NANA$0 34 8" Main ‐ Half Pipe75.00per LFNA NA$75.00$0 35 10" Main ‐ Full PipeN/Aper LFNA NANA$0 36 10" Main ‐ Half Pipe81.00per LFNA NA$81.00$0 37 12" Main ‐ Full Pipe166.00per LFNA NA$166.00$0 38 12" Main ‐ Half Pipe83.00per LFNA NA$83.00$0 39 15" Main ‐ Full Pipe174.00per LFNA NA$174.00$0 40 15" Main ‐ Half Pipe87.00per LFNA NA$87.00$0 41 18" Main ‐ Full Pipe186.00per LFNA NA$186.00$0 42 18" Main ‐ Half Pipe93.00per LFNA NA$93.00$0 43 21" Main ‐ Full Pipe204.00per LFNA NA$204.00$0 44 21" Main ‐ Half Pipe102.00per LFNA NA$102.00$0 45 24" Main ‐ Full Pipe211.00per LFNA NA$211.00$0 46 24" Main ‐ Half Pipe106.00per LFNA NA$106.00$0 47 27" Main ‐ Full Pipe244.00per LFNA NA$244.00$0 48 27" Main ‐ Half Pipe122.00per LFNA NA$122.00$0 49 30" Main ‐ Full Pipe287.00per LFNA NA$287.00$0 50 30" Main ‐ Half Pipe144.00per LFNA NA$144.00$0 51 33" Main ‐ Full Pipe315.00per LFNA NA$315.00$0 52 33" Main ‐ Half Pipe158.00per LFNA NA$158.00$0 53 36" Main ‐ Full Pipe356.00per LFNA NA$356.00$0 54 36" Main ‐ Half Pipe178.00per LFNA NA$178.00$0 55 39" Main ‐ Full Pipe423.00per LFNA NA$423.00$0 56 39" Main ‐ Half Pipe212.00per LFNA NA$212.00$0 ReimbursementsCity of Gilroy35Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 242Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Public Works# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔSpecial Public Works Services57 42" Main ‐ Full Pipe529.00per LFNA NA$529.00$0 58 42" Main ‐ Half Pipe265.00per LFNA NA$265.00$0 Storm Mains ‐ including manholes, catch basins and other pertinences Developer responsibility is up to and including 24" mains59 18" Main RCP ‐ Full PipeN/Aper LFNA NANA$0 60 18" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe63.00per LFNA NA$63.00$0 61 21" Main RCP ‐ Full PipeN/Aper LFNA NANA$0 62 21" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe69.00per LFNA NA$69.00$0 63 24" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe140.00per LFNA NA$140.00$0 64 24" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe70.00per LFNA NA$70.00$0 65 27" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe164.00per LFNA NA$164.00$0 66 27" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe82.00per LFNA NA$82.00$0 67 30" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe177.00per LFNA NA$177.00$0 68 30" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe86.00per LFNA NA$86.00$0 69 33" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe182.00per LFNA NA$182.00$0 70 33" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe91.00per LFNA NA$91.00$0 71 36" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe189.00per LFNA NA$189.00$0 72 36" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe95.00per LFNA NA$95.00$0 73 42" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe197.00per LFNA NA$197.00$0 74 42" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe99.00per LFNA NA$99.00$0 75 48" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe233.00per LFNA NA$233.00$0 76 48" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe117.00per LFNA NA$117.00$0 77 54" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe273.00per LFNA NA$273.00$0 78 54" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe137.00per LFNA NA$137.00$0 79 60" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe315.00per LFNA NA$315.00$0 80 60" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe158.00per LFNA NA$158.00$0 81 66" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe357.00per LFNA NA$357.00$0 82 66" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe179.00per LFNA NA$179.00$0 83 72" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe399.00per LFNA NA$399.00$0 84 72" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe200.00per LFNA NA$200.00$0 85 78" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe431.00per LFNA NA$431.00$0 86 78" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe216.00per LFNA NA$216.00$0 87 84" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe461.00per LFNA NA$461.00$0 88 84" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe231.00per LFNA NA$231.00$0 89 90" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe492.00per LFNA NA$492.00$0 90 90" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe246.00per LFNA NA$246.00$0 91 96" Main RCP ‐ Full Pipe522.00per LFNA NA$522.00$0 City of Gilroy36Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 243Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Public Works# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge Unit NotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔSpecial Public Works Services92 96" Main RCP ‐ Half Pipe261.00per LFNA NA$261.00$0 93 TrafficIn accordance with City's reimbursement policyNA NAIn accordance with City's reimbursement policy$0 Water Mains ‐ including fire hydrants, valves, valve boxes and other pertinences Developer responsibility is up to and including 12" mains94 6" Main ‐ Full PipeN/Aper LFNA NANA$0 95 6" Main ‐ Half Pipe39.00per LFNA NA$39.00$0 96 8" Main ‐ Full PipeN/Aper LFNA NANA$0 97 8" Main ‐ Half Pipe41.00per LFNA NA$41.00$0 98 10" Main ‐ Full PipeN/Aper LFNA NANA$0 99 10" Main ‐ Half Pipe47.00per LFNA NA$47.00$0 100 12" Main ‐ Full Pipe104.00per LFNA NA$104.00$0 101 12" Main ‐ Half Pipe52.00per LFNA NA$52.00$0 102 14" Main ‐ Full Pipe114.00per LFNA NA$114.00$0 103 14" Main ‐ Half Pipe57.00per LFNA NA$57.00$0 104 16" Main ‐ Full Pipe124.00per LFNA NA$124.00$0 105 16" Main ‐ Half Pipe62.00per LFNA NA$62.00$0 106 18" Main ‐ Full Pipe135.00per LFNA NA$135.00$0 107 18" Main ‐ Half Pipe68.00per LFNA NA$68.00$0 108 20" Main ‐ Full Pipe151.00per LFNA NA$151.00$0 109 20" Main ‐ Half Pipe76.00per LFNA NA$76.00$0 110 24" Main ‐ Full Pipe164.00per LFNA NA$164.00$0 111 24" Main ‐ Half Pipe82.00per LFNA NA$82.00$0 112 30" Main ‐ Full Pipe182.00per LFNA NA$182.00$0 113 30" Main ‐ Half Pipe91.00per LFNA NA$91.00$0 114 36" Main ‐ Full Pipe211.00per LFNA NA$211.00$0 115 36" Main ‐ Half Pipe106.00per LFNA NA$106.00$0 Notes: The Half Pipe schedule is used to determine the front footage reimbursement to former developers for infrastructure previously installed along the front footage of the development.The Full Pipe schedule is used to determine the oversizing reimbursement to the developer for installing water, sewer, and storm main extensions to sizes required by each master plan that are greater than the sizes required by the development. The oversized portion is the difference between the master planned size for the main and the greater of the main size required by the development or the developer’s minimum responsibility for each main.(A) Reflects fee increases to offset the City’s expenditures for the city’s High Speed Rail Master Plan effort. *For any user fee service request that is outside the scope, or for services for which there is no fee currently set, the City can charge up to the full cost of the FBHR for personnel involved.City of Gilroy37Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 244Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Recreation# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔFacility Fees (City Code Section 18.9)Christmas Hill Park Outdoor Sites1Mulberry (East or West) ‐ A*0.00Per Day$218.61 100% $0.00 $0 2Mulberry (East or West) ‐ B*100.00Per Day$226.03 56% $165.00 $65 3Mulberry (East or West) ‐ C*150.00Per Day$226.03 34% $200.00 $50 4Mulberry (East or West) ‐ D*200.00Per Day$226.03 12% $226.00 $26 5Mulberry (East or West) ‐ Deposit100.00Per DayNA NA $135.00 $35 6Mulberry (Total) ‐ A*0.00Per Day$305.22 100% $0.00 $0 7Mulberry (Total) ‐ B*200.00Per Day$312.63 36% $208.00 $8 8Mulberry (Total) ‐ C*250.00Per Day$312.63 20% $260.00 $10 9Mulberry (Total) ‐ D*300.00Per Day$312.63 4% $312.00 $12 10Mulberry (Total) ‐ Deposit100.00Per DayNA NA $135.00 $35 11Sycamore (No Lights) ‐ A*0.00Per Day$188.97 100% $0.00 $0 12Sycamore (No Lights) ‐ B*55.00Per Day$196.38 72% $69.00 $14 13Sycamore (No Lights) ‐ C*105.00Per Day$196.38 47% $132.00 $27 14Sycamore (No Lights) ‐ D*155.00Per Day$196.38 21% $196.00 $41 15Sycamore (No Lights) ‐ Deposit100.00Per DayNA NA $135.00 $35 16Amphitheater ‐ A*0.00Per Day$290.83 100% $0.00 $0 17Amphitheater ‐ B*155.00Per Day$298.24 48% $181.00 $26 18Amphitheater ‐ C*205.00Per Day$298.24 31% $239.00 $34 19Amphitheater ‐ D*255.00Per Day$298.24 14% $298.00 $43 20Amphitheater ‐ Deposit100.00Per DayNANA$135.00$35 21Walnut ‐ A*0.00Per Day$188.97 100% $0.00$0 22Walnut ‐ B*55.00Per Day$196.38 72% $69.00$14 23Walnut ‐ C*105.00Per Day$196.38 47% $132.00$27 24Walnut ‐ D*155.00Per Day$196.38 21% $196.00$41 25Walnut ‐ Deposit100.00Per DayNANA$135.00$35 26Christmas Hill Ranch Site not including TEEC Bldg. ‐ A*0.00Per Day$605.54 100% $0.00$0 27Christmas Hill Ranch Site not including TEEC Bldg. ‐ B*250.00Per Day$612.95 59% $437.00$187 28Christmas Hill Ranch Site not including TEEC Bldg. ‐ C*300.00Per Day$612.95 51% $524.00$224 29Christmas Hill Ranch Site not including TEEC Bldg. ‐ D*350.00Per Day$612.95 43% $612.00$262 30Christmas Hill Ranch Site not including TEEC Bldg. ‐ Deposit500.00Per DayNANA$500.00$0 31Christmas Hill Park Side ‐ A*NewPer Day$812.12 NA$0.00NA32Christmas Hill Park Side ‐ B*NewPer Day$819.53 NA$585.00NA33Christmas Hill Park Side ‐ C*NewPer Day$819.53 NA$702.00NAFacilities & ParksCity of Gilroy38Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 245Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Recreation# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔFacilities & Parks34Christmas Hill Park Side ‐ D*NewPer Day$819.53 NA $819.00 NA35Christmas Hill Park Side ‐ DepositNewPer DayNA NA $500.00 NA36Entire Christmas Hill Including Ranch Site (Not including TEEC Bldg.) ‐ A*0.00Per Day$2,038.13 100% $0.00 $0 37Entire Christmas Hill Including Ranch Site (Not including TEEC Bldg.) ‐ B*750.00Per Day$2,067.77 64% $1,500.00 $750 38Entire Christmas Hill Including Ranch Site (Not including TEEC Bldg.) ‐ C*1,000.00Per Day$2,067.77 52% $1,750.00 $750 39Entire Christmas Hill Including Ranch Site (Not including TEEC Bldg.) ‐ D*1,250.00Per Day$2,067.77 40% $2,067.00 $817 40Entire Christmas Hill Including Ranch Site (Not including TEEC Bldg.) ‐ Deposit750.00Per DayNA NA $750.00 $0 Las Animas Veteran’s Park Outdoor Sites41Lakeside ‐ A*0.00Per DayNo Music allowed $203.79 100% $0.00 $0 42Lakeside ‐ B*100.00Per DayNo Music allowed $211.20 53% $105.00 $5 43Lakeside ‐ C*150.00Per DayNo Music allowed $211.20 29% $158.00 $8 44Lakeside ‐ D*200.00Per DayNo Music allowed $211.20 5% $211.00 $11 45Lakeside ‐ Deposit100.00Per DayNo Music allowed NA NA $135.00 $35 46The Oaks ‐ A*0.00Per DayNo lights/no music allowed $218.61 100% $0.00 $0 47The Oaks ‐ B*120.00Per DayNo lights/no music allowed $226.03 47% $165.00 $45 48The Oaks ‐ C*170.00Per DayNo lights/no music allowed $226.03 25% $200.00 $30 49The Oaks ‐ D*220.00Per DayNo lights/no music allowed $226.03 3% $226.00 $6 50The Oaks ‐ Deposit100.00Per DayNo lights/no music allowed NA NA $135.00 $35 51Park Site Reservation Cancellation FeeNewPlus Actual Payment Processing Cost$64.31 NA $64.00 NAOther Park Amenities52Bounce House Special Permit Fee at Non‐Reservable Picnic Sites ‐ A*0.00$50.71 100% $0.00$0 53Bounce House Special Permit Fee at Non‐Reservable Picnic Sites ‐ B, C, or D*35.00$50.71 31% $50.00$15 54 San Ysidro Picnic Pavilion ‐ A*NewPer Day$203.79 NA$0.00NA55 San Ysidro Picnic Pavilion ‐ B*NewPer Day$211.20 NA$75.00NA56 San Ysidro Picnic Pavilion ‐ C*NewPer Day$211.20 NA$125.00NA57 San Ysidro Picnic Pavilion ‐ D*NewPer Day$211.20 NA$211.00NA58 San Ysidro Picnic Pavilion DepositNewNANA$135.00NACity of Gilroy39Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 246Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Recreation# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔFacilities & ParksSoftball Fields59 Field Reservations ‐ A* 0.00 per 2 hours baseball/softball/Soccer $188.47 100% $0.00 $0 60 Field Reservations ‐ B* 45.00 per 2 hours baseball/softball/Soccer $203.30 78% $60.00 $15 61 Field Reservations ‐ C* 55.00 per 2 hours baseball/softball/Soccer $203.30 73% $70.00 $15 62 Field Reservations ‐ D* 65.00 per 2 hours baseball/softball/Soccer $203.30 68% $90.00 $25 63 Field Reservations ‐ Deposit 100.00 baseball/softball/Soccer NA NA $135.00 $35 64 Lights ‐ A* 0.00$30.14 100% $0.00 $0 65 Lights ‐ B* 25.00 per hour $30.14 17% $30.00 $5 66 Lights ‐ C* 25.00 per hour $30.14 17% $30.00 $5 67 Lights ‐ D* 25.00 per hour $30.14 17% $30.00 $5 68 Lights ‐ Deposit NANA NA NA $0 69 Field Reservation Cancellation Fee NewPlus Actual Payment Processing Cost$64.31 NA $64.00 NASenior Center 70 Main Hall ‐ A* 0.00 per hour. $121.21 100% $0.00 $0 71 Main Hall ‐ B* 65.00 per hour. $128.63 49% $79.00 $14 72 Main Hall ‐ C* 85.00 per hour. $128.63 34% $103.00 $18 73 Main Hall ‐ D* 105.00 per hour. $128.63 18% $128.00 $23 74 Main Hall ‐ Deposit 500.00NA NA $500.00 $0 75 Meeting Room ‐ A* 0.00 per hour. $64.31 100% $0.00 $0 76 Meeting Room ‐ B* 25.00 per hour. $71.73 65% $39.00 $14 77 Meeting Room ‐ C* 35.00 per hour. $71.73 51% $55.00 $20 78 Meeting Room ‐ D* 45.00 per hour. $71.73 37% $71.00 $26 79 Meeting Room ‐ Deposit 100.00NA NA $135.00 $35 Wheeler Center80 Multi‐purpose Rm. ‐ A* 0.00 per hour. $64.31 100% $0.00 $0 81 Multi‐purpose Rm. ‐ B* 25.00 per hour. $71.73 65% $39.00 $14 82 Multi‐purpose Rm. ‐ C* 35.00 per hour. $71.73 51% $55.00 $20 83 Multi‐purpose Rm. ‐ D* 45.00 per hour. $71.73 37% $71.00 $26 84 Multi‐purpose Rm. ‐ Deposit 100.00NA NA $135.00 $35 85 Craft Room ‐ A* 0.00 per hour. $64.31 100% $0.00 $0 86 Craft Room ‐ B* 25.00 per hour. $71.73 65% $39.00 $14 87 Craft Room ‐ C* 35.00 per hour. $71.73 51% $55.00 $20 88 Craft Room ‐ D* 45.00 per hour. $71.73 37% $71.00 $26 89 Craft Room ‐ Deposit 100.00NA NA $135.00 $35 90 Dance Room ‐ A* 0.00 per hour. $64.31 100% $0.00 $0 91 Dance Room ‐ B* 25.00 per hour. $71.73 65% $39.00 $14 92 Dance Room ‐ C* 35.00 per hour. $71.73 51% $55.00 $20 93 Dance Room ‐ D* 45.00 per hour. $71.73 37% $71.00 $26 94 Dance Room ‐ Deposit 100.00NA NA $135.00 $35 City of Gilroy40Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 247Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Recreation# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔFacilities & ParksOther Community Recreation Buildings95Las Animas Park Multi‐Purpose Room ‐ A*0.00 per hour. $64.31 100% $0.00 $0 96Las Animas Park Multi‐Purpose Room ‐ B*65.00 per hour. $71.73 9% $39.00 ($26)97Las Animas Park Multi‐Purpose Room ‐ C*75.00 per hour. $71.73 ‐5% $55.00 ($20)98Las Animas Park Multi‐Purpose Room ‐ D*85.00 per hour. $71.73 ‐19% $71.00 ($14)99Las Animas Park Multi‐Purpose Room ‐ Deposit100.00NA NA $135.00 $35 100Facility Reservation Cancellation Fee50.00Plus Actual Payment Processing Cost$64.31 NA $64.00 $25 Gymnasiums 101 Wheeler ‐ A* 0.00 per hour. $79.14 100% $0.00 $0 102 Wheeler ‐ B* 35.00 per hour. $86.55 60% $54.00 $19 103 Wheeler ‐ C* 45.00 per hour. $86.55 48% $70.00 $25 104 Wheeler ‐ D* 55.00 per hour. $86.55 36% $86.00 $31 105 Wheeler ‐ Deposit 250.00 per hour. NA NA $250.00 $0 106 Solorsano ‐ A* 0.00 per hour. $79.14 100% $0.00 $0 107 Solorsano ‐ B* 50.00 per hour. $86.55 42% $61.00 $11 108 Solorsano ‐ C* 60.00 per hour. $86.55 31% $73.00 $13 109 Solorsano ‐ D* 70.00 per hour. $86.55 19% $86.00 $16 110 Solorsano ‐ Deposit 250.00NA NA $250.00 $0 111 Christopher High School Small Gym Set by GUSD$86.55 NA $86.00 $0 112 Cesar Chavez Gym Set by GUSD$86.55 NA $86.00 $0 113Gymnasium Reservation Cancellation Fee (except those managed by GUSD)50.00Plus Actual Payment Processing Cost$64.31 22% $64.00 $0 Facility Attendant and Custodial Hourly Rates for Rentals114 Facility Attendant 18.00 per hourMinimum 2 hours$21.39 16% $21.00$3 115 Custodial Attendant 24.00per hourMinimum 2 hours$24.60 2%$24.00$0 *Note:Category A ‐ City and GUSD programs and special eventsCategory B ‐ Non‐profit OrganizationsCategory C ‐ City of Gilroy Residents (Private functions and/or open to the public) Category D ‐ Non‐Residents or any company/business or group holding an event (social, business, educaƟon or for profit) Requires a City of Gilroy business license when rented for “profit‐making” events and may require a special event permit approval. In addition to the approval of the City of Gilroy Recreation Department Director, ten percent (10%) of gross revenues from the event or $500, whichever is greater, are payable and due to the City at the conclusion of the event.Additional personnel, set‐up and equipment costs will be assessed and applied accordingly to all categoriesCity of Gilroy41Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 248Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Fire# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ1Flammable/Combustible Material above‐ground Storage Tank (over 600 gallons) and new technological hazards, Fire training & equipment fee1,020.00 per address $1,914.02 47% $1,914.00 $894 2 Reproduction ‐ PRA's ‐ Photos copy, scanning Department hourly rate + cost of photoNA NADepartment hourly rate + cost of photo$0 3 Business License Regulatory Review Fire Inspections 130.00 per hour One hour minimum$279.98 NA$279.00$149 4 Annual Business Inspections ‐ Fire CompanyNewper hour One hour minimum$485.09 NA$485.00NABLES/Fire Prevention5 Delinquent Service265.00$313.40 15%$313.00$48 6 False AlarmNewper code$252.72 NA$252.00NA7 Fire Alternates Materials ReviewDivision Hourly Rate + Contractual Costsper application$265 minimum/application +$130.00/hour for each additional review/inspection NA NADivision Hourly Rate + Contractual Costs$0 8 Fire Alternates Materials Review ‐ additional review/inspection 130.00per hour$298.77 56%$298.00$168 9 Fire Clearance Inspection115.00per hour 2 hr minimum$375.43 69%$375.00$260 10 Fire Code Operational Permits (Section 105 of the CFC/GFC) 275.00Opertional, currently includes inpsection $432.18 36%$432.00$157 11 Fire Code Re‐Inspection130.00per hour 1/2 hr minimum$193.28 33%$193.00$63 12 Hazmat/CUPA Re‐Inspection Newper hour 1/2 hr minimum$193.28 NA$193.00NA13 Fire Flow Per Hydrant300.00$459.47 35%$459.00$159 14 Permit for new Fire or Haz Mat SystemsBuilding Table ADoes not include plan review or inspections ie:Sprinkler System and Chemical Equipment Review, including Fire Protection Systems, Alarm System, Aboveground TankNA NABuilding Table A $0 15 Fire Plan Check 400.00 for 2 hours $537.36 26% $537.00 $137 16 Fire Plan Check ‐ additional hour including resubmittals 130.00per hour$237.13 45%$237.00$107 17Energy Storage System ‐ Plan Check (Fire Prevention) ESS having capacities exceeding 20 KWh400.00+ divisional hourly rate for each additionalhour$421.44 5%$421.00$21 18Energy Storage System ‐ Inspection (Fire Prevention)ESS having capacities exceeding 20 KWh260.00+ divisional hourly rate for each additionalhour$275.49 6%$275.00$15 19 Fireworks ‐ Aerial DisplayFire Engine Standby Rate 1 hr minimumCity Code Section 10A.8 as required by the Fire Chief City Code Section 10.9$1,736.09 NA$1,736.00$0 20 Fireworks ‐ Aerial Display Inspection permit New 3 hr minimumPlus 150% after hours and travel time. (Does not include Fire Code permits)$562.57 NA$562.00$0 21 Fireworks ‐ Retail Sales635.00per booth$758.87 16%$758.00$123 FeesCity of Gilroy42Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 249Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Fire# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔFees22 Special Event Inpsection Fee130.00per hourPlus 50% after hours and travel time. 1 hr minimum (Does not include Uniform Fire Code permits)$389.63 67%$389.00$259 23 Special Inspection/Consultant310.00for 2 hours Plus consultant cost$361.78 14%$361.00$51 24 Special Inspection/Consultant ‐ additional hour125.00per hour Plus consultant cost$160.98 22%$160.00$35 25State Fire Marshal Required Inspection ‐ Business License processing Fee Apartments: 3‐16 units35.00per parcelState Health and Safety Code 13146.2(a) if not under a regulatory permit$256.99 86%$256.00$221 26State Fire Marshal Required Inspection ‐ Business License Processing Fee Apartments: 17‐32 units65.00per parcelState Health and Safety Code 13146.2(a) if not under a regulatory permit$332.95 80%$332.00$267 27State Fire Marshal Required Inspection ‐ Business License Processing Fee Apartments: 33‐100 units135.00per parcelState Health and Safety Code 13146.2(a) if not under a regulatory permit$408.92 67%$408.00$273 28State Fire Marshal Required Inspection ‐ Business License Processing Fee Apartments: 101 plus units270.00per parcelState Health and Safety Code 13146.2(a) if not under a regulatory permit$560.84 52%$560.00$290 29State Fire Marshal Required Inspection ‐ Apartments: Inspections/testing140.00per hour 1 hr minimum$649.79 78%$649.00$509 30 Other State Regulated Sites140.00per hour1 hr minimum. Schools, Hotels/Motels, Licensed Care Facilities, Institutions, $500.40 72%$500.00$360 31 Hazmat/Fire Prevention Application ReviewNewper hour$319.30 NA$319.00NA32 Tree Lots Cleaning DepsitNew$198.33 NA$198.00NABLES/Hazardous Materials33 Above Ground Petroleum Storage Site ‐Tier 1165.00site annualNo containers greater than 5,000 gallons and aggregate not more than 10, 000 gallons$384.36 57%$384.00$219 34 Above Ground Petroleum Storage Site Non‐qualifying Facility NewContainers greater than 10,000 gallons $505.34 NA$505.00NA35 Above Ground Petroleum Storage Site ‐Tier 2NewContainers greater than 5,000 gallons and no more than 10, 000 gallons. Cannot have an aggregate total storage of more than 10,000 gallons.$444.85 NA$444.00NA36 CAL‐ARP Facility Inspection Fee/Permit375.00per year$626.31 40%$626.00$251 37 CAL‐ARP Facility Audit/Processing Fee ‐ in house1,000.00$2,077.99 52%$2,077.00$1,077 38 CAL‐ARP Facility Audit Fee ‐ outsourced375.00plus consultant cost$2,532.59 85%$2,532.00$2,157 39 Technology Data Management Fee20.00per year Old CERS fee$11.59 ‐72%$11.00($9)40 Facility Closure295.00first 2 hours $125 for each add 1 hour$449.21 34%$449.00$154 41 Hazardous Material Plan Check/Inspection125.00per hour$686.75 82%$686.00$561 Hazardous Material Storage Ordinance Permit Fees42 HMS01/HMORT Retail Only (limited substances) 140.00per year over 1 hour inspection$263.39 47%$263.00$123 43 HMS02270.00per year plus$384.36 30%$384.00$114 City of Gilroy43Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 250Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Fire# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔFees44 Up to 5,000 lbs, solidsHourly over 2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 45 55 ‐ 550 gal, liquidsHourly over 2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 46 200 ‐ 2,000 cubic ft. at STP for compressed gasHourly over 2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 47 HMS03500.00per year plus$626.31 20%$626.00$126 48 5,000 ‐ 25,000 lbs, solidsHourly over 4 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 49 550 ‐ 2,750 gal, liquidsHourly over 4 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 50 2,000 ‐ 10,000 cubic ft. at STP for compressed gasHourly over 4 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 51 HMS04690.00per year plus$807.77 15%$807.00$117 52 25,000 ‐ 50,000 lbs, solidsHourly over 5 1/2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 53 2,750 ‐ 5,500 gal, liquidsHourly over 5 1/2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 54 10,000 ‐ 20,000 cubic ft. at STP for compressed gasHourly over 5 1/2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 55 HMS05820.00per year plus$928.74 12%$928.00$108 56 > 50,000 lbs, solidsHourly over 6 1/2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 57 > 5,500 gal, liquidsHourly over 6 1/2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 58 > 20,000 cubic ft. at STP for compressed gasHourly over 6 1/2 hour inspection$0.00 NAHourly$0 Corrosive, Toxic, & Highly Toxic Gas Fees including liquified and sub atmospheric materials59 Storage below MAQ125.00annual$382.53 67%$382.00$257 60 Storage above MAQ375.00annual$503.50 26%$503.00$128 61 Use below MAQ500.00annual$654.72 24%$654.00$154 62 Use above MAQ1,000.00annual$887.73 ‐13%$887.00($113)63 Cryogens270.00annual not corrosive, toxic or highly toxic$412.77 35%$412.00$142 Hazardous Waste Generator Fees64 HWG 1 – less than 2.5 tons/year100.00per year$263.39 62%$263.00$163 65 HWG 2 – 2.5 to less than 5 tons/year160.00per year$323.88 51%$323.00$163 66 HWG 3 ‐ 5 to less than 25 tons/year350.00per year$505.34 31%$505.00$155 67 HWG 4 ‐ 25 to less than 50 tons/year665.00per year$686.80 3%$686.00$21 68 HWG 5 ‐ 50 to less than 250 tons/year790.00per year$868.25 9%$868.00$78 69 HWG 6 ‐ 250 to less than 500 tons/year915.00per year$1,049.71 13%$1,049.00$134 70 HWG 7 ‐ 500 to less than 1,000 tons/year1,040.00per year$1,231.17 16%$1,231.00$191 71 HWG 8 ‐ 1,000 to less than 2,000 tons/year1,290.00per year$1,412.63 9%$1,412.00$122 72Hazardous Waste Generator (HWG0)–Retail/Episodic (Generates less than 100 kg/month)50.00per year$240.98 79%$240.00$190 73Hazardous Waste Generator RCRALQG (Generates more than 1 kg (2.2 lbs) of acute hazardous waste)50.00per year$240.98 79%$240.00$190 Tiered Permit Fees74 Conditional Exempt (CE)250.00annual$384.36 35%$384.00$134 City of Gilroy44Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 251Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Fire# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔFees75 Conditional Authorization (CA)500.00annual$626.31 20%$626.00$126 76 Permit by Rule (PBR)1,005.00annual plus recording fees$1,231.17 18%$1,231.00$226 77 Spill Investigation, Response/Cleanup oversightDepartment/Division hourly rate$125 minimum$600.74 NADepartment/Division hourly rate, $135 minimum$0 Underground Tank78 Installation1,190.00per site up to 3 tanks$3,344.54 64%$3,344.00$2,154 79 Modification (piping & repair only)270.00minimum plus $125/hr addl review/inspections$468.12 42%$468.00$198 80 Operating Permit500.00site annualfull compliance ($820.62 for first 3 tanks) $230 for each additional tank$1,184.89 58%$1,184.00$684 81 Re‐inspection270.00each$470.23 43%$470.00$200 82 Removal815.00per tank Including additional hourly rate $1,473.25 45%$1,473.00$658 83 Testing250.00per tank$267.61 7%$267.00$17 City of Gilroy45Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 252Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Police # Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ1 Call Back/Second ResponsePolice Operation Division Hourly ratesCity reserves legal options for amounts over $500.00(City Code Section 16.35) NA NAPolice Operation Division Hourly rates$0 2 Crime Analysis Services 120.00 per hour $152.81 21% $152.00 $32 3 DUI Cost Recovery Department(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus actual repair and/or replacement of damaged public propertyAll Emergency PersonnelGovernment Code Section 53130‐53158NA NADepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus actual repair and/or replacement of damaged public property$0 4 Graffiti Abatement FeesDepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus actual repair and/or replacement of damaged public property(City Code Section 12.5) NA NADepartment(s)/Division(s) hourly rates plus actual repair and/or replacement of damaged public property$0 5Provision of Special Services(Subsided Rate)145.00 per hour 45% of Police Operation Division hourly rate or $65.00 per hour$153.53 6% $153.00 $8 6 Reproduction ‐ Photos Department hourly rate plus cost of photoNA NADepartment hourly rate plus cost of photo$0 7 School Truancy Charges Police division hourly rates (City Code Section 7.4) NA NA Police division hourly rates $0 8 Tow Truck Driver ‐ Annual Fee 50.00 (City Code Section 24.A.2) $51.87 4% $51.00$1 City of Gilroy46Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 253Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Police # Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ9Vehicle Equipment Inspection and Certification ‐ Resident 10.00$56.13 82% $56.00 $46 10Vehicle Equipment Inspection and Certification ‐ Non‐Resident 35.00$56.13 38% $56.00 $21 11 Vehicle Impound/Release Fees 150.00(California Vehicle Code Section 22850.5)$146.80 ‐2% $146.00 ($4)12Police Community Room Fee ‐ *Category "A"FreeNA NA Free $0 13Police Community Room Fee ‐ *Category "B"50.00per hour with $200.00 security depositNA NA $50.00 $0 14Police Community Room Fee ‐ *Category "C"100.00per hour with $200.00 security depositNA NA $100.00 $0 15Police Community Room Fee ‐ *Category "D"100.00per hour with $200.00 security depositNA NA $200.00 $100 # Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ16 Firearms Sales Permit 205.00 Annually Also needs license (City Code Section 9A.4) $303.89 33% $303.00$98 17 Mobile Vendor ‐ New Application 160.00(Portable container, pushcart, stands, vehicle or wagon that is placed on private property)Also needs license(City Code Section 16A.13) $146.72 ‐9% $146.00($14)Police PermitsCity of Gilroy47Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 254Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Police # Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ18Mobile Vendor ‐ Renewal Application60.00 Annually(Portable container, pushcart, stands, vehicle or wagon that is placed on private property)Also needs license(City Code Section 16A.13) $76.93 22% $76.00 $16 19Solicitor’s Identity Permit (door‐to‐door solicitor) ‐ New Application160.00 Also needs license (City Code Section 16A.1) $146.72 ‐9% $146.00($14)20Solicitor’s Identity Permit (door‐to‐door solicitor) ‐ Renewal Application60.00Annually Also needs license (City Code Section 16A.1) $76.93 22% $76.00$16 21Adult Business Permit ‐ New ApplicationOperations hourly rate (minimum fee of $8,440.00)Police Investigations Also needs licenseNA NAOperations hourly rate (minimum fee of $8,440.00)$0 22Adult Business Permit ‐ Renewal Application1,515.00 Annually $1,951.78 22% $1,951.00 $436 (City Code Sections 4.7, 4.13, 4.14, 4.27, 4.28, 4.30, 4.37, 4.42, 4.59)23Animal Bite Investigation/Quarantine175.00$152.53 ‐15% $152.00 ($23)24 Spay/Neutered 1 yr. /3 yrs 17.00/49.00NA NA Per 3rd Party Contract $0 25 Non‐Altered 1 yr. /3 yrs. 25.00/70.00NA NA Per 3rd Party Contract $0 26 Late fees ‐ 60 days after due date 25.00NA NA Per 3rd Party Contract $0 27 Duplicate tag (Renewals only) 4.00NA NA Per 3rd Party Contract $0 Animal Control FeesAnimal License: Dog/CatCity of Gilroy48Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 255Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Police # Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ28Authority to contract for private serviceTo be determined by services contractNA NATo be determined by services contract$0 29First 24 hour impound at Police Dept100.00NA NA $100.00 $0 30 Each additional day at station 40.00 per day NA NA $40.00 $0 31 Animals quarantined at shelter 175.00+ County impound fee & boardNA NA $175.00 $0 32 At Large impound 110.00+ County impound fee & board, set mileage and Animal Shelter FeeNA NA $110.00 $0 33 Animal Control Permit Fee 45.00 AnnuallyPet shop, commercial kennel, private kennel, pet grooming parlor, animal menagerie, animal shelter or horse establishment or exotic animal(City Code Section 4.37) NA NA $45.00 $0 34 Bingo Permit ‐ New Application 200.00 (City Code Section 5A.7) $159.38 ‐25% $159.00($41)35 Bingo Permit ‐ Annual Renewal Fee 25.00$56.59 56% $56.00$31 36 Initial Cardroom Permit Fee 5,000.00deposit(Resolution 2013‐06) NA NA $5,000.00$0 37 Annual Cardroom Permit (Renewal) 555.00NA NA $555.00$0 38 Annual Table Permit Fees 300.00per tableNA NA $300.00$0 Impound FeeCity of Gilroy49Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 256Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Police # Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ39 One Week Table Permit 25.00Must have a minimum of one Annual Table Permit NA NA $25.00$0 40Initial Employee Registration Application370.00per employeeNA NA $370.00$0 41 Annual Employee185.00NA NA $185.00$0 42 Concealed Weapons Permit ‐ New Ap100.00$20.00 upon filing and remainder upon approvalPenal Code Section 12054 NA NA $100.00 $0 43 Concealed Weapons Permit ‐ Annual 25.00 Penal Code Section 12054 NA NA $25.00$0 44 Dance Hall Permit**405.00(City Code Chapter 8.2) $409.43 1% $409.00$4 45 Massage Permit ‐ Initial215.00(Establishments, managing employees and/or practitioners) Practitioners permit fee is waived if simultaneously applying for an establishment or management employee permit(City Code Section 13.52(c))$288.31 25% $288.00 $73 City of Gilroy50Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 257Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Police # Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Code Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ46 Massage Permit ‐ Renewal 125.00Annually(Establishments, managing employees and/or practitioners) Practitioners permit fee is waived if simultaneously applying for an establishment or management employee permit$137.82 9% $137.00 $12 47 Pawnbrokers, Junk and Secondhand 55.00 Annual Fee (City Code Chapter 12B) NA NA $55.00$0 48 Regulatory Bar Permit 405.00Annually(City Code Section 16.5) $439.72 8% $439.00$34 49 Taxi Cab ‐ Company Permits 235.00Permit(City Code Sections 23.6, 23.35)$273.97 14% $273.00$38 50 Taxi Cab Driver ‐ New 150.00$178.86 16% $178.00$28 51 Taxi Cab Driver ‐ Renewal 100.00$132.08 24% $132.00$32 52 False Alarms Reponse195.00After 3rd and subsequent alarm within 12 months.City reserves legal options for amounts over $500.00(City Code Section 3B.5) $192.11 ‐2% $192.00($3)53 False Alarms Registration 35.00per registrationInitial registration only.(City Code Section 3B.5) $38.58 9% $38.00$3 54 False Alarms Reinstatement 25.00per reinstatementNo response status after 7 alarms in 12 months. (City Code Section 3B.5) $38.58 35% $38.00$13 *Note:See Facilities Fees for category descriptionsCity of Gilroy51Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 258Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔGeneral Inspections and Fees (all divisions)(A)(B)1Additional plan review required by changes, additions or revisions to approved plansDivision(s) hourly rate 2 hour minimum NA NA Division(s) hourly rate $0 2 Inspections for which no fee is specifically indicated Division(s) hourly rate minimum charge‐one half hour NA NA Division(s) hourly rate $0 3 Inspections outside of normal business hours ‐ BldgDivision(s) hourly rate $525.003 hours plus $170/hr each additional hour $524.02 NA $895.00 NA4 Inspections outside of normal business hours ‐ Planning 575.00 3 hours plus $185/hr $476.46 ‐21% $476.46 ($99)5 Re‐inspection fees assessed determination 75.00 + Division(s) hourly rate $89.69 16% $89.69 $15 6 Building Damage Survey Inspection and Report NEW+ Division(s) hourly rate OR see Inspection outside of normal business hrs.$291.89 NA $291.89 NABuilding Life Environmental Safety (BLES)# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ7 Plan Check Review 75% of building permit feeMinimum 1/2 hour division hourly rate of $75.00 as set forth on Table 1‐A page 16NA NA 75% of building permit fee $0 8 Deferred Submittal 75.00 + Division(s) hourly rate (2 hour minimum)$137.03 45% $137.03$62 9 RevisionsDivision(s) hourly rate + Division(s) hourly rate (2 hour minimum)$137.03 NA$137.03NA10 Expedited Building Plan Check Review150% of Building Permit fee1st round review onlyNANA 150% of Building Permit fee $0 Building Permit Fees# DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ11 Building PermitAs set forth in Table 1‐A (page 14)12 Electrical, Mechanical and PlumbingAs set forth in pages 17‐2413 GradingAs set forth in pages 25State of California Fees# DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ14Strong Motion Fee (Charged by State through City)Strong Motion instrumentation and Seismic Hazard Mapping Fees (SMIP) State FeesFee is based on attached Building Valuation schedule which is determined by: $ .00010 x valuation with a minimum of $ 0.50 for Group R occupancies excluding hotels and motels, and $.00021 x valuation for all other occupancies.NANA Fee is based on attached Building Valuation schedule which is determined by: $ .00010 x valuation with a minimum of $ 0.50 for Group R occupancies excluding hotels and motels, and $.00021 x valuation for all other occupancies. $0 15 Category 1 ‐ Residential, 1st to 3rd Story: Valuation x 0.00013= Fee $ 0.50 Min. FeeNA NA $ 0.50 Min. Fee $0 16 Category 2 ‐ All Other Buildings: Valuation x 0.00028= Fee $ 0.50 Min. FeeNA NA $ 0.50 Min. Fee $0 17 Building Standards Administration Special Revolving Fund (BSASRF)18 Permit Valuation $1 to $25,000 $1 NA NA $1 $0 Building Plan Check City of Gilroy52Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 259Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ19 Permit Valuation $25,001 to $50,000$2 NANA$2 $0 20 Permit Valuation $50,001 to $75,000$3 NANA$3 $0 21 Permit Valuation $75,001 to $100,000$4 NANA$4 $0 22 Every $25,000 or fraction thereof above $100,000Add $ 1NANA Add $ 1 $0 City of Gilroy Standard Permitting Fees# DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ23General Plan Update Fee / High Speed Rail Master Plan Fee to offset city’s expenditures (Excludes Residential: photovoltaic; water heater, furnace, and air conditioning replacements; reroofs; and interior remodeling such as kitchen and bath remodels. For purposes of this section, “residential” is considered as one‐ and two‐family residences, including interior and photovoltaic work on individual condominium and townhouse units)4.7%of Building and Engineering fees AKA General Plan Update Fee 4.7% 13% 64% 13% 8%# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ24 Accessibility ‐ Equivalent Facilitation 225.00for first hour+ divisional hourly rate for each additional hour $224.23 0%$224.00($1)25 Accessibility ‐ Unreasonable Hardship Application295.00for first hour + divisional hourly rate for each additional hour $291.75 ‐1%$291.00($4)26 Addressing FeeNEWeach$89.20 NA$89.00NA27 Administrative Hearing1,195.00each$1,188.78 ‐1%$1,188.00($7)28 Alternative Materials Review960.00each type$944.09 ‐2%$944.00($16)29 Building Code Appeal Fee2,180.00each$1,601.79 ‐36% $1,601.00($579)30 Certificate of Occupancy ‐ Reproduction50.00each$84.74 41% $84.00$34 31 Demolition ‐ Historical Building 3,565.00$2,415.62 ‐48% $2,415.00($1,150)32 Demolition ‐ Major (Greater than 501 sq. ft.)1,050.00$996.88 ‐5%$996.00($54)33 Demolition ‐ Minor (120‐500 sq. ft.)395.00$366.51 ‐8%$366.00($29)34 House Moving ‐ Within City2,100.00$1,645.80 ‐28% $1,645.00($455)35 House Moving ‐ From outside City2,100.00plus travel time$1,645.80 ‐28% $1,645.00($455)36 Physically Challenged Board of Appeal2,180.00$1,439.50 ‐51% $1,439.00($741)37 Plot Plan Review/Lot Change550.00each$612.13 10% $612.00$62 38 Reproduction ‐ Building Permit40.00$50.40 21% $50.00$10 39 Reproduction ‐ Building Plans (Architectural 24x36, max 20 sheets) 92.00for first sheet $7.50 for each additional sheet$117.3322% $117.00$25 40Reproduction ‐ Building Address Files/Plans (8x14/11x17, max 20 sheets)NEWfor first sheet +$0.20/sheet$56.02 NA$56.00NA41 Reproduction ‐ Building Address Files/Plans (8x11, max 20 sheets) NEWfor first sheet +$0.10/sheet$56.02 NA$56.00NA42Reproduction ‐ Microfilm ‐ Building Plan Sheet (24x36, max 20 sheets)39.00for first sheet $7.50 for each additional sheet$117.33 67% $117.00$78 43Reproduction ‐ Microfilm ‐ Project Specification Sheet (24x36, max 20 sheets)92.00for first sheet $7.50 for each additional sheet$117.33 22% $117.00$25 Miscellaneous Fees (City Code Sections 6.1 & 7.1. (a))City of Gilroy53Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 260Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ44 Reproduction ‐ Project Specifications (8x11, max 20 sheets) 23.00 for first sheet +$0.10/sheet $56.02 59% $56.00 $33 45Temporary Certificate of OccupancyBond Application345.00$1,028.97 66% $1,028.00 $683 46 Utility Bond Application 245.00$295.87 17% $295.00 $50 47 Building Technology Fee NEW % of permit fees 5% NA 5% NAPhotovoltaic Permitting Fees# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ48 Residential 15 kW or less NEW Residential $562.10 NA $450.00 NA49 Residential More than 15 kW NEW + $15.00 per kwW above 15 kW $755.48 NA $500.00 NA50 Commercial 50 kW or less NEW Commercial $1,064.93 NA $1,000.00 NA51 Commercial 50 kW ‐ 250 kW NEW + $7.00 per kw above 50 kW $1,490.79 NA $1,000.00 NA52 Commercial More than 250 kW NEW + $5.00 per kW above 250 kW $2,681.77 NA $2,400.00 NASolar Thermal Permiting Fees# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ53Residential 10 kWth or less NEW$480.52 NA $450.00 NA54Residential More than 10 kWth NEW+ $ 15.00 per kWth above 10 kWth $533.39 NA $450.00 NA55Commercial 30 kWth or less NEW$1,104.75 NA $1,000.00 NA56Commercial 30 kWth – 260 kWth NEW+ $ 7.00 per kWth above 30 kWth $1,245.26 NA $1,000.00 NA57Commercial More than 260 kWth NEW+ $ 5.00 per kWth $2,426.94 NA $2,426.00 NAPhotovoltaic Energy Storage System Permitting Fees# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ58 Energy Storage System ‐ Permit Fee NEW each $103.27 NA $103.27 NA59 Energy Storage System ‐ Plan Check (Building) NEW + divisional hourly rate for each additional hour $166.03 NA $166.03 NA61 Energy Storage System ‐ Inspection (Building) NEW + divisional hourly rate for each additional hour $146.77 NA $146.77 NATable 1‐A ‐ Building Permit Fees Roofing Permitting Fees# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ62Residential Inspection 160.00 minimum fee + $147.00/each additional hour $146.77 ‐9% $146.00 ($14)Residential Re‐roof overlay, prep old roof, felt, new roof63 Application Fee 70.00 plus $69.80 0% $69.00 ($1)64 1st 25 squares 275.00 plus $195.73 ‐40% $195.00 ($80)City of Gilroy54Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 261Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ65 Ea. additional 25 squares130.00plus$135.18 4%$135.00$5 66 Ea. additional inspection after 3 inspections130.00$146.77 11% $146.00$16 Residential conversion, tear‐off plywood, felt, new roof67 Application Fee70.00plus$69.80 0%$69.00($1)68 1st 25 squares370.00plus $270.35 ‐37% $270.00($100)69 Ea. additional 25 squares130.00plus$165.45 21% $165.00$35 70 Ea. additional inspection after 3 inspections125.00$165.45 24% $165.00$40 Commercial/Industrial 71Commercial/Industrial Pre‐roof Inspections(A) (minimum charge – 1 hour) 205.00 minimum fee + 147.00/each additional hour $215.85 5% $215.00 $10 72 Commercial Re‐roofBased on valuation or contract price whichever is greater. **NA NA Based on valuation or contract price whichever is greater. ** $0 Swimming Pool Permitting Fees# Description *Minimum Valuation Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ73ResidentialSwimming Pools and/or Spas55.00 per sq. ft.Based on construction valuation or minimum sq. ft. whichever is greaterNA NA $120.00 $65 74CommercialSwimming Pools and/or Spas73.00 per sq. ft.Based on construction valuation or minimum sq. ft. whichever is greaterNA NA $150.00 $77 75 Supplementals (Plumbing, Mechanical, and Electrical) 210.00NA NA $179.00 ($31)76 Pool Replaster Surface NEW$333.05 NA $330.00 NA77 Demo: Vinyl NEW$345.49 NA $345.00 NA78 Demo: Gunite NEW$462.03 NA $450.00 NA79 Pre‐Treatment Discharge Permit 80.00NA NA $80.00 $0 Wall / Monument Sign or Art Sculpture Permitting FeesSigns, Outline Lighting and Marquees(A)# Description*Minimum ValuationUnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ80 New Sign / Art SculptureNEWBased on valuation or contract price whichever is greater.