HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HOUSING AUTHORITY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
WATER DISTRICT
Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, December 19, 2023
Closed Session - 5:00 PM
City Council Chambers
9700 Seventh Ave., Hesperia CA, 92345
City Clerk's Office: (760) 947-1007
City Council Members
Larry Bird, Mayor
Rebekah Swanson, Mayor Pro Tem
Brigit Bennington, Council Member
Cameron Gregg, Council Member
Allison Lee, Council Member
Rachel Molina, City Manager
Pam K. Lee, City Attorney
NOTE: In compliance with the Americans with Disability Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (760) 947-1007 or (760) 947-1026. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.
December 19, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT
9700 7th Avenue, Council Chambers, Hesperia, CA 92345
As a courtesy, please silence your cell phones and other electronic devices while the meeting is in session. Thank you.
Prior to action of the Council, any member of the audience will have the opportunity to address the legislative body on any item listed on the agenda, including those on the Consent Calendar.
Individuals wishing to speak during General Public Comments or on a particular numbered item must submit a speaker slip to the City Clerk with the agenda item noted. Speaker slips should be turned in prior to the public comment portion of the agenda or before an agenda item is discussed. Comments will be limited to three minutes for General Public Comments, Consent Calendar items and New Business items. Comments are limited to five minutes for Public Hearing items.
In compliance with the Brown Act, the City Council may not discuss or take action on non-agenda items or engage in question and answer sessions with the public. The City Council may ask brief questions for clarification; provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information and direct staff to add an item to a subsequent meeting.
CLOSED SESSION - 5:00 PM
Roll Call
Mayor Larry Bird
Mayor Pro Tem Rebekah Swanson
Council Member Brigit Bennington
Council Member Cameron Gregg
Council Member Allison Lee
Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation:
Government Code Section 54956.9(d)2
1. Two (2) Cases
CALL TO ORDER - 6:30 PM
A. Invocation
B. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
C. Roll Call
Mayor Larry Bird
Mayor Pro Tem Rebekah Swanson
Council Member Brigit Bennington
Council Member Cameron Gregg
December 19, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda
Council Member Allison Lee
D. Agenda Revisions and Announcements by City Clerk
E. Closed Session Reports by City Attorney
ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
1. Presentation to resident Cyndy Mandell, Pride Enhancement Program Honoree.
2. Presentation to Residential Christmas Decorating Contest Winner.
3. Presentation by Department of Transportation on I-15 Pavement Rehab Project.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items and matters not listed on the agenda) Individuals wishing to speak during General Public Comments or on a particular numbered item are requested to submit a speaker slip to the City Clerk with the agenda item noted. Speaker slips should be turned in prior to the public comment portion of the joint agenda or before an agenda item is discussed. Comments will be limited to three minutes for General Public Comments, Consent Calendar items and New Business items. Comments are limited to five minutes for Public Hearing items.
In compliance with the Brown Act, the City Council may not discuss or take action on non-agenda items or engage in question and answer sessions with the public. The City Council may ask brief questions for clarification; provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information and direct staff to add an item to a subsequent meeting.
JOINT CONSENT CALENDAR
1. Consideration of the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, December 5, 2023.
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council approve the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, December 5, 2023.
Staff Person: Assistant City Clerk Erin Baum
Draft CC Min 2023-12-5Attachments:
2. Warrant Run Report (City - Successor Agency - Housing Authority - Community Development Commission - Water)
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the Council/Board ratify the warrant run and payroll report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR Warrant Run 12-19-2023
Attachment 1 - Warrant Run
Attachments:
December 19, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda
3. Treasurer’s Cash Report for the unaudited period ended October 31, 2023 Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the Council/Board accept the Treasurer’s Cash Report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR Treasurer's Report 12-19-2023
Attachment 1- Treasurer's Report
Attachments:
4. Audited Hesperia Housing Authority Financial Statements for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023 and Housing Successor SB 341 Report Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council and the Hesperia Housing Authority (HHA) Board receive and file the audited Hesperia Housing Authority - Component Unit Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023 and Housing Successor SB 341 Report.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR Receive and File Audited Financial Statements HHA 12-19-2023 Attachment 1 - June 30 2023 Component Unit Financial Statements HHA Attachment 2 - SB 341 Housing Successor Report
Attachments:
5. Receive and File the Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act Report (SB 165) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023 Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council receive and file the Communities Facilities District (CFD) 2005-1 (Belgate Development Restructuring) Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act Report (SB 165) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR Receive & File SB 165 CFD 2005-1
Attachment 1 - CFD 2005-1 Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Report Attachments:
6. Nobel Systems, Inc. Contract Amendment
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District (District) authorize the City Manager to approve an amendment of $23,400 to the existing contract with Nobel Systems, Inc. (Nobel), for a revised not-to-exceed contract amount of $216,384 for the Nobel Forms Unlimited module.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
December 19, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda
SR Nobel Systems, Inc. Contract Amendment 12-19-2023Attachments:
7. Award of Contract for IT Office Construction
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to award a contract with Preferred General Services, Inc. in the amount of $63,914 and approve an additional 10% contingency in the amount of $6,391 for a not-to-exceed amount of $70,305 for the construction of one office and cubicle reconfiguration for the Information Technology (IT) division.
Staff Person: Management Analyst Marc Morales
SR Award of Contract for IT Office Construction 12-19-2023Attachments:
8. Award Professional Services Agreements for a Focused Update to the General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with PlaceWorks, Inc. in the amount of $849,161, with a 10% reserve contingency of $84,916, for a total contract cost of $934,077 for a Focused update to the City’s General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
Staff Person: Senior Planner Ryan Leonard
SR Award PSA for a Focused Update to the General Plan and EIR 12-19-2023 Attachment 1 - General Plan Update from PlaceWorks
Attachments:
9. Adopt Resolution No. 2023-70 Approving General Provisions, Contract Documents, and Notice Inviting Sealed Bids for Public Works Projects and Approve Standard Specifications as a component of the City’s Standard Specifications and Contract Documents
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution 2023-70 to allow the Development Services Department to defer the City Council’s approval of plans, specifications, and estimates for each individual project by City Council approving a standard (boiler plate) for Public Works specification documents and reviewing approval upon contract award.
Staff Person: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman SR Adopt Reso 2023-70 Approve Public Works Project Standards 12-19-2023 Resolution 2023-70
Attachments:
PUBLIC HEARING
December 19, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda
Individuals wishing to comment on public hearing items must submit a speaker slip to the City Clerk with the numbered agenda item noted. Speaker slips should be turned in prior to an agenda item being taken up.
Comments will be limited to five minutes for Public Hearing items.
WAIVE READING OF ORDINANCES
Approve the reading by title of all ordinances and declare that said titles which appear on the public agenda shall be determined to have been read by title and further reading waived.
10. User Fee Study
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District consider amending the City-wide fee schedule, as identified in the related to the User Fee Study, and the adoption of proposed Joint Resolution No. 2023-67 and Resolution HWD 2023-24.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher and City Manager Rachel Molina
SR User Fee Study 12-19-2023
Attachment 1 - User Fee Study Report - December 2023
Resolution 2023-67 and Resolution HWD 2023-24
Attachments:
NEW BUSINESS
11. City Council Appointments to Outside Agencies
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council follow past practice and appoint liaisons (both primary and alternate) to various outside agencies for a one-year period to commence in January 2024.
Staff Person: Deputy City Manager/City Clerk Melinda Sayre SR City Council Appointments to Outside Agencies 12-19-2023 Attachment 1 - 2023 Appointment Summary
Attachments:
12. Discussion of Potential Measures for the 2024 General Election Ballot Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff on potential measures to be placed on the ballot for the General Election occurring on November 05, 2024.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR Discussion of Potential Measures for the 2024 Election Ballot 12-19-2023Attachments:
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND COMMENTS
The Council may report on their activities as appointed representatives of the City on various Boards and Committees and/or may make comments of general interest or report on their activities as a representative of the City.
December 19, 2023City Council Meeting Agenda
CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY/STAFF REPORTS
The City Manager, City Attorney or staff may make announcements or reports concerning items of interest to the Council and the public.
ADJOURNMENT
I, Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk of the City of Hesperia, California do hereby certify that I caused to be posted the foregoing agenda on Wednesday, December 13, 2023 at 5:30 p.m. pursuant to California Government Code §54954.2.
_____________________________
Erin Baum,
Assistant City Clerk
Documents produced by the City and distributed less than 72 hours prior to the meeting regarding items on the agenda will be made available in the City Clerk's Office during normal business hours.
City of Hesperia
City of Hesperia
Meeting Minutes - Draft
City Council
Tuesday, December 5, 2023 6:30 PM
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
9700 7th Avenue, Council Chambers, Hesperia, CA 92345
CLOSED SESSION - 5:00 PM
Roll Call
Present: 5 - Mayor Pro Tem Bird, Council Member Swanson, Council Member Gregg, Mayor Ben
nington, and Council Member Lee
Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation: Government Code Section 54956.9(d)2
1. Two (2) Cases
CALL TO ORDER - 6:30 PM
A. Invocation
B. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
C. Roll Call
Present: 5 - Mayor Pro Tem Bird, Council Member Swanson, Council Member Gregg, Mayor Ben
nington, and Council Member Lee
D. A genda Revisions and Announcements by City Clerk
E.
Closed Session Reports by City Attorney
ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
City Council Chambers
9700 Seventh Ave.
Hesperia CA, 92345
City of Hesperia
1. Presentation to outgoing Mayor Brigit Bennington by Mayor Pro Tem Larry Bird.
COUNCIL/BOARD REORGANIZATION
1. Election of Officers:
A. Selection of the Ma
yor/Chair to serve for the City Council, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Community Development Commission, Housing Authority, Hes peria Fire Protection D
istrict and Hesperia Water District (term to expire at the first regular meeting held in Decem
ber 2024).
B. Selection of
the Mayor Pro Tem/Vice Chair to serve for the City Council, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Comm
unity Redevelopment Agency, Community Development Commission, Housing Authorit y, Hesperia Fire
Protection District and Hesperia Water District (term to expire at the first regular m eeting held in Decem
ber 2024).
Sponsors: Deputy City Manager/City Clerk Melinda Sayre
A motion was made by Bennington to appoint Council Member Bird as Mayor, seconded by Gregg. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0
A motion was made by Gregg, to appoint Council Member Swanson as Mayor Pro Tem, seconded by Lee. The mo
tion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0
Mayor Bird took over as chair of the meeting at this time.
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items and matters not listed on the agenda) Roberta Fox commented on various issues via voicemail.
John Ohanian commented on tract maps.
JOINT CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Gregg, seconded by Bennington, that the Joint Consent Calendar be approved. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0
1. Consideration of the Draft Minutes from the Special Meeting held Tuesday, November 21, 2023.
Recommended Action:
It is recomm
ended that the City Council approve the Draft Minutes from the Special Meeting held
Tuesday, November 21, 2023.
City of Hesperia
Sponsors: Assistant City Clerk Erin Baum
2. Warrant Run Report (City - Successor Agency - Housing Authority - Community Development Comm
ission - Water)
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the Council/Board ratify the warrant run and payroll report for the City, Succes sor Agency to the Hesperia Co
mmunity Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Comm unity Developm
ent Commission, and Water District.
Sponsors: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
3. Annual 2024-25 Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the Successor Agency adopt Resolution No. SA 2023-02, approving the Annual 2024-25 Recognized Obl
igation Payment Schedule (ROPS), including the Successor Agency’s F Y 2024-25 Adm
inistrative Budget and authorize staff to present the ROPS to the Oversight Board for its consideration a
nd approval.
Sponsors: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
4. Final Tract Map No. 18955-10
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-68 approving Final Map No. 18955-10 to create 76 resid
ential lots on approximately 24.77 gross acres and accept right-of-way necessary to develop Tract 18989-1 Lot 10, Planning Area 11 of the Tapestry Specific Plan (Applicant:
Silverwood Development Phase I, LLC).
Sponsors: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman , Deputy City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez and Assistant Project Manager Bethany Hudson
5. Final Tract Map No. 18955-11
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2023-69 approving Final Map No. 18955-11 to create 78 resid
ential lots on approximately 17.13 gross acres and accept right-of-way necessary to develop Tract 18989-1 Lot 11, Planning Area 12 of the Tapestry Specific Plan (Applicant:
Silverwood Development Phase I, LLC).
Sponsors: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman , Deputy City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez and Assistant Project Manager Bethany Hudson
City of Hesperia
COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND COMMENTS
The Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and Council Members reported from various events and Committees.
Council Member Gregg requested a future report on Public Safety’s use of Narcan and a possible coordination of resources.
CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY/STAFF REPORTS
None.
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned in honor of the recent passing of an Apple Valley Firefighter, the San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Sergeant who was shot in the line of duty in Hesperia, Council Member Bennington’s mother’s 87 th birthday and City staff member Bethany Hudson at 7:13 p.m. _____________________________
Erin Baum,
Assistant City Clerk
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
City Council, as Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency
Chair and Commissioners, Hesperia Housing Authority
Chair and Commissioners, Community Development Commission Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
Anne Duke, Deputy Finance Director
Shirley Domacio Calderon, Accountant
SUBJECT: Warrant Run Report (City – Successor Agency – Housing Authority – Community Development Commission – Water)
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the Council/Board ratify the warrant run and payroll report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.
BACKGROUND
The Warrant Run totals represented below are for th e period November 04 , 2023 through November 17, 2023.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Warrant Runs
Agency/District Accounts Payable Payroll Wires Totals
City of Hesperia $3,829,230.61 $290,791.75 $0.00 $4,120,022.36 Successor Agency 6,000.00 0.00 0.00 6,000.00
Housing Authority 0.00 193.40 0.00 193.40
Community Development Commission 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Water 235,895.80 117,818.56 0.00 353,714.36
Totals $4,071,126.41 $408,803.71 $0.00 $4,479,930.12
YEAR-TO PRIOR FY YTD
W/E W/E WARRANT DATE DATE
FUND # FUND NAME 11/10/2023 11/17/2023 TOTALS Wires TOTALS * TOTALS Accounts Payable
100 GENERAL 75,077.92$ 1,813,116.98$ 1,888,194.90 $ - $ 14,078,540.03$ 12,145,197.98$ 105 PENSION OBLIGATION TRUST -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 106 OPEB TRUST -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 200 HESPERIA FIRE DISTRICT -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 204 MEASURE I - RENEWAL -$ -$ -$ - $ 435,916.14$ 173,443.94$ 207 LOCAL TRANSPORT-SB 325 -$ -$ -$ - $ 967,882.81$ 27,651.68$ 209 GAS TAX-RMRA -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 210 HFPD (PERS) -$ -$ -$ - $ 907,316.00$ 1,093,204.87$ 251 CDBG -$ -$ -$ - $ 239,828.54$ 46,980.19$ 254 AB2766 - TRANSIT -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 255 AB3229 SUPPLEMENTAL LAW -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 256 ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS GRANT 278.95$ 1.50$ 280.45$ - $ 15,745.68$ 17,005.18$ 262 SB 1383 LOCAL ASSISTANCE GRANT -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ 6,000.00$ 263 STREETS MAINTENANCE 20,747.12$ 33,921.36$ 54,668.48$ - $ 963,492.56$ 926,749.62$ 300 DEV. IMPACT FEES - STREET -$ -$ -$ - $ 3,600.00$ 30,261.18$ 301 DEV. IMPACT FEES - STORM DRAIN -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ 17,460.50$ 303 DEV. IMPACT FEES - POLICE -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 304 DEV. IMPACT FEES - PUBLIC WKS. -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 306 DEV. IMPACT FEES - 2018-STREETS 194,580.09$ -$ 194,580.09$ - $ 1,355,940.42$ 1,983,485.83$ 312 DIF 2018-POLICE FACILITIES -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 313 DIF A-04 DRAINAGE -$ -$ -$ - $ 317,748.35$ 3,000.00$ 402 WATER RIGHTS ACQUISITION -$ -$ -$ - $ 1,217,911.69$ 1,092,323.17$ 403 2013 REFUNDING LEASE REV BONDS -$ -$ -$ - $ 570,901.39$ 655,055.62$ 504 CITY WIDE STREETS - CIP 757,864.82$ -$ 757,864.82$ - $ 4,410,420.58$ 4,516,234.14$ 509 CITY FACILITIES CIP -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 800 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 233,902.17$ 98,353.68$ 332,255.85$ - $ 3,515,629.62$ 3,564,142.38$ 801 TRUST/AGENCY 601,386.02$ -$ 601,386.02$ - $ 1,094,483.50$ 677,208.44$ 802
AD 91-1 AGENCY -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 804 TRUST-INTEREST BEARING -$ -$ -$ - $ 109,961.70$ 58,917.50$ 807 CFD 2005-1 -$ -$ -$ - $ 986,388.74$ 969,811.58$ 808 HFPD (TRANSITION) -$ -$ -$ - $ 347,796.19$ 317,384.59$ 815 PLAN REVIEW TRUST - FRONTIER -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ 6,584.08$ CITY 1,883,837.09$ 1,945,393.52$ 3,829,230.61$ - $ 31,539,503.94$ 28,328,102.47$ 163 REDEVELOP OBLIG RETIREMENT-2018 -$ 6,000.00$ 6,000.00$ - $ 8,085,433.89$ 7,746,169.98$ SUCCESSOR AGENCY -$ 6,000.00$ 6,000.00$ - $ 8,085,433.89$ 7,746,169.98$ 370 HOUSING AUTHORITY -$ -$ -$ - $ 4,936.37$ 5,034.77$ HOUSING AUTHORITY -$ -$ -$ - $ 4,936.37$ 5,034.77$ 170 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION -$ -$ -$ - $ -$ -$ 700 WATER OPERATING 119,267.21$ 66,857.02$ 186,124.23$ 4,739,506.97$ 3,983,761.22$ 701 WATER CAPITAL -$ -$ -$ -$ 313,800.00$ 8,087.00$ 710 SEWER OPERATING 10,883.08$ 38,760.99$ 49,644.07$ - $ 2,641,048.63$ 2,042,385.89$ 711 SEWER CAPITAL -$ -$ -$ - $ 525,100.10$ 191,215.57$ 720 RECLAIMED WATER OPERATIONS 127.50$ -$ 127.50$ - $ 15,590.52$ 11,265.71$ WATER 130,277.79$ 105,618.01$ 235,895.80$ - $ 8,235,046.22$ 6,236,715.39$ ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TOTAL 2,014,114.88$ 2,057,011.53$ 4,071,126.41$ - $ 47,864,920.42$ 42,316,022.61$ REG. PAYROLL
City 290,791.75$ -$ 290,791.75$ - $ 3,019,137.17$ 2,741,055.92$ Housing Authority 193.40$ -$ 193.40$ - $ 1,965.84$ 1,823.11$ Water 117,818.56$ -$ 117,818.56$ - $ 1,275,729.42$ 1,116,790.28$ PAYROLL TOTAL 408,803.71$ -$ 408,803.71$ - $ 4,296,832.43$ 3,859,669.31$ *No payments were issued on July 1, 2023.
City of Hesperia
WARRANT RUNS
11/04/2023-11/17/2023
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
City Council, Serving as Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency
Chair and Commissioners, Hesperia Housing Authority
Chair and Commissioners, Community Development Commission Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
Anne Duke, Deputy Finance Director
Jacob Weatherbie, Accountant
SUBJECT: Treasurer’s Cash Report for the unaudited period ended October 31, 2023.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the Council/Board accept the Treasurer’s Cash Report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.
BACKGROUND
This report is presented to the City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 5364 6 (b) setting forth the City’s investment portfolio.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The Treasurer’s Cash Reports are presented on the following pages for each agency.
FISCAL IMPACT
These reports reflect unaudited cash balances as of October 31, 2023.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. City of Hesperia Investment Report
2. Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency Investment Report
3. Hesperia Housing Authority Investment Report
4. Community Development Commission Investment Report
5. Hesperia Water District Investment Report
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council/Board Members Treasurer’s Cash Report
December 19, 2023
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council/Board Members Treasurer’s Cash Report
December 19, 2023
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council/Board Members Treasurer’s Cash Report
December 19, 2023
Type of Investment
Investments under the direction of the City:
Institution/
Fiscal Agent
Interest
Rate
Local Agency Investment Funds 1 State of Calif. ·r 3.670% Local Bank Checking Accounts U.S. Bank n/a
._ Total Unaudited Investments under the direction of the City Investments under the direction of fiscal agents:
2012L, ~ - US Bank 0.029%
iase Revenue Bonds I US Bank 0.447%
iase Revenue Bonds I US Bank 0.000%
:efunding Lease Revenue Bonds
t
US Bank
I
0.429% -efunding Lease Revenue Bonds US Bank 0.429%
efunding Lease Revenue Bonds
+-
US Bank 0.000%
=o 2005-1 Refunding US Bank 0.426%
FD 2005-1 Refunding US Bank 0.057%
:FD 2005-1 Refunding US Bank 0.430%
~
:FD 2005-1 Refunding US Bank 0.429%
City of Hesperia
Investment Report
Unaudited
October 3 l. 202_3
Date of Date of
Purchase Maturity
Par Value
at Maturity
Book
Value
Market
Value
~ 31-0ct-23 ~ Demand • $ 95,283,848.25 • 95,283,848.25 95,283,848.25 ' 31-0ct-23 Demand ; 1,462,787.37 1,462,787.37 1,462,787.37 $ 96,746,635.62 $ 96,746,635.62 $ 96,746,635.62
31-0ct-2_3_ Demand 62,060.741 62,060.74 62,060.74
31-0ct-23 Demand 1,458,617.00 1,458,617.00 1,458,617.00 31-0ct-23 Demand 973.22 973.22 973.22
31-0ct-23 Demand 653.02 653.02 653.02 --31-0ct-23 Demand 6,543.41 6,543.41 i 6,543.41 31-0ct-23 Demand 0.31 0.31 I 0.31
"71- oct-23 Demand 36,696.23 36,696.23 36,696.23
31-0ct-23 Demand 1.30 iToi 1.30
31-0ct-23 Demand 1,440,718.10 1,440,718.10 1,440,718.10 3foct-23 -Demand 25,134.45 25,134.45 I 25,134.4~ .
ATTACHMENT 1
Account
DescriQ.lion
2012 - Water Rights Interest Fund
2012 - Wat.er Rights Reserve Fund
2012 - Water Rights Surplus Revenue Fund
2005 Civic Plaza - Revenue Fund
2005 Civic Plaza - Reserve Fund
---
---- -2005 Civic Plaza - Refunding Fund
2014 CFO 05-1 - Special Tax Fund
2014 CFO 05-1 - Bond Fund
2014 CFO 05-1 - Reserve Fund
2014 CFD 05-1 Administrative Exeense Bonds
~
i
•
2012 L1
2012 L,
2013R
2013 R
2013 R
2014 C
2014 C
2014 C
2014 C
2023 R1
2023 R
Deposi
:funding Lease Revenue Bonds US Bank 0.000% 31-0ct-23 Demand . 112,673.61 112,673.61 112,673.61 1 2023 Refunding Lease Revenue Interest Funds :efunding Lease Revenue Bonds
I SullyM
[ci"tyof
City of
Hesp8!
City of
its - Workers' Comp
liller Retention - Ranchero
Hesperi~Stabalized Trust
Hesperia OPEB Trust
~a Fire Protection PST
Hesperia Settlement Escrow Account
US Bank
PERMA
US Bank
Charles Schwab
Charles Schwab - Charles Schwab
US Bank
0.394% 31-0ct-23 -+-
n/a 31-0ct-23
0.000% 31-0ct-23
n/a 31-0ct-23
n/a 31-0ct-23 -·
n/a 31-0ct-23
0.000% 31-0ct-23
Demand 13,782.22 13,782.22 13,782.22
n/a 706,439.07 706,439.07 706,439.07
n/a t· 1.08 1.08 1.08
n/a 3,286,548.38 3,286,548.38 3,286,548.38
n/~ 579,940.53 579,940.53 579,940.53
n/a -t 1,159,605.93 1,159,605.93 1,159,605.93
n/a 300,010.41 300,010.41 300,010.41
Total Unaudited Investments under the direction of fiscal agents $ 9,190,399.01 $ 9,190,399.01 $ 9,190,399.01 Please Note: All market value data is provided courtesy of the City's fiscal agent, US Bank.
I certify that this investment portfolio is in compliance with the statement of investment policy of the City of Hesperia and the investment program provides sufficient liquidity to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months, as required by the California Government Code sections 53646(b)(2) and (3), respectively. • Note: 2005 Certificates of Participation began in May 2005 for the finacing of the Civic Plaza.
Investment - City
Lta
2023 Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds Cost of Issuance -GL 1352 Ranchero Road - Escrow Account
City Pension
-- --
CityOPEB
Fire Pension
Settlement Escrow Account
t
Issuer/
Type of Investment Institution
Investments under the direction of the City:
Local Agency Investment Funds State of Calif.
Local Bank Checking Accounts U.S. Bank
Successor Agency to the Redevelopment Agency
Investment Report
Unaudited
October 3t 2023
Interest Date of Date of Par Value Book
Rate Purchase Maturity at Maturity Value
3.670% 31-Oct-23 Demand $ 339,351.58 $ 339,351.58
n/a 31-Oct-23 Demand 5,209.69 5,209.69
Total Unaudited Investments under the direction of the City $ 344,561.27 $ 344,561.27 Investments under the direction of fiscal ag_ents:
$
--
12.63 !
--
~
2018 Refunding Bonds US Bank 0.396% 31-Oct-23 Demand 12.63 -2018 Refunding Bonds US Bank 0.372% 31-Oct-23 Demand 10,106.43 _ 10,106.43 -2018 Refunding Bonds US Bank 0.000% 31-Oct-23 Demand 1.00 1.00 ~
Total Unaudited Investments under the direction of fiscal agents $ 10,120.06 $ 10,120.06 $ Please Note: All market value data is provided courtesy of the City's fiscal agent US Bank.
The 2018 Refunding Bonds are supported by a $9,799,443.76 bond insurance policy.
I certify that this investment portfolio is in compliance with the statement of investment policy of the City of Hesperia and the investment program provides sufficient liquidity to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months, as required by the California Government Code sections.~3646(b)(2) and (3), respectively . •. .t
~
• Note: The 2005 and 2007 Series Bonds were refinanced to 2018 Series Bonds in November 2018.
Investment - SA
ATTACHMENT 2
Market Account
Value Description
339,351.58
5,209.69
344,561.27
l
12.63 2018A & 20188 - Debt Service Account
10,106.43 2018A & 20188 - Interest Account
I 1.00 2018A & 20188 - Reserve Account
10,120.06
' .._,v, II V I I IVVVIAJ ll-"'411 ,t
T~ of Investment
Issuer/
Institution
Investments under the direction of the City:
Hesperia Housing Authority
Investment Report
Unaudited
October 31i 2023
Interest
Rate
Date of Date of
Purchase Maturih'.
I
- Local Agency Investment Funds L- State of California J 3.670% _ Local Bank Checking Accounts U.S. Bank j n/a
31-Oct-23
31-Oct-23
Demand
Demand
Total Unaudited Investments under the direction of the City Par Value
at Maturity
Book
Value
ATTACHMENT 3
Market
Value
$ 5,890,758.89 5,890,758.89 5,890,758.89
90,434.30 90,434.30 90,434.30
$ 5,981,193.19 $ 5,981,193.19 $ 5,981,193.19
I certify that this investment portfolio is in compliance with the statement of investment policy of the_ t;ify of Hesperia and the investment program provides sufficient liquidity to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months, as required by the California Government Code sections 53646(b)(2) and (3), respectively.
