Tuesday, September 17, 2024
Meeting Agenda
Closed Session - 5:00 PM
HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HOUSING AUTHORITY
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
WATER DISTRICT
City Council Chambers
9700 Seventh Ave., Hesperia CA, 92345
City Clerk's Office: (760) 947-1007
City Council Members
Larry Bird, Mayor
Rebekah Swanson, Mayor Pro Tem
Brigit Bennington, Council Member
Cameron Gregg, Council Member
Allison Lee, Council Member
Rachel Molina, City Manager
Pam K. Lee, City Attorney
NOTE: In compliance with the Americans with Disability Act, if you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk’s Office at (760) 947-1007 or (760) 947-1026. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility.
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.
September 17, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT
9700 7th Avenue, Council Chambers, Hesperia, CA 92345
As a courtesy, please silence your cell phones and other electronic devices while the meeting is in session. Thank you.
Prior to action of the Council, any member of the audience will have the opportunity to address the legislative body on any item listed on the agenda, including those on the Consent Calendar.
Individuals wishing to speak during General Public Comments or on a particular numbered item must submit a speaker slip to the City Clerk with the agenda item noted. Speaker slips should be turned in prior to the public comment portion of the agenda or before an agenda item is discussed. Comments will be limited to three minutes for General Public Comments, Consent Calendar items and New Business items. Comments are limited to five minutes for Public Hearing items.
In compliance with the Brown Act, the City Council may not discuss or take action on non-agenda items or engage in question and answer sessions with the public. The City Council may ask brief questions for clarification; provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information and direct staff to add an item to a subsequent meeting.
CLOSED SESSION - 5:00 PM
Roll Call
Mayor Larry Bird
Mayor Pro Tem Rebekah Swanson
Council Member Brigit Bennington
Council Member Cameron Gregg
Council Member Allison Lee
Conference with Legal Counsel – Existing Litigation
Government Code Section 54956.9(d)1
1. Assistant Secretary for FHEO v. City of Hesperia, California, et al.; Case Number 09-16-4717-8
2. Sully-Miller Contracting, et al. v. City of Hesperia et al., SBSC Case No.
CIVSB2410614
3. California Arroyo Fund, Inc. et al. v. City of Hesperia, et al., SBSC Case No.
CIVSB2225409
4. LCTH Investment, L.P., et al. v. City of Hesperia et al., SBSC Case No.
CIVSB2303245
5. LCTH Investment, L.P. et al. v. City of Hesperia et al., SBSC Case No.
CIVSB2303246
6. LCTH Investment, L.P. et al. v. City of Hesperia et al., SBSC Case No.
CIVSB2310835
7. Mojave Basin Adjudication, City of Barstow, et al, v City of Adelanto, et al
September 17, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
CALL TO ORDER - 6:30 PM
A.
Invocation
B. Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
C. Roll Call
Mayor Larry Bird
Mayor Pro Tem Rebekah Swanson
Council Member Brigit Bennington
Council Member Cameron Gregg
Council Member Allison Lee
D. Agenda Revisions and Announcements by City Clerk
E. Closed Session Reports by City Attorney
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items and matters not listed on the agenda) Individuals wishing to speak during General Public Comments or on a particular numbered item are requested to submit a speaker slip to the City Clerk with the agenda item noted. Speaker slips should be turned in prior to the public comment portion of the joint agenda or before an agenda item is discussed. Comments will be limited to three minutes for General Public Comments, Consent Calendar items and New Business items. Comments are limited to five minutes for Public Hearing items.
In compliance with the Brown Act, the City Council may not discuss or take action on non-agenda items or engage in question and answer sessions with the public. The City Council may ask brief questions for clarification; provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information and direct staff to add an item to a subsequent meeting.
JOINT CONSENT CALENDAR
1. 2.
Consideration of the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, September 3, 2024.
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council approve the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, September 3, 2024.
Staff Person: Assistant City Clerk Erin Baum
Attachments: Draft CC Min 2024-9-3
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
September 17, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
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 9-17-2024
Attachment 1 - Warrant Run
Attachments:
3. Treasurer’s Cash Report for the unaudited period ended June 30, 2024.
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the Council/Board accept the Treasurer’s Cash Report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR Treasurer's Report 9-17-2024
Attachment 1- Treasurer's Report
Attachments:
4. Community Facilities District 2005-1 Bond Refunding - Professional Services Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with NBS Government Finance Group (NBS) in an amount of $25,000, to provide professional services related to the Community Facilities District (CFD) 2005-1 (Belgate Development Restructuring) Special Tax, Series 2014 Bond Refunding. As this agreement is solely related to the refinancing of a debt issue, if approved, the agreement would be separate from other existing agreements with NBS totaling $200,000 for ongoing services related to CFD formation, assessment district administration, and annexation services, for CFD 2005-1, CFD 2021-1, CFD 2022-1, and CFD 2023-1.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR NBS Government Finance Group Agreement 9-17-2024Attachments:
5. Consideration of the Biennial Update of the City’s Statement of Economic Interests Designated Employee Filing Roster
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council and Water District Board adopt the Fair Political Practices Commission required biennial update of the City’s Statement of Economic Interest Employee Filing Roster (Conflict-of-Interest Code) for designated employees through adoption of Joint Resolution No. 2024-47 and HWD 2024-15.
Staff Person: Assistant City Clerk Erin Baum
September 17, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
SR Conflict of Interest Biennial Update 9-17-2024
Joint Resolution 2024-47 and HWD 2024-15
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A Designated Employees with Disclosure Attachment 3 - Exhibit B Conflict of Interest Disclosure Attachments:
6. Electronic Document Management Maintenance and Licensing Contract Authority
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to approve a contract amendment in the amount of $34,952, plus a contingency of $968, for a total not-to-exceed amount of $130,204, to provide an additional year of licensing support and maintenance of the City’s current Electronic Document Management System (Laserfiche).
Staff Person: Economic Development Manager Victor Knight SR Laserfiche Contract Amendment 9-17-2024Attachments:
7. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Rehabilitation - Five Water Production Wells
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District (District) authorize the City Manager to approve an amendment of $1,500,000 to the existing contract with General Pump Company for a not-to-exceed amount of $1,665,032 for the rehabilitation of five (5) water production wells.
Staff Person: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez SR Grant Equipment Rehabilitation Water Wells 9-17-2024Attachments:
8. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Vehicle Procurement - Two Super-Duty Trucks With Cranes
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Ken Grody Ford for the purchase of two (2) 2024 Ford F-550’s with Scelzi utility bodies and cranes in the not-to-exceed amount of $263,200.
Staff Person: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez SR Grant Vehicle Procurement Super-Duty Trucks with Cranes 9-17-2024Attachments:
9. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Procurement - Thirty Remote Pressure Monitoring Units
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with
September 17, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
Ferguson Waterworks for the purchase of thirty (30) remote pressure monitoring units in the not-to-exceed amount of $127,100.
Staff Person: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez SR Grant Equipment Procurement - Pressure Monitoring Units 9-17-2024Attachments:
10. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Procurement - Fourteen Reservoir Mixers
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Doane & Hartwig Water Systems for the purchase of fourteen (14) reservoir mixers manufactured by Tidal Wave in the not-to-exceed amount of $162,000.
Staff Person: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez SR Grant Equipment Procurement - Reservoir Mixers 9-17-2024Attachments:
CONSENT ORDINANCES
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.
11. Development Code Amendment DCA24-00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-00001; Applicant: City of Hesperia; Area affected: City-wide.
Recommended Action:
Place on second reading and adopt by title waiving the text of Ordinance No. 2024-09 approving Development Code Amendment DCA24-00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPL24-00001 modifying the development requirements associated with the establishment of new or the expansion of existing single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS), and repealing Urgency Ordinance No. 2024-02.
Staff Person: Assistant Planner Leilani Henry
SR Development Code Amendment & Specific Plan Amendment 9-3-2024 Ordinance 2024-09
Attachment 2 - Exhibit A
Attachment 3 - July 11, 2024, Planning Commission Staff Report Attachments:
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.
September 17, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
12. 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.
Staff Person: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
SR Revised User Fee Study 9-17-2024
Joint Resolution 2024-35 & Resolution HWD 2024-14
Attachment 2 - Revised User Fee Study FY 2023-24
Attachments:
13. Urgency Ordinance - Wooden Pallet Yards Moratorium
Recommended Action:
It
is recommended that the City Council waive further reading and adopt Urgency Ordinance 2024-11 pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 extending a moratorium for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days from its original expiration date on the establishment or expansion of wooden pallet yards, pending study and adoption of regulatory and zoning standards.
Staff Person: Principal Planner Ryan Leonard
SR Urgency Ordinance Wood Pallet Yards Moratorium 9-17-2024 Ordinance 2024-11
Attachments:
14. Program Year 2023-2024 Community Development Block Grant, Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council conduct a public hearing and, upon accepting public testimony, 1) approve the Program Year (PY) 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance Evaluation Report (CAPER); and 2) authorize the City Manager, or designee, to submit the PY 2023-2024 CAPER to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), along with any public testimony and changes thereto as directed by the City Council.
Staff Person: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman SR Consolidated Performance and Evaluation Report 9-17-2024 Attachment 1 - Exhibit A: PY 2023-2024 Draft CAPER
Attachments:
15. Consider Adoption of a Resolution of Necessity to Acquire Real Property located
North of Yucca Terrace Drive abutting the California Aqueduct, Assessor Parcel No. 3064-461-03
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council hold a public hearing on the proposed Resolution of Necessity (Resolution 2024-45) and adopt the Resolution of
September 17, 2024City Council Meeting Agenda
Necessity authorizing the commencement of eminent domain action to acquire the
real property located north of Yucca Terrace Drive abutting the California Aqueduct (Assessor Parcel No. 3064-461-03).
Staff Person: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman SR Resolution of Necessity 9-17-2024
Resolution 2024-45
Attachment 2- Legal Description and Plat Map
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.
The City Manager, City Attorney or staff may make announcements or reports concerning items of interest to the Council and the public.
ADJOURNMENT
I, Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk of the City of Hesperia, California do hereby certify that I caused to be posted the foregoing agenda on Wednesday, September 11, 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.
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
City of Hesperia
Meeting Minutes - Draft
City Council
Tuesday, September 3, 2024 6:30 PM
REGULAR MEETING AGENDA
HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
HESPERIA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
HESPERIA FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT
CLOSED SESSION - 5:00 PM
Roll Call
Present: 5 - Mayor Bird, Mayor Pro Tem Swanson, Council Member Gregg, Council Member Bennington and Co
uncil 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. California Arroyo Fund, Inc. et al. v. City of Hesperia, et al., SBSC Case No. CIVSB2225409
2. LCTH Investm
ent, L.P., et al. v. City of Hesperia et al., SBSC Case No. CIVSB2303245
3. LCTH Investm
ent, L.P. et al. v. City of Hesperia et al., SBSC Case No. CIVSB2303246
4. LCTH Investm
ent, L.P. et al. v. City of Hesperia et al., SBSC Case No. CIVSB2310835
5. Sully-Miller C
ontracting, et al. v. City of Hesperia et al., SBSC Case No. CIVSB2410614 Conference with Real Property Negotiators – Property Negotiations - Government Code Section – 54956.8
1. Negotiating Parties: City of Hesperia and Jane Hsieh Location: APN: 3
06-456-107
Under Negotiation: Price and terms
2. Negotiating Parties: City Manager and Donna Polich
Property: Water Rights
Under Negotiation: Price and terms
City Council Chambers
9700 Seventh Ave.
Hesperia CA, 92345
City of Hesperia
Personnel Matters - Performance Evaluations - Government Code Section 54957
1. Annual Performance Evaluation - City Attorney
2. Annual Perf
ormance Evaluation - City Manager
CALL TO ORDER - 6:47 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
E.
Closed Session Reports by City Attorney
GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENTS (For items and matters not listed on the agenda) The following members of the public commented.
Bob Nelson (via voicemail)
Leticia Cisneros
Susan Garcia
Stephanie James
Robert Davie
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:
Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0
1. Consideration of the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, August 20, 2024.
Recommended Action:
It is recomm
ended that the City Council approve the Draft Minutes from the Regular Meeting held Tuesday, August 20, 2024.
Sponsors: Assistant Cit
y Clerk Erin Baum
2. Warrant Run Report (City - Successor Agency - Housing Authority - Community Development Comm
ission - Water)
City of Hesperia
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the Council/Board ratify the warrant run and payroll report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Co
mmunity Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.
Sponsors: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
3. Professional Services Agreement with CivicPlus for Online Services Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a three (3) year agreement with CivicPlus,
LLC in an amount of $174,144, plus a 10% contingency on the website redesign com
ponent in the amount of $2,916, for a total not-to-exceed $177,060, to provide website redesign and h
osting, content management software, and online hosting and maintenance for the codification of th
e City’s Ordinances.
Sponsors: Assistant City Manager Casey Brooksher
4. Fiscal Year 2024/25 - 2028/29 Five Year Measure I Capital Improvement Plan Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council adopt Resolution No. 2024-42 approving the Measure I Five Year Capital Improvement Plan (
CIP) and Expense Strategy for Fiscal Years 2024/25 - 2028/29.
Sponsors: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez
5. American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Procurement - One Case Backhoe
Recommend
ed Action:
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter a
n agreement with Sonsray Machinery, LLC. for the purchase of one (1) 2024 Case Back
hoe in the not-to-exceed amount of $185,000.
Sponsors: Director of Public Works/City Engineer Cassandra Sanchez
6. Placer Labs Inc. Contract Amendment
Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to approve a contract amendment, in
the amount of $24,806, with P
lace Labs Inc. (Placer AI), for a total not-to-exceed amount of $70,931, to provide an
additional year of retail demographic data for the Economic Development division.
Sponsors: Director of Development Services Nathan Freeman
CONSENT ORDINANCES
7. Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-00003; Applicant: City of Hesperia; Location: Regional Comm ercial
City of Hesperia
(RC) zoned properties along the I-15 Freeway Corridor, Main Street, and Highway 395 Recommended Action:
Place on second reading and adopt by title waiving the text of Ordinance No. 2024-08 approving Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-
00003 to increase the Floor Area Ratio (FAR) within the Regional Commercial (RC) zone of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan from 0.23 to 0.35.
Sponsors: Senior Planner Edgar Gonzalez
A motion was made by Swanson, seconded by Bennington, that this item be approved. The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0
PUBLIC HEARING
8. Development Code Amendment DCA24-00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-00001; Applicant:
City of Hesperia; Area aff
ected: City-wide.
Recommended Action:
It is recomm
ended that the City Council introduce and place on first reading Ordinance No. 2024-09 approving Developm
ent Code Amendment DCA24-00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPL24-00001 modifying the development requirements associated with the establishment of new or the expansion of existing single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS), and repealing Urgency Ordinance No. 2024-02.
Sponsors: Assistant Planner Leilani Henry
A motion was made by Lee, seconded by Gregg, that this item be approved.