**NA NA Based on valuation or contract price whichever is greater.** NA81For signs with outline lighting systems or marquees supplied from a new branch circuit22.50 each $60.56 NA $60.00 $38 82For signs with outline lighting systems or marquees supplied from an existing branch circuit NEW each $30.28 NA $30.00 NA83For additional branch circuits within the same sign, outline lighting system or marquee4.50 each $6.06 NA $6.00 $2 84 Structural Footings for Monument Sign/Art Sculpture New each $363.85 NA $363.00 NA85 Electrical Supplemental Fee 47.00 As set forth on pg 17 $52.87 NA$52.00 $5 # Description *Minimum Valuation Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ86 Deck 8.70 per sq. ft. * NA NA $15.00 $6 Miscellaneous Permitting FeesCity of Gilroy55Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 262Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ87 Patio Cover / Structures with open walls16.30per sq. ft. *NANA$45.00$29 88 Exterior Stucco to Residence HomeNEWper sq ft.*NANA$7.00NA89 Outdoor Fireplace Based on valuation of $3,260 or contract price whichever is greater.+ supplemental fees for Electrical, Mechanical and/or PlumbingNANABased on valuation of $3,260 or contract price whichever is greater. $0 90 Above ground Tank905.00 + supplemental fees for Electrical, Mechanical and/or Plumbing‐Based on valuation or contract price whichever is greater.**NANA Based on valuation or contract price whichever is greater.** $0 * Minimum Valuation is considered as the valuation on this page or the contract / construction valuation whichever is greater ** ValuaƟon is based on contract price or construcƟon valuaƟon for material and labor at fair market value whicever is greaterTable A ‐ Building Valuation Data # Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔPermit Issuance91 For issuing each permit 115.00 plus $155.30 26% $155.00 $40 92 For issuing each supplemental permit 47.00$52.87 11% $52.00 $5 Temporary Power Service+ Issuance fees93For a temporary service power pole or pedestal including all pole or pedestal‐mounted receptacle outlets and appurtenances, each23.50 flat fee $30.28 NA $30.00 $7 94For a temporary distribution system and temporary lighting and receptacle outlets for construction sites, decorative light, Christmas tree sales lots, firework stands, etc. each11.50 flat fee $124.39 NA $124.00 $113 Lighting FixturesFor lighting fixtures, sockets or other lamp‐holding devices:95 First 20 each 26.00 plus $31.49 17% $31.00 $5 96 Additional fixtures, each additional 20 21.00 each $25.43 NA $25.00 $4 For pole or platform‐mounted lighting fixtures:97 First 10 26.00 plus $31.49 17% $31.00 $5 98 each additional 1.30 each $1.82 NA $1.00 ($0)For theatrical‐type lighting fixtures or assemblies99 First 10 26.00 plus $31.49 17% $31.00 $5 100 each additional 1.30 each $1.82 NA $1.00 ($0)Electrical Permittings FeesCity of Gilroy56Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 263Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔPower Apparatus(A)(B)For motors, generators, transformers, rectifiers, synchronous converters, capacitors, industrial eating, air conditioners and heat pumps, cooking or baking equipment and other apparatus, as follows: Rating in horsepower (HP), kilowatts (KW), kilovolt‐amperes (KVA), or kilovolt‐amperes‐reactive (KVAR):Note: a.For equipment or appliances having more than one motor, transformer, heater, etc., the sum of the combined ratings may be used. b.These fees include all switches, circuit breakers, contactors, thermostats, relays and other directly related control equipment.101 Up to and including 1, each 4.50$36.33 88% $36.00 $32 102 Over 1 and not over 10, each 11.50$31.49 63% $31.00 $20 103 Over 10 and not over 50, each 22.50$29.07 23% $29.00 $7 104 Over 50 and not over 100, each 42.50$26.64 ‐60% $26.00 ($17)105 Over 100, each 64.00$24.22 ‐164% $24.00 ($40)Busways+ Issuance fees106For trolley and plug‐in type busways, each 100 feet, or fraction thereof.6.80 Note:An additional fee will be required for lighting fixtures, motors and other appliances that are connected to trolley and plug‐in type busways. No fee is required for portable tools.$60.56 89% $60.00 $53 Carnivals and Circuses(A)Carnivals, circuses, or other traveling shows or exhibitions utilizing transportable‐type rides, booths, displays and attractionsFor permanently installed rides, booths, displays and attractions, use the UNIT FEE SCHEDULE107 For electric generators and electrically driven ride, each 23.50 each + Issuance fees $33.76 30% $33.00 $10 108For mechanically driven rides and walk‐through attractions or displays having electric lighting, each6.80 each + Issuance fees $27.01 75% $27.00 $20 109 For a system of area and booth lighting, each 6.80 each + Issuance fees $13.50 50% $13.00 $6 Electrical Services110 For main services of 400 amps or less 314.00$385.16 18% $385.00 $71 111 For main services over 400 amps 805.00$704.21 ‐14% $704.00 ($101)112For Sub-Panels of 200 amps or lessNEW + Issuance fees $177.55 NA $177.00 NA113For Sub-Panels over 200 amps NEW + Issuance fees $269.95 NA $269.00 NA114 Meter Pedelstal NEW flat fee $293.61 NA $293.00 NACell Tower: 115Cell Tower Permit feefee includes plan check for 1st and 2nd reviewNEW each plus $1,038.64 NA $1,038.00 NA116 With Battery NEW$785.11 NA $785.00 NA117 No Battery NEW$249.05 NA $249.00 NAElectrical Vehicle Charging118 EVC ‐ Residential NEW$275.68 NA $275.00 NA119 EVC ‐ Commercial NEWBased on valuation or contract price whichever is greater.**NA NABased on valuation or contract price whichever is greater.**NACity of Gilroy57Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 264Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔUnit Fee ScheduleFor receptacle, switch and lighting outlets. For receptacle, switch, lighting or other outlets at which current is used or controlled, except services, feeders and meters:+ issuance fees120 First 20, lump sum 26.00 plus $31.49 17% $31.00 $5 121 each additional 20 21.00$25.43 17% $25.00 $4 Electrical Permit Fees for new construction or addition shall be the Division Hourly Rate (half‐hour minimum) per required inspection or based on the fixture counts or the fee per square foot based on the construction category as set# Category Cost per Trade Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ122 Assembly Occupancies 0.115 per square foot $0.118 NA $0.118 $0 123 Hazardous Use 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256 $0 124 Hotel / Motel 0.115 per square foot $0.136 NA $0.136 $0 125 Manufacturing 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256 $0 126 Medical / Dental Office 0.168 per square foot $0.247 NA $0.247 $0 127 Office / Shell Speculative Uses 0.168 per square foot $0.178 NA $0.178 $0 128 Parking Structure 0.021 per square foot $0.021 NA $0.021 $0 129 Repair Garage / Gas Station 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256$0 130 Research and Development0.168per square foot$0.172 NA$0.172$0 131Residential (single, two‐family and multifamily apartments and condominiums)0.136per square foot$0.158 NA$0.158$0 132 Restaurant / Market0.251per square foot$0.242 NA$0.242($0)133 Commercial Restrooms0.251per square foot$0.724 NA$0.724$0 134 Store / Retail0.168per square foot$0.167 NA$0.167($0)135 Warehouses0.052per square foot$0.092 NA$0.092$0 136 All Others0.136per square foot$0.079 NA$0.079($0)# DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔPermit Issuance(A) (B)137 For issuing each permit115.00plus$155.30 26% $155.00$40 138 For issuing each supplemental permit47.00$52.87 11% $52.00$5 Heating, Ventilation, and Air Conditioning (HVAC)139Residential (New) Furnace and / or AC/Condenser293.00$332.00 12% $332.00$39 140Residential existing (Replace) Furnace and / or AC/CondenserNEW$192.73 NA$192.00NA141Residential (New, Adding, Replacing and / or Relocating) Ducting and vents.NEW each + Issuance fees, if standalone $27.58 NA $27.00 NA142 Commercial (New) Furnace and/or HVAC/Condenser NEW$494.58 NA $494.00 NAElectrical Permits Fees (A)(B)forth below. These Permit Fees are in addition to the Permit Issuance Fees. These fees do not include Plan Check fees.Mechanical Permit and Plan Review(a)(b)City of Gilroy58Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 265Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ143 Commercial existing (Replace) Furnace and/or HVAC/CondensorNEWFlat Fee or based on construction valuation, whichever is greater$366.51 NA $366.00 NA144 Commercial ‐ Ducts and Vents (New, Replacing or Relocating) NEW each +issuance fees, if standalone $30.00 NA $30.00 NAUnit Fee Schedule + issuance fees145For the installation or relocation of each forced‐air or gravity‐type furnace or burner, including ducts and vents attached to such appliance, up to 100,000 btu/h13.60$18.41 NA $18.00 $4 146For the installation or relocation of each forced‐air or gravity‐type furnace or burner, including ducts and vents attached to such appliance, over 100,000 btu/h15.70$18.41 NA $18.00 $2 147For the installation or relocation of each floor furnace, including vent 13.60$15.99 NA $15.00 $1 148For the installation or relocation of each suspended heater, recessed wall heater or floor‐mounted unit heater13.60$15.99 NA $15.00 $1 149For the installation, relocations or replacements of each appliance vent installed and not included in an appliance permit 6.50$7.75 NA $7.00 $1 150For the repair of, alteration of, or addition to each heating appliance, refrigeration unit, cooling unit absorption unit, or each heating, cooling, absorption, or evaporative cooling system, including installation of controls regulated by this code13.60$15.99 NA $15.00 $1 151For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor to and including 3 horsepower, or each absorption system to and including 100,000 btu/h13.60$15.99 NA $15.00 $1 152For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor to and including 3 horsepower and including 15 horsepower, or each absorption system over 100,000 btu/h to and including 500,000 btu/h23.50$27.86 NA $27.00 $4 153For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 15 horsepower to and including 30 horsepower, or each absorption system over 500,000 btu/h to and including 1,000,000 btu/h32.70$38.76 NA $38.00 $5 154For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor over 30 horsepower to and including 50 horsepower, or each absorption system over 1,000,000 btu/h to and including 1,750,000 btu/h48.20$56.92 NA $56.00 $8 City of Gilroy59Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 266Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ155For the installation or relocation of each boiler or compressor to and including 50 horsepower, or each absorption system over 1,750,000 btu/h87.00$102.94 NA $102.00 $15 156 For each air‐handling unit over 10,000 cfm 15.70$18.41 NA $18.00 $2 157 For each evaporative cooler other than portable type 10.00$15.74 NA $12.00 $2 158 For each ventilating fan connected to a single duct 6.50$7.63 NA $7.00 $1 159For each ventilation system which is not a portion of any heating or air conditioning system authorized by a permit 10.00$12.11 NA $12.00 $2 160For the installation of each hood which is served by mechanical exhaust, including the ducts for such hood10.00$12.11 NA $12.00 $2 161 For installation or relocation of each domestic type incinerator 15.70$18.41 NA $18.00 $2 162For the installation or relocation of each commercial or industrial type incinerator64.00$76.30 NA $76.00 $12 163For each appliance or piece of equipment regulated by this code but not classed in other appliance categories or for which no other fee is listed 10.00$12.11 NA $12.00 $2 Mechanical Permit Fees for new construction or addition shall be the Division Hourly Rate (half‐hour minimum) per required inspection or based on the fixture counts or the fee per square foot based on the construction category as set# Category Cost per Trade Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ164 Assembly Occupancies 0.115 per square foot $0.118 NA $0.118 $0 165 Hazardous Use 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256 $0 166 Hotel / Motel 0.115 per square foot $0.136 NA $0.136 $0 167 Manufacturing 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256 $0 168 Medical / Dental Office 0.168 per square foot $0.247 NA $0.247 $0 169 Office / Shell Speculative Uses 0.168 per square foot $0.178 NA $0.178 $0 170 Parking Structure 0.021 per square foot $0.021 NA $0.021 $0 171 Repair Garage / Gas Station 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256$0 172 Research and Development0.168per square foot$0.172 NA$0.172$0 173Residential (single, two‐family and multifamily apartments and condominiums)0.136per square foot$0.158 NA$0.158$0 174 Restaurant / Market0.251per square foot$0.242 NA$0.242($0)175 Restrooms0.251per square foot$0.724 NA$0.724$0 176 Store / Retail0.168per square foot$0.167 NA$0.167($0)177 Warehouses0.052per square foot$0.092 NA$0.092$0 forth below. These Permit Fees are in addition to the Permit Issuance Fees. These fees do not include Plan Check fees.Mechanical Permits Fees (A)(B)City of Gilroy60Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 267Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ178 All Others0.136per square foot$0.079 NA$0.079($0)# DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔPermit Issuance(A) (B)179 For issuing each permit115.00plus$155.30 26% $155.00$40 180 For issuing each supplemental permit47.00$52.87 11% $52.00$5 Water Heater & Water Softener permitting fees181 Tankles Water‐heaterNEW$219.33 NA$219.00NA182 Water heater replacement147.00$185.57 21% $185.00$38 183 Electric water heaterNew$185.57 NA$185.00NA184 Heat Pump Water HeaterNewflat fee$254.66 NA$254.00NA185 For each water heater vent11.00each+ Issuance Fees, if standalone$13.32 NA$13.00$2 *If converting and/or relocating, Building Plan Check and Building Inspections fees are also applicable.186 Water SoftnerNEWflat fee$146.86 NA$146.00NAWaterline & Sewer Repipe187 Residential repipe waterlineNEW$265.53 NA$265.00NA188 Residential repipe from house to main waterlineNEW$185.57 NA$185.00NA189 Residential repipe sewerNEW$354.89 NA$354.00NA190 Residential repipe from house to main sewerNEW$264.05 NA$264.00NA191 Commercial repipe sewerNEW$715.06 NA$715.00NA192 Commercial repipe from house to main sewerNEW$449.00 NA$448.00NA193 For each