Investment - HHA
T ~ e of Investment
Hesperia Community Development Comission
Investment Report
Unaudited
Issuer/
Institution
October 313 2023
Interest
Rate
Date of Date of
Purchase Maturi~
Par Value
at Maturi~
Investments under the direction of the Cityi__
Local Agency Investment Funds State of California 3.670% 31-Oct-23 . Demand $ 94,572.00 Local Bank Checking Accounts U.S. Bank n/a ;31-0ct-23 -. - Demand 1,451.86 Total Unaudited Investments under the direction of the City $ 96,023.86 $ I certify that this investment portfolio is in compliance with the statement of investment policy of the City of Hesperia and the investment program provides sufficient liquidity to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months, as required by the California Government Code sections 53646(b)(2) and (3), respectively.
Investment - CDC
ATTACHMENT 4
Book
Value
94,572.00 ---+--
1,451.86
96,023.86 $
Market
Value
94,572.00
1,451.86
96,023.86
TYQe of Investment
Investments under the direction of the City:
Issuer/
Institution
Hesperia Water District
Investment Report
Unaudited
October 31:. 2023
Interest Date of Date of
Rate Purchase Maturity
Par Value
at Maturity
Book
Value
Market
Value
ATTACHMENT 5
Account
DescriQtion
I Local Agency Investment Funds - State of California 3.670% 31-Oct-23 Demand $ 39,700,231.36 39,700,231.36 39,700,231.36 1 l Local Bank Checking Accounts U.S. Bank n/a 31-Oct-23 Demand 609,473.67 609,473.67 I 609,473.67 Total Unaudited Investments under the direction of the City $ 40,3Q9,705.03 $ 40,309,705.03 $ 40,309,705.03 Investments under the direction of fiscal agents:
[ Deposits -Workers' Comp _ ~--P-E-R-MA------,--n/-a I 31-Oct-22 n/a 877,475~ 877,475.29 1 Total Unaudited Investments under the direction of fiscal agents $ 877,475.29 $ 877,475.29 $ Please Note: All market value data is provided courtesy of the City's fiscal agent, US Bank.
I certify that this investment portfolio is in compliance with the statement of investment policy of the City of Hesperia and the investment program provides sufficient liquidity to meet expenditure requirements for the next six months, as required by the California Government Code sections 53646(b)(2} and (3), respectively.
Investment - ENT
877,475.29 [GL 1352
877,475.29
untant
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Housing Authority
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
Anne Duke, Deputy Finance Director
Victor Knight, Economic Development Manager
SUBJECT: Audited Hesperia Housing Authority Financial Statements for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023 and Housing Successor SB 341 Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and the Hesperia Housing Authority (HH A) Board receive and file the audited Hesperia Housing Authority – Component Unit Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023 and Housing Successor SB 341 Report.
BACKGROUND
The State of California Health and Safety Code §34176.1(f) requires that the housing successor (HHA) shall conduct, and provide to its governing body, and independent financial audit of the Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset fund within six months after the end of each fiscal year. In addition, the housing success or shall provide to its governing body the SB 341 report, as a component of the HHA audit.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The Agency's independent auditor, CliftonLarsonAllen LLP (CLA) performed an audit of the HHA for Fiscal Year 202 2-23. The document that comprise s the Financial Statements, commonly referred to as the Audit for the Authority, is the Hesperia Housing Authority - Component Unit Financial Statements – June 30, 2023.
Additionally, the HHA provid es the Board with the audited financial statements and S B 341 Report, which satisfies the legal requirement set forth by the State . These documents are included as Attachments 1 and 2.
The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, which reflects the Citywide Financial Statements, Component Unit Financial Statem ents for the Fire Protection District, Community Development Commission, HHA, and Water District, as well as the Single Audit, will be formally presented to the City Council in April of 2024.
FISCAL IMPACT
None.
Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Housing Authority Audited Hesperia Housing Authority Financial Statements for Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 202 3 December 19, 2023
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. June 30, 2023 Component Unit Financial Statements for the Hesperia Housing Authority
2. SB 341 Housing Successor Report
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
COMPONENT UNIT
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2023
Attachment 1
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
TABLE OF CONTENTS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2023
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT 1
MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS 4
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
STATEMENT OF NET POSITION 9
STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES 10
BALANCE SHEET 11
RECONCILIATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET TO THE STATEMENT OF NET POSITION – GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 12
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES – GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 13
RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES,
AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES TO THE STATEMENT OF
ACTIVITIES – GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS 14
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS 15
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE – HESPERIA HOUSING
AUTHORITY SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 26
BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE – VVEDA HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL REVENUE FUND 27
NOTE TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION 28
CLA (CliftonLarsonAllen LLP) is an independent network member of CLA Global. See CLAglobal.com/disclaimer.
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP
CLAconnect.com
1 INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT
Board of Directors
Hesperia Housing Authority
Hesperia, California
Report on the Audit of the Financial Statements
Opinions
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities and each major fund of the Hesperia Housing Authority (the Authority) (a component unit of the City of Hesperia), as of and for the year ended June 30, 20 23, and the related notes to the financial statements, which collectively comprise the Authority’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to abo ve present f airly, in all material respects, the financial position of the Authority, as of June 30, 2023, and the changes in financial position, and cash flows for the year then ended in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Basis for Opinions
We conducted our audit in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America (GAAS) and the standards applica ble to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United States. Our responsibilities under those standards are fur ther described in the Auditors’ Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements section of our report. We a re required to be independent of the Authority and to meet our other ethical responsibilities, in accordance with the relevant ethical requirements relating to our audit.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit opinions.
Responsibilities of Management for the Financial Statements Management is responsible for the pre paration and fair presentation of the financial statements in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, and for the design, implementation, and mainte nance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are free from material misstatement , whether due to fraud or error.
In preparing the financial statements, management is required to evaluate whether there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregat e, that raise substantial doubt about the Authority’s ability to continue as a going concern for 12 months beyond the financial statement date, including any currently known information that may raise substantial doubt shortly thereafter.
Board of Directors
Hesperia Housing Authority
2 Auditors’ Responsibilities for the Audit of the Financial Statements Our objectives are to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements as a whole are free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error, and to issue an auditors’ report t hat includes our opinions. Reasonable assurance is a high level of assurance but is not absolute assurance and therefore is not a guarantee that an audit conducted in accordance with GAAS and Government Auditing Standards will always detect a material misstatement when it exists. The risk of not detecting a material misstatement resulti ng from fraud is higher than for one resulting from error, as fraud may involve collusion, forgery, intentional om issions, misrepresentations, or the override of internal con trol.
Misstatements are considered material if there is a substantial likelihood t hat, ind ividually or in the aggregate, they would influence the judgment made by a reasonable user based on the fi nancial statements.
In performing an audit in accordance with GAAS and Government Auditing Standards, we:
• Exercise professional judgment and maintain professional skepticism throughout the audit. • Identify and assess th e risks of material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error, and d esign and perform audit procedures responsive to those risks. Such procedures include examining, on a test basis, evidence regarding the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.
• Obtain an understanding of internal control relevant to the audit in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority’s internal control. Accordingly, no such opinion is expressed.
• Evaluate the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting estimates made by management, as well a s evaluate the overall presentation of the financial statements.
• Conclude whether, in our judgment, there are conditions or events, considered in the aggregate, that raise substantial doubt about the Authority’s ability to continue as a going concern for a reasonable period of time.
We are required to communicate with those charged with governance regarding, among other matters, the planned scope and timing of the audit, sig nificant audit findings, and certain internal c ontrol related matters that we identified during the audit.
Required Supplementary Information
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the management’s discussion and analysis and budgetary comparison schedule s, be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information is the responsibility of management and, although not a part of the basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board who considers it to be an essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic, or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the required supplementary information in accordance with GAA S, which consisted of inquiries of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any assurance.
Board of Directors
Hesperia Housing Authority
3 Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report date d December 7, 2023 on our consideration of th e Authority’s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain provisions of laws, regula tions, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely to describe the scope of our tes ting of int ernal control over fina ncial reporting and compliance and the results of that testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the Authority’s internal control over financial reporting or on compliance. That report is an integral pa rt of an a udit performed in accor dance with Government Auditing Standards in considering the Authority’s internal control over f inancial reporting and compliance.
CliftonLarsonAllen LLP
Irvine, California
December 7, 2023
4 MANAGEMENT’S DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS
Our discussion and analysis of the Hesperia Housing Authority ’s (Authority) financial performance provides an overview of the Authority’s financial activities for the fiscal year (FY) ending June 30, 2023. Please read it in conjunction with the accompanying basic financial statements.
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
During FY 2022-23, t he Auth ority’s net position increased by 4% or approximately $0.5 million from June 30, 2022. This is primarily due to an increase of $0.5 million in interest revenues received during the fiscal year ending June 20, 2023 , of which $0.4 million is related to interest income on notes receivable from loans made for low and moderate housing projects.
USING THIS ANNUAL REPORT
This annual report consists of a series of financial statements. The Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities provide information about the activities of the Authority as a whole and present a longer-term view of the Authority’s finances. Fund financial statements tell how these services were financed in the short term as well as what remains for future spending. Fund financial statements also report the Authority’s operations in more detail than the government -wide statements by providi ng information about the Authority’s most significant funds.
REPORTING THE AUTHORITY AS A WHOLE
The discussion and analysis provided here are intended to serve as an introduction to the Authority’s basic financial statement s. The basic financial statements consist of three components: 1) government-wide financial statements, 2) fund financial statements , and 3) the notes to financial statements. This report also includes supplementary information intended to furnish additional detail to support the basic financial statements themselves.
Government-Wide Financial Statements
One of the most important questions asked about the Authority’s fi nances is, “Is the Authority as a whole better off or worse off as a result of this y ear’s activities?” The Government-Wide Statements – The Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities – report information about the Authority as a whole and about its activities in a way that helps answer this question. These statements include all assets and liabilities using the accrual basis of accounting method, which is similar to the accounting used by most private-sector companies. All of the current year’s revenues and expenses are taken into account regardless of when cash is received or paid.
The statement of net position presents financial information on all of the Authority’s assets, liabilities, and deferred inflows/outflows of resources, with the difference reported as net position. Over time, increases or decreases in net position may serve as a useful indicator of whether the financial position of the Authority is improving or deteriorating.
The statement of activities presents information s howing how the Authority’s net position changed during the most recent fiscal year. All changes in net position are reported as soon as the underlying event giving rise to the change occurs, regardless of the timing of related cash flows . Thus, revenues and expenses are reported for some items that will only result in cash flows in future fiscal periods (e.g., uncollected taxes and earned but unused vacation leave).
5 REPORTING THE AUTHORITY’S MOST SIGNIFICANT FUNDS
Fund Financial Statements – A fund is a grouping of related accounts that is used to maintain control over resources that have been segregated for specific activities or objectives. The Authority, like other state and local governments, uses fund accounting to ensure and demonstrate complia nce with finance-related legal requirements. The Authori ty uses a governmental fund to account for its operations.
Governmental Funds – Governmental funds are used to account for essentially the same functions reported as governmental activities in the government-wide financial statements. However, unlike the government-wide financial st atements, governmental fund financial statements focus on near-term inflows and outflows of spendable resources , as well as on balances of spendable resources available at the end of the fiscal year. Such information may be useful in assessing a government’s near -term financing requirements.
Because the focus of governmental funds is narrower than that of the government -wide financial statements, it is useful to compare t he information presented for governmental funds with similar information presented fo r governmental activities in the government -wide financial statements . By doing so, readers may better understand the long -term impact of the government’s near-term financing decisions. Both the governmental fund balance sheet and the governmental fund statement of revenues, expenditures, and changes in fund balances provide a reconciliation to facilitate this comparison between governmental funds and governmental activities.
Notes to the Financial Statements – The notes pr ovide additional informa tion that is necessary to acquire a full understanding of the data provided in the government-wide and fund financial statements.
THE HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY AS A WHOLE
Our analysis focuses on the Condensed Statement of Net Pos ition (Table 1) and Changes in Net Position (Table 2) of the Authority. As noted earlier, net position over time, may serve as a useful indicator of a government’s financial position.
2022 2023 Amount Percentage
Current and other assets 11,974,046 $ 12,467,590 $ 493,544 $ 4% Total assets 11,974,046 12,467,590 493,544 4% Total deferred outflow of resources - - - 0%
Current liabilities 107 5 (102) -95%
Total liabilities 107 5 (102) -95%
Total deferred inflow of resources - - - 0%
Net Position:
Restricted 11,973,939 12,467,585 493,646 4% Total Net Position 11,973,939 $ 12,467,585 $ 493,646 $ 4% Table 1
Condensed Statement of Net Position
Changes from 2022 to 2023
6 The following is a brief explanation for the changes in Table 1 above for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2023:
• Current and other assets in the amount of $12.5 million increased by $0.5 million from the year ending June 30, 2022. This is a result of a $0.5 million increase in interest income, of which $0.4 million is attributable to interest on notes receivable from loans made for low and moderate income housing projects.
• Current liabilities totaled $5 on June 30, 2023, which is a decrease of $ 102 and is primarily attributed to the timing of the payment of invoices.
• Total Net Position increase d by $0.5 million as a result of the changes to assets and liabilities discussed above.
AUTHORITY ACTIVITIES
As shown in Table 2, the Authority’s June 30, 2023, net position increased by approximately $0. 5 million. Total June 30, 2023 revenue of $ 0.6 million exceeds the Authority’s current year expenditures by $0.5 million, and is higher than June 30, 2022 revenue by $0.5 million. The year-over-year increase in revenue is a result of increased interest income, of which $0.4 million is related to interest on notes receivable from loans made for low and moderate income housing projects. Fiscal Year 2022 -23 expenditures of $ 153,628 are $ 225,199 less than the prior year ’s expenditures of $ 378,827. The decrease in expenditures is primarily related to a one-time $315,000 transfer out during FY 2021-22 to reimburse the Neighborhood Stabilization Grant fund for low moderate income housing expenses in excess of the grant allowance; this was offset by a FY 2022-23 market value loss of $90,000 in land held for resale.
2022 2023 Amount Percentage
Revenues
General revenues:
Income from money and property (28,612)$ 486,379 $ 514,991 $ 1800% Other 178,628 160,895 (17,733) -10%
Total revenues 150,016 647,274 497,258 331% Expenses
Development Services 378,827 153,628 (225,199) -59% Total expenses 378,827 153,628 (225,199) -59% Change in net position (228,811) 493,646 722,457 316% Net position at July 1 12,202,750 11,973,939 (228,811) -2% Net position at June 30 11,973,939 $ 12,467,585 $ 493,646 $ 4% Changes from 2022 to 2023
Table 2
Changes in Net Position
7 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS OF THE AUTHORITY’S FUNDS
At year-end, the Authority’s governmental funds reported combined fund balances of $12.5 million. • The fund balance of the Hesperia Housing Authority Fund is $10.6 million, which is restricted for low and moderate income housing functions. The Fund balance has increased by $ 0.4 million from June 30, 20 22, a result of increased interest revenue, of which $0.4 million is related to interest income on notes receivable from loans made for low and moderate income housing projects. • The Victor Valley Economic Development Agency (VVEDA) Housing Authority Fund balance is $1.9 million, which is relatively unchanged from June 30, 2022, having received $36,667 in interest earnings on cash balances . It should be noted that VVEDA funds m ust be utilized for low and moderate income housing functions in the VVEDA target area.
ECONOMIC FACTORS AND NEXT YEAR’S BUDGETS AND RATES
In Fiscal Year 2023-24, the Authority’s budget anticipates revenues of $0.2 million, which will be offset by expenditures of approximately $0.1 million to maintain current operations.
CONTACTING THE AUTHORITY’S FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT
This financial report is designed to provide our citizens, t axpayers, customers, and creditors with a general overview of the Authority’s finances and to show the Authority’s accountability for the money it receives. If you have questions about this report or need additional financial information, contact the Authority’s Finance Department, at the City of Hesp eria, 9700 Seventh Avenue, Hesperia, California 92345.
8 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
STATEMENT OF NET POSITION
JUNE 30, 2023
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
9 ASSETS
Current Assets:
Cash and Cash Equivalents 5,644,521$
Receivables:
Accrued Interest 43,007
Due from City of Hesperia 115
Land Held for Resale 6,779,947
Total Current Assets 12,467,590
Noncurrent Assets:
Notes Receivable 22,703,860
Allowance for Notes Receivable (22,703,860)
Total Noncurrent Assets -
Total Assets 12,467,590
LIABILITIES
Current Liabilities:
Accounts Payable and Other Current Liabilities 5
Total Current Liabilities 5
NET POSITION
Restricted for Low Income Housing 12,467,585
Total Net Position 12,467,585$
Governmental
Activities
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2023
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
10 Net (Expense)
Revenue and
Changes in
Net Position
Operating Capital
Charges for Grants and Grants and Governmental
Functions/Programs Expenses Services Contributions Contributions Activities Primary Government:
Governmental Activities:
Development Services 153,628$ -$ -$ $
- $
(153,628)
Total Governmental Activities 153,628$ -$ -$ $ - (153,628)
GENERAL REVENUES
Income from Money and Property 486,379
Other 160,895
Total General Revenues 647,274
CHANGE IN NET POSITION 493,646
Net Position - Beginning of Year 11,973,939
NET POSITION - END OF YEAR 12,467,585$
Program Revenues
- $
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
BALANCE SHEET
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
JUNE 30, 2023
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
11 Hesperia VVEDA Total Housing
Housing Housing Authority
Authority Authority Funds
ASSETS
Cash and Cash Equivalents 3,818,160$ 1,826,361$ 5,644,521$ Due from City of Hesperia 115 - 115
Accrued Interest 29,075 13,932 43,007
Notes Receivable 22,703,860
Allowance for Notes Receivable (22,703,860)
Land Held for Resale 6,779,947
22,703,860
(22,703,860)
6,779,947
Total Assets 10,627,297$ 1,840,293$ 12,467,590$
LIABILITIES AND FUND BALANCES
LIABILITIES
Accounts Payable and Other Current Liabilities 5$ -$ 5$ Total Liabilities 5
-
5 FUND BALANCES
Restricted:
Low Income Housing 10,627,292 1,840,293 12,467,585 Total Liabilities and Fund Balances 10,627,297$ 1,840,293$ 12,467,590$ -
-
-
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
RECONCILIATION OF THE BALANCE SHEET TO THE STATEMENT OF NET POSITION
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
JUNE 30, 2023
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
12 Total Fund Balances - Governmental Funds 12,467,585$ There are no reconciling items.
Total Net Position 12,467,585$
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2023
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
13 Hesperia VVEDA Total Housing
Housing Housing Authority
Authority Authority Funds
REVENUES
Use of Money and Property 449,712$ 36,667$ 486,379$ Other Revenues 160,895 - 160,895
Total Revenues 610,607 36,667 647,274
EXPENDITURES
Current:
Development Services 150,514 - 150,514
Total Expenditures 150,514 - 150,514
DEFICIENCY OF REVENUES
UNDER EXPENDITURES 460,093 36,667 496,760
Fund Balances - Beginning of Year 10,167,199 1,803,626 11,970,825 FUND BALANCES - END OF YEAR 10,627,292$ 1,840,293$ 12,467,585$
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
RECONCILIATION OF THE STATEMENT OF REVENUES, EXPENDITURES, AND
CHANGES IN FUND BALANCES TO THE STATEMENT OF ACTIVITIES
GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2023
See accompanying Notes to Financial Statements.
14 Net Change in Fund Balances - Total Governmental Funds 496,760$ Amounts reported for governmental activities in the Statement of Activities are different because:
Recording of long-term deposits are included in governmental activities in the government-wide Statement of Activities. (3,114) Change in Net Position of Governmental Activities 493,646$
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
15 NOTE 1 REPORTING ENTITY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES A. Reporting Entity
The Hesperia Housing Authority (Authority), which is a subsidiary component un it of the City of Hesperia (City), was established on April 5, 2011 by Resolution No. 2011-022 of the City Council. The Hesperia Housing Authority was activated when the dissolution of the former Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency occurred on February 1, 2012.
The Authority develops, manages, and prom otes programs an d projects that preserve and improve the supply of affordable housing in the City for low and moderate income persons.
B. Basis of Presentation
The acco unting polic ies of the Authority con form to accounting principles generally accepted in the United Stat es of America as they are applicable to governmental units.
The Govern mental Accounting Standards Bo ard (GASB) is the accepted standard setting body for establishing governmental accounting and financial reporting principles.
The more signi ficant accountin g po licies refle cted in the financial statements are summarized as follows:
Government-Wide Financial Statements
The government -wide fi nancial statement s (i.e., the statement of net positi on and the statement of activities) report information on all of th e activities of the Hesperia Housing Authority. For the most part, the effect of interfund activity has been removed from these statements. Governmental activities, which normally are suppo rted by taxes and intergovernmental revenues, are reported separately from business-type activities, which rely to a significant extent o n fees and cha rges for support. The Authority has no business-type activities.
The statement of activities demonstrate s the degree to which the direct expenses of a given function are o ffset by program revenues. Direct expenses are those that are clearly identifiable with a specific function. Program revenues include 1) charges to customers who pur chase, use, or directly benefit from goods, services, or privileges provided by a given fun ction and 2) gra nts and contributions that are restricted to meeting the operational or capital requirements of a particular function. Taxes and other items not prop erly included among prog ram revenues are reported instead as general revenues.
Governmental Fund Financial Statements
The accounting s ystem of the Authority is organized and operated on the basis of two funds, each of which is considered to be a separate accounting entity. Each fund is accounted for by providing a separate set o f self-balancing accounts that constitute its assets, liabilities, deferred inflows of resources, fund equity, revenues, and expenditures.
Governmental resources are a llocated to and accounted for in indiv idual funds based upon the purposes for which they are to be spent and the means by which spending activities are controlled.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
16 NOTE 1 REPORTING ENTITY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED)
B. Basis of Presentation (Continued)
Governmental Fund Financial Statements (Continued)
Fund financial statements for the Authority’s governmental funds are presented after the government-wide financial statements. These statements display informat ion about major funds individually.
The Authority’s Governmental Fund Balances are comprised of the following component:
• The restricted fund balance category includes amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by constitution, ex ternal resource p roviders, or through enabling legislation.
In the governmental fund statements, when e xpenditures are incurred, the Authority uses the most restrictive funds first. The Authority would use the appropriate funds in the following order: committed, assigned, and lastly unassigned amounts.
The Authority has two major funds described below:
Hesperia Housing A uthority Fund is used to account for Low and Moderate H ousing activity. The fund balance is set aside to provide for future low and mode rate income housing.
Victor Valley Economic Development Authority (VVEDA) Housing Authority Fund is used to account for Low and Moderate Housing activity within the VVEDA pro ject area that is located within the boundaries of the City.
C. Measurement Focus
Measurement focus is a term used to describe “which ” transactions are recorded within the various financial statements.
In the governm ent-wide statement of net position and the statement of activities, activities are presented using the economic resour ces measurement f ocus. Under the economic resources m easurement focus, all (both current and lo ng-term) economic resources and obligations of the government are reported.
In the fund financial statements, all governmental funds are accounted for on a spending or “financial flow” measurement focus. This means that o nly current assets and current liabilities are generally in cluded on their balance sheets. Their reported fund balances (net curr ent assets) are considered a mea sure of “available spendable resou rces”.
Governmental fund operating statements present increases (revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current assets. Accordingly, they are said to present a su mmary of sources and uses of available spendable resources during a period.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
17 NOTE 1 REPORTING ENTITY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED)
C. Measurement Focus (Continued)
Because of their s pending meas urement focus, expenditure recognition for governmental fund types ex cludes amounts re presented by noncurrent liabilities. Since they do not affect n et current assets, such long-term amount s are not recognized as governmental fund type expenditures or fund liabilities.
Amounts expended to acquire capital assets are recorde d as expenditures in the year that resources were exp ended, rather than as a fun d asset. The proceeds of long -term debt are recorded as other financing sources rather than as a fund liabi lity. Amounts paid to reduce long-term indebtedness are reported as fund expenditures.
In the statement of net position, the net position is classified in the following categories:
• Investment in capital assets – This amount consists of capita l assets net of accumulated depreciation and reduced by outstanding debt that is attributed to the acquisition, construction or improv ement of the assets. The Authority has no capital assets.
• Restricted net position – This amount is restr icted by external creditors, gran tors, contributors, or laws or regulations of other governments. • Unrestricted net p osition – This amount is the net position that do es not meet the definition of “invest ment in capita l assets, net of related debt” or “restr icted net position”.
When both r estricted and unrestricted resources are combined in a fund, expenses are considered to be paid first f rom restricted resources, and then from unrestricted resources.
D. Basis of Accounting
Basis of accou nting refers to “w hen” transactions are recorded re gardless of the measurement focus applied.
In the governm ent-wide statement of net position and statement of activities, the governmental activities are pr esented using the accrual basis of ac counting. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are r ecognized when earned and expenses are recorded when the liability is incurred or e conomic asset used, regardless of the timing of related cash flows. Revenues, expenses, gains, losses, assets, and liabilities resulting from exchange and exchange-like transactions are recognized when the exchange takes place.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
18 NOTE 1 REPORTING ENTITY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED)
D. Basis of Accounting (Continued)
In the fund financial statements, go vernmental funds are presented using the modified-accrual basis of accounting. Their revenues are recognized when they become measurable and avail able as net current assets. Measurable means that the amounts can be estimated, or otherwise determined. Available m eans that the amounts were collected during the reporting period or soon enough thereafter to be available to finance the expenditures accrued for the reporting period. The Authority considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 60 days of the end of the current fiscal period.
Revenue recognition is subject to the measurable and a vailability criteria for the governmental fun ds in the fund financial statements. Exchange transactions are recognized as revenues in the period in which they are earned (i.e., the related goods or services are provided). Locally imposed derived tax revenu es are recog nized as revenues in the period i n which the underlying exchange transaction upon which they are based takes place. Imposed nonexchange transactions are recognized as revenues in the period for which they were imposed. If the period of use is n ot specified, they are recognized as revenues when an enforceable legal claim to the revenues arises or when they are received, whichever occurs first. Government-mandated and voluntary nonexchange transactions are recognized as revenues when all applicabl e eligibility requirements have been met.
E. Cash and Investments
Investments ar e stated at fair value (quote d market price or best available estimate thereof, see Note 2).
F. Claims and Judgments
When it is probable that a claim liability has been incurred at year-end, and the amount of the loss can be reasonably estimated, the Authority records the estimated loss, net of any insurance coverage under its self -insurance program. At June 30, 2023, in the opinion of the Authority's Attorney, the Authority had no material unrecorded claims that would require loss provision in the financial statements, including losses for claims t hat are Incurred But Not Reported (IBNR). Small dollar claims and judgments are recorded as expenditures when paid.
The Authority participates in the insurance program of the City of Hesperia. Information relating to the insurance program can be found in the no tes to the basic financial statements of the City of Hesperia.
G. Land Held for Resale
Land held for resale is carried at the lower of cost or estimated realizable value.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
19 NOTE 1 REPORTING ENTITY AND SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANT ACCOUNTING POLICIES (CONTINUED)
H. Capital Assets
Capital a ssets, which include equipment, are depreciated and are rep orted in the government-wide financial state ments. Authority policy has set the capit alization threshold for reporting capital assets at $5,000.
