The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2003 ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT DATE: December 10, 2003 AGENDA SECTION: Consent ITEM: TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: John W. Stinson, Assistant City Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: December 2, 2003 CITY A'I'rORNEY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: Transfer the issue of park fee credit for open space in multi-family projects with four or less units for developer required public parkland from the Budget and Finance Committee to the · Planning and Development Committee. RECOMMENDATION: Budget and Finance Committee recommendS approval. BACKGROUND: The issue of Park Fee Credits was discussed at the council meeting of December 11, 2002. During the meeting, Vice-Mayor David Couch referred the issue of park fee credit for open space in multi-family projects with four or less units for developer required public parkland to the Budget and Finance Committee for additional review. Subsequently, city staff met with representatives from both the Building Industry Association (BIA) and North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District (NBRPD) to discuss the issue and make a recommendation to the Budget and Finance Committee. At the November 24~ Budget and Finance Committee meeting, this park fee credit issue was discussed and it was concluded that it would be more appropriate to transfer it to the Planning and Development Committee since that Committee is already reviewing similar issues involving park fee credits. Therefore, the majority of the Committee (with Councilmember Salvaggio absent), recommends transferring this issue to the Planning and Development Committee. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT MEETING DATE: December 10, 2003 I AGENDAiTEM: 5. SECTION:{~. Consent Calendar TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council A_P~ROVED FROM: Gregory J. Klimko, Finance Director DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: November 12, 2003 CITY ATTORNEY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: Resolution Adopting the Investment Policy of the City. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND: This resolution places the City in conformance with the California Government Code that requires staff to annually render to the legislative body a statement of investment policy which the legislative body shall consider at a public meeting. The policy has been changed to reflect California Government Code amendments: maximum maturity of bankers acceptances is amended from 270 days to 180 days, maximum maturity of commercial paper is amended from 180 days to 270 days and maximum percentage of the portfolio that can be invested in commercial paper is changed from 15% to 25%. These are the only changes to the previously adopted policy. The City has used bankers acceptances and commercial paper in its investment program in the past. Currently there are no investments in these instruments. These changes will not impede their use in the future. The current policy receiVed, certification through the Investment Policy Certification Program of the Association of Public Treasurers of the United States and Canada (PTA US&C). According to the PTA US&C these minor changes to comply with State statute, will not require re-certification of the City's Investment Policy. November 19, 2003, 4:18PM P:~MISC~Admin report invest policy.doc POLICY RESOLUTION NO, A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ADOPTING .AN INVESTMENT POLICY. WHEREAS, Section 53646 of the California Government Code requires the Treasurer or Chief Fiscal Officer to render an annual statement of Investment Policy to the legislative body of the local agency; and WHEREAS, the City of Bakersfield desires to adopt an Investment Policy in conformance with the California Government Code, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: The Council of the City of Bakersfield hereby adopts the Investment Policy as set forth in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and made a part hereof. ..... : .... o0o .......... I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed' and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on , by the following vOte: AYES: COUNCILMEMBER COUCH, CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD~HANSON, SULLIVAN. SALVAGGIO NOES: COUNClLMEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER PAMELA A. McCARTHY, CMC CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED By HARVEY L. HALL Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: VIRGINIA GENNARO City Attorney By MICHAEL G. ALLFORD Deputy City Attorney COUNTERSIGNED: By GREGORY J. KLIMKO Finance Director Exhibit "A" attached MGA:Isc S:\COUNClL\Resos/InvestmentPolicyAdopt. wpd 11/12/2003 t Page 2 of 2 t CITY OF BAKERSFIELD INVESTMENT POLICY I INTRODUCTION This Investment Policy is intended to provide guidelines for the prudent investment of the City of Bakersfield's temporary idle cash, and outline the policies for maximizing the efficiency of the City's cash management system. It is the policy of the City of Bakersfield to invest public funds in a manner which will provide safety of principal and at least a market rate of return while meeting the daily cash flow demands of the City. Investments will conform to all statutes governing the investment of public funds. The primary goals of this policy are: · To assure compliance with all Federal;State and Local laws governing the investment of public funds under the control of the City Treasurer. · To maintain the principal value of financial assets and ensure ample liquidity to meet operating expenditures. · Within the constraints of safety and liqUidity, and within the parameters of this Investment Policy generate a market rate of return. The ultimate goal is to enhance the economic status of the City of Bakersfield while protecting the safety of its financial assets. II SCOPE This policy applies to the investment activities of the City of Bakersfield and related entities. Idle cash in all funds is pooled for investment purposes except tax exempt bond proceeds, which are separated for arbitrage record keeping as required by Federal tax law, and the Firemen's Disability and Retirement Fund which is administered separately under the City of Bakersfield Municipal Code Section 2.92. Investments made on a pooled basis include monies of the City of Bakersfield, the Redevelopment Agency and the Public Financing Authority. The pooled funds are accounted for in the City of Bakersfield's Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR) and include: 0XX General Funds 1XX Special Revenue Funds 2XX Debt Service Funds 3XX Capital Project Funds 4XX Enterprise Funds 5XX Internal Service Funds 6XX Fiduciary-Agency Funds Any new fund created, unless specifically exempted. All debt issue proceeds will be invested in accordance with the' associated trust indentUre, and in such a manner that facilitates arbitrage rebate calculations. III PRUDENCE Investments shall be made in the context of the "prudent person" standard: Investments shall be made with judgement and care, under circumstance then prevailing which persons of prudence, discretion and intelligence exercise in the management of their own affairs, not for speculation, but for investment, considering.the probable safety of their capital as well as the probable income to be derived. The prudent investment diversification for the City's temporary idle cash vs. the Firemen's Disability and Retirement Fund (FDRF) is different. Up to 40% of the retirement fund may be invested in securities of a single agency of the four triple A rated United States Government Agencies authorized in this policy. This exception to investment diversification among the highest quality securities is deemed prudent and necessary in order to increase the available options for keeping retirement funds fully invested at or above the six percent actUarial rate of retUrn. IV OBJECTIVE Criteria for selecting investments and the order of priority are: .Safety - Safety of principal is the foremost objective of the investment program. The City only operates in those investments that are considered very safe. The City shall seek to preserve principal by mitigating the two types of risk, credit risk and market risk. * Credit Risk - Potential loss due to the failure of an issuer of a security. Market Risk - Potential decrease in the value of securities due to changes in the general level of interest rates. 2 Liquidi ,ty - Liquidity refers to the "ability to easily sell" at any moment in time with a minimal risk ~of losing some portion of principal and interest. Liquidity is an important investment quality should the need for cash occur unexpectedly. · Yield -Yield is the potential dOllar earnings an investment can provide and is sometimes described as the rate of return. V DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY In accordance with the City of Bakersfield Charter, Municipal Code and subsequent resolutions, the City Treasurer is authorized to invest the City's funds in accordance with California Government Code Section 53600 et seq. The City Treasurer shall be responsible 'for all transactions undertaken and shall establish a system of controls to regulate the activities of subordinate officials. VI ETHICS AND CONFLICTS OF INTEREST All officials involved with the City of Bakersfield's investment program shall exercise their. fiduciary responsibly as custodians °fthe public trust. The City Treasurer, or when appropriate the Treasury Supervisor, shall avoid any transactions that might impair public confidence in the City's ability to manage the investment of public funds in an effective manner. The City Treasurer, Treasury Supervisor, or any other official charged with the responsibility of making investment decisions, shall have no vested interest in any investment being made involving. public funds of the City, and shall gain no financial benefit fi.om such investment decisions. VII AUTHORIZED BROKER/DEALERS AND BANKS All financial institutions that desire to do business with the City shall' be evaluated by the City Treasurer to determine if they are adequately capitalized, meet California Government Code requirements and agree to abide by the conditions set forth in the City of Bakersfield Investment Policy. Whenever reasonable and in keeping with Government Code, investments are placed locally. Broker/dealers are investigated to determine if there is pending legal action against the finn or the individual broker who would be the City's contact and that the firm offers securities appropriate to the City's needs. All broker/dealers,, which may include "primary" dealers or regional dealers that qualify under Securities & Exchange Commission Rule 15c3-1 (Uniform Net Capital Rule), who desire to become authorized bidders for City investment transactions must supply the City Treasurer with the following: Current audited financial statements Account authorization forms · Proof of National Association of Securities Dealers certification · Completed broker/dealer questionnaire · Certification of having read and agreement to abide by the City of Bakersfield Investment Policy All banks that desire to become authorized bidders for time certificates of deposit (TCD) must be a qualified public depository as established by State Law and supply the City Treasurer with the following: Current audited financial statements Depository contracts · A copy of the latest FDIC call report · Certification of having read and agreement to abide by the City of Bakersfield Investment Policy Broker/dealer account authorizations and depository contracts will be executed bY the City of Bakersfield Finance Director as required by City Charter. The City Treasurer will maintain a list of authorized broker/dealers and banks that are approved to do business with the City. An annual review of the financial condition of authorized financial institutions will be conducted by the City Treasurer. VIII AUTHORIZED & SUITABLE INVESTMENTS The City of Bakersfield's investment program is governed by the California Government Code Sections 53600 et seq. Within the context of these ·limitations, the following investments are authorized, as further limited herein (Single Asterisk * denotes term or percentage imposed by State statute; Double Asterisk ** denotes term or percentage utilized by the City of Bakersfield which is more restrictive than statute): A. United States Treasury Bills, Notes and Bonds United State Treasury Bills, Notes and Bonds are securities which have the full faith and credit of the United States pledged for payment of principal and interest. Although there is no percentage limitation of the dollar amount that can be invested in these categories, the "prudent person" standard shall apply. Maturities are limited to five* years from settlement date. Treasury Bills (T-Bills) are short-term debt obligations of the United States Government, issued weekly with maturities up to one year. T-Bills are considered to have virtually no credit risk and to be the most liquid short-term fixed income instrument. Prices on ' T-Bills are quoted on a discount basis. The difference between the discount price and the full face value paid at maturity equals the total return. Treasury Note (T,Notes) are initially issued by the auction process with two, five and ten year maturities. T-Notes like Bills have virtually no credit risk and have liquidity through an active secondary market. T-Notes are issued at Par ($1,000) with a coupon or fixed rate of interest. The price Or market value will 4 fluctuate above or below par depending on the coupon rate and whether interest rates are rising or falling. T-Notes mature at par. Treasury Bonds (T-Bonds) are initially issued by the auction process with thirty year maturities and have characteristics similar to T-Notes. B. United States GOvernment Agencies United States Government agencies include the Federal Farm Credit Bank System (FFCB), the Federal Home Loan Bank (FHLB), the Federal Home Loan Mortgage Corporation (FHLMC), and the Federal National Mortgage Association (FNMA). Government agencies issue debt in the form of discount notes, much like T-Bills, and notes and bonds similar to T-Notes and T-Bonds. While agency - debt is not a direct obligation of the U.S. government, it is rated AAA, the highest rating. At the time of purchase no more than 20%** of the portfolio may be invested in any single agency name. Maturities are limited to five* years from settlement date. C. Bankers Acceptance Bankers Acceptance (BA) is a time draft or bill of exchange, issued from a letter of credit, and is normally used to finance international trade. When the accepting bank stamps "accepted" on the draft the bank guarantees payment of the draft at a specified future date and thereby creates an acceptance. BA's are considered extremely safe in that there has never been a default on a BA. BA's trade on a discount basis and may not exceed 180' days to maturity. No more than 10%** of the portfolio may be invested in BA's issued by any one bank. No more than 40%* of the portfolio may be invested in this category. Eligible BA's are those issued by banks with a short term debt rating of at least A-l** by Standard and Poor's Corporation or P-l** by Moody's Investors Service, Inc.. D. Commercial Paper Commercial Paper (CP) is a short-term promissory note. CP is sold on a discount basis. The maximum maturity is 270 days with most issued in the 30-50 day maturity range. Eligible CP is "prime" quality ranked A-1 by Standard and Poor's Corporation or P- 1 by Moody's Investors Service, Inc. cP is issued by domestic corporations having assets in excess of $500 million and having an A or higher rating on its debt, other than CP, as provided by Standard and Poor's or Moody's. Purchases of eligible CP may not exceed 270* days to maturity. No more than 10%* of the portfolio may be invested in CP issued by any one corporation. No more than 25%* of the portfolio maybe invested in this category. 5 E. Repurchase Agreements Repurchase Agreements, commonly called Repos, consist of two simultaneous transactions. One is the purchase of securities by an investor (City of Bakersfield) from a bank or dealer. The other is the commitment by the bank or dealer to repurchase the securities at the same price plus interest at some mutually agreed future date. Normally thc securities are U.S. Treasury notes or bonds and are held by a Federal Reserve Bank. Repos can be done with banks or dealers with which the City has entered into a master repurchase contract that specifics terms and conditions of repurchase agreements. The maturity of Repos shall not exceed 90** days. No more than 30%** of the portfolio may be invested in this category. F. Local Agency Investment Fund Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF) is a State of Califomia'managed investment pool for local agencies within the State. Investments may be up to the maximum permitted by State Law or 40%** of the portfolio whichever is less. Due diligence will be exercised in monitoring the performance of LAIF on a continual basis. G. Time Certificates of Deposit Time Certificates of Deposit (TCD's) are similar to a savings certificate that anyone can purchase at a bank where there is a fixed rate of interest and a specified maturity date. In the public funds area, TCD's are collateralized in accordance with Califomia Government Code and are non-negotiable. At the time of purchase no more than 10%** of the portfolio may be in TCD's of any one institution. Maturity is limited to five* years. No more than 40%** of the portfolio may be invested in this category. Section 53652 of the California Government Code also specifies that the City will have a deposit contract with each depository. H. Public Agency Savings Account - Demand Deposits Public Agency Savings Account ~ Demand Deposits are similar to a savings account that anyone can open at a bank. The interest rate is specified at the time of deposit, but is subject to change. All funds can be withdrawn on demand. Like public TCD's, public agency savings accounts are collateralized in accordance with California Government Code requirements. No more than 30%** of the portfolio may be invested in this category. I. Mutual Funds Mutual Funds are money market funds meeting criteria prescribedin California Government Code Section 53601 and related legislation. Investment in this 6 category is limited to funds that invest in U.S. Government Securities and maintain a net asset value of one (daily liquidity). 'The purchase price of shares shall not include any commission that these companies may charge. No more than 10%* of the portfolio may be invested in the shares of any one mutual fund. No more than 20%* of the portfolio may be invested in this category. Mutual funds are used for the investment of bond proceeds subject to arbitrage reporting. Due diligence will be exercised in the selection and performance monitoring of mutual funds on a continual basis. City of Bakersfield Summary Of Maximum Percent and Term Limitations By Investment Type: Percent Term U.S. Treasury Bills, Notes and Bonds 0 to 100% . 5 Years U.S. Government Agency Obligations 20% per agency 5 Years Bankers Acceptances(I) 40%(2) 180 Days Commercial Paper(3) 25%(2) .270 Days Repurchase Agreements 30% 90 Days Local Agency Investment Ftlnd 40% N/A Time Certificates of Deposit 40%(2) 5 Years Public Agency Demand Accounts 30% N/A Mutual Funds 20%(2) N/A (1) Short-term debt rating of at least A- 1 Standard and Poor's Corporation or P- 1 Moody's Investors Service, Inc. (2) No more than 10% of the portfolio may be invested in any one entity froTM these categories. (3) A-1 Standard and Poor's Corporation rating or P-1 Moody's Investors Service, Inc. rating. Should any investment percentage and portfolio limitation be exceeded due to the unexpected fluctuation in portfolio size, the affected securities may be held to avoid losses. When market values are such that no loss is indicated, the City Treasurer shall consider restructuring the portfolio basing the decision in part on the expected length of time the portfolio will be imbalanced. Any State of Califomia legislative action that further restricts allowable maturities, investment type or percentage allocations, will be incorporated into this Investment Policy and supersede any and all previous applicable language. IX UNAUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS Ineligible investments are those that are not described herein, including but not limited to, negotiable time certificates of deposit, non-government agency medium term corporate notes and reverse repurchase agreements. 