Hesperia City Council
August 6, 2024

HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

HOUSING AUTHORITY

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

WATER DISTRICT
Meeting Agenda
Tuesday, August 6, 2024
Special Meeting - 3:00 PM
Closed Session - 4:15 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
Amended Agenda
Green Sheet Item #3 information updated after posting the Agenda 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.

To leave a Public Comment by phone, call and leave a recorded message at (760) 947-1056 up to 5:30 pm on the day of the scheduled meeting. City Council meetings may be viewed live or after the event on the City’s website at www.cityofhesperia.us.

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
August 6, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda

SPECIAL 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.

CALL TO ORDER - 3:00 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
Council Member Allison Lee
D. Agenda Revisions and Announcements by City Clerk
E. Closed Session Reports by City Attorney

ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS
Presentation by Eydee Jimenez for Traffic Signal at Main St & Sultana St/Timberlane Ave - CO. No. 7159
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items and matters not listed on the agenda)

August 6, 2024City Council Meeting 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, July 16, 2024.

Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the City Council approve the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, July 16, 2024.

Staff Person: Assistant City Clerk Erin Baum
Draft CC Min 2024-7-16Attachments:

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 8-6-2024
Attachment 1 - Warrant Run
Attachments:

3. Parcel Map No. 20567
Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-34 approving Parcel Map No. 20567 to create three parcels on approximately 71.83 gross acres of land within the Commercial/Industrial Business Park (CIBP) of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan located on the northwest corner of Poplar Street and Highway 395, in conjunction with the adoption of an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Applicant: LA BELLE I, LLC; APNs: 3064-551-01, -02, -03, -04, -06, -07 &-08).

Staff Person: Administrative Analyst Dena Alcayaga

August 6, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
SR Parcel Map No. 20567 8-6-2024
Resolution 2024-34
Attachment 2 - Parcel Map 20567
Attachments:

4. Award Weed Abatement Contract - Rob’s Weed and Pest Control Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a three (3) year contract to the lowest responsive/responsible bidder, Rob’s Weed and Pest Control, for weed abatement services, in the amount of $107,470, with a 10% contingency of $10,747, for a contract authority in the not-to-exceed amount of $118,217.

Staff Person: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez SR Award Weed Abatement Contract 8-6-2024Attachments:

5. General Pump Company - New Contract
Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the City Council and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into a three (3) year agreement with General Pump Company in a not-to-exceed amount of $165,032 for well and booster services.

Staff Person: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez SR General Pump Company - New Contract 8-6-2024Attachments:

6. Contract with Badger Meter, Inc.

Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to approve a contract for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 with Badger Meter, Inc. in the not-to-exceed amount of $900,000. An anticipated $550,000 will be expended for the purchase of registers and cellular endpoints for automated meter reading infrastructure. An additional $350,000 is allocated for the purchase of water meters and related water meter parts.

Staff Person: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez SR Contract with Badger Meter, Inc. 8-6-2024Attachments:

7. Award Contract for theTraffic Signal- Main St & Sultana St/Timberlane Ave CO.

No. 7159
Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to 1) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-38 amending the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 Budget by appropriating $828,718 to Fund 204-29-700-7159-7500; 2) Award a construction contract for the Traffic Signal on Main Street and Sultana Street/Timberlane Avenue (C.O. 7159) project to the responsive/responsible bidder, DBX, Inc., in the amount of $1,665,171, plus a 10% contingency amount of $166,517 for a

August 6, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
not-to-exceed total of $1,831,688; 3) Approve the project design as represented by the plans and specifications; and 4) authorize the City Manager and/or designee to execute the contract and any other necessary documents related to the project.

Staff Person: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez SR Award Contract for theTraffic Signal- Main St & Sultana St 8-6-2024 Resolution 2024-38
Attachments:

8. Uniform Services Contract Amendment
Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the City Council and the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District approve an amendment of $30,000 to the contract with Mission Linen Supply for uniform services for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $97,146 and approve a one-year contract extension.

Staff Person: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman SR Uniform Services Contract Amendment 8-6-2024Attachments:

PUBLIC HEARING
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.

9. Electric Vehicle Charging Stations
Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the City Council introduce and place on first reading Ordinance No. 2024-07 adding Chapter 15.04.060 to the City’s Municipal Code, setting forth an expedited and streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations.

Staff Person: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman SR Electric Vehicle Charging Stations 8-6-2024
Ordinance 2024-07
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A
Attachment 3 - EV Checklist
Attachments:

10. Revised User Fee Study
Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the City Council and the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District consider amending the City-wide fee schedule related

August 6, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
to the User Fee Study, and the adoption of proposed Joint Resolution No. 2024-35 and Resolution HWD 2024-14.

Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR Revised User Fee Study 8-6-24
Attachment 1 - Revised User Fee Study Report
Joint Resolution 2024-35 and HWD 2024-14
Attachments:

NEW BUSINESS

11. Community Assistance Program Guidelines and Processes Recommended Action:

It is
recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-37, which will memorialize the Community Assistance Program guidelines and processes.

Staff Person: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman SR Community Assistance Program Guidelines and Processes 8-6-2024 Attachment 1 - CAP Guidelines
Resolution 2024-37
Attachments:

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.

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.

CLOSED SESSION - 4:15 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. One (1) Case
Conference with Real Property Negotiators – Property Negotiations Government Code Section – 54956.8

August 6, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda

1. Negotiating Parties: City of Hesperia and Gustavo Valdez and Fernando Valdez
Location: APN: 3064-461-03
Under Negotiation: Price and terms
Personnel Matters - Performance Evaluations Government
Code Section 54957

1. Annual Performance Evaluation - City Attorney

2. Annual Performance Evaluation - City Manager

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 Thursday, August 1, 2024 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, July 16, 2024 6:30 PM

REGULAR MEETING AGENDA

HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL

SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY

HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY

HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION

HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT
CLOSED SESSION - 5:00 PM
Roll Call

Present: 5 - Mayor Bird, Mayor Pro Tem Swanson, Council Member Gregg, Council Mem
ber Bennington and Council Member Lee
Conference with Legal Counsel - Potential Litigation: Government Code Section 54956.9(d)2

1. One (1) Case
Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation Government Code Section 54956.9(d)1

1. DAYCO Funding Corporation; and NV Hesperia Investors, LLC, v. City Hesperia, et al. (SBSC No.

CIVSB230702
0)

2. County of SB v. City of Hesperia, Case no: CIVSB2209965 Conference
with Real Property Negotiators – Property Negotiations Government Code Section – 54956.8

1. Negotiating Parties: City of Hesperia and DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC Location: APN: 303-936-101
Under Negotiation: Price and terms
Personnel Matters - Performance Evaluations Government Code Section 54957

1. Annual Performance Evaluation - City Attorney

2. Annual Performance Evaluation - City Manager
City Council Chambers
9700 Seventh Ave.

Hesperia CA, 92345

City of Hesperia
CALL TO ORDER - 6:30 PM
A. Invocation
B. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
C. Roll Call

Present: 5 - Mayor Bird, Mayor Pro Tem Swanson, Council Member Gregg, Council Member Bennington and Co
uncil Member Lee
D. A genda Revisions and Announcements by City Clerk
A green sheet a
ddition was proposed for an urgency item introduced after the Regular Meeting Agenda was posted. Item # 12,
Budget Obligation of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA), was proposed as new business.

A motion was made by Swanson, seconded by Gregg, that this item be added to the agenda as New Business item numb
er 12. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0
E. Closed Session Reports by City Attorney
Closed session was recessed at 6:30 pm, to be continued at the close of the regular meeting.

ANNOUNCEMENTS/PRESENTATIONS

1. Presentation to resident Brenda Canon, Pride Enhancement Program Honoree.

2. Presentatio
n by San Bernardino County Fire with Fireworks Enforcement update.

GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items and matters not listed on the agenda) The following people commented:

Bob Nelson (via voicemail)
Jeri Pike (via voicemail)
Robert Davie
Trudi Roser
Victoria Scaratt
Lois Papner

JOINT CONSENT CALENDAR
A motion was made by Swanson, seconded by Bennington, that the Joint Consent Calendar be approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

City of Hesperia

Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0

1. Consideration of the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, June 18, 2024.

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council approve the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesda
y, June 18, 2024.

Sponsors: Assistant City Clerk Erin Baum

2. Warrant Run Report (City - Successor Agency - Housing Authority - Community De velopment 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 Hes
peria Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.

Sponsors: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher

3. Treasurer’s Cash Report for the unaudited period ended May 31, 2024.

Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Council/Board accept the Treasurer’s Cash Report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hes
peria Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.

Sponsors: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher

4. Three-Year Maintenance and Licensing Agreement with Granicus Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a three-year agreement with Granicus Inc. f
or a not-to-exceed amount of $248,048 to provide maintenance and licensing for the Legislative Management Suite (Legistar), video streaming services, and Government Transparency Suite.

Sponsors: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher

5. Warehouse Commodity - Mueller Parts
Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into a on
e (1) year agreement with C Wells Pipeline in a not-to-exceed amount of $240,000, for the purchase of Mueller Water Products.

Sponsors: Director of Public Works Cassandra Sanchez

City of Hesperia

6. Construction Management Services Contract Amendment
Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council 1) approve an Amendment to the existing contract with AnGenious En
gineering Services, Inc. (AES) for the Ranchero Road Corridor Widening Project Phase III Construction Management Services, in the amount of $3,424,141 including a 10% contingency of $342,414.10, for a revised not-to-exceed contract amount of $10,469,733; 2) approve a one-year contract extension; and 3) authorize the City Manager or designee to execute the amendment to the Agreement and any other necessary documents related thereto.

Sponsors: Director of Public Works Cassandra Sanchez

7. Amend Cooperative Agreement with San Bernardino County for the Ranchero Road Corridor Widening Project
Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council 1) adopt Resolution No. 2024-30 approving Amendment No. 2 to Cooperative Agr
eement No. 11- 424 (Agreement) between the City and San Bernardino County (County) for the Ranchero Road Corridor Widening Project and 2) authorize the City Manager to execute the amendment to the Agreement and any other necessary documents related thereto.

Sponsors: Director of Public Works Cassandra Sanchez

8. Townsend Public Affairs Contract Amendment
Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to approve an amendment to the existing contract
with Townsend Public Affairs for an additional $84,000, for a revised not-to-exceed contract amount of $168,000 and approve a one-year contract extension for State and Federal Legislative Advocacy services.

Sponsors: Assistant to the City Manager Tammy Pelayes

9. Special Assessment of Unpaid Fees for Service and Abatement Costs Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council approve Joint Resolution No. 2024-32 and Resolution No. HWD 2024-12, conf
irming parcels of land upon which unpaid fees for services, and abatement costs remain, and Joint Resolution No. 2024-33 and Resolution No. HWD 2023-13, requesting that San Bernardino County place the unpaid fees for services, and abatement costs on the property tax rolls.

Sponsors: Administrative Analyst Jordyn LaSarge

10. Memorandum of Understanding between the City of Hesperia and DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council approve a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the City of Hesper
ia and DesertXpress Enterprises, LLC, doing business as Brightline West, for the DesertXpress Enterprises High-Speed Rail Hesperia Local Rail Services Station.

Sponsors: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman

City of Hesperia

11. Revised Combined Compensation Schedules
Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Housing Authority (HHA) and Hesperia W
ater District (HWD) adopt Joint Resolution No. 2024-26, HHA 2024-05, HWD 2024-09 approving the City’s Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 Revised Combined Compensation Schedule.

Sponsors: Deputy Human Resources/Risk Management Director Rita Perez

NEW BUSINESS

12. Budget Obligat ion of American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Funds Recommended Action:

It is recommended that the City Council approve Resolution 2024-36, approving $2,340,369 budget/obligati
on of American Recue Plan Act “ARPA” funds for the administration of ARPA proceeds.

Sponsors: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
A motion was made by Bennington, seconded by Lee, that this urgency item be approved. The motion carried by the following vote:

Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0

COUNCIL COMMITTEE REPORTS AND COMMENTS
The Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, and Council Members reported from various events and Committees.

CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY/STAFF REPORTS
None.

ADJOURNMENT
The regular meeting was adjourned at 7:28 pm in honor of the passing of Jim Busby and Ethan Hamilton and in celebration of the birthdays of Kelly Gregg, Boomer Shannon, Kelly Gregg, Jeff Bennington, Melinda Sayre, Erin Baum, and Ken Mc Bride.

CLOSED SESSION
Closed session resumed at 7:30 pm and was adjourned at 8:15 pm, with no reportable action.

City of Hesperia
_____________________________
Erin Baum,
Assistant City Clerk

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
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 June 08 , 2024 through June 28, 2024.

The wire amount total is as follows:

 $542,258.67 to First American Title Insurance Co. National Comm Services for purchase of APN 0405-272-09.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Financial Health – Maintain a balanced budget and adequate reserves.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Warrant Runs
Agency/District Accounts Payable Payroll Wires Totals
City of Hesperia $4,523,009.14 $294,876.46 $542,258.67 $5,360,144.27 Successor Agency 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Housing Authority 735.00 50.45 0.00 785.45
Community Development Commission 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Water 974,701.37 150,484.72 0.00 1,125,186.09
Totals $5,498,445.51 $445,411.63 $542,258.67 $6,486,115.81