Capital as sets hav e an estimated useful life greate r than one year and are valued at historical cost or estima ted cost if actual histo rical cost is not available. Donated capital assets are recor ded at acquisition value at the date of acquisition. The cost of normal maintenance and repairs that do not add to the value of the assets or materially extend asset lives are not capitalized.
Depreciation is ch arged to operations using the straight -line method based on the estimated useful life of an asset ranging from 5 to 30 years. The Authority has no capital assets.
I. Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources
In addition to assets, the statement of net position will some times repor t a separate section for deferred outflows of re sources. This separate financial statemen t element, deferred outflows of resources, represents a consumption of net position t hat applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recogn ized as an o utflow of r esources (expense/expenditure) until then. The Authority does not have any type of these items at June 30, 2023.
In addition to liabi lities, the statement of net position will someti mes report a separate section for deferred inflows of resources. This separate fi nancial statement element, deferred inflows of resources, represents an acquisition of net po sition that applies to a future period(s) and so will not be recognized as an inflow of reso urces (revenue) until that time. The Authority does not have any type of these items at June 30, 2023.
J. Receivables
All acco unts, t axes, and service receivab les are shown net of an allowance for uncollectibles.
K. Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America requires management to make estimates and assumptions that affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilitie s and disclo sure of contingent assets and li abilities at the date of th e financial statements and the reported amounts of revenues and expen ses d uring the reporting period. Actual results could differ from those estimates.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
20 NOTE 2 CASH AND INVESTMENTS
A. Equity in Cash and Investment Pool of the City of Hesperia The Authority does not have a separate bank account; however, the Authority’s cash and investments are maintained in an investment pool managed by the City. The Authority is a voluntary pa rticipant in that pool. This pool is gove rned by and under the regulatory oversight of the Investment Policy adopted by the City Council of the City. The Authority has not adopted an investment policy separate from that of the City . The fair value of the Authority’s investment in this pool is reported in the accompanying financial statements at amounts based upon the Authority’s pro -rata share of the fair value calculated by the City for the entire City portfolio. The balance available for withdrawal is based on the ac counting records maintained b y the City, which are recorded on an original cost basis.
B. Investments Authorized by the California Government Code and the Authority’s Investment Policy
The table below iden tifies the investment types that are authorized for the Authority by the Californi a Government Code (or the Authority’s investment p olicy, where more restrictive). The tab le also identifies certain provisions of the Cali fornia Government Code (or the Authority’s investment policy, where more restrictiv e) that address interest rate risk, and concentration of credit risk.
Maximum Maximum
Maximum Percentage Investment
Authorized Investment Type Maturity of Portfolio in One Issuer U.S. Treasury Obligations 5 Years Unlimited None
U.S. State or Local Agency Securities 5 Years Unlimited None Banker's Acceptances 180 Days 25% 5%
Commercial Paper 270 Days 15% 10%
Negotiable Certificates of Deposit 5 Years 25% None
Repurchase Agreements 1 Year 20% None
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) N/A Unlimited None
Medium-Term Notes 5 Years 30% None
Mutual and Money Market Funds N/A 20% 10%
Collateralized Bank Deposits 5 Years 10% None
Investment Pools N/A 30% None
Municipal Bonds 5 Years 10% None
Supranational Obligations 5 Years 30% None
Public Bank Obligations 5 Years 100% None
C. Disclosures Related to Interest Rate Risk, Credit Risk and Custodial Credit Risk, and Fair Value Measurements
The Authority’s cash and cash equiv alents are pooled with t he City of Hesperia’s cash and investments. Additional disclosures regard ing the pool ed invest ments related to interest rate risk, c redit risk, custodial credit risk and fai r value measurements are available in the City of Hesperia’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
21 NOTE 3 NOTES RECEIVABLE
Notes receivable, totaling $22.7 million at June 30, 2023 consists of loans provided for low and moderate income housing, with interest between 1% and 3% and maturity of 55 years.
Payments on these notes are based on a percentage of the residual receipts. The Authority does not know the timing of the repayment of the notes, as there is not enough information on the receipt of residual rec eipts; therefore, the Authority has recorded an allowance for uncollectible for the outstanding balance of $22.7 million.
Notes receivable at June 30, 2023 include the following:
Outstanding Outstanding
June 30, 2022 Additions Deductions June 30, 2023
A. KDF VAH I, L.P. 3,227,098$ 29,000$ -$ 3,256,098$ B. KDF Hesperia, L.P. 1,937,663 24,458 - 1,962,121
C. KDF Hesperia II, L.P. 2,626,903 28,102 - 2,655,005
D. PDDC San Remo Hesperia, L.P. 4,435,634 39,557 (28,904) 4,446,287 E. PDDC San Remo Hesperia II, L.P. 6,062,884 55,757 (108,722) 6,009,919 F. Eagle Hesperia 55, L.P. 4,290,531 76,639 (334,345) 4,032,825 G. Homebuyer Assistance Program 341,605 - - 341,605
Totals 22,922,318$ 253,513$ $ (471,971) 22,703,860$ A. KDF VAH I, L.P.
In July 2006, the former Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency (HCRA) entered into an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) with KDF VAH I, L.P. (a California limited partnership) for the development, constr uction and operation of a 68 -unit apartment complex of which certain units shall be available to very low income tenants, low income tenants, and moderate income tenants. Under the t erms of the OPA, the HCRA loaned $2,900,000 of its low and moderate income housing funds toward the actual cost for the development, construction, and opera tion of the project. The loan is for a term of not more than 55 years and shall bear interest at a rate of 1%. The agreement is secured by a deed of tru st on the property. Due to the dis solution of redevelopm ent agencies by AB 26x1, the Authority assum ed responsibility of the HCRA notes receivable. Accrued interest on the note throu gh June 30, 2023 is $ 356,098. The balance of the loan outstanding at June 30, 2023 was $3,256,098. Payments on the loan are based on a percentage of the Par tnership’s positive cash flow. Any unpaid balance is due and payable at the maturity date.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
22 NOTE 3 NOTES RECEIVABLE (CONTINUED)
B. KDF Hesperia, L.P.
In December 2005, the former HCRA entered into an OPA with KDF Hesperia, L.P. (a California limi ted partnership) for the development , construction and operation of a 110-unit apartment complex of which certai n units shall be available to very low inco me tenants, low income tenants, and moderate income te nants. Under the t erms of the OPA, the HCRA loaned $1,250,000 of its low and modera te income housing funds toward the actual cost for the development, construc tion, and operation of the project.
The loan is for a term of not more tha n 55 years and shall bear simple interest at a rate of 1%. The agreement is secured by a deed of trust on the property. Due to the dissolution of redevelopment agencies by AB 26x1, the Authority assumed responsibility of the HCRA notes receivable. On February 1, 2012, the Housing Authority issued a loan of $398,589, with an interest rate of 3%, to assist with converting the construction loan to a permanent loan. Accrued interest on the combined notes through June 30, 2023 is $313,532. The bal ance of the loan o utstanding at June 30, 2023 was $1,962,121.
Payments on the loan are based on a percentage of the Partnership’s positive cash flow.
Any unpaid balance is due and payable at the maturity date.
C. KDF Hesperia II, L.P.
In March 2006, the former HCRA entered i nto an OPA with KDF Hespe ria II, L.P. (a California limited partnership) for the development, constr uction an d operation of a 72-unit apartment complex of which certain unit s shall be available to very low income tenants, low income tenants, and moderate i ncome tenants . Under the terms of the OPA, the HCRA loaned $2,000,000 of its low and moderate income housing funds toward the actual cost for the development, construction, and operation of the pro ject.
The loan is for a term of not more than 55 years and shall bear intere st at a rate of 1%.
The agreement is secured by a deed of tru st on the property. Due to the dissolution of redevelopment agencies by AB 26x1, the Authority assumed responsibility of the HCRA notes receivable. On February 1, 2012, the Authority issued a loan of $270,07 0, with an interest rate of 3%, to assist with converting the construction loan to a permanent loan.
Accrued in terest on the combined n otes through June 30, 2023 is $384,935. The balance of the loan outstanding at June 30, 2023 was $2,655,005. Payments on the loan are based on a percentage of the Partnership’s positive cash flow. Any unpaid balance is due and payable at the maturity date.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
23 NOTE 3 NOTES RECEIVABLE (CONTINUED)
D. PDDC San Remo Hesperia, L.P.
On No vember 20 07, the former HCRA entered into an OPA with PDDC San Remo Hesperia, L.P. (Palm Desert Development Company, a California limited partnership) for the development, construct ion, and operation of a 65 -unit apartment complex of which certain units sh all be av ailable to very low -income tenants and low -income tenants.
Under the terms of the OPA, t he HCRA loan ed $3,955,711 of its low and mo derate income ho using funds toward the actual cost for the development, construction, and operation of the project. The loan is for a term of not more than 55 years and shall bear interest at a rate of 1%. The agreement is secu red by a deed of trust on the property.
Due to the dissolution of redevelopment agencies by AB 26x1, the Authority assumed responsibility of the HCRA notes receivable. Accrued interest on the note through June 30, 2023 is $490,576. The balance of the loan outstanding at June 30, 2023 was $4,446,287. Payments on the loan are based on a percentage of the Partnership’s positive cash flow. Any unpaid balance is due and payable at the maturity date.
E. PDDC San Remo Hesperia II, L.P.
On October 5, 2010, the former HCRA entered into an OPA with PDDC San Rem o Hesperia II, L.P. (Palm Desert Development Company, a California limited partnership) for the d evelopment, construction, and operat ion of a 58-unit apartm ent co mplex of which cert ain units shall be available to very low-income tenants and low-income tenants. Under the terms of the OPA, the HCRA loaned $ 6,613,620 of its low and moderate income housing fun ds towa rd the actual cost for t he devel opment, construction, and operation of t he project. The loan is for a term of not more than 55 years and sh all bear interest at a rate of 1%. The agreement is secured by a deed of trust on the property. Due to the dissolution of redevelopment agencies by AB 26x1, the Authority assumed responsibility of the HCRA notes re ceivable. Accrued interest on the note through June 30, 2023 is $483,592 and principal and interest payments received are $1,377,143. The balance of the loan outstanding at June 30, 2023 was $6,009,919.
F. Eagle Hesperia 55, L.P.
On February 16, 2016 , the former HCRA entered into an OPA with Eagle Hesperia 55 L.P. (a California limited partnership) for the development, construction, and operation of a 96-unit apartment complex of which certain units shall be availabl e to low income senior citizens. Under the terms of the OPA, the Authority loaned $3,831,975 of its low and m oderate income housing funds tow ard the actual cost for the development, construction, and operation of the project. The loan is for a term of 55 years, with the option of extending the term up to 25 years; the option must be exercised between the 53rd year and 54th year. The loan shall bear interest at a rate of two percent (2%). The agreement is secured by a deed of trust on the property. Accrued interest on the note through June 30, 2023 is $ 200,852. The balance of the l oan outstandi ng at June 30, 2023 was $4,032,825. Any unpaid balance is due and payable at the maturity date.
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTES TO FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
JUNE 30, 2023
24 NOTE 3 NOTES RECEIVABLE (CONTINUED)
G. Homebuyer Assistance Program
On July 17, 2012 the City Counci l and Housing A uthority adopted Joint Resolution No. 2012-061 and HHA 2012 -010 approving implementation of the S eller Mortgage Carryback Program (SMCP) that carried back a portion of the sale price of properties as a second m ortgage loan and; the SMCP wil l enable the City and HHA to fund the amount ne eded to make the purchase pri ce of single family residential properties affordable to households whose income is 50% AMI or below, in the form of a 30-year deferred, zero interest bearing loan for an original amount of $428,554. The SMCP loan is secure d by a second deed of trust on th e property. Principal payments received to date are $86,949. At June 30, 2023, four of the five loans are outstanding with t otal balance of $341,605.
NOTE 4 RISK MANAGEMENT
The Authority, through the City o f Hesperia, is a member of the P ublic Entity Risk Management Authority (PERMA), a joint powers auth ority for the purpose of achieving savings on insurance premiums. Disclosures regarding these po licies are available in the City of Hesperia’s Annual Comprehensive Financial Report.
25 REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL REVENUE FUND
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2023
See accompanying Note to Required Supplementary Information. 26 Variance with
Original Final Actual Final Budget
FUND BALANCE - BEGINNING OF YEAR 10,167,199$ 10,167,199$ 10,167,199$ -$
RESOURCES (INFLOWS)
Use of Money and Property 23,832 23,832 449,712 425,880 Other Revenues 94,084 94,084 160,895 66,811
Amount Available for
Appropriations 117,916 117,916 610,607 492,691
CHARGES TO APPROPRIATIONS
(OUTFLOWS)
Current:
Development Services 72,586 150,514 150,514 -
Total Charges to Appropriations 72,586 150,514 150,514 -
EXCESS OF RESOURCES
OVER CHARGES TO
APPROPRIATIONS 45,330 (32,598) 460,093 492,691
FUND BALANCE - END OF YEAR 10,212,529$ 10,134,601$ 10,627,292$ 492,691$ Budgeted Amounts
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
BUDGETARY COMPARISON SCHEDULE
VVEDA HOUSING AUTHORITY SPECIAL REVENUE FUND –
YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 2023
See accompanying Note to Required Supplementary Information. 27 Variance with
Original Final Actual Final Budget
FUND BALANCE - BEGINNING OF YEAR 1,803,626$ 1,803,626$ 1,803,626$ -$
RESOURCES (INFLOWS)
Use of Money and Property 3,500 3,500 36,667 33,167
FUND BALANCE - END OF YEAR 1,807,126$ 1,807,126$ 1,840,293$ 33,167$ Budgeted Amounts
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
NOTE TO REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
JUNE 30, 2023
28 NOTE 1 BUDGETARY DATA
In conjunction with the City of Hesperia’s budgeting process, the Authorit y adopts annual operating budgets for t he governmental funds e ach year. The Authority’s Board approves each year's budge t submitted by th e City Manag er prior to the beginning of the new fiscal year. The Board conducts public hearings prior to its adoption. Supplemental appropriations, when requ ired during the period, are also approved by the Board. Increases in a nnual expenditures require a pproval by t he Board. I nterdepartmental budget changes are approved by the City Manager. In most cases, expenditures ma y not exceed appropriations at the fund level for each fund. At fiscal year-end, all operating budget appropriations lapse.
However, encumbrances at year-end are reported as reservations of fund balance. Budgets for the governmental funds are adopted on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
1 Attachment 2
HOUSING SUCCESSOR ANNUAL REPORT
REGARDING THE
LOW AND MODERATE INCOME HOUSING ASSET FUND
FOR FISCAL YEAR 2022-23
PURSUANT TO
CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 34176.1(f)
FOR THE
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
This Housing Successor Annual Report (Report) regarding the Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund (LMIHAF) has been prepared pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 34176.1(f) and is dated as of December 19, 2023. This Report sets forth certain details of the Hesperia Housing Authority (Housing Successor) activities during Fiscal Year 2022-23 (Fiscal Year). The purpose of this Report is to provide the governing body of the Housing Successor an annual report on the housing assets and activities of the Housing Successor under Part 1.85, Division 24 of the California Health and Safety Code, in particular sections 34176 and 34176.1 (Dissolution Law).
The following Report is based upon information prepared by Housing Successor staff and information contained within the independent financial audit of the Low and Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund for Fiscal Year 2022-23 (Fiscal Year), as a part of the 2023 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report, as prepared by Clifton Larson Allen (Audit), which Audit is separate from this annual summary Report; further, this Report conforms with and is organized into sections I. through XI., inclusive, pursuant to Section 34176.1(f) of the Dissolution Law.
I. Amount Deposited into LMIHAF: This section provides the total amount of funds deposited into the LMIHAF during the Fiscal Year. Any amounts deposits for items listed on the Recognized Obligation Payment Schedule (ROPS) must be d istinguished from the other amounts deposited.
II. Ending Balance of LMIHAF: This section provides a statement of the balance in the LMIHAF as of the close of the Fiscal Year. Any amounts deposited for items listed on the ROPS must be distinguished from the other amounts deposited.
III. Description of Expenditures from LMIHAF: This section provides a description of the expenditures made from the LMIHAF during the Fiscal Year. The expenditures are to be categorized.
IV. Statutory Value of Assets Owned by Housing Successor: This section provides the stator value of real property owned by the Housing Successor, the value of loans and grants receivables, and the sum of these two amounts.
V. Description of Transfers: This section describes transfers, if any, to another housing successor agency made in previous Fiscal Year(s), including whether the funds are unencumbered and the status of projects, if any, for which the transferred LMIHAF will be used. The sole purpose of the transfers must be for the development of transit priority projects, permanent supportive housing, housing for agricultural employees or special needs housing.
VI. Project Descriptions: This section describes any project for which the Housing Successor receives or holds property tax revenue pursuant to the ROPS and the status of that project.
2 VII. Status of Compliance with Section 33334.16: This section provides a status update on compliance with Section 33334.16 for interests in real property acquired by the for mer redevelopment agency prior to February 1, 2012. For interests in real property acquired on or after February 1, 2012, provide a status update on the project.
VIII. Description of Outstanding Obligations under Section 33413: This section describes the outstanding inclusionary and replacement housing obligations, if any, under Section 33413 that remained outstanding prior to dissolution of the former redevelopment agency as of February 1, 2012 along with the Housing Successor’s progress in meeting those prior obligations, if any, of the former redevelopment agency and how the housing Successor’s plans to meet unmet obligations, if any.
IX. Income Test: This section provides the information required by Section 34176.1(a)(3)(B), or a description of expenditures by income restriction for five year period, with the time period beginning January 1, 2018 and whether the statutory thresholds have been met.
X. Senior Housing Test: This section provides the percentage of units of deed -restricted rental housing restricted to seniors and assisted individually or jointly by the Housing Successor, its former redevelopment Agency, and its host jurisdiction within the previous 10 years in relation to the aggregate number of units of deeds -restricted rental housing assisted individually or jointly by the housing successor, its former Redevelopment Agency and its host jurisdiction within the same time period. For this Repor t the ten -year period reviewed is July 1, 2013 to June 30, 2023.
XI. Excess Surplus Test: This section provides the amount of excess surplus in the LMIHAF, if any, and the length of time that the Housing Successor has had excess surplus, and the Housing Successor’s plan for eliminating the excess surplus.
This Report and the former redevelopment agency’s pre -dissolution Implementation Plans are to be made available to the public on the City’s website www.cityofhesperia.us I. AMOUNT DEPOSITED INTO LMIHAF
A total of $610,607 was deposited into the LMIHAF during the Fiscal Year. Of the total funds deposited into the LMIHAF, a total of $0 was held for items listed on the ROPS.
II. ENDING BALANCE OF LMIHAF
At the close of the Fiscal Year, the ending balance in the LMIHAF was $10,627,292 of which $0 is held for items listed on the ROPS.
III. DESCRIPTION OF EXPENDITURES FROM LMIHAF
The following is a description of expenditures from the LMIHAF by category:
Fiscal Year
Monitoring & Administration Expenditures $ 60,461
Homeless Prevention and Rapid Rehousing
Services Expenditures
0 Housing Development
Expenditures
Expenditures on Low
Income Units
0 Expenditures on Very-Low Income Units 0
Expenditures on Extremely-Low Income Units 0
Total Housing Development Expenditures 60,461
ADDITIONAL EXPENSE:
Loss on land held for resale
90,053
Total LMIHAF Expenditures in Fiscal Year $ 150,514
3 IV. STATUTORY VALUE OF ASSETS OWNED BY HOUSING SUCCESSOR IN LMIHAF Under the Dissolution Law and for purposes of this Report, the “statutory value of real property” means the value of properties formerly held by the former redevelopment agency as listed on the housing asset transfer schedule approved by the Department of Finance as listed in such schedule under Section 34176(a)(2), the value of the properties transferred to the Housing Successor pursuant to Section 34181(f), and the purchase price of property(ies) purchased by the Housing Successor. Further, the value of loans and grants receivable is included in these reported assets held in the LMIHAF.
The following provides the statutory value of assets owned by the housing Successor.
As of End of
Fiscal Year
Statutory Value of Real Property Owned by Housing Authority $ - Value of Loans and Grants Receivable 22,703,860
Total Value of Housing Successor Assets $22,703,860
V. DESCRIPTION OF TRANSFERS
The Housing Successor did not make any LMIHAF transfers to other Housing Successor(s) under Section 34176.1(c)(2) during the Fiscal Year.
VI. PROJECT DESCRIPTIONS
The Housing Successor does not receive or hold property tax revenue pursuant to the ROPS.
VII. STATUS OF COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 33334.16
Section 34176.1 provides that Section 33334.16 does not apply to interests in real property acquired by the Housing Successor on or after February 1, 2012; however, this Report presents a status update on the project related to such real property.
With respect to interests in real property acquired by the former redevelopment agency prior to February 1, 2012, the time periods described in Section 33334.16 shall be deemed to have commenced on the date that the Department of Finance approved the property as a housing asset in the LMIHAF; thus, as to real property acquired by the former redevelopment agency now held by the Housing Successor in the LMIHAF, the Housing Successor must initiate activities consistent with the development of the real property for the purpose for which it was acquired within five years of the date the DOF approved such property as a housing asset.
In furtherance thereof, the Housing Successor does not have any real property.
VIII. DESCRIPTION OF OUTSTANDING OBLIGATIONS PURSUANT TO SECTION 33413 Replacement Housing: According to the 2010 -2014 Implementation Plan for the former redevelopment agency, no Section 33413(a) replacement housing obligations were transferred to the Housing Successor. The former redevelopment agency’s implementation Plans are posted on the City’s website at www.cityofhesperia.us .
Inclusionary/Production Housing: According to the 2010-2014 Implementation Plan for the former redevelopment agency, no Section 33413(b) inclusionary/production housing obligations were transferred to the Housing Successor. The former redevelopment agency’s Implementation Plans are posted on the City’s website at www.cityofhesperia.us .
4 IX. EXTREMELY-LOW INCOME TEST
Section 34176.1(a)(3)(B) requires that the Housing Successor must require at least 30% of the LMIHAF to be expended for development of rental housing affordable to and occupied by household earning 30% or less of the AMI. If the housing Successor fails to comply with the Extremely-Low Income requirement in any five-year report, then the Housing Successor must ensure that at least 50% of the funds remaining in the LMIHAF be expended in each fiscal year following the latest year following the report on households earning 30% or less of the AMI until the Housing Successor demonstrates compliance with the Extremely -Low Income requirement.
For informational purposes, the following provides the Housing Successor’s Extremely -Low Income Housing Test as of FY 2022 – 2023.
Extremely-Low Income Test FY 2022-2023
LMIHAF Spent on Extremely-Low Income Households $0
Total LMIHAF Spent (Five Year Total FY 2019 thru 2023) $2,729,206 Extremely-Low Income Test 0%
X. SENIOR HOUSING TEST
The Housing Successor is to calculate the percentage of units of deed restricted rental housing restricted to seniors and assisted by the Housing Successor, the former redevelopment agency and/or the City within the previous 10 years in relation to the aggregate number of units of deed-restricted rental housing assisted by the Housing Successor, the former redevelopment agency and/or City within the same time period. If this percentage exceeds 50%, then the Housing Successor cannot expend future funds in the LMIHAF to assist additional senior housing units until the Housing Successor or City assists and construction has commenced on a number of restricted rental units that is equal to 50% of the total amount of deed-restricted rental units.
The following provides the Housing Successor’s Senior Housing Test for the 10-year period of July 1, 2013 through June 30, 2023.
XI. EXCESS SURPLUS TEST
The LMIHAF has a $0 Excess Surplus. The Housing Successor has three fiscal years to encumber, or transfer, the excess surplus, if any. The Housing Successor has not had an Excess Surplus since February 1, 2012.
Senior Housing Test
July 1, 2013-
June 30, 2023
# of Assisted Senior Rental Units 96
# of Total Assisted Rental Units 474
Senior Housing Percentage 20%
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Receive and File the Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act Report (SB 165) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file the Communities Facilities District (CFD) 2005-1 (Belgate Development Restructuring) Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act Report (SB 165) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023.
BACKGROUND
CFD 2005 -1 is the result of a workout agreement to restructure the previously defaulted CFD 91-3 (Belgate Development Project) $10,000,000 Special Tax Bonds, 1992 Series A (1992 Bonds). These bonds were used to finance the construction of certain street, sewer, water, storm drain, and fire suppression improvements within CFD No. 91-3. The 1992 Bonds were in default because the properties were not built -out as expected, which resulted in the failure to pay the special taxes.
On August 10, 2003, the City entered into a Workout Agreement with Hesperia-ET Ventures, LLC to restructure the defaulted 1992 Bonds from CFD 91 -3. Because delinquent principal and interest on the 1992 Bonds continued to accrue since issuance, the amount to defease and redeem the 1992 Bonds exceeded $18 million. In order to extend the maturity of the bonds and implement a new development plan, a new CFD was formed for the purpose of refunding the 1992 Bonds. In 2005, CFD 2005 -1 was formed and the related CFD 2005 -1 (Belgate Development Restructuring) $18,554,508 Special Tax Bonds, 2005 Series A were issued to refinance and restructure the 1992 Bonds.
In December 2014, these bonds were refinanced into CFD 2005-1 Special Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2014, achieving a net present value savings of $4.2 million. The refinancing lowered the special taxes by approximately 12% for the parcel owners within the District. The CFD 2005 -1 Bonds are secured by and payable solely from the proceeds of special taxes levied annually on the taxable property in the district.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Annually, a report is required of the CFD which includes information prepared in compliance with the Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act (Accountability Act). The Accountability Act was enacted by the California State Legislature through SB 165 to pr ovide accountability measures for any local special tax and/or bond measure subject to voter approval on or after January 1, 2001. According to the requirements of the Accountability Act (Section 53410 of the Government Code of the State of California), a n annual report must be filed by the
Staff Report to the City Council
Receive and File the Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act Report (SB 165) for the Fiscal Year Ended June 30, 2023
December 19, 2023
local agency levying the special tax and/or issuing a bond measure and shall contain a description of the following:
1. The amount of the funds collected and expended.
2. The status of any project required or authorized to be funded by the special tax and/or bond measure.
In compliance with SB 165, the CFD 2005-1 report for the Fiscal Year (FY) Ended June 30, 2023 is provided as Attachment 1 to this staff report and includes information regarding the total amount of annual Special Taxes collected and expended during FY 2022-23, as well as the status of projects authorized by the bonds.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with receiving and filing the SB 165 report.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. CFD 2005-1 Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act Report (SB 165)
City of Hesperia
2023/24 Annual Report - CFD No. 2005-1 (Belgate Development Restructuring) 3
1. SB 165: LOCAL AGENCY SPECIAL TAX AND BOND
ACCOUNTABILITY ACT
Senate Bill 165 enacted the Local Agency Special Tax and Bond Accountability Act. This Act requires that any local special tax/local bond measure subject to voter approval contain a statement indicating the specific purposes of the special tax, require that the proceeds of the special tax be applied to those purposes, require the creation of an account into which the proceeds shall be deposited, and require an annual report containing specified information concerning the use of the proceeds. The Act only applies to bonds issued on or after January 1, 2001, in accordance with Section 53410 of the California Government Code.