7 X COLLATERALIZATION Collateralization will be required on two types of investments, time certificates of deposit and repurchase agreements. Investment in time certificates of deposit shall be insured up to $100,000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC). Investments in time certificates of deposit in excess of $100,000 shall be properly collateralized. When a depository pledges government securities as collateral, section 53652 of the California Government Code requires the securities to have a market value of at least 10% in excess of the City's deposit or 50% in excess of the City's deposit when mortgages are pledged as collateral. Repo collateralization will be at least 102% of market value of principal and accrued interest. XI SAFEKEEPING AND CUSTODY All security transactions entered into by the City of Bakersfield shall be conducted on a delivery- versus-payment (DVP) basis. Securities shall be delivered to the City by book entry, physical delivery or by third party custodial agreement. XII DIVERSIFICATION To reduce credit and market risk in the overall portfolio, the City will diversify its investments by security type, maturity date and issuer. With the exception of U.S. Treasury securities, diversification is also achieved by the portfolio percentages and maturity limitations indicated in the Authorized & Suitable Investments section of this policy. XIII MAXIMUM MATURITIES To the extent possible, and within the five year maximum maturity required by California Government Code, the City of Bakersfield will attempt to match investment maturities with anticipated cash flow requirements. As required by California Government Code Section 53601, any investment term longer than five years requires express authority by the City Council to make that investment. This authority must be granted no less than three months prior to making the investment. Investments with terms longer than five years will be limited to the lesser of $10 million or 10% of the portfolio at the time the investment is made. XIV INTERNAL CONTROL Investment transactions are reviewed by the City's external auditor as part of the annual audit. This review verifies compliance with the City of Bakersfield Investment Policy and the California Government Code. XV PERFORMANCE STANDARDS The cash management system is designed to accurately monitor and forecast expenditures and revenues, thus ensuring the investment of monies to the fullest extent possible, including the estimated float for the Active Account and the Payroll Account. The City attempts to obtain the highest interest yields possible as long as investments meet the criteria required for safety and liquidity, do not exceed a term of five years (unless otherwise authorized by the City Council) and are within portfolio percentage limitations. The City strives to maintain the level of investment of all funds as near 100% as possible through daily and projected cash flow determinations. The basic premise underlying the City of Bakersfield Investment Policy is, and will continue to be,' to ensure that the money is always safe and available when needed. Because the investment portfolio is designed to operate on a "hold-to-maturity" Premise (or passive investment style) and because of the safety, liquidity, and yield priorities, the benchmark that will be used by the City Treasurer to determine whether market yields are being achieved shall .be the yield on the U.S. Treasury Bill or Note maturing closest to the weighted average maturity of the City's overall portfolio. XVI REPORTING The City Treasurer shall proVide the City Council monthly investment reports which proVide a clear picture of the status of the cun'ent investment portfolio. The Monthly Investment Report shall include the following: ' · A listing of individual securities held at the end of the reporting period by authorized investment category · Final maturity of all investments listed · Coupon, discount or earnings rate · Par value and market value · Transactions completed during the month · Percentage of the portfolio represented by each investment category XVII INVESTMENT POLICY ADOPTION The City of Bakersfield Investment Policy shall be reViewed annually by City staff and adopted by Resolution of the City Council. XVIII INDEMNIFICATION OF INVESTMENT OFFICIALS The standard of care to be used by investment officials shall be the "prudent person" standard and shall be applied in the context of managing the overall portfolio. The City Treasurer and his designees' acting in accordance with established procedures and the City of Bakersfield Investment Policy and exercising due diligence shall be relieved of personal responsibility for an individual security's credit risk or market price changes, provided deviations fi:om expectations are reported in a timely fashion and appropriate action is taken to control adverse developments. 9 GLOSSARY ACCRUED INTEREST: Interest earned but not yet received. ACTIVE ACCOUNTS: Funds which are immediately available for disbursement. AGENCIES: ' U.S. Government-authorized enterprises that issue debt securities commonly called "agencies". ARBITRAGE: In the public finance arena, arbitrage is ·interest earnings on invested bond proceeds that exceeds interest payments to the bondholders. The 1986 Tax Act requires arbitrage earnings to be rebated (paid) to the federal government. AUTHORIZED INVESTMENTS: A list ofpermittecl investments by investment type maintained as a component to an investment policy. Allowable investment listing will generally include descriptions or parameters for investment diversification ratios, terms of maturity, and quality ratings. BENCHMARK: A segment of the securities market with characteristics similar to the subject portfolio. It is used to compare portfolio performance to the performance of the appropriate segment of the market. BOND: A financial obligation for which the issuer promises to pay the bondholder a specified stream of future cash flows, including periodic interest payments and a principal repayment. BROKER: A broker brings buyers and sellers together for a commission. COLLATERAL: Evidence of deposit or other property, such as securtities, which a borrower pledges to secure repayment of a loan. Also refers to securities pledged by a bank to secure deposits of public monies. COMPREHENSIVE ANNUAL FINANCIAL REPORT (CAFR): The official annual report for a municipality. It includes combined statements for each individual fund and account group prepared in conformity with generally accepted accounting principals (GAAP). It also includes supporting schedules .necessary to demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal and contractual provisions, extensive introductory material, and a detailed statistical section. COUPON: The annual rate of interest that a bond's issuer promises to pay the bondholder on the bond's face value. CUSTODY: A banking service that provides safekeeping for the individual securities in a customer's investment portfolio under a written agreement which also calls for the bank to collect and pay out income, to buy, sell, receive and deliver securities when ordered to do so by the principal. DEALER: A dealer, as opposed to a broker, acts as a principal in all transactions, buying and selling for his own account. DEBENTURE: A bond secured only by the general credit of the issuer. DELIVERY VERSUS PAYMENT: There are two methods of delivery of securities: delivery versus payment, and delivery, versus receipt. Delivery versus payment is delivery of securities with an exchange of money for the securities. Delivery versus receipt is delivery of securities with an exchange of a signed receipt for the securities. DISCOUNT: The difference between the cost price'ofa security and its maturity mount when quoted at lower than face value. A security selling below original offering price shortly after being issued also is considered to be at a discount. DISCOUNT SECURITIES: Non-interest bearing money market instruments that are issued at a discount (less than face value expressed as the discount rate), and redeemed at maturity for' fUll face value, e.g., U.S. Treasury Bills. DIVERSIFICATION: Dividing investment funds among a variety of securities offering independent rems, to reduce risk inherent in particular securities. FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION (FDIC): Insurance provided to customers of a subscribing bank which guarantees deposits to a set limit (currently $100,000) per account. MARKET VALUE: The price at which a security is trading and could presumably be purchased or sold. MASTER REPURCHASE AGREEMENT: A written contract covering all fUture transactions between the parties- establishes each party's rights in the transactions. A master agreement will specify, among other things, the right of the buyer-lender to liquidate the underlying securities in the event of default by the seller-borrower. MATURITY: The date upon which the principal or stated value of an investment becomes due and payable. MONEY MARKET: The market in which short-term debt instruments (such as T-Bills, commercial paper and bankers acceptances) are issued and traded. NOTE: A written promise to pay a specified mount to a certain entity on demand or on a specified date. PORTFOLIO: Collection of securities held by an investor. PRIMARY DEALER: A group of government securities dealers who submit daily reports of market activity and positions and monthly financial statements to the Federal Reserve Bank of New York and are subject to its informal oversight. Primary dealers include Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)-registered securities broker-dealers, banks, and a few unregulated firms. PRUDENT PERSON RULE: An investment standard. In some states the law requires that a fiduciary, such as a trustee, may invest money only in a list of securities selected by the custody state-the so-called legal list. In other states the trustee may invest in a security if it is one which would be bought by a prudent person of discretion and intelligence who is seeking a reasonable income and preservation of capital. QUALIFIED PUBLIC DEPOSITORIES: A financial institution which does not claim exernption from the payment of any sales and compensating use or ad valorem taxes under the laws of this state, which has segregated for the benefit of the commission eligible collateral having a value of not less than its maximum liability and which has been approved by the Public Deposit Protection Commission to hold public deposits. SAFEKEEPING: A service to customers rendered by bank trust departments for a fee whereby securities and valuables of all types and descriptions are held in the bank's vaults for protection. SECURITIES & EXCHANGE COMMISSION: Agency created by Congress to protect investors in securities transactions by administering securities legislation. SEC RULE 15C3-1: See Uniform Net Capital Rule. UNIFORM NET' CAPITAL RULE: Securities and Exchange Commission requirement that member firms as well as nonmember broker-dealers in securities maintain a maximum ratio of indebtedness to liquid capital of 15 to 1: also called net capital rule and net capital ratio. Indebtedness covers all money owed to a firm, including margin loans and commitments to purchase securities, one reason new public issues are spread among members of underwriting syndicates. Liquid capital includes cash and assets easily converted into cash. WEIGHTED AVERAGE MATURITY (WA1VO:' The average maturity of all the securities that comprise a portfolio that is typically expressed in days or years. YIELD: The rate of annual income remm on an inVestment, expressed as a percentage. (a) INCOME YIELD is obtained by dividing the current dollar income by the current market price for the security. (b) NET YIELD or YIELD TO MATURITY is the current income yield minus any premium above par or plus any discount from par in purchase price, with the adjustment spread over the period from the date of purchase to the date of maturity of the bond. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT I MEETING DATE: October 8, 2003 I AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM: TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council ~OVED FROM: Donna L. Kunz, Economic Development Director DEPARTMENT HEA~3/ ~ DATE: September 30, 2003 CITY ATTORN ""E~ CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: A Resolution' of the Council of the City of Bakersfield Regarding Agreement No. 97-65 with Kern-Tech, Inc., authorizing release of lien of equipment for a payment of $32,235. RECOMMENDATION: Budget and Finance Committee recommends approval. BACKGROUND: On September 29, 2003, the Budget and Finance Committee recommended City Council adopt the attached Resolution authorizing a discount of the economic development loan. Kern-Tech, Inc. will pay the City $32,235. Due to a variety of unfortunate events, Kern-Tech, Inc., has indicated that it cannot pay the outstanding balance of its loan. Since the loan was approved in 1997, the company has employed about 60 employees and currently employs .18.. During its five year loan term, Kern-Tech exceeded it hiring goals of Iow- and moderate- income individuals. Several negative factors contributed the collapse of the company. One of the firm's customers went bankrupt, owing Kern-Tech about $350,000. Another customer took similar action owing Kern-Tech additional $20,000. Kern-Tech was doing well with work in the commercial aircraft business until September 11, 2001 when that WOrk stopped completely. Although the company is now involved in defense work, Kern-Tech has found that this is not as profitable as the commercial business was. A local manufacturer has offered to lease Kern-Tech's equipment, hire its employees, and continue work on existing contracts. Kern-Tech's president Mike Miller will continue to pay suppliers, pay past payroll taxes and other bills with the money received from the lease payments to Kern-Tech. Kern-Tech's president has indicated he will most likely have to declare personal bankruptcy because he has personally guaranteed many of Kern-Tech's obligations. The proposed buyer of Kem-Tech will not go forward with the purchase if the City's loan remains in place. If the purchase does not go forward, the offer to hire Kern-Tech's existing employees will be negated. In such a scenario, Mr. Miller has indicated he will be forced to immediately declare bankruptcy. C:~ocurnents and Settings~alawrenc. BAKERSFIELD~Local Settings\Temp~Kem tel.doc 9/30/2003 2:44 PM ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 2 Timeline · Here is a chronology of events leading up this situation: March 1997: Council approves Agreement 97-65 to 3rovide Kern-Tech with a CDBG-funded loan for $169,797 for the purchase of two pieces of equipment and computer software. The loan has a five year term with a balloon payment due in March 2002. February 2002: Budget and Finance Committee is advised by the company that it cannot make the balloon payment. The committee recommends amending the agreement to extend the loan term for six months with a 0% interest rate, keep the existing collateral in place, accept $1,000 monthly payments, and request a review of the company's financial statements in six months. March 2002: Council approves the Budget and Finance Committee recommendation to amend the agreement. September 2002: Kern-Tech co-owner Cliff David dies. September 2002: Budget and Finance Committee reviews the company's financial statements and recommends that the agreement be amended to continue the existing payment schedule with a one year review. This would provide the company an additional year to assess its status and adjust to the loss of one of its two partners. November 2002: Council approves the Budget and Finance Committee recommendation to amend the agreement. Auqust 2003: Kern-Tech misses its first monthly loan payment and says it will be paid along with the September payment. Auqust 2003: Kern-Tech notifies City staff that the company is near collapse and a local manufacturer has agreed to purchase the company. Staff requests additional information and a copy of the purchase agreement for analysis. ,September 2003: Kern-Tech misses its second monthly loan payment. Collateral ........ · The City has two types of collateral securing the loan. First, UCC filings, or liens, are being held on two pieces of equipment: Equipment "A" had an original purchase price of $155,401, and "B" $8,944. Second, a personal guaranty exists from Kern-Tech owner Mike Miller. The original personal guaranty was from both Mr. Miller and Mr. David but was subsequently amended to cover Mr. Miller following the death of Mr. David. Purchase Aqreement The buyer has offered $350,000 to pay off the existing secured debt (excluding the City's loan) and tax liabilities, pay rent, and purchase Kern-Tech equipment. Regarding the proposed equipment purchase, neither pieces "A" or "B" can be purchased as long as the City's liens remain in place. The existing secured debt, tax liabilities, and rent total $317,765, leaving a difference of $32,235 (see table below). C:~Documents and Settings~alawrenc. BAKERSFIELD~Local Settings\Temp\Kern tel.doc 9/30/20032:44 PM ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Kern-Tech, Inc. Sales agreement $350,000.00 Less: Secured debts 196,092.00 Less: Tax debts 114,673.34 Less: Rent 7,000.00 Amount remaining $32,234.66 Value of Equipment A comprehensive internet search of used equipment on September 4, 2003 foUnd the same Equipment "A" on the market for $43,500, or $0.28 on the dollar of the outstanding loan balance. Equipment "B" had a relatively small purchase price ($8,994) when purchased seven years ago and has no resale value. A search of similar equipment for sale was fruitless. "A" had the largest purchase price of any piece of Kern-Tech equipment while "B," as noted previously, had a much smaller value. Mr. Miller agrees that without "A," the deal will probably disintegrate and existing Kern-Tech workers would lose their jobs. Alternatives Alternative One: Forgive the loan. Many other economic development loans were structured as forgivable loans with no realistic thought that the City's investment would be repaid. These loans have been with · Guy Chaddock and Company, Hammons Meats, Inc., Southwest Contractors / ARB, Inc., Galey's Marine Supply, Harvel Plastics, Bakersfield Civic Light Opera, Dopaco, Step2, and Pleasant Holidays. Should the loan be forgiven the City would recoup no funds. Alternative Two: Declare Kern-Tech in default, take possession of equipment "A" and "B," and sell them. In theory, this could result in recovering some of the outstanding loan amount. However, it would involve taking physical possession of the equipment, being responsible for its upkeep, then marketing it. A comprehensive internet search found only one such piece of used equipment for sale at present. Alternative Three: Declare Kern-Tech in default, release the liens on the equipment to allow the purchase of the business to proceed and, in return, make a claim on the remaining funds from the purchase agreement. The purchase agreement calls for $350,000 to be paid to Kern-Tech. After paying all other secured debt and rent, $32,235 remains. The Budget and Finance Committee recommends approval of Alternative Three. C:~)ocuments and Settings~alawrenc. BAKERSFIELD\Local Settings\Temp~Kem tel,doc 9/30/20032:44 PM RESOLUTION NO.. A RESOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD REGARDING AGREEMENT NO. 97-65 WITH KERN-TECH, INC. WHEREAs, on March 26, 1997, the City of Bakersfield ("CITY") entered into Agreement No. 97-65 ("the Agreement") with Kern-Tech, Inc.; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, CITY loaned Kern-Tech money to purchase equipment that .would be installed in Kern-Tech's facility' located at 405 East 19th Street ("the Loan"); and WHEREAS, in order to be eligible to receive the Loan, Kern-Tech was to retain ten (10) jobs and create eighteen (18) jobs and have a majority of those jobs available to Iow- and moderate-income persons; and . WHEREAS, the amount of the' Loan was ONE HUNDRED SIXTY-NINE THOUSAND, SEVEN HUNDRED NINETY-SEVEN AND NO/100 DOLLARS ($169,797.00); and WHEREAS, as security for the Loan, CITY filed UCC-1 statements on the equipment purchased with the Loan proceeds and the owners of Kern-Tech executed personal guaranties; and · WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, the Loan was to bear no-interest and was due and payable on March 26, 2002; and WHEREAS, throughout the term of the Agreement, Kern-Tech hired forty-one (41) individuals and 67.5% of them were Iow- or moderate-income persons; and WHEREAS, prior to the Loan payoff date, Kern-Tech requested that the Loan be restructured to permit loan payments to be made. at ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,000.00) per month until the Loan was totally repaid; and WHEREAS, on March 20, 2002, CITY and Kern-Tech amended the Agreement to permit the Loan to be restructured for six months and then the issue would be reviewed to determine if the payment amounts .should be increased; and WHEREAS, in September, 2002, one of the two partners of Kem-Tech passed away and the remaining partner, Michael Miller, committed to continue the business, repay the Loan and remain personally liable for the repayment; and Page I of 3 Pages C:\Documents and Settings\dkramer'~Local Settings~,Temp~kemtech.doc Created on 9/25/2003 4:17 PM - :'~: : WHEREAS, on November 6,'2002, theAgreement was again amended to allOw' ' · . 