May 16, 2025
• Proposed adjustments would align our fees with regional standards, without making Palm Desert an outlier.
Recommendation:
• To minimize the impact on applicants, the City is proposing a phased increase in these fees over a three-year period. While the fees will initially remain below the full cost of service recovery, they are expected to reach full cost recovery by year three.
Next Steps:
• The results of this study, along with the proposed fee adjustments, are scheduled for presentation to the Palm Desert City Council in July 2025. This will include public discussions to ensure transparency and allow for community input before any changes are adopted.
The goal of this initiative is to maintain high-quality services while practicing responsible financial stewardship. The data from the study provides a strong foundation for fair and transparent updates to our fee structure.
If you have any questions or need further information, please feel free to contact me at (760) 776-6480 or [email protected].
Sincerely,
Rosie Lua
Director of Development Services
1727
City Listed Stakeholders for City Fees
Marc Troast
Senior Vice President
Building Industry Association of Southern California, Inc. 17192 Murphy Ave., #14445
Irvine, CA 92623
(951) 850-5900
[email protected]
Gretchen Gutierrez
CEO
Desert Valleys Builders Association
550 S. Oleander Road
Palm Springs, CA 92264
760-776-7001
[email protected]
Deborah McGarrey
Public Affairs Manager, SoCalGas
75095 Mayfair Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92211-5102
760-578-5985
[email protected]>
August 13, 2025 – Email to Stakeholders
The City is resending the cost of service study and fee schedule after review by the City Attorney. While no fees have been changed, the updated materials are intended to provide greater clarity and transparency.
The revised study improves upon the previous version by:
• Clearly identifying where specific information is located within the report; • Clarifying how costs of service are calculated, including the drivers of hourly rates and estimated service times;
• Explaining the basis for proposed fees and the cost of service methodology.
The City is recommending approval of the study with a three-year phased implementation approach. This will allow for a gradual adjustment based on the findings of the study, while providing stakeholders time to prepare.
We appreciate your continued participation and welcome any questions or feedback. The City Council Meeting date is August 28, 2025, hope to see you there. 1728
City of
Palm Desert
User and Regulatory Fee Study
Development Services Fees
City Council Review
1729
• Background
• Fundamentals and Terminology
• Study Findings and Recommendations
• Next Steps
MEETING AGENDA
2 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT 1730 Background
1731
• The City of Palm Desert reviews plans, issues permits, and performs required inspections to ensure safe,
orderly and aesthetically pleasing development within
the City.
• User/regulatory fees are the mechanism by which the
City may recoup a portion, or all, of the costs
associated with these services.
BACKGROUND
4 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT 1732 • Communities generally use tax revenues to fund
services that provide general (community-wide)
benefit
• Public works
• Public safety
• Park maintenance and community recreation
• Communities use fees and charges (direct recovery)
to fund services that provide direct benefit
• Plan Review
• Permitting
• Inspection
BACKGROUND
5 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT 1733 • Planning Fees - review of project entitlement and permits requests for compliance with City Municipal Code
• Engineering Fees - engineering review of developmentrelated grading and public improvements and requests for encroachment in the City right-of-way
• Building Fees - construction permit processing, plan check, and inspection
TYPES OF FEES EXAMINED
• This update DOES
NOT examine taxes,
assessments, utility
rates, or development
impact fees
6 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT 1734
GENERAL FINDINGS
7 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
• It has been more than a decade since fees were
comprehensively updated
• Prior study completed in 2012
• During that time the City’s cost of providing services has increased due to inflationary pressures, but fees
have remained relatively unchanged
• Regional cost inflation since prior study = 38%
1735
Fundamentals and Terminology
1736
• Legal requirements
• Encourage direct recovery of costs incurred
to serve private interests/benefit or respond
to individual actions
• Provide opportunity for relief to General
Fund or other Funds where costs are
incurred
• Enable continuity of service levels by
improving cost recovery levels
MUNICIPAL FEES
• Why do Cities
Review Fees and
Charge Fees for
Services?