The motion carried by the following vote:
Aye: 5 - Bird, Swanson, Gregg, Bennington, and Lee
Nay: 0
NEW BUSINESS
9. Designation of Voting Delegate and Alternates for League of CA Cities Conference Recommended Action:
It is recommended that the City Council designate a primary voting delegate and up to two alternate delegates to represent the Cit
y of Hesperia at the General Business meeting to be held during the League of
California Cities annual conference October 16, through October 18, 2024 in Long Beach.
Sponsors: Assistant City Clerk Erin Baum
A motion was made by Gregg, seconded by Lee, that Mayor Bird be the voting delegate, and M
ayor Pro Tem Swanson be the alternate voting delegate. The motion carried by the follow ing vote:
City of Hesperia
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.
Councilmember Gregg that an item on LOCC costs be agendized.
CITY MANAGER/CITY ATTORNEY/STAFF REPORTS
ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 7:42pm.
_____________________________
Erin Baum,
Assistant City Clerk
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 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 August 03 , 2024 through August 23, 2024.
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 $4,135,723.34 $302,831.84 $0.00 $4,438,555.18 Successor Agency 7,922,197.73 0.00 0.00 7,922,197.73
Housing Authority 0.00 205.85 0.00 205.85
Community Development Commission 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00
Water 1,040,324.34 152,923.66 0.00 1,193,248.00
Totals $13,098,245.41 $455,961.35 $0.00 $13,554,206.76
* Includes debt service payments made via Automated Clearing House (ACH) electronic deposit of funds.
YEAR-TO PRIOR FY YTD
W/E W/E W/E WARRANT DATE DATE
FUND # FUND NAME 8/9/2024 8/16/2024 8/23/2024 TOTALS Wires TOTALS * TOTALS Accounts Payable
100 GENERAL 156,079.71$ 27,845.64$ 254,114.08$ 438,039.43$ -$ 7,439,778.29$ 6,817,771.76$ 105 PENSION OBLIGATION TRUST -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 106 OPEB TRUST -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
200 HESPERIA FIRE DISTRICT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
204 MEASURE I - RENEWAL 2,970.93$ -$ -$ 2,970.93$ -$ 12,615.41$ 4,152.35$ 207 LOCAL TRANSPORT-SB 325 -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 750,622.22$ 209 GAS TAX-RMRA -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
210 HFPD (PERS) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 1,755,819.00$ 907,316.00$ 251 CDBG 3,876.10$ -$ -$ 3,876.10$ -$ 11,697.22$ 90,597.48$ 254 AB2766 - TRANSIT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
255 AB3229 SUPPLEMENTAL LAW -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 256 ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS GRANT 3,040.89$ -$ -$ 3,040.89$ -$ 3,418.89$ 3,894.11$ 262
SB 1383 LOCAL ASSISTANCE GRANT -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 263 STREETS MAINTENANCE 14,119.04$ 2,475.09$ 43,316.15$ 59,910.28$ -$ 459,407.70$ 596,165.38$ 300 DEV. IMPACT FEES - STREET 22,388.61$ -$ -$ 22,388.61$ -$ 22,388.61$ 3,600.00$ 301 DEV. IMPACT FEES - STORM DRAIN -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 303 DEV. IMPACT FEES - POLICE -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 304 DEV. IMPACT FEES - PUBLIC WKS. -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 306 DEV. IMPACT FEES - 2018-STREETS 474,176.99$ -$ 25.15$ 474,202.14$ -$ 499,353.94$ 341,141.71$ 312 DIF 2018-POLICE FACILITIES -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 313 DIF A-04 DRAINAGE -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
402 WATER RIGHTS ACQUISITION -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 403 2013 REFUNDING LEASE REV BONDS -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 568,901.39$ 404 2023 REFUNDING LEASE REV BONDS -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 504
CITY WIDE STREETS - CIP 916,260.59$ -$ -$ 916,260.59$ -$ 2,591,641.92$ 759,929.46$ 509 CITY FACILITIES CIP -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
800 EMPLOYEE BENEFITS 460,677.11$ 30,331.09$ 199,658.72$ 690,666.92$ -$ 1,746,063.47$ 1,525,155.96$ 801 TRUST/AGENCY 187,602.46$ 400.00$ 1,307.50$ 189,309.96$ -$ 275,243.66$ 143,591.90$ 802 AD 91-1 AGENCY -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
804 TRUST-INTEREST BEARING -$ 1,372.00$ -$ 1,372.00$ -$ 41,105.51$ 68,226.50$ 807 CFD 2005-1 -$ -$ 1,016,250.47$ 1,016,250.47$ -$ 1,016,250.47$ 979,188.02$ 808 HFPD (TRANSITION) -$ -$ 317,435.02$ 317,435.02$ -$ 317,435.02$ 347,796.19$ 815 PLAN REVIEW TRUST - FRONTIER -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ CITY 2,241,192.43$ 62,423.82$ 1,832,107.09$ 4,135,723.34$ -$ 16,192,219.11$ 13,908,050.43$ 163 REDEVELOP OBLIG RETIREMENT-2018 -$ -$ 7,922,197.73$ 7,922,197.73$ -$ 7,922,197.73$ 7,828,402.39$ SUCCESSOR AGENCY -$ -$ 7,922,197.73$ 7,922,197.73$ -$ 7,922,197.73$ 7,828,402.39$ 370 HOUSING AUTHORITY -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,676.97$ 2,976.08$ HOUSING AUTHORITY -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 3,676.97$ 2,976.08$ 170
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 700 WATER OPERATING 85,401.35$ 361,138.39$ 51,473.79$ 498,013.53$ -$ 2,073,071.07$ 2,612,148.41$ 701 WATER CAPITAL -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 255,510.08$
710 SEWER OPERATING 422,076.17$ 769.44$ 113,377.76$ 536,223.37$ -$ 702,843.28$ 897,160.41$ 711 SEWER CAPITAL -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ 928,844.89$ 350,964.00$ 720 RECLAIMED WATER OPERATIONS 3,118.57$ -$ 2,968.87$ 6,087.44$ -$ 14,981.33$ 7,419.85$ WATER 510,596.09$ 361,907.83$ 167,820.42$ 1,040,324.34$ -$ 3,719,740.57$ 4,123,202.75$ ACCOUNTS PAYABLE TOTAL 2,751,788.52$ 424,331.65$ 9,922,125.24$ 13,098,245.41$ -$ 27,837,834.38$ 25,862,631.65$ REG. PAYROLL
City -$ 302,831.84$ -$ 302,831.84$ -$ 1,242,948.18$ 1,219,971.71$ Housing Authority -$ 205.85$ -$ 205.85$ -$ 990.70$ 803.07$ Water -$ 152,923.66$ -$ 152,923.66$ -$ 613,908.79$ 527,565.09$ PAYROLL TOTAL -$ 455,961.35$ -$ 455,961.35$ -$ 1,857,847.67$ 1,748,339.87$ *No payments were issued on July 1, 2023.
City of Hesperia
WARRANT RUNS
08/03/2024-08/23/2024
Attachment 1
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members
City Council, Serving as Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency
Chair and Commissioners, Hesperia Housing Authority
Chair and Commissioners, Community Development Commission Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
Anne Duke, Deputy Finance Director
Cristina Hall, Accountant
SUBJECT: Treasurer’s Cash Report for the unaudited period ended June 30, 2024.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the Council/Board accept the Treasurer’s Cash Report for the City, Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency, Hesperia Housing Authority, Community Development Commission, and Water District.
BACKGROUND
This report is presented to the City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 53646 (b) setting forth the City’s investment portfolio.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The Treasurer’s Cash Reports are presented on the following pages for each agency.
CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM
Financial Health – Maintain a balanced budget and adequate reserves.
FISCAL IMPACT
These reports reflect unaudited cash balances as of June 30, 2024.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. City of Hesperia Investment Report
2. Successor Agency to the Hesperia Community Redevelopment Agency Investment Report
3. Hesperia Housing Authority Investment Report
4. Community Development Commission Investment Report
5. Hesperia Water District Investment Report
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council/Board Members Treasurer’s Cash Report
September 17, 2024
FUND VALUE
General Fund (100 & 800) 32,242,909.55
Pension Obligation Trust (105) 79,138.85
OPEB Trust (106) -
HFPD (PERS) (210) 2,055,958.68
AB27666 - Transit (254) 25,151.26
AB3229 Supplemental Law (255) 302,618.22
AD No. 91-1 (802) 391,794.16
Beverage Recycling Grant (256) 281,721.11
CFD 2005-1 (807) 1,902,600.28
HFPD Transition (808) 317,435.02
City Wide-Capital Projects (504) (9,103,997.62)
Community Dev Block Grant (251, 252, & 253) 3,207,227.03 American Rescue Plan Grant (261) 22,224,656.85
SB 1383 Local Assistance Grant (262) 80,043.99
Development Impact Fund (300-304) 5,194,455.73
Development Impact Fund 2018 (306-312) 22,323,335.83
Development Impact Fund A-04 Drainage (313) 987,180.41
Disaster (260) 46,459.64
Gas Tax Fund (205) 1,945,004.87
Gas Tax - RMRA (209) 7,432,669.24
Gas Tax Swap (206) 1,520,632.05
Local Transportation SB325 (207) 1,745,866.54
Measure I - Renewal (204) 11,909,804.72
Public Works Street Maint (263) 772,190.47
Public Art (230) 256,848.23
Trust Fund (801, 803-806, & 815) 605,557.46
2012 Water Rights Acquisition (402) 1,755,521.86
2013 Refunding Lease Rev Bonds (403) -
2023 Refunding Lease Rev Bonds (404) 1,720,073.99
TOTAL CITY FUNDS 112,222,858.42$
CITY OF HESPERIA
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council/Board Members Treasurer’s Cash Report
September 17, 2024
FUND VALUE
RORF Retention - (163) 8,401,363.14$
SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
FUND VALUE
Hesperia Housing Authority Fund (370) 4,223,433.70$
VVEDA Housing Authority (371) 1,923,327.89
TOTAL HOUSING AUTHORITY FUNDS 6,146,761.59$
HESPERIA HOUSING AUTHORITY
FUND VALUE
Community Development Commission Fund (170) 98,015.66$
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council/Board Members Treasurer’s Cash Report
September 17, 2024
VALUE
Water Operating (700) 14,284,595.79$
Water Capital (701) 3,746,206.57
Water Capital Rehab and Replace (703) 3,569,797.74
Water Contamination Mitigation (704) 2,629,219.12
Water Pension Obilgation Trust (705) 750,000.00
Water OPEB Trust (706) -
Sewer Operating (710) 13,346,800.33
Sewer Capital (711) 2,314,392.34
Sewer Capital Rehab and Replace (713) 811,225.95
Reclaimed Water Operations (720) 195,953.33
TOTAL WATER FUNDS 41,648,191.17$
1 WATER
FUND
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
SUBJECT: Community Facilities District 2005-1 Bond Refunding - Professional Services Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to enter into a n agreement with NBS Government Finance Group (NBS) in an amount of $25,000, to provide professional services related to the Community F acilities District (CFD) 2005 -1 (Belgate Development Restructuring) Special Tax, Series 2014 Bond Refunding. As this agreement is solely related to the refinancing of a debt issue, if approved, the agreement would be separate from other existing agreements with NBS totaling $200,000 for ongoing services related to CFD formation, assessment district administration, and annexation services, for CFD 2005-1, CFD 2021-1, CFD 2022-1, and CFD 2023-1.
BACKGROUND
On April 14, 2005, under the provisi ons of the Mello-Roos Act, the City issued $18,554,508 initial principal amount City of Hesperia Community Facilities District No. 2005 -1 (Belgate Development Restructuring), County of San Bernardino, State of California Special Tax Bonds, 2005 S eries A (t he “2005 CFD Bonds”). The 2005 CFD Bonds were issued to cause a refinancing and exchange of the $10,000,000 original principal amount of Community Facilities District No. 91-3 of the City of Hesperia, Special Tax Bonds (the “1992 Bonds”), which were in payment default. The bonds related to CFD 2005-1 are paid solely from assessments received from the district, and the bonds are not an obligation of the City.
On December 18, 2014, as a result of favorable market conditions, the 2005 CFD Bonds were refinanced into the CFD 2005-1 (Belgate Development Restructuring) Special Tax Refunding Bonds, Series 2014 (the “2014 CFD Bonds” ) and achieved a savings in interest costs for the district. NBS provided needed professional services related to the 2014 CFD Bond refinancing due to their familiarity with the CFD 2005-1 district.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Current market conditions have presented an opportunity to refinance the 2014 CFD Bonds, in order to further reduce interest costs for district property owners. Based upon a recent CFD refunding analysis, $12.8 million of the 2014 CFD Bonds are callable. Further, the 2014 CFD Bonds were sold as “non-rated” bonds. Under current market co nditions, CFD financing, with a similar value to lien ratio and development status as CFD 2005-1, have achieved an S&P rating that has enabled a sale with more competitive interest rates. As such, based upon current market projections, a refinancing of the 2014 CFD Bonds would result in an estimated net present value savings of approximate ly $840,000. Further, because the 2014 CFD Bonds are payable solely from assessments received from property owners within the district, the projected savings would be passed on as reduced assessments in the future.
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
Community Facilities District 2005-1 Bond Refunding - Professional Services Agreement with NBS Government Finance Group
September 17, 2024
In order to proceed with the refinanci ng, an agreement is needed for NBS to provide required disclosure information related to CFD 2005-1 for inclusion in the bond documents. If approved, the cost of thes e services would be paid from the bond’s costs of issuance upon completion of the refinancing. If market conditions change, however, and render the refinancing no longer feasible, the cost of the services would be paid from CFD 2005-1 district funds.
CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM
Financial Health: Maintain a balanced budget and adequate reserves.
FISCAL IMPACT
An agreement with NBS in the amount of $25,000 is needed to provide the required disclosure services related to CFD 2005 -1 in order to proceed with the proposed refinancing of the 2014 CFD Bonds. If approved, the cost of these services would be paid from the bo nd’s costs of issuance, upon completion of the refinancing. If market conditions change, however, and render the refinancing no longer feasible, the cost of the services would be paid from CFD 2005-1 district funds.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
None
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members
Chair and Board Members, Hesperia Water District
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Melinda Sayre, Deputy City Manager/City Clerk
SUBJECT: Consideration of the Biennial Update of the City’s Statement of Economic Interests Designated Employee Filing Roster
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and Water District Board adopt the Fair Political Practices Commission required biennial update of the City’s Statement of Economic Interest Employee Filing Roster (Conflict -of-Interest Code) for designated employees through adoption of Joint Resolution No. 2024-47 and HWD 2024-15.
BACKGROUND
The Political Reform Act of 1974 (Gov. Code sections 81000-91014) requires local public officials and employees to disclose certain personal financial holdings which may be materially affected by their official actions or job duties. In accordance with the Act, each local agency must adopt a conflict-of-interest code, which is the legal instrument requiring individuals holding designated positions to disclose their personal financial interests on a Statement of Economic Interests Form 700 when they assume or leave a designated position and on an annual basis.