Some of the requirements of the Act are handled at the formation (bond issuance) of the Special Tax District and others are handled through annual reports. This Report intends to comply with Section 53411 of the California Government Code that states:
“The chief fiscal officer of the issuing local agency shall file a report with its governing body no later than January 1, 2002, and at least once a year thereafter. The Annual report shall contain all of the following:
1. The amount of funds collected and expended.
2. The status of any project required or authorized to be funded as identified in subdivision (a) of Section 53410.”
The requirements of the Act apply to the Funds of:
City of Hesperia
CFD No. 2005-1 (Belgate Development Restructuring)
Special Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2014
Purpose of Special Tax
The original bonds were sold for the purpose of financing the construction and acquisition of certain street, sanitary sewer, water, storm drain, and fire suppression improvements. The 2005 CFD Bonds were issued to refinance the original bonds. The 2014 Bonds issued on December 18, 2014 were issued to refund the full outstanding series of bonds previously issued.
Collections and Expenditures
Fund Name
06/30/2022
Balance
Amount
Collected
Amount
Expended
06/30/2023
Balance
Special Tax Fund $1,621,373.60 $1,996,979.20 $1,915,858.47 $1,702,494.33
Fund Name Initial Deposit
Amount
Expended
6/30/2023
Balance Status
Escrow Fund $17,826,791.11 $17,826,791.11 $0.00 Closed
Costs of Issuance Fund 148,549.94 148,549.94 0.00 Closed Administrative Expense Fund 15,000.00 15,000.00 0.00 Ongoing Reserve Fund 1,428,212.50 0.00 1,498,064.38 Ongoing
Attachment 1
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
Michael Assumma, Information Systems Manager
SUBJECT: Nobel Systems, Inc. Contract Amendment
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District (District) authorize the City Manager to approve an amendment of $23,400 to the existing contract with Nobel Systems, Inc. (Nobel), for a revised not-to-exceed contract amount of $216,384 for the Nobel Forms Unlimited module.
BACKGROUND
Nobel has been the City’s provider for geographical information systems (GIS) and GeoViewer integrations, data management, and administrative training since 2007 . In 2016, Nobel also began cloud hosting the City’s GeoViewer public system, which allows City employees access to GIS data and real -time parcel information. This system also facilitates citizen access to public GIS data through the City’s website.
Additionally, as part of the GIS data management service, Nobel provides updates for the City’s GIS assets, including water, sewer, storm, and street geodatabases. This data is regularly used for hydraulic modeling purposes, as well as other existing City operated applications such as:
GeoViewer, Cityworks, Trakit, and Granite XP. In addition, Nobel provides regular feature and security updates.
GeoViewer Mobile and unlimited forms will be the primary GIS program for the federally mandated lead line inspection and inventory project that is to be completed by year end of 2024 . Public Works staff will be able to inspect and update GIS lead line pipes in the field from any mobile device using unlimited forms. This will save staff resources, increase efficiency, and reduce inspection costs. The City currently has a site license for Geoviewer Mobile, desktop, and unlimited forms. The collected field data will be available to all City employees in Geo Viewer desktop and mobile. The unlimited forms module allows municipalities to create codeless forms and business workflows that tie directly into GIS asset databases. Additional City forms can be inputted into unlimited forms by the vendor at no additional costs.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
In 2020, a separate three (3) year contract was established with Nobel for GeoViewer Mobile , which was set to expire on June 30, 2023. Nobel provided updated pricing for an additional two (2) year term for a total of $29,000 ($14,500 per year) through June 30, 2025 , which was
Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members, and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District Contract Amendment with Nobel Systems, Inc.
December 19, 2023
accepted. Additionally, the contract with Nobel was amended in May 2023 to add Valve Exercise and USA DigMark capabilities, to achieve compliance with State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regulations. Since there is a current contract with Nobel, Forms Unlimited will be added to that agreement, which will now include all products and services Nobel provides to the City.
Costs covered under this amendment cover a one -time setup fee of $3,800, and two years of licensing and support for $9,800 per year.
FISCAL IMPACT
Sufficient funding exists in the Fiscal Year 2023-24 Budget.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS
None
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Mark Faherty, Interim Director of Public Works
Brian Blckwell, Streets Operations Manager
Marc Morales, Management Analyst
SUBJECT: Award of Contract for IT Office Construction
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to award a contract with Preferred General Services, Inc. in the amount of $63,914 and approve an additional 10% contingency in the amount of $6,391 for a not-to-exceed amount of $70,305 for the construction of one office and cubicle reconfiguration for the Information Technology (IT) division.
BACKGROUND
The City has a need for additional office space to accommodate IT staff, which will include one new office and cubicle reconfiguration in their current location. This reconfiguration will allow for more storage space and accommodate the needs for IT staff. The new office space will be for the IT Man ager and will allow for a private space to work on confidential projects and review performance evaluations with staff.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The Notice of Inviting Bids for this project was released and advertised on November 6, 2023, on the City’s online bidding platform (PUBLIC|PURCHASE) where numerous contractors are notified about the project. Bids were received, opened online, and publicly read on December 5, 2023.
The City received the following bids:
Contractor R
Dependable
Const.
Bob
Walters Jr.
Const.
Stormguard KNC
Const.
Preferred
General
Services,
Inc.
At Your
Service
Const.
Total
Cost
$85,000 $68,230 $73,500 $108,300 $63,913.51 $118,000
Upon review of the submitted bids, Preferred General Services, Inc. was deemed the lowest responsible/responsive bidder to construct one office space and cubicle reconfiguration.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funding has been included in Fiscal Year 2023-24 Operating Budget.
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
Award of Contract for IT Office Construction
December 19, 2023
ALTERNATIVES
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS
None
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services Ryan Leonard, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Award Professional Services Agreement for a Focused Update to the General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a Professional Services Agreement (PSA) with PlaceWorks, Inc. in the amount of $849,161, with a 10% reserve contingency of $84,916, for a total contract cost of $934,077 for a Focused update to the City’s General Plan and General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
BACKGROUND
In September 2010, the City Council adopted a comprehensive General Plan update which was the first comprehensive update to the General Plan since it was originally adopted in 1991. The General Plan includes seven mandatory elements: Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Noise, Conservation, Open Space, and Safety. As regulations change, the General Plan is required to be updated to ensure consistency with new State law.
In addition, all cities in California are required , by State law, to update and certify their Housing Element every eight years. The City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element was approved by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) on March 24, 2023, and was adopted by the City Council on May 2, 2023. Among other things, the 6th Cycle Housing Element requires the City to modify several zoning designations to increase the density within the General Plan from a maximum of 15 dwelling units per acre (du/ac) to 30 du/ac.
As a result of the zoning modifications outlined in the Housing Element, and to ensure the City is in compliance with State Law, updates to the General Plan’s Land Use, Safety, and Circulation Elements, as well as the creation of a new Environmental Justice Element, need to be completed.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
On June 8, 2023, staff issued Request for Proposal (RFP) No. 2022 -23-006, utilizing Public Purchase (the City’s online site), seeking a General Plan update and Environmental Assessment.
On July 20, 2023, a total of four (4) proposals were received and reviewed by a selection committee. The proposals received were evaluated based on experience, technical expertise, and approach to the scope of work. The firms were ranked by the selection committee as follows:
Firm Name Total Score
PlaceWorks 274
CASC Engineering and Consulting 246
Michael Baker 219
4Leaf 205
Staff Report to the City Council
Award Professional Services Agreement for a Focused Update to the General Plan and General Plan EIR December 19, 2023
The selection committee conducted interviews with the top 3 ranked firms. At the conclusion of the interviews, the selection committee unanimously identified PlaceWorks as the most qualified firm based on their experience and demonstrated ability to deliver the required update s. Upon selection of the most qualified and responsi ve proposal , Development Services staff opened negotiations with PlaceWorks and agreed to a final scope, schedule, and budget. The anticipated time to complete the update is 16 months. A brief synopsis of the scope of work is as follows:
Development of an extensive community outreach and engagement plan, to include multiple community workshops, stakeholder interviewers, and public engagement. Development of n ew objective design standards , which will be formalized in the Municipal Code to provide appli cants and developers with a clear understanding of the City’s expectations for mixed-use and high-density development projects. Updating of the General Plan Land Use Map to reflect the zoning modifications required in the City’s adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element.
Updating of the Land Use Element to accommodate new growth projections based upon new land use densities. An updated buildout analysis will also be prepared. Updating of the Safety Element, as required by Government Code Section 65302 upon the adoption of a Housing Element, to ensure it complies with State regulations. Preparation and adoption of an Environmental Justice Element in compliance with SB -100.
The Environmental Justice Element is a newly required element to the General Plan. Updating of the Circulation Element to include the City’s updated truck routes as well as to accommodate new growth projections based on new land use densities. As a part of the update, the City’s existing roadway classifications will be analyzed and upda ted as appropriate.
An environmental analysis will be conducted in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). As part of the environmental analysis, the following technical studies will be prepared: air quality and greenhouse gas an alysis, noise and vibration analysis, water supply evaluation, and updated traffic studies based on new General Plan buildout projections.
In addition, multiple workshops and public hearings will be held with the Planning Commission and City Council prior to adoption of the Focused General Plan Update.
FISCAL IMPACT
The cost of the contract is $ 849,161, with a contingency of $84,916, for a total project cost of $934,077. Funding for this project will extend through two fiscal years and is shown below:
FY 2023-24
Contract Cost $424,580
10% Contingency $42,458
Total FY 2023-24 $467,038
FY 2024-25
Contract Cost $424,581
10% Contingency $42,458
Total FY 2024-25 $467,039
Total Contract Cost $849,161
10% Contingency $84,916
TOTAL $934,077
Staff Report to the City Council
Award Professional Services Agreement for a Focused Update to the General Plan and General Plan EIR December 19, 2023
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2023 -24 Budget includes finding in the amount of $68,962 for the Safety Element Update and creation of Environmental Justice Element . If approved, the request to amend the FY 2023 -24 Budget with the use of reserves, for the unbudgeted difference of $398,076 will be included in the FY 2023 -24 Mid-Year Budget Review. Funding for year two of the agreement will be included in the FY 2025-25 Proposed Budget.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. General Plan Update and Environmental Assessment proposal from PlaceWorks
PlaceWorks
City of Hesperia General Plan Update and Environmental Assessment TABLE 2: EXTENDED BUDGET - REVISED 10/16/2023
FEHR & PEERS 10%
HOFFMAN WITTER CEJA PLANNER LOOMIS MENDOZA SO GUY SEALE KRISPI ROHR ROBBINS TEAGUE OSMAN PLANNER VERMILION FITZGERALD EL CHAMMAS GASS
VANG NGUYEN CHUNG KHAN
Associate
Principal
Associate II Project
Planner
Planner Principal,
Urban
Design
Associate II Associate GIS
Coordinator
Principal Associate II Associate II Project
Planner
Managing
Principal,
Env
Associate II Planner Principal Principal
Engineer
Senior
Engineer
Senior
Associate
Associate Associate
Principal
Project
Planner
Description
Principal in
Charge
Project
Manager &
Outreach
Lead
Planning,
Outreach,
Spanish
Planner Urban
Design
Associate
Planner
Urban/
Graphic
Design
GIS Principal,
Safety
Safety Lead Associate Project
Planner
CEQA
Principal
CEQA
Proj Mgr
Planner Director, AQ,
Energy, GHG,
Noise
Director,
Engineering
Hydrology, Water
Quality Lead
Air Quality,
Energy,
GHG Lead
Air Quality,
Energy,
GHG
Noise Lead Noise
Hourly Rate: $250 $170 $150 $130 $250 $170 $155 $155 $250 $210 $175 $140 $260 $155 $130 $250 $230 $205 $230 $155 $230 $145 $110 $135 $125 TASK 1. PROJECT INITIATION
1.1 Kickoff Meeting with Planning Staff 8 12 10 00 30 $5,540 $0 $5,540
1.2 Project Team Meetings 84 100 12 12 2 2 16 4 16 00 248 $51,480 $0 $51,480
1.3 Day-to-Day Project Coordination 42 140 00 182 $34,300 $0 $34,300 T a s k 1 . S u b t o t a l 1 3 4 2 5 2 1 00 1 2 1 20022 1 64 1 600 0 0 0000 0000 4 6 0 $91,320 $0 $0 $91,320 TASK 2. COMMUNITY OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT
2.1 Community Workshops (up to 4) 30 32 28 20 24 32 30 12 18 12 18 00 256 $46,360 $0 $46,360
2.2 Stakeholder Interviews (up to 8) 40 60 20 20 00 140 $25,800 $0 $25,800
2.3 Project Website 10 16 20 81 6 00 70 $12,380 $0 $12,380
2.4 Online Engagement 12 20 30 30 2 12 16 8 12 00 142 $22,900 $0 $22,900
2.5 Public Participation Report 10 20 40 70 $11,900 $0 $11,900 T a s k 2 . S u b t o t a l 1 0 2 1 4 8 1 1 8 9 0 2 6 4 4 4 6000 2 0 3 0 2 0 3 40 0 0 0000 0000 6 7 8 $119,340 $0 $0 $119,340 TASK 3. OBJECTIVE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
3.1 Data Gathering / Document Research and Review 4 20 18 00 42 $7,190 $0 $7,190
3.2 Community Design Standards - Admin Draft 2 2 20 40 80 00 144 $25,040 $0 $25,040
3.3 Community Design Standards - Public Review Draft 2 2 16 32 72 00 124 $21,440 $0 $21,440
3.4 Community Design Standards - Final Draft 1 1 2 4 8 00 16 $2,840 $0 $2,840 T a s k 3 . S u b t o t a l 5 500 4 2 9 6 1 7 800000000 0 0 0000 0000 3 2 6 $56,510 $0 $0 $56,510 TASK 4. LAND USE ELEMENT UPDATE
4.1 Land Use Plan 10 40 16 16 82 $13,780 $0 $13,780
4.2 Buildout Analysis 8 40 20 20 88 $14,400 $0 $14,400
4.3 Goals and Policies 8 20 20 20 68 $11,000 $0 $11,000
4.4 Draft Land Use Element 20 24 20 20 24 90 $15,450 $0 $15,450
4.5 Final Land Use Element 8 8 20 0 24 42 $7,130 $0 $7,130 T a s k 4 . S u b t o t a l 5 4 1 3 2 9 6 7 60 0000000000 0 0 0000 0048 3 7 0 $61,760 $0 $0 $61,760 TASK 5. SAFETY ELEMENT UPDATE
5.1 Technical Study: Climate Vulnerability Assessment 16 2 2 16 50 42 92 $13,990 $0 $13,990
5.2 Technical Study: Background Report and Mapping 40 4 6 20 60 12 6 148 $22,730 $0 $22,730
5.3 Safety Element Update 4 8 6 4 36 60 12 8 138 $22,020 $0 $22,020 T a s k 5 . S u b t o t a l 4 8000 00 5 6 1 2 1 2 7 2 1 7 0000 0 0 00000 0 2 8 1 6 3 7 8 $58,740 $0 $0 $58,740 TASK 6. ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ELEMENT
6.1 Review and Prepare Recommendations 24 30 40 70 4 00 168 $26,820 $0 $26,820
6.2 Draft and Adopted Environmental Justice Content 36 60 80 80 4 24 266 $42,990 $0 $42,990 T a s k 6 . S u b t o t a l 6 09 0 1 2 0 1 5 00 0080000000 0 0 0000 0024 4 3 4 $69,810 $0 $0 $69,810 TASK 7. CIRCULATION ELEMENT UPDATE
7.1 Traffic Data Collection 0 $0 29,660 $32,626 $32,626
7.2 LOS Analysis 0 $0 9,560 $10,516 $10,516
7.3 Roadway Classification and Cross Section Assessment 0 $0 8,730 $9,603 $9,603
7.4 Goals and Policies 8 20 20 20 68 $11,000 $0 $11,000
7.5 Draft Circulation Element 20 24 20 20 84 $14,680 $0 $14,680
7.6 Final Circulation Element 8 8 20 0 36 $6,360 $0 $6,360 T a s k 5 . S u b t o t a l 3 65 2 6 0 4 00 0000000000 0 0 0000 0000 1 8 8 $32,040 $47,950 $52,745 $84,785 TASK 8. CEQA DOCUMENTATION
8.1 Project Initiation 82 0 1 29 $5,430 $0 $5,430
8.2 Technical Analysis 2 12 39 16 40 100 22 101 8 340 $60,095 101,185 $111,304 $171,399
8.3 Option 1: Addendum 83 24 0 8 42 8 81 6 4 4 152 $24,700 $0 $24,700
8.4 Project Management 46 80 126 $24,360 $0 $24,360
T a s k 7 . S u b t o t a l 0 0000 0000000 6 4 1 4 4 4 0 4 8 1 6 4 04 1 2 8 3 0 1 1 7844 6 4 7 $114,585 $101,185 $111,304 $225,889 TASK 9. PUBLIC HEARINGS
9 . 1 S t u d y S e s s i o n s ( 2 ) 1 62 4 2 0 2 08 8 1 6588 133 $23,860 $0 $23,860 9 . 2 A d o p t i o n H e a r i n g s ( 2 ) 1 62 4 2 0 2 08 8 1 6588 133 $23,860 $0 $23,860 T a s k 8 . S u b t o t a l 3 24 8 4 0 4 0 1 6 1 60000 3 2 1 0 1 6 1 60 0 0 0000 0000 2 6 6 $47,720 $0 $0 $47,720 Labor Hours Total 391 683 384 356 96 168 224 64 14 14 140 214 116 194 40 48 16 40 4 128 30 117 8 38 32 3,559 $651,825 Labor Dollars Total $97,750 $116,110 $57,600 $46,280 $24,000 $28,560 $34,720 $9,920 $3,500 $2,940 $24,500 $29,960 $30,160 $30,070 $5,200 $12,00 0 $3,680 $8,200 $920 $19,840 $6,900 $16,965 $880 $5,130 $4,000 $651,825 $149,135 $164,049 $815,874 PlaceWorks Percent of Total Labor 11.0% 19.2% 10.8% 10.0% 2.7% 4.7% 6.3% 1.8% 0.4% 0.4% 3.9% 6.0% 3.3% 5.5% 1.1% 1.3% 0.4% 1.1% 0.1% 3.6% 0.8% 3.3% 0. 2% 1.1% 0.9% 100.0% Subconsultants Reimbursable Expenses $11,000 $12,100 $12,100 PlaceWorks Reimbursable Expenses $21,188
REIMBURSABLE EXPENSES TOTAL $33,288
GRAND TOTAL $849,161
TOTAL
TASK
BUDGET
PlaceWorks
Labor Total
PLACEWORKS
Traffic and
Evacuation
Planning
PlaceWorks
Hours
Senior
Editor
WP/
Clerical
Subcons.
Labor
Total (incl.
10% mark-
up)
Task
Env. Report
Graphics
PLACEWORKS 10/16/2023
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services Dani Fox, Deputy Director of Development Services
Cassandra Sanchez, P.E., Deputy City Engineer
SUBJECT: Adopt Resolution No. 2023-70 Approving General Provisions, Contract Documents, and Notice Inviting Sealed Bids for Public Works Projects and Approve Standard Specifications as a component of the City’s Standard Specifications and Contract Documents
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution 2023-70 to allow the Development Services Department to defer the City Council’s approval of plans, specifications, and estimates for each individual project by City Council approving a standard (boiler plate) for Public Works specification documents and reviewing approval upon contract award.
BACKGROUND
On November 6, 1997 , the then City Council adopted Resolution 97 -75 to establish an accelerated approval process for the advertisement of Capital Improvement Projects (CIP). The then City Council also adopted standard general provisions contract documents and Notice Inviting Bids for Public Works projects and approved standard specifications and plans for Public Works construction.
The adoption of standard specifications, bid documents, and standard plans allow s for a streamlined procurement process unhindered by the request to adver tise the project from City Council. The standard process to approve a Public Works contract typically includes four separate approvals including:
Approval of the annual CIP program at the beginning of each fiscal year. Approval of the individual project plans, specifications, and estimates prior to the solicitation of bids.
Approval of the project and award of the contract to the successful low bidder. Acceptance of the construction improvements.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Several outside public agencies , who administer grant funding to the City , have recently taken exception to Resolution 97-75 due to its age. Staff finds that the subject resolution enhances staff abilities to procure projects and seeks to renew the resolution and update the listed stand ard specifications commonly used in the design of Public Works projects within the City limits.
Staff Report to the City Council
Approve General Provisions, Contract Documents and Notice Inviting Sealed Bids for Public Works Projects and Approve Standard Specifications as a component of the City’s Standard Specifications and Contract Documents
To expedite and streamline the bidding process and reduce staff time , the City Council is encouraged to renew the resolution to allow for the following modifications:
Defer the City Council’s approval of plans, specifications, and estimates for each individual project by the City Council approving a standard (boiler plate) for Public Works specification documents including Notice Inviting Bids.
Process all public bid notices utilizing the standard documents, with any substantive changes in the contract documents being brought back to the City Council for separate approval. Once the bids are received, the City Council will take two actions:
o Approve the design of the project represented by the plans and specifications. o Accept the lowest responsive bid and award contract or reject all bids. Adopt the following standard specifications/drawings for City advertised Public Works projects:
o Current Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (SSPWC or “Greenbook”).
o Current Edition of California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) for traffic control.
o Current Edition of Caltrans Standard Specifications and Standard Plans. o City of Hesperia Standard Specifications.
o City of Hesperia Standard Drawings.
Adoption of Resolution No. 23 -70 will maintain the current process and save time in the procurement of Public Works projects.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with the adoption of Resolution No. 2023-70.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Resolution No. 2023-70
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-70
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA,
CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE STANDARD GENERAL PROVISIONS,
CONTRACT DOCUMENTS , AND NOTICE INVITING SEALED BIDS FOR
PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS AND APPROVING THE STANDARD
SPECIFICATIONS FOR PUBLIC WORKS CONTSTRUCTION (GREENBOOK)
AND CALTRANS STANDARDS FOR TRAFFIC CONTROL AS A COMPONENT OF THE CITY’S STANDARD SPECIFICATIONS AND CONTRACT
DOCUMENTS
WHEREAS, in order for the City to award a Public Works contract, the project is approved by the City Council at least three times during the design process; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approves the annual Capital Improvement Program at the beginning of each fiscal year; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approves individual project plans, specifications, and estimates (PS&E) prior to the solicitation of bids; and
WHEREAS, the City Council approves the project when the contract is awarded for construction.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA AS FOLLOWS:
In order to expedite and streamline the bidding process and reduce staff time, City Council shall approve modifying the existing process as follows:
A. Defer the City Council’s approval of plans, specifications , and estimates for each individual project by City Council approving a standard (boiler plate) for Public Works specification documents including Notice Inviting Bids.
B. Process all public bid notices utilizing the standard documents, with any substantive changes in the contract documents being brought back to the City Council for separate approval.
C. Adopt the following Standard specifications/drawings for City advertised Public Works Projects:
1. Current Edition of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (SSPWC or “Greenbook”).
2. Current Edition of California Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (CAMUTCD) for traffic control.
3. Current Edition of Caltrans Standard Specifications and Standard Plans.
4. City of Hesperia Standard Specifications.
5. City of Hesperia Standard Drawings.
D. Once the bids are received, Council would take two actions:
1. Approve the design of the project represented by the plans and specifications.
2. Accept and a ward the contract to the lowest responsive/responsible bidder; or reject all bids.
E. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED ON this 19th day of December, 2023.
_____________________________
Larry Bird
Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Erin Baum
Assistant City Clerk
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
Anne Duke, Deputy Finance Director
Keith Cheong, Senior Accountant
SUBJECT: User Fee Study
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District consider amending the City-wide fee schedule, as identified in the related to the User Fee Study, and the adoption of proposed Joint Resolution No. 2023-67 and Resolution HWD 2023-24.
BACKGROUND
The City charges user fees for the various services provided. Services such as these are requested of the City’s departments but involve limited or no direct benefit to the community as a whole. Without recovering the cost to provide these services, the City would have to use general tax monies to provide these individualized benefits, in effect subsidizing the cost of providing the service, which would impact the limited funds that might otherwise be available for community - wide benefits.
In order to enact fees, the City must follow a series of laws enacted by the California legislature starting with Proposition 13 (1978), which rules the limitation on property taxes. Subsequently, Proposition 4 (1979) determined the difference between a tax and a fee, where in a fee must be no greater than the cost of providing the service. Unlike the private sector, the City cannot establish user fees above their cost in order to generate a profit. As such, the City may only set fees at a level to recover the full estimated cost of providing the service (user fee).
As such, the City relies on fee studies to determine the appropriate fees, and has three groupings of fees that are included in the ‘City Fee Schedule’.
1. Development Impact Fees (DIF) – This grouping of fees was developed by a fee study which was completed during FY 201 7-18 by DTA (David Taussig and Associates) , and more recently during FY 2020-21 for drainage. The DIF rates were last approved by the City Council on February 1, 2022. Further increase to this grouping will necessitate a new DIF study and approval.
2. Water and Sewer Rate – During FY 2017-18, the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District conducted a Proposition 218 hearing and subsequently approved rates on November 21, 2017 . The last increase to the water and sewer rates occurred on December 01, 2021. Like DIF, further rate increases will necessitate a new Water and Sewer rate study.
Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District User Fee Study
December 19, 2023
3. General City-wide fees – All other fees assessed by the City.
Since Fiscal Year 1999-2000, staff has prepared the study and supporting documentation for all general City-wide fees (user fees) for City Council approval. Staff adhere to the principle that a user fee should recoup the costs of providing services that benefit individuals or companies .
Further, the user fee should be borne by the individuals or companies receiving the service, and not the entire community. Using this principle, the objective of a user fee is to recover as much as (but no more than) 100% of the cost to provide the service, from the individuals or companies that benefit from the services being provided.
Given that many fees have not been updated in a number of years, the FY 2022 -23 Budget included funding to engage a consultant to prepare a comprehensive User Fee Study. The purpose of this study is to ensure that all fees are applicable, meet state law, and recoup the cost of providing the service. The City released a Request for Proposal (RFP), which three consultants responded to the City. Ultimately, the proposal submitted by Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) was deemed the most responsive/responsible. On November 09, 2022, the City engaged Willdan to complete the study for approximately $30,000.
The principal goal of the User Fee Study was to determine the full cost of the services provided by the City. 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 consistency with City policies and goals; and Creation of a model that can be updated by the City should fees need to be changed based on current conditions.
To properly develop the user fee study , Willdan , in conjunction with the Finance Division, conducted a series of m eetings with each department to review the current fees and assist the departments in identifying the applicable costs (time) spent to provide services. Each department conducted an in-depth review of their pro cesses to determine the applicable cost of providing services for the basis of the user fee. The following areas are included in the user fee study:
Animal Control
Miscellaneous City Fees
Building (Not including Developer Impact Fees) – Includes Building & Safety, Planning, and Engineering
Business License
Public Safety
Water District Fees (Not including Water and Sewer Rates)
It should be noted that Willdan was the consultant to update the City’s Indirect Cost Allocation plan during FY 2016-17. The indirect cost allocation essentially determines the General Fund’s overhead charges applicable to all other City funds, which include the Water District. This is important in that the indirect cost allocation plan is used to determine some fees in the user fee study. As an objective of the scope for the user fee study, Willdan created a model that allows staff to review and update fees as needed, with City Council approval. The data from the indirect cost allocation plan can be uploaded to the user fee model to capture the current overhead rates.
Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District User Fee Study
December 19, 2023
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
A review of City-wide fees by a consultant has not occurred since prior to FY 1999-2000. While fees have been updated, such updates have been done internally with many fees not being adjusted for a number of years. Of the 517 different types of fees, 24 are recommended to be added, 222 are being recommended to increase, 49 would decrease, and there would be no change to the remaining 222 fees. The following table details the changes by area.
Department/Fee Category
No. of
Fees
Added
No. of
Fees
Increased
No. of Fees
Decreased
No. of Fees
with No
Changes
Avg.
Estimated
Fee
Increase
Animal Control 5 61 12 44 2%
Miscellaneous Fees 9 6 4 34 1%
Building & Safety 6 69 16 33 23%
Planning 2 45 10 7 43%
Engineering 1 22 1 43 58%
Business License 0 3 3 30 -0.5%
Public Safety 0 5 0 11 1%
Water District (Non-Utility Rate) 1 11 3 20 11%
*Note: In addition to the changes noted above, there are three fees with a recommended change in the basis for calculation, as identified in the User Fee Study.
Attached to this staff report is the User Fee Study report, which provides the detail for the fee changes. Specifically, Appendix C, starting on page 27 of the report, details the current fee and recommended change. It should be noted, that the Appendix details the full cost for services, percentage of subsidy , or amount not charged, and the new fee. The following details three sample recommendations with 1. No Change, 2. Reduction, and 3. Increase:
1. Business License (Page 40 – Item 1) – The current fee is $50 and the results of the study reflect a total cost of $63.07; however, the recommendation is to maintain the $50 fee at a 21% subsidy.
2. Plan Review-New Residence (Page 38 – Item 132) – The current fee is $285 for the first 1,000 square feet (sq ft) plus $0.215 per square foot over 1,000 sq ft. For example, a 2,000 sq ft house would generate $495 for this fee type. It is recommended that this fee be increased to a flat fee of $ 445. With the proposed fee, any house exceeding 1,745 sq. ft. would see a reduction for this fee type.
3. General Plan Amendment (Page 43 – Item 13) – The current fee is $695 and based on the study, it is determined that the total cost be $2,578. Currently, the City is subsidizing $1,883 of this fee type. It is recommended that the fee match the City’s cost of $2,578.
If approved, the changes to the fees would become effective March 01, 2024, generating additional revenue through the remaining four months of the fiscal year.
In addition, as labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services can fluctuate over time, an element in the development of any fee schedule is that it has the flexibility to remain current. Therefore, an inflationary factor has been included in the proposed resolution to allow the City Council, by resolution, to annually increase or decrease the fees. The resolution provides for the ability to annually adjust the User Fee Schedule by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for
Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District User Fee Study
December 19, 2023
the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario area using the year -over-year percentage change from September to September of not less than 0% and no more than 5%. Such increase would be subject to approval by the City Council on an annual basis and, if approved, the first CPI increase would occur March 01, 2025.
FISCAL IMPACT
It is estimated that, based upon the FY 2023-24 Revenue Budget, the annualized General Fund revenues could increase by approximately $324,000 annually. The largest General Fund revenue increases would derive from Engineering Permit and Plan Check Fees ($ 122,000), Business License Administrative Fees ($86,000), Animal Control License and Apprehension Fees ($59,000), Building Fees ($35,000), and General Plan Update Fees ($22,000).
The annualized Water District revenues could increase by approximatel y $187,000 annually , based upon the FY 2023-24 Revenue Budget, largely due to anticipated increases to the Water Meter Service Fees ($145,000) and Delinquency Fees ($42,000).
ALTERNATIVES
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS
1. User Fee Study Report – December 2023
2. Resolution No. 2023-67 and Resolution HWD No. 2023-24
City of Hesperia
User Fee Study Report
April 2019
User Fee Study
Dece
mber 2023
Attachment 1
i Comprehensive User Fee Study
TABLE OF CONTENTS
TABLE OF CONTENTS ................................................................................................. i Executive Summary .................................................................................................. 1 User Fee Background ............................................................................................... 2 Background .................................................................................................................................................. 2 California User Fee History .......................................................................................................................... 2 Additional Policy Considerations ................................................................................................................. 3 Study Objective ....................................................................................................... 4 Scope of the Study ....................................................................................................................................... 4 Aim of the Report......................................................................................................................................... 5 Project Approach and Methodology ........................................................................... 6 Conceptual Approach................................................................................................................................... 6 Fully Burdened Hourly Rates........................................................................................................................ 6 Summary Steps of the Study ........................................................................................................................ 7 Allowable Costs ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Methodology ................................................................................................................................................ 8 Quality Control/Quality Assurance .............................................................................................................. 8 Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current fees............................................................................. 8 City Staff Contributions ................................................................................................................................ 9 Hesperia User Fees ................................................................................................ 10 Cost Recovery............................................................................................................................................. 10 Subsidization .............................................................................................................................................. 10 Impact on Demand (Elasticity) ................................................................................................................... 11 Summary .................................................................................................................................................... 11 Animal Control ...................................................................................................... 12 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 12 Miscellaneous ....................................................................................................... 13 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 13 Building and Safety ................................................................................................ 14 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 14 Business License .................................................................................................... 15
ii Comprehensive User Fee Study
Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 15 Hesperia Housing Authority (HHA) and Hesperia Community Development Commission (HCDC) ................................................................................................................. 16 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 16 Planning ............................................................................................................... 17 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 17 Engineering .......................................................................................................... 18 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 18 Police - Public Safety ............................................................................................. 19 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 19 Water District Fees ................................................................................................ 20 Analysis ...................................................................................................................................................... 20 Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered .................................................. 21 Appendix B – Salary and Benefit Hourly Rates ........................................................... 22 Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis ....................................................................... 27
1 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Executive Summary
The City of Hesperia engaged Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) to determine the full costs incurred by the City to support the various activities for which the City charges user fees. Due to the complexity and the breadth of performing a comprehensive review of fees, Willdan employed a variety of fee methodologies to identify the full costs of individual fee and program activities. This report and the appendices herein identify 100% full cost recovery for City services and the recommended level of recovery as determined through discussion with departmental staff. The recommended fees identified herein are either at or less than full cost recovery.
2 Comprehensive User Fee Study
User Fee Background
Background
As part of a general cost recovery strategy, local governments adopt user fees to fund programs and services that provide limited or no direct benefit to the community as a whole. As cities struggle to maintain levels of service and variability of demand, they have become increasingly aware of subsidies provided by the General Fund and have implemented cost-recovery targets. To the extent that governments use general tax monies to provide individuals with private benefits, and not require them to pay the full cost of the service (and, therefore, receive a subsidy), the government is limiting funds that may be available to provide other community-wide benefits. In effect, the government is using community funds to pay for private benefits. Unlike most revenue sources, cities have more control over the level of user fees they charge to recover costs, or the subsidies they can institute.
Fees in California are required to conform to the statutory requirements of the California Constitution, Proposition 218, Proposition 26, and the California Code of Regulations. The Code also requires that the City Council adopt fees by either ordinance or resolution, and that any fees in excess of the estimated total cost of rendering the related services must be approved by a popular vote of two-thirds of those electors voting because the charge would be considered a tax and not a fee. There are no fees suggested to be set above the cost of service and as such a public vote is not required.
California User Fee History
Before Proposition 13, In times of fiscal shortages, California cities were able to raise property taxes, which funded everything from police and recreation to development-related services. However, this situation changed with the passage of Proposition 13 in 1978.
Proposition 13 established the era of revenue limitation in California local government. In subsequent years, the state saw a series of additional limitations to local government revenues. Proposition 4 (1979) defined the difference between a tax and a fee: a fee can be no greater than the cost of providing the service; and Proposition 218 (1996) further limited the imposition of taxes for certain classes of fees. As a result, cities were required to secure a supermajority vote in order to enact or increase taxes. Due to the thresholds needed to increase local taxes, cities have less control and very few successful options for new revenues.
The State of California took a series of actions in the 1990’s and 2000’s to improve the State’s fiscal situation, at the expense of local governments. In 2004-05, the Educational Revenue Augmentation Funds (“ERAF”) take-away of property taxes and the reduction of Vehicle License Fees further reduced local tax revenues.
In addition, on November 2, 2010, California voters approved Proposition 26, the “Stop Hidden Taxes Initiative”, which is aimed at defining “regulatory fees” as a special tax rather than a fee, thus requiring approval by two-thirds vote of local voters. These regulatory fees are typically intended to mitigate the societal and environmental impacts of a business or person’s activities. Proposition 26 contains seven categories of exceptions. The fees analyzed as part of a User Fee study typically fall under categories one through five consisting of charges for specific benefits, government service, regulatory need, for use of government property, or a fine/penalty.
3 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Additional Policy Considerations
State regulations require that municipalities update their fee schedules to reflect the actual costs of certain public services primarily benefiting users. User Fees recover costs associated with the provision of specific services benefiting the user, thereby typically reducing the use of General Fund monies for such purposes.
In addition to collecting the direct cost of labor and materials associated with processing and administering user services, it is common for local governments to recover reasonable support costs. Support costs are those costs relating to a local government’s central service departments that are allocable to the local government’s operating departments. Central services support cost allocations were incorporated using the resulting indirect overhead percentages determined through the City’s Cost Allocation Plan. This plan was used in the User Fee study to account for the burden placed upon central services by the operating departments in order to allocate a proportionate share of central service cost through the study.
As labor effort and costs associated with the provision of services fluctuate over time, a significant element in the development of any fee schedule is that it has the flexibility to remain current. Therefore, it is recommended that the City include an inflationary factor in the resolution adopting the fee schedule to allow the City 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 GDP, which is much like the CPI except that while the CPI is based on the same “basket” of goods and services every year, the price deflators’ “basket” can change year to year. Since the primary factor for the cost of a City’s services is usually the costs of the personnel involved, tying an inflationary factor that connects more directly to the personnel costs can also be suitable if there is a clear method, or current practice of obtaining said factor.
Each City should use an inflator that they believe works the best for their specific situation and needs. It is also recommended that the City perform this internal review annually with a comprehensive review of services and fees performed every five years, which would include adding, amending, or removing fees for programs/services.
4 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Study Objective
As the City of Hesperia seeks to efficiently manage limited resources and adequately respond to increased service demands, it needs a variety of tools. A User Fee Study provides assurance that the City has the best information and the best resources available to make sound decisions, fairly and legitimately set fees, maintain compliance with state law and local policies, and meet the needs of the City administration and its constituency. Given the limitations on raising revenue in local government, the City recognizes that a User Fee Study is a very cost-effective way to understand the total cost of services and identify potential fee deficiencies. Essentially, a User Fee is a payment for a requested service provided by a local government that primarily benefits an individual or group.
The total cost of each service included in this analysis is based on the full cost of providing City services, including direct salaries and benefits of City staff, direct departmental costs, and indirect costs from central service support. This study determines the full cost recovery fee for the City to provide each service; however, each fee is set at the City’s discretion, up to 100% of the total cost, as specified in this report.
The principal goal of the study was to help the City determine the full cost of the services that the City provides. In addition, Willdan established a series of additional objectives including:
Developing a rational basis for setting fees
Identifying subsidy amount, if applicable, of each fee in the model Ensuring compliance with State law
Developing an updatable and comprehensive list of fees Maintaining accordance with City policies and goals
The study results will help the City better understand its true costs of providing services and may serve as a basis for making informed policy decisions regarding the most appropriate fees, if any, to collect from individuals and organizations that require individualized services from the City.
Scope of the Study
The scope of this study encompasses a review and calculation of the user fees charged by the following Hesperia departments and fee groups:
Animal Control
Miscellaneous City Fees
Building
Building License
Hesperia Housing Authority (HHA) and Hesperia Community Development Commission (HCDC) o Fees were included in Appendix C, but were not analyzed or suggested to change Planning
Engineering
5 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Public Safety
Water District Fees
o Not including utility rates
The study involved the identification of existing and potential new fees, fee schedule restructuring, data collection and analysis, orientation and consultation, quality control, communication and presentations, and calculation of individual service costs (fees) or program cost recovery levels.
Aim of the Report
The User Fee Study focused on the cost of City services, as City staff currently provide them at existing, known, or reasonably anticipated service and staff level needs. This report provides a summary of the study results, and a general description of the approach and methods Willdan and City staff used to determine the recommended fee schedule. The report is not intended to document all of the numerous discussions throughout the process, nor is it intended to provide an influential dissertation on the qualities of the utilized tools, techniques, or alternative approaches.
6 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Project Approach and Methodology
Conceptual Approach
The basic concept of a User Fee Study is to determine the “reasonable cost” of each service provided by the City for which it charges a user fee. The full cost of providing a service may not necessarily become the City’s fee, but it serves as the objective basis as to the maximum amount that may be collected.
The standard fee limitation established in California law for such fees fees is the “estimated, reasonable cost” principle. In order to maintain compliance with the letter and spirit of this standard, every component of the fee study process included a related review. The use of budget figures, time estimates, and improvement valuation clearly indicates reliance upon estimates for some data.
Fully Burdened Hourly Rates
The total cost of each service included in this analysis is primarily based on the Fully Burdened Hourly Rates (FBHRs) that were determined for City personnel directly involved in providing services. The FBHRs include not only personnel salary and benefits, but also any costs that are reasonably ascribable to personnel. The cost elements that are included in the calculation of fully burdened rates are:
Salaries & benefits of personnel involved
Operating costs applicable to fee operations
Departmental support, supervision, and administration overhead Indirect City-wide overhead costs calculated through the Cost Allocation Plan An important factor in determining the fully burdened rate is in the calculation of productive hours for personnel. This calculation takes the available workable hours in a year of 2,080 and adjusts this figure to 1,650 productive or billable hours to account for calculated or anticipated hours’ employees are involved in non-billable activities such as paid vacation, sick leave, holidays, and other considerations as necessary.
Dividing the full cost, including overhead, of a position by the number of productive hours provides the FBHR.
The FBHRs are then used in conjunction with time estimates, when appropriate for how a service is provided, to calculate a fee’s cost based on the personnel and the amount of their time that is involved in providing each service.
7 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Summary Steps of the Study
The process of the study is straightforward and simple in concept. The following list provides a summary of the study process steps:
Allowable Costs
This report identifies three types of costs that, when combined, constitute the fully burdened cost of a service (Appendix A). Costs are defined as
direct labor, including salary and benefits,
departmental overhead costs, and the City’s
central services overhead, where
departmental and central service overhead
costs constitute support costs. These cost
types are defined as follows:
Direct Labor (Personnel Costs): T he
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: T hese costs, as provided via the City’s Cost Allocation Plan, represent services provided by those Central Services Departments whose primary function is to support other City departments.
Data Analysis
Department Interviews
Time Estimates
Labor Costs
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
8 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Methodology
The two methods of analysis for calculating fees used in this report are the:
Case Study Method (Standard Unit Cost Build-Up Approach): This approach estimates the actual labor and material costs associated with providing a unit of service to a single user. This analysis is suitable when City staff time requirements do not vary dramatically for a service, or for special projects where the time and cost requirements are easy to identify at the project’s outset. Further, the method is effective in instances when a staff member from one department assists on an application, service or permit for another department on an as-needed basis. Costs are estimated based upon interviews with City staff regarding the time typically spent on tasks, a review of available records, and a time and materials analysis.
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 rental based fee levels more than other types of services. Willdan employed a different methodology where appropriate to fit a 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.
Quality Control/Quality Assurance
All study components are interrelated, thus flawed data at any step in the process will cause the ultimate results to be inconsistent and unsound. The elements of our Quality Control process for User Fee calculations include:
Involvement of knowledgeable City staff
Clear instructions and guidance to City staff
Reasonableness tests and validation
Internal and external reviews
Cross-checking
Reasons for cost increases/decreases over current fees
Within the fee tables in Appendix C , the differences are identified between the full costs calculated through the study and the fee levels currently in effect. The reasons for differences between the two can arise from a number of possible factors including:
Previous fee levels may have been set at levels less than full cost intentionally, based on policy decisions
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
9 Comprehensive User Fee 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 the Cost Allocation Plan
Changes in processes and procedures within a department, or the City as a whole Changes in the demand for services in a City may have also changed the staffing or cost structure of departments over time
City Staff Contributions
As part of the study process, Willdan received tremendous support and cooperation from City staff, which contributed and reviewed a variety of components to the study, including:
Budget and other cost data
Staffing structures
Fee and service structures, organization, and descriptions Direct and indirect work hours (billable/non-billable) Time estimates to complete work tasks
Review of draft results and other documentation
A User Fee Study requires significant involvement of the managers and line staff from the departments on top of their existing workloads and competing priorities. The contributions from City staff were critical to this study. We would like to express our appreciation to the City and its staff for their assistance, professionalism, positive attitudes, helpful suggestions, responsiveness, and overall cooperation.
10 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Hesperia User Fees
Cost Recovery
The cost recovery models, by department/division fee type, are presented in detail in Appendix C. Full cost recovery is determined by summing the estimated amount of time each position (in increments of minutes or hours) spends to render a service. Time estimates for each service rendered were obtained through interviews conducted with City staff for each department/division fee included in the study. The resulting cost recovery amount represents the total cost of providing each service. The City’s current fee being charged for each service, if applicable, is provided in this section, as well, for reference.
It is important to note that the time data used to determine the amount of time each employee spends assisting in the provision of the services listed on the fee schedule is essential in identifying the total cost of providing each service, and will differ from City to City depending on staffing, positions involved, experience on staff, the use of consultants, and the policies and procedures in place for each City.
Specifically, in providing services, a number of employees are often involved in various aspects of the process, spending anywhere from a few minutes to several hours on the service.
The primary goal of this study was to identify the cost of City services, to provide information to help the City make informed decisions regarding the actual fee levels and charges. The responsibility of determining the final fee levels is a complicated task. City staff must consider many issues in formulating recommendations, and the City Council must consider those same issues and more in making the final decisions.
City staff assumes the responsibility to develop specific fee level recommendations to present to the City Council. Unfortunately, there are no hard and fast rules to guide the City, since many of the considerations are based on the unique characteristics of the City of Hesperia, and administrative and political discretion.
However, in setting the level of full cost recovery for each fee, one should consider whether the service solely benefits one end user or the general community.
Subsidization
Recalling the definition of a user fee helps guide decisions regarding subsidization. The general standard is that individuals (or groups) who receive a wholly private benefit should pay 100% of the full cost of the services. In contrast, services that are simply public benefit should be funded entirely by the general fund’s tax dollars. Unfortunately, for the decision makers, some services fall into the range between these two extremes.
Further complicating the decision, opponents of fees often assert that the activities subject to the fees provide economic, cultural, “quality of life,” or other community benefits that exceed the costs to the City, but it is important to distinguish the difference between any purported possible benefits that may be conveyed through the result of activities of the service receiver and the direct benefit being conveyed through the City providing the service to the requestor.
It is recommended the City consider such factors during its deliberations regarding appropriate fee levels.
11 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Of course, subsidization can be an effective public policy tool, since it can be used to reduce fees to encourage certain activities (such as to ensure public safety) or allow some people to be able to afford to receive services they otherwise could not at the full cost. In addition, subsidies can be an appropriate and justifiable action, such as to allow citizens to rightfully access services, without overburdensome costs.
Despite the intent, it is important for the City and public to understand that subsidies must be covered by another revenue source, typically the General Fund’s other unoblbigated funds. Therefore, the general taxpayer will potentially help to fund private benefits, and/or other City services will not have available funds that are otherwise directed to cover fee subsidies.
Impact on Demand (Elasticity)
Economic principles of elasticity suggest that increased costs for services (higher fees) will eventually curtail the demand for the services; whereas lower fees may spark an incentive to utilize the services and encourage certain actions. Either of these conditions may be a desirable effect to the City. However, the level of the fees that would cause demand changes is largely unknown. The cost of service study did not attempt to evaluate the economic or behavioral impacts of higher or lower fees; nevertheless, the City should consider the potential impacts of these issues when deciding on fee levels.
Summary
City staff is recommending setting user fees at 100% of the full cost identified in this study except for specific considerations where it makes sense based on how service is provided such as trade fees within Building that are often coupled together when provided, or for the City xeroxing fee where the full cost would be considered prohibitive. City and departmental goals, City Council priorities, policy initiatives, past performance, implementation issues, and other internal and external factors should influence staff recommendations and City Council decisions. In this case, the proper identification of additional services (new or existing services) and the update to a consistent and comprehensive fee schedule were the primary objectives of this study. City staff has reviewed the full costs and identified the recommended fee levels for consideration by City Council. The attached appendices exhibit these unit fees individually.
The preceding sections provide background for each department, division, and fee group and the results of this study’s analysis of their fees. For the full list of each fee’s analysis, refer to Appendix C of this report.
12 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Animal Control
Animal Control provides several public safety functions including rabies control, dog licensing, stray and dangerous animal abatement, hearings for public nuisance, quarantine, and hearings for dangerous and/or vicious animals. These functions are paramount in achieving the City Council’s first goal of Public Safety.
Animal Control also provides care, shelter, and treatment for unwanted and abused animals. Animal Control maintains a large population of adoptable animals, and the on-site veterinarian provides weekly vaccination and spay/neuter clinics for High Desert residents.
Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with Animal Control. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.
The analysis of the Animal Control services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most fees are currently set below the full cost of providing the service. It is recommended that the City set Animal Control fees at the levels detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
An increase for 61 fees;
12 fees would decrease;
5 new fees would be added;
1 fee would change to CRB from a flat fee;
44 fees would remain as currently set, and;
the average change in fees would be an increase of 2%.
13 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Miscellaneous
The Miscellaneous fee section include appeals, copying, electronic media, driving under the influence, FOG program, film permits, and liquor licenses.
Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Miscellaneous fees. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.
The analysis of the Miscellaneous services fee section relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis resulted in a combination of fees that are currently set below and above full cost. Staff have suggested reasonable fee adjustments to the fee schedule, and they are detailed in
Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
An increase for 6 fees;
4 fees would decrease;
9 new fees would be added;
1 fee, General Plan Update fee, would change from a per EDU fee to a % of the Building Permit; 34 fees would remain as currently set, and;
the average change in fees would be an increase of 1%.
14 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Building and Safety
Building and Safety is responsible for permitting, plan checking, building inspection, and land grading operations for compliance with adopted building codes and Federal and State Laws, which assists with achieving the City Council goal on Future Development. Technicians at the public counter process permits and provide public information for a wide variety of development related issues. The program also administers the business licensing, billing, and fee collection of several key programs within the City including Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG); Residential Truck Parking; Rental Housing; Deemed Approved Alcohol; Tobacco Retail Licensing; and provides the Permit-To-Operate and inspections for the eleven mobile home parks that lie within the City’s boundaries.
Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with Building and Safety. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.
The analysis of Building and Safety 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 County Central Services. The analysis found that most services are currently set below the full cost of providing them. It is recommended that the City increase cost recovery to 100% for Building & Safety services as detailed in
Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
an increase to 69 fees;
16 fees would decrease;
33 fees would remain as currently set;
6 new fees would be added, and;
the average change in fees would be an increase of 23%.
15 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Business License
All entities transacting business within the City of Hesperia must obtain and maintain a valid business license.
Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with Business License. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.
The analysis of the Business License services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most flat rate fees are currently set below the full cost of providing the service. Staff have suggested reasonable fee adjustments to the fee schedule, and they are detailed in
Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
An increase for 3 fees;
3 fees would decrease;
30 fees would remain as currently set, and;
1 fee would change to a flat fee from a no charge fee.
16 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Hesperia Housing Authority (HHA) and Hesperia
Community Development Commission (HCDC)
The Hesperia Housing Authority (HHA), develops, manages, and promotes programs and projects that preserve and improve the supply of affordable housing in the City of Hesperia for low and moderate income persons.
The Hesperia Community Development Commission (CDC) is primarily responsible for the City’s business attraction and retention efforts. These efforts result in an increase in the job base, increased sales and use tax, property taxes, and the overall economic progress and diversity of the City. Under the direction of the City Manager’s Department, the CDC administers marketing efforts for the City.
Analysis
No cost analysis was done with Hesperia Housing Authority (HHA) and Hesperia Community Development Commission (HCDC) fees are recommended to remain as currently set.
17 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Planning
Planning provides public information, project review, and approvals or recommendations for development proposals to ensure that new development conforms to Hesperia’s environment as described in the General Plan (City Council Goal 3 – Future Development), specific plans, and Development Code. This Program assures conformance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Subdivision Map Act, the Municipal Code, and the Specific Plan. The Program also supports the Development Review Committee, the Planning Commission, and the City Council in all planning matters. Planning prepares applications for the annexation of sphere areas, as well as environmental documents for private developments and public developments such as Economic Development and Public Works projects. Planning also recommends changes to the City’s Land Use Plan to keep pace with the increase in population, commercial and industrial growth, and the changing regulatory environment to assure Hesperia’s future growth and success.
Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services and programs associated with Planning. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.
The analysis of Planning services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved in providing services to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that current fee levels are subsidizing the cost for most services to a large degree. It is recommended that the City increase cost recovery to 100% for Planning services as detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
An increase to 45 fees;
10 fees would decrease;
2 new fees would be added;
7 fees would remain as currently set, and;
the average fee change would be an increase of 43%.
18 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Engineering
Engineering is responsible for processing development projects as they relate to public infrastructure including; roads, water systems, sewer systems, drainage control, and Traffic signal systems. The department is also responsible for the engineering, planning, design, and construction of all infrastructure projects included in the City's Capital Improvement Program. Engineering maintains all records of public infrastructure (maps, plans and documents) for use by other departments, outside agencies and the public.
Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with Engineering. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.
The analysis of the Engineering services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most fees are currently set below the full cost of providing service. It is recommended that the City increase cost recovery to 100% for Engineering services as detailed in
Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
An increase for 22 fees;
1 fee would decrease;
1 new fee would be added;
43 fees would remain as currently set, and;
The average fee change would be an increase of 58%.
19 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Police - Public Safety
The Hesperia City Police Department provides law enforcement and public safety services to the residents of the City and to all those within its jurisdiction (City Council’s first goal of Public Safety). Our mission is to deliver collaborative law enforcement solutions that meet the needs of our communities and partners by giving quality professional services. The Department works in partnership with the community, other governmental agencies and City entities to promote individual responsibility, and safer neighborhoods in an effort to enhance the quality of life in Hesperia.
The San Bernardino County Sheriff’s Department has provided law enforcement services to the City under a service contract since its incorporation in 1988. By virtue of this contract, the City of Hesperia provides its citizens with full-service law enforcement, which include patrol operations, traffic enforcement, detective services, gang investigation/suppression, problem-oriented policing and community outreach programs.
Sworn, professional and volunteer staff work collectively to make the Police Department a productive and efficient operation.
Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with the Police Department. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.
The analysis of the Police services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach for fees, excluding penalties, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that fees are currently set below the full cost of providing service. It is recommended that the City set Police fees at the levels detailed in Appendix C. As
a result, there would be:
An increase for 5 fees;
11 fees would remain as currently set, including penalties, and; The average change would be an increase of 1%.
20 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Water District Fees
The Customer Service / Meters Division is responsible for accurately reading all water meters manually and remotely throughout the City of Hesperia. This division also takes care of meter maintenance and repair. In addition, the division responds to customer service calls including water reconnects, turn offs and meter repairs.
Analysis
Willdan individually reviewed the services associated with Water District Fees. The review also consisted of an evaluation of existing services in an effort to update the fee schedule.