9 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT 1737 • Fees proposed are not taxes, as defined by
Article 13C of the California State Constitution
• Fees are set in accordance with parameters set
by Article 13C and by Section 66014 of the
California Government Code:
• Costs allocated to the payer should bear a fair or
reasonable relationship to the payer's burdens on or
benefits received from the governmental activity
• Fees should not exceed the reasonable cost of
providing the service for which the fee is charged
FEES ARE APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL
The City Council has
authority to Directly
Approve User and
Regulatory Fees and
Increases to Fees
10 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT 1738 • Full Cost of Service
• Cost Recovery
• Subsidy
TERMINOLOGY
These terms of art
have specific meaning
across California
municipalities and
within the City
11 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT 1739
COST OF SERVICE
• The cost of service sets the
maximum limit of a cost-based
fee. It includes:
• Direct program costs for
labor, services, and supplies
• Departmental administration
• Citywide administration and
central support services
12 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
100%
0%Cost Recovery Targeted
Hourly
Rate for
Personnel
Providing
Services
Time
Required
to Perform
the
Service
Cost of x = Service
Fully Burdened
Hourly Rates:
• Direct and indirect
labor costs
• Services and supplies
• Agency overhead
Estimated or
Known Times for
Providing Services
Maximum Fee
Amount
1740
Exclusively individual benefit
Considerable individual benefit
Balanced individual and community
benefit
Considerable community benefit
Mostly community benefit
Entirely community-wide benefit
COST RECOVERY POLICY FRAMEWORK
• Fees are regulatory
• High level of direct benefit
resulting from construction
activities including
enjoyment of property
enhancements, and
increased property values
• Avoid having other Palm
Desert residents and
businesses subsidize
individual private
construction activities
13 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
100%
0%Cost Recovery Targeted
1741
SUBSIDY
• The amount of a
program’s full cost of
service that is
supported by other
City revenue sources
14 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
100%
0%Cost Recovery Targeted
Full Cost
of Service
($)
Revenue
from
Current
Fee ($)
City Subsidy
Maximum Level of
Cost Recovery =
100%
Current Level of
Cost Recovery =
X%
Minimum Level of
Cost Recovery =
0%
1742
Study Findings and Recommendations
1743
MULTI-YEAR PHASE-IN APPROACH
16 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
• Staff Recommends Using a Multi-Year Phase-In
Approach to Adjust Fees and Enhance Cost
Recovery
• Since these fees are regulatory in nature, and typically correlated with high levels of direct benefit to the service recipient, communities frequently target full cost recovery for developmentrelated services. • In order to allow the City to move toward full cost recovery, while being mindful of broad community goals and values and
collaboration with the development community, staff recommends using a multi-year phase in approach to enhance cost recovery levels
1744
BUILDING FEES
17 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
• Restructure fees to enhance correlation between services provided and fees collected
• Established fixed fees for the City’s most commonly requested minor permits
• Fee schedule will allow applicants to easily estimate permit fees and works well for online permitting scenarios
• Proposed fees scale to allow for lower fees for less complex projects and higher fees for more complex projects
1745
REGIONAL COMPARISON
18 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
$148
$153
$159
$168
$169
$178
$191
$205
$212
$219
$0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250
INDIO
RANCHO MIRAGE
PALM DESERT - CURRENT - INSPECTION
PALM DESERT - CURRENT - PLAN REVIEW
CATHEDRAL CITY
PALM DESERT - PROPOSED
LA QUINTA
PALM SPRINGS - INSPECTION
INDIAN WELLS
PALM SPRINGS - PLAN REVIEW
Building Hourly Rate
1746
PLANNING FEES
19 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
• The City’s current planning fees recover less than the City’s cost of service.