YEAR-TO PRIOR FY YTD

W/E W/E W/E WARRANT DATE DATE
FUND # FUND NAME 6/14/2024 6/21/2024 6/28/2024 TOTALS Wires TOTALS * TOTALS Accounts Payable
100 GENERAL 355,915.24$ 123,545.20$ 1,999,649.10$ 2,479,109.54$ -$ 34,073,771.94$ 29,244,704.77$ 105 PENSION OBLIGATION TRUST -$ 400,000.00$ -$ 400,000.00$ -$ 400,000.00$ 3,400,000.00$ 106 OPEB TRUST -$ 100,000.00$ -$ 100,000.00$ -$ 100,000.00$ 600,000.00$ 200 HESPERIA FIRE DISTRICT 1,262.85$ 654.82$ -$ 1,917.67$ -$ 1,917.67$ -$ 204 MEASURE I - RENEWAL -$ -$ 762.68$ 762.68$ -$ 540,655.95$ 284,637.88$ 207 LOCAL TRANSPORT-SB 325 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 967,882.81$ 311,825.64$ 209 GAS TAX-RMRA -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 880.00$
210 HFPD (PERS) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 937,658.00$ 2,293,204.87$ 251 CDBG -$ -$ 1,962.50$ 1,962.50$ -$ 407,613.27$ 880,746.29$ 254 AB2766 - TRANSIT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
255 AB3229 SUPPLEMENTAL LAW -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 256 ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS GRANT 47.88$ 200.00$ 1,851.63$ 2,099.51$ -$ 28,354.76$ 42,018.96$ 262 SB 1383 LOCAL ASSISTANCE GRANT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 28,389.96$ 31,598.69$ 263 STREETS MAINTENANCE 35,117.47$ 208,641.57$ 27,558.08$ 271,317.12$ -$ 2,196,659.02$ 1,863,334.45$ 300 DEV. IMPACT FEES - STREET -$ 5,196.29$ -$ 5,196.29$ -$ 112,034.81$ 5,277,770.18$ 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 -$ 73,655.47$ 193,952.88$ 267,608.35$ -$ 2,475,783.76$ 10,681,656.36$ 312 DIF 2018-POLICE FACILITIES -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 7,969.11$ 313 DIF A-04 DRAINAGE -$ -$ -$ -$ 542,258.67$ 872,707.02$ 6,270.00$ 402 WATER RIGHTS ACQUISITION -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,493,915.59$ 1,432,851.95$ 403 2013 REFUNDING LEASE REV BONDS -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 571,151.39$ 872,892.46$ 404 2023 REFUNDING LEASE REV BONDS -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 171,268.51$ 504
CITY WIDE STREETS - CIP -$ 343,379.66$ -$ 343,379.66$ -$ 13,258,230.49$ 9,860,894.25$ 509 CITY FACILITIES CIP -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
800 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 342,228.93$ 26,764.01$ 191,743.27$ 560,736.21$ -$ 8,892,231.53$ 8,858,895.64$ 801 TRUST/AGENCY 56,365.53$ 200.00$ 6,213.32$ 62,778.85$ -$ 1,889,107.59$ 1,876,619.72$ 802 AD 91-1 AGENCY -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
804 TRUST-INTEREST BEARING -$ 13,533.36$ 12,607.40$ 26,140.76$ -$ 327,074.76$ 212,748.50$ 807 CFD 2005-1 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,271,634.16$ 1,302,827.50$ 808 HFPD (TRANSITION) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 347,796.19$ 317,384.59$ 815 PLAN REVIEW TRUST - FRONTIER -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 6,584.08$ CITY 790,937.90$ 1,295,770.38$ 2,436,300.86$ 4,523,009.14$ 542,258.67$ 71,365,839.18$ 79,685,776.39$ 163 REDEVELOP OBLIG RETIREMENT-2018 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 9,949,902.79$ 9,708,465.48$ SUCCESSOR AGENCY -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 9,949,902.79$ 9,708,465.48$ 370 HOUSING AUTHORITY -$ -$ 735.00$ 735.00$ -$ 44,420.75$ 51,116.19$ HOUSING AUTHORITY -$ -$ 735.00$ 735.00$ -$ 44,420.75$ 51,116.19$ 170
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 700 WATER OPERATING 260,887.21$ 61,323.14$ 34,843.46$ 357,053.81$ -$ 12,863,452.09$ 9,825,535.71$ 701 WATER CAPITAL -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 320,389.00$ 98,459.00$ 710 SEWER OPERATING 7,774.45$ 150,827.32$ 448,261.51$ 606,863.28$ -$ 6,923,971.73$ 4,828,031.17$ 711 SEWER CAPITAL -$ 2,425.00$ 3,705.00$ 6,130.00$ -$ 1,509,412.24$ 1,117,147.69$ 720 RECLAIMED WATER OPERATIONS -$ 1,660.27$ 2,994.01$ 4,654.28$ -$ 284,729.64$ 265,471.51$ WATER 268,661.66$ 216,235.73$ 489,803.98$ 974,701.37$ -$ 21,901,954.70$ 16,134,645.08$ ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TOTAL 1,059,599.56$ 1,512,006.11$ 2,926,839.84$ 5,498,445.51$ 542,258.67$ 103,262,117.42$ 105,580,003.14$ REG. PAYROLL
City -$ 294,876.46$ 294,876.46$ -$ 7,882,023.03$ 7,472,920.91$ Housing Authority -$ 50.45$ 50.45$ -$ 4,790.22$ 4,727.44$ Water -$ 150,484.72$ 150,484.72$ -$ 3,495,826.06$ 3,034,990.90$ PAYROLL TOTAL -$ 445,411.63$ -$ 445,411.63$ -$ 11,382,639.31$ 10,512,639.25$ *No payments were issued on July 1, 2023.

City of Hesperia

WARRANT RUNS
06/08/2024-06/28/2024
Attachment 1

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Cassandra Sanchez, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Dena Alcayaga, Administrative Analyst

SUBJECT: Parcel Map No. 20567

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-34 approving Parcel Map No. 20567 to create three parcels on approximately 71.83 gross acres of land within the Commercial/Industrial Business Park (CIBP) of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan located on the northwest corner of Poplar Street and Highway 395, in conjunction with the adoption of an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Applicant: LA BELLE I, LLC; APNs: 3064-551-01, -02, -03, -04, -06, -07, & -08)

BACKGROUND

On January 26, 2023 , the Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 20 567 to create three parcels on approximately 71.83 gross acres of land within the Commercial/Industrial Business Park (CIBP) of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan located on the northwest corner of P oplar Street and Highway 395, in conjunction with the adoption of an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Applicant: LA BELLE I, LLC; APNs: 3064-551-01, -02, -03, -04, -06, -07, & -08). It was approved in conjunction with conditional use permit CUP22-00003 to allow the construction of a 750,000 square foot distribution building.

Staff has reviewed the map and determined that it complies with all the General Plan and zoning regulations and with all local ordinances related to the creation of these parcels.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

No issues have been identified with this item.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Future Development- Facilitate balanced growth to ensure cohesive community development and pursue economic development.

FISCAL IMPACT

There are no significant fiscal impacts to the City related to this action.

Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
Parcel Map No. 20567
August 6, 2024

ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Resolution No. 2024-34

2. Parcel Map No. 20567

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-34

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PARCEL MAP NO. 20567 TO CREATE THREE PARCELS ON APPROXIMATELY 71.83 GROSS ACRES OF LAND WITHIN

THE COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL BUSINESS PARK (CIBP) OF THE MAIN

STREET AND FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN LOCATED ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF P OPLAR STREET AND HIGHWAY 395, IN

CONJUNCTION WITH THE ADOPTION OF AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS OF CEQA (APPLICANT: LA BELLE I, LLC; APNS: 3064-551-01, -02, -03, -04, -06, -07, & -08).

WHEREAS, On January 26, 2023, the Planning Commission approved Tentative Parcel Map No. 20567 to create three parcels on approximately 71.83 gross acres of land within the Commercial/Industrial Business Park (CIBP) of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan located on the northwest corner of Poplar Street and Highway 395, in conjunction with the adoption of an Environmental Impact Report pursuant to the provisions of CEQA (Applicant: LA BELLE I, LLC; APNs: 3064-551-01, -02, -03, -04, -06, -07, & -08); and

WHEREAS, Parcel Map No. 20567 was approved in conjunction with conditional use permit CUP22-00003 to allow the construction of a 750,000 square foot distribution building; and

WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this resolution have occurred.

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

Section 1. Parcel Map No. 20567 is hereby approved, and the City Clerk is authorized to present same to the County Recorder to be filed for record.

Section 2. 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 6th day of August, 2024.

Larry Bird
Mayor
ATTEST:

Erin Baum
Assistant City Clerk

Attachment 2

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Cassandra Sanchez, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Brian Blackwell, Streets Operation Manager

SUBJECT: Award Weed Abatement Contract – Rob’s Weed and Pest Control

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to execute a three (3) year contract to the lowest responsive/responsible bidder, Rob’s Weed and Pest Control, for weed abatement services, in the amount of $107,470, with a 10% contingency of $10,747, for a contract authority in the not-to-exceed amount of $118,217.

BACKGROUND

The Public Works Traffic Division manages the weed abatement contract within the City to minimize weed growth along local roadways, not only for aesthetic reasons but also to prevent fires when weeds dry out.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

With the current contract for weed abatement expiring on June 30, 2024, bids were solicited for a new three (3) year contract . Two (2) bids were received, with Rob’s Weed and Pest Control providing a complete bid and being deemed the lowest responsive/responsible bidder with a total bid amount of $107,470. With the probability of adding additional areas as they are developed or as additional weed abatement services are requested, staff is requesting a 10% contingency in the amount of $10,747 be included in the contract.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Public Safety: Ensure public safety resources adequately protect our community.

FISCAL IMPACT

Funding for weed abatement services has been included in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Operating Budget.

ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENT(S)

None

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
TO: Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Cassandra Sanchez, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Jeremy McDonald, Water Operations Manager

SUBJECT: General Pump Company - New Contract

RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into a three (3) year agreement with General Pump Company in a not-to-exceed amount of $165,032 for well and booster services.

BACKGROUND
The Hesperia Water District currently maintains fifteen (15) active wells, one (1) standby well, and six (6) booster stations to purvey water throughout the City. Having a water pump repair service provider on a contract helps minimize interruption in the event that a pump requires repair.

Additionally, General Pump Company provides ser vices beyond pump repair , including routine maintenance services, electrical repair, and supervisory control and data acquisition (SCADA) support.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS
With the previous agreement for water pump repair services ending June 30, 2024, staff released RFB 2023-24-012 and received three (3) complete bids. It has been determined that General Pump Company is the lowest responsive/responsible bidder. The funding included in the Fiscal Year 2024 -25 Water Operating Fund 700 Budg et is sufficient to cover minor repairs and preventative maintenance. Should a well pump need to be overhauled or replaced, additional contract authority will be requested.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Public Safety: Ensure public safety resources adequately protect our community.

Financial Health: Maintain a balanced budget and adequate reserves.

FISCAL IMPACT

Funding has been included in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Water Operating Fund 700 Budget.

ALTERNATIVES

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENTS
None

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
TO: Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Cassandra Sanchez, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Robert Worby, Fleet / Warehouse Supervisor

SUBJECT: Contract with Badger Meter, Inc.

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to approve a contract for Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 with Badger Meter, Inc. in the not- to-exceed amount of $ 900,000. An anticipated $550,000 will be expended for the purchase of registers and cellular endpoints for automated meter reading infrastructure. An additional $350,000 is allocated for the purchase of water meters and related water meter parts.

BACKGROUND

The Hesperia Water District has standardized various services and repair products to minimize the need to stock multiple products and simplify installation processes . Badger water products are one the District has standardized and is the direct distributor in Southern California for Badger water materials.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

Badger water meters interface with the cellular endpoints used for remote meter reading and with Badger's Beacon automated metering analytics software. This contract to purchase Badger water meters will allow the Customer Service/Meter Division to continue with the meter rotation program.

An estimated 1,200 meters and 3,790 endpoints will be installed and replaced during FY 2024- 25, continuing with the ongoing implementation of the AMI reading system. It will also allow for the purchase of Badger water meters and miscellaneous replacement meter parts for the purpose of new service installations and the maintenance of existing services. Badger offers a 10-year warranty on the endpoint transmitters, endpoints, and meters.

In previous fiscal years, the purchase of registers and cellular endpoints was part of a separate agreement and not included with the purchase of water meters and water meter parts. This agreement combines all physical meter reading infrastructure, helping to streamline the purchase of warehouse material.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Financial Health: Maintain a balanced budget and adequate reserves.

Staff Report to the Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District Contract with Badger Meter Inc.

August 6, 2024

FISCAL IMPACT

Sufficient funding has been included in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Operating Budget.

ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENT(S)

None

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Cassandra Sanchez, Director of Public Works/City Engineer Eydee Jimenez, Project Manager

SUBJECT: Award Contract for theTraffic Signal- Main St & Sultana St/Timberlane Ave CO.

No. 7159

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to 1) Adopt Resolution No. 2024-38 amending the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 Budget by appropriating $828,718 to Fund 204- 29-700-7159-7500; 2) Award a construction contract for the Traffic Signal on Main Street and Sultana Street/Timberlane Avenue (C.O. 7159) project to the responsive /responsible bidder, DBX, Inc., in the amount of $1,665,171, plus a 10% contingency amount of $166,517 for a total not-to-exceed of $1,831,688 ; 3) Approve the project design as represented by the plans and specifications; and 4) authorize the City Manager and/or designee to execute the contract and any other necessary documents related to the project.

BACKGROUND

Based on recent traffic collision history, the City has determined the need to install a traffic signal at the intersection of Main Street and Sultana Street/Timberlane Avenue. The City successfully obtained a Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant in the amount of $899,300 for the intersection improvements, which include the installation of a traffic signal, widening to construct Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA) ramps, and the construction of curbs, gutters, and sidewalks at the intersection approaches.

The improvements are expected to improve traffic flow and enhance safety along Main Street and in the local community.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

This project was advertised for bids on May 21, 2024. Over 500 contractors were notified about the project through Public Purchase, the City’s online bidding platform, and cold calling. On June 24, 2024, bids were received from one contractor. The bid results for the project were as follows:

 DBX, Inc. - Temecula, CA: $1,665,171

Staff reviewed the bid, evaluating accuracy, costs, experience, and references. Staff recommend awarding the subject project to the responsive and responsible bidder, DBX, Inc., based on their respective pricing, scope of work, and qualifications . DBX, Inc. has over 50 years of experience and has delivered successful projects in Redlands, Colton, Apple Valley, and other cities. As

Staff Report to the City Council
Award Contract for Traffic Signal- Main St & Sultana St/Timberlane Ave CO. No. 7159 August 6, 2024

As specified in the bid documents, the contractor must execute and return the contract, along with other required documents, within ten calendar days of receiving this Notice to Award.

Construction is anticipated to begin in September 2024.

In addition, due to the rigorous and time-consuming document control requirements for federally funded projects, City staff solicited proposals from the City’s on -call consultants to provide construction project management and inspection services for the duration of the project, totaling $177,638, plus a 10% contingency amount of $17,763 for a not to exceed total of $195,401. This brings the total construction budget to $2,027,089.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Capital Improvement- Continually evaluate capital improvement priorities.

FISCAL IMPACT

Funding for the project will require amending the FY 2024-25 Budget by appropriating a total of $828,718 to Fund 204 through resolution No. 2024-38 for the Traffic Signal- Main St & Sultana St/Timberlane Ave, (C.O. No. 7159) project.

The (FY) 202 4-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget include s funds for the Traffic Signal Installation at Main Street and Sultana Street/Timberlane Avenue, in the amount of $1,198,371. The estimated costs for this project are as follows:

Construction contract $1,665,171
10% Contingency 166,517
Project Management 195,401
Total Construction $2,027,089

ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENT(S)

Resolution No. 2024-38

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-38

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE FISCAL YEAR 2024 -25 CAPITAL

IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM BUDGET BY APPROPRIATING AN ADDITIONAL $828,718 TO FUND 204 MEASURE I RENEWAL FOR THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL

INSTALLATION PROJECT AT MAIN STREET AND SULTANA
STREET/TIMBERLANE AVENUE, C.O. 7159

WHEREAS, on June 18, 2024, the City Council adopted the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024 -25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget; and

WHEREAS, the City successfully obtained a Highway Safety Improvement Program (HSIP) grant of $899,300 for the intersection improvements at Main Street and Sultana Street/Timberlane Avenue and

WHEREAS, the CIP budget was prepared before the design was finalized and a construction cost estimate was received, and

WHEREAS, the (FY) 2024-25 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) Budget includes funds for the Traffic Signal Installation at Main Street and Sultana Street/Timberlane Avenue, C.O. No. 7159, in the amount of $1,198,371, including HSIP grant funds amounting to $899,300; and

WHEREAS, with estimated project costs totaling $ 2,027,089, additional Measure I funding is required in the amount of $828,718.