The analysis of the Water District Fees services relied primarily upon a standard unit cost build-up approach, whereby the reasonable cost of each fee occurrence was determined using staff time involved with providing the service to recover the direct cost of staff and the pro-rata share of departmental costs, including indirect costs for City Central Services. Willdan then compared the calculated full cost against the current fee amount to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that most fees are currently set below the full cost of providing service. Staff have suggested reasonable fee adjustments to the fee schedule, and they are detailed in
Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
An increase for 11 fees;
3 fees would decrease;
20 fees would remain as currently set;
1 new fee would be added;
Utility rates were not included in the study, and;
The average fee change would be an increase of 11%.
21 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix A – Total Allowable Cost to be Recovered
Below are the total allowable costs that may be recovered through User Fees; however, only a portion of the total allowable cost is recovered as staff not only works on services related to User Fees, but also works on an array of other City functions during the operational hours of the City. The amounts listed below will not reconcile to City budgets as costs that should not be included in overhead for personnel in the application of determining fully burdened hourly rates were excluded. Examples of these costs are capital, debt, monetary transfers, contract costs, and any other costs that are charged directly to the service requestor.
City of Hesperia - User Fee Study
Overhead Rate Calculations
Department
Salaries &
Benefits
Department
Operations &
Administration
Direct
Overhead
%
Indirect
Allocation
%
City Manager 1,354,552 118,439 9% 0% Information Technology 1,141,156 247,640 22% 0% Finance 1,841,447 36,381 2% 0% Human Resources 865,910 104,569 12% 0% Economic Development 293,092 23,960 8% 37% Planning 866,933 25,329 3% 40% Building & Safety 1,049,420 88,136 8% 37% Code Enforcement 2,022,425 302,045 15% 34% Animal Control 1,869,936 346,814 19% 33% Engineering 664,116 29,001 4% 81% Building Maintenance 307,895 204,845 67% 0% Water Fund 7,259,529 4,961,308 68% 20%
22 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix B – Salary and Benefit Hourly Rates
Below are Salary and Benefit hourly rates of staff positions . The hourly rates were used in the study to determine the full cost of each service when combined with the associated overhead rates and reasonable time to provide each service. They include the salary and benefit costs for each position based on the City’s salary step schedule for positions as well as the appropriate benefits depending on each position’s bargaining unit. The total salary and benefits are then divided by 1,650 productive or billable hours to reduce the total 2,080 workable hours in a year to remove hours when positions are paid but not on the job such as holidays, paid leave, and sick pay. A further reduction of under 10% is made for administrative, general, or non-specific work hours. When a position is used in the study to identify direct work hours spent on a fee or service the applicable overhead rates of the operating unit (shown in Appendix A) is applied to that positions’ salary and benefit rate to determine full cost recovery. For any user fee service request that is outside the scope of the fees detailed in
Appendix C, or for services for which there is no fee currently set, the City can charge up to the full cost of the service by using the salary benefit rate of the positions below along with the appropriate overhead factors from Appendix A.
23 Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Hesperia - User Fee Study
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Position
S&B Hourly
Rate
Position Rates
Account Clerk $34.13
Accountant $47.43
Accounting Technician $43.00
Administrative Aide $35.37
Administrative Analyst $49.80
Administrative Intern-PT $15.00
Administrative Secretary $40.95
Animal Care Technician $32.50
Animal Care Technician-PT $25.02
Animal Control Officer $39.51
Animal Services Specialist $48.83
Animal Services Supervisor $56.52
Assistant City Clerk $57.65
Assistant City Manager $125.84
Assistant Engineer $60.54
Assistant Planner $51.27
Assistant to the City Manager $77.24
Associate Planner $60.54
Budget/Finance Specialist $47.43
Building Inspector $52.96
City Manager $156.86
Code Enforcement Officer $50.44
Code Enforcement Supervisor $63.54
Community Development Supervisor $57.65
Community Development Technician $39.51
Community Relations Specialist $49.80
Construction Inspector $52.29
Custodian $32.50
Customer Service Representative $35.84
Customer Service Representative-PT $27.59
Customer Service Supervisor $57.65
Deputy City Clerk $37.15
Deputy Community Development Director $85.18
Deputy Development Services Director $85.18
Deputy Finance Director $89.43
Deputy Human Resources/Risk Management Director $85.18
24 Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Hesperia - User Fee Study
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Position
S&B Hourly
Rate
Position Rates
Director of Administrative Services $119.86
Director of Government Services/City Clerk $108.70
Director of Public Works $85.18
Economic Development Manager $79.52
Engineering Technician $42.52
Environmental Compliance Inspector $52.29
Equipment Operator $40.49
Equipment Operator/Water $41.49
Equipment Operator/Water-2% $42.31
Equipment Operator-2% $41.31
Executive Secretary $47.43
Facilities Electrician-PT $41.48
Facilities Maintenance Technician $39.51
Facilities Supervisor $60.54
Field Services Supervisor $56.52
Financial Analyst $52.29
Fleet Warehouse Supervisor $57.65
Geographical Information Systems Manager $70.08
Geographical Information Systems Technician $45.16
Human Resources Analyst $57.65
Information Systems Manager $81.11
Information Systems Specialist $57.65
Information Systems Technician $45.16
Maintenance Crew Supervisor $60.54
Maintenance Worker $35.84
Maintenance Worker/Water $36.73
Maintenance Worker/Water-2% $37.46
Maintenance Worker-2% $36.55
Maintenance Worker-PT $27.59
Management Analyst $57.65
Meter Reader $35.84
Meter Reader-2% $36.55
Office Assistant $33.69
Office Assistant-PT $26.73
Personnel Technician $45.16
Plans Examiner $57.65
25 Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Hesperia - User Fee Study
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Position
S&B Hourly
Rate
Position Rates
Principal Planner $81.11
Project Construction Manager $77.24
Public Relations Analyst $63.54
Public Works Supervisor $66.75
Pump Maintenance Worker $39.51
Pump Maintenance Worker-2% $40.29
Pump Operator $40.49
Pump Operator-2% $41.31
Receptionist $29.48
Receptionist-PT $22.69
Risk Manager $66.75
Secretary to the City Manager and City Council $52.29
Senior Account Clerk $39.51
Senior Accountant $60.54
Senior Animal Care Technician $35.84
Senior Animal Control Officer $43.56
Senior Code Enforcement Officer $52.29
Senior Community Development Technician $45.16
Senior Custodian $35.84
Senior Development Specialist $66.75
Senior Maintenance Worker $41.49
Senior Maintenance Worker/Water $42.52
Senior Maintenance Worker/Water-2% $43.37
Senior Maintenance Worker-2% $42.31
Senior Management Analyst $66.75
Senior Office Assistant $37.15
Senior Office Specialist $37.15
Senior Planner $70.08
Senior Project Manager $77.24
Senior Pump Maintenance Worker $44.64
Senior Pump Maintenance Worker-2% $45.55
Senior Pump Operator $44.64
Senior Pump Operator-2% $45.55
Senior Warehouse Technician $39.51
Traffic Signal Technician $43.56
Utility Line Locator $35.84
26 Comprehensive User Fee Study
City of Hesperia - User Fee Study
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Position
S&B Hourly
Rate
Position Rates
Utility Line Locator-2% $36.55
Warehouse Technician $35.84
Water Quality Specialist $44.64
Water Quality Specialist-2% $45.55
Water Quality Technician $40.49
Water Resource Specialist $55.61
27 Comprehensive User Fee Study
Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis
The following tables provide the results of the analysis, resulting full cost recovery amount, and recommended fees. For fees, services, and penalties in which the full cost, existing fee, and suggested fee is listed as “NA”, the amount or percentage was not calculable. This is most common when either the current or the suggested fee includes a variable component that is not comparable on a one-to-one basis, a full cost was not calculated (for penalties, fines, market-based fees, or items not included in the study), or when there is not a current fee amount to compare against.
Animal Control
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Notes Fee Δ 1 License
2 Unaltered Dog
3 1yr. 70.00 $143.72 44% $80.00 $10.00
4 2yrs. 130.00 $143.72 3% $140.00 $10.00
5 3yrs. 200.00 NA NA $200.00 $0.00
6 Altered Dog
7 1yr. 13.00 $143.72 90% $15.00 $2.00
8 2yrs. 24.00 $143.72 82% $26.00 $2.00
9 3yrs. 33.00 $143.72 76% $35.00 $2.00
10 Senior Citizen with Altered Dog
11 1yr. 8.00 $143.72 93% $10.00 $2.00
12 2yrs. 14.00 $143.72 89% $16.00 $2.00
13 3yrs. 20.00 $143.72 85% $22.00 $2.00
14 Transfer from other Jurisdiction-altered 5.00 $117.09 91% $10.00 $5.00 15 Transfer from other Jurisdiction-unaltered 10.00 $117.09 83% $20.00 $10.00 16 Replacement Tag 3.50 $45.67 91% $4.00 $0.50
17 Optional Cat License
18 1yr. 4.00 $45.67 89% $5.00 $1.00
19 2yrs. 6.00 $45.67 85% $7.00 $1.00
20 3yrs. 9.00 $45.88 76% $11.00 $2.00
21 Kennel License (including boarding/breeding facilities) 22 a. Less than 10 150.00 NA NA $100.00 -$50.00
23 b. 11-30 170.00 NA NA $125.00 -$45.00
24 c. 31-60 190.00 NA NA $150.00 -$40.00
25 d. 61-100 215.00 NA NA $175.00 -$40.00
26 e. Over 100 250.00 NA NA $200.00 -$50.00
27 Cattery License (including boarding/breeding facilities) 28 a. Less than 10 140.00 NA NA $100.00 -$40.00
29 b. 11-30 160.00 NA NA $125.00 -$35.00
30 c. 31-50 180.00 NA NA $150.00 -$30.00
31 d. For each additional range of 10 cats 40.00 NA NA $25.00 -$15.00 32 Pet Shop License (including feed stores w/ live
animals) 150.00 year NA NA $150.00 $0.00
33 Grooming Parlor License 145.00 year NA NA $145.00 $0.00 34 Boarding Stables License (horses) less than 25
horses 150.00 NA NA $150.00 $0.00
35 Boarding Stables License (horses) more than 25
horses 250.00 NA NA $250.00 $0.00
36 Menagerie License (including petting zoos, pony rides) 37 a. Permanent (year round) 225.00 NA NA $200.00 -$25.00 28
Animal Control
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Notes Fee Δ 38 b. Temporary (seasonal) 85.00 NA NA $85.00 $0.00
39 Game Bird/Aviary License 190.00 year NA NA $190.00 $0.00 40 Veterinary Clinic License 145.00 year NA NA $150.00 $5.00 41 Animal Exhibit Permit (incl'd Circuses, Rodeos,
Filming) 250.00 + $150 per day of
event NA NA $250.00 + $150 per day of
event $0.00
42 Exotic Animal Permit (privately owned wild/non-
domestic/exotic) 150.00 year NA NA $150.00 $0.00
43 Guard Dog Permit (dogs kept in industrial areas) 50.00 year + licensing fees $117.09 44% $65.00 + licensing fees $15.00 44 Re-inspection fee
45 a. Initial re-inspection No charge $71.42 100% No Charge $0.00 46 b. Second re-inspection 82.00 NA NA $75.00 -$7.00
47 c. Third re-inspection 164.00 NA NA $100.00 -$64.00
48 Late License Penalty
49 Unaltered Dog 25.00 $32.36 7% $30.00 $5.00
50 Altered Dog 10.00 $32.36 63% $12.00 $2.00
51 Impound/Boarding Fees
52 Dogs and Cats (per day) 10.00 $25.69 53% $12.00 $2.00 53 Fowl (per day) 5.00 $38.53 84% $6.00 $1.00
54 Small Animals including rabbits (per day) 5.00 $38.53 84% $6.00 $1.00 55 Large Animals (per day) 15.00 $38.53 53% $18.00 $3.00 56 Quarantine of animal at Owners Residence (first
occurrence) 25.00 $71.42 58% $30.00 $5.00
57 Quarantine of animal at Owners Residence
(additional occurrence) 50.00 $71.42 16% $60.00 $10.00
58 Rabies Test Head Shipment 65.00 $310.14 74% $81.00 $16.00 59 Quarantine at Shelter (per day) 10.00 $52.31 77% $12.00 $2.00 60 Owner Turn In Animals (at Shelter)
61 Cats (Alive Includes boarding) 40.00 $264.47 81% $50.00 $10.00 62 Cats DOA 20.00 $84.67 70% $25.00 $5.00
63 Cats PTS Request 50.00 $97.51 36% $62.00 $12.00
64 Dogs (Alive includes boarding) 40.00 $264.47 81% $50.00 $10.00 65 Dogs DOA 20.00 $84.67 70% $25.00 $5.00
66 Dogs PTS request 50.00 $97.51 36% $62.00 $12.00
67 Litters of Kittens(4 months and under) 40.00 $264.47 81% $50.00 $10.00 68 Litters of puppies (4 months and under) 40.00 $264.47 81% $50.00 $10.00 69 Small livestock (under 100 lbs, including pot belly pigs) alive or PTS request 70 a. 0-50 lbs 50.00 $272.18 77% $62.00 $12.00
71 b. 51-100 lbs 75.00 $272.18 66% $93.00 $18.00
72 Rabbits, Fowl, and Similar 5.00 $142.74 96% $6.00 $1.00 29
Animal Control
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Notes Fee Δ 73 Other Dead Animals
74 a. Under 100 lbs. 25.00 $45.67 23% $30 or $35 $10.00 75 b. 100 lbs and over Not Accepted NA NA Not Accepted $0.00 76 Field Pick Up with Owner Release
77 Dog, Cat, Rabbit and Fowl (Live or Dead) 25.00 $117.09 74% $30.00 $5.00 78 Litters 35.00 $117.09 63% $43.00 $8.00
79 Small Livestock (Under 100 lbs) 50.00 $117.09 47% $62.00 $12.00 80 Pot Belly Pig or Swine $75 or CRB $117.09 NA $75 or CRB $0.00 81 After Hours Pickup (except Swine) CRB $54.64 NA CRB $0.00 82 Owner Turn In Large Livestock Owner
Responsibility NA NA CRB + Add. Cost $0.00
83 Field Pick Up (Apprehension)
84 a. Tagged and Altered
85 First 0.00 $344.31 100% $0.00 $0.00
86 Second 75.00 $344.31 71% $100.00 $25.00
87 Third 175.00 $344.31 42% $200.00 $25.00
88 b. Tagged and Unaltered *
89 First 85.00 * Includes State fee
$35 $344.31 71% $100.00 * Includes State fee
$35 $15.00
90 Second 150.00 * Includes State fee
$50 $344.31 42% $200.00 * Includes State fee
$50 $50.00
91 Third 300.00 * Includes State fee
$100 $344.31 0% $344.00 * Includes State fee
$100 $44.00
92 c. Untagged and Altered
93 First 75.00 $313.09 68% $100.00 $25.00
94 Second 100.00 $313.09 52% $150.00 $50.00
95 Third 300.00 $313.09 4% $300.00 $0.00
96 d. Untagged and Unaltered * (Mand. Spay/Neuter at first) 97 First 135.00 * Includes State fee
$35 $313.09 46% $168.00 * Includes State fee
$35 $33.00
98 Second 150.00 * Includes State fee
$50 $313.09 40% $187.00 * Includes State fee
$50 $37.00
99 Third 200.00 * Includes State fee
$100 $313.09 20% $250.00 * Includes State fee
$100 $50.00
100 e. After hours apprehension add CRB NA NA CRB $0.00 101 Cats
102 a. Altered 10.00 $130.40 91% $12.00 $2.00
103 b. Unaltered, (Mandatory Spay/Neuter) 25.00 $130.40 77% $30.00 $5.00 104 Other Animals CRB $130.40 NA CRB $0.00
30
Animal Control
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Notes Fee Δ 105 Pet Adoptions
106 Non-Dog/Cat spay/neuter New NA NA CRB NA
107 Dog (includes spay/neuter, microchip, e-collar,
vaccines) 80.00 $123.67 35% $80.00 $0.00
108 Cat (includes spay/neuter) 50.00 $123.67 60% $50.00 $0.00 109 Large Livestock (hogs, cows, etc.) 150.00 + Cost of Auction NA NA $150.00 + Cost of Auction $0.00 110 Small Livestock (Under 100 lbs) 25.00 $84.67 65% $30.00 $5.00 111 Rabbits and Fowl 3.00 $84.67 94% $5.00 $2.00
112 Exotic Birds Market Value
less 25% $84.67 NA Market Value less
25% $0.00
113 Horses CRB $84.67 NA CRB $0.00
114 Pot Belly Pigs 15.00 $110.36 86% $15.00 $0.00
115 Adoption Dog or Cat Spay/Neuter deposit 40.00 $164.24 76% $40.00 $0.00 116 *Animal Rescue Group Pet Adoptions (Must have valid 501c3 on file) 117 Rescue Cat Free (Red Status) New NA NA $0.00 NA
118 Rescue Dog Free (Red Status) New NA NA $0.00 NA
119 Cat (Unaltered) 5.00 $71.36 93% 5.00 $0.00
120 Cat (already altered upon impound) 10.00 $71.36 86% 10.00 $0.00 121 Litter of Kittens 20.00 $84.67 76% 20.00 $0.00
122 Dog (Unaltered) 10.00 $71.36 86% 10.00 $0.00
123 Dog (already altered upon impound) 15.00 $71.36 79% 15.00 $0.00 124 Litter of Puppies (3 or less) 20.00 $84.67 76% 20.00 $0.00 125 Litter of Puppies (4 or more) 40.00 $84.67 53% 40.00 $0.00 126 Rabies Vaccination 5.00 $47.96 90% 5.00 $0.00
127 Microchip 25.00
$20 for pets leaving
with rescue
organization
$47.96 48% 25.00
$20 for pets leaving
with rescue
organization
$0.00
128 *Basic vaccinations, FVRCP, DHPP, & Bordtella, are included in the above prices. 129 Investigations/Other
130 Regular Business Hours CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
131 Overtime Hours (Two hour minimum) CRB NA NA CRB $0.00 132 Late Return of Traps (per day) 5.00 $121.44 95% $6.00 $1.00 133 Trap rental deposit 50.00 $75.16 18% $62.00 $12.00
134 Cat/Dog Trap not returned or damaged New NA NA Actual Cost NA 135 Microchip w/ Registration 25.00 $69.26 57% $30.00 $5.00 136 E-Collar 5.00 $23.59 58% $10.00 $5.00
137 Cat carrier box 5.00 $18.45 46% $10.00 $5.00
138 Cat trap rentals 10.00 week $72.30 83% $12.00 $2.00 139 Leashes/used collars 3.00 NA NA $3.00 $0.00
31
Animal Control
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Notes Fee Δ 140 Return to Owner (RTO) Fees
141 Feline Mandatory spay/neuter
Males/Females (includes ecollar) New NA NA $35/$45 NA
142 Mandatory spay/neuter Males/Females
(includes E-Collar) $65/$75 NA NA $65/$75 $0.00
143 Male cryptorchid, or female (pregnant or in
heat) 25.00 add. NA NA $25.00 $0.00
144 X-Rays needed (full-term pregnancy) 110.00 HESPERIA NA NA $110.00 $0.00 145 Blood work needed (geriatric dog- over 7 years
old) 70.00 add. NA NA $70.00 $0.00
146 Reclaiming Fee (Animal must be licensed and
microchipped) 500.00 NA NA $500.00 $0.00
147 Intravenous Fluids (Pregnant/In Heat,
Cryptorchid, or Geriatric) 40.00 add. NA NA $40.00 $0.00 148 Vaccination Clinics
149 Rabies 10.00 $10.00 0% $10.00 $0.00
150 DHPP, Bordatella, FVRCP, etc (per shot) 10.00 NA NA CRB NA 32
Miscellaneous
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Appeals
2 Appeals of Enforcement Fees 25.00 $81.94 1% $81.00 $0.00 3 Administrative Appeal New $85.44 1% $85.00 NA
4 Appeals of Public Nuisance Determinations, Building Code Violations, and other HMC provisions 25.00 $145.44 0% $145.00 $120.00
5 Appeals to Planning Commission/Land Use Determinations 311.00 $233.49 0% $233.00 -$78.00 6 Appeals to City Council or Board of Directors 324.00 NA NA $324.00 $0.00 7 Notice of Contest of Administrative Citation (Appeal Hearing Fee) *(Adopted by Ordinance No. 2001-6) 25.00 $145.44 0% $145.00 $120.00 8 Copying
9 Non-Color (per page)
10 Copy
11 a. Letter and Legal Size 0.25 NA NA 1-25 pages, no charge. $0.25 thereafter $0.00
12 b. Ledger (11 x 17) 0.50 NA NA $0.50 $0.00
13 c. Plan Size (24 x 36) 7.00 NA NA $7.00 $0.00
14 d. Presentation Size (36 x 48) 20.00 NA NA $20.00 $0.00 15 Plot
16 a. Letter and Legal Size 1.00 NA NA $1.00 $0.00
17 b. Ledger (11 x 17) 2.50 NA NA $2.50 $0.00
18 c. Plan Size (24 x 36) 7.00 NA NA $7.00 $0.00
19 d. Presentation Size (36 x 48) 20.00 NA NA $20.00 $0.00 20 Color (per page)
21 Copy
22 a. Letter and Legal Size 1.00 NA NA $1.00 $0.00
23 b. Ledger (11 x 17) 5.00 NA NA $5.00 $0.00
24 Plot
25 a. Letter and Legal Size 2.50 NA NA $2.50 $0.00
26 b. Ledger (11 x 17) 5.00 NA NA $5.00 $0.00
27 c. Plan Size (24 x 36) 15.00 NA NA $15.00 $0.00
28 d. Presentation Size (36 x 48) 30.00 NA NA $30.00 $0.00 29 Electronic Media
30 Information Placed on Flash Drive 15.00 $15.00 0% $15.00 $0.00 31 Electronic Transfer CRB, $5 min. NA NA CRB, $5 min. $0.00 32 Developer Handbook / Standards 25.00 NA NA $25.00 $0.00 33 Driving Under the Influence
34 DUI Administrative Fee 400.00
* This fee shall be paid prior to
release of the vehicle driven by an
impaired driver and stored or
impounded as a result of the
arrest of such driver when
conditions exist as defined in
Resolution 96-96, or as may be
amended.
NA NA $400.00 $0.00
35 DUI Emergency Response Cost Recovery CRB (Reso 2013-43) NA NA CRB (Reso 2013-43) $0.00 36 County Tax Roll Fee New NA NA
Current Fees charged by San
Bernardino County to
add/amend/remove parcel to/from
the tax roll
NA
37 Admin Lien Fee New NA NA $30.00 NA
33
Miscellaneous
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 38 Fees Not Listed
39 1) Whenever a service is provided for which a specified fee has not been established, the fee shall be for full recovery of costs reasonably borne and the hourly rates established in“Appendix C” shall be utilized. 40 2) The City Manager may establish fees for services not anticipated or as mandated by State or Federal law upon written recommendation of the department heads establishing the justification for the fee. Said fees shall be presented to the City Council for their approval at a public meeting prior to their effective dates.
41 Fats, Oils, and Grease (FOG) Program
42 FOG Discharge Permit 62.50 $134.56 0% $134.00 $71.50 43 Quarterly Inspection 81.00 $157.78 0% $157.00 $76.00 44 Re-inspection Fee (each re-inspection per ½ hr) 40.50 $78.89 1% $78.00 $37.50 45 Late Manifest 50.00 NA NA $50.00 $0.00
46 Service overdue (greater than 30 days) 200.00 NA NA $200.00 $0.00 47 Film Permits
48 Permits Application 300.00 $151.16 1% $150.00 -$150.00 49 Permit Amendment 250.00 $151.16 1% $150.00 -$100.00
50 Personnel Changes (minimum deposit amount determined by all affected departments) CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
51 Student films are exempt from the application fee. No Charge NA NA No Charge $0.00 52 Liquor Licenses
53 Letter of Public Convenience 90.00 $151.16 1% $150.00 $60.00 54 Miscellaneous Fees
55 Correctable Citation Fee (in addition to other fines and fees) 25.00 NA NA $25.00 $0.00 56 Technology Fee (all development applications and permits) 10% of fee 23% 56% 10% $0.00 57 General Plan update fee (per EDU, or 1.5 multiple dwelling units) 47.00 7% 0% 7% of Building Permit NA 58 Invoice Fee - when not making monthly payments 25.00 $23.05 13% $20.00 -$5.00 59 Medical Cannabis Business Compliance Review 2,000.00 Reimburse contracted consultant's
rate NA NA $2,000.00 $0.00
60 Medical Cannabis Business Financial Audit 10,000.00 Reimburse contracted consultant's rate NA NA $10,000.00 $0.00
61 Online Solar Permit Processing Credit Card Service Fee New per transaction Use of SolarApp+ (and Stripe, the
SolarApp+ payment processor), is
required by California Senate Bill
379
NA NA Current Rate charged by Stripe
(SolarApp+ payment processor) NA
62 Refunds/Additional Fees
63 a. Added fees and refunds. Pursuant to California Government Code Sections 29373.1 and 29375.1, where additional fees are collected for completed staff work due or when a refund of deposited funds are due, when such charges or refunds are ten dollars ($10) or less, a charge or refund need not be made.
64 b. The City Manager or designee may authorize a full refund of any fee that was erroneously paid or collected.
65 c. The City Manager or designee may authorize the refunding of up to eighty percent (80%) of any fee paid when a written request for withdrawal is received prior to any action being taken. Up to sixty dollars ($60) of the initial application fee may be retained.
34
Miscellaneous
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 66 d. The City Manager or designee shall not authorize the refunding of any fee except upon written application filed by the original applicant no later than one hundred eighty (180) days after the application date. 67 e. Cost Reasonably Borne (CRB) shall be charged for all projects exceeding costs for the minimum amount.
68 f. All fees shall be calculated to the nearest one-quarter (1/4) hour. 69 g. Penalty fees shall be assessed wherever required permits or licenses have not been properly obtained.