'the monthly payments of ONE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($1,000.00)to Continue, t° indicate that Michael Miller Was now the sOle guarantor on the Loan and to permit an extension of the UCC-1 statement for'another five Years; and WHEREAS, additionally, that November 6, 2002 amendment set forth that in October, 2003, the amount of the monthly repayment would be revisited, and if Kern-' ~ Tech could afford to increase its monthly payment, it would and, if Kern-Tech Could not afford to increase its monthly payments, other terms wOuld be negotiated; and WHEREAS, Kern-Tech has been approached by GF Kern-Tek, Inc., a California cOrporation ("Buyer") willing to purchase the entire company and retain all of the Current employees; and .. WHEREAS, Buyer will not' consummate the purchaSe while the Loan is outstanding and the UCC-1 statements are on file; and WHEREAS, if th'e sale proceeds, after all of Kern-Tech's debts are paid, approximately THIRTY-TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($32,000.00) will be available for repayment of the Loan; and WHEREAS, CITY desires to declare Kern-Tech in default, permit the sale of Kern-Tech to Buyer, to record a satisfaction and release of the UCC-1 statements and · make' a claim on the unencumbered funds remaining after'Consummation of the purchase. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, incorporating the above recitals herein, by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: 1. Kern-Tech is in default under Agreement No. 97-65 and the Agreement is hereby terminated; and 2. The purchase of Kern-Tech and all its assets and other liabilities by GF Kern-Tek, Inc. is hereby approved by the City of Bakersfield; 3. City staff is authorized to file a claim on the unencumbered .funds remaining after the consummation of the sale of Kern-Tech to GF Kern- Tek; 4. The City of Bakersfield will record a satisfaction and release of the UCC-1 .filings created by the debt set forth in Agreement No. 97-65 within ten (10) calendar days of the adoption of this resolution. Page 2 of 3 Pages C:\Documents and Settings\dkrame~Local Settings\Temp\kerntech.doc Created on 9/25/2003 4:17 PM I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by' the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on , by the following vote: · AYES: COUNCILMEMBER COUCH, CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO NOES: COUNCILMEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the 'Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED By HARVEY L. HALL Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: BART J. THILTGEN City Attorney By JANICE SCANLAN .~.- Deputy City Attorney Page 3 of 3 Pages C:~Documents and Settings\dkramer~Local Settings\Temp~emtech.doc Created on 9125/2003 4:17 PM TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: Bart J. Thiltgen, City Attorney DEPARTMENT HEAD ~ DATE: September 26, 2003 CITY ATI'ORNE¥. ~~' CITY MANAGER .~ SUBJECT: Ordinance Repealing Chapter 5.10 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code Relating to Ambulances. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Ordinance. BACKGROUND: First Reading was held on September 24, 2003. On August 26, 2003, the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern adopted a Resolution setting the rates which ambulance providers may charge in the City of Bakersfield. By adopting this Resolution, the Board of Supervisors exercised its statutory authority contained in Health and Safety Code sections 1797, et seq., to completely regulate the provision of emergency medical services in the County of Kern. As such, the County's assumption of this role preempts many portions of the Bakersfield Municipal Code. This Ordinance repeals, in its entirety, the City's regulation of ambulance services. Staff recommends the Council adopt this Ordinance. BJT:dll S:\COUNClL~mins~nbulanceRepealChapterS.10.doc September 9x, 200:3 - I1'~0 ~ ": ! ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD REPEALING IN ITS ENTIRETY CHAPTER 5.10 OF · THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE ·· RELATING TO AMBULANCES. WHEREAS, pursuant to the Emergency Medical Services System and Prehospital Emergency Medical Personnel Act (Health and Safety Code section 1797, et seq.), Kern County is the local· EMS agency; and WHEREAS, in accordance with this state law and the Ordinances of the County of Kern, the County has the authority to regulate· ambulance providers and the rates charged by such providers to their patrons; and WHEREAS, prior to August 26, 2003, the County of Kern had declined to fully exercise this authority and the· City of. Bakersfield regulated Certain aspects of the ambulance businesses in the City of Bakersfield in accordance with the duly adopted Ordinances of the City; and ' WHEREAS, on August 26, 2003, the Board of Supervisors of ·the County of Kern adopted a ResolutiOn which exercised its authority; and WHEREAS, upon adoption of the aforementioned Resolution, the City of Bakersfield's regulation was preempted and its Ordinances relating ·to the regulations adopted by the County of Kern are no longer of any force and effect; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Bakersfield desires to eliminate the duplicative regulatory system to avoid confusion and to streamline the Bakersfield Municipal Code. ': .*:~ .~....-. ~... NOW, THEREFORE,' BE 'IT ORDAINEDby the'c~uncil~f, theCity~of Bakersfield* '.-:~ ........ .:. as follows: ~ SECTION 1, All of the foregOing recitals are hereby found to be true and correct. SECTION 2. Chapter 5.10 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code is hereby repealed in its entirety. .......... oo0oo .......... S:~couNClL~Ords~AmbulanceOrdRepealChplr5.10.doc Page 1 of 2 Pages · HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing OrdinanCe was passed and adopted bY · · the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held On by the following vote: · ' · AYES: COUNCIL MEMBER COUCH CARSON, RENHAM, MAGGARD, HANsoN, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO · NOES: COUNCIL MEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBER ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBER CITY CLERK-and EX OFFICIO of the ·. Council of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED: 'By:. HARVEY L. HALL, MAYOR CITY OF BAKERSFIELD APPROVED AS TO FORM: ' BART J. THILTGEN. ~'. City Attorney ' · By:. BART J. THILTGEN City Attorney S:\COUNCIL\OrdsLS~.mbulanceOrdRepealChptrS. lO.doc ~Page 2 of 2 Pages ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT I MEETING DATE: September 10, 2003 I AGENDA SECTION: Hearings · ITEM: Cl. 0.,. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council ,A/~PROVED FROM: Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: September 2, 2003 CITY ATTORNEY /~---'~'" CITY MANAGER ~ SUBJECT: Hearing t© consider a Resolution approving and adopting an adjusted fee for the development and improvement of parks within the City of Bakersfield, (All Wards). RECOMMENDATION: Budget and Finance Committee recommends adoption of resolution. BACKGROUND: In accordance with Section 15.82.060 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, the following is the Public Works Director's annual report to the City Council with updated, new, or additional information regarding the fee amount collected for the development of parks within the City. Staff recommends increasing the current $647 per dwelling unit fee to $1,275 per dwelling unit (97% increase). The remaining narrative in this administrative report summarizes what led to the recommended increase. Two council referrals to the Budget and Finance Committee involved the Park Development Fee. Following are the two specific referrals: · Future park amenities (council meeting date of 11/20/02): Councilmember Couch referred the issue of how parks are landscaped, what amenities (equipment, etc) are provided, and how that affects the Park Development Fees. · Park Fee Credit (council meeting date of 12/11/02): Councilmember Couch requested additional review of the Park Fee Credit by the Budget and Finance Committee. At the April 21, 2003, Budget and Finance Committee meeting, staff provided documentation on the specific amenities that go into a typical 10 acre park and-the costs associated with these amenities. The Committee directed staff to meet with the Building Industry Association (BIA) and do the groundwork so a recommendation could be reached at the next Budget and Finance Committee meeting on the standard amenities to be included in a neighborhood park and based on that, what the Park Development Fee needs to be to construct a 10 acre (neighborhood) park. Staff was also instructed to contact the North Bakersfield Recreation and Park District (NBRPD) to get their input on amenity standards in a neighborhood park and invite them to attend the next Budget and Finance Committee meeting. City staff met with representatives from both the BIA and NBRPD on April 30th, May 27th, and August 14th, 2003. During these meetings several issues were discussed and resolved. It is important to note that staff addressed all questions regarding the specific amenities and their costs to the satisfaction of the BIA. The BIA had no unanswered questions or concerns regarding the specific amenities and the associated costs. GL: September 2, 2003, 4:34PM G:\GROUPDAT~DMINRPT~003U39-10~Park Dev Fee Admin.dot ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT 'Page At the August 18th Budget and Finance Committee meeting, the Committee recommended that the current $647 per dwelling unit fee be increased to $1,275 per dwelling unit. The revised fee ensures that sufficient funds are collected to construct a typical 10 acre (neighborhood) park. In addition, the Budget and Finance Committee recommended the proposed adjustment to the park improvement fee referred to the City Council for approval. Both the BIA and NBRPD indicated that they were comfortable with proceeding with the recommended park development fee increase even With three unresolved issues remaining. The three unresolved issues are summarized below: · NBRPD Issue: Is there a way to cause developers to provi~le all street improvements for our facilities like they are required to do for the city? If not, NBRPD recommends keeping street improvements in as part of the estimated park construction costs. It is important to note that staff's recommendation regarding a revised park development fee includes eliminating the street improvement line item since developers are required to construct streets adjacent to a park site. · NBRPD Issue: It was also requested that fees for permits and services traditionally waived for city parks also be waived for NBRPD parks. · BIA Issuei BIA indicated that they are interested in a park fee credit similar to Title 15 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code for open space in multi-family projects with four or less 'units. It is their opinion that the open space requirement for this type of multi-family development should receive credit towards public parks. This is a complex issue with significant impact on our park system and additional review time is needed. All parties have agreed that these three remaining issues should not slow down the process of adopting an appropriate park development fee. The Budget and Finance Committee instructed staff to submit recommendations on the above three items at their October meeting. GL: September 4, 2003, 12:17PM Document2 ? RESOLUTION NO.. RESOLUTION APPROVING AND ADOPTING AN. ADJUSTED FEE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND IMPROVEMENT OF PARKS WITHIN THE CITY · OF BAKERSFIELD ' WHEREAS, ChaPter 15.82 of the Bakersfield MuniciPal Code reqUires the Public Works Director to submit an annual report to the City Council with updated, new or additional information regarding the park deVelopment and improvement fee amount to be collected for each new dwelling unit, and that a public hearing shall be conducted if the City Council determines that the fee schedule should be adjusted; and · WHEREAS, on September 10, 2003, said Public Works Director's report was submitted to the City Council to consider adjustment of a fee for the purposes of developing and improving parks and recreational facilities within the City of Bakersfield; and WHEREAS, on September 10, 2003, the City CoUncil held a Public Hearing to receive public comment regarding the proposed adjusted Park Development and Improvement Fee Schedule; and WHEREAS, informational notices were mailed to the Building Industry Association, Architects Association, and North Bakersfield Recreation and Parks District; and WHEREAS, the law and regulations relating to the preparation and adoption of Negative Declarations as set forth in CEQA and the City of Bakersfield local 'implementation procedures have been duly followed by the City staff; and WHEREAS, for the above described resolution, City Council approved a Negative Declaration on October 17, 1990; and ..... .. WHEREAS, new residential development generates a need for improVed public parks and recreational facilities; and WHEREAS, the fee addresses the City of Ba[,~:ersfield's particular needs for the provision of improved local public parks for new residential development; and WHEREAS, Policy Three of the Parks Elemer~t of the Metropolitan Bakersfield'2010 General Plan requires new residential dev~-;topment to provide · improvements and/or in-lieu fees for parks; and WHEREAS, the requirements of Section 66(?i~)~ of the Government Code have been met; and G:\GROUPDA'IXADMINRFIM003X09-10XPark Dev Fee Res. DOC I ' WHEREAS,. based on the last five years of building permit data, the ratio of type of building permits is, for every 100 permits.there are 97 permits'for single family and 3 permits for multiple family units; 'and WHEREAS, the formula for the "flat fee" Park DeVelopment Fee is based on a Weighted average of personS per dwelling unit; and '. :WHEREAS, the City CoUncil, from time to time, may consider adjustment to the fee schedule to reflect new information affecting the fee, as specified in Ordinance NO. 3327; and WHEREAS, the amount of the fee shall be levied as follows, except as specified as exempt in Ordinance NO. 3327. · Single ·Family Dwelling ~ $1,275 - Duplex Dwelling Unit $1,275 Multiple Family Dwelling Unit $1,275 Mobile Home $1,275 NOW, THEREFORE; IT IS HEREBY FOUND AND RESOLVED AS FOLLOWS: 1. The above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and Correct. 2. All required public notices have been given. 3. The proVisions of CEQA have been followed. 4. The Negative Declaration approved and adopted on October · · 17, 1990 is adequate for the proposed adjustment in the amount of park fee. 5. The fee is in the public interest and is necessary for public convenience, health, welfare snd safety. 6. The fee established by this resolution is for the purposes of developing, improving and/or enhancing public parks and recreation facilities within the City of Bakersfield. 7. The fee shall be used to defray all or a portion of the cost of developing, improving or enhancing of public parks and '- recreation facilities serving new residential developments. These parks and recreation facilities shall be identified in the Capital improvement plan, the Parks Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, or other comprehensive plans concerning parks. G:\GROUPDATXADM INRPTL2003\09-10kPark Der Fee Res. DOC2 8. There isa reasonable'relationship between 'the fee's uSe and the type of development project on which the fee will be imPosed because the fee is calculated in relationship to the number of people residing in the development and the current estimated cOst of developing, improving or enhancing of public parks and recreation facilities. 9. There is a reasonable relationship between the amount of ~the fee and the cost of parks and recreational facilities or portion thereof attributable to the residential development which' the fee is imposed. 10. There is a reasonable relationshiP between the need for parks and recreational facilities and the type of development project on which the fee is imposed because new residential dwelling unit development creates or contributes an additional demand fOr. developed parks and recreational facilities at the level of service (standard rate) required by the General. Plan. 11. The requirements of Section 66001 of the Government Code have been met. 12. The requirements of Bakersfield Municipal Code Chapter 15.82 relative to the Public Works Director's Annual Report have been met. 13. Such fee as stated above is hereby approved and adopted, effective sixty (60) days upon adoption of this resolution. ................ 000 ............... ~o · G:\GROUPDAT~DMINRP'I~003\09-10~°ark Dev Fee ReS.DoC3 *'-'" Analysis of DevelOpment· COst for ·TypiCal 10 ·ACre Park · of Items Qt~ Unit Unit Price Extension I ~ Earthwork / Grading (Flat, Hilly Playfield, Etc. - Subject to specific site conditions) · $135,000 Clear and Grub Site .. 10 Acre $1,500 $15,000 Rough Grade Site (1.5 foot average over site) 24,000 CY $5 $120,000 2 Utility (ElectriCaVWater/Sewer - Subject to specific design'requirements) $43,100 ·· 6" Water Service / Meter / Backflow Prevention / 1 ' LS $30,000 $30,000 · Connection Electrical Meter & Panel · I LS $5,000 $5,000 ' 4"'Sewer Service Line 300 LF $17 $5,100 SewerCleanout 2 EA. $1,500 $3,000. 3 Irrigation System $258,400 A Automatic Irrigation System 380,000 SF $0.68 $258,400 B Booster Pump (Not required for 10 acre' park) $0 C Maxicom System (Included in Automatic Irrigation System) $0 4 Security Light System (20 poles for 10 acre) $50,000 Convenience Lighting 20 EA $2,500 $50,000 5 RestrOom FaCility with Storage Room - ADA Accessible $120,000 Restroom 600 SF ILS $120,000 $120,000 6 Parking Lot (36-40 Cars: w/landscaping) $22,440 ? Stall Parking LOt (16,000 SF) 4" AB and 2" AC. ggregate Base 380 Ton $18 $6,840 Asphalt Concrete 200 Ton $42 $8,400 Curb & Gutter 400 LF $13 $5,200 Commercial Driveway 2 EA $1,000 $2,000 7 Concrete Work InteriodDriveway & MowstriP- minimum hardscape $46,50C 4'Wide Sidewalk 12,000 SF $3 $36,000 MowCurb 1,400 LF $7.50 $10,500 8 Picnic Facilities (BBQs, tables, shade structureS, etc.) $50,000 Picnic*Facilities 10 EA $5,000 $50,000 9 Landscape Plant Materials (Trees, Shrubs, Grass and Ground C~y..e.r) $149,340 Soil Amendment ' 380,000 SF $0.19 $72,200 24' Box Trees 136 EA $200 $27,200 5 Gallon Plants 200 EA $13.20 $2,640 'Hydroseed Turf 380,000 SF $0.10 $38,000 Mulch 3" Deep 300 CY $31 $9,300 10 Drinking Fountains (Combination Standard/ADA) $3,000 Ddnking Fountain 2 EA $1,500 $3,000 11 Multigame Slab (60x60; Y2 Court; wire reinforcement footing; no lighting) ' $18,000 Game Court 3,600 SF $5 $18,000 360 Day Maintenance $57,00£ Landscape & Irrigation System 380,000.. SF. $0.15 $57,000 .. "'. Analysis of Development Cos'~ for TyPical. 10 Acre Park " ·. tern # Descript on of Items ~.