Additionally, the Act requires each local agency to review its code biennially during even - numbered years to ensure the list of designated employees and the disclosure categories are reflective of the agency’s current organization and ability to affect economic interests. At the conclusion of the 2024 biennial code review it was determined that substanti al personnel classification changes occurred and an update was warranted.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The proposed Conflict-of-Interest Code includes each of the positions within the City and Water District that involve the making or participation in the making of decisions that may foreseeably have a material financial effect on any financial interest, and updates the disclosure categories to allow accurate disclosure of economic interests and sources of income and gifts, without violation of privacy rights.
The list of job classifications required to file a Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 has been updated to reflect the current personnel classification structure of the City. Classifications that have been eliminated are shown on Exhibit “A” with a strikethrough and new classifications being added are shown in bold. Exhibit “B” is an explanation of the Disclosure Categories reflected for each classification.
Staff Report to the City Council
Conflict of Interest Code Amendments
September 17, 2024
Positions added to the Designated Conflict of Interest filing Positions:
Code Compliance Manager
Deputy City Engineer
Deputy Finance Director
Field Services Supervisor
Finance Manager
Human Resources Supervisor
Street Operations Manager
Water Operations Manager
Positions Eliminated:
Director of Administrative Services
CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM
Organizational Health - Foster a high performing organization that provides opportunities for professional growth.
FISCAL IMPACT
There is no fiscal impact associated with this item.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Joint Resolution Nos. 2024-47 and HWD 2024-15
2. Exhibit “A” Designated Employees with Disclosure Categories
3. Exhibit “B” Conflict of Interest Disclosure Categories
JOINT RESOLUTION NO. 2024-47
RESOLUTION HWD NO. 2024-15
A JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE HESPERIA CITY COUNCIL, HESPERIA AND
HESPERIA WATER DISTRICT OF HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING THE
CONFLICT-OF-INTEREST CODE FOR DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES
WHEREAS, the City Council / Board of Directors heretofore adopted a Conflict of Interest Code for designated employees; and
WHEREAS, it is necessary to revise said Conflict of Interest Code to accurately reflect changes in job titles and responsibilities; and
NOW THEREFOR E, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL / BOARD OF DIRECTORS AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. In all respects, the facts set forth in this resolution are true and correct.
Section 2. The Conflict-of-Interest Code pertaining to designated employees and their filing categories (Exhibit A) and the Disclosure Categories (Exhibit B) are hereby amended by the adoption of this Resolution.
Section 4. That the City Clerk/Secretary to the Board shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17th day of September 2024.
______________________________
Larry Bird, Mayor/Chair
ATTEST:
____________________________
Erin Baum,
Assistant City Clerk/ Secretary to the Board
EXHIBIT “A”
CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE REFLECTING 2024 PROPOSED CHANGES
DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
Accountant 5 & 6
Analysts 6
All Economic Development and Finance Analysts 5 & 6
Animal Control Officer (all) 6 & 7
Animal Services Supervisor 6 & 7
Assistant City Manager 1 & 2
Assistant City Clerk 6
Assistant Engineer 2, 3, 7
Assistant to the City Manager 6
Budget/Finance Specialist 5 & 6
Building Official 1 & 2
Community Development Supervisor 1 & 2
City Engineer (Contract) 2, 3, 6, 7
Code Enforcement Officer (all) 6 & 7
Code Compliance Manager 6 & 7
Code Enforcement Supervisor 6 & 7
Community Relations Specialist 6
All Coordinators 6
Customer Service Supervisor 1
City Clerk 1 & 2
Deputy City Engineer 2, 3, 6, 7
Deputy City Manager 6
Deputy Finance Director 1 & 2
Director of Administrative Services 1 & 2
Deputy Community Development Director 1 & 2
Deputy Development Services Director 1 & 2
Deputy Finance Director 1 & 2
Deputy Human Resources/Risk Management Director 1 & 2
Director of Government Services/City Clerk 1 & 2
Director of Public Works 1 & 2
Economic Development Manager 1 & 2
Facilities Supervisor 6
Field Services Supervisor 6 & 7
Finance Manager 5 & 6
GIS Manager 1
Human Resources Supervisor 6
Information Systems Manager 6
Information Systems Specialist 6
Inspectors (All) 2, 3, 6, 7
Planners (All) 2, 3, 6, 7
Plans Examiner 2, 3, 6, 7
All Project Managers 2, 3, 6, 7
All Public Works Supervisors 1 & 2
Secretary to the City Manager and City Council 6 & 7
Senior Accountant 5
Senior Animal Control Officer 6 & 7
Senior Code Enforcement Officer 6 & 7
Streets Operations Manager 6 & 7
Water Operations Manager 6 & 7
NOTE: The City Council, Pl anning Commission, City Manager, Finance Officer , City Attorney, and other designated perso nnel are required to submit disclosure statements pursuant to State law (California Government Code §87200 et seq.).
With respect to consultants, the City Manager sh all determine if a particular consultant performs a range of duties requiring disclosure h ereunder. This determination shall include a description of the consultant’s duties and statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. A copy of this determina tion shall be filed with the City Clerk.
Attachment 2
EXHIBIT “B”
DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
Individuals holding designated positions must report their interests according to all of the disclosure categories listed below that identify the types of investments, business entities, sources of income, including gifts, loans and travel payments, or real property to which their position has been assigned.
Category 1: All investments and business positions in business entities, and sources of income, that are located in, do business in or own real property within the jurisdiction of the City.
Category 2: All investments in real property which is located in whole or in part within, or not more than two (2) miles outside, the jurisdiction of the City.
Category 3: All investments and business positions in, a nd sources of income from, business entities that are engaged in land development, construction, or the acquisition or sales of real property within the jurisdiction of the City.
Category 4: All investments and business positions in, and sources of in come from business entities that are banking, savings and loan, or other financial institutions.
Category 5: All investments and business positions in, and sources of income from, business entities that provide services, supplies, materials, machinery, vehicles, or equipment of a type purchased or leased by the City.
Category 6: All investments and business positions in, and sources of income from, business entities that provide services, supplies, materials, machinery, vehicles, or equipment of a t ype purchased or leased by the Designated Employee’s Department.
Category 7: All investments and business positions in, and sources of income from, business entities subject to the regulatory, permit, or licensing authority of the Designated Employee’s Department.
NOTE: The City Council, Planning Commission, City Manager, Finance Officer, City Attorney, and other designated personnel are required to submit disclosure statements pursuant to State law (California Government Code §87200 et seq.).
With respect to consultants, the City Manager shall determine if a particular consultant performs a range of duties requiring disclosure hereunder. This determination shall include a description of the consultant’s duties and statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. A copy of this determination shall be filed with the City Clerk.
Attachment 3
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Casey Brooksher, Assistant City Manager
Victor Knight, Economic Development Manager
SUBJECT: Electronic Document Management Maintenance and Licensing Contract Authority
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council authorize the City Manager to approve a contract amendment in the amount of $34,952, plus a contingency of $968, for a total not -to-exceed amount of $130,204, to provide an additional year of licensing support and maintenance of the City’s current Electronic Document Management System (Laserfiche).
BACKGROUND
The City has utilized Laserfiche Software for electronic document management services since 2003. These services include the maintenance and licensing of Laserfiche, the City’s electronic records system, scanning of plans, documents, and microfilm , and creating online forms and automated workflows.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Laserfiche currently hosts historical documents related to the City’s finances, personnel, and building plans. Considering another service provider would involve a lengthy and time-intensive effort to migrate from the existing platform. Establishing a one-year amendment will ensure product stability and support for an additional term. In addition to securing support and licensing, the contract includes a contingency of $968 to allow for additional licenses if needed to support future staffing or projects.
CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM
Future Development – Facilitate balanced growth to ensure cohesive community development and pursue economic development.
FISCAL IMPACT
Funding for this agreement exists within the Fiscal Year (FY) 2024-25 Budget.
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council Members
Electronic Document Management Maintenance and Licensing Contract September 17, 2024
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
None
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 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 Jeremy McDonald, Water Operations Manager
SUBJECT: American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Rehabilitation – Five Water Production Wells
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District (District) authorize the City Manager to approve an amendment of $1,500,000 to the existing contract with General Pump Company for a not -to-exceed amount of $1,665,0 32 for the rehabilitation of five (5) water production wells.
BACKGROUND
The Hesperia Water District currently maintains fifteen (15) active wells and one (1) standby well that supplies potable water to its customers. No less than every two years, each water production well is tested by Southern California Edison to determine operating efficien cy. The most recent results indicate that the District’s wells operate in a range of “Fair” to “Excellent” based upon industry standards established by the Public Utilities Commission.
Staff proposes that five wells determined to be operating within the “Fair” range be rehabilitated to improve efficiency which will reduce operating run time resulting in a cost savings . Based on the results of the efficiency test report generated by Southern California Ediso n, the District could potentially save up to $100,000 per year. Performing preventative maintenance will allow staff to schedule the rehabilitation during a time when water demand is minimal and will reduce the likelihood for failure when demand is at its peak during the summer months.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
With the previous agreement for water pump repair services having ended June 30, 2024, the current agreement with General Pump Company was approved by the Board of Directors at the meeting held on August 6, 2024. The agreement only included funding to cover minor repairs and preventative maintenance. Staff recommends amending the contract with General Pump Company who was deemed the lowest responsive /responsible vendor.
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.
Staff Report to the City Council and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Rehabilitation – Five Water Production Wells September 17, 2024
FISCAL IMPACT
ARPA Grant funding in the amount of $1,500,000 has been identified for the proposed rehabilitation of five (5) water production wells. If approved, an amendment to the FY2024 -25 Budget will be presented at the First Quarter Budget Review to appropriate the necessary funds.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
None
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 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 Robert Worby, Fleet / Warehouse Supervisor
SUBJECT: American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Vehicle Procurement – Two Super- Duty Trucks With Cranes
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Ken Grody Ford for the purchase of two (2) 2024 Ford F-550’s with Scelzi utility bodies and cranes in the not-to-exceed amount of $263,200.
BACKGROUND
Service trucks are essential for maintaining and repairing infrastructure . Procuring two additional vehicles will help reduce downtime and increase productivity. They are designed to navigate narrow streets and operate in confined spaces. The cranes facilitate the lifting and maneuvering of tools and equipment for on-site repairs. They are also designed for quick setup and multiple jobs per day which enhances efficiency. Crane trucks can carry all necessary equipment on board, minimizing traffic disruption by reducing the need for additional support vehicles.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Hesperia Public Works released Request for Bid (RFB) 2024 -25-003 for two (2) service trucks with cranes on August 14, 2024, soliciting bids from eight (8) dealerships both locally and out of the area to maximize bid response. The bid closed on August 28, 2024 with one (1) response received. Staff recommends awarding the bid to Ken Grody Ford who have been deemed the lowest responsive / responsible vendor with a total bid amount of $263,163.19.
The City has identified available American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant funds that are an eligible funding source for the truck purchases.
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
ARPA Grant funding in the amount of $263,200 has been identified for the proposed purchase of the two (2) 2024 Ford F-550 crane trucks. If approved, an amendment to the FY 2024-25 Budget will be presented at the First Quarter Budget Review to appropriate the necessary funds.
Staff Report to the City Council and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Vehicle Procurement – Two Super-Duty Trucks with Cranes September 17, 2024
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
None
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 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 Robert Worby, Fleet / Warehouse Supervisor
SUBJECT: American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Procurement – Thirty Remote Pressure Monitoring Units
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Ferguson Waterworks for the purchase of thirty (30) remote pressure monitoring units in the not-to-exceed amount of $127,100.
BACKGROUND
Throughout the District’s service area there are twenty -two (22) pressure reducing stations. Each pressure reducing station contains a primary and secondary valve that reduces high pressure created by the natural topography. When pressure reducing valves experience failure, they allow for the high pressure to bypass the valve and continue downstream into the distribution system. This high pressure creates stress on the distribution system and can damage plumbing systems.
The proposed remote pressure monitoring units are capable of alerting staff when predefined high or low pressures are encountered, minimizing the City’s response time to remediate pressure issues.
The remote pressure monitoring units communicat e via cellular technology and can send text messages and email notifications to staff. The units can detect and record transient pressure surges by collecting up to 256 samples per second. The eight (8) additional pressure monitoring units will be deployed as needed to assist with resolving pressure complaints and collection of data to assist with future commercial and industrial development.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Hesperia Public Works released Request for Bid (RFB) 2024-25-006 for thirty (30) remote pressure monitoring units on August 14, 2024, soliciting bids from five (5) vendors. The bid closed on August 29, 2024, with one (1) response received. Staff recommends awarding the bid to Ferguson Waterworks, who have been deemed the lowest responsive / responsible vendor with a total bid amount of $127,037.25.
The City has identified available American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant funds that are an eligible funding source for the remote pressure monitoring units.
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.
Staff Report to the City Council and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Procurement – Thirty Remote Pressure Monitoring Units September 17, 2024
FISCAL IMPACT
ARPA Grant funding in the amount of $127,100 has been identified for the proposed purchase of the thirty (30) remote pressure monitoring units. If approved, an amendment to the FY 2024 -25 Budget will be presented at the First Quarter Budget Review to appropriate the necessary funds.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
None
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 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 Robert Worby, Fleet / Warehouse Supervisor
SUBJECT: American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Procurement – Fourteen Reservoir Mixers
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council and Board of Directors of the Hesperia Water District authorize the City Manager to enter into an agreement with Doane & Hartwig Water Systems for the purchase of fourteen (14) reservoir mixers manufactured by Tidal Wave in the not-to-exceed amount of $162,000.
BACKGROUND
The District currently operates and maintains fourteen (14) reservoirs that store potable water to meet the demands of the distribution system. The reservoirs range in size from 1.5 million gallons to 5 million gallons in capacity. Due to thermal stratification caused by heat generated from the sun, warmer water floats to the top of tank, while colder, denser water remains at the bottom. The warmer water remains at the top of the tank and ages as it becom es stratified. As water ages, it loses its chlorine residual and disinfection capabilities, creating a favorable environment for the growth of microorganisms.
Adding reservoir mixers will eliminate any stratification within twenty -four hours of installat ion. The resulting uniform water temperature will eliminate stratification and ensure adequate chlorine residuals are maintained, further improving the City’s superior water quality.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Hesperia Public Works released Request for Bid (RFB) 2024-25-005 for fourteen (14) reservoir mixers on August 14, 2024, soliciting bids from three (3) vendors. The bid closed on August 27, 2024, with three (3) responses received. Staff recommends awarding the bid to Doane & Hartwig Water Systems who have been deemed the lowest responsive / responsible vendor with a total bid amount of $161,892.50.
The City has identified available American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant funds that are an eligible funding source for the reservoir mixer purchases.
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.