70 i. First Occurrence Double Fee NA NA Double Fee $0.00 71 ii. Second and Subsequent Occurrences Triple Fee or $500, whichever is greater NA NA Triple Fee or $500,
whichever is greater $0.00
72 Sale of Printed Material
73 Developers Handbook 90.00 $90.00 0% $90.00 $0.00
74 Plans and Specifications 50.00 $50.00 0% $50.00 $0.00 75 Master Plan of Drainage (3 Volumes) Actual Cost NA NA Actual Cost $0.00 76 Late Fee on citation and abatement (Lien, Citation, track and payment) New NA NA 12% NA 77 Demand letter for the payoff (citation & abatement cost) New $133.05 0% $133.00 NA 78 Inspection and release of NOP New $198.27 0% $198.00 NA 79 For payment plan New $78.54 1% $78.00 NA
80 Remove from tax roll Without payment New $124.61 0% $124.00 NA 35
Building & Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 1 Grading
2 Condition Compliance
3 a. Parcel maps 26.00 $100.77 1% $100.00 $0.00
4 b. Tract maps 52.00 $201.55 0% $201.00 $149.00
5 c. Other (with conditions) 52.00 $201.55 0% $201.00 $149.00 6 Pre-construction meeting 240.00 $339.64 0% $339.00 $99.00 7 Plan Review- Non Residential and Multi-Family Residential (Rough or Precise) 8 a. Up to 10 Acres 414.00 $772.92 0% $772.00 $358.00
9 b. Greater than 10 Acres 920.00 + CRB $1,545.83 0% $1,545.00 $625.00 10 c. CASp Review - up to one acre 96.00 $214.70 0% $214.00 $118.00 11 d. CASp Review - 1 to 10 acres 192.00 $300.58 0% $300.00 $108.00 12 e. CASp Review - over 10 acres 288.00 + CRB $429.40 0% $429.00 $141.00 13 Plan Review-Subdivisions for Single Family Residential 14 a. Parcel Maps (1-5 Lots) 478.00 $201.55 0% $201.00 -$277.00 15 b. 6-100 Lots
16 i. Rough 722.00 $601.16 0% $601.00 -$121.00
17 ii. Precise 552.00 $1,116.44 0% $1,116.00 $564.00
18 c. 101-250 Lots
19 i. Rough 998.00 $1,116.44 0% $1,116.00 $118.00
20 ii. Precise 828.00 $1,803.47 0% $1,803.00 $975.00
21 d. 251 + Lots
22 i. Rough 1,366.00 $1,545.83 0% $1,545.00 $179.00
23 ii. Precise 1,159.00 $2,232.87 0% $2,232.00 $1,073.00 24 e. Mass Grading 1,274.00 $1,374.07 0% $1,374.00 $100.00 25 f. Stock Plan Setup (1 hr. of plan review) 88.00 $128.82 1% $128.00 $40.00 26 g. Stockpile (plan check and permit) 407.00 $463.80 0% $463.00 $56.00 27 h. CASp Review for model home complex 192.00 $171.76 0% $171.00 -$21.00 28 Inspection - Single Family Residential (includes plan review) 29 Pre-site investigation for grading plan submittal New $119.52 0% $119.00 NA 30 a. No drainage 225.00 $474.28 0% $474.00 $249.00
31 b. With drainage 409.00 + Hydrology Study Fee $517.22 0% $517.00 $108.00 32 c. Precise Grading 297.00 + $16/lot over 7 lots $322.56 0% $322.00 $25.00 33 Inspection - Non Residential and Multi-Family
34 a. 0 - 5,000 Cubic Yards 297.00 $279.62 0% $279.00 -$18.00 35 b. 5,001 - 50,000 Cubic Yards 489.00 $362.00 0% $362.00 -$127.00 36 c. 50,001 - 250,000 Cubic Yards 632.00 + CRB $401.45 0% $401.00 -$231.00 37 d. 250,000 and above 1,132.00 + CRB $401.45 0% $401.00 -$731.00 38 e. Native plant plan review 257.00 $257.64 0% $257.00 $0.00 39 f. Preliminary Site Plan Review 81.00 $100.77 1% $100.00 $19.00 40 Other Fees
41 Permit Renewal due to expiration
Within 1 year - 1/2
permit fee;
after 1 year full permit
fee
NA NA
Within 1 year - 1/2 permit
fee;
after 1 year full permit fee
$0.00
42 Notice of Pendency or Nuisance Abatement Lien placement and removal
Current S.B. County
Rate NA NA Current S.B. County Rate $0.00
43 Additional plan review or inspection time (After 3 checks or inspections) CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
44 Annual Permits 269.00 $92.87 1% $92.00 -$177.00
45 Cash Deposits/Bonds 104.00 + CRB $165.24 0% $165.00 $61.00 46 Demolitions 173.00 $177.20 0% $177.00 $4.00
36
Building & Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 47 Hourly plan review fee New need to be able to input
quantity $158.25 0% $158.00 NA
48 Extend building permit application prior to expiration New $63.44 1% $63.00 NA 49 Renew expired building permit application
Within one year - 1/4
application fee; after
one year - 1/2
application fee
NA NA
Within one year - 1/4
application fee; after one
year - 1/2 application fee
$0.00
50 Certificate of Occupancy
51 b. Change of name/owner/use/new 134.00 $220.12 0% $220.00 $86.00 52 Field Investigations (pre-alteration) 182.00 + CRB $187.21 0% $187.00 $5.00 53 Fire Sprinklers
54 a. Non-Residential Plan Review 150.00 $171.76 0% $171.00 $21.00 55 a. Non-Residential Plan Review - over 10,000 SF 0.003 $171.76 0% $171.00 $171.00 56 b. Non-Residential Permit 223.00 $230.15 0% $230.00 $7.00 57 b. Non-Residential Permit - over 10,000 SF 0.012 $230.15 0% $230.00 $229.99 58 c. Residential Plan Review 104.00 $128.82 1% $128.00 $24.00 59 d. Residential Permit 138.00 $190.71 0% $190.00 $52.00 60 Light Standards/Flag Poles - Up to Three (includes electrical) 219.00 $237.14 0% $237.00 $18.00 61 Light Standards/Flag Poles - per pole over three poles (includes electrical) 16.00 $316.03 0% $316.00 $300.00 62 Manufactured buildings (includes plan review)
63 a. Setdowns 570.00 $510.23 0% $510.00 -$60.00
64 b. Install permanent foundation 241.00 $510.23 0% $510.00 $269.00 65 c. State HCD fee per section 11.00 $29.43 25% $22.00 $11.00 66 Microfilm Fee
67 a. Single-Family residential and minor projects 19.00 $29.43 1% $29.00 $10.00 68 b. Non-residential, multiple family residential and large projects 52.00 $58.86 1% $58.00 $6.00 69 Patio Covers/Enclosures
70 a. With standard plan 214.00 $216.64 0% $216.00 $2.00 71 b. Non-standard plan 260.00 $263.08 0% $263.00 $3.00 72 Re-inspection Fee 48.00 $54.16 0% $54.00 $6.00
73 Signs (includes plan review and inspections)
74 a. Wall signs and miscellaneous 204.00 $237.14 0% $237.00 $33.00 75 b. Monument signs (10 ft. or less) 257.00 $276.59 0% $276.00 $19.00 76 c. Pole signs (more than 10 ft. high) 311.00 $316.03 0% $316.00 $5.00 77 Special Inspector Registration - Single address 40.00 $68.88 1% $68.00 $28.00 78 Special Inspector Registration - Multiple addresses 100.00 $137.75 1% $137.00 $37.00 79 Storage Sheds (includes plan check and inspection) 172.00 $194.20 0% $194.00 $22.00 80 Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP)
81 a. Category I Construction (based upon valuation)
$0.50 for first $3,850
and
$0.13 per $1,000
above $3,850
NA NA
$0.50 for first $3,850 and
$0.13 per $1,000 above
$3,850
$0.00
82 b. Category II Construction (based upon valuation)
$0.50 for first $1,786
and $0.28 per $1,000
above $1,786
NA NA
$0.50 for first $1,786 and
$0.28 per $1,000 above
$1,786
$0.00
83 Building Standards Commission Revolving Fund
84 a. Permit Valuation $1-25,000 1.00 NA NA $1.00 $0.00 85 b. Permit Valuation $25,001-50,000 2.00 NA NA $2.00 $0.00 86 c. Permit Valuation $50,001-75,000 3.00 NA NA $3.00 $0.00 87 d. Permit Valuation $75,001-100,000 4.00 NA NA $4.00 $0.00 88 e. Every $25,000 or fraction thereof above $100,000 Add $1 NA NA Add $1 $0.00 37
Building & Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 89 Swimming Pools and Spas (includes plan review)
90 b. In-ground 450.00 $467.29 0% $467.00 $17.00
91 c. Above ground pools and/or spas 224.00 $223.63 0% $223.00 -$1.00 92 Temporary Electrical Services
93 a. Up to 5 additional poles 125.00 $137.75 1% $137.00 $12.00 94 b. Per pole over 5 poles 8.00 $7.89 0% $7.89 -$0.11
95 Valuations
Use most recent years'
edition of Building
Standards Magazine
NA NA
Use most recent years'
edition of Building
Standards Magazine
$0.00
96 Voucher Use by Builders 77.00 $112.05 0% $112.00 $35.00 97 Walls (first 200 lineal feet, successive 200 feet, includes plan review) 235.00 $216.64 0% $216.00 -$19.00 98 Walls (first 200 lineal feet, successive 200 feet, includes plan review) 95.00 $290.10 0% $290.00 $195.00 99 Wireless Towers 435.00 $441.36 0% $441.00 $6.00
100
Windmills and Photovoltaic Systems (ResidenPal)(Plan Review and InspecPon) 101 a. Residential 242.00 $276.59 0% $276.00 $34.00
102 b. Residential (with stock plan) 198.00 $244.13 0% $244.00 $46.00 103 c. Non-residential (per structure) 242.00 $480.80 0% $480.00 $238.00 104 CASp Consulting CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
105 Medical Cannabis Delivery Permit Part II 5,000.00 NA NA $5,000.00 $0.00 106 Non-Residential
107 Building Permits 1,221.00 $2,315.81 0% $2,315.00 $1,094.00 108 Building Permits - per SF up to 10,000 SF 0.35 plus base fee NA NA $0.35 $0.00 109 Building Permits - per SF over 10,000 SF 0.17 plus previous tier fee amount NA NA $0.17 $0.00 110 Electrical/Plumbing/Mechanical (each) 452.00 NA NA $452.00 $0.00 111 Electrical/Plumbing/Mechanical (each) - per SF 0.03 NA NA $0.03 $0.00 112 Plan Review
113 a. Building plan review 503.00 NA NA $503.00 $0.00
114 a. Building plan review - per SF 0.10 plus base fee NA NA $0.10 $0.00 115 b. E/P/M (each) 261.00 $158.25 0% $158.00 per hour -$103.00 116 b. E/P/M (each) - per SF 0.05 plus base fee NA NA $0.05 $0.00 117 Tenant improvements (no area added)
118 a. Building permit 211.00 NA NA $211.00 $0.00
119 a. Building permit - per SF 0.06 plus base fee NA NA $0.06 $0.00 120 b. Plan review 111.00 $158.25 0% $158.00 per hour $47.00 121 b. Plan review - per SF 0.04 plus base fee NA NA $0.04 $0.00 122 CASp Review - Plan Review
123 a. New buildings up to 10,000 square feet 144.00 $171.76 0% $171.00 $27.00 124 b. New buildings 10,001 to 25,000 square feet 240.00 $214.70 0% $214.00 -$26.00 125 c. New buildings over 25,000 square feet 384.00 + CRB $300.58 0% $300.00 + CRB -$84.00 126 d. Tenant Improvements Same as new buildings NA NA Same as new buildings $0.00 127 CASp Review - Inspections Same as plan review NA NA Same as plan review $0.00 128 Residential (includes application or permit)
129 Plan Review
130 a. Minimum plan review fee (includes 30 min. plan review) 104.00 $115.31 0% $115.00 $11.00 131 b. Garage or additions (less than 1,000 sq. ft.) 127.00 $244.13 0% $244.00 $117.00 132 c. New residences/additions/garages/accessory uses 285.00 + $0.21 PSF over 1,000 SF $445.32 0% $445.00 $160.00 133 d. Residences with multiple roof plans 91.00 add each roof style $201.55 0% $201.00 add each roof style $110.00
134 e. Residences with multiple roof plans New add each roof style $42.94 2% $42.00 add each roof style NA
38
Building & Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 135 Inspection
136 a. Single InspecPons (includes meter reset, re-pit, andsimilar) 106.00 $108.32 0% $108.00 $2.00 137 b. Two inspections (includes re-roofs, lattice patios, minor alterations, new meter installation, and similar) 138.00 $187.21 0% $187.00 $49.00 138 c. Three inspections (includes patio covers and similar) 170.00 $266.11 0% $266.00 $96.00 139 d. Room additions without plumbing 409.00 $466.83 0% $466.00 $57.00 140 d. Room additions without plumbing - per SF 0.17 plus base fee NA NA $0.17 $0.00 141 i. Wood floor, second story modifier (add) 95.00 NA NA $95.00 $0.00 142 e. New residences/additions/accessory
uses/garages/garage conversions with plumbing 824.00 $890.72 0% $890.00 $66.00 143 e. New residences/additions/accessory
uses/garages/garage conversions with plumbing - per SF over 1,000 SF 0.35 plus base fee NA NA $0.35 $0.00 144 f. Garage, Garage conversion no plumbing 217.00 $575.15 0% $575.00 $358.00 145 Construction Waste Management Plan Program (Construction and Demolition) 146 Single Family Residential (including room additions) 55.00 $88.29 0% $88.00 $33.00 147 Tenant Improvements (increase in sq. footage only) 55.00 $88.29 0% $88.00 $33.00 148 Non-Residential 165.00 $88.29 0% $88.00 -$77.00
149 Multi-Family Residential 165.00 $176.58 0% $176.00 $11.00 150 Projects that receive entitlement (Conditions of Approval) from City
No fee, but must
comply with 50%
diversion to receive
C of O
NA NA
No fee, but must comply
with 50% diversion to
receive
C of O
$0.00
151 Penalty for not taking construction waste to Advance Disposal New NA NA $500.00 NA 152 Protected Plant/Tree Security (Per plant or tree) 310.00 per plant or tree + 110% NA NA $310.00
per plant or tree
+ 110% $0.00
153 Penalty for removing HVAC without contractors license New NA NA $500.00 NA 39
Business License
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Business License
2 Business License Fee (annual) 50.00 $63.07 21% $50.00 $0.00 3 Renewal License (annual) 50.00 $63.07 21% $50.00 $0.00 4 Late Fee (within 30 days) 50.00 NA NA $50.00 $0.00
5 Late Fee (after 30 days) 75.00 NA NA $75.00 $0.00
6 Senate Bill 1186 Accessibility Fee 4.00 per license NA NA $4.00 $0.00 7 Administration Fee
8 New License 83.00 $126.14 0% $126.00 $43.00
9 Renewal License 63.00 $63.07 0% $63.00 $0.00
10 Changes to Business License (address, name, etc.) 25.00 $29.43 1% $29.00 $4.00 11 Department of Justice Review/Process Current SB County cost NA NA Current SB
County cost $0.00
12 Investigation Fee - Annual
13 Junk dealer or Pawnbroker 100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.00 14 Massage Facility Office 200.00 $271.40 26% $200.00 $0.00 15 Adult Business 200.00 $271.40 26% $200.00 $0.00
16 Home Occupations (includes Admin. Fee) - New 129.00 NA NA $129.00 $0.00 17 Home Occupations (includes Admin. Fee) - Renewal 113.00 NA NA $113.00 $0.00 18 Industrial General Permit (SB205) 100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.00 19 Medical Cannabis Delivery
20 Medical Cannabis Delivery Business Application Fee 4,500.00 NA NA $4,500.00 $0.00 21 Medical Cannabis Delivery Business Application Extension Fee 2,000.00 NA NA $2,000.00 $0.00
22 Medical Cannabis Delivery Business Investigation Fee 4,500.00 $6,981.22 36% $4,500.00 $0.00 23 Cannabis Indoor Cultivation Registration 100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.00 24 Deemed Approved and Tobacco Retailers
25 Deemed Approved Alcohol License and Annual Inspection for all ABC license types, except for types 41 and 47 325.00 NA NA $325.00 $0.00 26 Deemed Approved Alcohol License and Annual Inspection for ABC License types 41 and 47 (e.g., restaurant
establishments)
175.00 NA NA $175.00 $0.00
27 Deemed Approved Alcohol License Re-Inspection 60.00 $143.74 58% $60.00 $0.00 28 Tobacco Retailer License and Annual Inspection 210.00 NA NA $210.00 $0.00 29 Tobacco Retailer License Re-Inspection 60.00 $143.74 58% $60.00 $0.00 30 Combination License for Alcohol and Tobacco Retailers 485.00 NA NA $485.00 $0.00 31 Combination License for Alcohol and Tobacco Retailers Re-Inspection 75.00 $143.74 48% $75.00 $0.00
32 Rental Housing Business License
33 Single Family Residential 75.00 + Current Business License Fee $203.45 63% $75.00 $0.00 34 Multi-Family (Including Duplexes) 50.00 unit + Current Business License Fee $203.45 75% $50.00 $0.00 40
Business License
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 35 Self-Certification Fee for Single Family Residences 40.00 + Current Business License Renewal Fee $169.25 76% $40.00 $0.00
36 Self-Certification for Multi-Family Residences 55.00 for the first two units
$10 for each additional unit
thereafter + Current Business
License Renewal Fee
$130.21 58% $55.00 $0.00
37 Re-inspection rental inspection No charge $131.04 2% $128.00 NA 38 Residential Truck Parking Permit
39 Parking Permit - 1st Tractor and 1st Trailer 0.00 $168.45 100% $0.00 $0.00 40 Parking Permit - 2nd Tractor and 2nd Trailer 0.00 $168.45 100% $0.00 $0.00 41 Parking Permit - 3+ Tractors 100.00 per tractor
annually $168.45 0% $168.00 $68.00
42 Parking Permit - 3+ Trailers 400.00 per trailer
annually $168.45 0% $168.00 -$232.00
43 **The following exceptions to the business license fee are applied at the time of application:
1. If the applicant intends to park a company vehicle which they do not own, a no fee license is issued
2. If the applicant presents a DOT Regulated Number a no fee license is issued
3. All other applicants are charged home occupation license fees for the office portion of the truck business
44 Third Party Haulers
45 Third-Party Hauler Permit 100.00 Permit + Current Business License Fee $61.13 0% $61.00 -$39.00 46 Third-Party Hauler Permit - Annual Renewal 100.00 Permit + Current Business License Renewal Fee $61.13 0% $61.00 -$39.00
(In addition to standard business license fees for home occupation) 41
Hesperia Housing Authority (HHA) and Hesperia Community Development Commission (HCDC) # Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 HHA and HCDC Fees
2 Down-payment Assistance Program, Housing
Rehabilitation Program, Seller Mortgage Carryback
Program and other housing programs Subordination Fee
150.00 NA NA $150.00 $0.00
3 Owner Participation Agreement and Disposition and
Development Agreement Subordination Fee 300.00 NA NA $300.00 $0.00 4 Affordable Housing NOFA Underwriting 1.5% of loan amount NA NA 1.5% of loan amount $0.00 5 Annual Affordable Housing Monitoring Fee (Multi-Tenant exceeding 20 units) 2,500.00 NA NA $2,500.00 $0.00
6 Annual Affordable Housing Monitoring Fee (Multi-Tenant 20 units or less) 1,000.00 NA NA $1,000.00 $0.00
7 Affordability Covenant Monitoring Fee 75.00 unit NA NA $75.00 $0.00 8 Owner Participation Agreement and Disposition and
Development Agreement Underwriting Application
1% of assistance provided or $1,000,
whichever is greater, NTE $2,500. $1,000
will be due upon application.
NA NA
1% of assistance provided or $1,000,
whichever is greater, NTE $2,500. $1,000
will be due upon application.
$0.00
9 OPA/DDA/Incentive Compliance Monitoring (Annual) 1% of outstanding loan balance not to exceed $1,000 NA NA 1% of outstanding loan balance not to exceed $1,000 $0.00
10 Late Payment Fee 5% of monthly payment upon
expiration of grace period NA NA 5% of monthly payment upon expiration of grace period $0.00
11 Loan Statement Fee/Payoff Statements/Demand Fee 30.00 NA NA $30.00 $0.00 12 Loan Reconveyance Fee 45.00 NA NA $45.00 $0.00
13 Processing Fee for Appraisals (residential) 400.00 NA NA Actual Cost NA 14 Processing Fee for Appraisals (commercial) 700.00 NA NA Actual Cost NA 15 Administrative Processing Fee for new
telecommunications licenses or leases
Cost negotiated on
case by case per request NA NA Cost negotiated on
case by case per request $0.00
16 Administrative Processing Fee for telecommunication
license or lease equipment modification reviews 1,500.00 per request NA NA $1,500.00 $0.00 17 Administrative processing Fee for new revenue generating lease and licenses 1,500.00 NA NA $1,500.00 $0.00
42
Planning
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Accessory Dwelling Units 140.00 $180.59 0% $180.00 $40.00 2 Adult Entertainment Business Permit 293.00 $217.26 0% $217.00 -$76.00 3 Alteration of Non-Conforming Use 199.00 $3,052.64 0% $3,052.00 $2,853.00 4 Annexation 1,056.00 + CRB $3,052.64 0% $3,052.00 $1,996.00 5 Certificate of Correction/Certificate of Compliance 140.00 $180.59 0% $180.00 $40.00 6 Conditional Use Permit 3,009.00 $3,111.50 0% $3,111.00 $102.00 7 Conditional Use Permit for uses including alcoholic
beverages (DRC hearing Only, type 21 on-site beer and
wine)
971.00 $986.78 0% $986.00 $15.00
8 Conditional Use Permit for uses including alcoholic
beverages (Offsale P.C., C.C. hearing) 971.00 $3,111.50 0% $3,111.00 $2,140.00 9 Development Agreement (includes density bonus, etc.) 906.00 $1,541.04 0% $1,541.00 $635.00 10 Document Review (Bio Study, Cultural, Traffic, Noise, etc.) 140.00 each $180.59 0% $180.00 $40.00
11 Initial Study (with negative declaration) 971.00 $995.25 0% $995.00 $24.00 12 Extension of Time Request 257.00 $281.36 0% $281.00 $24.00 13 General Plan Amendments/Zone Change/Specific Plan
Amendments 695.00 $2,578.20 0% $2,578.00 $1,883.00
14 Preliminary application pursunt to SB330 New $79.82 1% $79.00 NA 15 Landscape Plans
16 a. Commercial, Industrial, Multi-Family (Includes LMD) 388.00 $634.07 0% $634.00 $246.00 17 b. Subdivisions, up to 5 plans 257.00 $230.98 0% $230.00 -$27.00 18 c. Subdivision, Landscape Maintenance District (includes basins) 388.00 $432.53 0% $432.00 $44.00
19 d. Parks (HRPD or HOA) 131.00 $130.20 0% $130.00 -$1.00 20 e. Specific Plans/Planned Developments CRB or Deposit NA NA Initial Deposit $10K + CRB $0.00
21 Lot Line Adjustment/Lot Merger/Access
Easements/Suspension
Agreements
161.00 $180.59 0% $180.00 $19.00
22 Medicinal Cannabis Delivery Business Permit 2,128.00 $2,519.34 0% $2,519.00 $391.00 23 Minor Exception 91.00 $216.26 0% $216.00 $125.00
24 Revised Site Plan Reviews (SPRRs) and Revised
Conditional Use Permits (CUPRs) - Minor Revisions 257.00 $764.28 0% $764.00 $507.00 25 Revised Site Plan Reviews (SPRRs) and Revised
Conditional Use Permits (CUPRs) - Major Revisions 2,128.00 $2,175.11 0% $2,175.00 $47.00 43
Planning
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 26 a. Site Sign Plans 180.00 $331.75 0% $331.00 $151.00 27 Site Plan Review 2,128.00 $2,204.54 0% $2,204.00 $76.00 28 Public Facility Review 2,128.00 $2,204.54 0% $2,204.00 $76.00 29 Special Event/Temporary Use Permit/Temporary
Occupancy Permit 140.00 $151.16 0% $151.00 $11.00
30 Special Event/Temporary Use Permit/Temporary
Occupancy Permit (Major) 140.00 $302.32 0% $302.00 $162.00 31 Specific Plan/EIR/Planned Development 2,500.00 $2,548.77 0% $2,548.00 $48.00 32 Tentative Parcel Map
33 a. Residential 466.00 $478.68 0% $478.00 $12.00
34 a. Residential - plus per lot 2.00 plus base fee NA NA $2.00 $0.00 35 b. Non-Residential 648.00 $655.03 0% $655.00 $7.00
36 b. Non-Residential - plus per lot 2.00 plus base fee NA NA $2.00 $0.00 37 Tentative Tract Map 1,975.00 $2,015.47 0% $2,015.00 $40.00 38 Tentative Tract Map - plus per lot, addressing fee 2.00 NA NA $2.00 $0.00 39 Variance 971.00 $1,541.04 0% $1,541.00 $570.00
40 Other Services
41 a. ABC and Public Convenience or Necessity Letters 70.00 $100.77 1% $100.00 $30.00 42 b. Site Review (without application) 140.00 $130.20 0% $130.00 -$10.00 43 c. Zoning Letter 140.00 $165.88 1% $165.00 $25.00
44 d. Non-Specified Services 45.00 min NA NA $45.00 $0.00 45 e. Additional plan review or inspection time (After 3 checks/
incomplete letters/inspections)
CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
46 f. Mobile Food Service 140.00 $151.16 0% $151.00 $11.00 47 f. Mobile Food Service - Renewal New $75.58 1% $75.00 NA 48 f. Sidewalk Vending 140.00 $130.20 0% $130.00 -$10.00 49 g. Plan review
50 i. Grading
51 1. Tract maps (5-100 lots) 309.00 $503.87 0% $503.00 $194.00 52 2. Tract maps (101- 250 lots) 412.00 $554.26 0% $554.00 $142.00 53 3. Tract maps (251 + lots) 618.00 $604.64 0% $604.00 -$14.00 54 4. Non-residential and MFR (0-10 acres) 412.00 $503.87 0% $503.00 $91.00 55 5. Non-residential and MFR (10+ acres) 618.00 $604.64 0% $604.00 -$14.00 56 ii.Residences in tracts (per 5 units in model complex) (up to 5 floor plans) 154.00 $302.32 0% $302.00 $148.00 57 iii. Multi-family residences (each building elevation) 360.00 $403.09 0% $403.00 $43.00 44
Planning
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 58 iv. Non-residential (each building)
59 1. 0-10,000 sq. ft. 257.00 $503.87 0% $503.00 $246.00 60 2. 10,001 - 100,000 sq. ft. 309.00 $554.26 0% $554.00 $245.00 61 3. $100,001 sq. ft. + 360.00 $604.64 0% $604.00 $244.00 62 4. Tenant Improvement Plan Review 140.00 $100.77 1% $100.00 -$40.00 63 v. Final Map Review 255.00 $403.09 0% $403.00 $148.00 64 h. Inspections
65 i. Tract architectural review (per 5 units) 154.00 $100.77 1% $100.00 -$54.00 66 i. Tract architectural review (per 5 units) - plus per unit 30.80 plus base fee NA NA $30.80 $0.00 67 ii. Multi-family architectural review 360.00 $201.55 0% $201.00 -$159.00 68 iii. Non-residential
69 1. 0-10,000 sq. ft. 206.00 $503.87 0% $503.00 $297.00 70 2. 10,001 - 100,000 sq. ft. 309.00 $554.26 0% $554.00 $245.00 71 3. 100,001 + sq. ft. 360.00 $604.64 0% $604.00 $244.00 72 iv. Miscellaneous (tenant improvements, additions,
landscaping,
etc.)