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

Section 1. The recitals above are true and correct and have been adopted as findings.

Section 2. The City Council hereby amends the Fiscal Year 20 24-25 Capital Improvement Program Budget and appropriates $ 828,718 to Account No. 204 -29-700-7159- 7500 for the Traffic Signal Installation at Main Street and Sultana Street/Timberlane Avenue, C.O. 7159.

Section 3. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions. and adopted by as findings.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 6th day of August 2024.

Resolution No. 2024-38

______________________________
Larry Bird, Mayor

ATTEST:

____________________________
Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members
Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Nathan Freeman, Director of Development Services
Andrew Lemke, Building Official

SUBJECT: Uniform Services Contract Amendment

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council and the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District approve an amendment of $30,000 to the contract with Mission Linen Supply for uniform services for a total not-to-exceed contract amount of $97,146 and approve a one-year contract extension.

BACKGROUND

On November 1, 2022, the City Council and the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District entered into a two-year agreement with Mission Linen Supply to provide uniform services. These services provide uniform rental and laundering services for various departments/divisions that regularly perform their job duties outside of City buildings.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

The current contract with Mission Linen Supply expires on October 31, 2024 . After reviewing Mission Linen’s contract performance and gathering feedback from the various departments, staff recommends extending the contract for an additional year. Mission Linen Supply has also agreed to hold the current contract pricing for an additional year.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Organizational Health - Foster a high -performing organization that provides opportunities for professional growth.

Financial Health- Maintain a balanced budget and adequate reserves.

FISCAL IMPACT

Sufficient funding has been included in the various departments/divisions/programs in the Fiscal Year 2024-25 Budget.

ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

Staff Report to Mayor and Council Members,
Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District
Uniform Services Contract Amendment
August 6, 2024

ATTACHMENT(S)

None

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services Andrew Lemke, Building Official

SUBJECT: Electric Vehicle Charging Stations

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council introduce and place on first reading Ordinance No. 2024- 07 adding Chapter 15.04.060 to the City’s Municipal Code , setting forth an expedited and streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations.

BACKGROUND

The State of California adopted Assembly Bill 1236 , which added Section 65850.7 to the Government Code, to incorporate numerous requirements and permitting processes applicable to the installation of Electric Vehicle (EV) charging stations. Amongst other things, AB 1236 also requires that all municipalities, with a population of 200,000 or less, adopt an or dinance to streamline the permitting process for EV charging stations. Moreover, in developing the expedited permitting process, the City must also adopt a checklist of all requirements with which EV charging stations shall comply to be eligible for expedited review.

AB 1236 applies to all EV charging station installations, including Level 1, Level 2, and DC Fast Charging; public and private charging stations; light -medium- and heavy-duty charging stations; and stations that are installed as the accessory or primary use of a site.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

The content of the noted checklist requires the permit applicant to check the features of the existing electrical service such as rating in amperes, system voltage, connected or calculated load, spare capacity in amperes, voltage and ampere rating of the electric vehicle supply equipment, circuit rating of the electric vehicle supply equipment, location of the electric vehicle supply equipment, if ventilation is/or is not required, and clearances of the charging equipment to comply with all applicable building and fire safety laws.

The checklist also assists the applicant in confirming that the location of the electric vehicle supply equipment will comply with any vehicle clearance requirements in the City’s Zoning Ordinance.

Section 65850.7 requires that the City’s checklist may be based on the “ Plug-In Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Permitting Checklist” of the “Zero -Emission Vehicles in California: Community Readiness Guidebook” of the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research.

Staff recommends that City Council introduce for First Reading the attached ordinance, given Government Code Section 65850.7’s requirement that local agencies adopt such an ordinance to

Staff Report to the City Council
Electric Vehicle Charging Stations
August 6, 2024

create an expedi ted, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations . The process and procedures required can be accommodated to comply with the requirements of the Assembly Bill. Staff anticipates that the successful implementation of an expedited, streamlined process will be available to permit applicants when the ordinance is adopted.

Environmental: Approval of the subject Development Code Amendment is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act per Section 15061(b)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no significant effect on the environment. The proposed Development Code Amendment is also exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act by Section 16.12.4 15(B)(10) of the City’s CEQA Guidelines, as the Development Code Amendment does not propose to increase the density or intensity allowed in the General Plan.

Conclusion: The subject Development Code Amendment complies with the General Plan.

Ensuring th at the new streamlining process will mee t the intent of the States mandate for enactment and implementation.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM

Future Development – Facilitate balanced growth to ensure cohesive community development and pursue economic development.

FISCAL IMPACT

There is no fiscal impact associated with this action.

ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. Ordinance No. 2024-07

2. Exhibit A- H.M.C. 15.04.060

3. EV Checklist

01071.0005/1003194.1
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-07

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, ADDING SECTION 15.04.060 TO

THE HESPERIA MUNICIPAL CODE SETTING FORTH

PROCEDURES FOR EX PEDITING THE REVIEW AND

PERMITTING OF ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING SYSTEMS

WHEREAS, the State of California adopted Assembly Bill 1236, wh ich requires local agencies to adop t an ordinance that creates an expedited , streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging systems; and
WHEREAS, creation of an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations would facilitate convenient charging of electric vehicles; and WHEREAS, the State of California adopted Assembly Bill No. 970 (“AB 970”) in 2021, which updated the requirements set forth in Gove rnment Code Section 65850.7 and added a new Government Code Section 65850.71 pertaining to processing of electric vehicle charging system applications; and
WHEREAS, AB 970 requirements were operative for cities with a population of less than 200,000 residents effective January 1, 2023; and
WHEREAS, the City proposes adding Section 15.04.060 to the City of Hesperia Municipal Code which sets forth an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations as required by Government Code Sections 65850.7 and 65850.71.

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

Section 1. All of the above recitals are true and correct and incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full.

Section 2. A new Section 15.04.060 to Chapter 15.04 [Building Codes] of the City of Hesperia Municipal Code is hereby added as follows:
“15.04.060 Expedited Electric Vehicle Charging Station Permitting A. Electric vehicle charging stations which qualify for expedited permit processing, pursuant to Government Code Section 65850.7 , shall be subject to the administrative permitti ng procedures set fo rth in this Section . The terms, phrases, and words used in this section shall be construed in compliance with the definitions set forth by Cali fornia Government Code Section s 65850.7 and 65850.71 (or any amendments or successor statutes thereto).

B. Consistent with Government Code Section s 65850.7 and 65850.71, the Building Official shall implement an expedited administrative permi t review process for e lectric vehicle chargi ng stations and adopt a checklist of all requirements with which electri c vehicle charging stations sha ll comply with in order to be eligible for expedited review. The expedited administrative permit review process and checklist may r efer to the recommenda tions in the checklist prescribed by the most current vers ion of the "Pl ug-In Electric Vehicle

Ordinance No. 2024-07

01071.0005/1003194.1
Infrastructure Permitting Checklist" of the "Zero -Emission Vehicles in California:

Community Readiness Guidebook" pub lished by the Governor 's Office of Planning and Research, as may be amended from time to time . The Cit y’s adopted checklist shall be published on the City’s website.

C. Consistent with Government Code Section 65850.7 , the Building Official shall allow for electronic submittal of permi t applications covered by this section and associated supporting documentation. In accepting such permit applications, the Building Official shall also accept electronic signatures on all f orms, applications, and other documentation in lieu of a wet signature by any applicant.

D. If the Building Official determines that the permit application is incomplete, he or she shall issue a written correction not ice to the applicant, in accordance with the timelines est ablished by Governm ent Code S ection 65850.71. detailing all deficiencies in the application and any additional information required to be eligible for expedited permit issuance.

E. A permit appl ication that satisfies the information requirements in the City's adopted checklist shall be deemed complete a nd be promptly processed, in accordance with the timelines est ablished by Government Code S ection 65850.71. Upon confirmation by the Building Official that the permit application and supporting documents meet the requirements of the City’s adopted checklist, and are consistent with all applicable laws, the Building Official shall, consistent with Government Code Section 65850.7, approve the appli cation and issue all necessary permits. Such approval does not authorize an applicant to energize or utilize the electric vehicle chargin g station until authorization and approval to connect the electric vehicle charging station to the local utility provider’s electrical grid is provided and of all necessa ry approvals for operation are granted by the City.

F. It is the intent of this Section to encourage the installation of electric vehicle chargi ng s tations by removing obstacles to permitting for charging stations so long as the action does not supersede the Building Official's authority to address higher priority health and safety situations. If the Building Offi cial makes a finding based on substantia l evidence that the elec tric vehicle charging station or its installation could have a specific adverse impact upon the public health or safety, as defined in Government Code 65850.7, the City may require the applicant to apply for a site plan review with the Planning Division.

G. Consistent with Government Co de Section 65850.7, the Building Official shall not condition the approval for any electric vehicle charging station permit on the approval of such a system by an association, as that term is defined by Civil Code Section 4080.”
Section 3. Any provision of th e Ci ty of Hesperia ’s Municipal Code or appendices thereto, inconsistent with the provisions of this Ordinance, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed or modified to that extent necessary to affect the provisions of this Ordinance.

Section 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is fo r any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by a decision of any court of any competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this

01071.0005/1003194.1
Ordinance No. 2024-07

Ordinance. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed this Ordinance, and each Section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase not declared invalid or unconstitutional without regard to whether any portion of the Ordinance would be subsequently declared invalid or unconstitutional.

Section 5. The Mayor shall sign, and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause this Ordinance, or a summary thereof, to be published once in the official newspaper within 15 days after its adoption. This Ordinance shall become effective 30 days after its adoption.

ADOPTED AND APPROVED on this 6th day of August 2024.
__________________________________ _______________________________ Larry Bird, Mayor
ATTEST:
______________________________________
Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk

EXHIBIT “A”

Chapter 15.04.060 - Electrical Vehicle Charging Systems

15.04.061: Definitions:

ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION OR CHARGING STATION: Means any level of electric vehicle supply equipment station that is designed and built-in compliance with article 625 of the California Electrical Code and delivers electricity from a source outside an electric vehicle into a plug-in vehicle.

ELECTRONIC SUBMITTAL: Means the utilization of one or more of either electronic mail, the internet , or the City’s online portal.

FEASIBLE METHOD TO SATISFACTORILY MITIGATE OR AVOID THE SPECIFIC ADVERSE IMPACT:

Includes, but is not limited to, any cost-effective method, condition or mitigation imposed by the City on another similarly situated application in a prior successful application for a similar permit.

SPECIFIC ADVERSE IMPACT: Means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified, and written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.

15.04.062: Purpose:

The purpose of this chapter is to promote and encourage the use of electric vehicles by creating an expedited, streamlined permitting process for electric vehicle charging stations while promoting public health and safety and preventing specific adverse impacts in the installation and use of such charging stations.

15.04.063: Applicability:

This chapter applies to the permitting of all electric vehicle charging systems in the city. Electric vehicle charging systems legally established or permitted prior to the effective date of this chapter are not subject to the requirements of this chapter unless physical modifications or alterations are undertaken that materially change the size, type, or components of an electric vehicle charging system in such a way as to require new permitting. Routine operation and maintenance or like-kind replacements shall not require a permit.

15.04.064: Exceptions:

This section shall not apply to electric vehicle charging station projects that include additional scope. All electric vehicle charging station projects with additional scope shall be processed under section 16.12.065 Hesperia Municipal Code and the provisions of this section shall not apply.

15.04.065: Duties of the City's Building Official:

A. All documents required for submission of an electri c vehicle charging system application shall be made publicly available on the City's website.

B. By resolution, the City Council shall adopt a checklist of all requirements with which electric vehicle charging systems shall comply to be eligible for expedited review.

C. The electric vehicle charging system permit process and checklist shall substantially conform to recommendations contained in the most current version of the Plug -In Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Permitting Checklist contained in the Zero -Emission Vehicles in California; Community Readiness Guidebook adopted by the Governor's Office of Planning and Research.

Attachment 2

D. The Building Official shall allow the electronic submittal of the electric vehicle charging station application.

15.04.066: Electric vehicle charging system requirements:

A. All electric vehicle charging systems shall meet the requirements of the California Electrical Code, the Society of Automotive Engineers, the National Electrical Manufacturers Association, and accredited testing laboratories such as Underwriters Laboratories, and rules of the Public Utilities Commission regarding safety and reliability.

B. Installation of electric vehicle charging stations shall be incorporated into the load calculations of all new or existing electrical services and shall meet the requirements of the California Electrical Code. Electric vehicle charging equipment shall be considered a continuous load.

C. Anchorage of either floor -mounted or wall -mounted electric vehicle charging stations shall meet the requirements of the California Building or Residential Code as applicable per occupancy, and the provisions of the manufacturer's installation instructions. Mounting of charging stations shall not adversely affect building elements.

15.04.067: Permit review requirements:

A. The Building Official shall implement an administrative review process to expedite approval of electric vehicle charging stations. Review of a complete permit application shall be limited to the Building Official's review of whether it meets all health and safety requirements of local, state, and federal law. Local law requirements shall be limited to those standards and regulations necessary to ensure there is no specific, adverse impact on public health or safety by the proposed installation.

B. A permit application that satisfies the information requirements in the checklist, as adopted by the City of Hesperia, shall be deemed complete.

C. A complete permit application and proposed installation that meets the required standards and approved checklist that does not have a specific, adverse impact on public health or safety shall not be denied.

D. An applicant that provides an incomplete permit application shall be provided with a written correction notice detailing all deficiencies in the application and any info rmation required to be eligible for expedited permit issuance.

E. The Building Official may require an applicant to apply for a conditional use permit if the official makes a written finding, based on substantial evidence, that the proposed electric vehicle charging station could have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety and conditions are necessary. The decision of the Building Official may be appealed to the City Planning Commission in accordance with the procedures of Section 16.12.055 of the Hesperia Municipal Code.

F. The Director of Development Services may not deny an application for a conditional use permit unless he/she makes written findings based upon substantial evidence in the record that the proposed installation would have a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety, and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. The Director’s written findings shall include the basis for the rejection of potential feasible alternatives or conditions for preventing the adverse impact.

The decision of the Director may be appealed to the City’s Planning Commission in accordance with the procedures of Section 16.12.055 of the Hesperia Municipal Code.

G. Any conditions imposed on an application shall be designed to mitigate the specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety at the lowest cost possible. Government Code Section 65850.7 requires that the Building Official shall not condition the approval for any conditional use permit on the approval of such a system by an association, as that term is defined by Civil Code 4080.

H. A feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact includes, but is not limited to, any cost-effective method, condition, or mitigation imposed by the City on another similarly situated application in a prior successful application for a permit.