• In order to foster continued collaboration with the
development community and residents, some fees are
proposed for less than full cost recovery
• The recommended fees will allow the City to remain in-line with amounts charged by other agencies in the region
1747
REGIONAL COMPARISON
20 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
$138
$179
$184
$191
$201
$206
$219
$0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250
PALM DESERT - CURRENT
RANCHO MIRAGE
PALM DESERT - PROPOSED
LA QUINTA
INDIO
CATHEDRAL CITY
PALM SPRINGS
Planning Hourly Rate
1748
ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT FEES
21 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
• The department uses a combination of outside service
providers and internal staff to perform certain plan review and inspection activities.
• The proposed fee structure encourages recovery of City costs in addition to contract service provider costs, while developing fixed fees intended to scale to reflect project complexity.
• The proposed fees are calculated based on the type of project reviewed and inspected.
• Full cost recovery is targeted from proposed fees.
1749
REGIONAL COMPARISON
22 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
$155
$172
$191
$205
$213
$241
$247
$0 $50 $100 $150 $200 $250 $300
PALM DESERT - CURRENT
RANCHO MIRAGE
LA QUINTA
CATHEDRAL CITY
PALM DESERT - PROPOSED
PALM SPRINGS
INDIO
Engineering Hourly Rate
1750
RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FEE COMPARISON
23 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
• The study considers whether proposed fees will potentially deter residential development within Palm Desert.
• Comparison information for other regional agencies is based on information contained in 2024 Residential
Development Fee Study prepared by Desert Valleys
Builders Association (DVBA).
• Comparison information shows that Palm Desert’s current development services fees (Building, Planning,
Engineering) are the lowest in the region.
• If adopted, Palm Desert’s fees will be in-line with regional average.
1751
REGIONAL COMPARISON
24 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
$6,520
$7,068
$8,089
$8,315
$8,822
$9,918
$10,199
$11,061
$11,240
$11,431
$0 $2,000 $4,000 $6,000 $8,000 $10,000 $12,000 $14,000
PALM DESERT - CURRENT
INDIAN WELLS
PALM DESERT - PROPOSED
LA QUINTA
INDIO
COACHELLA
CATHEDRAL CITY
PALM SPRINGS
DESERT HOT SPRINGS
RANCHO MIRAGE
Development Services Fees - 60 Unit Tract Home Dev
Figure: Estimated Development Services Fees Per Unit – 60-Unit Tract Home Development (Year 3 Comparison) Compares estimated Building, Planning, and Engineering fees per unit for a 60-unit tract home project in Year 3 of Palm Desert’s proposed fee schedule, alongside current fee levels in surrounding cities. 1752
OVERALL FINDINGS OF REGIONAL FEE COMPARISON
25 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
• Hourly billing rates inform development services fees:
• Current rates are at the low end of the regional spectrum. • Proposed rates are in-line with the region.
• Agency fee schedules contemplate hundreds of potential fee scenarios making an exhaustive comparison unrealistic. Depending on fees examined Palm Desert may reside at the low end, mid-range, or upper end of the regional spectrum
• Proposed fees should not deter development within City limits. • Current service fees are the lowest in the region.
• Proposed service fees align to the region.
• Palm Desert currently has the lowest development impact fees in the region.
1753
FISCAL IMPACT
26 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT
• The City will target full cost recovery
for most services, however the costs
of certain services (e.g., General Plan
Update) will continue to be funded via
other City sources.
• Proposed Cost Recovery is
Consistent with Other Agencies.