~,~ Unit · Unit Price Extension" .13 ' Playground Equipment with ADA Requirements ': · $124,000 A Slides, Swings, Sand, Trashcans, etc ..... '. Tot Lot.Equipment 2 to 5 years 1 LS $20,000 $20,000 '" ' Tot Lot Equipment 5 to 12 years ~.' 1 L $40,000 $40,000 WashedSand · . 400 CY $30 $12,000 Resilient Rubber Surfacing : 600 SF $25 $15,000 Trash Receptacles_ 10 EA $500 $5,000 B Shade Structure. (size not specified) Shade Structure 900 SF .~ 1 LS $15,000 $!5,000 C Concrete - Amount can vary per park site .: Tot Lot Concrete Perimeter Edge 500 LF $10 $5,000 D Benches - 2 per'acre ~ · 16 EA $750 $121000 Pa~;k Benches 14 Sign/Monument Wall (5'x12') . 1 EA $3,600 $3,600 $3,600 15 Y2 Street Improvements on 2 Sides of Park Site $92,000 A Sidewalk: 1250 LF 5.5" wide 5.5'Wide Sidewalk 6,900 SF $3 $20,700 B Curb'& Gutter 1,250 LF $13 $16,250 C Pavement: 32,600 SF 6" Aggregate Base 1,180 Ton $18 $21,240 4, Asphalt Concrete 805 Ton $42 $33,810 Construction Total $1 16 Design / Development / Administration, including Construction Inspection (1.5% of Construction Total) $176,000 TOTAL REVISED'COSTS OF IMPROVEMENT ITEMS $1,348,380 Analys,s Of.DevelOPment Cost for Typical 10 Acre'Park 3tion of Items · DDITIONAL REQUIRED AMENITIES AND COSTS 17 Civil Site Work - Storm Drain System · . $4! ,000 18" PVC Storm Drain ~ 1,500 LF $25 $37,500 24" Christy Box Catch Basin 7 EA $500 $3,500 18 Architectural - Trash Enclosure $8,500 Trash 'Enclosure (Walls and Slab) . I LS $8,500 $8,500' 19 Site Furnishings - Basketball Pole & Backboards $5,000 Basketball Pole & Backboards 2 EA $21500 $5,000 20 Site Lighting - Parking LOt, Basketball Court, Electrical $45,000 parking Lot Lighting 4 EA. $2,500 $10,000 Basketball Court'Lighting (30 foot tall poles, 2 ~ 1000 watt 4 EA $6,250 $25,000 lamps per pole) Electrical DistributiOn to Parking Lot & Basketball Court 1 LS $10,000 $10,000 21 Delete Offsite Street Improvements .$92,000. 5.5' Wide Sidewalk -6,900 SF $3 -$20,700 Curb & Gutter -1,250 LF $13 -$16,250 6" Aggregate Base -1,180 Ton $18 -$21,240 4" Asphalt Concrete -805 Ton $42 -$33,810 2~)ouble Size of. Game Court $18,000 ~ame Court 3,600 SF $5 $18,000 23 Two USTATennis CoUrts $80,000 . Reinforced Concrete Slab 12,960 SF $3.90 $50,400 10' High Fencing ' 456 LF $32 $14,600 'Lighting Poles with' 12,000 watt illumination 12 EA $1,250 $15,000 ;ub-total of Construction Costs for Recommended Changes $105,500 24 MobiliZation (5% of All Construction Costs)* $64,000 25 Contingency (10% of Construction Total)** - ...... - $134,000 iub-total of items 17 to 25 $303,500 26 Design / DevelOpment / Administration, including Construction Inspection on items 17 to 25 $46,000 (15% of Construction Total) tOTAL COSTS FOR NEWLY ADDED ITEMS $349,500 rOTAL COSTS FOR TYPICAL 10 ACRE PARK (A + B) $1,697,880 IConstruction Total on page 2 ($1,172,380) and Sub-total of Construction Costs for ~ended Changes on page 3 ($105,500). "Construction Total computed as follows: Construction Total on page 2 $1,172,380 Plus Sub-total of Construction Costs for Recommended Changes on page 3 $105,500 Plus Item 24, Mobilization $64,000 $1,341,880 · PARK DEVELOPMENT FEE WORKSHEET· - Method Used to Calculate' Fee: ~' 1.' A 10-acre park serves 4,000 people baSed upon the General Plan and Bakersfield - Municipal Code Ch.apter .15.80 standard of providing park land at a rate of 2.5 · acres per 1,000 population. 2. cost of developing a 10-acre park is divided by 4,000 people to obtain a cost per person. a) $1,697,880 + 4,000 = $424.47 · · cost to # pop. serVed cost per person develop by 10-acre park to develop park 10-acre park 3. ' Number of persons per dwelling unit type: : Type of Unit 2000 Federal Census Persons Per Unit i Single Family (SFR) 3.01 Multiple Family (MFR) 2.77 Note: Consistent with the Planning Division, permits are categorized into 2 type of units as · identified above. In pdor calculations, 1990 Federal Census Persons Per Unit data was used for the duplex and mobile home units. The 2000 Federal Census recategorized many of the unit types. Mobile Home and duplex information are now included with multiple family. . 4. Based on last 5 years of build!ng permit data, the ratio of type of building permits is: For every 100 permits there are 97 permits for single family and 3 permits for multiple family. 5. Weighted average of persons per dwelling unit: 97 SFR X 3.01 persons per unit = 291.97 3 MFR X 2.77 persons-per unit = 8.31 (291.97 + 8.31)+ 100' = 3.00 weighted average persons per unit (pp/du). 6. Calculate the fee using the weighted average persons per unit: . 3.00 pp/du X $424.47 (cost/person to'develop park) = $1,273.41 per unit G:\GROUPDAT~Georgina~Park Development Fees~3df wksht 8/13/2003 MEETING DATE: August 27, 2003 I AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar J I ITEM: ~, V'V. I TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: Donna L. Kunz, Economic Development Director DEPARTMENT HEAD ~ DATE: August 19, 2003 CITY ATTORNEY ~ CITY MANAGER ~ SUBJECT: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Economic Development Loan Policy RECOMMENDATION: Budget and Finance Recommends Approval BACKGROUND: Currently we have a loan policy in place that requires all of our CDBG Economic Development loans be repaid. This policy was initially approved by the Budget and Finance Committee and City Council in order to recycle limited economic development resources. However, it should be noted that since the new prevailing wage law has been in effect, the economic value of a business accepting a loan with 100% repayment requirement does not offset the cost of the required prevailing wage compliance requirement in the increased development costs. We believe this has led to the steep decline in interest and utilization of our loan program. Staff reported these issues to the Budget and Finance Committee a few months ago and was asked by the committee to examine ways to make the loan program more attractive to businesses to overcome the. prevailing wage added cost issue. Two Southeast (SE) business assistance requests were recently approved by City Council through a reallocation of SE business loan funds to a public improvements account to provide financial assistance only for the required public improvements associated with their new developments. Providing financial assistance to these businesses in this manner allowed for prevailing wage costs to be applied only to the public works component of the project and did not impact the remaining commercial development costs of the project. In addition, the Budget and Finance Committee at their August 17', 2003 meeting unanimously approved allowing more flexibility to staff in structuring direct loan assistance for projects. The following modifications to the loan policy were discussed and approved by the committee: o:o Assistance requests may not exceed 50% of the total project development costs. (Previously this amount was not to exceed 30 %.) S:~Admins\City Council\Loanpolicyl.doc 8/19/2003 10:18 AM ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT ,Page 2 %% Loans may be structured as forqivable based on achieving certain employment benchmarks each year over the life of the loan and based on the project's expected cash flow. As you can see, there are many creative ways to structUre economic development assistance using an array of grants, forgivable loans and Iow cost loans. Each project will be carefully analyzed for its relevant merit and financially structured to meet the required gap that keeps it from being attainable if done privately. Several of our staff members have been trained and certified by various national economic development councils to analyze and structure economic development assistance packages and have many years experience in dOing so. Staff will include a summary of the deal points for the committee's consideration in all' CDBG financial assistance request packages. This same information is provided to the Redevelopment Agency and City Council for their consideration. Staff.would encourage the City Council to allow deal flexibility on a case by case basis. S:~Admins\City Council~Loanpolicyl .doc 8/19/200310:18 AM ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT MEETING DATE: August 27, 2003 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM: ~. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APP~ED /~,, FROM: Raul M. Rojas, Public Works Director DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: July 25, 2003 CITY ATTORNEY ~--~ CITY MANAGER ~(~_~ SUBJECT: 'Acceptance of 2002-03 Transportation Development Act Funds Financial Statement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends acceptance of audit report. BACKGROUND: The above audit report was referred to the Budget and Finance Committee for review and recommendation. The Committee accepted the audit report at the July 21, 2003 meeting. The financial statement summarizes fiscal activity for the Streets and Roads Fund, the Bikeway and Pedestrian Fund, and the Public Transit Fund. The accuracy and fairness of the presentation is the responsibility of the City. The audit firm of Macias, Gini & Company has issued an unqualified opinion. No other reports were issued by the accounting firm in regards to the above audit report. July 28, 2003, 11:09AM G:\GROUPDA'r~ADMINRFT~003\08-27~TDA Funds Financial Statements.doc MEETING DATE: August 27, 2003 I AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar 1 I ITEM: ~, rYt lq3. I TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: Donna L. Kunz, Economic Development Director DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: August 19, 2003 CITY ATTORNEY CITY MANAGER SUBJECT: Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 02-34l with Kern Economic Development Corporation for an amount not to exceed $54,000 for economic development in Kern County. (VVards A~) RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval~ BACKGROUND: The agreement with Kern Economic DevelOpment Corporation expired June 30, 2003. This amendment would extend that agreement to June 30, 2004, as well as make it retroactive to July 1, 2003. Payment to Kern EDC has been two-phased: First, there is an annual contribution which was $20,000 during the past fiscal year. Second, there is an incentive contribution which Kern EDC can earn should it be directly responsible for creating new jobs within the City of Bakersfield. During the past fiscal year, the potential incentive amount was $50,000. No incentive payments were earned by Kern EDC during the past fiscal year. Due to the State of California's budgetary uncertainty, Kern EDC, like other outside organizations that receive City funding, have been asked to take a reduction in contributions. This amendment lowers the $20,000 annual payment to $18,000 and reduces the potential incentive amount from $50,000 to $36,000. The amendment also changes how the annual payment is made. Rather than making the annual payment in one lump sum, the amendment would change the payment to periodic payments. The first payment would be $2,000 payable by October 1. Beginning November 1, monthly payments of $2,000 would be made. Should the State's budget situation worsen, this system of periodic payments would allow the agreement to be terminated and any commitment for future payment to be negated. S:~Admins\City Council\KEDC.doc 8/19/2003 3:25 PM AGREEMENT NO. 02-341(1) AMENDMENT NO: 1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 02-341 FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT IN KERN COUNTY THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO AGREEMENT NO. 02-341 is entered into on by and between the CITY OF BAKERSFIELD, a California charter city and municipal corporation ("CITY" herein) and the KERN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION, a California non-profit, mutual benefit corporation ("CORPORATION" herein). RECITALs WHEREAS, on November 20, 2002, CITY and CORPORATION entered into Agreement No. 02-341 ("the Agreement"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to the Agreement, CORPORATION wOuld attempt to seek out and locate new business in Kern County and CITY would contribute funding to help CORPORATION do so; and WHEREAS, the Agreement expired July 1, 2003 and the parties desire to extend the Agreement until July 1., 2004; and WHEREAS, the State of California's budgetary uncertainty has forced CITY to reduce all .contributions by a minimum of ten percent (10%); and WHEREAS, if the State's budget situation worsens, CITY. may be forced to terminate this Agreement and forego all contributions hereunder. NOW, THEREFORE, incorporating the foregoing recitals herein, CITY and CORPORATION mutually agree as follows: 1. Paragraph 2.1 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "2.1 CITY shall Provide CORPORATION EIGHTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($18,000.00) annually, payable in monthly installments. On or before October 1, 2003, CITY shall deposit TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($21000.00) with CORPORATION and on the first day of each mOnth thereafter, CITY shall deposit-the sum of TWO THOUSAND DOLLARS ($2,000.00) with CORPORATION, with the last payment being made on June 1; 2004." -- Page 1 of 3 Pages -- S:~Agreement\kedc2005.doc Created on 711812003 1:48 PM 2. ParagraPh 2.2 of the Agreement is hereby amended to read as follows: "2.2 CORPORATI°N shall receive an incentive· payment based uPon the creation of new jobs in the' city of Bakersfield. For each fifty (50) jobs~ created in each of the first two (2) years of new employers existence in 'or location to the City of Bakersfield, CITY shall pay CORPORATION FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000.00). Such incentive shall be earned by one new employer creating fifty (50) jobs or several neW employers creating a total of fifty (50) jobs cumulatively in the requisite amount of time. There is no pro-rata calculation of the incentive bonus. Thus, if one employer creates 75 jobs, CORPORATION will only receive FIVE THOUSAND DOLLARS ($5,000.00)(for the 50 jobs, no extra bonus for any amount of jobs over 50). CITY shall pay no more than THIRTY-SIX 'THOUSAND DOLLARS ($36,000.00) in incentives in any fiscal year." 3. Paragraph 3.1 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: "3.1 This Agreement shall remain in full force and effect for one year effective July 1; 2003, unless otherwise modified or terminated as provided herein." Paragraph 3.3 of the Agreement is amended to read as follows: "3.3 This' Agreerrient may be terminated by either party on thirty (30) days' written notice to the other party. Such notice shall be provided herein. CORPORATION acknowledges that, in the event that the State of California's budgetary situation worsens and CITY's General Fund is impacted, CITY may be forced to terminate this Agreement prior to any funding being forwarded to CORPORATION. In that event, CITY shall not be liable to CORPORATION for any damage sUffered by CORPORATION as a result of such termination." IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment No. 1 to Agreement No. 02-341 to be executed, the day and year first-above written. "CITY .... CORPORATION" CITY OF BAKERSFIELD KERN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION Mayor. President ' MORE SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE S:~Agreement\kedc2005.doc Created on 7/18/2003 1:48 PM "'APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: APPROVED AS TO FORM.: ECONOMIC AND COMMUNITY BART J. THILTGEN DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT City Attorney . By~ By: JANICE SCANLAN Economic Development Dir. Deputy City Attorney COUNTERSIGNED: By: GREGORY J. KLIMKO Finance Director S:~Agreement\kedc2005;doc S:~Agreement\kedc2OOS.doc Created on 7/18/2003 1:48 PM ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT I MEETING DATE: August 27, 2003 AGENDA SECTION: Consent Calendar ITEM: ~, V'V. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: D°nna Kurtz, Economic Development Director DEPARTMENT HEAD ~ L. v DATE: August 19, 2003 CITY ATTORNEY ~ CITY MANAGER ~'~ SUBJECT: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Economic Development Loan Policy RECOMMENDATION: Budget and Finance Recommends Approval BACKGROUND: Currently we have a loan policy in place that requires all of our CDBG Economic Development loans be repaid. This policy was initially approved by the Budget and Finance Committee and City Council in order to recycle limited economic development resources. However, it should be noted that since the new prevailing wage law has been in effect, the economic value of a business accepting a loan with 100% repayment requirement does not offset the cost of the required prevailing wage compliance requirement in the increased development costs. We believe this has led to the steep decline in interest and utilization of our loan program. Staff reported these issues to the Budget and Finance Committee a few months ago and was asked by the committee .to examine ways to make the loan program more attractive to businesses to overcome the prevailing wage added cost issue. Two Southeast (SE) business assistance requests were recently approved by City Council through a reallocation of SE business loan funds to a public improvements account to provide financial assistance only for the required public improvements associated with their new developments. Providing financial assistance to these businesses in this manner allowed for prevailing wage costs to be applied, only to the public works component of the project and did not impact the remaining commercial development costs of the project. In addition, the Budget and Finance Committee at their August 17, 2003 meeting unanimously approved allowing more flexibility to staff in structuring direct loan assistance for projects. The following modifications to the loan policy were discussed and approved by the committee: o:o Assistance requests may not exceed 50% of the total project development costs. (Previously this amount was not to exceed 30 %.) S:~Admins\City Council\Loanpolicyl .doc 8119/2003 10:18 AM 'ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 2 o:o Loans may be structured as forqivable based on achieving certain employment benchmarks each year over the life of the loan and based on the project's expected cash flow. As you can see, there are many creative ways to structure economic development assistance using an array of grants, forgivable loans and Iow cost loans. Each project will be carefully analyzed for its relevant merit and financially structured to meet the required gap that keeps it from being attainable if done privately. Several of our staff members have been trained and certified by various national economic development councils to analyze and structure economic development assistance packages and have many years experience in doing so. Staff will include a summary of the deal points for the committee's consideration in all CDBG financial assistance request packages. This same information is provided to the Redevelopment Agency and City Council for their consideration. Staff.would encourage the City Council to allow deal flexibility on a case by case basis. S:~Admins\City Council~Loanpolicyl .doc 8/19/200310:18 AM B A K E R S F I E L D CITY OF BAKERSFIELD MEMORANDUM TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Raul Rojas, Public Works Director DATE: August 15, 2003 SUBJECT: Park Development Fees On August 14, 2003, City, Building Industry Association (BIA), and North Bakersfield Recreation and Parks District (NBRPD) staff met for the third time on the park development fee issue. The following was discussed at this meeting: · City staff discussed specific cost estimate questions raised by the BIA. They had no other issues on the cost estimates. · City staff informed NBRPD that the 2 issues they raised, as summarized on the August 14th memo, remain pending and will be addressed at a later date. They had no problem with this. · Construction costs provided by Castle and Cooke for Windermere, Deer Peak, and Windsor Parks were discussed. This schedule (attached) was not included with the August 14th package since it was received late in the afternoon on August 13th. The construction costs do not include prevailing wages, which the City of Bakersfield is required to pay. A factor of 25% was discussed as the amount to apply to the construction costs to take into account prevailing wages. · All three parks average between 6 to 6.5 acres each. For Windermere Park, the average per acre cost is $173K after the prevailing wages adjustment. This is consistent with the estimated costs used by staff. · The August 14t~ packet (specifically Attachment E of the memo) included information from the BIA regarding construction costs for a park in Deiano. The BIA later said to disregard this information since the park in Delano is not comparable to the park amenities used in staff's cost estimates. · Due to miscommunication between BIA and City staff, no formal proposal was Presented on a park fee credit. Each of the parties thought the other was to prepare the formal proposal for review. The BIA indicated that they are interested in a park fee credit similar to Title 15 (Section 15.80.120) for open space in multi-family projects with four or less units. It is their opinion that the open space requirement for this type of multi-family development (Ordinance No. 4104-attached) should receive credit towards public parks. This is a complex issue with significant impact on our park system and additional review time is needed. G:\GROUPDAT~Georgina\Park Development Fees~ark Dev Fee Memo 8-15-03.doc Windermere Park DESIGN / ARC / SURVEY / SOILS / ADMIN. $92,676 ELECTRICAL DEPOSIT $1,021 GRADING $32,050 SEWER $2,782 CURB & GUTTER $12,222 WATER $13,103 JOINT TRENCH $8,460 SIDEWALK/DRIVE APPROACH $95,673 STREETS: LIGHTS $19,158 STREETS: SIGNS $250 WALLS $51,729 FENCES $2,500 ENTRY MONUMENTS $10,922 LANDSCAPING $147,787 CLEAN-UP/MAINTENANCE $30,448 PLAYGROUND / SITE EQUIPMENT $171,299 RESTROOM / TRELLIS AREAS $196,330 FEES $10,747 BOND PREMIUMS $1,350 $900,507 Deer Peak Park $807,438 Windsor Park $759,786 .