C i t y o f H e s p e r i a

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION

240715-BS-XX EV Charging Check List

Residential and Non-Residential Checklist for Permitting Electric Vehicles and Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE)

Please complete the following information related to the permitting and installation of Electric Vehicle Service Equipment (EVSE) as a supplement to the application for a building permit. This checklist contains the technical aspects of EVSE installations and is intended to help expedite the permitting and use for electric vehicle charging.

Upon this checklist being deemed complete, a permit shall be issued to the applicant.

However, if it is determined that the installation might have a specific adverse impact on public health or safety, additional verification will be required before a per mit can be issued.

This checklist substantially follows the “Plug-In Electric Vehicle Infrastructure Permitting Checklist” contained in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research “Zero Emission Vehicles in California: Community Readiness Guidebook” and is purposed to augment the guidebook’s checklist.

Job Address: Permit No.
☐ Single-Family ☐ Multi-Family (Apartment) ☐ Multi-Family (Condominium) ☐ Commercial (Single Business) ☐Commercial (Multi-Businesses) ☐ Mixed-Use ☐ Public Right-of-Way

Location and Number of EVSE to be Installed:

Garage ______ Parking Level(s) _____ Parking Lot _____ Street Curb _____ Description of Work:

Attachment 3

C i t y o f H e s p e r i a

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION

240715-BS-XX EV Charging Check List

Applicant Name:

Applicant Phone Number & E-mail:

Contractor Name: License Number & Type:

Contractor Phone Number & E-mail:

Owner Name:

Owner Phone Number & E-mail:

EVSE Charging Level: ☐ Level 1 (120V) ☐ Level 2 (240V) ☐ Level 3 (480V) Maximum Rating (Nameplate) of EV Service Equipment = kW Voltage EVSE = V Manufacturer of EVSE:

Mounting of EVSE: ☐ Wall Mount ☐ Pole Pedestal Mount
☐ Other

System Voltage:
☐ 120/240V, 1ϕ, 3W ☐ 120/208V, 3ϕ, 4W ☐ 120/240V, 3ϕ, 4W ☐ 277/480V, 3ϕ, 4W ☐ Other
Rating of Existing Main Electrical Service Equipment = Amperes Rating of Panel Supplying EVSE (if not directly from Main Service) = Amps Rating of Circuit for EVSE: Amps / Poles
AIC Rating of EVSE Circuit Breaker (if not Single Family, 400A) = A.I.C. (or verify with Inspector in field)

C i t y o f H e s p e r i a

BUILDING AND SAFETY DIVISION

240715-BS-XX EV Charging Check List

Specify Either Connected, Calculated, or Documented Demand Load of Existing Panel:
• Connected Load of Existing Panel Supplying EVSE = Amps • Calculated Load of Existing Panel Supplying EVSE = Amps • Demand Load of Existing Panel or Service Supplying EVSE = Amps (Provide Demand Load Reading from Electric Utility)

Total Load (Existing plus EVSE Load) = Amps
For Single Family Dwellings, if Existing Load is not known by any of the above methods, then the Calculated Load may be estimated using the “Single -Family Residential Permitting Application Example” in the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research “Zero Emission Vehicles in California: Community Readiness Guidebook” https://www.opr.ca.gov

EVSE Rating Amps x 1.25 = Amps = Minimum Ampacity of
EVSE Conductor = # AWG
For Single-Family: Size of Existing Service Conductors = # AWG or kcmil - or -: Size of Existing Feeder Conductor
Supplying EVSE Panel = # AWG or kcmil
(or Verify with Inspector in field)

I hereby acknowledge that the information presented is a true and correct representation of existing conditions at the job site and that any causes for concern as to life -safety verifications may require further substantiation of information.

Signature of Applicant: Date:

City of Hesperia

STAFF REPORT

DATE: August 6, 2024
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: Revised User Fee Study

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council and the Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District consider amending the City-wide fee schedule related to the User Fee Study, and the adoption of proposed Joint Resolution No. 2024-35 and Resolution HWD 2024-14.

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 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 s ervice. 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 fee s for the three groupings of fees that are included in the ‘City Fee Schedule’ shown below:

1. Development Impact Fees (DIF)

2. Water and Sewer Rate

3. General City-wide fees

In FY 2022-23, the City conducted a Request for Proposal (RFP) to engage a consultant to prepare a comprehensive User Fee Study. At the conclusion of the RFP process , Willdan Financial Services (Willdan) was awarded the contract 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.

The study would identify the fee amounts that would allow the City to recoup as much as (but no more than) 100% of the cost to provide the service to the individuals or companies that benefit

Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District Revised User Fee Study
August 6, 2024

from the services being provided, instead of the cost being burdened by the entire community. As a part of that study, Willdan established a series of objectives which included , developing a rational basis for setting fees; identifying subsidy amount, if applicable, of each fee in the model; ensuring compliance with State law; maintaining consistency with City policies and goals; and the creation of a model that can be updated by the City should fees need to be changed based on current conditions.

Willdan held meetings with each department to review the current fees and identify the applicable costs (time) spent to provide services for each of the following areas:
 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)

The resulting fee study was presented and adopted by the City Council at the December 19, 2023 council meeting, with the changes to the fees effective March 1, 2024.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

After the implementation of the fee changes, it was discovered by City staff that the fully burdened hourly rate calculations within Willdan’s rate model calculation had omitted the inclusion of the benefits costs portion for City staff’s time for City services. Upon discovery, City staff notified and directed Willdan to correct and update the model and fee study report to correct the hourly rate calculations. Additionally, City staff provided updates to specific fee items and staff time data to correct discrepancies discovered after the original fee study implementation. These updates more accurately reflect the fee items needed and the appropriate staff processing time. Of the 524 different types of fees, 7 are recommended to be added, 189 are being recommended to increase, 3 would decrease, and there would be no change to the remaining 322 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 0 0 0 123 0%
Miscellaneous Fees 0 13 0 42 6%
Building & Safety 6 78 3 37 88%
Planning 1 58 0 6 62%
Engineering 0 23 0 44 24%
Business License 0 7 0 30 3%
Public Safety 0 0 0 16 0%
Water District (Non-Utility Rate) 0 10 0 24 16%
*Note: In addition to the changes noted above, Mobile Home regulatory fees were added to the Building fee schedule. These are set by the State and so are included for reference to the public. 1 fee in Building changed in the structure for how it is determined.

Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District Revised User Fee Study
August 6, 2024

Attached to this staff report is the updated 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 fees adopted in December and the recommended changes. The following details three areas in which the recommended fee changes are expected to have a notable impact:

1. Business License Administration Fees – Business licenses are comprised of two components, the Business License Fee, and the Administration Fee. While the Business License Fee to monitor the program is recommended to remain fixed at $50 (a $54 fee subsidy), the Administration Fee to process new licenses and license renewals is recommended to increase to $207 and $103 respectively in order to match the City’s cost.

2. Building Fees – New Single-Family Residence – The building fees , not including Developer Impact Fees , charged for new single -family residential homes consists of multiple items, such as plan review, inspection, automation, and various administrative fees. Of these building fees, the largest recommended fee increase involves plan review fees, one of which is recommended to increase from a flat fee of $445 to a flat fee of $1,182 for the first 1,000 square feet (sq ft) plus $0.21 per square foot over 1,000 sq ft.

For example, a 2,000 sq ft house would generate $ 1,392 for this fee type , which represents the minimum staff time needed to review the plans along with the fee increase based on the size of the residence to reflect the additional review time needed for larger plans. In total, building fees on a 2,000 sq ft house would change from $2,841 to $4,197, an increase of $1,356.

3. Engineering Permit and Plan Check Fees – Engineering charges fees related to issuing permits and performing plan checks for the grading and inspections on new residential, commercial, and industrial development projects. The individual recommended fees, which can vary depending on the size and quantity of the projects, represent the City staff time needed to properly review and inspect each project. Based upon the current level of development activity in the FY 2024 -25 Budget, the City would receive an addi tional $84,000 in revenue from fully recovering the City’s staff costs from the recommended fees.

If approved, the changes to the fees would become effective December 01, 2024, generating additional revenue through the remaining four months of the fiscal year.

FISCAL IMPACT

It is estimated that, based upon the FY 2024-25 Revenue Budget, the annualized General Fund revenues could increase by approximately $579,000 annually. The largest General Fund revenue increases would derive from Business License Administrative Fees ($ 270,000), Building Fees ($172,000), Engineering Permit and Plan Check Fees ($84,000), Conditional Use Permit Fees ($27,000) and Site Plan Review ($26,000).

The annualized Water District revenues could increase by approximately $13,000 annually, based upon the FY 2024-25 Revenue Budget, largely due to anticipated increases to the Fire Flow Test Fees ($8,700) and Construction Meter Set-up Fees ($4,600).

ALTERNATIVES

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District Revised User Fee Study
August 6, 2024

ATTACHMENTS

1. Revised User Fee Study Report – 2023-24

2. Resolution No. 2024-35 and Resolution HWD No. 2024-14

City of Hesperia
User Fee Study Report
April 2019
User Fee Study
Fiscal Year 2023/24

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 ....................................................................... 26

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
 Business 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
a. The salaries of positions are increased by 6% from the prior study b. The study and fees adopted in December of 2023 did not include benefits for employees in error. As such all hourly rates have been updated in this report and have increased by 54%  Operating costs applicable to fee operations
 Departmental support, supervision, and administration overhead  Indirect City-wide overhead costs calculated through the Cost Allocation Plan a. The cost allocation plan was updated to the FY 23/24 plan An important factor in determining the fully burdened rate is in the calculation of productive hours for personnel. This calculation takes the available workable hours in a year of 2,080 and adjusts this figure to 1,650 productive or billable hours to account for calculated or anticipated hours’ employees are involved in non-billable activities such as paid vacation, sick leave, holidays, and other considerations as necessary.

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

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

7 Comprehensive User Fee Study

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

Allowable Costs
This report identifies three types of costs that, when combined, constitute the fully burdened cost of a service (Appendix A). Costs are defined as
direct labor, including salary and benefits,
departmental overhead costs, and the City’s
central services overhead, where
departmental and central service overhead
costs constitute support costs. These cost
types are defined as follows:
 Direct Labor (Personnel Costs): The
costs related to staff salaries for
time spent directly on fee-related
services.
 Departmental Overhead: A
proportional allocation of
departmental overhead costs,
including operation costs such as
supplies and materials that are necessary for the department to function.  Central Services Overhead: These costs, 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 or when full cost recovery was determined to be unreasonable or require too large of an increase. 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
The update 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 updated full cost calculation against the current fees that were adopted in December of 2023 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. Since staff had recommended that the City limit any increases to Animal Control fees at 25% there are no recommended fee changes as detailed in Appendix C.

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 updated full cost calculation against the current fees that were adopted in December of 2023 to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that additional increases would be needed from the previously adopted fees to achieve the cost recovery targets of the prior study. The cause for the lower cost calculations in the prior study was a result of the 6% increase in personnel salaries, the update to the indirect overhead rates, and incorrectly omitting the 54% benefit factor. The recommended fee adjustments to the fee schedule are detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase for 13 fees;
 The annual FOG inspection fee would be split into 2 fees based on producer size;  42 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average change in fees would be an increase of 6%.

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, 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 updated full cost calculation against the current fees that were adopted in December of 2023 to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. In addition, staff provided desired changes to the fee schedule to better reflect the time it takes to provide services and how service is provided it provided to the public. The analysis found that most services are currently set below the full cost of providing them. The cause for the lower cost calculations in the prior study was a result of the 6% increase in personnel salaries, the update to the indirect overhead rates, incorrectly omitting the 54% benefit factor on personnel costs, and the changes provided by staff to the schedule and time calculations. 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 78 fees;
 3 fees would decrease;
 37 fees would remain as currently set;
 1 fee would change its basis of determinatioin from cubic yards to a base fee or percentage of project cost estimate;
 mobile home fees that are regulated and set by the State were added to the schedule;  6 new fees would be added, and;
 the average change in fees would be an increase of 88% on current fees. o 39% of the increase is due to the 6% increase in personnel salaries, the update to the indirect overhead rates, incorrectly omitting the 54% benefit factor on personnel costs, and;
o 49% of the increase is due to the time data increases provided by department staff.

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 updated full cost calculation against the current fees that were adopted in December of 2023 to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that the cost recovery targets from the prior study were not being met by the adopted fees. The cause for the lower cost calculations in the prior study was a result of the 6% increase in personnel salaries, the update to the indirect overhead rates, incorrectly omitting the 54% benefit factor on personnel costs. As a result, fee increass to the fee schedule are being recommended, and they are detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase for 7 fees;
 30 fees would remain as currently set;
 the average change in fees would be an increase of 3%.

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 updated full cost calculation against the current fees that were adopted in December of 2023 to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that the cost recovery targets from the prior study were not being met by the adopted fees. The cause for the lower cost calculations in the prior study was a result of the 6% increase in personnel salaries, the update to the indirect overhead rates, incorrectly omitting the 54% benefit factor on personnel costs. As a result, fee increass to the fee schedule are being recommended, and they are detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase to 58 fees;
o 3 fee increases included increases in time data provided by staff  1 new fee for Sign Plan would be added;
 6 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 the average fee change would be an increase of 62%.

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 updated full cost calculation against the current fees that were adopted in December of 2023 to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that the cost recovery targets from the prior study were not being met by the adopted fees. The cause for the lower cost calculations in the prior study was a result of the 6% increase in personnel salaries, the update to the indirect overhead rates, incorrectly omitting the 54% benefit factor on personnel costs. As a result, fee increass to the fee schedule are being recommended, and they are detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase for 23 fees;
 44 fees would remain as currently set, and;
 The average fee change would be an increase of 24%.

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 updated full cost calculation against the current fees that were adopted in December of 2023 to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that the cost calculation for the citation filing fee was lower than previously calculated in the prior study. The cause for the lower cost calculations in the prior study was a result of the 6% increase in personnel salaries, the update to the indirect overhead rates, incorrectly omitting the 54% benefit factor on personnel costs. There are no recommended fee changes as a result of the findings as detailed in Appendix C.

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 updated full cost calculation against the current fees that were adopted in December of 2023 to determine, if charged, whether the current fee is recovering the costs associated with the requested service. The analysis found that the cost recovery targets from the prior study were not being met by the adopted fees. The cause for the lower cost calculations in the prior study was a result of the 6% increase in personnel salaries, the update to the indirect overhead rates, incorrectly omitting the 54% benefit factor on personnel costs. As a result, fee increass to the fee schedule are being recommended, and they are detailed in Appendix C. As a result, there would be:
 An increase for 10 fees;
 24 fees would remain as currently set;
 Utility rates were not included in the study, and;
 The average fee change would be an increase of 16%.

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% 33% Planning 866,933 25,329 3% 38% Building & Safety 1,049,420 88,898 8% 38% Code Enforcement 2,022,425 325,455 16% 27% Animal Control 1,869,936 208,298 11% 29% Engineering 664,116 29,001 4% 65% Building Maintenance 307,895 204,845 67% 0% Water Fund 7,259,529 4,961,308 68% 17%

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.