building sewer and each trailer park sewer28.30each+issuance fee$33.91 17% $33.00$5 Unit Fee Schedule + issuance fees194 For each plumbing fixture or trap or set of fixtures on one trap 8.90each$12.11 NA$12.00$3 194For each industrial waste pretreatment interceptor including its trap and vent excepting kitchen‐type grease interceptors functioning as fixture traps18.00each$24.22 NA$24.00$6 195For installation, alteration, or repair of water piping and/or water treating equipment, each4.50each$5.45 NA$5.00$1 196 For repair or alteration of drainage or vent piping, each fixture 4.50each$5.45 NA$5.00$1 197For each lawn sprinkler system on any one meter, including backflow protection devices therefore 13.00each$15.74 NA$15.00$2 For atmospheric‐type vacuum breakers:198 1 to 5 11.00each$13.32 NA$13.00$2 199 Over 52.40each$2.91 NA$2.00($0)Plumbing Permit and Plan Review(a)(b)City of Gilroy61Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 268Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee ΔFor each back flow protective device other than atmospheric‐type vacuum breakers200 2 inches and smaller 11.00 each $13.32 NA $13.00 $2 201 Over 2 inches 22.50 each $26.64 NA $26.00 $4 Plumbing Permit Fees for new construction or addition shall be the Division Hourly Rate (half‐hour minimum) per required inspection or based on the fixture counts or the fee per square foot based on the construction category as set# Category Cost per Trade Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ202 Assembly Occupancies 0.115 per square foot $0.118 NA $0.118 $0 203 Hazardous Use 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256 $0 204 Hotel / Motel 0.115 per square foot $0.136 NA $0.136 $0 205 Manufacturing 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256 $0 206 Medical / Dental Office 0.168 per square foot $0.247 NA $0.247 $0 207 Office / Shell Speculative Uses 0.168 per square foot $0.178 NA $0.178 $0 208 Parking Structure 0.021 per square foot $0.021 NA $0.021 $0 209 Repair Garage / Gas Station 0.251 per square foot $0.256 NA $0.256$0 210 Research and Development0.168per square foot$0.172 NA$0.172$0 211Residential (single, two‐family and multifamily apartments and condominiums)0.136per square foot$0.158 NA$0.158$0 212 Restaurant / Market0.251per square foot$0.242 NA$0.242($0)213 Restrooms0.251per square foot$0.724 NA$0.724$0 214 Store / Retail0.168per square foot$0.167 NA$0.167($0)215 Warehouses0.052per square foot$0.092 NA$0.092$0 216 All Others0.136per square foot$0.079 NA$0.079($0)# CategoryCost per TradeUnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ217 Mininmum plan review290.00Minimum (1 hr Plan Review)$263.62 ‐10% $263.00($27)218 Up to 1000 cubic yards 390.00Inpection Times Included.$384.31 ‐1%$384.00($6)219 1001 cubic yards, to 10,000 cubic yards390.00for the first 1,000 cubic yardsplus $12.60 for each additional 1,000 cubic yards, or fraction thereof$384.31 ‐1%$384.00($6)220 10,001 cubic yards, to 100,000 cubic yards500.00for the first 10,000 cubic yardsplus $54.00 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards, or fraction thereof$495.62 ‐1%$495.00($5)forth below. These Permit Fees are in addition to the Permit Issuance Fees. These fees do not include Plan Check fees.Plumbing Permits Fees (A)(B)Grading/Cut and/or Fill Permit Fees(a)City of Gilroy62Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 269Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Community Development# Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ221 100,001 cubic yards or more985.00for the first 10,000 cubic yardsplus $30.40 for each additional 10,000 cubic yards, or fraction thereof$1,074.36 8%$1,074.00$89 # DescriptionCurrent Fee/ChargeUnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy %Recommended Fee Fee Δ222 Loan Demand Payoff Fee250.00$6.00 ‐4067% $6.00($244)(A) Reflects fee increases to offset the city’s expenditures for the city’s High Speed Rail Master Plan effort.*For any user fee service request that is outside the scope, or for services for which there is no fee currently set, the City can charge up to the full cost of the FBHR for personnel involved.(B) Fee will be reduced by 4.49% for residential: photovoltaic; water heater, furnace, and air conditioning replacements; reroofs; and interior remodeling such as kitchen and bath remodels. For purposes of this section, “residential” is considered as one‐ and two‐family residences, including interior and photovoltaic work on individual condominium and townhouse units. Housing Community Development Loan FeesCity of Gilroy63Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 270Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Minimum Value Maximum ValueCurrent Base RateSuggested Base RateCurrent Plus $$Suggested Plus $$ For every11,000 250.00259.560.000.0001,0012,000 250.00259.563.483.611002,001 25,000 286.04296.9815.2215.801,00025,001 50,000 636.18660.5010.9811.401,00050,001 100,000 910.75945.577.617.901,000100,001 500,000 1,291.341,340.716.086.311,000500,001 1,000,000 3,724.573,866.965.165.361,0001,000,001 and up 6,305.426,545.593.423.551,000Percent Change = 3.8%Cost Recovery Level = 100%Building Valuation TableSuggested (All New Construction)City of Gilroy64Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 271Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Planning Fees ‐ Processing Fees and Charges (City Code Section 7.1. (a))# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge UnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy % Recommended Fee Fee Δ1Administrative Time Extension380.00plus publishing costs***$410.06 7% $410.06$30 2Annexation15,910.00Plus actual attorney fees. Note: Actual cost for other related fees will be collected by the City for outside agencies.$19,632.13 19% $19,632.13$3,722 Appeals 3 Appeal, Planning Commission600.00Plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees$930.31 36% $930.00$330 4 Appeal, All others2,540.00Plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees$1,145.09 ‐122% $1,145.00($1,395)Architectural and Site Review ‐ Commercial, Wireless & Miscelleanous4,55 New Construction (up to 5,000 sq.ft.)8,900.00$10,365.88 14% $10,365.88$1,466 6 New Construction (each additonal 5,000 sq.ft.)695.00$925.92 25% $925.92$231 7 Remodel/Additions4,065.00Additions up to 10% of existing SF$2,647.74 ‐54% $2,647.74($1,417)Architectural and Site Review ‐ Residential8 New Construction, 4 or more homes (base fee)7,295.00$8,293.65 12% $8,294.00$999 9New Construction, 4 or more homes (add for each flat land tract plan)$540.00$591.58 9% $592.00$52 10New Construction, 4 or more homes (add for each hillside tract plan)1,160.00$1,202.53 4% $1,203.00$43 11 Hillside (single custom home), Duplex or Triplex4,090.00$4,532.05 10% $4,532.00$442 12 Remodel/Additions735.00$1,172.46 37% $1,172.46$437 Architectural and Site Review ‐ Industrial4,513 New Construction (up to 10,000 sq.ft.)5,125.00$7,655.15 33% $7,655.15$2,530 14 New Construction (each additonal 10,000 sq.ft.)$290.00$604.08 52% $604.08$314 15 Remodel/Additions2,130.00Additions up to 10% of existing SF$2,292.14 7% $2,292.14$162 16Conditional Use Permit5,275.00Plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees$5,530.11 5% $5,530.00$255 17Development Agreement17,250.00DepositMinimum (Hourly rate invoiced against initial deposit, plus $10,000 deposit for attorney fees)$19,081.10 10% $19,081.10$1,831 Environmental 18 Categorical Exemption450.00$536.41 16% $536.00$86 19 Initial Study/ND/MND, non‐complex project (Staff Review) 9,415.00min15% of contract cost (admin) + Mitigation Monitoring cost + publishing cost*** + 15% staff review + 10% contingency$12,113.17 22% $12,113.17$2,698 20 Environmental Impact Report (staff review)19,820.00min15% of contract cost (admin) + Mitigation Monitoring cost + publishing cost*** + 15% staff review + 10% contingency$23,739.79 17% $23,739.79$3,920 21 EIR/MND/Initial Study (Consultant Contract)pass throughActual contract cost plus 15% of contract cost + 15% staff review + 10% contingency NA NA$0 General Plan Amendment22 General Plan Map Amendment (up to 10 acres)15,575.00min + hourly rate if fee explus attorney fees and publishing cost***$15,603.93 0% $15,603.93$29 23 General Plan Map Amendment (each additional 10 acres)$100.00$150.27 33% $150.00$50 24 General Plan Text Amendment10,710.00min + hourly rate if fee explus attorney fees and publishing cost***$18,747.74 43% $18,747.74$8,038 25Habitat Conservation Permit Processing, Not Complex1,150.00DepositDivision hourly rate invoiced against initial deposit plus consultant cost and 15% admin fee$1,373.34 16% $1,373.34$223 26Mills Act Request1,305.00Plus actual attorney fees$2,112.49 38% $2,112.49$807 27Minor Deviation Variance Review1,235.00$2,451.84 50% $2,451.84$1,217 28Minor Modification320.00Deposit$332.71 4% $320.00$0 29Miscellaneousdivision hourly rate NA NA division hourly rate $0 30Mobile Home Rent Review4,945.00plus arbitrator's fee$5,032.26 2% $5,032.26$87 31Planned Unit Development 13,875.00plus A&S fee, plus attorney fees + publishing fees$16,202.91 14% $16,203.00$2,328 City of Gilroy65Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 272Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Planning Fees ‐ Processing Fees and Charges (City Code Section 7.1. (a))# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge UnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy % Recommended Fee Fee Δ32Reasonable Accommodation400.00$1,120.29 64% $1,120.00 $720 33Sign Permit (first sign)126.00$293.14 57% $293.00 $167 34Temporary Use Permit (standard) 925.00 min Planning Division hourly rate plus attorney fees $2,074.06 55% $2,074.00 $1,149 35Tentative Parcel Map (up to 4 lots)7,355.00 Plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees $10,252.85 28% $10,253.00 $2,898 Tentative Tract Map (5 or more lots)36 Tentative Tract Map (5 ‐ 12 lots) 13,995.00 Plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees $19,036.49 26% $19,036.49 $5,041 37 Tentative Tract Map (each lot over 12 lots, flat lot) $115.00$301.85 62% $302.00 $187 38 Tentative Tract Map (each lot over 12 lots, Hillside lot) $500.00$876.58 43% $877.00 $377 39 Tentative Tract Map Extension 1,010.00 Plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees $767.71 ‐32% $768.00 ($242)Urban Service Area Amendment 40 Urban Service Area Amendment (up to 10 acres) 27,785.00plus publishing cost and attorney fees. LAFCO fees and additional deposit to be provided after city action***$29,187.63 5% $29,188.00 $1,403 41 Urban Service Area Amendment (each additoinal 10 acres) $165.00$423.15 61% $423.00 $258 42Variance Request5,185.00 Plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees $5,469.66 5% $5,469.66 $285 Zoning Amendment43 Zoning Map Amendment (up to 10 acres) 5,060.00 plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees $11,884.56 $0.57 $11,884.56 $6,825 44 Zoning Map Amendment (each additional 10 acres) 120.00$150.27 $0.20 $150.27 $30 45 Zoning Ordinance Text Amendment7,085.00Plus publishing costs***Plus actual attorney fees$14,417.42 $0.51 $14,417.42$7,332 46Pre‐Application DRG Review1,520.00$3,485.52 56% $3,485.52$1,966 Other Review and Service Fees47 Continuation Request by ApplicantHourly Ratehourly rate, minimum $370 plus publishing cost***NA NA Hourly Rate$0 48 Research Hourly Rate + Direct Cost Depositminimum 2 hourNA NA Hourly Rate + Direct Cost $0 49 Planning InspectionsDivisional hourly rate$69.00 minimumNA NADivisional hourly rate $0 50 Planning Plan CheckDivisional hourly rate$69.00 minimumNA NA Divisional hourly rate $0 51 Security Deposit Application Fee270.00DepositNA NA $270.00$0 52 Affordable Housing Project4,290.00plus attorney fees$3,271.03‐31% $3,271.03($1,019)53 Affordable Housing Agreement3,450.00unit/Depositplus attorney fees$6,089.20 43% $6,089.20$2,639 54 Designated Historic Resource review permit (Admin)3,560.00$2,935.88 ‐21% $2,935.88($624)55 Designated Historic Resource review permit (Commission) 3,560.00plus consultant fees and 15% admin fee$2,967.01 ‐20% $2,967.00($593)56 Historic Demolition / Significant Alteration review permit (commission) Newplus consultant fees and 15% admin fee$4,423.38 NA $5,712.91NA57 Initial Study/ND/MND, Complex project (Staff Review)New15% of contract cost (admin) + Mitigation Monitoring cost + publishing cost***$5,068.23 NA $12,581.51NA58 Existing Sign Program PermitNew$507.70 NA $507.70NA59 New Sign Program (e.g., for new/remodeled shopping centers) New$2,224.20 NA $2,224.20NA60 Sign Permit, each additional sign New$126.93 NA $126.93NA61 Minor Temporary Use Permit (e.g. flower vendors, model homes, trailers)New$1,536.17 NA $1,536.17NA62 Minor Conditional Use Permit (e.g., wine bar, farmers market)New$1,159.68 NA $1,159.68NA63 Habitat Conservation Permit Processing ‐ Complex Newplus consultant fees$3,162.47 NA $3,162.00NA64 Zoning VerificationNew$400.42 NA $400.42NA65 General Plan / Zoning Ordinance Update Fee15%of Planning Applications20%25% 20%5%City of Gilroy66Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 273Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Planning Fees ‐ Processing Fees and Charges (City Code Section 7.1. (a))# DescriptionCurrent Fee/Charge UnitNotesFull CostCurrent Subsidy % Recommended Fee Fee Δ66 Technology FeeNewOf Planning Applications and Building Permits5%NA 5%NA67 Public Noticing FeeNew$1,128.32 NA $1,128.32NA68 Murray Las Animas Overlay FeeNew$1,422.32 NA $1,422.00NA69 Tree Removal Permit300.00$332.71 NA $300.00$0 70 Zoning Clearance (Wireless Facilities320.00Depositplus RF Report Preparation Cost$335.57 NA $320.00$0 For those projects involving multiple public hearing applications, the publication costs will be reduced to a single charge when it is determined, and reasonably possible, that the public‐hearing applications can be processed together.For any user fee service request that is outside the scope, or for services for which there is no fee currently set, the City can charge up to the full cost of the FBHR for personnel involved.City Attorney costs will be passed on directly to applicant as neededAdditional fees may be assessed, as determined by the Community Development Director, based upon complications due to environmental review, three or more re‐submittals, applicant‐initiated project revisions, continued public hearings, additional publishing City of Gilroy67Comprehensive User Fee Study11.4.aPacket Pg. 274Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