Staff Report to the City Council and Board Members of the Water District American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) Grant Equipment Procurement – Fourteen Reservoir Mixers September 17, 2024
FISCAL IMPACT
ARPA Grant funding in the amount of $162,000 has been identified for the proposed purchase of the fourteen (14) reservoir mixers. If approved, an amendment to the FY 2024 -25 Budget will be presented at the First Quarter Budget Review to appropriate the necessary funds.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
None
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 3, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager SECOND READING AND ADOPTION BY: Ryan Leonard, Principal Planner
Leilani Henry, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Development Code Amendment DCA2 4-00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-00001; Applicant: City of Hesperia; Area affected: City-wide.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council introduce and place on first reading Ordinance No. 2024- 09 approving Development Code Amendment DCA24 -00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPL24-00001 modifying the development requirements associated with the establishment of new or the expansion of existing single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS) , and repealing Urgency Ordinance No. 2024-02.
BACKGROUND
On February 6, 2024, the City Council determined that without further regulation of the location and operation of such establishments, there is the potential for significant negative impacts from the development of such uses that cannot be mitigated. As such, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 202 4-02 establishing a 45-day moratorium on the establishment or the expansion of new SPODS in the City.
Moreover, on March 19, 2024, the City Council approved an extension of the moratorium for an additional period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days, for a total period of one year.
The purpose of the development moratorium was to allow staff time to study the issues associated with SPODS and to present recommendations which would regulate the location of such establishments and the types of development standards that should be imposed on their operation to mitigate any potential negative impacts to the community.
Planning Commission Review: On April 11, 2024, the Planning Commission considered Resolution No. PC-2024-06. After discussion, the Planning Commission motioned and voted 4-1 that the item be continued to a future date. Thereafter, on July 11, 2024, the Planning Commission voted 4-1 to forward this item to the City Council with a recommendation that they introduce and place the item on first reading. There were no residents who spoke either in favor or opposition to the code amendment at either hearing.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Existing Regulations: Hesperia Municipal Code section 16.16.320 currently allows retail sales in the Convenience Commercial (C1) , General Commercial (C2), and Service Commercial (C3), zoning designations. The City’s Municipal Code does not specifically identify SPODS as permitted by right or as a conditional use, so n o specific regulations exist. Under the existing regulations, SPODS are considered a general retail use and are permitted by right in the Convenience
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council Members
DCA24-00001 and SPLA24-00001
September 3, 2024
Commercial (C1), General Commercial (C2), and Service Commercial (C3) zoning designations.
The Limited Manufacturing (I1) and General Manufacturing (I2) zones allow restricted retail sales only when it is incidental to a principally permitted use on the site and the retail sales do not occupy more than twenty-five (25) percent of the total building square footage. As such, SPODS are not currently permitted within the Limited Manufacturing (I1) and General Manufacturing (I2) zones.
Additionally, within the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan), retail sales are listed as a permitted use in the Regional Commercial (RC) , Office Commercial (OC) , and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning designations. As with the Municipal Code, the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan does not specifically identify SPODS as permitted by right or as a conditional use, so no specific regulations exist. Under the existing regulations, SPODS are considered a general retail use and are permitted by right in the Regional Commercial (RC), Neighborhood Commercial (NC), and Office Commercial (OC) zoning de signations. The Office Park (OP), Auto Sales Commercial (ASC), General Industrial (GI) , and Commercial Industrial Business Park (CIBP) zoning designations allow for limited commercial retail sales that are incidental to a principally permitted use with add itional restrictions. Therefore, SPODS are not currently permitted within the Office Park (OP), Auto Sales Commercial (ASC), General Industrial (GI), or Commercial Industrial Business Park (CIBP) zones.
Proposed Regulations: As previously noted, SPODS are not currently defined in the Development Code, nor are there specific development standards for SPODS. As a part of the proposed regulations, staff is proposing to add the following definition for SPODS under Section 16.08.935 of the Hesperia Municipal Code:
Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS) - A retail establishment with a floor area less than 15,000 square feet that offers for sale a combination and variety of convenience shopping goods and consumer shopping goods, such as including food or beverage for off-premises consumption, personal grooming and health products, household goods, and other consumer products, and continuously offers a majority of the items in its inventory for sale at a discount or price per item of $10.00 or less, adjusted for inflation. This definition shall control any use that fits the same despite definition otherwise being termed “grocery store,” “variety store,” or “convenience store”.
In addition, t he proposed Ordinance would require all future SPODS proposals to ap ply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) where retail sales are listed as a permitted use, allowing the Planning Commission final say in determining whether a proposed project or occupancy is suitable and appropriate (Attachment 2). By implementing the requi rements of a CUP, the Planning Commission will determine if a site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use, that the proposed use will not have a substantial adverse effect on abutting properties or the permitted use thereof and will not generate excessive disturbances, nuisances or hazards, and that the use is consistent with the goals and policies of the Development Code, General Plan, and other applicable codes and ordinances adopted by the City.
Furthermore, additional requirements may be placed upon the development project by the reviewing authority as conditions of approval such as specific hours of operations, landscape maintenance, and efficient site upkeep from trash and debris. Lastly, t he City’s Municipal Code authorizes the P lanning Commission to periodically review any CUP to ensure that it is being operated in a manner consistent with conditions of approval and in a manner which is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injuriou s to properties in the vicinity.
Staff Report to the Mayor and City Council Members
DCA24-00001 and SPLA24-00001
September 3, 2024
ENVIROMENTAL: Approval of the Development Code Amendment and Specific Plan 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 16.12.415(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.
CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM:
Future Development: Facilitate balanced growth to ensure cohesive community development and pursue economic development.
CONCLUSION: The Development Code Amendment complies with the General Plan and the Specific Plan amendment complies with the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan. Both ensure that all future SPODS are subject to a conditional use permit to ensure that future sites are developed in an orderly manner.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts identified with this action.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Ordinance No. 2024-09
2. Exhibit A
3. July 11, 2024, Planning Commission Staff Report (includes March 19, 2024, City Council Staff Report as attachment)
01071.0005/1011664.1
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-09
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA,
CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT AND A
MAIN STREET AND FREEWAY CORRIDOR SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENT
MODIFYING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF ANY NEW OR THE EXPANSION OF EXISTI NG SINGLE PRICE
OVERSTOCK/DISCOUNT S TORES (SPODS) (DCA24-00001 AND SPLA2 4- 00001) AND REPEALING URGENCY ORDINANCE NO. 2024-02
WHEREAS, on January 5, 1998, the City C ouncil of the City of Hesperia adopted Ordinan ce No. 250, thereby adopting the Hesperia Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, On September 2, 2008, the City Council of the City of Hesperia adopted Ordinance No. 2008-12, thereby adopting the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan; and
WHEREAS, the City is responsible for adopting and implementing land use regulations within its boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the C ity has no other development standard s or regulations applicable to the operation of SPODS; and
WHEREAS, the City’s pe rmissive policy towards SPODS could res ult in a proliferation or oversaturation of said uses within the City; and
WHEREAS, the oversaturation of SPODS in the City provides little economic benefit to the City or City residents; and
WHEREAS, absent clear regulation, the proliferation and oversaturation of SPODS in the City poses a threat to the public peace, health, an d safety, and, unless the City takes action t o regulate, the impacts described above are likely to continue to occur; and WHEREAS, the City desires to regulate SPODS to ensure that public right-of-ways and public property remain free of public nuisanc es, safe and accessible for all users, and cl ear of conditions t hat pose threats to public health, safety, and welfare, to ensur e that future development is undertaken in a manner consistent with the City’s General Plan, and to ensure that SPODS operators comply with State and City regulations tha t consider the public’s health, safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City finds that it is necessary to amend the dev elopment regulations within the City of Hesperia Municipal Code and the Main Street and F reeway Corridor Specific Plan to require a C UP for Single Price Oversto ck/Discount Stores (SPODS) within all zones in which retail is permittable; and
WHEREAS, the City has a compelling interest in protec ting the public h ealth, safety, a nd welfare of its citizens, residents, visitors and businesses, and preserving the peace and quiet of the neighborhoods with in the City by regula ting t he establishment and expansion of SPODS within City limits; and
Ordinance No. 2024-09
01071.0005/1011664.1
WHEREAS, the City proposes to amend Chapter 16.08 - Definitions of t he City of Hesperia Municipal Code by adding Section 16.08.935 to i nclude the defin ition of “Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS)” which means “a retail establishment with a floor area less than 15,000 square feet that offers for sale a combination and variety of convenience s hopping goods and consumer shopping goods, such as including food or beverage for off -premises consumption, personal gr ooming and health products, ho usehold goods, and other consumer products, and continuously offers a majority of the items in its inventor y for sale at a discount or price per item of $10.00 or less, adjusted for inflation. This definition shall control any use that fits the same despit e otherwise being termed ‘grocery store,’ ‘variety store,’ or ‘convenience store’ “; and
WHEREAS, the City p roposes to amend Chapter 16.16.320 of the City of Hesperia Municipal Code which contains per mitted uses and pe rmit requirements to require , where r etail is permittable, that the establishment of any new or the expansion of an existing single price overstock/discount store (SPODS) be approved by a conditional use permit (CUP); and
WHEREAS, the City proposes to amend Chapter 9 of the Main Street and F reeway Corridor Specific Plan to require , where retail is p ermittable, that the establishment of any new or the expansion of an existing single price overstock/discount store s (SPODS) be by approved by a CUP; and
WHEREAS, on February 6, 2024, the City Cou ncil ad opted Urg ency Ordinance No. 202 4-02 establishing a 45-day moratorium on the establishment or expansion of new carwash facilities in the City; and
WHEREAS, on March 19, 2024, the City Council adopted Urg ency Ordinance No. 202 4-02 extending the moratorium for an additional period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days, for a total period of one year; and
WHEREAS, as of the effective date of this ordinance, Urgency Ordinance No. 2024-02 will be repealed and will no longer be in effect; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Development Code Amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 15061(b)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no signifi cant effect on th e environment. The proposed Amendments are also exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act by Section
16.12.415(B)(10) of the City’s CEQA Gu idelines, as the Amendments are exempt if they do not propose to increase the density or intensity allowed in the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, on July 11, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Hesperia conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaini ng to the proposed amendment and concluded said hearing on that date; and
WHEREAS, on September 3, 2024, the City Council of the C ity of Hesperia conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaining to the proposed Amendment and concluded said hearing on that date; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
Ordinance No. 2024-09
01071.0005/1011664.1
Section 1. The City Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in this Ordinance are true and correct.
Section 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the City Council, i ncluding written and oral staff reports, the City Council specifically finds that the propos ed Ordinance is consistent with the goals and objectives of the adopted General Plan as it will enhance the quality of li fe by preserving the peac e and quiet of the neighborhoods within the City by regulating the establishment and expansion of SPODS within City limits and will ensure that future development is undertaken in a manner consistent with the City’s General .
Section 3. The proposed develop ment code amendment is ne cessary because the existing regulations do not co ntain any developme nt stan dards as to the placement or operational characteristics of SPODS. The oversaturation of SPODS in the City provides little economic benefit to the City or City residents.
Section 4. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in this Ordinance, the City Council hereby adopts Development Code Am endment DCA24-00001 and Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-00001 modifying development standards associated with the establishment of new of car wash facilities as shown on Exhibit “A.”
Section 5. This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days from the date of adoption.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of t his Ordinance and shall cause the s ame to be posted in three (3) public places within the City of Hesperia pursua nt to the provisions of Resolution No. 2007-101.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED on this 17TH day of September 2024.
__________________________________ _______________________________ Larry Bird, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________________
Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk
EXHIBIT “A”
DCA24-00001 and SPLA24-00001
The following are modifications to Chapter 16.16.320 of the City of Hesperia Development Code regulations and Chapter 9 of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (additions are in underlined red text and deletions are shown with red and strikethrough):
1) The following are modifications to Chapter 16.08- Definitions of the City Municipal Code:
16.08.935- Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
“Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS)” means a retail establishment with a floor area less than 15,000 square feet that offers for sale a combination and variety of convenience shopping goods and consumer shopping goods, such as including food or beverage for off-premises consumption, personal grooming and health products, household goods, and other consumer products, and continuously offers a majority of the items in its inventory for sale at a discount or price per item of $10.00 or less, adjusted for inflati on. This definition shall control any use that fits the same despite otherwise being termed “ grocery store,” “variety store,” or “convenience store”.
2) The following are modifications to Chapter 16.16.320- Commercial and industrial uses of the City Municipal Code
Land Use Designations
Land Uses C1 C2 C3 I1 I2
TT. Retail sales (not including off-sale alcohol7 or
single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS).
R R R R6 R6
UU. School — Trade, community college, university R R R R VV. School — Specialty non-degree (e.g., dance and
martial arts)
R R R R R
WW. Semi-truck repair and storage
CUP CUP
XX. Shopping center (not including off-sale alcohol 7 ) R R R
YY. single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS). CUP CUP CUP
ZZ YY. Outdoor storage of shipping containers and semi- truck trailers as a primary use 2
NP NP NP CUP CUP
AAA ZZ. Trucking facilities including truck terminals, bus terminals, and truck storage yards 2
CUP CUP
BBB AAA. Theater NP NP NP NP NP
CCC BBB. Upholstery and furniture repair/refinishing
R R R R
DDD CCC. Vehicle fuel station 2 CUP CUP CUP
EEE DDD. Vehicle parts and accessories sales
R R
FFF EEE. Vehicle repair facility — Major (not including semi-truck repair)
CUP CUP R R
GGG FFF. Vehicle repair facility — Minor
CUP CUP R R
HHH GGG. Vehicle sales/rentals and leasing — new and
used 2
R
Attachment 2
III HHH. Vehicle wash facility 2
CUP CUP CUP
JJJ III. Veterinary services — Clinics and small animal’s hospitals (short term boarding)
R R R
KKK JJJ. Warehousing and wholesale distribution center
R R
LLL KKK. Wrecking yard 2 NP NP NP NP CUP
3) The following are modifications to Chapter 9- Non-Residential Zones of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan
Section B. REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ZONE
1. Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted in the Regional Commercial zone:
a) Artist studio (including photo).
b) Assemblies of people – live entertainment venues - (e.g., theatre – live performance, auditoriums, banquet halls, nightclubs, etc.).
c) Banks and financial institutions/services.
d) Business support services and facilities (including graphic reproduction, computer services, etc.).
e) Catering establishments.
f) Grocery stores.
g) Health and fitness clubs.
h) Home improvement sales and service, retail (e.g., hardware, lumber and building material stores).
i) Hotel.
j) Medical services - clinic, medical/dental offices, laboratory, urgent/express care, and optometrist (not including hospital).
k) Motel.
l) Offices (administrative, business, executive and professional, but not including medical or dental).
m) Outdoor sales and display, incidental to the primary use. n) Personal services (e.g., barber shop, beauty salon, spa, tailor, dry cleaner, selfservice laundry, etc.).
o) Repair shop – small items (computers, small appliances, watches, etc), with incidental sales.
p) Restaurants (sit down and take out), including outdoor dining. q) Retail sales. (excluding Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS)). r) Schools - specialty non-degree (e.g., dance and martial arts). s) Shopping center – more than 10 acres in size.
t) Vehicle parts and accessories sales.
u) Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to any permitted uses when located
on the same site with the main building and use.
v) Veterinary services with no outdoor runs.
w) Drive thru lanes incidental to the primary use, pursuant to the HMC. x) Other similar uses, as interpreted by the Development Services Director or his/her designee.