The Salary and benefit rates were corrected from the prior study which had omitted the benefits in the calculation. They have been corrected to include a 54% benefit factor for full time personnel.

23 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Hesperia - User Fee Study
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Position
S&B Hourly
Rate
Accountant $77.65
Accounting Technician $70.43
Administrative Aide $57.93
Administrative Analyst $81.55
Administrative Intern - Part-Time $15.50
Administrative Secretary $67.08
Animal Care Technician $53.21
Animal Care Technician - Part-Time $26.53
Animal Control Officer $64.68
Animal Services Specialist $81.55
Animal Services Supervisor $94.39
Assistant City Clerk $94.39
Assistant City Manager $206.09
Assistant Engineer $99.14
Assistant Planner $85.63
Assistant Project Manager $99.14
Assitant to the City Manager $126.51
Associate Planner $99.14
Budget/Finance Specialist $77.65
Building Inspector $86.67
City Manager $237.78
Code Enforcement Officer $82.54
Code Enforcement Supervisor $104.08
Community Development Supervisor $94.39
Community Development Technician $64.68
Custodian $53.21
Custodian- Part-Time $26.53
Customer Service Representative $58.67
Customer Service Representative - Part-Time $29.24
Customer Service Supervisor $94.39
Deputy City Clerk $60.84
Deputy City Manager/ City Clerk $196.27
Deputy Community Development Director $139.49
Deputy Development Services Director $139.49
Deputy Finance Director $146.46
Deputy Human Resources/Risk Management Director $139.49 Director of Development Services $196.27
Director of Public Works $139.49
Economic Development Manager $132.84

24 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Hesperia - User Fee Study
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Position
S&B Hourly
Rate
Engineering Specialist $73.95
Equipment Operator $66.29
Equipment Operator/Water $67.92
Facilities Maintenance Technician $64.68
Facilities Supervisor $99.14
Field Services Supervisor $94.39
Finance Manager $109.28
Financial Analyst $85.63
Fleet/Warehouse Supervisor $94.39
GEN = General $0.00
Geographical Information Systems Manager $114.74
Geographical Information Systems Technician $73.95
Human Resources Analyst $94.39
Human Resources Specialist $85.63
Information Systems Manager $132.84
Information Systems Specialist $94.39
Information Systems Technician $73.95
Information Systems Technician - Part-Time $37.98
Maintenance Crew Supervisor $99.14
Maintenance Worker $58.67
Maintenance Worker - Part-Time $29.24
Maintenance Worker/Water $60.12
Management Analyst $94.39
Meter Reader $58.67
Office Assistant $55.18
Office Assistant - Part-Time $28.34
Personnel Technician $73.95
Plans Examiner $94.39
Principal Planner - Part-Time Retired Annuitant $68.22
Project Manager $109.28
Public Relations Analyst $104.08
Public Works Inspection Supervisor $104.08
Public Works Inspector $85.63
Public Works Supervisor $109.28
Pump Operator $66.29
Receptionist - Part-Time $24.06
Risk Manager $109.28
Secretary to the City Manager and City Council $85.63
Senior Account Clerk $64.68

25 Comprehensive User Fee Study

City of Hesperia - User Fee Study
Fully Burdened Hourly Rate Calculation
Position
S&B Hourly
Rate
Senior Accountant $99.14
Senior Animal Control Officer $71.31
Senior Code Enforcement Officer $85.63
Senior Community Development Technician $73.95
Senior Custodian $58.67
Senior Maintenance Worker $67.92
Senior Maintenance Worker/Water $69.60
Senior Office Assistant $60.84
Senior Office Specialist $60.84
Senior Planner $114.74
Senior Project Manager $126.51
Senior Pump Maintenance Worker $73.09
Senior Pump Operator $73.09
Senior Warehouse Technician $64.68
Senior Warehouse Technician - Part-Time $32.24
Traffic Signal Technician $71.31
Utility Line Locator $58.67
Water Quality Specialist $73.09
Water Quality Technician $66.29

26 Comprehensive User Fee Study

Appendix C – Cost Recovery Analysis
The following tables provide the results of the analysis, resulting full cost recovery amount, and recommended fees. For fees, 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. 80.00 $208.78 62% $80.00 $0.00
4 2yrs. 140.00 $208.78 33% $140.00 $0.00
5 3yrs. 200.00 NA NA $200.00 $0.00
6 Altered Dog
7 1yr. 15.00 $208.78 93% $15.00 $0.00
8 2yrs. 26.00 $208.78 88% $26.00 $0.00
9 3yrs. 35.00 $208.78 83% $35.00 $0.00
10 Senior Citizen with Altered Dog
11 1yr. 10.00 $208.78 95% $10.00 $0.00
12 2yrs. 16.00 $208.78 92% $16.00 $0.00
13 3yrs. 22.00 $208.78 89% $22.00 $0.00
14 Transfer from other Jurisdiction-altered 10.00 $169.22 94% $10.00 $0.00 15 Transfer from other Jurisdiction-unaltered 20.00 $169.22 88% $20.00 $0.00 16 Replacement Tag 4.00 $67.86 94% $4.00 $0.00
17 Optional Cat License
18 1yr. 5.00 $67.86 93% $5.00 $0.00
19 2yrs. 7.00 $67.86 90% $7.00 $0.00
20 3yrs. 11.00 $68.18 84% $11.00 $0.00
21 Kennel License (including boarding/breeding facilities) 22 a. Less than 10 100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.00
23 b. 11-30 125.00 NA NA $125.00 $0.00
24 c. 31-60 150.00 NA NA $150.00 $0.00
25 d. 61-100 175.00 NA NA $175.00 $0.00
26 e. Over 100 200.00 NA NA $200.00 $0.00
27 Cattery License (including boarding/breeding facilities) 28 a. Less than 10 100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.00
29 b. 11-30 125.00 NA NA $125.00 $0.00
30 c. 31-50 150.00 NA NA $150.00 $0.00
31 d. For each additional range of 10 cats 25.00 NA NA $25.00 $0.00 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) 200.00 NA NA $200.00 $0.00 27

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 150.00 year NA NA $150.00 $0.00 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) 65.00 year + licensing fees $169.22 62% $65.00 + licensing fees $0.00 44 Re-inspection fee
45 a. Initial re-inspection No Charge $101.36 100% No Charge $0.00 46 b. Second re-inspection 75.00 NA NA $75.00 $0.00
47 c. Third re-inspection 100.00 NA NA $100.00 $0.00
48 Late License Penalty
49 Unaltered Dog 30.00 $48.08 38% $30.00 $0.00
50 Altered Dog 12.00 $48.08 75% $12.00 $0.00
51 Impound/Boarding Fees
52 Dogs and Cats (per day) 12.00 $38.15 69% $12.00 $0.00 53 Fowl (per day) 6.00 $57.22 90% $6.00 $0.00
54 Small Animals including rabbits (per day) 6.00 $57.22 90% $6.00 $0.00 55 Large Animals (per day) 18.00 $57.22 69% $18.00 $0.00 56 Quarantine of animal at Owners Residence (first
occurrence) 30.00 $101.36 70% $30.00 $0.00
57 Quarantine of animal at Owners Residence
(additional occurrence) 60.00 $101.36 41% $60.00 $0.00
58 Rabies Test Head Shipment 81.00 $455.86 82% $81.00 $0.00 59 Quarantine at Shelter (per day) 12.00 $77.70 85% $12.00 $0.00 60 Owner Turn In Animals (at Shelter)
61 Cats (Alive Includes boarding) 50.00 $392.81 87% $50.00 $0.00 62 Cats DOA 25.00 $125.79 80% $25.00 $0.00
63 Cats PTS Request 62.00 $144.86 57% $62.00 $0.00
64 Dogs (Alive includes boarding) 50.00 $392.81 87% $50.00 $0.00 65 Dogs DOA 25.00 $125.79 80% $25.00 $0.00
66 Dogs PTS request 62.00 $144.86 57% $62.00 $0.00
67 Litters of Kittens(4 months and under) 50.00 $392.81 87% $50.00 $0.00 68 Litters of puppies (4 months and under) 50.00 $392.81 87% $50.00 $0.00 69 Small livestock (under 100 lbs, including pot belly pigs) alive or PTS request 70 a. 0-50 lbs 62.00 $404.45 85% $62.00 $0.00
71 b. 51-100 lbs 93.00 $404.45 77% $93.00 $0.00
72 Rabbits, Fowl, and Similar 6.00 $212.11 97% $6.00 $0.00 28

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. $30 or $35 $67.86 48% $30 or $35 $0.00 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) 30.00 $169.22 82% $30.00 $0.00 78 Litters 43.00 $169.22 75% $43.00 $0.00
79 Small Livestock (Under 100 lbs) 62.00 $169.22 63% $62.00 $0.00 80 Pot Belly Pig or Swine $75 or CRB $169.22 NA $75 or CRB $0.00 81 After Hours Pickup (except Swine) CRB $76.48 NA CRB $0.00 82 Owner Turn In Large Livestock CRB + Add. Cost NA NA CRB + Add. Cost $0.00 83 Field Pick Up (Apprehension)
84 a. Tagged and Altered
85 First 0.00 $506.81 100% $0.00 $0.00
86 Second 100.00 $506.81 80% $100.00 $0.00
87 Third 200.00 $506.81 61% $200.00 $0.00
88 b. Tagged and Unaltered *
89 First 100.00 * Includes State fee
$35 $506.81 80% $100.00 * Includes State fee
$35 $0.00
90 Second 200.00 * Includes State fee
$50 $506.81 61% $200.00 * Includes State fee
$50 $0.00
91 Third 344.00 * Includes State fee
$100 $506.81 32% $344.00 * Includes State fee
$100 $0.00
92 c. Untagged and Altered
93 First 100.00 $460.44 78% $100.00 $0.00
94 Second 150.00 $460.44 67% $150.00 $0.00
95 Third 300.00 $460.44 35% $300.00 $0.00
96 d. Untagged and Unaltered * (Mand. Spay/Neuter at first) 97 First 168.00 * Includes State fee
$35 $460.44 64% $168.00 * Includes State fee
$35 $0.00
98 Second 187.00 * Includes State fee
$50 $460.44 59% $187.00 * Includes State fee
$50 $0.00
99 Third 250.00 * Includes State fee
$100 $460.44 46% $250.00 * Includes State fee
$100 $0.00
100 e. After hours apprehension add CRB NA NA CRB $0.00 101 Cats
102 a. Altered 12.00 $189.00 94% $12.00 $0.00
103 b. Unaltered, (Mandatory Spay/Neuter) 30.00 $189.00 84% $30.00 $0.00 104 Other Animals CRB $189.00 NA CRB $0.00
29

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 CRB NA NA CRB NA
107 Dog (includes spay/neuter, microchip, e-collar,
vaccines) 80.00 $183.71 56% $80.00 $0.00
108 Cat (includes spay/neuter) 50.00 $183.71 73% $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) 30.00 $125.79 76% $30.00 $0.00 111 Rabbits and Fowl 5.00 $125.79 96% $5.00 $0.00
112 Exotic Birds Market Value
less 25% $125.79 NA Market Value less
25% $0.00
113 Horses CRB $125.79 NA CRB $0.00
114 Pot Belly Pigs 15.00 $163.93 91% $15.00 $0.00
115 Adoption Dog or Cat Spay/Neuter deposit 40.00 $243.97 84% $40.00 $0.00 116 *Animal Rescue Group Pet Adoptions (Must have valid 501c3 on file) 117 Rescue Cat Free (Red Status) 0.00 NA NA $0.00 NA
118 Rescue Dog Free (Red Status) 0.00 NA NA $0.00 NA
119 Cat (Unaltered) 5.00 $106.01 95% 5.00 $0.00
120 Cat (already altered upon impound) 10.00 $106.01 91% 10.00 $0.00 121 Litter of Kittens 20.00 $125.79 84% 20.00 $0.00
122 Dog (Unaltered) 10.00 $106.01 91% 10.00 $0.00
123 Dog (already altered upon impound) 15.00 $106.01 86% 15.00 $0.00 124 Litter of Puppies (3 or less) 20.00 $125.79 84% 20.00 $0.00 125 Litter of Puppies (4 or more) 40.00 $125.79 68% 40.00 $0.00 126 Rabies Vaccination 5.00 $71.25 93% 5.00 $0.00
127 Microchip 25.00
$20 for pets leaving
with rescue
organization
$71.25 65% 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) 6.00 $180.38 97% $6.00 $0.00 133 Trap rental deposit 62.00 $111.68 44% $62.00 $0.00
134 Cat/Dog Trap not returned or damaged Actual Cost NA NA Actual Cost NA 135 Microchip w/ Registration 30.00 $102.90 71% $30.00 $0.00 136 E-Collar 10.00 $35.04 71% $10.00 $0.00
137 Cat carrier box 10.00 $27.41 64% $10.00 $0.00
138 Cat trap rentals 12.00 week $107.42 89% $12.00 $0.00 139 Leashes/used collars 3.00 NA NA $3.00 $0.00
30

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) $35/$45 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) CRB NA NA CRB NA 31

Miscellaneous
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 1 Appeals
2 Appeals of Enforcement Fees 81.00 $128.07 0% $128.00 $47.00 3 Administrative Appeal 85.00 $134.72 1% $134.00 $49.00 4 Appeals of Public Nuisance Determinations, Building Code Violations, and other HMC provisions 145.00 $227.28 0% $227.00 $82.00
5 Appeals to Planning Commission/Land Use Determinations 233.00 $364.86 0% $364.00 $131.00 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) 145.00 $227.28 0% $227.00 $82.00 8 Copying
9 Non-Color (per page)
10 Copy
11 a. Letter and Legal Size 1-25 pages, no charge.
$0.25 thereafter 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
Current Fees charged by
San Bernardino County to
add/amend/remove parcel
to/from the tax roll
NA NA
Current Fees charged by San
Bernardino County to
add/amend/remove parcel to/from
the tax roll
$0.00
32

Miscellaneous
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 37 Admin Lien Fee 30.00 NA NA $30.00 $0.00
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 134.00 $221.40 0% $221.00 $87.00 43 Annual Inspections (4-Total)-Small Producers 157.00 $259.47 0% $259.00 $102.00 44 Annual Inspections (4-total)- Large Producers 157.00 $389.20 1% $389.00 $232.00 45 Re-inspection Fee (each re-inspection per ½ hr) 78.00 $194.60 0% $194.00 $116.00 46 Late Manifest 50.00 NA NA $50.00 $0.00
47 Service overdue (greater than 30 days) 200.00 NA NA $200.00 $0.00 48 Film Permits
49 Permits Application 150.00 $244.45 39% $150.00 $0.00 50 Permit Amendment 150.00 $244.45 39% $150.00 $0.00
51 Personnel Changes (minimum deposit amount determined by all affected departments) CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
52 Student films are exempt from the application fee. No Charge NA NA No Charge $0.00 53 Liquor Licenses
54 Letter of Public Convenience 150.00 $244.45 39% $150.00 $0.00 55 Miscellaneous Fees
56 Correctable Citation Fee (in addition to other fines and fees) 25.00 NA NA $25.00 $0.00 57 Technology Fee (all development applications and permits) 0.10 23% 56% 10% $0.00 58 General Plan update fee (per EDU, or 1.5 multiple dwelling units) 7% of Building Permit 7% 0% 7% of Building Permit $0.00 59 Invoice Fee - when not making monthly payments 20.00 $37.75 47% $20.00 $0.00 60 Medical Cannabis Business Compliance Review 2,000.00 Reimburse contracted consultant's rate NA NA $2,000.00 $0.00
61 Medical Cannabis Business Financial Audit 10,000.00 Reimburse contracted consultant's rate NA NA $10,000.00 $0.00
62 Online Solar Permit Processing Credit Card Service Fee Current Rate charged by
Stripe (SolarApp+ payment
processor)
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) $0.00
63 Refunds/Additional Fees
64 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.
65 b. The City Manager or designee may authorize a full refund of any fee that was erroneously paid or collected.
33