Description Cost of Service
Fee Cost
Recovery
General Fund
Subsidy
Incremental
Change
Overall Cost
Recovery
Current $4,500,000 $2,735,000 $1,765,000 61%
Year 1 $4,500,000 $3,059,000 $1,441,000 $324,000 68%
Year 2 $4,500,000 $3,383,000 $1,117,000 $324,000 75%
Year 3 $4,500,000 $3,706,000 $794,000 $323,000 82%
Total $971,000
• Enhanced Cost Recovery of
$971,000 to General Fund
over three-years
• Current Cost Recovery from Fees = 61%;
• Proposed Cost Recovery from Fees =
82%
1754
Next Steps
1755
City Council to Determine Whether to
Adopt Updated Fees and Charges
NEXT STEPS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
28 CLEARSOURCE PRESENTATION TO THE CITY OF PALM DESERT 1756 Questions or Feedback
1757
1758
1 Rosie Lua
To: Carlos Flores
Subject: RE: Updated Fee Schedule - August 28, 2025 City Council Agenda From: McGarrey, Deborah <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 21, 2025 11:33 AM
To: Carlos Flores <[email protected]>
Cc: Liao, William <[email protected]>; Munoz, Draykke L <[email protected]> Subject: RE: Updated Fee Schedule - August 28, 2025 City Council Agenda Thank you Carlos, SoCalGas is fine with the prop osed utility fees as presented. Deborah McGarrey Public Affairs Manager, So CalGas 760-57 8-5985 cell d [email protected] Follow me o n Twitter: @Deb Mc_So CalGas Fro m: Carlos Flores <[email protected]> Sent
CGBANNE RINDICATO R
Thank you Carlos,
SoCalGas is fine with the proposed utility fees as presented.
Deborah McGarrey
Public Affairs Manager, SoCalGas
760-578-5985 cell
[email protected]
Follow me on Twitter: @DebMc_SoCalGas
From: Carlos Flores <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 5:04 PM
To: McGarrey, Deborah <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Updated Fee Schedule - August 28, 2025 City Council Agenda Hi Deborah, The highlighted fees under #14 of the proposed fee schedule do not apply to any utility specific permits that are pulled for work in the righ t of way. These on ly apply to develop ment pro ject improve ments. Fees that wou ld apply to Hi Deborah,
The highlighted fees under #14 of the proposed fee schedule do not apply to any utility specific permits that are pulled for work in the right of way. These only apply to development project improvements. Fees that would apply to utility company permits (which includes SoCalGas) fall under #’s 15 & 16 and would be all inclusive of the permit/scope of work that they are applying for. Please let me know if you have any questions. Thank you.
1759
2 Carlos Flores, AICP
Deputy Director of Development Services
City of Palm Desert
73510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert, CA 92260
[email protected] | 760.776.6478 | www.palmdesert.gov [palmdesert.gov]
From: McGarrey, Deborah <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 3:47 PM
To: Carlos Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: Updated Fee Schedule - August 28, 2025 City Council Agenda I spoke with Angelica and she stated that the fees do not apply to SoCalGas but developments. However this should be stated in the fee schedule so that everyone would understand this. 1760
3 I had an unscheduled meeting yesterday that required my immediate attention. Do you think that I could receive something in writing via email for our files that states the fees that apply to SoCalGas? That should work for us.
Deborah McGarrey
Public Affairs Manager, SoCalGas
760-578-5985 cell
[email protected]
Follow me on Twitter: @DebMc_SoCalGas
From: Carlos Flores <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 20, 2025 3:40 PM
To: McGarrey, Deborah <[email protected]>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Updated Fee Schedule - August 28, 2025 City Council Agenda
Hi Deborah, Were you able to connect with A ngelica to d iscuss y our pendin g questions? Also, did you have any up date on a letter? Thanks, Carlos Flores, AICP Deputy Director of Development Services City of Palm Desert 73510 Fred Waring Drive, Hi Deborah,
Were you able to connect with Angelica to discuss your pending questions? Also, did you have any update on a letter? Thanks,
1761
1762
1 Rosie Lua
From: Ron Feiro <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, August 17, 2025 8:24 AM
To: Rosie Lua
Subject: City of Palm Desert Proposed Fee Increases
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
Rosie,
Please include this in the record for the proposed fee increase:
Honorable City Councilmembers,
I am the owner of Feiro Engineeirng, Inc, a Civil Engineering and Land Surveying company in the City of Palm Desert, CA. Our company has been in business since 1979 and our o)ice has always been located within the City. We have completed over 1500 projects within the City over a 45-year span. I only briefly reviewed the City’s fee study, but I would like to share a higher-level view of my experience with the City’s plan review process. For 40 years, I sought out projects within the City because of the development friendly and homeowner friendly environment, helpful attitudes in Planning and Engineering Departments and e)icient plan review process. However, in the last 5 years, I have witnessed a tailspin in that e)iciency and now, unfortunately, only work in Palm Desert for repeat clients.