-~.80.1~20 Credit for private park and/or recreation facility. Page 1 of 1 T i__t_!e_ I__5_.~_UJ L__D Chapter 15.80 DEDICATION OF LAND, _P_ A~YM~E_N_'I' _O_F_Egg_S_, OR BOTH FOR THE PURPOSES OF p~AR__K._S_AN D R _E _C_R EA_ T_I ~__N___L_A N__~ 15.80.120 Credit for private park and/or recreation facility. A. The advisory agency shall determine whether credit for park and/or recreation facilities constructed by the developer may be given. Except for the provisions of Section 15.80.120B, the following credit may be allowed providing the criteria stated in paragraph 3 of this subsection are met: 1. No more than seven-tenths of one acre per one thousand population credit may be given for private park and/or recreation facilities within a subdivision or development. 2. No more than one and one-half acre per one thousand population credit may be given for park and/or recreation facilities located within lands encumbered with electrical transmission line easements of a residential subdivision. 3. The following criteria must be met to obtain credit as stated in paragraphs 1 and 2 above. a. Yard, court areas, setbacks and other open areas required by the zoning and building ordinances and regulations shall not be included in the computation of such credit; b. The ownership and maintenance of open space is adequately provided for by recorded written agreement, covenants or restrictions, approved by the city attorney; c. The use of the open space is restricted and preserved for park and recreational purposes by recorded covenants, easement or other instrument approved by the city attorney, which run with the land in favor of future owners of property within the tract and which cannot be defeated or eliminated without the consent of the city council. d. The proposed open space is reasonably adaptable for use for park and recreational purposes taking into consideration such factors as size, shape, topography, geology, access, and location of the open space; e. The facilities proposed are: (1) In substantial accordance with the provisions of the Parks Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan, or adopted community or specific plans; (2) Are appropriate to the recreational needs of future residents of the development; (3) Substantially comparable to the park and recreation lands otherwise required to be dedicated in meeting the recreation needs of the residents; f. Park and/or recreation facilities for private use shall be maintained by the private property owners. B. The advisory agency shall determine whether one hundred percent credit may be given. Credit for the full amount of park land dedication and/or in-lieu fee shall be based on the subdivider developing and constructing a public park in accordance to city standards, including the facilities specified in the Parks Element of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Prior to recordation of any final map, the subdivider shall enter into an agreement with the city which includes, but is not limited to, the subdivider's responsibilities, date to complete construction of the park, concept design with proposed facilities, bonding requirements as deemed necessary by the city engineer and/or parks superintendent, and transfer of real property title of the park to the city. (Ord. 3818 § 1,1998: Ord. 3646 § 1 (part), 1995: Ord. 3317 § 1 (part), 1990) http://bpc.iserver, net/codes/bakersfld/_DATA/TITLE15/Chapter 15 80 DEDICATION_OF_LAND_II5 .... 8/14/2003 ORDINANCE 4 I 0 4 AN ORDINANCE ADDING AND AMENDING SECTIONS OF TITLE 17 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING, OPEN SPACE, LANDSCAPING, AND ONSITE PARK LIKE AMENITIES FOR MULTIPLE-FAMILY PROJECTS WITH FOUR OR LESS UNITS. WHEREAS, the City Council, through the City Clerk, did set, WEDNESDAY, December 11, 2002 at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before said City Council on said ordinance, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title Seventeen of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the ordinance was found to be exempt from the provisions of CEQA and the law and regulations as set forth in CEQA and City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures, have been duly followed by city staff and the Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, the City Council referred to the Planning Commission for review and recommendation the matter of design, location, and amenities for multi-family dwellings with four units or less: and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, through its Secretary, did set, MONDAY, July 29, 2002 and, THURSDAY, August 1,2002 at the hour of 5:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before said Planning Commission on said ordinance, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provicled in Title Seventeen of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, said hearing was continued and the draft ordinance was referred to committee for review; and WHEREAS, the draft ordinance and committee recommendations were conSidered in hearing on November 21, 2002, WHEREAS, at said public hearing, the amendments were duly heard and considered and the Planning Commission recommended their adoption by the City Council, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT HEREBY ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: 1. That the text additions and amendments to Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code are hereby approved as follows: SECTION 1 Section 17.14.026 (E) is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.14.026 Additional requirements E. For multiple-family dwellings with four units or less, the living room, main entrance and windows for the street-facing end unit and side units must face the street and public sidewalk. For all units, utility and other mechanical equipment shall not be visible from the street, and architectural elevations for adjacent buildings shall be significantly different (i.e.: different elevation, roof types, colors, or other structural elements.) This requirement shall not apply to any lot less than 10,000 square feet and, that is not part of, or adjacent to multi-family subdivisions or other multifamily projects that existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance. Duplexes and triplexes shall comply with these requirements regardless of lot size, location or adjacent development. Refuse containers shall not be located within the front yard, and if visible from the street' shall be located within a masonry enclosure with metal gates. SECTION 2 Subsection (F) is hereby added to section 17.14.026 to read as follows: 17.14.026 Additional requirements F. Each multi-family development shall provide and maintain a minimum of twenty (20) percent of the gross area of the site as open space. This shall include 200 square feet of contiguous landscape space per lot, not less than twenty feet (20') in width or depth at any point. Open space shall not be deemed to include buildings, driveways, parking areas, or other surfaces designed or intended for vehicular travel. Required front building setbacks and street frontage setbacks shall not be included in calculating usable open space. This requirement shall not apply to any lot less than 10,000 square feet and, that is not part of, or adjacent to multi-family subdivisions or other multifamily projects that existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 3 Subsection (g) is hereby added to section 17.14.026 to read as follows: 17.14.026 Additional requirements G. A solid masonry wall constructed at a minimum height of 6 feet from highest grade shall be required for multi-family development proposed where the rear or side property line separates a lot zoned R-l, R-2 of a single family character, MH or a PUD project of a single-family character. Any wall located within or along the front yard area shall not exceed a height of 4 feet. This requirement shall 'not apply to any lot less than 10,000 square feet and, that is not part of, or adjacent to multi-family subdivisions or other multifamily projects that existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 4 Section 17.58.110 is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.58.110 Schedule of parking requirements iSpecified Use 'Required Off-Street Parking Facilities ;unit, j'~'~'-'iMultiple-family dwellings and condominium'1-1/2 space per unit, i(efficiency and one bedroom units). (The guestiplus an additional 10% iparking requirement for projects with two to four[for guest parking on !units shall not apply to any lot less than 10,000 parcels conta~ning 6 or isquare feet and, that is not part of, or adjacent to more units. A minimum imulti-family subdivisions or other multifamily of I guest space shaft iprojects that existed prior to the effective date of be provided for each i umt for projects with i this ordinance.) ' ' 'two to four units. For ithese projects tandem space may be oermittedsubject to the approval of the Planning Director. iMultiple-family dwellings and condominiums (2 or 2 spaces per unit, plus imore bedrooms). (The guest parking requirement an additional 10% for ;for projects with two to four units shall not apply to guest parking on iany lot less than 10,000 square feet and, that is parcels containing 6 or !not part of, or adjacent to multi-family subdivisions more units. A i or other multifamily projects that existed prior to minimum of 1 guest i the effective date of this ordinance.) ·space shall be iprovided for each unit ifor projects with two to If our units. For these projects tandem space Imay be permitted Isut)ject to the approval !of the Planning Director. SECTION 5 Section 17.61.030 is hereby added to read as follows: 17.61.030 Minimum landscape standards R. An 8 foot landscape area shall be provided between each building and the drive aisle for multi-family projects using a common drive aisle with shared access. This requirement shall not apply to any lot less than 10,000 square feet and, that is not part of, or adjacent to multi-family subdivisions or other multifamily projects that existed prior to the effective date of this ordinance. SECTION 6 Section 17.14.070 is hereby amended to read as follows: 17.14.070 Minimum lot area. A. For multiple-family dwellings with five units or more per lot the minimum lot area shall be not less than six thousand square feet, and the minimum lot area shall be not less than two thousand five hundred square feet per dwelling unit. When a nonconforming lot has less than six thousand square feet and was recorded in the office of the county recorder at the time of the passage of the ordinance codified in this section, said lot may be occupied by not more than one dwelling unit for each two thousand five hundred square feet. B. For one-family dwellings the minimum lot size may be reduced to four thousand five hundred square feet per dwelling unit in accordance with Section 16.28.170(C)(3). I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance was passed ar~ ~ld,o@te~y the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting thereof held on,,,~r~ .[ a ,:u~,.~ , by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIl_MEMBER CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, COUCH, HANSON, SULLIVAN, SALVAGGIO NOES: COUNClLMEMBER ABSTAIN: COUNClLMEMBER ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER /7/55~*. CITY CLERK and Ex Officib Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield 4 APPROVED JAN 15 Z003 HARVEY L. HALL ~.' MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED as to form: BART THILTGEN City Attorney SG 01/02/2003 S:Stanley\4plex Ordinance AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING DOCUMENT_~S STATE OF CALIFORNIA) ) SS. County of Kern ) PAMELA A. McCARTHY, being duly sworn, deposes and says: That she is the duly appointed, acting and qualified City Clerk of the City .of Bakersfield; and that on the 16th day of January , 2003 she posted on the Bulletin Board at City Hall, a full, true and correct copy of the following: Ordinance No. 4104 , passed by the Bakersfield City Council at a meeting held on the 15th day of January 2003 and entitled: AN ORDINANCE ADDING AND AMENDING SECTIONS OF TITLE 17 OF THE BAKERSFIELD MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO PARKING, OPEN SPACE, LANDSCAPING, AND ONSITE PARK LIKE AMENITIES FOR MULTIPLE-FAMILY PROJECTS WITH FOUR OR LESS UNITS. Isl PAMELA A. McCARTHY City Clerk of the City of Bakersfield By: , ." DEPUTY City C,terk TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: John W. Stinson, Assistant City Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: June 11, 2003 CITY ATrORNEY CITY MANAGER ·. SUBJECT: · Public Hearing for the FY 2003-04 Operating, Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency and Capital Improvement Program Budgets. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends Council hear public testimony. BACKGROUND: Each year a public hearing is required to receive public comment prior to adoption of the budget. The FY 2003-04 Operating Budget is proposed at $324,132,509 which includes a $289,118,128 Operating Budget, a $7,509,781 Bakersfield Redevelopment Agency Budget and a $27,504,600 Capital Improvement Budget. Final adoption of the budget is scheduled for June 25, 2003. Prior to this public hearing, individual department budget presentations were made to the Coundl on May 14, 2003, May 19, 2003, May 28, 2003, June 2, 2003 and June 11,2003. Responses to Coundl budget questions resulting from the budget presentations were forwarded to each Council member. OWH:jp 6/3/2003 7:55 AM S:\03-04Budpro\OpCIPBRABudget Hearings 061103.doc ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council APPROVED FROM: John W. Stinson, Assistant City Manager DEPARTMENT HEAD DATE: June 24, 2003 CITY ATTORNEY CITY MANAGER / SUBJECT: Resolution Adopting Fees Pursuant to the Cost Recovery Program. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends adoption of the Resolution. BACKGROUND: State law requires new fees and charges, as well as increases in existing fees and charges, be adopted by ordinance or resolution following a public hearing. The City's procedure is provided for in Chapter 3.70 Of the Bakersfield Municipal Code. The City's biennial review process includes a thorough review of all fees every two years to check assumptions for labor costs, materials usage, etc. Staff last performed this review and Council adopted the recommended fee changes at the April 30= Council meeting. Due to the state budget crisis and its effects on the City's current and future financial status, staff again reviewed of all fees to move closer to full cost recovery where appropriate. This administrative report represents the Phase II fees which include new proposed fees, or restructured and modified fees which required additional study and have not been increased during the past year. Due to the current fiscal crisis, the Phase II fees for services which do not fully recover costs need to be increased to help avoid further budget cuts and additional reductions in services. The Phase II increases are recommended by staff and are necessary to move closer to recovering 100% of the cost of providing the service. If the Phase II fees are adopted by the City Council, the additional estimated revenue generated will reduce the current subsidy provided by the General Fund to these service centers. The exact amount of additional revenue is dependent upon {he number and types of services utilized by the public and will be evaluated mid-year to determine the impact on General Fund revenues. Fire Safety Review and Inspection fees are proposed to increase to recover the actual costs of management and supervisory administrative salaries not previously captured but directly involved in the service delivery. As a result of the inability of the SPCA and the City of Bakersfield to come to a contractual arrangement relating to animal control services for the City, the City has entered into a contract with the County of Kern to assist in animal care as we transition into animal control. As a facet of this agreement, staff is recommending the City Council adopt the animal control fee schedule currently in existence for Kern County as part of the Proposed Master Fee Schedule for the City of Bakersfield which is included in this administrative report. ADMINISTRATIVE .REPORT · Page 2 The Recreation and Park Department is proposing adjusted and new fees for most of the dePartment fees. Most of the current fees do not reflect increasing maintenance, labor and utility costs of operating the programs. The department is moving toward establiShing self-supporting fees and reducing the burden to the General Fund, where appropriate. The proposed fees are comparable to other recreation and park district fees. Staff is also recommending the establishment of fees for the new McMurtrey Aquatic Center which are also included as part of this proposal and need to be adopted in anticipation of the opening of the facility. Development related fees have been reviewed by the Building Industry Association (BIA), their board and other affected industry groups and they have taken a neutral position on the proposed fee increases. The Development Services Department is requesting a modification to the master fee schedule to apply the General Plan Maintenance fee to the building permitS for new construction and collect as part of the building permit process rather than at Site Plan Review consistent with State law. In addition, staff is proposing some new fees in response to recent legislative changes and' for services whose costs were not captured and currently funded by the General. Fund. Staff is also proposing to charge a Business License Processing Fee for the initial business license and renewal of business licenses to recover the cost involved of processing the license. This nominal processing fee is currently charged by 46 California cities. Business and organizations that are "exempt" from paying the business license tax (non-profit groups and others identified by ordinance) will not be charged this fee. Listed below is a summary of the more noteworthy changes proposed. City staff is recommending the proposed changes to the Master Fee Schedule as presented on Exhibit "A" be adopted by resolution. 