Miscellaneous
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 66 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.
67 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. 68 e. Cost Reasonably Borne (CRB) shall be charged for all projects exceeding costs for the minimum amount.
69 f. All fees shall be calculated to the nearest one-quarter (1/4) hour. 70 g. Penalty fees shall be assessed wherever required permits or licenses have not been properly obtained.
71 i. First Occurrence Double Fee NA NA Double Fee $0.00 72 ii. Second and Subsequent Occurrences Triple Fee or $500, whichever is greater NA NA Triple Fee or $500,
whichever is greater $0.00
73 Sale of Printed Material
74 Developers Handbook 90.00 $90.00 0% $90.00 $0.00
75 Plans and Specifications 50.00 $50.00 0% $50.00 $0.00 76 Master Plan of Drainage (3 Volumes) Actual Cost NA NA Actual Cost $0.00 77 Late Fee on citation and abatement (Lien, Citation, track and payment) 12% NA NA 12% $0.00 78 Demand letter for the payoff (citation & abatement cost) 133.00 $207.90 0% $207.00 $74.00 79 Inspection and release of NOP 198.00 $309.78 0% $309.00 $111.00 80 For payment plan 78.00 $129.47 0% $129.00 $51.00
81 Remove from tax roll Without payment 124.00 $201.47 0% $201.00 $77.00 34

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 $103.76 52% $50.00 $0.00 3 Renewal License (annual) 50.00 $103.76 52% $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 126.00 $207.52 0% $207.00 $81.00
9 Renewal License 63.00 $103.76 1% $103.00 $40.00
10 Changes to Business License (address, name, etc.) 29.00 $48.41 1% $48.00 $19.00 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 $430.58 54% $200.00 $0.00 15 Adult Business 200.00 $430.58 54% $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 $7,400.21 39% $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 $224.63 73% $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 $224.63 73% $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 $224.63 67% $75.00 $0.00
35

Business License
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 32 Rental Housing Business License
33 Single Family Residential 75.00 + Current Business License Fee $317.88 76% $75.00 $0.00 34 Multi-Family (Including Duplexes) 50.00 unit + Current Business License Fee $317.88 84% $50.00 $0.00 35 Self-Certification Fee for Single Family Residences 40.00 + Current Business License Renewal Fee $263.24 85% $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
$202.23 73% $55.00 $0.00
37 Re-inspection rental inspection 128.00 $204.74 37% $128.00 $0.00 38 Residential Truck Parking Permit
39 Parking Permit - 1st Tractor and 1st Trailer 0.00 $266.44 100% $0.00 $0.00 40 Parking Permit - 2nd Tractor and 2nd Trailer 0.00 $266.44 100% $0.00 $0.00 41 Parking Permit - 3+ Tractors 168.00 per tractor
annually $266.44 0% $266.00 $98.00
42 Parking Permit - 3+ Trailers 168.00 per trailer
annually $266.44 0% $266.00 $98.00
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 61.00 Permit + Current Business License Fee $79.56 1% $79.00 $18.00 46 Third-Party Hauler Permit - Annual Renewal 61.00 Permit + Current Business License Renewal Fee $79.56 1% $79.00 $18.00
(In addition to standard business license fees for home occupation) 36

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 100.00 $162.97 1% $162.00 $0.00
4 b. Tract maps 201.00 $325.94 0% $325.00 $124.00
5 c. Other (with conditions) 201.00 $325.94 0% $325.00 $124.00 6 Pre-construction meeting 339.00 $558.89 0% $558.00 $219.00 7 Plan Review- Non Residential and Multi-Family Residential (Rough or Precise) 8 a. Up to 10 Acres 772.00 $1,271.57 0% $1,271.00 $499.00 9 b. Greater than 10 Acres 1,545.00 + CRB $2,543.13 0% $2,543.00 $998.00 10 c. CASp Review - up to one acre 214.00 $353.21 0% $353.00 $139.00 11 d. CASp Review - 1 to 10 acres 300.00 $494.50 0% $494.00 $194.00 12 e. CASp Review - over 10 acres 429.00 + CRB $706.43 0% $706.00 $277.00 13 Plan Review-Subdivisions for Single Family Residential 14 a. Parcel Maps (1-5 Lots) 201.00 $1,093.40 0% $1,093.00 $892.00 15 b. 6-100 Lots
16 i. Rough 601.00 $2,082.39 0% $2,082.00 $1,481.00
17 ii. Precise 1,116.00 $2,930.11 0% $2,930.00 $1,814.00 18 c. 101-250 Lots
19 i. Rough 1,116.00 $3,495.25 0% $3,495.00 $2,379.00
20 ii. Precise 1,803.00 $4,060.39 0% $4,060.00 $2,257.00 21 d. 251 + Lots
22 i. Rough 1,545.00 $4,521.13 0% $4,521.00 $2,976.00
23 ii. Precise 2,232.00 $5,086.27 0% $5,086.00 $2,854.00 24 e. Mass Grading 1,374.00 $1,977.99 0% $1,977.00 $603.00 25 f. Stock Plan Setup (1 hr. of plan review) 128.00 $405.58 0% $405.00 $277.00 26 g. Stockpile (plan check and permit) 463.00 $749.04 0% $749.00 $286.00 27 h. CASp Review for model home complex 171.00 $772.66 0% $772.00 $601.00 28 Inspection - Single Family Residential (includes plan review) 29 Pre-site investigation for grading plan submittal 119.00 $196.63 0% $196.00 $77.00 30 a. No drainage 474.00 $1,018.26 0% $1,018.00 $544.00 31 b. With drainage 517.00 + Hydrology Study Fee $1,289.27 0% $1,289.00 $772.00 32 c. Precise Grading 322.00 + $16/lot over 7 lots $449.16 0% $449.00 $127.00 33 Inspection - Non Residential and Multi-Family
34 a. Rough / Mass Grading Variable $801.50 0%
Use base Fee of $ 801 or
2% of Engineering Cost
estimate, Which ever is
greater
NA
35 b. Native plant plan review 257.00 $740.18 0% $740.00 $483.00 36 c. Preliminary Site Plan Review 100.00 $222.50 0% $222.00 $122.00 37 Other Fees
38 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
39 Notice of Pendency or Nuisance Abatement Lien placement and removal Current S.B. County Rate NA NA Current S.B. County Rate $0.00 40 Additional plan review or inspection time (After 3 checks or inspections) CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
41 Annual Permits 92.00 $152.81 1% $152.00 $60.00
42 Cash Deposits/Bonds 165.00 + CRB $271.87 0% $271.00 $106.00 43 Demolitions 177.00 $410.48 0% $410.00 $233.00
44 Hourly plan review fee 158.00 per hour $260.34 0% $260.00 per hour $102.00 37

Building & Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 45 Extend building permit application 63.00 $104.40 0% $104.00 $41.00 46 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
47 Addressing: Written Verification, Full Distribution New $152.17 0% $152.00 NA 48 Addressing: Subdivision addressing, per lot (Tract Only) New $37.80 2% $37.00 NA 49 Addressing: Individual infill lots New $21.19 1% $21.00 NA 50 Yard/Garage Sale Permit New $14.52 4% $14.00 NA
51 Light Standards/Flag Poles - Up to Three (includes electrical) 237.00 $390.07 0% $390.00 $153.00 52 Light Standards/Flag Poles - per pole over three poles (includes electrical) 316.00 $129.73 1% $129.00 -$187.00 53 Certificate of Occupancy
54 a. Change of name/owner/use/new 220.00 $362.11 0% $362.00 $142.00 55 b. Field Investigations (pre-alteration) 187.00 + CRB $509.10 0% $509.00 $322.00 56 Fire Sprinklers
57 a. Non-Residential Plan Review 171.00 $1,350.11 0% $1,350.00 $1,179.00 58 b. Non-Residential Plan Review - over 10,000 SF 171.000 $282.57 39% $171.00 $0.00 59 c. Non-Residential Permit 230.00 $556.67 0% $556.00 $326.00 60 d. Non-Residential Permit - over 10,000 SF 230.000 $259.47 11% $230.00 $0.00 61 e. Residential Plan Review 128.00 $211.93 0% $211.00 $83.00 62 f. Residential Permit 190.00 $313.65 0% $313.00 $123.00 63 Manufactured buildings (includes plan review)
64 a. Setdowns 510.00 $839.24 0% $839.00 $329.00
65 b. Install permanent foundation 510.00 $509.13 0% $509.00 -$1.00 66 Mobile Home (Within a park, per current edition of Title 25) Not to exceed Title 25 maximums: regulated NA NA NA
67 HCD MH 415 Inspection (First Inspection) regulated NA NA NA 68 HCD MH 415 Inspection (Added 1/2 hour to inspection) regulated NA NA NA 69 HCD MH 415 Inspection (Added hour to inspection) regulated NA NA NA 70 HCD MH 415 Inspection (Reinspection) regulated NA NA NA 71 HCD MP 50 Inspection (First Inspection) regulated NA NA NA 72 HCD MP 50 Inspection (Added 1/2 hour to inspection) regulated NA NA NA 73 HCD MP 50 Inspection (Added hour to inspection) regulated NA NA NA 74 HCD MP 50 Inspection (Reinspection) regulated NA NA NA 75 HCD Plan Check (First hour) regulated NA NA NA
76 HCD Plan Check (Added 1/2 hour to review) regulated NA NA NA 77 HCD Plan Check (Added hour to review) regulated NA NA NA 78 HCD Alternate Approval regulated NA NA NA
79 HCD Standard plan Approval regulated NA NA NA
80 HCD Mobile Home Installation (1 Section) regulated NA NA NA 81 HCD Mobile Home Installation (2 Sections) regulated NA NA NA 82 HCD Mobile Home Installation (3 Sections) regulated NA NA NA 83 HCD Mobile Home Complaint regulated NA NA NA
84 Digital Scanning
85 a. Single-Family residential and minor projects 29.00 $48.41 1% $48.00 $19.00 86 b. Non-residential, multiple family residential and large projects 58.00 $96.82 1% $96.00 $38.00 Fees charged by State of
California
38

Building & Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 87 Patio Covers/Enclosures
88 a. With standard plan 216.00 $582.85 0% $582.00 $366.00 89 b. Non-standard plan 263.00 $1,017.38 0% $1,017.00 $754.00 90 Re-inspection Fee 54.00 $96.82 1% $96.00 $42.00
91 Signs (includes plan review and inspections)
92 a. Wall signs and miscellaneous 237.00 $519.81 0% $519.00 $282.00 93 b. Monument signs (10 ft. or less) 276.00 $649.54 0% $649.00 $373.00 94 c. Pole signs (more than 10 ft. high) 316.00 $649.54 0% $649.00 $333.00 95 Special Inspector Registration - Single address 68.00 $165.48 0% $165.00 $97.00 96 Special Inspector Registration - Multiple addresses 137.00 $278.76 0% $278.00 $141.00 97 Storage Sheds (includes plan check and inspection) 194.00 $638.86 0% $638.00 $444.00 98 Strong Motion Instrumentation Program (SMIP)
99 a. Category I Construction (based upon valuation)
Pass through from State:
$13.00 per $100,000
valuation (minimum
$0.50 fee0
NA NA
Pass through from State:
$13.00 per $100,000
valuation (minimum
$0.50 fee0
$0.00
100 b. Category II Construction (based upon valuation)
Pass through from State:
$28.00 per $100,000
valuation (minimum
$0.50 fee0
NA NA
Pass through from State:
$28.00 per $100,000
valuation (minimum
$0.50 fee0
$0.00
101 Building Standards Commission Revolving Fund
102 a. Permit Valuation $1-25,000 1.00 NA NA $1.00 $0.00 103 b. Permit Valuation $25,001-50,000 2.00 NA NA $2.00 $0.00 104 c. Permit Valuation $50,001-75,000 3.00 NA NA $3.00 $0.00 105 d. Permit Valuation $75,001-100,000 4.00 NA NA $4.00 $0.00 106 e. Every $25,000 or fraction thereof above $100,000 Add $1 NA NA Add $1 $0.00 107 Swimming Pools and Spas (includes plan review)
108 a. In-ground 467.00 $1,228.44 0% $1,228.00 $761.00
109 b. Above ground pools and/or spas 223.00 $839.24 0% $839.00 $616.00 110 Temporary Electrical Services
111 a. Up to 5 power poles 137.00 $582.85 0% $582.00 $445.00 112 b. Per pole over 5 poles 7.89 $12.97 8% $12.00 $4.11 113 Valuations
Use most recent years'
edition of Building
Standards Magazine
NA NA
Use most recent years'
edition of Building
Standards Magazine
$0.00
114 Walls (first 200 lineal feet, successive 200 feet, includes plan review) 216.00 $532.90 0% $532.00 $316.00 115 Walls (first 200 lineal feet, successive 200 feet, includes plan review) 290.00 $129.73 1% $129.00 -$161.00 116 Wireless Towers 441.00 $725.96 0% $725.00 $284.00
117 Windmills and Photovoltaic Systems (ResidenƟal)(Plan Review and InspecƟon) 118 a. Residential 276.00 $454.94 1% $450.00 $174.00
119 b. Residential (with stock plan) 244.00 $401.63 0% $401.00 $157.00 120 c. Non-residential (per structure) 480.00 $790.82 0% $790.00 $310.00 121 CASp Consulting CRB NA NA CRB $0.00
122 Medical Cannabis Delivery Permit Part II 5,000.00 NA NA $5,000.00 $0.00 39