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

11.4.a
Packet Pg. 275 Attachment: 2022 Comprehensive User Fee Study (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

ORDINANCE NO. 2022-XX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GILROY AMENDING SECTIONS 7.3, 7.4 AND 7.5 OF
CHAPTER 7 OF THE GILROY CITY CODE ENTITLED

COST COMPARISON SYSTEM FOR FEE AND SERVICE

CHARGE REVENUE

WHEREAS, pursuant to Article XIIIB of the California Constitution, it is the intent of the City Council of the City of Gilroy to require the ascertainment and recovery of costs reasonably borne from fees and charges levied therefor in providing the regulation, products, or services as enumerated in the Chapter 7 of the City’s code; and
WHEREAS, a comprehensive user fee study was conducted by the City of Gilroy to determine the costs of providing services; and
WHEREAS, section 7.3 of the Chapter 7 defines “cost reasonably borne” as used and ordered to be applied; and
WHEREAS, it is the City’s intent to exclude certain expense types which may not be directly attributable to a service being provided; and
WHEREAS, section 7.4 and 7.5 of the Chapter 7 provides a schedule of fees and service charges and outlines the frequency at which the fees shall be reviewed and adjusted via an annual public hearing; and
WHEREAS, it is the City’s intent to (1) replace the existing schedule with a revised schedule, (2) to automatically adjust the said fees and service charges annually in July based on the published Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the San Francisco Area or, if said index ceases to be published, according to a comparable measure of inflation determined by the City’s Finance Director; and (3) conduct a full analysis of City’s cost reasonably borne not less than every five years; and

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION I
The forgoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION II
Sections 7.3 through Section 7.5 of the Gilroy City Code is amended to read as follows:

7.3 “Costs reasonably borne” defined.
“Costs reasonably borne,” as used and ordered to be applied in this chapter are to consist of the following elements:

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 276 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Ordinance No. 2022-XX
User Fee Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting | July 5, 2022

Page 2 of 9 ends

(a) All applicable direct costs including, but not limited to salaries, wages, overtime, employee fringe benefits, services and supplies, maintenance and operation expenses, contracted services, special supplies, and any other direct expense incurred. (b) All applicable indirect costs including, but not restricted to, building maintenance and operations, equipment maintenance and operations, communications expenses, computer costs, printing and reproduction, vehicle expenses, insurance, debt services and like expenses when distributed on an accounted and documented rational proration system. (c) Fixed assets recovery expenses, consisting of depreciation of fixed assets, and additional fixed asset expense recovery charges calculated on the current estimated cost of replacement, divided by the approximate life expectancy of the fixed asset. A further additional charge to make up the difference between book value depreciation not previously recovered and reserved in cash and the full cost of replacement, which also shall be calculated and considered a cost so as to recover such unrecovered costs between book value and cost of replacement over the remaining life of the asset.
(d) General overhead, expressed as a percentage, distributing and charging the expenses of the city council, city administrator, city clerk, elections, city treasurer, finance department, city attorney, unallocated non-departmental expenses, and all other staff and support service provided to the entire city organization as now organized and as it may be reorganized at any time in the future. Overhead shall be prorated between tax-financed services and fee- financed services on the basis of said percentage so that each of taxes and fees and charges shall proportionately defray such overhead costs.
(e) Departmental overhead, expressed as a percentage, distributing and charging the cost of each department head and his or her supporting expenses as enumerated in subsections (a), (b), (c) and (f) of this section.
(f) Debt service costs, consisting of repayment of principal, payment of interest, and trustee fees and administrative expenses for all applicable bond, certificate, or securities issues or loans.

Any required coverage factors of added reserves beyond basic debt service costs also shall be considered a cost if required by covenant within any securities ordinance, resolution, indenture or general law applicable to the city. (Ord. No. 90-5, § 1, 3-19-90; Ord. No. 91- 15, §§ 3, 4, 5-20-91)
When developing the cost allocation plan or service charge model which establishes the said fees and service charges, certain expenses may be considered for exclusion from the calculation which may not be directly attributable to a service being provided.

7.4 Schedule of fees and service charges.

The primary factor for the cost of a City’s service or fee is usually the costs of the personnel which typically increase year over year. As such, tying an inflationary factor to annually adjust the fees and services charges is deemed reasonable. Unless otherwise specified by resolution, the fees and service charges set pursuant to this chapter shall be automatically adjusted annually in July for Consumer Price Index (CPI) increase so as to recover the listed percentage of costs reasonably

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 277 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Ordinance No. 2022-XX
User Fee Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting | July 5, 2022

Page 3 of 9 ends

borne necessary to provide the listed regulation, product or service. The CPI increase shall be based on the published CPI for San Francisco Area (San Francisco – Oakland – San Jose) April Edition or, if said index ceases to be published, according to a comparable measure of inflation as determined by the City’s Finance Director, and rounded to nearest dollar unless a different edition or rounding is otherwise specified by resolution. The City Administrator, Finance Director and each City department head, under the direction of the City Administrator, shall review the fees and services charges periodically and provide, if necessary, an adjusted fee or charge schedule to the City Council for its consideration, in place of or in addition to the automatic annual CPI increase for the regulation, product or service below. A full analysis of City costs reasonably borne, as defined in Section 7.3, shall be conducted not less than every five years.

Regulation, Product, or Service
Percentage of Cost Reasonably
Borne to Be Recovered
(percent)
Method of Cost Recovery
(F=Fee) (H=Hourly)
General Administration:

Miscellaneous:

Letters of verification, certification
and clearance 100 H
Notary service 100 F
Notice of intention to file 100 F
Research 100 H
Special services/inspections 100 H
Publications 100 H and F
Reproduction 100 H and F
Subpoena-witnesses/duces
tecum 100 H and F
Finance:

Business license—
New/Move/Change 100 F
Miscellaneous:

Abandoned shopping cart 100 F
Delinquent account receivables 100 H
Refuse collection lien process 100 H
Returned check fee 100 F
Rentals 100 F
Sewer enterprise 100 F
Water enterprise 100 F
Backflow inspections 100 H
Construction water 100 F
Delinquency services 100 F
Locking services 100 F
Meter installation, removal and
testing 100 H and F

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 278 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Ordinance No. 2022-XX
User Fee Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting | July 5, 2022

Page 4 of 9 ends

Portable meter rental 100 F
Water meter 100 F
Water (tank truck) 100 F
Water service initiation 100 F
Water and Wastewater Rates Fees set by resolution, not subject to CPI adjustment Community Development Department—All Divisions:

After hours building and fire
inspection 100 H
Building and fire re-inspections 100 H
Special inspections 100 H
Community Development Department—Building:

Building plan change review 100 F
Building plan check 100 F
Building permit 100 F
Miscellaneous
Alternative materials review 100 F
Building code appeal 100 F
Building moving/demolition 100 F
Lot change 100 F
Pre-roof inspection 100 H
Temporary certificate of
occupancy 100 F
Permits and inspection 100 F
Community Development Department— Fire Prevention:

Fire clearance inspection 100 H
Fire code/gen. fire insp. 100 F
Fire flow test 100 F
Fire plan check, including energy
storage systems 100 F
Hazmat/CUPA Inspection 100 F
Fireworks—Aerial display 100 H
Fireworks—Retail sales 100 F
Fireworks—Warehouse 100 H
Special event 100 F
Weed abatement 100 F

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 279 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Ordinance No. 2022-XX
User Fee Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting | July 5, 2022

Page 5 of 9 ends

Community Development Department—Hazardous Materials:

Facility closure 100 H
Hazardous materials storage
permit 100 F
Hazardous waste generators 100 F
Protected aboveground or
underground storage tank 100 F
Spill cleanup and investigation
(including fire dept. costs) 100 H
Tank removal/installation 100 F
Tiered permit 100 F
Community Development Department— Pretreatment:

Pool drain inspection 100 F
Pretreatment plan check and
inspections 100 F
Special events plan check 100 F
Community Development Department—Planning:

Annexation 100 F
Appeals 100 F
Architectural and site 100 F
Conditional use 100 F
Continuance request by applicant 100 F
Development time extension 100 H
Environmental:

Categorical exemption 100 F
Initial study 100 H
Expanded initial study 100 H
Initial study—City preparation 100 H
Environmental impact report 100 F
General plan map amendment 100 F
General plan text amendment 100 F
Historic neighborhood 100 F
Historic site 100 F
Habitat Conservation 100 F
Home occupation 0 —
Home occupation appeal 100 F
Minor deviation appeal 100 F
Minor deviation variance 100 F

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 280 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Ordinance No. 2022-XX
User Fee Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting | July 5, 2022

Page 6 of 9 ends

Mobile home rent 100 F
Planned unit development 100 F
Sign permit 100 F
Temporary use 100 F
Tentative parcel map 100 F
Tentative tract map 100 F
Urban service area 100 F
Variance 100 F
Williamson Act cancellation 100 F
Zoning change 100 F
Zoning code enforcement 100 H
Zoning ordinance amendment 100 F
Public Works Department—Engineering:

Development impact fees 100 F
Miscellaneous:

Assessment/ 100 F reapportionment map
Certificate of compliance 100 F

Encroachment
Handicap signs 100 F
Curb painting/signage 100 F
Wide/oversized vehicle 100 F
Stormwater best management
practice (BMP) setup and
monitoring
100 F
Public improvement plan check
and inspection 100 F
Subdivision final map and parcel
map 100 F
Recreation Services—Parks and Facilities:

Facility and parks rental* 100 F

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 281 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Ordinance No. 2022-XX
User Fee Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting | July 5, 2022

Page 7 of 9 ends

*Recreation facility and park rental have 4 categories (Category A, B, C, and D) as outlined below.