140.00 $165.88 1% $165.00 $25.00
45
Engineering
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 1 Engineering Fees
2 Development Review Committee
3 a. All Applications Except Tentative Tracts 172.00 + CRB $357.47 0% $357.00 $185.00 4 b. Tentative Tracts 334.00 + CRB $930.84 0% $930.00 $596.00 5 Final Map Review
6 a. Final Parcel Map 550.00 $1,074.23 0% $1,074.00 $524.00 7 b. Final Tract Map 550.00 $1,363.82 0% $1,363.00 $813.00 8 b. Final Tract Map - per lot 20.00 $35.00 0% $35.00 $15.00 9 Pre-Construction Meeting 240.00 $448.53 0% $448.00 $208.00 10 Cash Deposits/Bonds (grading and paving) 104.00 + CRB $397.67 0% $397.00 $293.00 11 Additional plan review or inspection time (After 3 checks or inspections) CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
12 Plan Check
13 Mass Grading (Sites over 10 acres) 450.00 per sheet $4,905.64 0% $4,905.00 per sheet $4,455.00 14 Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family Grading 450.00 per sheet $1,240.51 0% $1,240.00 per sheet $790.00 15 Commercial/Multi-Family Onsite Utility Plan New per sheet $1,927.72 0% $1,927.00 per sheet NA 16 Industrial Onsite Utility Plan 1,732.00 per sheet $1,125.51 0% $1,125.00 per sheet -$607.00 17 Rough Grading (Residential Tracts) 450.00 per sheet $3,760.29 0% $3,760.00 per sheet $3,310.00 18 Precise Grading (Residential Tracts) 311.00 $1,183.24 0% $1,183.00 $872.00 19 Precise Grading (Residential Tracts) - per lot 20.00 NA NA $20.00 $0.00 20 Hydrology Review 550.00 + CRB after 2 checks $553.29 0% $553.00 $3.00 21 Professional Report Review (Geotechnical, Soils Report) 214.00 $219.15 0% $219.00 $5.00 22 Plan Review for Public Improvements
23 Streets, Drainage, Storm Drain Water, Sewer, Utility Plan (Includes fire hydrants, fire services, domestic water connections, sewer connections, misc. utility connections, and new line installation not requiring plan & profile but on same sheet(s)) New Line Installation (Plan and Profile View)
3% of
Engineers
Cost
Estimate
Variable 0%
3% of
Engineers
Cost
Estimate
$0.00
24 Fire Hydrant (Stand Alone - Not on Utility Plan) 129.00 NA NA $129.00 $0.00 25 Revisions to Plans (per sheet) 192.00 $552.83 0% $552.00 $360.00 26 Legal document Review (per document) (Includes Irrevocable Offers of Dedication, Easements, Lot Mergers and Lot Line Adjustments, Title Reports)
192.00 $725.10 0% $725.00 $533.00
27 Request and Processing of Vacations 450.00 $980.47 0% $980.00 $530.00 28 Permits & Inspections
29 Streets, Drainage, Storm Drain, Water, Sewer. Includes fire hydrants, domestic water connections, sewer connections, misc. utility connections, and new line installation, drive approaches, uPlity cuts and trenches
2% of
Engineers
Cost
Estimate
Variable 0%
2% of
Engineers
Cost
Estimate
$0.00
fees are estimated and then validated with actual
number of inspections and average daily dedicated
time. The city reserves to right to evaluate costs
and apply additional fees if the original assessment
did not adequately cover the cost of inspection.
fees are estimated and then validated with actual
number of inspections and average daily dedicated
time. The city reserves to right to evaluate costs
and apply additional fees if the original assessment
did not adequately cover the cost of inspection.
46
Engineering
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 30 Driveway Approach-Stand Alone (not assoc. to project) 31 a. Residential (Asphalt or Concrete, Each) 86.00 $441.38 0% $441.00 $355.00 32 b. Non-Residential 172.00 $639.24 0% $639.00 $467.00 33 Utility Cuts and Trenches-Stand Alone (not assoc. to project) 34 a. Up to 18 square feet in area 48.00 $162.95 1% $162.00 $114.00 35 d. Over 1,000 ft. in length (per 100 ft. additional) 15.00 $212.41 0% $212.00 $197.00 36 f. Over 1,000 ft. in length (per 100 ft. additional) 15.00 $261.88 0% $261.00 $246.00 37 Fire Service (per service - all sizes) 172.00 $696.76 0% $696.00 $524.00 38 Permits
39 Oversize Load and Heavy Load Vehicles
40 a. Per Trip 16.00 $144.59 89% $16.00 $0.00
41 b. Annual 90.00 $144.59 38% $90.00 $0.00
42 Tree Removal 26.00 NA NA $26.00 $0.00
43 Oversized Parking (per night) 75.00 NA NA $75.00 $0.00 44 Other Services Not Identified
45 Automatic Water Meter Reader 109.00 in addition to standard meter fees NA NA $109.00 $0.00 46 Traffic Scoping Analysis Review 500.00 NA NA $500.00 $0.00 47 Traffic Impact Study Review 2,500.00 NA NA $2,500.00 $0.00 48 Research (per quarter hour) 16.00 NA NA $16.00 $0.00 49 National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Program/Stormwater 50 Plan Check
51 WQMP Review
52 a. Site Design Only WQMP
53 i. Single Family Residential Infill 225.00 + CRB after 3 NA NA $225.00 $0.00 54 ii. Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) 165.00 + CRB after 3 NA NA $165.00 $0.00 55 iii. Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family 300.00 + CRB after 3 NA NA $300.00 $0.00 56 b. Preliminary/Final Regulated WQMP
57 i. Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family 1,500.00 NA NA $1,500.00 $0.00 58 ii. Tracts 1,500.00 NA NA $1,500.00 $0.00
59 iii. Tracts with more than 50 lots 10.00 per lot plus base fee NA NA $10.00 per lot $0.00 60 c.WQMP Consistency Review with Landscape/Civil Plans 61 i. Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family 140.00 + CRB after 3 NA NA $140.00 $0.00 62 ii. Tracts 210.00 + CRB after 3 NA NA $210.00 $0.00 63 Erosion Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) 64 a. ESCP Sites less than 1 acre
65 i. Single Family Residential 125.00 + CRB after 3 NA NA $125.00 $0.00 66 ii. Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family 190.00 + CRB after 3 NA NA $190.00 $0.00 67 b.SWPPP Sites over 1 acre
68 i. Single Family Residential 1,000.00 NA NA $1,000.00 $0.00 69 ii. Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family 1,000.00 NA NA $1,000.00 $0.00 70 iii.Tracts 1,000.00 NA NA $1,000.00 $0.00
71 Inspections
72 Erosion Sediment Control (ESCP) –Sites less than 1 acre 73 a. Single Family Residential Site Inspection 450.00 NA NA $450.00 $0.00 74 b. Commercial/Industrial Multi-Family Site Inspection 640.00 NA NA $640.00 $0.00 47
Engineering
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 75 Storm Water PolluPon PrevenPon Plan (SWPPP) - Sites over 1 acre 76 a. Single Family Residential Site Inspection 850.00 + CRB after 8 NA NA $850.00 $0.00 77 b. Commercial/Industrial Multi-Family Site Inspection 1,550.00 + CRB after 12 NA NA $1,550.00 $0.00 78 c. Tracts Site Inspection 2,350.00 NA NA $2,350.00 $0.00 79 c. Tracts Site Inspection - per lot 10.00 Plus base fee and CRB after 12 NA NA $10.00 $0.00 80 Post Construction BMP Installation Inspections
81 a. Single Family Residential Site Design Measure Implementation 110.00 NA NA $110.00 $0.00 82 b. Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family $0.00
83 i. Site Design Measure Implementation 165.00 NA NA $165.00 $0.00 84 ii. Above/Underground Detention/Retention 170.00 NA NA $170.00 $0.00 85 c. Tracts $0.00
86 i. Site Design Measure Implementation 65.00 lot NA NA $65.00 lot $0.00 87 ii. Detention/Retention System 179.00 NA NA $179.00 $0.00 88 NPDES Program
89 Post Construction BMP Maintenance Program
90 a. Annual BMP Certification Permit 100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.00 91 b. BMP Inspection 110.00 NA NA $110.00 $0.00
92 c. Overdue Certification (greater than 30 days) 200.00 NA NA $200.00 $0.00 93 Business Operations NPDES Compliance Program
94 a. Business Site Inspection 110.00 NA NA $110.00 $0.00 48
Police - Public Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Administrative Fees
2 Citation Sign-off 10.00 $20.00 0% $20.00 $10.00
3 Citation Filing Fee 19.00 $38.47 1% $38.00 $19.00
4 Excessive False Alarms (Police MulPple Disturbance Response Program) 5 1st No charge/Warning and
3 year probation NA NA No charge/Warning and
3 year probation $0.00
6 2nd 500.00 NA NA $500.00 $0.00
7 3rd 1,000.00 NA NA $1,000.00 $0.00
8 4th 1,000.00 NA NA $1,000.00 $0.00
9 5th 2,500.00 NA NA $2,500.00 $0.00
10 Stored Vehicle Release Fee (tow fee) 150.00 $150.00 0% $150.00 $0.00 11 Repossession Fee 15.00 regulated NA NA $15.00 $0.00
12 VIN Verification 10.00 $20.00 0% $20.00 $10.00
13 Clearance Letter/Records Check 15.00 $37.00 0% $37.00 $22.00 14 Emergency Response
15 Incidents involving person under the influence CRB with $1,000 max. NA NA CRB with $1,000 max. $0.00 16 DUI Tow Release Fee 400.00 NA NA $400.00 $0.00
17 Incident Reports
18 Incident Reports 10.00 $10.00 0% $10.00 $0.00
19 LiveScan Fee 10.00 $8 City Fee/$2 County
Fee $32.00 0% $32.00 $22.00
20 Fingerprinting Cards 10.00 NA NA $10.00 $0.00
49
Water District Fees
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Water Rates See HWD Reso No. 2008-
10 NA NA See HWD Reso No. 2008-10 $0.00
2 New Account Setup 50.00 NA NA $50.00 $0.00
3 Turn on/off water meter - same day regular
hours 38.00 $90.00 0% $90.00 $52.00
4 Turn on/off water meter - same day after hours 125.00 NA NA $125.00 $0.00 5 Clean and Show 75.00 $70.05 0% $70.00 -$5.00
6 Bill Suppression 19.00 NA NA $19.00 $0.00
7 Delinquency Fee-Minimum 61 days Delinquent 36.00 $644.34 93% $45.00 $9.00 8 Water Service Disconnect
Reconnection/Delinquency Fee - After Hrs. 109.00 NA NA $109.00 $0.00 9 Backflow Testing
10 Initial Test 119.00 $81.58 1% $81.00 -$38.00
11 Multiple Test 243.00
Add additional 30 minutes
per device requiring
inspection and testing
$40.79 2% $40.00 -$203.00
12 Annual Residential 65.00 NA NA $65.00 $0.00
13 Fire Flow Test
14 Commercial 111.00 $467.29 0% $467.00 $356.00
15 Residential 44.00 $73.99 1% $73.00 $29.00
16 Bad Check/Fraudulent Credit Card
17 1st Offense 25.00 NA NA $25.00 $0.00
18 2nd Offense 35.00 NA NA $35.00 $0.00
19 Accounts turned over to Collections Balance + Current Admin.
Fee NA NA Balance + Current Admin.
Fee $0.00
20 Broken Lock/Tampering with District Property
Lock $30.00, Illegal
Consumption 1st time
$100.00 plus consumption
at 2 times actual usage @
highest tier; 2nd time
$150.00 plus consumption
at 2 times actual usage @
highest tier.
$93.96 NA
Lock $30.00, Illegal
Consumption 1st time
$100.00 plus consumption at
2 times actual usage @
highest tier; 2nd time
$150.00 plus consumption at
2 times actual usage @
highest tier.
$0.00
21 Change in termination/start date - 2nd and
Subsequent Requests 10.00 1st request No Charge $54.92 45% $30.00 $20.00 22 Non-Compliance Customer Service Call-Out 50.00 $89.18 44% $50.00 $0.00 23 Non-Compliance Customer Service Call-Out (After
hrs.) 50.00 $90.52 45% $50.00 $0.00
50
Water District Fees
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 24 Meter Pull/Reset - 3/4" Meter Pull/Reset 45.00 each $107.23 0% $107.00 $62.00 25 Meter Pull/Reset - 1” Meter Pull/Reset 50.00 each $107.23 0% $107.00 $57.00 26 Meter Testing CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
27 Late Fee- 21st day 1% of
unpaid balance NA NA 1% of
unpaid balance $0.00
28 Construction Meter Monthly Rental Fee 49.00 Month NA NA $49.00 $0.00 29 Construction Meter Deposit and Set Up Charge -
Admin Fee 33.00 non-refundable $75.91 1% $75.00 $42.00
30 Construction Meter Deposit and Set Up Charge -
Deposit 950.00 NA NA $950.00 $0.00
31 Construction Meter Deposit and Set Up Charge -
Wrench 50.00 $75.91 1% $75.00 $25.00
32 Obstruction Fine 50.00
Fee and CRB to
remove
obstruction
NA NA $50.00 $0.00
33 Payment Extension 2.00 per request maximum 3 per year $85.19 98% $2.00 $0.00 34 Re-calculate Bill 25.00 each occurrence $39.80 2% $39.00 $14.00 35 Residential Water Service Installations (1" or
smaller) 1,240.00
Plus cost of material, see
Water Service Line
Material worksheet
NA NA $1,240.00 $0.00
36 M35HRE Badger Meter for Fire Service
Compliance 126.00 Plus cost of 3/4" meter,
$146.97 NA NA $126.00 $0.00
37 Admin Lien Fee 25.00 $790.62 96% $30.00 $5.00
38 County Tax Roll Fee New NA NA
Current Fees charged by San
Bernardino County to
add/amend/remove parcel
to/from the tax roll
NA
* Not all 'Residential Water Service Installations' require asphalt repair. Asphalt repair is unknown until staff performs the installation and determines location of water main and conflicting underground utilities. A typical water service line installation that requires asphalt repair requires (26) square feet of repair. The cost to repair an average (26) square foot section can be found on the Water Service Line Material worksheet.
51
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
JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 2023-67
RESOLUTION NO. HWD-2023-24
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA AND
THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT, AMENDING THE CITY-
WIDE FEE SCHEDULE RELATED TO THE USER FEE STUDY
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Article XIII B (Proposition 4) of the California Constitution, it is the intent of the City Council of the City of Hesperia and the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District to recover costs reasonably borne from fees and charges for services rendered; and
WHEREAS, Pursuant to Article XIII C and Article XIII D (Proposition 218) of the California Constitution the fees, charges and regulatory fees are levied as an incident of the voluntary act of an individual or business and not the result of property ownership; and
WHEREAS, City staff has converted actual cost fees based on historical information to establish a fixed fee format for development-related processes to better serve customers; and
WHEREAS, the fees, rates, and service charges do not exceed the cost of providing the services; and
WHEREAS, the City has, pursuant to California Government Code section 66016, provided notice of and conducted a public hearing and received written and oral presentations regarding the fees, rates, and service charges; and
WHEREAS, the approval of these fees, rates, and service charges directly reimburses the City for the cost of providing those services; and
WHEREAS, in addition to the recommended adoption of the F iscal Year 2023-24 User Fee Schedule, the City will recommend adjusting the User Fee Schedule on an annual basis, with an effective date of March 01, 2025 and occurring each year thereafter by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario area using the year-over-year percentage change from September to September of not less than 0% and no more than 5%, with such future change subject to annual Council action;
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA AND THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF THE HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT, AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. In all respects, the facts as set forth in this resolution are true and correct.
Section 2. That the Fiscal Year 2023-24 User Fee Schedule, attached as Exhibit A, is hereby adopted as prescribed below.
Section 3. That the adopted fees, rates, and service charges will be effective the 1 st day of March, 2024.
Section 4. That the adopted fees, rates, and service charges include the ability to annually adjust the User Fee Schedule by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the Riverside- San Bernardino-Ontario area using the year -over-year percentage change from September to September of not less than 0% and no more than 5%. Such
Joint Resolution No. 2023-67 and Resolution No. HWD 2023-24, amending the City-wide fee schedule related to the User Fee Study
increases would be subject to approval on an annual basis by the City Council.
The first CPI increase would occur, if approved, March 01, 2025.
Section 5. That the current adopted fees, rates, and service charges shall supersede any and all previously adopted fees, rates, and service charges.
Section 6. Interpretation of this resolution may be made by the City Manager and/or designee.
When there are conflicts between fees, the lower fee shall be applied.
Section 7. If any section, sub -section, sentence, clause, or word in the resolution is held to be invalid by decision of any court of competent jurisdiction or action of State legislation, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.
Section 8. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 19th day of December 2023.
______________________________
Larry Bird, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Melinda Sayre, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk
SUBJECT: City Council Appointments to Outside Agencies
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council follow past practice and appoint liaisons (both primary and alternate) to various outside agencies for a one-year period to commence in January 2024.
BACKGROUND
Historically, the Council has reviewed the liaison assignments (b oth primary and alternate) to various outside agencies and City advisory committees on an annual basis. The City Council currently has representatives on the following:
League of California Cities (Annual Conference October 16-18 Long Beach Convention Center)
The League of California Cities is an association of California city officials who work together to enhance their knowledge and skills, exchange information, and combine resources so that they may influence state policy decisions that affect cities.
2023 Primary/Alternate Representatives: Bennington/Lee
League of California Cities – Desert Mountain Division (Bi-monthly, 3rd Friday, no compensation)
The Committee participates in policy development and carrie s out grassroots activities in support of the League’s legislative, regulatory, and ballot measure goals.
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District (MDAQMD) (Monthly, 4th Monday, 10 a.m. , $100/meeting compensation, requires Form 700 filing)
MDAQMD is a public agency that provides citizens with important information regarding the Mojave Desert’s past and current quality of air. Their m ission is to enforce the Clean Air Act, and attain and maintain a healthful environment while supporting strong and sust ainable economic growth.
2023 Primary/Alternate Representatives: Bennington/Gregg
San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) (Formerly SANBAG) (Monthly, 1st Wednesday, 10:00 a.m., $200/meeting compensation, requires Form 700 filing) SBCTA is the council of governments and transportation planni ng agency for San Bernardino County responsible for cooperative regional planning and furthering an efficient multi -modal transportation system countywide.
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council
City Council Appointments to Outside Agencies
December 19, 2023
As the County Transportation Commission, SBCTA supports freeway construction projects, regional an d local road improvements, train and bus transportation, railroad crossings, call boxes, ridesharing, congestion management efforts and long -term planning studies. SBCTA administers Measure I, the half-cent transportation sales tax approved by county voter s in 1989 and reauthorized in 2007.
2023 Primary/Alternate Representatives: Swanson/Bennington San Bernardino County Transportation Authority (SBCTA) (Formerly SANBAG) Mountain Desert Measure I Committee (Monthly, 3 rd Friday, 9 :30 a.m., $100/meeting compe nsation, requires Form 700 filing)
The Committee reviews the Measure I Mountain / Desert Region Expenditure Plan and makes policy recommendations to the SBCTA Board.
2023 Primary/Alternate Representatives: Swanson/Bennington
San Bernardino County Solid Waste Task Force (Semi-Annual April & October , no compensation)
The Task Force carries out responsibilities mandated by the California Integrated Waste Management Act (1989) and makes recommendations to the County o n other solid waste related matters. For the last year, the City Manager has designated the alternate representative as a City staff member.
2023 Primary/Alternate Representatives: Staff Appointee/Gregg
Victor Valley Economic Development Authority (VVE DA) (3rd Wed. in Jan., March, Sept., 4:30 p.m., $50/meeting compensation by request, requires Form 700 filing) VVEDA is a joint powers authority, and was established for the purpose of providing economic development in and around the former George Air Forc e Base. Five jurisdictions oversee the economic development of the area, which include: the cities of Victorville, Hesperia and Adelanto, the Town of Apple Valley and the County of San Bernardino. VVEDA totals approximately 60,000 acres and is administere d by the City of Victorville. The uninco rporated portion of VVEDA i s approximately 16,000 acres. VVEDA is currently in its eighth amendment, in which approximately 30,236 acres are being added.
2023 Primary/Alternate Representatives: Lee/Swanson
Victor Valley Transit Authority (VVTA) (Monthly, 3 rd Monday, 9:30 a.m. , $125/meeting compensation, requires Form 700 filing)
VVTA operates local fixed -route, county commuter, and ADA complementary paratransit bus services in the Victor Valley area. It has a maintenance facility located in Hesperia. VVT A was established through a Joint Powers Authority in 1991. The JPA includes the five cities of Adelanto, Apple Valley, Barstow, Hesperia and Victorville and the certain unincorporated portions of the County of San Bernardino.
2023 Primary/Alternate Representatives: Bird/Gregg
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council
City Council Appointments to Outside Agencies
December 19, 2023
Victor Valley Wastewater Reclamation Authority (VVWRA) (Monthly, 3 rd Thursday, 7:30 a.m., $100/meeting compensation, requires Form 700 filing) VVWRA was originally formed by the Mojav e Water Agency to help meet the requirements of the federal Clean Water Act and provide wastewater treatment for the growing area. The original treatment plant, with supporting pipelines and infrastructure, began operating in 1981, providing tertiary level treatment for up to 4.5 million gallons per day (MGD). The VVWRA is now a joint powers authority and public agency of the state of California and now treats approximately 14 MGD of wastewater.
2023 Primary/Alternate Representatives: Bird/Gregg
Greater High Desert Chamber of Commerce (Weekly Coffee, Fridays, 7:15 a.m..; Monthly, Luncheon, 3rd Monday, noon, no compensation)
The Chamber is an independent organization that represents the interests of business to legislators, provides a variety of service s to businesses, and promotes positive community development. The objective is to promote the common economic interest of the businesses serving the Hesperia Community.
2023 Primary/Alternate non-voting liaison: Bennington/Bird
Tri-Agency Committee (Monthly, 2nd Wednesday, 3:30 p.m., no compensation) The Tri-Agency Committee is comprised of representatives from the City of Hesperia, Hesperia Recreation and Park District and the Hesperia Unified School District and has been meeting since 1995 to discuss i ssues relating to the three agencies and the commu nity. No primary or alternate roles.
2023 Co-Representatives (Primary/Alternate): Swanson/Lee
City Council Advisory Committee (2nd Wednesday, 6:00 p.m., Jan, Apr, Jul, Oct, no compensation)
The City Council Advisory Committee is an advisory resource an d as directed by the City Council and may review the Capital Improvement Project Plan (CIP) and provides recommendations to the Council regarding the use of Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds and other applicable financing programs. No alternate role.
2023 Liaison (Primary/Alternate): Lee/Bennington
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Individual City Council appointments are designed to help facilitate a better flow of information between the City Council, various outside agencies and staff. The recommended action follows past practice and allows an opportunity for reassignments as needed.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council
City Council Appointments to Outside Agencies
December 19, 2023
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS
1. 2023 Appointment Summary
City of Hesperia
2023 City Council Outside Agency & Committee Appointments
Agency/Committee Name Representatives Regular Meeting Schedule Location/ Contact League of California Cities(LOCC)
Inland Empire & Desert Mountain
Division
Primary – Bennington
Alternate – Lee
3rd Friday bi-monthly at 10 a.m.
Feb – Palmdale
April – Bishop
June – Mammoth Lakes
August – Big Bear Lake
Oct – Long Beach
November - TBD
League of California Cities, 1400 K Street, Suite 400,
Sacramento 95814, (916)658-8200 / (916)658-8240 (fax)
Laura Morales – (909)275-4110; [email protected]
Staff Appt - TBD
Mojave Desert Air Quality
Management District (MDAQMD)
Primary – Bennington
Alternate – Gregg
Monthly, 4th Monday, 10:00
a.m.
14306 Park Ave., Victorville
Deanna Hernandez, Senior Executive Analyst, (760)245-
1661 x6244 [email protected]
San Bernardino County
Transportation Authority
(SBCTA)
Primary – Swanson
Alternate – Bennington
Monthly, 1st Wednesday, 10:00
a.m.
1170 W Third St, 2nd Floor Lobby Board Room
San Bernardino 92410
Ashley Izard, Deputy Clerk of the Board
(909)884-8276, [email protected]
Mountain/Desert Policy
Committee
Monthly, 3rd Friday, 9:30 a.m.
Mojave Desert Air Quality Management District
14306 Park Avenue, Victorville, 92392
San Bernardino County Solid
Waste Task Force
Primary – Gregg
Alternate - Staff
*Rachel will designate
April & October Sam J Racadio Library Environmental Learning Center 7863 Central Ave. Highland CA 92346
Rhiannon Garza, Analyst, (909)386-8752
[email protected]
Victor Valley Economic
Development Authority (VVEDA)
Primary – Lee
Alternate – Swanson
3rd Wednesday in January,
March, September at 4:30 p.m.
Location: SCLA Theatre, 18374 Phantom Victorville, 92394 Mail to: 14343 Civic Dr., Victorville CA 92392
Jennifer Thompson, Secretary to the Board
(760)243-4773 [email protected]
Victor Valley Transit Authority
(VVTA)
Primary – Bird
Alternate – Gregg
Monthly, 3rd Monday, 9:30 a.m.
VVTA Conference Room A127 (Every 3rd meeting in
Barstow). 17150 Smoke Tree St., Hesperia CA 92345
Debi Lorrah, Clerk, (760)948-3262 x112;
[email protected]
Victor Valley Wastewater
Reclamation Authority (VVWRA)
Primary – Bird
Alternate – Gregg
Monthly, 3rd Thursday, 7:30 a.m.
20111 Shay Rd., Victorville CA 92394
Kristi Casteel, (760)246-2896 x112 [email protected]
Greater High Desert Chamber of
Commerce Liaison
Primary – Bennington
Alternate – Bird
Weekly Coffee, Friday 7:15 a.m.
Monthly Luncheon, 3rd Monday
12:00 p.m.
14321 Main St, CA Hesperia 92345
Christy Harris, Office Manager, (760)244-2135
[email protected]
Tri Agency Committee
Primary – Swanson/ Lee
Alternate – none
Monthly, 2nd Wednesday, 3:30
p.m.
Location rotates on an annual basis
Council Liaison to Advisory &
Internal Committees
City Council Advisory Committee Primary – Lee
Alternate – Bennington
Jan, April, July & Oct, 2nd
Wednesday, 6:00 p.m.
City Council Chambers – Yvonne Kliewer
Updated January 2023
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: December 19, 2023
TO: Mayor and Council Members
Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Discussion of Potential Measures for the 2024 General Election Ballot
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council provide direction to staff on potential measures to be placed on the ballot for the General Election occurring on November 05, 2024.
BACKGROUND
During the October 17, 2023 City Council meeting, Council Member Gregg requested a staff report for the discussion and consideration by the City Council for meausres to be placed in the ballot for the General Election.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
While the first deadline for measures to appear on the General Election will occur on Monday, July 22, 2024, the City Council will need to approve the following prior to the end of Fiscal Year 2023-24.
Resolution to submit a measure to the voters
Proposed ordinance
Creation of a ballot question
Resolution to authorize the City Attorney to draft an impartial analysis Resolution Authoring Rebuttals
Furthermore, the following table from the San Bernardino County – Registrar of Voters details the deadlines for the 2024 General Election upon approvals by the City Council.
Event
Resolution received 116 or more days
before election date
Resolution received between 115 and 88 days
before election date
Impartial Analysis
submission deadline By 5 p.m., 106 days before election By 5 p.m., 78 days before election Argument submission deadline By noon, 106 days before election By noon, 78 days before election Rebuttal submission deadline By 5 p.m., 102 days before election By 5 p.m. 74 days before election End of 10-day public examination
period for Arguments Noon, 96 days before election Noon, 68 days before election End of 10-day public examination
period for Rebuttals 5 p.m., 92 days before election 5 p.m. 64 days before election Assignment of measure letters 11 a.m., 85 days before election Deadline to withdraw measure 5 p.m., 83 days before election Planned Measure Deadlines
Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District Discussion of Potential Measures for the 2024 General Election Ballot December 19, 2023
FISCAL IMPACT
All cities within the County share the costs of the General Election. The costs will increase for each measure that the City places on the ballot, however, these increased costs are substantially less than conducting a special election. Currently, there are no fiscal impacts of ballot costs.
ALTERNATIVES
1. Provide direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
None