Building & Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 123 Non-Residential
124 Building Permits 2,315.00 $3,808.46 0% $3,808.00 $1,493.00 125 Building Permits - per SF up to 10,000 SF 0.35 plus base fee NA NA $0.35 $0.00 126 Building Permits - per SF over 10,000 SF 0.17 plus previous tier fee amount NA NA $0.17 $0.00 127 Electrical/Plumbing/Mechanical (each) 452.00 NA NA $452.00 $0.00 128 Electrical/Plumbing/Mechanical (each) - per SF 0.03 NA NA $0.03 $0.00 129 Plan Review
130 a. Building plan review 503.00 NA NA $503.00 $0.00
131 a. Building plan review - per SF 0.10 plus base fee NA NA $0.10 $0.00 132 b. E/P/M (each) 158.00 $260.34 0% $260.00 per hour $102.00 133 b. E/P/M (each) - per SF 0.05 plus base fee NA NA $0.05 $0.00 134 Tenant improvements (no area added)
135 a. Building permit 211.00 NA NA $211.00 $0.00
136 b. Building permit - per SF 0.06 plus base fee NA NA $0.06 $0.00 137 c. Plan review 158.00 $260.34 0% $260.00 per hour $102.00 138 d. Plan review - per SF 0.04 plus base fee NA NA $0.04 $0.00 139 CASp Review - Plan Review
140 a. New buildings up to 10,000 square feet 171.00 $282.57 0% $282.00 $111.00 141 b. New buildings 10,001 to 25,000 square feet 214.00 $353.21 0% $353.00 $139.00 142 c. New buildings over 25,000 square feet 300.00 + CRB $494.50 0% $494.00 + CRB $194.00 143 d. Tenant Improvements Same as new buildings NA NA Same as new buildings $0.00 144 CASp Review - Inspections Same as plan review NA NA Same as plan review $0.00 145 Residential (includes application or permit)
146 Plan Review
147 a. Minimum plan review fee (includes 30 min. plan review) 115.00 $189.70 0% $189.00 $74.00 148 b. Additions/garages/accessory uses (under 1,000sf) 244.00 $463.91 0% $463.00 $219.00 149 c. Additions/garages/accessory uses (over 1,000sf) 0.21 per sq ft plus base fee NA NA $0.21 per sq ft $0.00 150 d. New residences 445.00 + $0.21 PSF over 1,000 SF $1,182.65 0% $1,182.00 $737.00 151 e. Residences with multiple roof plans 42.00 add each roof style $211.93 0% $211.00 add each roof style $169.00
152 Inspection
153 a. Single InspecƟons (includes meter reset, re-pit, andsimilar) 108.00 $178.15 0% $178.00 $70.00 154 b. Two inspections (includes re-roofs, lattice patios, minor alterations, new meter installation, and similar) 187.00 $307.88 0% $307.00 $120.00 155 c. Three inspections (includes patio covers and similar) 266.00 $437.61 0% $437.00 $171.00 156 d. Additions / Accessory Uses without plumbing 466.00 $767.72 0% $767.00 $301.00 157 e. Additions / Accessory Uses without plumbing - per SF 0.17 plus base fee NA NA $0.17 per sq ft $0.00 158 f. Wood floor, second story modifier (add) 95.00 NA NA $95.00 $0.00 159 g. New residences New $1,945.99 0% $1,945.00 NA
160 h. New residences - per SF over 1,000Sf New per sq ft plus base fee NA NA $0.35 per sq ft NA 161 i. Additions/accessory uses/garages /
garage conversions with plumbing 890.00 $1,037.86 0% $1,037.00 $147.00 162 j. Additions/accessory uses/garages/garage conversions with plumbing - per SF over 1,000 SF 0.35 per sq ft plus base fee NA NA $0.35 per sq ft $0.00 163 k. Garage, Garage conversion no plumbing 575.00 $945.86 0% $945.00 $370.00 164 Construction Waste Management Plan Program (Construction and Demolition) 165 Single Family Residential (including room additions) 88.00 $145.24 0% $145.00 $57.00 166 Tenant Improvements (increase in sq. footage only) 88.00 $145.24 0% $145.00 $57.00 167 Non-Residential 88.00 $145.24 0% $145.00 $57.00
168 Multi-Family Residential 176.00 $290.47 0% $290.00 $114.00 40

Building & Safety
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 169 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
170 Penalty for not taking construction waste to Advance Disposal 500.00 NA NA $500.00 $0.00 171 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
172 Penalty for removing HVAC without contractors license 500.00 NA NA $500.00 $0.00 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) Actual Cost NA NA Actual Cost NA 14 Processing Fee for Appraisals (commercial) Actual Cost 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 180.00 $292.86 0% $292.00 $112.00 2 Adult Entertainment Business Permit 217.00 $352.19 0% $352.00 $135.00 3 Alteration of Non-Conforming Use 3,052.00 $4,937.46 0% $4,937.00 $1,885.00 4 Annexation 3,052.00 + CRB $4,937.46 0% $4,937.00 $1,885.00 5 Certificate of Correction/Certificate of Compliance 180.00 $292.86 0% $292.00 $112.00 6 Conditional Use Permit 3,111.00 $5,034.28 0% $5,034.00 $1,923.00 7 Conditional Use Permit for uses including alcoholic
beverages (DRC hearing Only, type 21 on-site beer and
wine)
986.00 $1,596.61 0% $1,596.00 $610.00
8 Conditional Use Permit for uses including alcoholic
beverages (Offsale P.C., C.C. hearing) 3,111.00 $5,034.28 0% $5,034.00 $1,923.00 9 Development Agreement (includes density bonus, etc.) 1,541.00 $2,492.93 0% $2,492.00 $951.00 10 Document Review (Bio Study, Cultural, Traffic, Noise, etc.) 180.00 each $292.86 0% $292.00 $112.00 11 Initial Study (with negative declaration) 995.00 $1,611.95 0% $1,611.00 $616.00 12 Extension of Time Request 281.00 $455.83 0% $455.00 $174.00 13 General Plan Amendments/Zone Change/Specific Plan
Amendments 2,578.00 $4,171.03 0% $4,171.00 $1,593.00
14 Preliminary application pursunt to SB330 79.00 $129.90 1% $129.00 $50.00 15 Landscape Plans
16 a. Commercial, Industrial, Multi-Family (Includes LMD) 634.00 $1,026.22 0% $1,026.00 $392.00 17 b. Subdivisions, up to 5 plans 230.00 $374.35 0% $374.00 $144.00 18 c. Subdivision, Landscape Maintenance District (includes basins) 432.00 $700.28 0% $700.00 $268.00
19 d. Parks (HRPD or HOA) 130.00 $211.38 0% $211.00 $81.00 20 e. Specific Plans/Planned Developments Initial Deposit $10K + CRB NA NA Initial Deposit $10K
+ CRB $0.00
21 Lot Line Adjustment/Lot Merger/Access
Easements/Suspension
Agreements
180.00 $292.86 0% $292.00 $112.00
22 Medicinal Cannabis Delivery Business Permit 2,519.00 $4,074.20 0% $4,074.00 $1,555.00 23 Minor Exception 216.00 $350.14 0% $350.00 $134.00
24 Revised Site Plan Reviews (SPRRs) and Revised
Conditional Use Permits (CUPRs) - Minor Revisions 764.00 $1,237.60 0% $1,237.00 $473.00 43

Planning
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 25 Revised Site Plan Reviews (SPRRs) and Revised
Conditional Use Permits (CUPRs) - Major Revisions 2,175.00 $3,519.16 0% $3,519.00 $1,344.00 26 Sign Plans New $162.97 1% $162.00 NA
27 a. Site Sign Plans 331.00 $537.32 0% $537.00 $206.00 28 Site Plan Review 2,204.00 $3,567.57 0% $3,567.00 $1,363.00 29 Public Facility Review 2,204.00 $3,567.57 0% $3,567.00 $1,363.00 30 Special Event/Temporary Use Permit/Temporary
Occupancy Permit 151.00 $244.45 0% $244.00 $93.00
31 Special Event/Temporary Use Permit/Temporary
Occupancy Permit (Major) 302.00 $488.90 0% $488.00 $186.00 32 Specific Plan/EIR/Planned Development 2,548.00 $4,122.62 0% $4,122.00 $1,574.00 33 Tentative Parcel Map
34 a. Residential 478.00 $774.10 0% $774.00 $296.00
35 a. Residential - plus per lot 2.00 plus base fee NA NA $2.00 $0.00 36 b. Non-Residential 655.00 $1,059.29 0% $1,059.00 $404.00 37 b. Non-Residential - plus per lot 2.00 plus base fee NA NA $2.00 $0.00 38 Tentative Tract Map 2,015.00 $3,259.36 0% $3,259.00 $1,244.00 39 Tentative Tract Map - plus per lot, addressing fee 2.00 NA NA $2.00 $0.00 40 Variance 1,541.00 $2,492.93 0% $2,492.00 $951.00
41 Other Services
42 a. ABC and Public Convenience or Necessity Letters 100.00 $162.97 1% $162.00 $62.00 43 b. Site Review (without application) 130.00 $211.38 0% $211.00 $81.00 44 c. Zoning Letter 165.00 $268.66 0% $268.00 $103.00
45 d. Non-Specified Services 45.00 min NA NA $45.00 $0.00 46 e. Additional plan review or inspection time (After 3 checks/incomplete letters/inspections) CRB NA NA CRB $0.00 47 f. Mobile Food Service 151.00 $422.42 0% $422.00 $271.00 48 g. Mobile Food Service - Renewal 75.00 $122.23 0% $122.00 $47.00 49 h. Sidewalk Vending 130.00 $211.38 0% $211.00 $81.00 50 i. Plan review
51 i. Grading
52 1. Tract maps (5-100 lots) 503.00 $814.84 0% $814.00 $311.00 53 2. Tract maps (101- 250 lots) 554.00 $896.32 0% $896.00 $342.00 54 3. Tract maps (251 + lots) 604.00 $977.81 0% $977.00 $373.00 55 4. Non-residential and MFR (0-10 acres) 503.00 $814.84 0% $814.00 $311.00 56 5. Non-residential and MFR (10+ acres) 604.00 $977.81 0% $977.00 $373.00 44

Planning
# Fee Description Current Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Fee Δ 57 ii.Residences in tracts (per 5 units in model complex) (up to 5 floor plans) 302.00 $488.90 0% $488.00 $186.00 58 iii. Multi-family residences (each building elevation) 403.00 $651.87 0% $651.00 $248.00 59 iv. Non-residential (each building)
60 1. 0-10,000 sq. ft. 503.00 $814.84 0% $814.00 $311.00 61 2. 10,001 - 100,000 sq. ft. 554.00 $896.32 0% $896.00 $342.00 62 3. $100,001 sq. ft. + 604.00 $977.81 0% $977.00 $373.00 63 4. Tenant Improvement Plan Review 100.00 $162.97 1% $162.00 $62.00 64 v. Final Map Review 403.00 $651.87 0% $651.00 $248.00 65 h. Inspections
66 i. Tract architectural review (per 5 units) 100.00 $244.45 0% $244.00 $144.00 67 i. Tract architectural review (per 5 units) - plus per unit 30.80 plus base fee $53.78 1% $53.00 $22.20 68 ii. Multi-family architectural review 201.00 $325.94 0% $325.00 $124.00 69 iii. Non-residential
70 1. 0-10,000 sq. ft. 503.00 $814.84 0% $814.00 $311.00 71 2. 10,001 - 100,000 sq. ft. 554.00 $896.32 0% $896.00 $342.00 72 3. 100,001 + sq. ft. 604.00 $977.81 0% $977.00 $373.00 73 iv. Miscellaneous (tenant improvements, additions,
landscaping,
etc.)
165.00 $268.66 0% $268.00 $103.00
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 357.00 + CRB $476.40 0% $476.00 $119.00 4 b. Tentative Tracts 930.00 + CRB $1,246.41 0% $1,246.00 $316.00 5 Final Map Review
6 a. Final Parcel Map 1,074.00 $1,544.72 0% $1,544.00 $470.00 7 b. Final Tract Map 1,363.00 $1,581.48 0% $1,581.00 $218.00 8 b. Final Tract Map - per lot 35.00 $35.00 0% $35.00 $0.00 9 Pre-Construction Meeting 448.00 $668.52 0% $668.00 $220.00 10 Cash Deposits/Bonds (grading and paving) 397.00 + CRB $536.27 0% $536.00 $139.00 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) 4,905.00 per sheet $7,199.19 0% $7,199.00 per sheet $2,294.00 14 Commercial/Industrial/Multi-Family Grading 1,240.00 per sheet $1,736.18 0% $1,736.00 per sheet $496.00 15 Commercial/Multi-Family Onsite Utility Plan 1,927.00 per sheet $2,760.49 0% $2,760.00 per sheet $833.00 16 Industrial Onsite Utility Plan 1,125.00 per sheet $1,621.18 0% $1,621.00 per sheet $496.00 17 Rough Grading (Residential Tracts) 3,760.00 per sheet $5,492.00 0% $5,491.00 per sheet $1,731.00 18 Precise Grading (Residential Tracts) 1,183.00 $1,650.82 0% $1,650.00 $467.00 19 Precise Grading (Residential Tracts) - per lot 20.00 NA NA $20.00 $0.00 20 Hydrology Review 553.00 + CRB after 2 checks $711.86 0% $711.00 $158.00 21 Professional Report Review (Geotechnical, Soils Report) 219.00 $298.43 0% $298.00 $79.00 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) 552.00 $767.58 0% $767.00 $215.00 26 Legal document Review (per document) (Includes Irrevocable Offers of Dedication, Easements, Lot Mergers and Lot Line Adjustments, Title Reports)
725.00 $967.94 0% $967.00 $242.00
27 Request and Processing of Vacations 980.00 $1,348.57 0% $1,348.00 $368.00 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, uƟlity 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) 441.00 $644.66 0% $644.00 $203.00 32 b. Non-Residential 639.00 $939.59 0% $939.00 $300.00 33 Utility Cuts and Trenches-Stand Alone (not assoc. to project) 34 a. Up to 18 square feet in area 162.00 $229.62 0% $229.00 $67.00 35 d. Over 1,000 ft. in length (per 100 ft. additional) 212.00 $303.36 0% $303.00 $91.00 36 f. Over 1,000 ft. in length (per 100 ft. additional) 261.00 $377.09 0% $377.00 $116.00 37 Fire Service (per service - all sizes) 696.00 $1,025.31 0% $1,025.00 $329.00 38 Permits
39 Oversize Load and Heavy Load Vehicles
40 a. Per Trip 16.00 $202.26 92% $16.00 $0.00
41 b. Annual 90.00 $202.26 56% $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
47

Engineering
# Fee Description
Current
Fee/Charge Unit Notes Full Cost Subsidy % Suggested Fee Unit Fee Δ 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 75 Storm Water PolluƟon PrevenƟon 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 20.00 $20.00 0% $20.00 $0.00
3 Citation Filing Fee 38.00 $60.11 37% $38.00 $0.00
4 Excessive False Alarms (Police MulƟple 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 20.00 $20.00 0% $20.00 $0.00
13 Clearance Letter/Records Check 37.00 $37.00 0% $37.00 $0.00 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 32.00 $8 City Fee/$2 County
Fee $32.00 0% $32.00 $0.00
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 90.00 $144.05 38% $90.00 $0.00 4 Turn on/off water meter - same day after hours 125.00 NA NA $125.00 $0.00 5 Clean and Show 70.00 $112.12 0% $112.00 $42.00
6 Bill Suppression 19.00 NA NA $19.00 $0.00
7 Delinquency Fee-Minimum 61 days Delinquent 45.00 $1,042.05 96% $45.00 $0.00 8 Water Service Disconnect
Reconnection/Delinquency Fee - After Hrs. 109.00 NA NA $109.00 $0.00 9 Backflow Testing
10 Initial Test 81.00 $130.56 0% $130.00 $49.00
11 Multiple Test 40.00
Add additional 30 minutes
per device requiring
inspection and testing
$65.28 0% $65.00 $25.00
12 Annual Residential 65.00 NA NA $65.00 $0.00
13 Fire Flow Test
14 Commercial 467.00 $747.85 0% $747.00 $280.00
15 Residential 73.00 $118.42 0% $118.00 $45.00
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.
$150.37 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 30.00 1st request No Charge $87.91 66% $30.00 $0.00 22 Non-Compliance Customer Service Call-Out 50.00 $142.73 65% $50.00 $0.00 23 Non-Compliance Customer Service Call-Out (After
hrs.) 50.00 $144.87 65% $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 107.00 each $171.62 0% $171.00 $64.00 25 Meter Pull/Reset - 1” Meter Pull/Reset 107.00 each $171.62 0% $171.00 $64.00 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 75.00 non-refundable $121.48 0% $121.00 $46.00 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 75.00 $121.48 0% $121.00 $46.00
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 $136.37 99% $2.00 $0.00 34 Re-calculate Bill 39.00 each occurrence $63.70 1% $63.00 $24.00 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 30.00 $1,276.12 98% $30.00 $0.00
38 County Tax Roll Fee
Current Fees charged by
San Bernardino County to
add/amend/remove parcel
to/from the tax roll
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. 2024-35
RESOLUTION NO. HWD-2024-14

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, the FY 2023-24 User Fee Schedule was adopted on December 19 th, 2023 and
effective March 1, 2024; and

WHEREAS, in addition to the recommended adoption of the FY 2023- 24 Revised 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 of 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 Revised 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 1st day of December, 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-

Adopt Joint Resolution No. 2024-35 and Resolution No. HWD 2024-14, amending the City-wide fee schedule related to the User Fee Study.