2003 Cost Recovery Proqram Update Exhibit "A" Proposed Master Fee Schedule For 2003: The attached schedule is a comprehensive list of all fees authorized under the cost recovery program. Exhibit "B" Proposed Master Fee Schedule For 2003: Proposed Changes Only: The attached schedule is a complete list of services that staff is proposing to increase or modify to recover the actual cost of providing the service. RESTRUCTURED DEVELOPMENT FEES A- INSPECTION FEES & SERVICES A-5 STREET CUT INSPECTION $ 176 - Street Cut Inspection - Per Additional Inspection $ 88 The current street cut inspection fee is $130 and additional inspections are $65. This fee is proposed to increase 35.4% to recover the cost of providing the service. Expenditures have exceeded revenues historically. A-6 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT INSPECTION $176 plus $1.04% of project valuation The current base fee is $120 plus 0.94% of the project valuation. This fee is proposed to increase 46.7% to recover the cost of providing the service. Expenditures have exceeded revenues historically. A-7 STREET ENCROACHMENT INSPECTION $150 The current base fee is $145. This fee is proposed to increase by 3.4% to recover the cost of providing the service. ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 3 B - LAND USE REVIEW I PERMITS B-26 MINOR LAND DIVISION REVIEW - Right of Way Vacation - Base Fee $1,285 - Right of Way Vacation (Non Summary Vacation) $1,285 plus time and materials over the base fee The current fee for right of way vacation is $4101 The amount of work for right of way vacations varies tremendouSly and very few take place in Any one year. Some are very simple and take a minimum of review or oversight; some are very complicated with multiple property owners, convoluted property ownerships, or. multiple utility easements or serious political ramifications. For these reasons, staff is proposing a two-tiered fee structure. The basic fee would be for a "summary Vacation"- the simplest possible process with no dissenting property owners and no complications regarding property ownership, utilities, etc. Any more complicated vacation "Non Summary Vacation" would pay the same base fee plus time and materials to take the process to completion. The Fire Department is proposing to restructure the Fire Safety Review and Inspection Fees to recover the actual cost. In the past, Administrative salaries for the supervisory and management positions with direct involvement in the program were not previously captured and included as part of the cost to provide the service. The new restructured fees propose to capture and include those costs as part of the cost to provide the service. Reinspection fees have been restructured and standardized generally at $75.00 per hour. The Fire Safety and Review Inspection fees have not been increased since calendar year 2001. A- INSPECTION FEES & SERVICES A-10 FIRE SAFETY REVIEW / INSPECTIONS - Safety Inspections - Private Party Insurance Requests $ 75 per hour - Reinspection Fee $ 75 per hour The current fee is $60 per hour. This fee is proposed to increase by 25% recover the cost of providing the service. Liquified Petroleum Gas Installation $134 (Charged Under CUPA Fees - - Reinspection Fee $ 67 Remove From Schedule) This fee isa duplicate fee already charged for the installation inspection of an above ground flammable liquid storage tank as part of the Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Fees on the master fee schedule. Staff is recommending this fee be removed from the master fee schedule - Paint Booths (One time Fee) - New Spray Paint Booths $ 191 - Reinspection Fee $ 75 The current fee is $164 per inspection and $82 per reinspection. The one time fee to inspect new spray paint booths is proposed to increase 16.5% and the reinspection fee is proposed, to decrease 9.3% to recover the cost of providing the service. - Tent Installation (One time Fee) $ 75 - Reinspection Fee $ 75 After Hours Rate $ 89 The current fee is $ 66 per inspection, $ 66 per reinspection, and $92 for inspections provided before or after the normal work hours of 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. The one time fee and reinspection fee is proposed to increase' 13.6% and. the after hours inspection fee is proposed to decrease by 3.3% to recover the cost of providing the service. - High Rise Inspection Fee $ 131 per hour - Reinspection Fee $ 131 per hour - Additional Hours - Fire Inspector $ 35 (Delete - Not applicable) ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 4 - Additional Hours - Fire Captain $ 62 (Delete - Not applicable) The current fee is $111 per hour per inspection and reinspection. The new fee of $131 per hour represents an increase of 18% and is proposed based on two inspectors performing the inspection. This fee is restructured to reflect a per hour charge for two inspectors working together to provide the service. - Sprinkler System Inspection (Commercial) Minimum Fee $ 490-~i~ Reinspection Fee $ 75 per The current sprinkler system inspection fee is $408 and the reinspection fee is $204 per hour. The fee to inspect a sprinkler system is proposed to increase 20.1% and the reinspection fee is proposed to decrease 172% to recover the cost of providing the service. - Sprinkler System Inspection (Additions/Remodels) .- Minimum Fee $ 141 per hoUr - Reinspection Fee $ 75 per hour The current sprinkler system inspection fee is $119 and the reinspection fee is $ 60 per hour. This fee is proposed to recover the cost of providing the service. - Fire Alarm System Component Inspection ~. - Minimum Fee $ 195 per hour - Reinspection Fee $ 75 per hour The current fire alarm system component inspection fee is $165 and the reinspection fee is $ 83 per hour. This fee is proposed to recover the cost of providing the service. Commercial Vent Hood Inspection $ 148 per hour Inspection of Each Additional Vent Hood $ 30 per hour Reinspection Fee $ 75 per hour The current commercial vent hood inspection fee is $124, each additional vent hood inspection is $12, and the reinspection fee is $ 62 per hour. This fee is proposed to recover the cost of providing the service. - Standpipe Inspection - One Standpipe $ 98 per hour - Inspection of Each Additional Standpipe $ 30 per hour - ReinsPection Fee $ 75 per hour The current standpipe inspection fee is $ 82, each additional standpipe inspection is $ 25, and the reinspection fee is $ 41 per hour. This fee is proposed to recover the cost of providing the service. - Explosives Purchase, Sales & Storage Inspection Inspection & Permit Fee (If Material Type Changes) - Fimt Inspection $ 177 per hour - Explosives Storage Permit $ 25 per hour - Reinspection Fee $ 75 per hour The current explosive related inspection is $150, each explosive storage permit inspection is $14, and the reinspection fee is $ 75 per hour. This fee is proposed to recover the cost of providing the service. - Pyrotechnics Inspection New One-time*Fee $$ 50 per event Normal Business Hours New Fee 75 per hour Fimt Inspection - $159 (Delete- Not applicable) Second Inspection - $128 (Delete - Not applicable) Third Inspection - $ 98 (Delete - Not applicable) - After Houm Rate New Fee $ 89 per hour - First Inspection - $216 (Delete- Not applicable) - Second Inspection - $173 (Delete- Not applicable) ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 5 - Third Inspection - $127 (Delete- Not applicable) The Fire Department is proposing to charge an hourly rate versus the current $159 for the first inspection, $128 for the second inspection and $98 for a third. The current after hours rate for the first inspection is $216, $173 for the second inspection and $127 for the third. This fee is proposed to be restructured to accurately recover the cost of providing the service as past experience indicates most inspections typically require several hours to complete. Staff does not believe changing the rate structure will negatively impact revenue received from performing this service. If this request is approved, staff is recommending the current fees be removed form the master cost recovery fee schedule. NEW FEES B - LAND USE REVIEW ! PERMITS B23 FIRE SUPPRESSION - PERMIT PROCESSING AND PLAN REVIEW FEES - Portable LPG Storage/Distribution $ 54 A new one-time fee is proposed to recover the cost for permitting and inspection of liquid propane gas storage tanks. Large stores such as Lowe's, Home Depot and major grocery stores are selling and renting, small propane tanks for home use barbeques. By state codes these applications need to be permitted and inspected to ensure proper storage techniques are used in order to prevent accidents. The proposed fee applies to all commercial facilities that exchange propane bottles empty or full. If the bottles contain 5 gallons or more and there are more than 5 bottles, this one time fee is applied. The proposed fee will enable staff to recover the cost of providing the service. B23 FIRE SUPPRESSION - PERMIT PROCESSING AND PLAN REVIEW FEES - Mail Out Inspection (Self-inspection) $ 25 During routine inspections there are often minor fire code violations found in small businesses and four-plex or larger apartments. These mail-out self-inspection forms will have a checklist of common violations which will enable Iow risk business to complete a self inspection and return the completed checklist with the required fee to the Prevention Services Division. The form is then reviewed by the inspectors and an appointment is scheduled if it is warranted. It is anticipated this process will reduce physical inspections. B-24 SIGN - PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - Sign Permanent- Face Change $ 40 The Building Division is proposing to introduce a new fee to recover the costs of changing the face on an existing permanent sign. These changes occur when the face on an existing sign needs to be changed due to a new logo or there is a change in the tenant or business. Processing a permit for a typical new sign installation requires a plan check to verify that the proposed signage complies with City ordinance. F-99 BROADCAST PRODUCTION FEES Equipment Charges Sound System (included in $300 base facility rental fee) Video Presentation System $ 34 per hour Broadcasting. Equipment $ 100 per hour Staff Charges (actual cost) Tape Duplication (actual cost) The fees are proposed to recover the cost of rental of the video presentation system, broadcasting equipment and staff to operate the equipment in the City Council Chambers. All requests for tape duplication services will include the cost of the tape, in addition to actual city staff charges. F-lO0 BUSINESS LICENSE PROCESSING FEE (Annual Fee) $ 5 - Business License Renewal Fee (Annual' Fee) $ 5 The fees are proposed to recover the annual cost of processing business licenses and business license renewal requests. 46 California cities currently charge these types 'of fees. Previously these costs have not been captured and have been subsidized by the General Fund. Those. business and organizations that are "exempt" from paying ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT Page 6 the business license tax (non-profit groups and others identified bY ordinance) will not be charged a fee for processing their business license. MODIFICATION TO THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE Remove From: B-28 SITE PLAN REVIEW - General Plan. Maintenance- 5 year review & update $ 65 - General Plan Maintenance - 10 year comprehensive rewrite $ 65 Move To: A-1 NEW RESIDENTAIL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION - General Plan Maintenance $ 65 As part of the 2002 legislative session, the Governor signed AB 2936 which allows local governments to recover the cost of preparing and maintaining the General Plan and policies governing the zone changes, subdivision maps and permits processed under these plans. The subject fee is a new fee adopted by the City Council on April 30, 2003 to be collected at Site Plan Review. The legislation which authorized this fee does not allow for the fee to be collected at Site Plan Review, however, the legislation does authorize the fee to be applied to building permits for new construction and collected as part of the build permit process. This modification to the Master Fee Schedule will enable staff to properly apply the feeas the law intended when it goes into effect. ANIMAL REGULATION - 2003 PROPOSED ANIMAL CONTROL COST RECOVERY FEES 'As a result of the inability of the Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals (SPCA) and the City of Bakersfield to come to a contractual arrangement relating to animal control services for the City, the City has agreed to a contract with the County of Kern tO assist in animal care. As part of this agreement the County has requested the City adopt the County's current animal control fee schedule. Adoption of this fee schedule will provide consistent fee schedules between the County and City and will general less confusion among residents that visit the County animal shelter as well* as those local veterinarians who provide licensing assistance in their offices. The County Animal Control Fee Schedule is attached under separate cover as an attachment to this administrative report and has been incorporated, into the City of Bakersfield Proposed Master Fee Schedule Master - PhaSe II for City Service Centers. RECREATION AND PARK DEPARTMENT 2003- PROPOSED COST RECOVERY FEF_-~ A memorandum and a detailed summary of the proposed fee increases and modifications to the master fee schedule are provided for your review under a separate cover as an attachment to this administrative report. Recreation/Cultural fees are proposed to increase September 1,2003. Development. Services fees require a sixty (60) day waiting period and shall become effective on September 10, 2003. All other fees including animal control fees become effective beginning July 10, 2003. RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION ADOPTING FEES PURSUANT TO *THE COST RECOVERY SYSTEM. .WHEREAS, state law requires new fees and charges and ~ncreases in existing fees and charges be adopted by ordinance or resolution following a public hearing on. said fees and charges; and. WHEREAS, Chapter 3.70 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code authorizes the establishment and increase of fees under the cost recovery system; and WHEREAS, a public hearing before the City CounCil was advertised twice in the Bakersfield Californian, a newspaper of general circulation, and held on July 9, 2003; and WHEREAS, adoption of new and increased fees and charges, pursuant to Chapter 3.70 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code, is necessary for the City to recover the reasonable estimated cost of providing the services for which the fees are charged; and WHEREAS, the fees and charges set forth in Exhibit "A" including animal control fees attached hereto and incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein, do not exceed the reasonable estimated cost of providing the services for which the fees are .charged. ~ · - NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Bakersfield as follows: 1 The above recitals and findings are true and correct. 2 The fees set forth in Exhibit "A," the Master Fee Schedule, inclUding animal control fees are hereby, adopted. Recreation/Cultural fees shall become effective September 1., 2003. Development Services fees require a sixty (60) day ~waiting period, and shall become effective on September 10, 2003. All other fees including animal control fees shall become effective on July 10, 2003. .............. 000 .............. I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was passed and adopted by the Council of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting' thereof held on · . by the following vote: · AYES: COUNClLMEMBER CARSON, BENHAM, MAGGARD, COUCH, HANSON SULLIVAN, sALVAGGiO · NOES: - COUNCIl_MEMBER. ABSTAIN: -.. COUNCILMEMBER ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER CITY CLERK and Ex Officio Clerk of the Council of the City of Bakersfield -' :~'-._ ~- ' APPROVED HARVEY L. HALL MAYOR of the City of Bakersfield APPROVED as to form: BART THiLTGEN CITY ATTORNEY DWH:jp S:\damellresolutionpg2 July 9, 2003 B A K E R S F I E L D OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM June 30, 2003 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager Trudy Slater, Administrative Analyst II! ~ FROM: SUBJECT: Animal Control Cost Recovery Fees As a result of the inability of the SPCA and the City of Bakersfield to come to a contractual arrangement relating to animal control services for the City, the City has agreed to enter into a contract with the County of Kern to assist in animal care as we transition into animal control. As a facet of this agreement, the County has asked the City to accept the County's current animal control fee schedule to ease in the transition. _ The County's fee schedule was recently updated and adopted to reflect current County cost recoveries. As the City's fees have not had a thorough review in quite some time and as the County has recently made 'this assessment, we propose accepting the County's assessment based on their experience. This will provide consistent fee schedules between County and City and will generate less confusion among residents who visit the County animal shelter as well as those local veterinarians who provide licensing assistance in their offices. The County Animal Control Fee Schedule is attached. P:V~%M0306301-Animal Control Cost Recovery Fees . ORDINANCE NO. ~ · . AN UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE OF THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF KERN, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING LICENSE AND PERMIT FEES RELATED TO ANIMAL CONTROLSERVICES The following orcl. inance, consisting of three (3) sections, was duly and regularly passed and adopted by the Board of Supervisors of the County of Kern, State of California, at a regular meeting of the Board of Sul~ervisors held on the 3rd' day of December ,2002, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: McQuiston, perez, Patrick', Watson NOES: None ABSENT: Parra ~'"' ' \" .....; ..... - ..~.. · ,, ,~,~.,~,. !.;~,,.. ~ '"' ¢.~,.,_.,.,.."~;:':' ~i~.'-.~ '-,:~{, . Chairman of the Board of S rs of ' ~ ~"'~:~t~'~* ' I" ~ ' ' . ATTES °"~~S S PENNELL .. Clerk of the Board of Supervisors- By "" ' ,[~,,¢... ,~'~/ , Deputy Clerk TUE BOARD OF SUP :RWSORS OFTHE COUNTY OF. <ERN'ORDAINS'AS FoLLows: Section 1. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on 'and after .. the .... 2nd day of January ,2003, and sh'all be.published once in Bake.~sfie:l.a Ca].±£orn£an a-newspaper 6f general circulation, published in t~"~ ·. County of Kern, State of Calif(~'rnia, together With the names of the members of the Board of.SUPervisors voting for and against ~e same. ..- t Book NQ, Ord. No. G-6943 Section 2.. Ordinance G-6241 is hereby repealed effectiVe December 31, 2002. · Section 3. A new. Uncodified Ordinance is hereby added to ithe Kern County Ordinance Code t(~' read as f0.11ows, effective JanUary 1, 2003: · License and permit fee~i " Delinquent Penalty , ,. $ 10,00' Duplicate License $ 5,00 · Service Dog - ·., No Fee -. Dangerous Animal (per year in addition to fee below) $120,00 Non-Compliance. $ 20,00 Natural Dog .. One year option $ 60,00 Two year option $120,00 : Three year· option $150,00 I .. Altered Dog · One year option · · .. ' ' $ 15,00 .. ... .... One year option/senior, citizen discount · $ 5,00 · .' ..., Two year option ' :- $ 25,00 ' . ...:'.'..".' .".. ; Two year Option/senior citizen discount '"" '. $ 10.00 " Three year option $ 30,00 .... · .. Three year option/senior citizen discount :. $ 15.00 ... Kennel . .. ~. ' -. Administrative Fee ? Kennel: per year for over 20 dogs $100.00 "" "?:"" "' ' ' Kennel: per year for 11 t.o 20 dogs $ 75.00 ".. ' ..- . Kennel: per year 1-10 dogs $, .50.00 Cats Owner I.D tag (opti;3nal): per cat per year $ 6.00 Duplicate license tag' ~ · $ 5.00 wild' Or Exotic Animals - Administrative fee .- One (1) or more animals per year $150.00 Inspections to Ensure Compliance · Compliance Inspection Fee $40.00/hour · .. (per officer, per hour after initial !nspection(s))" .. Charges for Care and Feeding: Animals: up to '100 lbs., per day per animal $ 15.00 · . Animals: over 100 lbs., per day per animal $ 25.00 ImPOund· Fees: · Dogs.· Licensed .". unaltered first impoundment $ 25.00 .. Altered, first impoundment $ 15.00 · ::......~:, =!. (subsequent ~mpoundments are charged · :- Same rate as unlicensed dogs). ..... "-First impoundment · Second impoundment $ 80.00 '~. ': · Third and subsequent impoundments " ·Female Dog in season per dog ' · --- in addition to care and feeding and imPound fees 'a~id fines $ 20;00. Small animals (under 25 lbs. except dogs) First impoundment .. $ 15~00 Second impoundment . $ 50.00 Third and subsequent impoundments .