Category D represents 100 percent cost recovery. Fees for Categories A through C are set in the adopted resolution.

Category A ‐ City and GUSD programs and special events
Category B ‐ Non‐profit Organizations
Category C ‐ City of Gilroy Residents (Private functions and/or open to the public) Category D ‐ Non‐Residents or any company/business or group holding an event (social, business, education or for profit)

Recreation Services - Seasonal Classes, Programs, and Events:

Aquatics
Fees for recreation classes and programs are established seasonally at the time recreation activity guide is prepared. As such, these fees are to be adjusted based on seasonal market analysis and should consider fluctuations and trends in participation rates to attain maximum cost recovery.

Recreation programs
Adult programs
Cultural classes/events
Preschool
Youth and teen programs
Special events

Fire Department:

False alarm 100 F
Police Department:

Permits—Regulatory:

Firearms sales 100 F
Mobile vendor 100 F
Massage 100 F
Solicitor’s 100 F
Animal control 100 F
Bingo 100 F
Cardroom 100 F
Concealed weapons 100 F
Dance hall 100 F
Pawnbrokers, junk and
secondhand dealers 100 F
Regulatory bar 100 F
Taxi cab—Company 100 F
Taxi cab—Driver 100 F
Tow Truck 100 F
Other Services:

Call back/2nd response 100 H

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 282 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Ordinance No. 2022-XX
User Fee Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting | July 5, 2022

Page 8 of 9 ends

Crime analysis services 100 H
DUI investigation 100 H
False alarm 100 F
Graffiti abatement 100 H
Provision of special services 100* H
School truancy 100 H
Tow truck driver 100 F
Vehicle equipment inspection 100 F
Vehicle impound/release 100 F
Reproduction of documents 100 F
False alarm 100 F

* 100% cost recovery except for events where the public safety benefit, as determined by the police chief, is of community concern. In this case the event may be subsidized at 55%.

All fees and charges set pursuant to this section shall take effect immediately upon the passage of a resolution by the City Council setting forth said specific fee amounts, with the exception of the annual automatic CPI adjustment, which shall take effect every July 1 and shall not require passage of a resolution by the City Council. Said fees and charges will be initially adopted via resolution by the city council after a public hearing. The city clerk shall cause notice to be provided as set out in Government Code Section 6062.a.

Section 7.5 Provision of data.

Pursuant to the California Government Code, at least ten (10) days prior to the required public hearing set out herein, the city administrator shall make available to the public appropriate data indicating the cost, or estimated cost, required to support the fees and charges for which changes are proposed to be made or fees or charges imposed. The city administrator also shall provide a summary of the present fee and charge schedules and those proposed at such public hearing. A general explanation of such changes also shall be published per the requirements of Government Code Section 6062.a.

SECTION III
Except as set forth in this Ordinance, all other provisions of the Gilroy Charter and City Code shall remain in full force and effect.

SECTION IV
This Ordinance is not intended to and shall not be construed or given effect in a manner that imposes upon the City or any officer or employee thereof a mandatory duty of care towards persons and property within or without the City, so as to provide a basis of civil liability for damages, except as otherwise imposed by law.

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 283 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

Ordinance No. 2022-XX
User Fee Schedule
City Council Regular Meeting | July 5, 2022

Page 9 of 9 ends

SECTION V
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION VI
This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish this Ordinance or a summary thereof pursuant to Government Code Section 36933.

PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY this 5th day of July 2022 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:

Marie Blankley, Mayor

ATTEST:

___________________________
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk

11.4.b
Packet Pg. 284 Attachment: Draft Ordinance (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT

Agenda Item Title: Introduction of Comprehensive User Fee Study Update Meeting Date: May 16, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Finance Department
Submitted By: Harjot Sangha
Prepared By: Harjot Sangha

Strategic Plan Goals
 Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization

☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities

☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All

☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION
Receive report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
As part of its FY22 and FY23 workplan, staff is completing an update to the City’s Comprehensive User Fee Schedule which was last adopted in 2014. The fee schedule establishes user fees charged for services rendered by various departments. The fee schedule report is being finalized and the draft report will be made available for the public and presented to the City Council in June, and subsequently will be brought back for a public hearing to formally adopt the updated fee schedule.

BACKGROUND

11.4.c
Packet Pg. 285 Attachment: May 16th, 2022 Staff Report (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

The City’s current fee schedule was last updated and adopted in 2014. In 2019, the City initiated a comprehensive user fee study update (the “study”) as part of its workplan.

However, in 2020 the project was paused due to the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic which shifted the City’s priorities to addressing the challenges brought on by the pandemic. As part of the current biennial budget development process, staff included the completion of the user fee study project in its workplan. Over the last 10 months, staff re-engaged with the consultant (Willdan Financial Services), reviewed the 2019 draft fee study schedules, and worked with various departments to adjust the calculations based on budget and level of effort. This was needed as the 2019 update was based on pre-pandemic levels of staffing and service budgets.

ANALYSIS
The study’s objective is to help determine the full cost of the services the City provides.

The total cost of each service included in the analysis is based on the full cost of providing the service, including direct salaries and benefits, direct departmental costs, and indirect costs from central support services. The scope of the study encompasses a review and calculation of fees charged by the following departments and fee groups:

Administration, Finance, Wastewater, Building, Planning, Public Works, Recreation, Police and Fire.

Process and Methodology
The City is made up of various departments, each with its own purpose and function. Departments that provide support internally to other City departments are generally referred to as central services. Examples of these include City Council, City Administrator, City Attorney, City Clerk, Communications and Engagement, Human Resources, and Finance. These departments perform various functions that provide support to other operating departments including Fire, Police, Community Development, and Public Works. The first step in updating the fee study is to develop a Cost Allocation Plan (CAP), which is used to determine the appropriate allocation of costs from the central service departments to the operating departments and to ensure allowable versus unallowable costs are in accordance with standard and accepted cost allocation principles. These are often referred to as indirect costs or indirect overhead.

Next, the consultant and staff identify direct overhead for the operating departments which include supplies, materials, and other direct overhead costs within the respective department’s budget. The indirect cost and the direct overhead costs are then averaged into the hourly rates for each employee position.

The City’s user fee calculations are mostly time-based, except for select fees which are either capped by legislation or follow the industry standard. In other words, fees are developed by determining the amount of time that each position works on a particular service rendered, multiplied by the average fully burdened

11.4.c
Packet Pg. 286 Attachment: May 16th, 2022 Staff Report (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

hourly rate for that position. This approach has been applied for most departmental user fees except for Building Permits and the Recreation division’s programmatic fees which are discussed further below.

Below is an illustrative example:

Building Permit Fees
For the building permit fees, the valuation-based method is utilized. The City’s current practice, also the industry standard, for assessing building permit fees is to utilize the International Code Council’s (ICC) building valuation data table which provides the average construction costs per square foot. This is a common methodology used by jurisdictions in determining permit fees. Building permit fees are based on the valuation of the project, to reflect the amount of work to be completed in reviewing the project. The larger the project, the higher the valuation. Since larger projects require more staff time for review and inspections, the fees escalate with the valuation to ensure the project pays for its use of City resources, such as staff time, in permitting the project. No changes will be recommended to this method, except for utilizing the most current ICC building valuation data table.

Recreation Fees
Since 2014, the Recreation program fees, excluding facilities and park rentals, have been established each season at the time that the recreation activity guide is prepared. The fees are typically adjusted based on market analysis which considers fluctuations and trends in participation rates, which helps to attain maximum cost recovery. As part of the General Fund Fiscal Recovery Plan instituted in 2020, the City Council fundamentally changed how the Recreation division provides services. The General Fund contribution towards recreation was reduced from $2.7 million to $1.5 million annually. Additionally, a new

11.4.c
Packet Pg. 287 Attachment: May 16th, 2022 Staff Report (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

approach was established that the $1.5 million would be expended on programs that serve the needs of the City’s vulnerable population(s). Those programs include adaptive, special needs, Senior Center, Youth Center, and volunteer programs, as well as park and facility reservations. Any new programs identified by the Division requires the City Administrator’s approval and must either be accommodated within the existing $1.5 million funding or demonstrate 100% cost recovery for consideration. The facilities and park rental fee group will be included on the City’s updated user fee schedule.

Removal and Addition of Fees
Included in the comprehensive fee study update was a process of identifying services that the departments are currently performing for which a current fee does not exist. Departments also reviewed existing fees to see if any are obsolete. As a result of this process, existing fees that are obsolete will be recommended to be removed, and new fees for which a fee did not previously exist will be added.

Inflationary Factor
Since most of the City’s user fees are time-based, it is recommended that City Council include an inflationary factor in the resolution adopting the fee schedule.

As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of the service fluctuate over time, having an inflationary factor affords the flexibility for the fee schedule to remain current. The City can employ different approaches to inflationary factors. The commonly used inflator is a form of Consumer Price Index (CPI). As such, staff will be recommending an index to be utilized to annually adjust the fee schedule. Building permit fees will be recommended to be adjusted at the release of the ICC’s building valuation data table.

City Code Amendments via Ordinance
The City Code contains language pertaining to levels of cost recovery for fee- based services, as well as the definition of what is to be included for such cost analysis. Staff will be bringing forward some clean-up language to the Code that aligns it with current and best practice. For example, current language requires Council to annually approve a fee schedule, which has not been the practice.

While staff will recommend the fee schedule be adjusted annually by CPI, the full scaled comprehensive fee study is generally conducted at a lesser frequency, every three to five years. Further, it is recommended the definition of costs to be included be revised to generally exclude debt service and capital expenses if it cannot be directly ascribed to the service being provided as doing so could inflate the department’s expenses which can result in higher fully burdened hourly rates used in the time-based calculation.

11.4.c
Packet Pg. 288 Attachment: May 16th, 2022 Staff Report (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

The City Code’s Chapter 7, Section 7.4 provides for cost recovery percentage for all product and services at 100% across all departments, except for recreation programs which vary from 20% to 100% depending on the program. As previously mentioned, as part of the General Fund Fiscal Recovery Plan instituted during 2020, the City Council performed a reset of the Recreation Division’s service levels and established any new programs to be 100% cost recovery. Staff will propose Code changes that effectuate this change and direct any future recreation programs and related fees be adjusted at the time the program offering is made available based on market analysis and as approved by the City Administrator.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The cost for the user fee study to update the 2019 study is $7,500 and is included in the Finance Department’s adopted FY22 budget. Various departments have contributed efforts to review and update the fee calculation models and the work was accommodated within their respective department’s workplan.

NEXT STEPS
The report will be introduced and presented to the City Council in June and subsequently will be brought back for a public hearing for formal adoption via resolution.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
Staff will release the draft user fee study report to the public, especially the developer community, to solicit feedback.

11.4.c
Packet Pg. 289 Attachment: May 16th, 2022 Staff Report (3861 : User Fee Study Introduction)

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: 2022 Fireworks Public Safety Mitigation Fees Meeting Date: June 20, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Fire Department
Submitted By: Jim Wyatt, Fire Chief
Prepared By: Jim Wyatt, Fire Chief
Strategic Plan Goals

☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization

 Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities

☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All

☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION

A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Setting the Annual Fireworks Service Fee for Impacts on City Fire and Police Services Related to the Sale and Use of Safe and Sane Fireworks Pursuant to Gilroy City Code Section 10A.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Pursuant to Gilroy City Code Section 10A.8(b), the Fireworks Service Fee is to be determined each year by the City's Fire and Police Chiefs and adopted by resolution.

The Fireworks Service Fee is intended to provide funding for the City to take actions to:

12.1 Packet Pg. 290

1) Reduce the use of illegal and dangerous fireworks that occur in conjunction with the legal use of Safe and Sane Fireworks during the 4th of July celebration.
2) Augment daily staffing in preparation for an increase in pol ice, fire and EMS activity resulting from firework usage.

The Fireworks Service Fee is separate and different from the booth permit and application fee that the City charges for the operation of the Safe and Sane Fireworks sales booths.