2. Conditionally Permitted Uses
The following uses are conditionally permitted in the Regional Commercial zone:
a) Alcohol sales – on-site, incidental to the primary use. b) Alcohol sales – off-site.
c) Assisted living (residential care facilities).
d) Bars, saloons, cocktail lounges and taverns.
e) Bus terminals.
f) Day care facility – child or adult, pursuant to the Hesperia Municipal Code (HMC). g) Hospital.
h) Multi-family residential, as a part of a mixed use development in the Interstate-15/Main Street Interchange District.
i) Recreational facilities – commercial (e.g., billiard parlors and pool halls, bowling alleys, etc.).
j) Schools – college, community college, university (public or private). k) Schools – vocational and technical.
l) Vehicle fuel stations (i.e., gasoline stations).
m) Vehicle sales and leasing – new and used.
n) Vehicle rental.
o) Vehicle repair facilities – minor.
p) Vehicle wash facilities.
q) Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
E. OFFICE COMMERCIAL ZONE
1. Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted in the Office Commercial zone:
a) Artist studio (including photo).
b) Banks and financial institutions/services.
c) Business support services and facilities (including graphic reproduction, computer services, etc.).
d) Catering establishments.
e) Health and fitness clubs – 4,000 square feet or less.
f) Home improvement sales and service, retail (e.g., hardware, lumber and building material stores) – under 10,000 square feet.
g) Offices (administrative, business, executive and professional, including medical and dental).
h) Outdoor sales and display, incidental to the primary use. i) Restaurants (sit down and take out), including outdoor dining. j) Retail sales – under 10,000 square feet (excluding Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
k) Schools - specialty non-degree (e.g., dance and martial arts). l) Shopping center – up to 5 acres in size – limited to a corner lot location m) Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to any permitted uses when located on the same site with the main building and use. n) Veterinary services.
o) Drive thru lanes, incidental to the primary use, pursuant to the HMC. p) Other similar uses, as interpreted by the Development Services Director or his/her designee.
2. Conditionally Permitted Uses
The following uses are conditionally permitted in the Office Commercial zone:
a) Alcohol sales – off-site.
b) Alcohol sales – on-site, incidental to the primary use. c) Bars, saloons, cocktail lounges and taverns.
d) Day care centers – child or adult, pursuant to the HMC. e) Recreational facilities – commercial (e.g., billiard parlors and pool halls, bowling alleys,etc.).
f) Repair shop – small items (computers, small appliances, watches, etc), with incidental sales.
g) Retail sales – over 10,000 square feet.
h) Schools – vocational and technical.
i) Shopping center – more than 5 acres in size – limited to a corner lot location j) Vehicle fuel stations (i.e., gasoline stations) – limited to a corner lot location k) Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
F. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE
1. Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial zone:
a) Artist studio (including photo).
b) Banks and financial institutions/services.
c) Business support services and facilities (including graphic reproduction, computer services, etc.).
d) Catering establishments.
e) Grocery stores.
f) Health and fitness clubs.
g) Home improvement sales and service, retail (e.g., hardware, lumber and building material stores) – under 10,000 square feet.
h) Offices (administrative, business, executive and professional, including medical and dental).
i) Outdoor sales and display, incidental to the primary use. j) Personal services (e.g., barber shop, beauty salon, spa, tailor, dry cleaner, selfservice laundry, etc.).
k) Repair shop – small items (computers, small appliances, watches, etc), with incidental sales.
l) Restaurants (sit down and take out), including outdoor dining. m) Retail sales – under 60,000 square feet (excluding Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
n) Schools - specialty non-degree (e.g., dance and martial arts). o) Shopping center – up to 5 acres in size.
p) Vehicle parts and accessories sales.
q) Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to any permitted uses when located on the same site with the main building and use.
r) Veterinary Services.
s) Drive thru lanes, incidental to the primary use, pursuant to the HMC t) Other similar uses, as interpreted by the Development Services Director or his/her designee.
2. Conditionally Permitted Uses
The following uses are conditionally permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial zone:
a) Alcohol sales – off-site.
b) Alcohol sales – on-site, incidental to the primary use. c) Assemblies of people - entertainment - (e.g., theatre – live performance, auditoriums, banquet halls, nightclubs, etc.)
d) Bars, saloons, cocktail lounges, and taverns.
e) Bus terminals.
f) Day care centers – child or adult, pursuant to the HMC. g) Equipment (small) sales and rental.
h) Home improvement sales and service, retail (hardware, lumber and building material
stores) - 10,000 square feet or more.
i) Recreational facilities – commercial (e.g., billiard parlors and pool halls, bowling alleys, etc.).
j) Schools – vocational and technical.
k) Shopping center – more than 5 acres in size.
l) Vehicle fuel stations (i.e., gasoline stations).
m) Vehicle rental.
n) Vehicle repair facilities – minor.
o) Vehicle wash facilities.
p) Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: July 11, 2024
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services BY: Ryan Leonard, Principal Planner
Leilani Henry, Assistant Planner
SUBJECT: Development Code Amendment DCA2 4-00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-00001; Applicant: City of Hesperia; Area affected: City-wide.
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution No. PC -2024-06 recommending that the City Council introduce and place on first reading an ordinance approving Development Code Amendment DCA24-00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-00001 modifying the development requirements associated with the establishment of new or the expansion of existing single price overstock/discount stores, or store as appropriate (SPODS).
BACKGROUND
On February 6, 2024, the City Council determined that without further regulation of the location and operation of SPODS, there is a potential for negative impacts from the development of such uses that cannot be mitigated. As such, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2024-02 establishing a 45-day moratorium on the establishment or expansion of new SPODS throughout the City.
Additionally, on March 19, 2024, the City Council voted to extend the noted moratorium for an additional period of ten months and fifteen days, for a total period of one year (Attachment 1).
The purpose of the moratorium is to allow staff time to study the issue (s) associated with SPODS and to present recommendations which would regulate the location of such establishments and the types of development standards that should be imposed on their operation to mitigate any potential negative impacts to the community.
On April 11, 2024, the Planning Commission considered a resolution recommending that the City Council introduce and place on first reading an ordinance approved a Development Code Amendment and Specific Plan Amendment modifying the development requirements associated with the establishment of new or the expansion of existing SPODS. After discussion, the Planning Commission directed staff to continue the item to a future date.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Existing Regulations: Hesperia Municipal Code section 16.16.320 currently allows retail sales in the Convenience Commercial (C1) , General Commercial (C2), and Service Commercial (C3), zoning designations. The City’s Municipal Code does not specifically identify SPODS as permitted by right or as a conditional use, so no specific regulations exist. Under the existing regulations, SPODS are considered a general retail use and are permitted by right in the Convenience Attachment 3
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
DCA24-00001 and SPLA24-00001
July 11, 2024
Commercial (C1), General Commercial (C2), and Service Commercial (C3), zoning designations.
The Limited Manufacturing (I1) and General Manufacturing (I2) zones allow restricted retail sales only when it is incidental to a principally permitted use on the site and the retail sales do not occupy more than twenty-five (25) percent of the total building square footage. As such, SPODS are not currently permitted within the Limited Manufacturing (I1) and General Manufacturing (I2) zones.
Additionally, within the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (Specific Plan), retail sales are listed as a permitted use in the Regional Commercial (RC), Office Commercial (OC) and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zoning designations. As with the Municipal Code, the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan does not specifically identify SPODS as permitted by right or as a conditional use, so no specific regulations exist. Under the existing regulations, SPODS are considered a general retail use and are permitted by right in the Regional Commercial (RC), Neighborhood Commercial (NC) and Office Commercial (OC) zoning designations. The Office Park (OP), Auto Sales Commercial (ASC), General Industrial (GI) , and Commercial Industrial Business Park (CIBP) zon ing designations allow for limited commercial retail sales that are incidental to a principally permitted use with additional restrictions. Therefore, SPODS are not currently permitted within the Office Park (OP), Auto Sales Commercial (ASC), General Industrial (GI), or Commercial Industrial Business Park (CIBP) zones.
Proposed Regulations: As previously noted, SPODS are not currently defined in the Development Code, nor are there specific development standards for SPODS. As a part of the proposed regulations staff is proposing to add the following definition for SPODS (Attachment 2):
Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS) - A retail establishment with a floor area less than 15,000 square feet that offers for sale a combination and variety of convenience shopping goods and consumer shopping goods, such as including food or beverage for off-premises consumption, personal grooming and health products, household goods, and other consumer products, and continuously offers a majority of the items in its inventory for sale at a discount or price per item of $10.00 or less, adjusted for inflation. This definition shall control any use that fits the same despite definition otherwise being termed “ grocery store,” “variety store,” or “convenience store”.
In addition, t he proposed Ordinance would require all future SPODS proposals to apply for a Conditional Use Permit (CUP) where retail sales are listed as a permitted use , allowing the Planning Commission final say in determining whether a proposed project or occupancy is suitable and appropriate. By implementing the requirements of a CUP, the Planning Commission will determine if a site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use, that the proposed use will not have a substantial adverse effect on abutting properties or the permitted use thereof and will not generate excessive disturbances, nuisances or hazards, and that the use is consistent with the goals and policies of the Development Code, General Plan, and other applicable codes and ordinances adopted by the City.
Furthermore, additional requirements may be placed upon the development project by the reviewing authority as conditions of approval such as specific hours of operations, landscape maintenance and efficient site upkeep from trash an d debris. Lastly, t he City Municipal Code authorizes the P lanning Commission to periodically review any CUP to ensure that i t is being operated in a manner consistent with conditions of approval and in a manner which is not detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties in the vicinity.
Staff Report to the Planning Commission
DCA24-00001 and SPLA24-00001
July 11, 2024
Environmental: Approval of the Development Code Amendment and Specific Plan 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 16.12.415(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 proposed Development Code Amendment complies with the General Plan .
The Specific Plan amendment complies with the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan.
Each ensuring that all future SPODS are subject to a conditional use permit to ensure that future sites are developed and maintained in an orderly manner.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts identified with this action.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. March 19, 2024, City Council staff report
2. Exhibit A.
3. Resolution No. PC-2024-06
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: March 19, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services Ryan Leonard, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Urgency Ordinance-Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores Moratorium
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council waive further reading and adopt Urgency Ordinance 2024-03 pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 extending a moratorium for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days on the establishment or expansion of single price overstock/discount stores, or store as appropriate (SPODS).
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to State law, Government Code Section 65858, a city may enact an interim zoning ordinance on an urgency basis (“Urgency Ordinance”) for the protection of public safety, health, and welfare by prohibiting any use(s) that a city is intending to study within a reasonable period of time.
On February 6, 2024, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2024 -02 establishing a 45-day moratorium on the establishment or expansion of SPODS in the City. Pursuant to State law, the adopted Urgency Ordinance is valid for 45 days and will expire on March 22, 2024, unless extended by the City Council. After holding a public hearing, the City Council may extend the Urgency Ordinance for up to an additional 10 months and 15 days, for a total period of one year.
As with the initial adoption of the Urgency Ordinance, a four-fifths (4/5) vote is required to extend the Urgency Ordinance.
An extension of the Urgency Ordinance will allow staff the necessary time to draft a Development Code Amendment, to regulate the establishment or expansion of new SPODS, and present it to the Planning Commission for review and then the City Council for final review and approval.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
As noted in staff’s previous report, dated February 6, 2024, SPODS are generally defined as a retail store that is less than 15,000 square feet and sells individual items generally obtained through outlet, close-out, discontinued, liquidation, or overstock, primarily at a single discount price or in the low and very low price ranges (e.g., $10.00, or less). Moreover, a SPODS typically dedicates less than fifteen percent (15%) of shelf space to fresh or frozen foods and produce and sells at retail an assortment of physical goods, products or merchandise directly to the consumer, including food or beverage for off-premises consumption, personal grooming and health products, household goods, and other consumer products.
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
Urgency Ordinance - Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores Moratorium March 19, 2024
Additionally, SPODS may have a profound impact on the public health, safety, general welfare, and quality of life of surrounding communities and tend to proliferate in low -income neighborhoods. SPODS typically have lower quality items, items that cost much more per ounce over time, and limited access to fresh foods for vulnerable neighborhoods. Furthermore, SPODS generally employ fewer people at lower wages than grocery stores and tend to depend on taxpayers to subsidize their employees’ health insurance. Also, SPODS contribute to resident fear of safety by being a source of trash, loitering, or graffiti, and theft in and around them due to their lack of security.
The City’s current zoning code does not specifically identify SPODS as permitted by right or as a conditional use, so no specific regulations to curb threats to public health, safety, or welfare exist.
As developable land becomes scarcer in the City, there is concern that the proliferation of SPODS, without further regulation, could have adverse impacts on the community. SPODS tend to operate in minimally developed spaces , discourage the upgrading of the existing area and its future economic vibrancy, and are inconsistent with the goal of upgrading commercial areas. Should SPODS continue to be permitted to locate within the commercial areas of the City, without further regulation, such development s would constitute a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare in that such a development will start an irrevocable downward shift in the economic and aesthetic value of the area and thus act as a bar to the goals of the City.
Currently, the City has seventeen (17) single price overstock discount stores within the community:
Number Company Location
1 Dollar Tree Main St / Eighth Ave
2 Family Dollar Main St / Hickory Ave
3 Dollar Tree Main St / I Ave
4 Dollar Tree Main St / Escondido Ave
5 Button’s Discount Store Main St / G Ave
6 99 Cents Only Main St / G Ave
7 99 Cents Only Main St / Topaz Ave
8 Dollar General I Avenue / Danbury Ave
9 M&M $.99+ Store Main St / Eleventh Ave
10 760 Discount Tools Hesperia Rd / Mesa St
11 Elite Tools and More Main St / Eighth Ave
12 Second Time Around Bin Store Hesperia Rd / Sequoia St 13 High Desert Thunder Deals Main St / Eighth Ave
14 99 Cent Discount Store Main St / C Ave
15 99 Cent and Plus Bear Valley Rd / Hesperia Rd
(PENDING)
16 H&R Discount Main St / Eighth Ave
17 Cash Deal and More Main St / Seventh Ave
Staff intends to study the issues associated with SPODS to determine which locations are most appropriate to mitigate any potential adverse impacts on the City. This includes reviewing land use definitions for SPODS to determine if revisions are needed, evaluating all land use districts
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
Urgency Ordinance - Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores Moratorium March 19, 2024
where SPODS are permitted for suitability, and study development standards and best practices from other jurisdictions to determine if they would be appropriate City-wide.
Staff believes that continued approval of entitlements, building permits, or other approvals for new SPODS, without further regulations or studies , poses a current and immediate threat to public health, safety, and general welfare. Further regulations , via a Development Code Amendment, are needed for the purpose of protecting neighborhoods from negative secondary effects created by the concentration or clustering of such businesses. The regulations will help to avoid and reduce over-concentration and to maintain cleanliness for the health and safety of residents within the City’s neighborhoods.