I aware that I’m not exposed to the inner-workings of City Hall, I’m viewing this as a bit of an outsider, but I would like to share the perception of an outsider and of my clients. Until about 2020, the plan review attitude seemed to be, “How e)iciently can we issue permits for this project, making sure it complies with the quality of development the City deserves?” The attitude now appears to be, “How much money can we make from this project’s review, neglecting the permittee’s vision, pocketbook and time frame?” (and I can cite specific examples). Palm Desert has gone from my favorite City to work with, to a deadlast tie with CVWD (and that’s bad).
I understand the need for fees to cover costs and that it should be a goal, but the goal can be achieved substantially through e)iciency as well. As one quick example, a couple years ago I had Grading Plan in review for a small parking lot. There was one small restroom and storage room proposed – those were the only structures. My plan was reviewed 4 times during entitlement review and another 4 times during construction document review. It was returned to me with comments eight times. The developer was a prominent businessman whose business has been located within the City as long as mine and I was mystified about the way he was treated – his plans were in review for 17 months. What I’m witnessing now is the quality local design professionals, the Surveyors, Engineers, Architects, Landscape Architects and Builders who have helped make the City what it has become are running like beaten dogs to other jurisdictions.
I’m hopeful that you will take a closer look at City sta) and processes as part of the proposed increase. Fees are necessary but should be commensurate with e)iciency and attitude. I find that people tolerate fee increases, but with those increases should come a higher quality of service. Please consider pursuing a reasonable balance.
1763
2 Ron Feiro
President
Feiro Engineering, Inc.
(760) 346-8015
1764
1 Rosie Lua
Subject: RE: Comments on Proposed Fee Increases to be placed in the Public Record From: Lance O'Donnell <[email protected]>
Date: August 17, 2025 at 6:05:10 PM PDT
To: [email protected]
Cc: Robert Johnson <[email protected]>, Octavio Rocha <[email protected]>
Subject: Comments on Proposed Fee Increases to be placed in the Public Record
Lance O'Donnell, Architect
38701 Desert Mirage Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
August 17, 2025
Palm Desert City Council
City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, CA 92260
Subject: Comments on Proposed Fee Increases
Dear Honorable City Councilmembers,
As a longtime resident of Palm Desert and a practicing architect, I am writing to formally express my concerns regarding the proposed fee increases currently under review.
While I understand the City's need to recover the costs of providing services, I believe that any fee adjustment must be accompanied by a thorough evaluation of internal operations. The current fee study appears fundamentally incomplete, as it lacks analysis of staffing levels, reliance on consultants, and other cost-control measures that are essential to a fair and effective cost recovery strategy.
In my professional capacity, I regularly collaborate with civil engineers and interact with multiple agencies throughout the Coachella Valley. From this vantage point, I can confidently say that the City of Palm Desert ranks among the least efficient in terms of planning and land development processes. The absence of a dedicated engineering department, prolonged review timelines, and the use of underqualified consultants have created a burdensome environment for applicants and professionals alike.
Raising fees without first addressing these systemic inefficiencies risks compounding the problem.
The proposed fee schedule would more than double many routine charges.
The core issue is not merely the proposed fee amounts, but the persistent lack of competent and timely review by City staff and consultants. My firm, with over 30 years of experience serving the Palm Desert community, is recognized for producing high-quality work. Yet, even the most straightforward ministerial cases routinely take four to six times longer to process in Palm Desert than in neighboring jurisdictions. Without meaningful reform, fee increases alone will not achieve the goal of 100% cost recovery. On the contrary, they risk discouraging development, undermining 1765
2 trust in the City's processes, and driving professionals away from working in Palm Desert—where reasonable fees are no longer sufficient to offset the costs of prolonged reviews and arbitrary agency demands.
I support the principle of cost recovery and acknowledge that modest fee increases may be necessary. However, I urge the Council to prioritize internal improvements within the Planning and Development Departments. Addressing inefficiencies and demanding accountability will yield far greater progress toward cost recovery than simply doubling fees. With thoughtful reform, the City can move closer to its financial goals while fostering a more responsive and professional development environment.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Respectfully,
Lance C. O'Donnell, AIA
o2 Architecture
1089 N. Palm Canyon Drive, Suite B
Palm Springs, CA 92262
[email protected]
www.o2arch.com
760.778.8165 p.
1766
1 Rosie Lua
From: Benjamin Egan <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2025 5:11 PM
To: Rosie Lua
Subject: City of Palm Desert Proposed Fee Increases
To help
protect your
privacy,
Micro so ft
Office
prevented
auto matic
download of
this picture
from the
Internet.
Rosie,
I want the following placed in the record for the proposed fee increases:
Honorable City Councilmembers,
I am the owner of Egan Civil, Inc., a small Civil Engineering company in the City of Palm Desert, CA. While I understand the need of any organiza$on to recapture the cost of services, it is also important to a%empt to control costs. For this reason, I find the fee study, and proposed fee increases, to be fundamentally flawed, for the reason that no review of staffing levels, use of consultants, or other relevant cost control informa$on is included in the cost study,
Our firm rou$nely interacts with the City on development projects, and we also rou$nely act with other agencies in the same fashion, hence we are in unique posi$on to observe the efficiency and produc$vity of those various agencies with which we interact. To this point, if asked to score all agencies in the Coachella Valley with which we interact, we would sadly have to score the City of Palm Desert as dead last in terms of working with their planning and land development staff. Over the past years, we have repeatedly found that processing any land planning or development case with the City is made very difficult due to the lack of a proper engineering department, the inexcusably slow processing $mes with the planning department, and the use of incompetent engineering consultants. Increasing the fees collected without any review of processes or demand for accountability will likely only result in even more onerous processes in the future with ever increasing costs. The concern is that despite the significant increase in fees, the city s$ll will never achieve 100% cost recovery.
The proposed fee schedules will more than double many rou$ne fees. Many of the fees represent costs that o6en exceed the fees we charge to prepare the documents being reviewed, a good example being minor ma%ers such as lot line adjustments and parcel mergers. The issue with cost recovery on many of these items is not the amount of the fee collected, but that City has not retained competent and efficient staff or consultants to complete the processing and reviews in a $mely and efficient manner. Our firm has a sterling reputa$on for producing high quality work, and yet it o6en takes 4 to 6 $mes as long to process even the simplest ministerial land development case with the City Planning Department compared to any other agency in the Coachella Valley. Increasing fees without addressing the exis$ng underlying problems and inefficiencies will never see the goal of 100% cost recovery realized.
I certainly agree that the City likely needs to modestly increase fees to recover costs, and I agree that 100% cost recovery should be the goal. However, it is indisputable that serious inefficiencies exist within the City Planning and Development Departments. Significantly more progress can made toward 100% cost recovery by 1767
2 addressing these inefficiencies versus doubling the fees. If real efforts are made to address these inefficiencies, it is likely cost recovery can approach 100% with far more modest fee increases.
Regards,
Benjamin Daniel Egan, PE, PLS
Principal
Egan Civil, Inc.
(760) 404-7663 Office
(760) 898-1106 Cell
Mailing Address:
PO BOX 5282
La Quinta, CA 92248-5282
Physical Address:
We have moved!!!
73605 Dinah Shore Drive, Suite 1330
Palm Desert, CA 92211
[email protected]
1768