$ 75.00 Large animals (over 25 lbs. except dogs) Fimt impoundmen[ .$ 50,00. .. Second impoundment :' $150.00. Third and subsequent impoundments ' ' $300,00 Dangerous animals First .impoundment $100.00 · SecOnd impoundment $200.00 ... . Third and subsequent impoundments $400.00 ' .~" "ImPound Fines for Unaltered.(~ats &' Dogs~'~ ~~/ First Occurrence ' '$ 35.00 ,! i' Second Occurrence $ 50.00 ; ~ Third and SubseqtJent Occurrences $100.00 ...!"' Redemption and Adoption Services Charges: !'~-' : '- Vaccinations, dog or cat, each Actual Cost i"... ' ~ Flea & tick dip, each animal .. $ 5.00 ." ' Feline Leukemia Test : i.. · · ............. Actual Cost .. : -... Adopl~ion Fees: - Adoption Spay/Neuter Vaccination · TOTAL. · - . Fee Fee** · ! Female Cat $5.00 $25.00 $10.00 $40.00 , :~..:' .. 'Male Cat . $5.00 $15.00 $10.00 $30.00 . ." Dog $10,00 $40.00 . $10.00 $60;00 '"~. '" ** fee includes core vaccinations for dogs and cats i"!?' :i:'. ~' Adoption fees' for other Animals to be Determined ~i' ~' ..."' by the Director of Environmental Health Services Variable Response t~o Loose, Injured or Dead Animals: ' Response to loose, in. jumd or dead. animals $40.00/hour/ . per officer EIJthanasia and Disposal of Cats and Dogs at Owner's RequeSt: · .~ Delivered to the Sheiter~ per animal · . . No Charge . Picked.up by Animal Control, per animal $ 40.00 BAKERSFIELD OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER MEMORANDUM June 24, 2003 TO: Alan Tandy, City Manager FROM: Darnell Haynes, Assistant to the City Manager ~,~ SUBJECT: 'RECREATION AND PARKS DEPARTMENT 2003 - PROPOSED COST RECOVERY FEES The Recreation and Parks Department has submitted adjusted and new cost recovery fees for many of the departmental fees. The department is moving toward establishing self-supporting fees and reducing the burden to the General Fund where appropriate. Many of the park facility and room rental fees have not been increased in several years. The proposed park facility and room rental rates have been adjusted for convenience and simplicity for citizens and to more accurately reflect costs. In almost all cases the fees are proposed to increase due to increases in personnel, and operating costs. Also, some services are proposed to be deleted as they are no longer applicable or appropriate. New fees have been developed and are proposed for the McMurtrey Aquatic Center. All aquatic programs, recreational swimming and activities have been reevaluated in light of the budget situation and increases are being requested in many programs and activities where it makes sense. For example, the Silver Creek after-school program has been free of charge for three years. Staff is recommending this high-demand program be offered at a fee that covers the cost. Many participants' parents have expressed an interest in keeping the program by paying the fee. The program runs Monday through Friday for 2.5 hours in the afternoon. Each year the pools are subsidized in the range of $50,000 to $80,000. The proposed fees recommended reflect increased operating, maintenance and personnel costs. The City Youth Program and Activities fees have been restructured to move those activities toward establishing self-supporting fees. For example, the Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Camp is currently provided free. The new fee is proposed to be $35 for city residents for the seven week program. The program costs approximately $40,000 annually to operate. The proposed fee of $1 per day for a five and one half hour day for a seven week program is projected to recover 9% of the cost of providing the program. Recreation/Cultural fees are proposed to increase September 1, 2003. The. specific details of the Recreation and Parks Department 2003 Cost Recovery proposed fees are attached. S :\03 -04BudproW.003costreco veryrecandparks.doc B A K E R S F' I E L D Department of Recreation and parks Date: June 20, 2003 To: Alan Tandy, City Manager From: Stan Ford, Director Subject: 2003 COST RECOVERY PROPOSED FEES The Department of Recreation and Parks is submitting adjusted and new cost reCovery fees for many of the departmental fees. The department is moving toward establishing self-supporting fees and Teducing the burden, to the General Fund, where appropriate. For nearly all fees, personnel and operating costs have increased. In addition, we have established fees for the McMurtrey Aquatic Center. Attached are the cost recovery worksheets. The following is a summary of proposed new fees, increases, and justifications: Park Facility Rental Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center (Resident) Fee Cost Resident , ,, /Resident/ Recover~ /New/ E-82 Centennial Plaza - Facility $28 $40 100% $50 Fee has not increased Rental since it was established in 1999. Includes increases in personnel/maintenance 'costs. 2003 ' April 8, ~)003 Page 2 of 12 Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center ' (Resident) Fee Cost Resident (Resident) Recove~ (New) E-82 Park Area Rental - One $32 $40 100% $50 Fee has not increased Area with Alcohol Permit; 4- ($28 - park) since 1998. The fee hour block ($41- alcohol) combines area rental and (change the words "Facility" , . I the alcohol permit. to "Area") Potentially this allows us to schedule more than one Each Additional Hour n/a $10 (new) 100% $12 user group per day. NBRPD rents in 4-hour blocks, E-82 Park Area Rental - Each $18 $20 100% $25 Fee has not increased AdditionalArea- since 1997. Includes (change the words "Facility" increa{;es in personnel/ to "Area") maintenance costs. Each Additional Hour n/a $5 (new) 100% $6 E-82 Alcohol Permit with Facility $4 Delete .... Proposed to be combined Reservation with park area reservation (see explanation below). E-82 Alcohol Permit without $8 $10 100% $12 Fee has not increased Facility Reservation since it was established in 1993. Includes increases in personnel/administrative costs. 'E-82 Sports Field Rental $28 $48 100% $60 Fee has not increased since 1998. Includes increases in personnel/ maintenance costs. E-82 Open to the Public- Special $60 $100 100% $125 Fee has not increased Event Fee (minimum) (minimum) since 1997. Based on the size of the event, additional charges will be incurred based on actual costs. 2003 Fees April 8, 2003 Page 3 of 12 The proposed Park Facility Rental Fee includes the alcohol permit fee to streamline the process. Approximately 65-75% of the park facility reservations include an alcohol permit. In addition, the facility rental will be for a 4-hour block of time with a charge for each additional hour. Currently, a facility rental can be from 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. for the same fee for just a few hours of usage. This excludes use of the facility by other citizens. A four-hour block allows for a reasonable amount of time for an event and allows others to use the park. If the citizen wants to use the park for longer then they have to pay the additional hourly amount. The North Bakersfield Recreation and Parks District rents facilities in 4-hour blocks and .charges for each additional hour. Open to the Public - Special Event Reservation Fee. We are proposing to establish a fee range ($100-$500) depending on the size of the event. A tremendous amount of staff time goes into special events. For example, recently Jim Burke Ford and KGET Channel 17 held large events at Beach and Yokuts parks. Special event preparation includes meeting with and following-up with the vendor to determine special event needs, marking sprinklers, preparing bathroom, etc. After the event activities such as cleaning-up, assessing 'any damage, making repairs, etc. are needed. Large events like these do not allow others to use the park as well..Each event is different and requires varying amounts .of staff time. The fee range allows for determining appropriate charges for special events. Recreation Center Rental Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Fee Proposed Cost Comments Center (Non-profit/ (Non-profit/ Recovery Other) Other) (Non-profit/ Otherl E-83 MLK -Room Rental $10-$20/ $20~530 5%~7% Fees have not increased since they $25-$55 were established in 1993. Since all E-83 MLK - Strong Room $10/$25 Delete .- rooms are approximately the same E-83 MLK - Green Room 510/$25 Delete ._ size, one fee is proposed for all rooms E-83 MLK - Strong/Green · 515/$40 Delete __ instead of separate fees. Fee includes increases in Room E-83 MLK - Young Room $12/$30 Delete .. personnel/maintenance costs. E-83 MLK - Brown Room $15/$40 Delete -- E-83 MLK - Young/Brown $20/$55 Delete -- Room 2003 April 8, 2003 Page 4 of 12 Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Fee Proposed Cost Comments Center (Non-profit/ (Non-profit/ Recovery Other) Other) (Non-profit/ Other/ E-83 Williams GYM $15/$25 $40/$60 10%/15% Fee has not increased since it was E-83 Williams GYM (wi $201530 Delete -- established in 1993. Proposed fee bleachers) includes use of the bleachers. A separate fee for bleachers is not needed. E-83 MLK- Conference Room $3~55 Delete -- This room is not rentable because it is part of an office. E-83 Silver Creek - Each $12-$20/ $35/$50 70%/100% Fees have not increased since they Room $30-$45 were established in 1993. Since all E-83 Silver Creek - Meeting $12/$30 Delete -- rooms are approximately the same RoOm A size, one fee is proposed for all rooms E-83 Silver Creek -Meeting $12/530 Delete -- instead of separate fees. Fee Room B includes increases in E-83 Silver Creek - Meeting $20/$45 Delete ._ personnel/maintenance costs. Room A & B E-83 Silver Creek - Covered $8/$12 $30/$45 67%/100% Fee has not increased since it was Pavilion established in 1993. No separate fee E-83 Silver Creek - Covered $12/515 Delete -- for lighting needed. Fee includes Pavilion w/Lighting increases in personnel/maintenance costs. E-83 Silver Creek - Kitchen $8/$12 Delete -- A room rental is required with the (without meeting room kitchen rental. rental) E-83 Silver Creek - Kitchen $4~55 $8/512 67%/100% Fee reflects cost to operate such items as refrigerator, microwave, etc. E-83 Table & Chair Set-up Fee New $36 100% The department has received a - Non-Profit/Other Use number of requests for this service. Fee reflects cost for table and chair set-up of special events. 2003 Fees April 8, 2003 Page 5 of 12 Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Fee Proposed Cost Comments Center (Non-profit/ (Non-profit/ Recovery Other) Other) (Non-profit/ Other) . E-83 ' Private Use - Silver Creek $10 $50 48% In 2002, this fee was approved for an - Surcharge After 10 PM increase but inadvertently left off the - Charge per hour Fee Schedule. This corrects the Fee (change "Private" to schedule. "Other") The room rental rates have been adjusted for convenience and simplicity for citizens and more accurately reflect costs. For all room rentals', Category B on the Fee Schedule should be changed from "Private Use" to "Other." City Adult Programs and Activities Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Comments Center Action E-84 Drop-ins Ath'letic Program $2 Delete The program is no longer offered. (MLK) - Event'Day - Registration City Youth Program and Activities Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center Fee Cost Resident Recover}/ /New) E-85 Youth Flag Football - $50 Delete -- - There are no separate charges for Charge per Player with players with coaches. Coaches E-85 Youth Flag Football - $25 No .... Title Change Only (delete the words Change "Charge Per Player without Coaches") 2OO3 April 8, 2003 Page 6 of 12 Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center Fee Cost Resident Recover)/ (New) E-85 Youth Softball - Charge $40 Delete .... There are no separate charges fo! per Player with Coaches players with coaches. E-85 Youth Softball - (delete $20 No .... Title Change Only the words "Charge Per Change Player without Coaches") E-85 Youth Basketball- $55 Delete .... There are no separate charges foi Charge per Player with players with coaches. Coaches I E-85 Youth Basketball- $30 $40 19% $50 Fee has not increased since (delete the words 1996. Includes increases in "Charge per Player personnel/operating costs. without Coaches") E-85 MLK Youth Day Camp - Free $35 9% $45 This equates to $1 per day for a 7 week program 5.5 hours/day, 7-week program. E-85 Youth Day Camp - Per $88 $110 100% $140 Fee has not increased since Week (delete the words 2000. Currently, we are "5 Day Summer recovering 60% of costs. Program") Proposed fee reflects full cost recovery and includes increases in personnel/operating costs. This program is offered at Silver Creek Center. E-85 Youth Day Camp - 10 $170 Delete .... No need for a separate charge fo{' Day Summer Program a 10-day Youth Day Camp; it would be the same rate each week. E-85 ' Youth Talent Contest $3 Delete .... These programs are no longer E-85 Youth Dance Program $3 Delete .... offered. E-85 Children's Carnivals $3 Delete .... 2003 Fees April 8, 2003 Page 7 of 12 Svc Description Existing Fee Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center Fee Cost 'Resident Recove~ /New/ E-85 Youth Tee Ball $20' $30 43% $40 Fee has not increased since it was established in 1998. Includes increases in personnel/operating costs. E-85 Special Event Fee $1 $2 5% $2 Fee has not increased since it was established in 2000. Includes increases in personnel/operating costs. E-85 Party Mobile New $80 100% $100 New program provides a service to the community and utilizes mobile recreation units during non-operational times to assist in recovering Mobile Recreation program .expenses. E-85 Silver Creek After School Free $12/week 100% $15 Fee increased to recover costs. Program Youth Basketball, Youth Day Camp (Silver Creek), Youth Tee Ball, Special Event Fee - The proposed fee reflects increased personnel, maintenance, and operating costs. Martin Luther King, Jr. Day Camp - Currently, the Camp King Program is provided free. This program costs approximately $40,000 each year. The proposed fee will offset a portion (9%) of the cost to operate the 5 days per week, 7-week program. Party Mobile - The department is proposing a new program called "Party Mobile." Party Mobile is designed to offer another option to parents planning special celebrations for their children. This program provides a party package for children 3 years and older, accommodating up to 15 participants. Parties may be scheduled on Saturdays from May through October to be held in a city park. Given the budget environment, this program would provide funds to assist in offsetting a portion of the cost to provide the Mobile Recreation Program and provide a Iow-cost service to citizens. 2003 April 8, 2-003 Page 8 of 12 Silver Creek After-School Program. The Silver Creek After-School Program has been free of charge for three years. The proposal is to offer this high-demand program at a fee that covers the cost. Many participants' parents have expressed an interest in keeping the program by paying the fee. The program runs Monday through Friday for 2.5 hours in the afternoon. Aquatic Pro.qrams- Recreational Swimmin_cl Svc Description Existing Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center Fee Fee Cost Resident Recovery (Existing/ Propose, d/ E-86 Recreation Swim - Daily $1 $2 37% $1/$2 Fee has not increased since 1993. at Silver Creek, MLK, & This fee will go into effect after pool Jefferson (delete renovations are completed. "Charge per Day") Includes increases in personnel/ operating costs. Daily fee for ali other pools remains at $1except for McMurtrey. E-86 Recreational Swim - $30 : $55 35% $30/$70 Fee has not increased since 1992. Punch Pass at Silver Includes increases in personnel/ Creek, MLK, & Jefferson operating costs. Fee is. good for 30 (delete the words pool admissions. "Seasonal Pass") E-86 Lap Swim - Daily - All $2 $3 6% $2/53 Fee has not increased since 1992. Pools (delete the words Fee is for all pools including "Swim for Fitness - McMurtrey and is consistent with Charge per Day") other pool facilities in Bakersfield. Includes increases in personnel/operating costs. E-86 Lap Swim - Punch Pass $30 $90 9% $30/$115 Fee has not increased since 1992. · (delete the words "Swim Fee is for all pools including for Fitness - Seasonal McMurtrey. Includes increases in Pass") personnel/operating costs. Fee is good for 30 pool admissions. 2003 Fees April 8, 2003 Page 9 of 12 Svc Description Existing Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center Fee Fee Cost Resident Recovery (Existing/ Proposed/ E-86 Swim Instructor Training $40 $30 100% $30 Proposed fee adjusted to reflect E-86 New Lifeguard Training $75 $60 100% $60 actual cost of training exclusive of E-86 Renewal Lifeguard $60 $50 100% $50 the book deposit, which was Training originally in the fee. E-86 Swim Lessons (delete $28 $40 17% $41/$50 Fee has not increased since 2000. the words "One Session- Fee is for all pools except MLK. 10 days") Includes increases in personnel/ operating ,costs. E-86 Private Lessons -All $50 $60 100% $50/$75 Fee has not increased since 1992. Pools Fee is for all pools including McMurtrey. Includes increases in personnel/operating costs. E-86 Semi-Private Lessons $31 Delete n/a $34- Program no longer offered. E-86 Swim Lessons @ MLK $5 $10 4% No fee Fee has not increased since it was (delete the words "One listed for established in 2000, Proposed fee Session - 10 days") non- equates to $1.25 per session and is residents less than 25% of swim lessons /$15 charged at other pools. Fee ' includes increases in personnel/ operating costs. E-86 Competitive Swimming - $40 $65 100% $51/$80 Fee has been adjusted to recover All Pools (delete the costs. Fee is for all pools including words "Aquatics") McMurtrey. Fee previously approved by. City Manager. 2003 April 8, 2003 Page 10 of 12 Svc Description Existing Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center Fee Fee Cost Resident Recovery (Existing/ Proposed) E-86 Pool Party Rental- $45 $50 100% $50/$65 Fee has not increased since 2000. (delete the words "Swim" (minimum) Proposed fee is the minimum fee for and "Large Pools, 1-50") up to 50 people in the pool party. E-86 : Swim Pool Rental- $50 Delete -- $55/-- Depending on the size of the pool Large Pools, 51-100 party, actual costs for additional E-86 Swim Pool Rental - $55 Delete -- $60/-- lifeguards will be added to the Large Pools, 101-200 minimum fee. Fee is for all pools E-86 Swim Pool Rental- $40 Delete -- $45/-- except McMurtrey. Includes Other Pools, 1-50 increases in personnel/operating E-86 Swim Pool Rental- $45 Delete -- $50/-- costs. Other Pools, 51-100 E-86 Swim Pool Rental- $50 Delete -- $55/-- Other Pools, 101-200 E-86 Swim Club Rental- $35 $40 100% $35/$50 Last increase occurred in 2002. Hourly - Excluding Fee includes increases in McMurtrey (delete the Personnel/operating costs and words "Renter is ensures this service is self- Qualified to Provide Own supporting. Lifeguards") Each year the pools are subsidized in the range of $50,000 to $80,000. The proposed fees reflect increased operating, maintenance, and personnel costs. 2003 Fees April 8, 2003 Page 11 of 12 McMurtrey Aquatic Center Fees Svc Description Existing Proposed Proposed Non- Comments Center Fee Fee Cost Resident Recovery (Existing/ Proposed) E-86 Recreation Swim - Daily New $3 27% New/S3 The McMurtrey facility is a higher " quality swim facility with higher operational costs. E-86 Recreational Swim - New $80 6% New/S100 Fee is good for 30 pool admissions. Punch Pass E-86 Swim Club Rental - New $50 100% New/S65 Proposed fee is for rental 8 - 25 Hourly - Competitive yard lanes, consistent with other Pool pool facilities in Bakersfield. E-86 Swim Club Rental - New $110 100% New/S140 Proposed fee is for rental 8 - 50 Hourly - Competitive meter lanes, consistent with other Pool pool facilities in Bakersfield. E-86 Party Pool Rental - New $90 100% New/S115 Proposed fee is the minimum fee for Recreational Pool up to 50 people in the pool party. E-86 Party Pool Rental- New $130 100% New/S165 Depending on the size of the pool Competitive Pool party, actual costs for additional lifeguards will be added to the minimum fee. 2003 Page 12 of 12 Leisure Classes Svc Description Existing. Proposed Proposed Non- Comment Center Fee Fee Cost Resident Recovery. (NEW) E-87 MLK Leisure Classes Free $5 38% $7 New fee to pay for a portion of the cost to operate the classes. Currently, there is no fee to reimburse some of the costs of leisure classes at the Martin Luther King, Jr. Center. Costs include staff to open and close the facility for the classes, instructor pay, utilities, and set-up and clean-up staff time. In a typical class, the room would be booked for two hours, which prevents other rentals. The proposed fee reflects a portion of the cost to operate the classes. For example, a typical class (e.g., computer, quilting) averages eight sessions., thus, the cost for each session would be $0.63. ~ cc: John W. Stinson, Assistant City Manager Darnell Haynes, Assistant to the City Manager Allen Abe, Assistant Director Greg Cronk, Director of Operations Sally Ihmels, Recreation Superintendent Ken Trone, Parks and Facilities Planner .CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PRoPoSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" TABLE OF CONTENTS A - INSPECTION FEES & SERVICES A-1 NEW RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................... A-2 RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, ALTERATION, REMODEL OR REPAIR ................................................................................... A-3 COMMERCIAL ADDITION, ALTERATION, REMODEL OR REPAIR ' 1 A-4 SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION ................................................................................... 