As previously noted, per Government Code Section 65858, a municipality may adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the legislative body, planning commission or the planning department is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time, for the immediate preservation of the general health, safety, or welfare, provided the ordinance contains a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency, and is passed by not less than a four -fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council.
As such, staff recommends that the City Council waive further reading and adopt Urgency Ordinance 2024 -03 pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 extending the moratorium for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days, or until such time as a permanent development code is in full force and effect, on the establishment or expansion of SPODS.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The City, as the Lead Agency, has determined that the proposed interim ordinance is exempt from further review under the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code 21000, et seq., "CEQA"). Section 15378 of the CEQA Guidelines provides that an activity is a project subject to CEQA when action that has the potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, either directly or indirectly. Section 15061(b)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines provides that CEQA only applies to projects that have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. The City has determined that there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, or that if it does have the potential, there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment.
FISCAL IMPACT
There are no fiscal impacts identified with this action.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Urgency Ordinance 2024-03
EXHIBIT “A”
DCA24-00001 and SPLA24-00001
The following are modifications to Chapter 16.16.365 of the City of Hesperia Development Code regulations and Chapter 9 of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan (additions are in underlined red text and deletions are shown with red and strikethrough):
1) The following are modifications to Chapter 16.08- Definitions of the City Municipal Code:
16.08.935- Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS). “Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS)” means a retail establishment with a floor area less than 15,000 square feet that offers for sale a combination and variety of convenience shopping goods and consumer shopping goods, such as including food or beverage for off - premises consumption, personal grooming and health products, household goods, and other consumer products, and continuously offers a majority of the items in its inventory for sale at a discount or price per item of $10.00 or less, adjusted for inflation. This definition shall control any use that fits the same despite otherwise being termed “ grocery store,” “ variety store,” or “convenience store”.
2) The following are modifications to Chapter 16.16.320- Commercial and industrial uses of the City Municipal Code
Land Use Designations
Land Uses C1 C2 C3 I1 I2
TT. Retail sales (not including off-sale alcohol7 or
single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS).
R R R R6 R6
UU. School — Trade, community college, university R R R R VV. School — Specialty non-degree (e.g., dance and
martial arts)
R R R R R
WW. Semi-truck repair and storage CUP CUP
XX. Shopping center (not including off-sale alcohol 7 ) R R R
YY. Single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS). CUP CUP CUP ZZ YY. Outdoor storage of shipping containers and semi- truck trailers as a primary use 2
NP NP NP CUP CUP
AAA ZZ. Trucking facilities including truck terminals, bus terminals, and truck storage yards 2
CUP CUP
BBB AAA. Theater NP NP NP NP NP
CCC BBB. Upholstery and furniture repair/refinishing
R R R R
DDD CCC. Vehicle fuel station 2 CUP CUP CUP
EEE DDD. Vehicle parts and accessories sales
R R
FFF EEE. Vehicle repair facility — Major (not including semi-truck repair)
CUP CUP R R
GGG FFF. Vehicle repair facility — Minor CUP CUP R R
HHH GGG. Vehicle sales/rentals and leasing — new and
used 2
R
III HHH. Vehicle wash facility 2 CUP CUP CUP
JJJ III. Veterinary services — Clinics and small animals hospitals (short term boarding)
R R R
KKK JJJ. Warehousing and wholesale distribution center R R LLL KKK. Wrecking yard 2 NP NP NP NP CUP
3) The following are modifications to Chapter 9- Non-Residential Zones of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan
Section B. REGIONAL COMMERCIAL ZONE
1. Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted in the Regional Commercial zone:
a) Artist studio (including photo).
b) Assemblies of people – live entertainment venues - (e.g., theatre – live performance, auditoriums, banquet halls, nightclubs, etc.).
c) Banks and financial institutions/services.
d) Business support services and facilities (including graphic reproduction, computer services, etc.).
e) Catering establishments.
f) Grocery stores.
g) Health and fitness clubs.
h) Home improvement sales and service, retail (e.g., hardware, lumber and building material stores).
i) Hotel.
j) Medical services - clinic, medical/dental offices, laboratory, urgent/express care, and optometrist (not including hospital).
k) Motel.
l) Offices (administrative, business, executive and professional, but not including medical or dental).
m) Outdoor sales and display, incidental to the primary use. n) Personal services (e.g., barber shop, beauty salon, spa, tailor, dry cleaner, self service laundry, etc.).
o) Repair shop – small items (computers, small appliances, watches, etc), with incidental sales.
p) Restaurants (sit down and take out), including outdoor dining. q) Retail sales. (excluding Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS). r) Schools - specialty non-degree (e.g., dance and martial arts). s) Shopping center – more than 10 acres in size.
t) Vehicle parts and accessories sales.
u) Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to any permitted uses when located on the same site with the main building and use.
v) Veterinary services with no outdoor runs.
w) Drive thru lanes incidental to the primary use, pursuant to the HMC. x) Other similar uses, as interpreted by the Development Services Director or his/her designee.
2. Conditionally Permitted Uses
The following uses are conditionally permitted in the Regional Commercial zone:
a) Alcohol sales – on-site, incidental to the primary use. b) Alcohol sales – off-site.
c) Assisted living (residential care facilities).
d) Bars, saloons, cocktail lounges and taverns.
e) Bus terminals.
f) Day care facility – child or adult, pursuant to the Hesperia Municipal Code (HMC). g) Hospital.
h) Multi-family residential, as a part of a mixed-use development in the Interstate-15/Main Street Interchange District.
i) Recreational facilities – commercial (e.g., billiard parlors and pool halls, bowling alleys, etc.).
j) Schools – college, community college, university (public or private). k) Schools – vocational and technical.
l) Vehicle fuel stations (i.e., gasoline stations).
m) Vehicle sales and leasing – new and used.
n) Vehicle rental.
o) Vehicle repair facilities – minor.
p) Vehicle wash facilities.
q) Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
E. OFFICE COMMERCIAL ZONE
1. Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted in the Office Commercial zone:
a) Artist studio (including photo).
b) Banks and financial institutions/services.
c) Business support services and facilities (including graphic reproduction, computer services, etc.).
d) Catering establishments.
e) Health and fitness clubs – 4,000 square feet or less. f) Home improvement sales and service, retail (e.g., hardware, lumber and building material stores) – under 10,000 square feet.
g) Offices (administrative, business, executive and professional, including medical and dental).
h) Outdoor sales and display, incidental to the primary use. i) Restaurants (sit down and take out), including outdoor dining. j) Retail sales – under 10,000 square feet. (excluding Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
k) Schools - specialty non-degree (e.g., dance and martial arts). l) Shopping center – up to 5 acres in size – limited to a corner lot location m) Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to any permitted uses when located on the same site with the main building and use. n) Veterinary services.
o) Drive thru lanes, incidental to the primary use, pursuant to the HMC. p) Other similar uses, as interpreted by the Development Services Director or his/her designee.
2. Conditionally Permitted Uses
The following uses are conditionally permitted in the Office Commercial zone:
a) Alcohol sales – off-site.
b) Alcohol sales – on-site, incidental to the primary use. c) Bars, saloons, cocktail lounges and taverns.
d) Day care centers – child or adult, pursuant to the HMC. e) Recreational facilities – commercial (e.g., billiard parlors and pool halls, bowling alleys, etc.).
f) Repair shop – small items (computers, small appliances, watches, etc), with incidental sales.
g) Retail sales – over 10,000 square feet.
h) Schools – vocational and technical.
i) Shopping center – more than 5 acres in size – limited to a corner lot location j) Vehicle fuel stations (i.e., gasoline stations) – limited to a corner lot location k) Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
F. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONE
1. Permitted Uses
The following uses are permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial zone:
a) Artist studio (including photo).
b) Banks and financial institutions/services.
c) Business support services and facilities (including graphic reproduction, computer services, etc.).
d) Catering establishments.
e) Grocery stores.
f) Health and fitness clubs.
g) Home improvement sales and service, retail (e.g., hardware, lumber and building material stores) – under 10,000 square feet.
h) Offices (administrative, business, executive and professional, including medical and dental).
i) Outdoor sales and display, incidental to the primary use. j) Personal services (e.g., barber shop, beauty salon, spa, tailor, dry cleaner, selfservice laundry, etc.).
k) Repair shop – small items (computers, small appliances, watches, etc), with incidental sales.
l) Restaurants (sit down and take out), including outdoor dining. m) Retail sales – under 60,000 square feet (excluding Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
n) Schools - specialty non-degree (e.g., dance and martial arts). o) Shopping center – up to 5 acres in size.
p) Vehicle parts and accessories sales.
q) Accessory structures and uses customarily incidental to any permitted uses when located on the same site with the main building and use.
r) Veterinary Services.
s) Drive thru lanes, incidental to the primary use, pursuant to the HMC t) Other similar uses, as interpreted by the Development Services Director or his/her designee.
2. Conditionally Permitted Uses
The following uses are conditionally permitted in the Neighborhood Commercial zone:
a) Alcohol sales – off-site.
b) Alcohol sales – on-site, incidental to the primary use. c) Assemblies of people - entertainment - (e.g., theatre – live performance, auditoriums, banquet halls, nightclubs, etc.)
d) Bars, saloons, cocktail lounges and taverns.
e) Bus terminals.
f) Day care centers – child or adult, pursuant to the HMC. g) Equipment (small) sales and rental.
h) Home improvement sales and service, retail (hardware, lumber and building material stores) - 10,000 square feet or more.
i) Recreational facilities – commercial (e.g., billiard parlors and pool halls, bowling alleys, etc.).
j) Schools – vocational and technical.
k) Shopping center – more than 5 acres in size.
l) Vehicle fuel stations (i.e., gasoline stations).
m) Vehicle rental.
n) Vehicle repair facilities – minor.
o) Vehicle wash facilities.
p) Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS).
RESOLUTION NO. PC-2024-06
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
ADOPT A DEVELOPMENT CODE AMENDMENT AND SPECIFIC PLAN
AMENDMENT MODIFYING DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED
WITH THE E STABLISHMENT OF ANY NEW OR THE EXPANSION OF EXISTING SINGLE PRIC E OVERSTOCK/DISCOUNT STORES (SPODS). (DCA24-00001 AND SPLA24-00001)
WHEREAS, on January 5, 1998, the City Council of the City of Hesperia adopted Ordinance No. 250, thereby adopting the Hesperia Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, On September 2, 2008, the City Council of the City of Hesperia adopted Ordinance No. 2008-12, thereby adopting the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, the City proposes to amend Chapter 16.08- Definitions of t he City of Hesperia Municipal Code to add 16.08.935- Single Price Overstock/Discount Stores (SPODS) means a retail establishment with a floor area less than 15,000 square feet that offers for sale a combination and variety of convenience s hopping goods and consumer shopping goods, such as including food or beverage for off -premises consumption, personal grooming and health products, household goods, and other consumer products, and continuously offers a majority of the items in its inventor y for sale at a discount or price per item of $10.00 or less, adjusted for inflation. This definition shall control any use t hat fits the same despite otherwise being termed “grocery store,” “variety store,” or “convenience store”; and WHEREAS, the City p roposes to amend Chapter 16.16.320 of the City of Hesperia Municipal Code which contains per mitted uses and permit requirements to require that the establishment of any new or the expansion of an existing single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS ), in the Convenience Commercial (C1), General Commercial (C2), and Service Commercial (C3) zones, require a CUP; and
WHEREAS, the City proposes to amend Chapter 9 of the Main Street and Freeway Corridor Specific Plan to require that the establishment of any new or the expansion of an existing single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS), in the Regional Commercial (RC), Office Commercial (OC) and Neighborhood Commercial (NC) zones, require a CUP; and WHEREAS, the proposed Development Code Amendment is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) per Section 1506 1(b)(3), where it can be seen with certainty that there is no signifi cant effect on th e environment. The proposed Amendments are also exempt fr om the requirements of the California Envir onmental Quality Act by Section
16.12.415(B)(10) of the City’s CEQA Gu idelines, as the Amendments are exempt if they do not propose to increase the density or intensity allowed in the General Plan; and WHEREAS, on July 11, 2024, the Planning Commission of the City of Hesperia conducted a duly noticed public hearing pertaini ng to the proposed amendment and concluded said hearing on that date; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW THEREFORE, BE IT RESO LVED BY THE CITY OF HESPERIA PLANNING COMMISSION AS FOLLOWS:
ATTACHMENT 1
Resolution No. 2024-06
Section 1. The Planning Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in this Resolution are true and correct.
Section 2. Based upon substantial evidence presented to the Commission, including written and oral staff reports, the Commi ssion specifically finds that the proposed Ordinance is consistent with the goals and objectives of the adopted General Plan.
Section 3. Based on the findings and conclusions set forth in this Resolution, this Commission hereby recommends adoption of Development Code Amendment DCA24- 00001 and Specific Plan Amendment SPLA24-00001 modifying the development requirements associated with establishment of new, or expansion of existing, single price overstock/discount stores (SPODS) as shown on Exhibit “A.” Section 4. That the Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED on this 11th day of July 2024.
__________________________________ _______________________________ Roger Abreo, Chair, Planning Commission
ATTEST:
_________________________________________
Maricruz Montes, Secretary, Planning Commission
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 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 service. Unlike the private sector, the City cannot establish user fees above their cost in order to generate a profit. As such, the City may only set fees at a level to recover the full estimated cost of providing the service (user fee).
As such, the City relies on fee studies to determine the appropriate 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 an 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
September 17, 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.
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:
Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District Revised User Fee Study
September 17, 2024
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 dev elopment projects. The individual recommended fees, which can vary depending on the size and quantity of the projects, represents the City staff time needed to properly review and inspect each project. Based upon the current level of development activity i n the FY 2024 -25 Budget, the City would receive an additional $84,000 in revenue from fully recovering the City’s staff costs from the recommended fees.
August 6, 2024 City Council Meeting - The revised fee study was presented to the City Council at the August 6, 2024 City Council meeting to identify corrections to the fully burdened hourly rate calculations within the Willdan rate calculation model and provide updates to other specific fees as described below. The revised fee study was continued for further discussion as directed by the City Council.
If approved, the changes to the fees would become effective December 01, 2024, generating additional revenue through the remaining seven months of the fiscal year.
CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM
Financial Health – Maintain a balanced budget and adequate reserves.
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).
Staff Report to the Mayor, Council Members and Chair and Board Members of the Hesperia Water District Revised User Fee Study
September 17, 2024
ALTERNATIVES
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution No. 2024-35 and Resolution HWD No. 2024-14
2. Revised User Fee Study Report – 2023-24
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.
Section 5. That the current adopted fees, rates, and service charges shall supersede any and all previously adopted fees, rates, and service charges.
Section 6. Interpretation of this resolution may be made by the City Manager or designee.
When there are conflicts between fees, the lower fee shall be applied.
Section 7. If any section, sub- section, sentence, clause, or word in the resolution is held to be invalid by decision of any court of competent jurisdiction or action of State legislation, such decision or legislation shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this resolution.
Section 8. That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.
ADOPTED AND APPROVED this 17
th day of September 2024
______________________________
Larry Bird, Mayor
ATTEST:
____________________________
Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk
City of Hesperia
User Fee Study Report
April 2019
User Fee Study
Fiscal Year 2023/24
Attachment 2
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
THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Mayor and Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services Ryan Leonard, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Urgency Ordinance - Wooden Pallet Yards Moratorium
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council waive further reading and adopt Urgency Ordinance 2024-11 pursuant to California Government Code Section 65858 extending a moratorium for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days from its original expiration date on the establishment or expansion of wooden pallet yards, pending study and adoption of regulatory and zoning standards.
BACKGROUND
Pursuant to State law, Government Code Section 65858, a city may enact an interim zoning ordinance on an urgency basis (“Urgency Ordinance”) for the protection of public safety, health, and welfare by prohibiting any use(s) that a city is intending to study within a reasonable period of time. If approved, the Urgency Ordinance will be effective for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days from the original date.
On August 20, 2024, the City Council adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 2024-10 establishing a 45- day moratorium on the establishment or expansion of wooden pallet yards. Pursuant to State law, the adopted Urgency Ordinance is valid for 45 days and will expire on October 4, 2024, unless extended by the City Council. After holding a public hearing, the City Council can extend the Urgency Ordinance from its original expiration date for up to an additional 10 months and 15 days, for a total period of one year. As with the initial ado ption of the Urgency Ordinance, a four-fifths (4/5) vote is required to extend the Urgency Ordinance.
Within the next few months, staff intends to present a Development Code Amendment to the Planning Commission that will include additional regulations and/or restrictions for the establishment or expansion of new pallet yards. After the Planning Commission hearing, the Development Code Amendment will be presented to the City Council for a final decision. An extension of the Urgency Ordinance will allow sta ff additional time to complete the necessary work to process the Development Code Amendment and to present it to the Planning Commission and City Council.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
The City’s Municipal Code currently lacks regulatory and zoning standards to assure that wooden pallet yards do not adversely affect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. For example,
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
Urgency Ordinance – Wooden Pallet Yards Moratorium
September 17, 2024
pallet storage yards are currently classified as a general industrial use in the Municipal Code and are subject to the general development standards regulating outdoor storage. However, the existing standards do not contain regulations or criteria specifically addressing wooden pallet yards.
Under California Government Code Section 65858, the City may adopt an interim urgency moratorium ordinance temporarily prohibiting land uses which constitute an immediate threat to public health, safety, and welfare and which may be in conflict with contemplated land use policies and regulations which the City is s tudying or intends to study within a reasonable time. Should wooden pallet yards continue to be permitted without further regulation, such developments would constitute a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, and welfare for the following reasons:
Fire Risk: Wooden pallet storage yards present an obvious fire hazard due to the storage of large quantities of wood, a combustible material, at a single site. Within the past few years there have been multiple fires associated with pallet yards in nearby cities that have caused millions of dollars in losses.
Stacking Hazards: Pallet storage yards often store wooden pallets in high stacks. Without adequate regulation of the location, height and volume of these stacks, or the separation between these stacks, the hea lth, safety, and welfare of the public may be endangered.
The improper or unsafe stacking of wood pallets may be a falling risk, endangering employees, and visitors to these sites, or may become a fire hazard, endangering the general public and neighboring properties.
Currently there are 3 active business licenses within the City for existing pallet yards. In addition, the Planning Division is currently processing four (4) entitlement applications for proposed pallet yards. If the development moratorium is extended, no permit shall be issued for the development or expansion of any wooden pallet storage yards. In addition, the issuance of any zoning, land use, discretionary permit, building permit, environmental approval, business license, or any other entitlement involving wooden pallet storage yards shall be prohibited while the development moratorium is in effect.
In accordance with Government Code 65858(d) staff is currently studying the issues associated with pallet yards, including new restrictions and/or development standards that may be imposed on their operation to mitigate any potential impacts. This includes evaluating all land use districts in which pallet yards are permitted for suitability and evaluating development standards and best practices from other jurisdictions to determine if they would be appropriate City wide.
Further, staff believes that the continued approval of entitlements, building permits, or other approvals for new pallet storage yards without further studies and regulatory standards, poses a current and immediate threat to public health, safety, and general welfare. Further regulations are needed for the purpose of protecting neighborhoods from the negative effects created by such businesses.
As previously noted, per Government Code Section 65858, a municipality may adopt an interim ordinance prohibiting any uses that may be in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the legislative body, planning commission or the planning department is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time, for the immediate preservation of the general health, safety, or welfare, provided the ordinance contains
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
Urgency Ordinance – Wooden Pallet Yards Moratorium
September 17, 2024
a declaration of the facts constituting the urgency, and is passed by not less than a four -fifths (4/5) vote of the City Council. With adoption of this Ordinance, the City will extend the moratorium for a period of ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days from the original expiration date, or until such time as a permanent development code amendment is in full force and effect.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Approval of the Urgency Ordinance 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.
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 fiscal impacts identified with this action.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Urgency Ordinance 2024-11
ORDINANCE NO. 2024-11
AN INTERIM URGENCY O RDINANCE OF THE CITY OF
HESPERIA, CALIFORNIA , ENACTED PURSUANT T O
CALIFORNIA GOVERNMEN T CODE SECTION 65858
EXTENDING A TEMPORAR Y MORATORIUM ON THE
ESTABLISHMENT OR EXPANSION OF WOODEN PALLET
STORAGE YARDS WITHIN CITY LIMITS DURING THE
PENDENCY OF THE CITY’S REVIEW AND ADOPTION OF
PERMANENT ZONING REGULATIONS FOR SUCH USES
WHEREAS, the City of Hesperia has the authority and responsibility to protect the public health, safety, and welfare of the City , and is responsible for adopting and implementing land use regulations within its boundaries; and
WHEREAS, the Hesperia Municipal Code lacks specific regulatory and zoning standards to assure that wooden pallet storage yards do not adversely affect the health, welfare, and safety of the public; and
WHEREAS, the issuance of permits for wooden pallet storage yards without having zoning and regulatory standards in place, threatens the public, health, safety , and welfare of the public for the following reasons:
Fire Risk: Wooden pallet storage yards present an obvious fire hazard due to the storage of large quantities of wood, a combustible material, at a single site. Within the past few years there have been multiple fires associated with pallet yards in nearby cities that have caused millions of dollars in losses.
Stacking Hazards: Pallet storage yards often store wooden pallets in high stacks. Without adequate regulation of the location, height and volume of these stacks, or the separation between these stacks, the health, safety, and welfare of the public may be endangered.
The im proper or unsafe stacking of wood pallets may be a falling risk, endangering employees and visitors to these sites, or may become a fire hazard, endangering the general public and neighboring properties.
WHEREAS, Government Code Sections 36934, 36937 and 65858 expressly authorize the City Council to adopt an urgency ordinance for the immediate preservation of the public peace, health, or safety and to prohibit a use that is in conflict with a contemplated general plan, specific plan, or zoning proposal that the legislative body, planning commission, or the planning department is considering or studying or intends to study within a reasonable time; and
WHEREAS, on August 20, 2024, the City Council adopted Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 2024- 10 establishing a 45-day moratorium on the establishment or expansion of wooden pallet yards within the City pending study and adoption of zoning and regulatory standards to protect the public health, safety, and welfare; and
WHEREAS, the City intends to study the issues associated with pallet yards including new development standards that may be imposed on their operation to mitigate any potential impacts.
This could include evaluating all land use districts in which pallet yards are permitted for suitability
and evaluating development standards and best practices from other jurisdictions to determine if they would be appropriate City wide; and
WHEREAS, after undertaking this study, the City intends to enact regulations specific to pallet storage yards. The City intends to undertake the required study within a reasonable time. In the interim, the City Council finds it necessary to establish a moratorium on the development of new wooden pallet storage yards or the expansion of existing pallet yards in order to prevent a conflict with the contemplated new policies or regulations; and
WHEREAS, because the Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 2024 -10 expires on October 4, 2024, the City desires to extend the moratorium for ten months (10) and fifteen (15) days from the date of expiration to prohibit the development of new wooden pallet yards or the expansion of existing wooden pallet yards within the City limits in order to complete a proposed development code amendment that will create new development regulations and development standards for pallet yards; and
WHEREAS, continued approval of entitlements, building permits, or other approvals for new or expanded wooden pallet storage yards poses a current and immediate threat to the public health, safety, or general welfare. There is therefore an urgent necessity for the City to establish a moratorium on the establishment or expansion of wooden pallet storage yards to take effect immediately;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HESPERIA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS.
SECTION 1. FINDINGS
The City Council finds the facts set forth in the recitals in this Urgency Ordinance are true and correct and are hereby incorporated by reference. Additionally, based on the foregoing, both verbal and written testimony at the public hearing, including the staff report, exhibits, and any materials provided by members of the public, the City Council finds as follows:
A. This Ordinance is being adopted in order to allow the City time to thoroughly study and develop the City’s laws, rules, procedures , and fees related to the operation and establishment of pallet storage yards, to adequately and appropriately balance the rig hts of existing operators and future applicants who wish to establish or expand pallet storage yards in the City , and to adequately and appropriately preserve the health, safety, and welfare of the community in the City of Hesperia.
B. The City finds that in the absence of a regulatory framework to govern pallet storage yards, the adverse impacts frequently associated with pallet storage yards likely will occur, resulting in unregulated and significant negative impacts upon the public health, safety, and welfare of the community.
C. The City finds that the adverse impacts from pallet storage yards include the following:
(1) Fire Risk: Wooden pallet storage yards present an obvious fire hazard due to the storage of large quantities of wood, a combustible material, at a single site.
Within the past few years there have been multiple fires associated with pallet yards in nearby cities that have caused millions of dollars in losses.
(2) Stacking Hazards: Pallet storage yards often store wooden pallets in high stacks. Without adequate regulation of the location, height and volume of these stacks, or the separation between these stacks, the health, safety, and welfare of the public may be e ndangered. The improper or unsafe stacking of wood pallets may be a falling risk, endangering employees and visitors to these sites, or may become a fire hazard, endangering the general public and neighboring properties.
D. The City needs time to draft a pro posed development amendment to the Zoning Code to preserve the health, safety , and welfare of the community in the City of Hesperia with respect to the operation of pallet storage yards.
SECTION 2. AUTHORITY AND EFFECT
The State Planning and Zoning Law (C al. Gov’t Code Sections 65000, et seq.) broadly empowers the City to plan for and regulate the use of land in order to provide for orderly development, the public health , safety, and welfare, and a balancing of property rights and the desires of the community and how its citizens envision their city.
SECTION 3. MORATORIUM
A. During the Effective Period of this Ordinance , as specified below, no permit shall be issued for any development of any wooden pallet storage yard, nor may a permit be issued for the expansion of wooden pallet storage yard within the City. The foregoing shall explicitly prohibit the issuance of any zoning, land use, discretionary permit, building permit, environmental approval, business license, or any other entitlement involving businesses defined as a wooden pallet storage yard, during the Effective Period.
B. Notwithstanding the foregoing, any existing pallet storage yard shall be allowed to obtain their annual City of Hesperia business license. Additionally, permits may be issued for minor construction, rehabilitation and landscaping or other purposes not involving an expansion of building area. Any pallet storage yard under construction with a valid building permit or any pallet storage yard approved by the Development Review Committee or Planning Commission on the effective date of this Urgency Ordinance shall be exempt from this Urgency Ordinance.
SECTION 4. STUDY AND DEVELOPMENT
During the period of this Ordinance, the City shall study and develop as necessary City laws, rules, procedures, and fees related to pallet storage yards, to enable the City to preserve the health, safety, and welfare of the community adequately and app ropriately in the City of Hesperia. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 the Planning Manager will issue a report for the legislative body on what has been accomplished during the moratorium before it expires or is extended.
SECTION 5. URGENCY MEASURE
It is hereby declared that this Ordinance is necessary as an urgency measure for the preservation of the public health, safety , and welfare. The City Council finds that current zoning regulations and land use plans do not adequately regulate the establishment an d operation of pallet storage yards and therefore do not adequately protect the peace, health, safety , and general welfare of the residents of the City or in communities around the City. The City Council
finds the urgency measure is necessary, in order, to ensure adequate regulation of the operation of pallet storage yards. The facts constituting the urgency are:
The City’s Municipal Code currently lacks regulatory and zoning standards to assure that wooden pallet yards do not adversely affect the health, safety, and welfare of the public. The negative impacts frequently associated with operation of pallet storage yards will likely increase as pallet yards continue to proliferate throughout the City, resulting in an unregulated and significant negative impact upon public health, safety, and welfare of the community.
Pallet storage yards are likely to seek to be located in the City based on the lack of explicit regulations, which will further exacerbate the impacts of such businesses. As a result of the negative and harmful effects associated with improperly regulated or unregulated operation of pallet storage yards , the current and immediate threat such effects pose to the public health, safety, and welfare, it is necessary extend the moratorium on the establishment of new, or the expansion of existing pallet storage yards in the City for an additional ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days from the expiration of the Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 2024-10 on October 4, 2024 to August 19, 2025. A moratorium is immediately required to preserve the public health, safety , and welfare and should be adopted immediately as an urgency ordinance, to make certain that the establishment and expansion of pallet storage yards are prohibited for the period of this Ordinance. Imposition of a moratorium will allow the City sufficient time to conclude the preparation of a comprehensive ordinance for the regulation of such activities.
SECTION 6. SEVERABILITY
The City Council hereby declares, if any provision, section, subsection, paragraph, sentence, phrase or word of this Ordinance is rendered or declared invalid or unconstitutional by any final action in a court of competent jurisdiction or by reason of any preemptive legislation, then the City Council would have independently adopted the remaining provisions, sections, subsections, paragraphs, sentences, phrases or words of this Ordinance and as such they shall remain in full force and effect.
SECTION 7. CEQA COMPLIANCE
Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines ("CEQA," California Code of Regulations Title 14, §§ 15000 et seq.), this Interim Urgency Ordinance is exempt from CEQA based on the following: (i) this Ordinance is not a project within the meaning of CEQA Section 15378 because it has no p otential for resulting in physical change to the environment, either directly or indirectly and (ii) this Ordinance is also exempt pursuant to CEQA Section 15061(b)(3) since the proposed ordinance involves an Interim Urgency Ordinance establishing a ten (1 0) month and fifteen (15) day temporary moratorium on the establishment of pallet storage yards and thus there is no possibility that the proposed ordinance may have a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION 8. EFFECTIVENESS OF ORDINANCE.
This Ordinance shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by a 4/5 vote, pursuant to the authority conferred upon the City Council by Government Code Sections 36934, 36937, and 65858. This Ordinance shall be effective during the Effective Period which shall be upon the expiration date of Interim Urgency Ordinance No. 2024-10 on October 4, 2024, and shall be of no further force and effect ten (10) months and fifteen (15) days therefrom, on August 19, 2025, unless extended in accordance with the provisions set forth in Government Code Section 65858(b).
SECTION 9. PUBLICATION
The City Clerk shall certify as to the passage and adoption of this Interim Urgency Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in a manner prescribed by law.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Hesperia, California, at a regular meeting held on this 17th day of September 2024.
____________________________
Larry Bird, Mayor
ATTEST:
_____________________________
Erin Baum, Assistant City Clerk
City of Hesperia
STAFF REPORT
DATE: September 17, 2024
TO: Mayor and City Council Members
FROM: Rachel Molina, City Manager
BY: Nathan R. Freeman, Director of Development Services
SUBJECT: Program Year 2023-2024 Community Development Block Grant , Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
RECOMMENDED ACTION
It is recommended that the City Council conduct a public hearing and , upon accepting public testimony, 1) approve the Program Year (PY) 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Per formance Evaluation Report (CAPER); and 2) authorize the City Manager, or designee, to submit the PY 2023-2024 CAPER to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development ( HUD), along with any public testimony and changes thereto as directed by the City Council.
BACKGROUND
HUD requires t he City to prepare and submit a CAPER to describe the City ’s progress in meeting the goals established in the PY 2023-2024 Action Plan that was approved by the City Council on April 18, 2023. The CAPER must be submitted to HUD on or before September 28, 2024, to comply with HUD regulations (per Code of Federal Regulations 91.520). The PY 2023- 2024 CAPER was prepared and made available for the HUD -required 15-day public review and comment period, which began on August 30, 2024, and concluded on September 17, 2024.
During the PY 2023-2024, the City received $899,363 in Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds to be awarded to activities designed to meet the City’s F ive-Year Consolidated Plan – Strategic Plan g oals. This was the fourth year of the City’s five-year 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan cycle for the CDBG program. The 2023 -2024 Street Improvement project received $779,363. The remainder of the 2023 -2024 PY funding was allocated to Fair Housing and Administration of the program; $20,000 and $100,000 respectively.
ISSUES/ANALYSIS
Prior to the commencement of the 15-day public review period, the City published a notice in the Victorville Daily Press (English and Spanish) informing the public that the City had prepared the Draft 2023-2024 CAPER and its availability for review and comment until September 17, 2024.
The public was informed of the opportunity to provide oral and/or written comments on the CAPER. To d ate, no public comments have been received. Additionally, the Citizen Participation Plan requ ires that a public hearing be held to receive comments from interested residents or parties regarding the CAPER. This public hearing fulfills the requirements fo r the public hearing.
The accomplishments for this year include, but are not limited to:
Staff Report to the Mayor and Council Members
2023-2024 CAPER
September 17, 2024
Funding of fair housing and landlord tenant mediation services provided by Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board (IFHMB) , who were able to assist 386 unduplicated City residents (41 Fair Housing and 345 Landlord Tenant Mediation).
Award of a construction contract, for the 2021-22 CDBG Street Improvement P roject, consisting of pavement rehabilitation s and re-establishment of pavement delineations and marking for approximately 3 5 streets thro ughout the community, utilizing the following funding sources:
o CDBG PY 2021-22: $174,639
o CDBG PY 2022-23: $826,162
o Reprogrammed funds of $3,747,044, of which $3, 535,941 is from the close out of the Neighborhood Stabilization Funds.
Commitment of 2023-2024 Street Improvement Project funds, in the amount of $ 779,363, to the Oakwood Avenue design and reconstruction project.
Funding of a total of 10 public service agencies (food banks, senior/disabled adult services, shelter and shelter services, veteran services, etc.) through the City’s Community Assistance Program (CAP) whom collectively were able to assist 7,130 City residents.
A more detailed explanation of accomplishments can be found in the atta ched Draft PY 2023- 2024 CAPER. As the final FY 2023-24 year-end close-out entries are being performed, such as interest allocation, the final report submission will be updated for these entries.
CITY GOAL SUPPORTED BY THIS ITEM
Future Development: Facilitate balanced growth to ensure cohe sive community development and pursue economic development.
FISCAL IMPACT
Presently, there is no fiscal impact . The Ci ty is required to submit the 2023-2024 CAPER to HUD to report on the annual accomplishments and expenditures during the program year.
Although the submittal of the C APER has never resulted in a f iscal impact to the City, fail ure to submit the CAPER to HUD in a timely manner could possibly result in n on-compliance with CDBG regulations, which has the potential to lead to future financial sanctions. Further more, HUD could find that activities contained in the CAPER and funded wi th CDBG funds were not compliant, which also has the potential to cause the repayment of funds.
ALTERNATIVE(S)
1. Provide alternative direction to staff.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Exhibit A: PY 2023-2024 Draft CAPER
City of Hesperia
DRAFT CONSOLIDATED ANNUAL
PERFORMANCE AND
EVALUATION REPORT (CAPER)
Program Year 2023-2024
Approved – September 17, 2024
Prepared by:
Attachment 1
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
This page intentionally left blank.
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report City of Hesperia Page TOC-1 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
Table of Contents
CR-05 - Goals and Outcomes .......................................................................................................... 1 CR-10 Racial and Ethnic Composition of (person/households/families) Assisted ......................... 6 CR-15 Resources and Investments.................................................................................................. 7 CR-20 Affordable Housing ............................................................................................................. 10 CR-25 Homeless and Other Special Needs ................................................................................... 13 CR-30 Public Housing .................................................................................................................... 19 CR-35 Other Actions ...................................................................................................................... 22 CR-40 Monitoring .......................................................................................................................... 28 CR-45 CDBG ................................................................................................................................... 30
Appendices
Appendix A – Public Notices ........................................................................................................... A Appendix B – Summary of Citizen Participation Comments........................................................... B Appendix C – IDIS Reports .............................................................................................................. C
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
This page intentionally left blank.
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report City of Hesperia Page 1 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
CR-05 - Goals and Outcomes
Progress the jurisdiction has made in carrying out its strategic plan and its action plan.
91.520(a)
This 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) is the City of Hesperia’s (City) report to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) describing the use of federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) funds during the fourth program year of the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan period, covering July 1, 2023, to June 30, 2024.
The City receives CDBG funds from HUD on a formula basis each year, and in turn, implements projects and awards grants and loans to nonprofit, for-profit or public organizations for projects in furtherance of the adopted Consolidated Plan. The CDBG program generally provides for a wide range of eligible activities for the benefit of low- and moderate-income City residents.
For the 2023-2024 program year, the City received $899,363 of CDBG funds. The 2023-2024 Street Improvement Project received $779,363 in CDBG funding.
The investment of CDBG funds was a catalyst for positive change in the community. Together with other federal, state, and local investments, HUD resources allowed the City and its partners to:
Provide fair housing services to 41 unduplicated residents. Award a construction contract for the City’s 2021-2022 Street Improvement Project benefitting approximately 6,000 unduplicated City residents. Commit 22-23 Street Improvement Project funds to the 21-22 Street Improvement Project.
Table 1 provides a summary of the five-year and one-year accomplishments for the period ending June 30, 2024, arranged by each of the Strategic Plan Goals included in the 2020-2024 Strategic Plan of the Consolidated Plan.
Draft2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
City of Hesperia Page 2 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
Comparison of the proposed versus actual outcomes for each outcome measure submitted with the consolidated plan and explain, if applicable, why progress was not made toward meeting goals and objectives. 91.520(g) Categories, priority levels, funding sources and amounts, outcomes/objectives, goal outcome indicators, units of measure, targets, actual outcomes/outputs, and percentage completed for each of the grantee’s program year goals.
Table 1 - Accomplishments – Program Year & Strategic Plan to Date Goal Category 2023-2024
Amount Indicator Unit of
Measure
Expected – 5-
Yr. Strategic
Plan
Actual –
Strategic
Plan
Percent
Complete
Expected
Program
Year
Actual
Program
Year
Percent
Complete
Public Facility and
Infrastructure
Improvements
Non-Housing
Community
Development
CDBG:
$ 5,819,569
Public Facility or Infrastructure
Activities other than
Low/Moderate Income Housing
Benefit
Persons
Assisted 20,000 10,970 55% 1,000 0 0%
Economic
Opportunity
Non-Housing
Community
Development
CDBG:
$0 Businesses Assisted Businesses
Assisted 30 1 3% 0 0 0%
Fair Housing
Services
Affordable
Housing
CDBG:
$20,000
Public service activities other
than Low/ Moderate Income
Housing Benefit
Persons
Assisted 650 215 33% 20 41 2.05%
Administration All CDBG:
$100,000
Fund the needs of the
administration to run the CDBG
Program
N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
City of Hesperia Page 3 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
Assess how the jurisdiction’s use of funds, particularly CDBG, addresses the priorities and specific objectives identified in the plan, giving special attention to the highest priority activities identified.
During the program year, the City and its housing and community development partners made progress on several 2023-2024 activities as well as some multi-year activities that continued during the program year. All CDBG funded activities addressed specific high priority objectives identified in the 2020-2024 Consolidated Plan.
Through City leveraged dollars under the Community Assistance Program (CAP), the City was able to fund a total of 10 public service agencies who provided services including but not limited to food banks, senior/disabled adult services, shelter and shelter services and veteran services. Together these agencies were able to assist a total of 7,130 City residents. The City’s fair housing and landlord tenant mediation service provider, Inland Fair Housing and Mediation Board (IFHMB) was able to provide services to a total of 386 unduplicated City residents (41 Fair Housing and 345 Landlord Tenant Mediation). In addition, the City awarded a construction contract for the 2021-2022 Street Improvement Project. Construction commenced in the first quarter of the 2024-2025 PY with completion projected for the end of the first quarter or early in the second quarter of the 2024-2025 PY. The City made progress in design and engineering efforts in the fourth quarter of the 2023-2024 program year for the 2023-2024 Street Improvement Project and is projecting to award a design and engineering contract early in the 2024-2025 PY.
The majority of CDBG funds were allocated to public facilities and infrastructure improvements to benefit low- and moderate-income individuals. Key accomplishments included the construction contract award for the 2021-2022 Street Improvement Project, allocation of the 2022-2023 Street Improvement funds to the 2021-2022 Street Improvement Project, and progress in design and engineering efforts for the 2023-2024 Street Improvement Project.
These accomplishments will assist a great number of residents throughout the City.
Each of the activities that were underway during the 2023-2024 program year are listed in Figure 1, including the amount of CDBG funds allocated to the activity and the amount spent as of June 30, 2024. Figure 2 provides the numerical accomplishment goal and the amount accomplished as of June 30, 2024.
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
City of Hesperia Page 4 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
Figure 1 – Use of CDBG Funds
Note: These figures reflect the inclusion of the approved Draw No. 11, which has not upated in IDIS as of the 08/27/2024 and therefore is not listed on IDIS reports
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
City of Hesperia Page 5 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
Figure 2 – Program Year Accomplishments by Strategic Plan Goal
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
City of Hesperia Page 6 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
CR-10 - Racial and Ethnic composition of families assisted Describe the families assisted (including the racial and ethnic status of families assisted).
91.520(a)
Table 2 – Table of assistance to racial and ethnic populations by source of funds Race/Ethnicity CDBG
White 269
Black or African American 102
Asian 0
American Indian or American Native 5
Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander 0
Other 10
Total 386
Hispanic 183
Not Hispanic 203
IFHMB amounts based on 386 for Fair Housing and Landlord Tenant Mediation Services
Narrative
Table 2 provides an aggregate of race and ethnicity data for persons and households served during the program year based on available accomplishment data from all CDBG activities reported in HUD’s Integrated Disbursement and Information System (IDIS). For more detailed demographic information by project or activity, refer to the PR-03 report in Appendix C.
Based on the information in Table 2, a diverse array of persons and households benefitted from CDBG funded activities during the 2023-2024 program year.
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
City of Hesperia Page 7 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
CR-15 - Resources and Investments 91.520(a)
Identify the resources made available
Table 3 – Resources Made Available
Source of Funds Resources Made
Available
Amount Expended
During Program Year
CDBG $5,939,569.00 $247,971.28*
* Includes amounts drawn from prior year activities and also reflects the inclusion of Draw No. 11, which has not updated in IDIS as of 08/27/2024 and therefore is not listed on the IDIS reports.
Narrative
The federal, state, local and private resources available for the implementation of projects during the 2023-2024 program year are identified in Table 3. The CDBG resources include $5,939,569 of CDBG formula grant funds (includes current, prior year and program income) to be allocated to projects in the 2023-2024 Action Plan.
Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments
Table 4 – Identify the geographic distribution and location of investments Target Area
Planned
Percentage
of
Allocation
Actual
Percentage
of
Allocation
Narrative Description
CDBG Low- and
Moderate-Income
CT/BG
98% 3%
2021-2022, 2022-2023, and 2023-2024 Street
Improvement Projects and Peach Avenue Drainage
Improvement Project
At the end of June 30, 2024, a total of $158,978.60
was drawn during the 2023/2024 PY (includes prior
year activities)
Citywide 2% 1.5%
Fair Housing Services and Admin
At the end of June 30, 2024, a total of $88,992.68
was drawn during the 2023/2024 PY
Narrative
For the 2023-2024 program year, the City allocated $5,819,569 of CDBG funds (includes prior year dollars) to Public Facilities and Infrastructure activities designed to benefit the Low-and Moderate-Income Areas, representing 98 percent of the City’s total CDBG investment for the 2023-2024 program year. At the end of June 30, 2024, the City was able to draw a total of $155,196.10 (includes prior year activities) during the 2023-2024 program year.
Draft 2023-2024 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report
City of Hesperia Page 8 September 17, 2024
OMB Control No: 2506-0117
Leveraging
Explain how federal funds leveraged additional resources (federal, state, local, and private funds), including a description of how matching requirements were satisfied, as well as how any publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that were used to address the needs identified in the plan.
To address housing and community development needs in the City, the City leveraged its CDBG entitlement grant with a variety of funding resources to maximize the effectiveness of available funds such as appropriate state, local and private resources. The City and its subrecipients were able to leverage approximately $50,000 of additional funds to address identified needs in the plan. The City leverages it’s CDBG allocation to IFHMB Fair Housing services, as IFHMB also assists Hesperia residents with Landlord Tenant Mediation. Other examples of funds that could be utilized for the City of Hesperia residents include the following:
Federal Resources
Continuum of Care (CoC) Program
HUD Veterans Affairs supportive Housing (HUD-VASH)
Supportive Housing for the Elderly (Section 202)
Supportive Housing for Persons with Disabilities (Section 811) Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA)
Youthbuild
Federal Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program
Department of Transportation Grants
Department of Energy Grants
Federal Highway Administration
State Resources
State Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program
Building Equity and Growth in Neighborhoods Program (BEGIN) CalHome Program
Multifamily Housing Program (MHP)
Housing Related Parks Grant
CalHFA Single and Multi-Family Program
Mental Health Service Act (MHSA) Funding
Prop 47 – Board of State & Community Corrections
Justice Assistance Grant (JAG) Program
Homeless Emergency Aid Program (HEAP)