BACKGROUND

The City Code does not specify what the Fireworks Service Fee is intended to cover or how the Mitigation Plan is to be structured. In the past, the Police and Fire Chiefs determined the required staffing and deployment including:

1) staffing additional dispatchers for the July 4th weekend; 2) staffing additional patrol officers for the July 4th weekend; 3) staffing an additional Fire Engine for the July 4th weekend; 4) adding additional staffing to existing fire engines for the July 4th weekend; and
5) the bulk mailing of an English/Spanish notification postcard to all Gilroy mailing addresses and the coordination of any administrative citations issued and the subsequent appeals hearings, if needed, performed by the Fire Marshal’s office.

Gilroy City Code Section 10A.8 requires that a Fireworks Service Fee be paid by the Safe and Sane Fireworks vendors to fund additional staff resources to counter the use of illegal and dangerous fireworks during the July 4th celebrations. The Fireworks Service Fee is to provide cost recovery for the Gilroy Fire and Police Departments' Fireworks Mitigation Plan.

The City Code establishes a limit of booth permits and grandfathers the booth permit to organizations that had a permit the prior year. Currently, one vendor provides the fireworks for up to 15 non-profit organizations that have a booth permit. The vendor monitors the existing organizations as well as manages any potential new applicants for a booth permit that becomes available.

How, or if, the vendor then recoups the fee from the potential 15 non-profit organizations is a contractual arrangement between the vendor and the non -profit booth organizations, and is not dictated by the City Code. However, the vendor typically assesses a portion of the estimated fee to each organization. This fee has ranged between 6-8% of the organizations’ revenue, which is dependent on the fee and that year’s revenues.

ANALYSIS

12.1 Packet Pg. 291

The cost of the 2022 Fireworks Mitigation Plan is based on the attached spreadsheet and totals $51,900.65. The Police Department, Fire Department, and Fire Marshal's Office each provided the cost analysis for their portion of the plan using the Finance Department’s calculated hourly rate by position. The attached Fee Calculation 202 2 form provides the cost breakdown. The attached Resolution is to adopt the Fireworks Service Fee for implementing the 2022 Fireworks Mitigation Plan.

The wholesale vendor that supplies the State Certified Safe and Sane Fireworks to the non-profit organizations pays the fireworks service fee. The fee is deposited into the fireworks mitigation account and is then transferred to each department’s revenue accounts. Since the fees are based on the costs provided by each department, there is typically not a shortage or overage. However, if there is an excess of funds collected, staff could apply the excess funds to the next year’s fireworks service fee. However, if additional overtime is required to implement the mitigation plan, then the City could add any unreimbursed overtime costs to the fee calculation for the following year’s program.

A surplus of $1,349.94 from the 2021 Mitigation Fee has been applied to offset this year’s mitigation fees.

ALTERNATIVES

The City Council could decide to take no action. A Fireworks Service Fee would not be established to provide funding to reduce the use of illegal and dangerous fireworks. The additional enforcement would not occur, and funding would be provided through the general fund, or a combination of reduced enforcement with taxpayer funding. Staff does not recommend this action.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE

Staff does not expect any net costs to the City as the fee charged to the vendor is based on the actual cost of carrying out the plan.

CONCLUSION

The fee will reimburse the City for the implementation of the Fireworks Mitigation Plan.

NEXT STEPS

If approved, staff would then implement this year’s Illegal and Dangerous Fireworks Mitigation Program and apply the fee as authorized.

PUBLIC OUTREACH

The City Communications and Engagement Manager and the Fire Marshal’s office will produce and send out post card mailers to all Gilroy addresses to inform the public about illegal and dangerous fireworks. The Fire Marshal’s Office will also coordinate

12.1 Packet Pg. 292

with the Community Engagement Office to release the same information on media channels used previously for community engagement.

Attachments:

1. Spreadsheet of the 2022 Fireworks Mitigation Fee Calculation

2. Spreadsheet of the 2022 Fireworks Booth locations

3. Draft Resolution

12.1 Packet Pg. 293

Fully
Burdened
Hourly Rate
OT
Hours
# of
Staff
# of
Hours Total

Police Department
Police Sergeant (OT)187.14 1.5 1 5.5 $1,543.91
Police Corporal (OT)167.89 1.5 1 5.5 $1,385.09
Patrol Officer (OT)153.53 1.5 12 5.5 $15,199.47
Public Safety Communicator (OT)110.44 1.5 2 5.5 $1,822.26 TOTAL POLICE $19,950.73
Fire Department
Firefighter I/II (OT)151.92 1.5 4 10 $9,115.20
Fire Engineer (OT)159.49 1.5 4 10 $9,569.40
Fire Captain (OT)177.39 1.5 4 10 $10,643.40
TOTAL FIRE $29,328.00
Fire Prevention
Fireworks Administrative Citation Booklets $0.00
All Fireworks Prohibited Posters & Duct Tape $411.01
Fireworks Facebook Boosts $200.00
Utility Bill Insert (electronic and mailed)$1,120.00
Deputy Fire Marshal (OT)149.39 1.5 1 10 $2,240.85
TOTAL Fire Prevention $3,971.86
TOTAL PROGRAM $53,250.59
LESS ACT. BALANCE ($1,349.94)
TOTAL FEE $51,900.65

12.1.a
Packet Pg. 294 Attachment: Spreadsheet of the 2022 Fireworks Mitigation Fee Calculation (3859 : 2022 Fireworks Public

Organization:Permit#
1 Apostolic Assembly Church
2 Christian School Parents Club
3 El Camino Club (CHP)
4 Gavilan College
5 Gilroy Elks Lodge
6 Gilroy High School Cheerleader Boosters
7 Gilroy High School Quarterback Club
8 Gilroy High School Wrestling
9 Gilroy Police Officers Association
10 Gilroy Little League BallPark Fund
11 Gilroy Pop Warner Football
12 Gilroy Youth Football & Cheer
13 South County Baseball Boosters
14 Victory Outreach Gilroy
15 Stick and Move Amateur Boxing
Green highlight means new location
Yellow highlight means potential issue
691 First Street
2022 Firework Booth Permits
Proposed Sales Site:
7150 Camino Arroyo
303 East Tenth Street
971 First Street
1203- 1260 First Street
825 First Street
7940 Monterey Rd.
6900 Automall Parkway
8850 San Ysidro Ave
8400 Church Street
8401 Church Street
80 W. Tenth Street
727 First Street
777 First Street
8000 Santa Teresa Blvd.

12.1.b
Packet Pg. 295 Attachment: Spreadsheet of the 2022 Fireworks Booth locations (3859 : 2022 Fireworks Public Safety

RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

GILROY SETTING THE ANNUAL FIREWORKS SERVICE

FEE FOR IMPACTS ON CITY FIRE AND POLICE SERVICES

RELATED TO THE SALE AND USE OF SAFE AND SANE

FIREWORKS PURSUANT TO GILROY CITY CODE
CHAPTER 10A
WHEREAS, Chapter 10A of the City of Gilroy (“City”) City Code regulates the local retail sale, use and storage of “safe and sane fireworks” as defined in 12529 of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California; and

WHEREAS, the City Fire and Police Departments each year experience a significant number of non-routine Fire and Police requests for services, emergency calls and citizen complaints, all of which are directly related to the use of illegal and legal fireworks during 4 th of July celebrations; and

WHEREAS, the City Council on April 5, 2004, adopted Ordinance No. 2004-03 adding section 10A.8(b) to Chapter 10A of the City Code to establish a permit fee for fireworks sales, and a fireworks service fee to alleviate the financial impacts of providing public safety services directly related to the 4th of July celebrations; and

WHEREAS, Ordinance No. 2004-03 requires that the fireworks service fee be determined by the City’s Fire and Police Chiefs and adopted annually by City Council resolution; and

WHEREAS, the City Council also on April 5, 2004, adopted Resolution No. 2004-24, directing the City’s Fire and Police Chiefs to develop a Fireworks Mitigation Strategy for the upcoming 4th of July celebrations each year, setting forth the amount of the fireworks service fee to recover the anticipated costs.

WHEREAS, the City Fire and Police Chiefs have developed a Fireworks Mitigation Strategy for the 4th of July, 2022, celebrations that includes both public information and additional public safety staff hours at an anticipated cost to the City of $51,900.65, and

WHEREAS, the City Council on June 20, 2022 reviewed the Fireworks Mitigation Strategy Fee for 4th of July, 2022, attached hereunto as Exhibit A.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY, AS FOLLOWS:

1. Based on the 4th of July, 2022 Fireworks Mitigation Strategy with supporting documents (e.g. Staff Report, Mitigation Fee Calculation, Permit list), the fireworks service fee for 2022 has been determined to be $51,900.65.

12.1.c
Packet Pg. 296 Attachment: Draft Resolution (3859 : 2022 Fireworks Public Safety Mitigation Fees)

Resolution No. 2022-XX
Annual Fireworks Service Fee
City Council Regular Meeting | June 20, 2022

Page 2 of 2 ends

2. On June 20, 2022, the City Council reviewed the fireworks service fee for the 4th of July, 2022, and finds that the fee is a reasonable regulatory cost designed to mitigate the adverse health, safety, environmental, and/or other societal effects from the local retail sale, use, and storage of “safe and sane fireworks” as regulated by Gilroy City Code Chapter 10A and is no more than necessary to cover the costs of the City’s police and fire department July 4th fireworks mitigation strategy activities.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 20th day of June, 2022 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:

Marie Blankley, Mayor

ATTEST:

_______________________
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk

12.1.c
Packet Pg. 297 Attachment: Draft Resolution (3859 : 2022 Fireworks Public Safety Mitigation Fees)

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Approval of the Third Operating Memorandum to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement
Meeting Date: June 20, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Community Development Department
Submitted By: Jon Biggs, Interim Community Development Director Prepared By: Melissa Durkin, Planner II
Strategic Plan Goals

☐ Develop a Financially
Resilient Organization

☐ Ensure Neighborhood
Equity from City
Services
☐ Promote Economic
Development
Activities

☐ Promote Safe,
Affordable Housing for All

☐ Maintain and Improve
City Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION

Approve the Third Operating Memorandum to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommends entering into a Third Operating Memorandum to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement to memorialize the City Council’s direction to redirect funding from Glen Loma Ranch McCutchin Creek Park to the Glen Loma Ranch fire station. Redirecting these funds will reduce the gap in fire station funding. The Operating Memorandum would also obligate the City to accept the offer of dedication for the McCutchin Creek Park parcel (assuming no extraordinary conditions would prevent

12.2 Packet Pg. 298

the acceptance of the offer of dedication ) and to construct McCutchin Creek Park at an unspecified date.

BACKGROUND
The City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation entered into a Development Agreement (Glen Loma Ranch DA) dated November 21, 2005 for the development of the Glen Loma Ranch project. The Glen Loma Ranch DA obligated the Glen Loma Corporation to construct several public improvements including a fire station and two parks. One park (Cydney Casper Park) has been constructed. The second park (McCutchin Creek Park) and the fire station have not been constructed.

Glen Loma Ranch DA section 4.4.1.3 provides for caps on the funds Glen Loma is required to pay the City for construction of Glen Loma Ranch public improvements. The cost caps are in 2005 dollars and are subject to upward adjustment. The construction cost caps, in 2005 dollars, for McCutchin Creek Park is $1,608,194 and for the fire station is $3,853,993.

At the Council’s December 2, 2019 meeting, the Council voted unanimously to direct staff to redirect funding from McCutchin Creek Park to the fire station to reduce the gap in fire station funding.

In authorizing the use of McCutchin Park funds for the fire station, t he City Council recognized that the funds obligated for construction of the fire station were inadequate to construct a modern station.

ANALYSIS
Glen Loma Ranch DA section 3.13 anticipates refinements and clarifications to the Glen Loma Ranch DA. This section of the Glen Loma Ranch DA allows the City and Glen Loma to enter into operating memoranda to make such refinements and clarifications.

After execution, the operating memoranda becomes a part of the Glen Loma Ranch DA.

The City and Glen Loma Corporation have entered into two operating memoranda so far.

This proposed third operating memorandum would obligate Glen Loma Corporation to pay the City the funds required for construction of McCutchin Creek Park. The proposed payment amount, $2,336,791, is equivalent to the $1,608,194 referenced in the Glen Loma Ranch DA adjusted upward in accordance with DA secti on 4.4.1.3. This payment would be concurrent with recordation of the Palomino/McCutchin Creek final map. The Operating Memorandum would obligate the City to accept dedication of the McCutchin Creek Park parcel if it meets City standards for parkland use; if the City does not accept the offer within two years of final recordation of the Palomino/McCutchin Park Parcel Final Map, then both parties would be required to meet and confer to identify a reasonable future use of the parcel. After receipt of the fun ds from the Glen

12.2 Packet Pg. 299

Loma Corporation, the City would be responsible for construction of the McCutchin Creek Park.

The proposed Operating Memorandum would eliminate Glen Loma Corporation’s obligation to construct McCutchin Creek Park. Further, the Operatin g Memorandum would redirect the park funding to the City, allowing the City to use the funding for the Glen Loma Ranch fire station.

ALTERNATIVES
Denial of the approval of the Operating Memorandum would result in no changes to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement as it currently stands. This alternative is not recommended, as the City is utilizing these park fund to assist in funding the costs construct the new fire station.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Approval of this Operating Memorandum would assist in funding for the new fire station in the Glen Loma Ranch area. The City will receive the $2.3 million from Glen Loma and deposit it into the Capital Projects Fund to offset the cost of constructing the Fire station in the future. Furthermore, the City will need to identify funding in the future to develop the McCutchin Creek Park.

CONCLUSION
Staff finds that the proposed Operating Memorandum is consistent with the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan, does not increase the density or intensity of use of the property, and does not increase the anticipated disturbed areas within the Specific Plan.

Furthermore, the proposed Operating Memorandum is consistent with City Council direction to redirect McCutchin Creek Park construction funds toward construction of the Glen Loma Ranch fire station.

Attachments:

1. Glen Loma - Third Operating Memorandum to Development Agreement

2. Exhibit A - MC Park Parcel - OM

12.2 Packet Pg. 300

Page 1 ends

Gilroy City CouncilJune 20, 2022

Gilroy City Council
June 20, 2022