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 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.

Sec
tion 5. That the current adopted fees, rates, and service charges shall supersede any and all previously adopted fees, rates, and service charges.

Sec
tion 6. Interpretation of this resolution may be made by the City Manager or designee.

When there are conflicts between fees, the lower fee shall be applied.

Sec
tion 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.

Sec
tion 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 6th day of August 2024
______________________________
Larry Bird, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk

THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK

City of Hesp eria

STAFF REPOR T

DATE: August 6, 2024

TO: Mayor and Council Members

FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager

BY: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services April Antonio, Administrative Analyst

SUBJECT: Community Assistance Program Guidelines and Processes

RECOMMENDED ACTION

It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-37, which will memorialize the Community Assistance Program guidelines and processes.

BACKGROUND

Since Fiscal Year (FY) 2017-18, the Economic Developme nt Division has facilitated t he Community Assistance Program (CAP), which is a grant program funded each fiscal year in the amount of $50,000 through the City’s General Fund for local non-profit organizations.

The CAP program has historically provided grants, typically $5,000 per grantee , to local community organizations throughout the M ojave River Valley. Since the program ’s inception, successful grantees have provided Hesperia residents with a wide range of community-related services.

ISSUES/ANALYSIS

Based on recent feedback received from the City Council, and to streamline and improve the process, staff recommends the City Council adopt a resolution memorializing the following CAP guidelines:

1. Priority CAP Activities: Priority will be given to grantees who provide the following (in no particular order): food and clothing services/assistance; unhoused shelter services/assistance; youth/foster care services/assistance; disability services/assistance; senior services/assistance; veteran services/assistance; and an imal spay and neuter services/assistance.

2. Financial Priorities: Priority shall be further given based on the documented financial need of each potential grantee.

3. Funding Amounts: Each successful grantee shall be funded in an amount not to exceed $5,000.

4. Schedule of Events: the CAP schedule of events shall be:
 In mid -January of each fiscal year , a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) will be published (in English and Spanish) in the Daily Press, on the Ci ty’s website and social media.

Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
City of Hesperia Community Assistance Program (CAP)
August 6, 2024

 Applications will be made available on the same day the NOFA is published and will be accessible on the City’s website and social media with hardcopies available at City Hall.  Hard copy applications will be due within one month of the NOFA.

5. City Council Adv isory Comm ittee: Once applicat ions are received, the City Counci l Advisory Committee (CCAC) will conduct a public meeting to receive in put and public testimony on the needs and priorities of the community . The CCAC will the n review and rank all applications based on the above-noted CAP priority activities, the financial needs of each applicant, and community feedback received. Once all applications have been ranked, the CCAC will forward its rankings/funding slate to the City Council for final approval.

6. City C ouncil Appr oval: In acknowledgement of the CCAC ’s considerable efforts to carefully review all applications, consider public testimony from potential grantees, and rank applications based on the above -noted p riorities, staff recommends tha t the C ity Counci l approve the ranking/funding slate from the CCAC.

CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THE ITEM

Future Development: Facilitate balanced growth to ensure cohesive community development and pursue economic development.

FISCAL IMPACT

The CAP grant, in the amount of $50,000, is included in the (FY) 2024-25 Adopted Budget and is anticipated, with City Council approval, to be included in subsequent Fiscal Years.

ALTERNATIVE(S)

1. Provide alternative direction to staff.

ATTACHMENT(S)

1. CAP Guidelines

2. Resolution No. 2024-37

Funding:

The City of Hesperia’s Community Assistance Program (CAP) is a grant program, specifically for non-profit organizations, that is funded each Fiscal Year, with City Council approval, in the amount of $50,000.

Priority Activities:

 Food and clothing services/assistance
 Unhouse shelter services/assistance
 Youth and foster care services/assistance
 Disability services/assistance
 Senior services/assistance
 Veteran services/assistance
 Spay and neuter services/assistance for animals

Ineligible Activities:

 New construction or rehabilitation of structures
 Acquisition of real property
 Lobbying
 Political or religious solicitation/services
 Broker fees/services
 Illegal activities
 Activities that are prohibited by City Ordinance and/or Resolution  Operations that lack all required government agency licensing, permits, or approvals

Schedule of Events (Dates are Selected by the Program Manager):

 In mid-January of each Fiscal Year, a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) will be published (in English and Spanish) in the Daily Press and on the City’s website and social media  Applications will be made available on the same day the NOFA is published and will be accessible on the City’s website and social media with hardcopies available at City Hall  Hard copy applications will be due within one month of the NOFA  The City Council Advisory Committee (CCAC) will conduct a public hearing to review all applications (applicants are encouraged to attend and speak)
 City Council review and approval of CCAC’s recommended funding slate

Required Documentation for Funding:

 Copy of your current program year Articles of Incorporation and By-Laws  Non-profit Determination Letter from the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) for your organization City of Hesperia
Community Assistance Program (CAP)
Program Guidelines
Attachment 1

 Organizational Chart for the current program year for your program/project  List of Board of Directors for the current program year for your program/project  Completed Hesperia CAP Application
 Active City of Hesperia Business License
 Completed W-9 form (City provided document)
 Completed Vendor Application (City provided document)  Executed CAP contract with the City of Hesperia (City provided document)  Current General Liability Insurance and Workers Comp Insurance (if you have employees)

Program Management:

Data collected on unduplicated Hesperia residents will be utilized to support CDBG Consolidated Plan goals (Fair Housing Services, Public Services for Low -Income Families, Senior Services, Unhoused Prevention , and Special Needs Services) and will be reported in the annual CDBG Action Plan and CDBG Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report.

City staff will perform annual monitoring. Participants are responsible for giving an accounting for all funds received. The City reserves the right to conduct an independent audit.

Insurance Requirements:

 Workers' Compensation - A program of Workers' Compensation insurance or a state -approved Self Insurance Program in an amount and form to meet all applicable requirements in the Labor Code of the State of California, including employer's liability with $2 50,000 limits, covering all persons providing services on behalf of participant and all risks to such persons under this contract.

 Comprehensive General and Automobile Liability Insurance - This coverage must include contractual coverage and automobile liability coverage for owned, hired, and non-owned vehicles. The policy shall be of the "per occurrence" type and have combined single limits for bodily injury and property damage of not less than one million dollars ($1,000,000).

Public Records:

Applicants should understand that under the California Public Records Act all submitted documents, in response to the NOFA are considered public records and will be made available to the public upon request per the Public Records Request Act, following the application deadline unless specifically excluded by law.

Request for Reimbursement:

To receive reimbursement, recipients must submit the Request for Reimbursement form. Reimbursement requests must be submitted by the 10th day of the following quarter or month. If the 10th falls on a weekend or holiday, the report must be submitted the next business day. Reimbursement requests will not be processed until staff have received all proper documentation. Reimbursements shall only be for expenses that have occurred within the contract effective date and the termination date. All items, rent, utilities, etc. expensed must be purchased and received between July 1st and June 30th.

When staff reviews a reimbursement request it will be compared to the eligible expenses to ensure the expenses are agreeable with the overall intent of the program/activity. Progress toward meeting the number of unduplicated Hesperia residents will also be reviewed each quarter to ensure that each agency meets their stated unduplicated goals.

Your total reimbursement of grant funds will be based on meeting at least 75% of your projected goal. If your projected goal is 100 Hesperia resi dents served and you assist 75 residents, then you will receive 100% of your grant funds. If you meet less than 75% of your projected goal, your total grant funds may not be reimbursed.

Itemization:

When submitting a request for reimbursement, recipients must itemize on the form items or services they are requesting for reimbursement.

Direct Costs:

Direct Costs include administration, salaries or wages to employees, employee benefits, contract services, consultants, insurance, materials and supplies, equipment/capital expenditures, and travel.

Advertising/Marketing is an allowable expense. Be sure to attach receipts and a copy of the advertisement/flyer. You will request reimbursement based on the percentage of Hesperia residents assisted in your Quarterly Performance Report (QPR) for the quarter.

NOTE: If you are spending your Hesperia grant funds to help Hesperia residents only, please make a note of it in your Quarterly Performance Report.

Personnel Costs:

Reimbursement for personnel time will be based on hours worked assisting Hesperia residents, as documented in the Weekly Time Sheet or other similar form. When requesting reimbursement for personnel, recipients will need to turn in a time sheet and pay stub for verification of hours worked.

City of Hesperia
Community Assistance Program (CAP)
Request for Reimbursement

Non-Personnel Costs:

Reimbursement of direct costs will require receipts/documentation for purchases, whether they are purchased with cash, check, money order, or credit card. We will require that the organization show proof of payment on a paid credit card bill. Cancelled checks and bank statements will be required. Please keep a copy of your reimbursement request and all backup in your office for monitoring purposes. Recipients should use the vendor who can provide the best value for your grant funds.

NOTE: Expenditures must be for items listed in recipient ’s Budget Summary and agreeable with the approved activity or program. For example: An organization that provides counseling would not necessarily be purchasing kitchen equipment and a Food Bank would not necessarily be procuring for or acquiring office furniture.

Indirect Costs:

Reimbursement for Indirect Costs will be based on a percentage of the total of unduplicated Hesperia residents served during the reimb ursement request period against the entire unduplicated population served during that same period. Examples of indirect costs include rent, mortgage, utilities, and audit expenses.

Budget:

You may spend your budget on supplies or any other needs to run y our program. Should you need to amend your budget before the 4th quarter please contact us in writing so that we may review, discuss, and approve the request.

Examples
Indirect Costs:

 XYZ Organization is requesting a rent reimbursement payment in the amount of $3,000 for the 1 st quarter (3 months) of the Program Year.
 XYZ served a total of 200 people during those 3 months. Out of those 200, 50 of those people served were Hesperia residents (duplicated is okay for this comparison).  In this case, 50 Hesp eria residents out of 200 equals 25% of the total population served. We can reimburse XYZ 25% of the $3,000 or $750.00.

Direct Costs:

In another example, if you are purchasing food for all your clients then you would figure out the percentage of Hesperia residents assisted using your QPR and request that amount on your reimbursement for that quarter.

If you are using food purchased with grant funds to feed 100% of Hesperia residents, then you do not need to figure out the percentage.

Unallowable Expenses:

The following is a list of expenses that are not reimbursable under CAP: Items that would be considered extravagant, candy, excessive amounts of cleaning products, refreshments for the office or office meetings; catered luncheons or breakfasts/snacks/coffee/paper goods/utensils/soda, alcoholic beverages, costs for entertainment, lobbying, costs associated with religious or political solicitation/services, new construction, rehabilitation over $500, acquisition, demolition, broker fee s/services, illegal activities, activities prohibited by City Ordinance and/or Resolution, operations that lack government agency licensing, permits, or approvals, expenses that are related to the recipient ’s approved activity/program, and items that are not listed on the recipient’s Budget Summary unless an amendment has been approved by staff.

The items, whether they are office supplies or food items, should not be extravagant in nature. For example, high-end pens (Mont Blanc), leather office chairs, and leather embroidered office items or high- end food items like filet mignon, kobe beef, and lobster are not acceptable expenditures of CAP funds.

RESOLUTION NO. 2024-37

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA,

CALIFORNIA, APPROVING GUIDELINES FOR THE COMMUNITY ASSISTANCE

PROGRAM (CAP)

WHEREAS, the City of Hesperia (City) is a municipal corporation duly organized under the laws and Constitution of the State of California and

WHEREAS, the City Council directed Staff to allocate $50,000 in funding to CAP for the 2024-25 Fiscal Year (FY) and

WHEREAS, the CAP grant will be funded each Fiscal Year , with City Council approval, through the City’s General Fund and managed by the Economic Development Division and

WHEREAS, priority activities include food & clothing, unhoused shelter ; youth /foster, disability, senior, veteran, and animal spay/neuter services; and

WHEREAS, priority shall be further given based on the documented financial need of each potential grantee and

WHEREAS, all complete applications received within the deadline will be presented to the City Council Advisory Committee (CCAC) for review and
WHEREAS, the CCAC will conduct public meetings to receive input and public testimony on the needs and priorities of the community and
WHEREAS, the CCAC will review and rank all applications based on the CAP priority activities, the financial needs of each applicant, and community feedback received and WHEREAS, once all applications have been ranked, the CCAC will forward it s rankings/funding slate to the City Council for final approval and WHEREAS, in acknowledgment of the CCAC’s considerable efforts to carefully review all applications, consider public testimony from potential grantees, and rank applications based on the above-noted priorities, the City Council shall approve the ranking/funding slate from the CCAC and WHEREAS, each successful grantee shall be funded in an amount not to exceed $5,000 ; and
WHEREAS, all funding decisions of the Hesperia City Council shall be final.

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

Section 1. The recitals above are true and correct and are adopted as findings.

Section 2. The City Council approves the CAP Guidelines.

Resolution No. 2024-37

Section 3. The City Manager and/or designee is hereby authorized to execute all necessary documents and any certifications to implement the CAP Program.

Section 4. 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 6th day of August 2024.

Larry Bird, Mayor
ATTEST:

Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk