ATTACHMENT 8
Agenda Report Page2
contracted hearing officers' time and incidentals, such as the hearing officer's mileage costs, and materials and postage. This fee is based on the minimum amount of time a hearing officer would be required for any hearing, that being three hours. The City's contracts with hearing officers stipulate an hourly rate of $150, and three hours of their time costs $450. With mileage, materials, and postage costs typically about $50, the total fee would be $500. The proposed hearing fee will result in an average cost to the City of $1,167.22 per hearing, the amount of the $1,667.22 average hearing cost uncovered by the proposed hearing fee. The City typically receives about 10 appealhearing requests per year, which would amount to an average yearly fiscal impact of $11,672.20 should all appeals result in a hearing.
Recommended
Action: STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT the City Council 1) adopt a Resolution entitled A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN CLEMENTE,
CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A FIXED FEE FOR APPEALS UNDER CHAPTER
1.22 OF THE SAN CLEMENTE MUNICIPAL CODE, and 2) adopt Ordinance No. 1715 entitled AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SAN CLEMENTE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 1.22 RELATING TO FEES FOR ADMINISTRA TlVE HEARINGS AND APPEALS.
Attachments: 1. Resolution - Appeal Hearing Fee
2. Introduced Ordinance No. 1715
3. Fee Analysis - Two Estimated Hearing Fee Calculators
4. City Council Agenda Report dated June 15, 2021 and Ordinance No. 1715.
Notification: None.
7-20-21 I 12A-2
Approvals:
AGENDA REPORT
SAN CLEMENTE CITY COUNCIL MEETING
Meeting Date: June 15, 2021
City Manager � .15
Dept Heacljti 11.r C&l>
·1
Department City Attorney
Community Development Department
Prepared By: · Scott C. Smith1 City Attorney
Cecilia Gallardo�Daly, Community Development Director
Attorney
Finance
Subject: CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE AMEND/NG SAN CLEMENTE MUNICIPAL CODE CHAPTER 1.22 TO SET A FIXED FEE FOR APPEALS AND ADMINTSTRATJVE HEARINGS Fiscal Impact: The fiscal impact of this amendment is dependent upon the appeal hearing fee cost. At this time, the cost for all unsuccessful appeals is covered by the appeal hearing fees charged to the appellants. Any set appeal hearing fee that does not cover the cost of some or all hearings will have a negative impact on the City's finances, as those currently unbudgeted costs will then be paid for by the general fund.
Jackground: In 2018, the City Council amended Chapter 1.22 of the San Clemente Municipal Code ("SCMC") to authorize full recovery of costs of administrative hearings and appeals from individuals seeking those hearings and appeals ("appellants") when their appeals are unsuccessful. At its meeting on June 1, 2021, the City Council asked that staff prepare and present an ordinance repealing that full cost recovery and providing instead for a fixed fee.
Discussion: The current version of SCMC Chapter 1.22 contains basic provisions relating to fees for administrative hearings and appeals ("appeals"). Sections 1.22.01 o through 1.22.030 provide for payment of the costs of unsuccessful appeals from unsuccessful appellants rather than coverage of them by the general fund. At Its June 1, 2021 meeting, the City Council asked staff to return with (1) an ordinance amending Chapter 1.22 to provide instead that appeals be subject to a fixed fee, which would be recoverable by successful appellants, with the inclusion of a provision to allow a hardship waiver, and information on a fixed fee amount.
The attached draft Ordinance ellminates the full cost recovery provisions of Chapter 1.22 and provides instead for an appeal fee for unsuccessful appeals as set by resolution of the City Council. (The provisions of Section 1.22.040 providing for fee refunds from unsuccessful appellants are now consolidated into Section 1.22.020.) If Council were to introduce this draft Ordinance for first reading, it could simultaneously give instruction of what, if any appeals fee should follow. Staff could then prepare and notice a resolution adopting an. appeals fee for subsequent Council consideration. The fee could be set to take effect concurrently with the effective date of the Ordinance. The remainder of City Council Agenda Report
---
6�15�21 / 98-1
7-20-21 I 12A-12
(
Agenda Report Page 2
Recommended
Chapter 1.22 would remain Intact The current information related to fees is {- based on the actual amount of fees collected for the -cost of the appeal hearings , held.
Fee Collected
$3,597.27
$1,614.37
Appeals tend to involve complicated cases that require additional staff time for the preparation of the report and supporting documentation. In addition, the hearing may take up to. a full da.y of staff and the Administrative Hearing Officer's· time. Prior to the appeal hearing fee, the cost of the Administrative Hearing Officer was covered by the GenerE;ll Fund. The last budgeted amount for the hearings to cover the cost of the Administrative Hearing Officer was $1 o ,000. The consideration of a flat fee for an appeal hearing In the amount of $250 to $500 per appeal would llkely not be cost recoverable. In comparison, the fee to appeal a Planning Permit by a hearing body is a flat fee of $1,250.99.
Actions: STAFF RECOMMENDS THAT the City Council:
1. Consider introducing for first reading an Ordinance entitled:
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF. SAN CLEMENTE,
CALIFORNIA AMENDING SAN CLEMENTE MUNICIPAL CODE
CHAPTER 1.22 RELATING TO FEES FOR ADMINISTRATIVE
Hl=ARINGS AND APPEALS
.2. Give staff direction on the possibility of bringing back a resolution establishing an appeals fee pursuant to this Ordinance, Attachments: 1) Proposed Ordinance
2) Agenda Report from June 1, 2021
6-15�21 / 98-2
7-20--21 I 12A-13
(_
..
r
I ..
•:,;::" �� $AN CLEMENTE CITY COUNCiL MEETING
Me�Ung D�te�May·1, �018
:• Agehda ltefm ({_�ft .
·· ··Approval$: ..
.Cit:, Ma_rmgar ---
Oapt H�ad
Attorney �:;t::t::::"'
flnange
D�partment. City Attorney
Prepared By; ·soott Smith, City Attorney
ORPINANOi: AM.t:NOl�� MUNlQIPAt Cops TO R�COVE:R. COSTS OF AnMINl$l"AA TIVS Hl:AAIN(38 ANO /;f PSA!..S
Ftlscsi lmpt1.ct: U adopted1 tOQether w!th-a re®lt.Jtion establishing reasonable fees, the City will be able to reooverth� oasts t:issqd!�ted with conducting admlnliatrative hearings and appeals In �ose oases where the City prevails in the P,ro�dlrig, Summary,◄ $�ff reoo.mmends th!:lt th$ City Cou11otr a) lntro<lude the attaoMd ·ordinance whioh authorizes the reoqveiy of fee$ for .adminlatratlve hean.ngs an<l tippealsl gives the Olly so!� disor�tion, to ponsolidate muttlpte· administrative eltatlon challenges by the s.sms person into �me hearingj limits the number of times a hearinQ may be c¢ntfnued, and ntakes aom� mlnQr oorre¢ttoM to the code relating to-adnifnlstraUve · citatlons1
·
and b) direct st�ff to notice a pubJla hearing pyrsua.nt to Govemment Gode Seotlol')s 86018 and 66018 � adopt a resolutlon ·e.stabtishlns reasonabfe h�aring (ees. ' ·
. '
Sac.kgrot.ind: The City Man.ag,r reqyested that an ordinance be prepared to ali4W the Ciw to recover the oosts associated with oonduotlng ��mlnlstrative heatings and E1ppeala In thos� oases whare·the Cfty preva!ts In the prooeedtng.
_ . Dl$cusslon: murent!y when t� ·olty coriduots an adrril�tstrabVe hearing or app�t, It bearf? tne flmmolaf' burden of processing and cofll;fucllng these prtloeedlngs, lnoludlng an staff time, mafe,rlals and the fee,� and c;ost$ for a hearing officer, with the �oeptlon of haartogs conducted pursuant to Muntclpal Code section s,eo.020 relating to· sh oppl_ng carts, Since these ptoceadlngs ar� typJoaHy loi.tiatecl by persons ·Seek!n.g review of an administrative deolston or �h�lle.ngfng the imposition of a fine1 the CO$t of ihe prooeedlngs shour� b� borne by such persons, unless they pr$vall in the · proceeding,
New Chapter 1.2.2 provfdea that any person seeking an admtntstratlve hearing Qr f!Ung an appeal undir any provision of the Municipal Code shall be requl� to pay the costs assoalated with the hearf ns1 and deposft those cos� with the requeJt. for hearlng/notloe of appe"al, unlesi auoh person prevails fn the �earing/appeal, In the event that a person seeking the hearing or appeal pr�valls crt soma Qf the olafma1 it ' shall be responsible for only 1/2 of the costs,
In addition to. the oost reoovery provfs!ons of new Chapter 1.22, the ordinance amends Munioipat Code Section 1.20.0800 to gfve the City sole discretion ta (. \_ Pk_deptAgendaRaport 5--1�18 I 9A-1
6-1-21 / 9C-5
6-15-21 / 98-12
7-20-21 I 12A-23
i
\. I • 'Aseti.dftltti� llage2
oonaol!dmi., oha!lenga$. tP muli!pl$ admlnfetratMt oltatlons by the same petrlQn lttto a single hearlrtS1· and llmrts fhe number Qf oontlnuanc:ee that may be g�nt«J for administrative hearings and lippeiah�1 and make several other modifrbatfons In ChE!pter 1 ,20 to be oani�!stent with the new prcwJ�lons relating to ·oost recovary. The proposed ordinance also am�ds Seotlo11 1,20,090 relating i<> fudlo!al reView �f admlnistrm!Ve cttat!Qrta to oorreot a roferettoe to the 01:1IWomla Governmer1t C\ide a1;1d to update tha address of tha Oral1g� county Superior Ooott where appeala from admintstrath/e �tatron determinations are flied.
. I , .
•
Last1Y1 In order to comply with Gov.ammeht Code Sabtlons 66016 anq '36018, It is reoommanded thai the Ctty Caunoll dlrfmt a½�ff to provide tto-lice for a. j;Jublic he�rlng ta be held bafore the Clty Counoll to adopt1 by ra-sah,1tlan1 ihe new feea for appeah,,. \Nhloh wlfl be on a,iima and m;tforlals recovery basls, · . . ·
lieaoirttrnmded . .
'I
·� l '
I
I
:/ (" , , � \
-,,., j i
l
•, I
. 1
I
!
I
i
I
. Action: Srm �COMMSNoa THA, tha City Council a) lnu-oduce the attijoh� ordinance which 1) a<lda .a new Chapter 1.� to the Mutdcfpaf Cods relatlng ta iaes for adml11!.stratlve heating$ aria appeals and 2) amends Saotion 1,20,090 relating to Judicial re"JieW of administrative tl!tatlo�a to oorrect a reference to the Governh'lant Cade and update the address for thei Orange 0011nty Superlor Court, and b) diraot staff to n9tlae- a p1;1bHo hearing pursuant to Govmnment Cr:Rts"'Se::titi'm---0001"Enfna tf®'1 e ts eatabliah. . . !
i
'
'
'
I
i
l
. ,
(.
'
i
'
(
Notifl�fJon:
masonabfa hearing fees, ·
. ,
1, OROINANCS NO:�.: AN Ol=IDlNANCa Or THI: OITY'COUNOIL ()f' iHE OITY OF SAN CLEMENTE, CALIFORNfA. AOlJl'N0 A NEW CfiAP1'E!R 1,22. 'TO llTL,E; 1 Or 11-fE SAN CLEMEN'Jt MUN1Cf PAL CODE lie.LATING TO f:�ge PO� AOMINlSTRATMi HEARi.NG$ ANO APP5Al.S ANO ·AMENDING SSOitONs
1.20.oao AN)) 1.2Q.090 OF. CHAPl'ER 1.20 Or 'TITLE 1 OF THS MUNIOlPAL CODE �E:LA11NG TO JUDICIAL RSVJSW OF AbMlNISTAATIVa CITATIONS, Notloo Qf fee to be pub ff shed n l'lotad above,
o-1 �113 / 9A--2
6--1-21 / 90"6
. i
'
. f
,/
6-15-21 / 9B-13
7-20-21 I 12A-24
i
· I
!
I
I
I
l
I
i
i