1 A-$ STREET CUT INSPECTION ................................................................................... 3 A-6 PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT INSPECTION ................................................................................... 3 A-7 STREET ENCROACHMENT INSPECTION ................................................................................... 3 · A-8 STATE-MANDATED FIRE INSPECTION ... .......................................... : ........ : ............................. 3 A-9 OIL WELL INSPECTION (ANNUAL) .......... · ......................................................................... 3 A-10 FIRE SAFETY REVIEW/INSPECTION '. ................................................................................... 3 A-12 REINSPECTION OF MUNICIPAl CODE VIOLATIONS ................................................................................... 4 A-13 ·HOUSING PROGRAMS ................................................................................... 4 B - LAND USE REVIEW I PERMITS 8-21 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT ................................................................................... 4 8-22 HOME OCCUPATION REVIEW .......... · ......................................................................... 4 8-23 " FIRE SUPPRESSION - PERMIT PROCESSING AND PLAN REVIEw FEES ................................................................................... 4 8-24 SIGN- PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTIONS FEES ................................................................................... 5 B-25 TENTATNE SUBDNISION MAP REVIEW ................................................................................... 5 B.25 MINOR LAND DNISION REVIEW ................................................................................... 5 8-27 PRELIMINARY PROJECT REVIEW ................................................................................... 5 · 8-28 SITE PLAN REVIEW ................................................................................... 5 8-29 SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW ................................................................................... 5 8-30 PUD OR PCD ZONE CHANGE 5 8-31 ZONE CHANGE REVIEW ' 5 B-32 APPEAL PROCESSING .......................................... ....... ~ ................................. 5 8-33 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT REVIEW ................................................................................... 5 8-34 CONCURRENT APPLICATION TIERED FEE ................................................................................... 5 8-35 ZONE MODIFICATION REVIEW- MODIFICATIONS ................................................................................... 6 8-36 SIGN REVIEW ................................................................................... 6 8-37 MAP & IMPROVEMENT PLAN CHECKING ................................................................................... 6 B-38 DEVELOPMENT TIME EXTENSION REVIEW ................................................................................... 6 B.39 TRAFFIC MARKING REQUEST REVIEW .................................................................................. 6 B-40 CERTIFIED UNIFIED PROGRAM AGENCY (CUPA) FEES ................................................................................... 6 8-4'1 CULTURAL RESOURCE REVIEW ................................................................................... 7 8-42 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ................................................................................... ? B-43 HISTORIC DISTRICT REVIEW 7 8-44 WIDE/oVERLOAD REVIEW .................................................................................. 7 C - PUBLIC INFORMATION SERVICES C-§1 FIRE REPORT COPY ................................................................................... 7 C-$2 POLICE RECORDING DUPLICATION SERVICE .................................................................................. 7 ' . cITY'OF BAKERSFIELD.. · PROPOSED MASTER FEE sCHEDULE FOR 2003 · PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" TABLE OF CONTENTS C-53 POLICE PHOToGRApH COPY .................................................................... i .............. ? C-54 DOCUMENT PRINTING AND COPYING ................................................................................... C-55 REQUEST FOR PUBLIC RECORDS ................................................................................... C-56 RESEARCH AND CERTIFICAi'IONS .................................................................................... 7 C-57 AGENDNMINUTE MAILING SERVICE ................................................................................... 7 C-§8 MUNICIPAL CODE SUPPLEMENT ................................................................................... ? C-59 PUBLIC WORKS INFORMATION ................................................................................... ? D - PUBLIC SAFETY D-61 BUSINESS REGULATION ................................................................................... 8 D-62 CONCEALED WEAPON PERMIT PROCESSING ................................................................................... 8 D-63 LIMOU SIN E/TAXI/TOWING REGULATION .... ~ .............................................................................. 8 D-64 WEED ABATEMENT OR FIRE HAZARD ABATEMENT ' 8 D.6S. HAZARDOUS MATERIAL RESPONSE .................................................................................. 8 D-66 FIRE FALSE ALARM RESPONSE .................................................................................. 8 D-67 POLICE FALSE ALARM RESPONSE .................................................................................. 8 D-68 SPECIAL EVENT SAFETY SERVICES ................................................................................... 8 D-69 AUTOMOTNE ACCIDENT INVESTIGATION ................................................................................... 8 D.70 FINGERPRINT SERVICE .................................................................................. 8 D-71 VEHICLE CODE ENFORCEMENT .............................................................................. ~... 8 D-72 . SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD SERVICE ................................................................................... 9 D.73 PARKING ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT ................................................................................... 9 0-74 BOARD UP OF STRUCTURES ' 9 D-75 ANIMAL REGULATION ................................................................................... 9 E -' RECREATION I CULTURAL E-82 PARK FACILITY RENTAL ................................................................................... 10 E-83 RECREATION CENTER RENTAL ................................................................................... l0 E-84 CITY ADULT PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES ................................................................................... 11 E-85 CITY YOUTH PROGRAMS AND ACTNITIES ................................................................................... 12 E.85 AQUATIC PROGRAMS. RECREATIONAL SWIMMING ................................................................................... 13 E-8?' LEISURE CLASSES ........................... = ...................................................... 14 F - MISCELLANEOUS FEES F-91 FIRE HYDRANT DISTRIBUTION AND INSTALLATION INSPECTIO~ ............................................................................... 14 F-92 DOWNTOWN OFF-STREET PARKING ................... ............................................................ 14 F-93 PROCESSING SCHOOL FACILITY FEES .................................................................................. 14 F-94 COMPUTER DATA ................................................................................... 14 F-95 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FEES ................................................................................. 14 F-96 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY STREET USE ............................ : ................................................ 14 F-97 CHECK COLLECTION .............. : .................................................... . ............. 14 F-95 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER RENTAL .................................................................................. 14 F-99 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER BROADCAST FEES ................................................................................ 14 F-100 BUSINESS LICENSE PROCESSING FEES .................................................................................. 14 Prepared by: L Simpson 2 of 2 71112003 · . CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ;? PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE .CENTERS EXHIBIT #A" I SERVICE '. ADOP¥~'L~ PRoPOsED AMTOF FEE CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES ' INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS ' NUMBER 4/30103 719103 (DECREASE) A. INSPECTION FEES & SERVICES ALL CONSTRUCTION (INCLUDING: NEW, ADOITIONAL, ALTERATION, REMODEL REPAIR, AND OTHER CONSTRUCTION) FOR BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION PERMIT PROCESSING, SERVICES, AND INSPECTION FEES ARE CALCULATED AS FOLLOWS: 1~/O GENERAL METHODS ARE USED TO CALCULATE FEES. THE USE OF A FLAT FEE AND THE USE OF THE ESTIMATED REGIONAL MARKET VALUE OF THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION MULTIPUED BY A 'FEE FACTOR'. THESE METHODS REPRESENT THE ESTIMATED COST OF PROViDiNG ALL PLAN REVIEW AND VARIOUS INSPECTION FEES REQUIRED FOR THE PROJECT. VALUATION DATA IS BASED UPON THE APRIL 2001 'BUILDING STANDARDS'. ALTERATIONS & REMODELS WILL BE VALUED AT $30 PER SQUARE FOOT 0R BY AN OFFiC!AL CONTRACT APPROVED BY THE BUILDING DIRECTOR· THE REVENUE GENERATED FROM THIS iS THEN SPREAD TO THE VARIOUS COSTS CENTER AS FOLLOWS: BUILDING PERMITS: 55.00% PLAN CHECKING FEES: 45.00% THIS METHODOLOGY IS USED IN SERVICE CENTERS Al. A2. A3, AND A4. A-1 NEW RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION · NEW RESIOENTIAL CONSTRUCTION -PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - M~NIMUM FEE $40 $40 S0 · OTHER THAN MINIMUIk, I (VALUATION · S6.001.00) '0.0055 X VAL 0.0055 X VAL $0 VARIES WITH VALUATION ABOVE iNCLUDES STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL PLUMBING. ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS AND PLAN REVIEN - NEW COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION -PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 $0 - OTHER THAN MINIMUM (VALUATION · $4,501.00} - VALUATION $4.501.00 TO $1,000,000.00 0.0078 X VAL 0.0078 X VAL $0 VARIES WITH 'dAL UATION - VALUATION $1.000.001.00 AND GR EATER 0.0068 X VAL 0.0068 X VAL $0 VARIES WITH VALUATION ABOVE INCLUDES STRUCTURAL, MECHANICAL, PLUMBING. ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS AND PLAN REVIEW · GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE S65 $65 $0 MOVE~ FROM a.2S ~ESIDENTIAL ADDITION, ALTERATION, REMODEL OR REPAIR - RESIDENTIAL ADDITION, ALTERATION. REMODEL OR REPAIR - PERMIT PROCESSING ANO INSPECTION FEES - MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 S0 - OTHER THAN M N MU~, (VALUATION · S6.001,00) 0,0055 X VAL 0.0055 X '/AL $0 VARIES WITH VALUATION ABOVE INCLUDES STRUCTURAL. MECHANICAL. PLUMBING. ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS AND PLAN RE~/IEW · MECHANICAL (ONLY) ADDITION. ALTERATION. REMODEL OR REPAIR PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES · MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 $0 !NCLUOES RERMiTAND ~SSUANCE ~EE - OTHER THAN U N I~, UM (VALUATION · S6.001.00) 0.0055 X VAL 0.0055 X VAL S0 VARIES W~T~ VALUATION - PLUh B NG (ONLY) ADDITION. ALTERATION. REMODEL OR REPAIR PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES -MINIMUM FEE ' , S40 S40 $0 - OTHER THAN MINIMUM (VALUATION · 50 001 00) 0.0055 X VAL 0.0055 X VAL $0 _ VARIES '/~,-,~ VALUATION - ELECTRICAL ONLY ADDITION. ALTERATION. REMOOELOR REPAIR PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 $0 INCLUDES =LUMBiNG ELECT & HEATER - OTHER T~AN MINIMUM (VALUATION · $6.001 O0) 0.0055 X VAL 00055 X VAL S0 VARIES W~TH VALUATION A-3 COMMERCIAL ADDITION, ALTERATION, REMODEL OR REPAIR · COMMERCIAL ADOITiON. ALTERATION, REMODEL OR REPAIR PERMIT PROCESSING ANO INSPECTION FEES - MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 $0 ~ OTHER THAN MINIMUM (VALUATION · $4.501.00) " - VALUATION S4.501.00 TO $!,00'0,000.00 0.0078 X VAL 0,0078 X VAL S0 VARIES WiTH VALUAT!ON · VALUATION Sl.000.001.00 AND GREATER 0.0068 X VAL 0.0068 X VAL S0 VARIES W:T~ VALUAT!ON ABOVE iNCLUDES STRUCTURAL. MECHAN!CAL PLUMBING. ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS AND PLAN REVIEW - ~, ECHANICAL (ONLY) ADOITiON. ALTERATION REMODEL OR REPAIR PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES : MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 S0 !NCLUOES ~.~MBING ELECT & HEARER - OTHER THAN MINIMUM (VALUATION · 54.501,00) 00078 X VAL 0.0078 X '.YAL $0 VARIES W~T~ VALUATION · PLUMBING (ONLY) A0D T ON. ALTERAT ON. REMODEL OR REPAIR PERMIT PROCESSING ANO INSPECTION FEES - MINIMUM FEE S40 540 50 - OTHER THAN MINIMUM (VALUATION > ~,.501 00) 0.007B X VAL 00078 X ',/AL S0 VARIES W?~ VALUATION - ELECTRICAL (ONLY) ADDITION. ALTERATiCN. REMOnEL OR REPAIR PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - MINIMUM FEE 540 S40 S0 ~NCLUOE$ =LUMBING. ELECT & HEATER - OTHER THAN MINIMUM (VALUATION · $4.50100) 0 0078 × VAL 0.0078 X VAL $0 ',ARIES ',~l~ ~ VALUATION A-4 SPECIAL RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION - MECHANICAL CONSTRUCTION- PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES (EACH PERMIT) · - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD " : PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II ' FOR CITY SERVlC'E CENTERS · EXHIBIT "A" " CENTER SERV1CE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS NUMBER 4/30103 7/9103 (DECREASE) · AIR CONDITIONER, ALL SIZES $40 $40 $0 INCLUDES PLUMBING ELECT & HEATER - WALL HEATER INSTALLATION $40 ~40 $0 INCLUOES PLUMBING. ELECT & HEATER - FIREPLACE iNSERT INSTALLATION 540 S40 50 - COOLER ~NSTALLKrION * $40 $40 $0 INCLuDEs PLUMBING. ELECT & HEATER - KITCHEN HOOD INSTALLATION $40 $40 $6 INCLUDES PLUMBING. ELECT & HEATER - M SCELLANEOUS MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT, FIXTURES APPLIANCES & OTHER APPARATUSES (EACH PERMIT) - MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 S0 INCLUDES PLUMBING, ELECT & HEATER OTHER THAN MINIMUM FEE IS CALCULATED UNDER SERVICE CENTER A-2 OR A-3 AS A MECHANICAL PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - PLUMBING CONSTRUCTION - PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES (EACH PERMIT) - GAS [:INE $40 $40 50 - SEWER LiNE . $40 $40 SO - WATER LINE $40 '$40 50 - PIPE LINE REPAIR (GAS, SEWER. WATER, ETC) S40 $40 S0 - WATER HEATER REPLACEMENTS $40 $40 S0 - SEPTIC TANK ' $40 $40 S0 - SEPTIC TANK ABANDONMENT . · $40 $40 S0 - GREASE iNTERCEPTORS $80 $80 $0 - WATER SOFTENERS S40 $40 $0 - SHOWER PAN $40 - SOLAR $40 S40 S0 - SITE S~flER SYSTEMS $40 $40 S0 - SITE STORM DRAINAGE SYSTEMS $40 $40 S0 · MISCELLANEOUS PLUMBING EQUIPMENT. FIXTURES. APPLIANCES AND OTHER APPARATUSES (EACH PERMIT} .- MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 $0 - OTHER THAN MINIMUM FEE iS CALCULATED UNDER SERVICE CENTER A-2 OR A-3 AS A PLUMBING PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - ELECTRICAL CONSTRUCTION, PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES (EACH PERMIT) - TEMPORARY POWER SERVICE < or = 600 VOLTS AND 200 AMPS $40 $40 $0 INCLUDES PLUMBING ELECT A HEATER - PERMANENT POWER SERVICE < or = 600 VOLTS AND 200 AMPS $40 $40 S0 INCLUDES P'..U~,IBING. ELECT & HEATER - SITE ELECTRICAL AND OTHER SITE POWER APPARATUSES ~40 $40 S0 - MISCELLANEOUS ELECTRICAL EQUIPMENT. FIXTURES. APPLIANCES AND OTHER APPARATUSES (EACH PERMIT) - MINIMUM FEE S40 $40 $0 INCLUOES FLU',,IBING, ELECT & HEATER - OTHER THAN MINIMUM FEE IS CALCULATED UNDER SERVICE CENTER A-2 OR A-3 AS A ELECTRICAL PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES · DEMOLITIONS OF RESIDENTIAL AND CONIMERCIAL.STR UCTU RE - PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - INTERIOR OR EXTERIOR PARTIAL DF~{OLITION $40 $40 $0 - ENTIRE STRUCTURE DEMOLITION $40 $40 50 · MOVED RESl0ENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL STRUCTURE - PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - RESIDENTIAL MOVED STRUCTURE $40 $40 $0 - COMMERCIAL MOVED STRUCTURE $40 $40 S0 - RESIOENTIAL STATE APPROVED MOBILE HOME AND PRE-MANUFACTURED (~ONSTRUCTION - PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - MOBILE HOME WITHOUT PERMANENT FOUNDATION $40 ~0 $0 - I~IOSlLE HOME WITH PERMANENT FOUNDATION $160 $160 $0 - MOBILE HOME GARAGE ~ $40 $0 - MOBILE HOME ACCESSORY STRUCTURES S40 ~ S0 INCLUDES PLUMBING. ELECT & HEATER - PRE-MANUFACTURED HOUSING $160 S160 $0 - COMMERCIAL STATE APPROVED MOBILE COACH AND PRE-MANUFACTURED CONSTRUCTION - PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - COMMERCIAL COAC~ (PERMANENT) $160 $160 SO - COMMERCIAL PRE-MANUFACTURED (PERMANENT) $160 S160 $0 - COMMERCIAL COACH ACCESSORY STRUCTURES $40 $40 ~0 ~NCLUOES PLUMBING ELECT & HEATER · CONSTRUCTION TRAILER (TEMPORARY) - PERMIT PROCESSING AN0 iNSPECTION FEES - CONSTRUCTION TRAILER (TEMPORARY) $40 $40 $0 - RESIDENTIAL RE-ROOF - PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - MINIMUM FEE (EACH PERMIT. REGARDLESS OF SIZEi S80 S80 S0 VARIES WNALUE & :F COMMERCIAL OR RESiDENT;AL - COMMERCIAL RE-ROOF- PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - MINIMUM FEE (EACH PERMIT. REGARDLESS OF SIZE) $80 580 S0 VARIES WNALUE & ~f COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL - POOLS AND SPAS - PERMIT PROCESSING AND iNSPECTiON FEES - SWiMMiNG POOLS $160 S160 SO ~NCLUOES P1.UMB'ING ELECTRICAL & ;-,EATER - POOL & SPA 8200 5~00 S0 INCLUDES PLUMBING. ELECTRICAL & HEATER - SPA I IN GROUND S80 580 S0 INCLUDES PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL & HEATER - SPA t PORTABLE $40 $40 S0 EACH OF THE ABOVE INCLUDES STRUCTURAL. MECHANICAL, PLUt`IBING. ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS ANO PLAN REVIEW - RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL MISC,. PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES Prepared by: L. Simpson 2of14 7/1t2003 'CITY OF BAKERSFIELD · ~ PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" SERVICE ADOPTED PROPOSED AMT OF FEE · CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/* NOTES/COMMEHTS NUMBER 4~30103 7/9103 (DECREASE) - PATIO ADO T1ON (EACH PERMIT}, REGARDLESS OF S~ZE $80 $80 SO - ANTENNA DISH $40 $40 S0 - OIL WELL PERMIT FEE $688 S686 $0 - RETAINING WALL OR FENCING - MINIMUM FEE $40 $40 $0 · OTHER THAN MINIMUM (LENGTH · 80 UN FI' ) SO.SO PER F'r $0.50 PER FT SO PER LINEN. FOOT - STORAGE RACKS/SHELVES (EACH PERMIT) $80 S80 SO - STORAGE CONTAINER/SEA TRAIN (EACH PERMIT) $40 $40, - REQUESTED PLAN REVIEW FEES RE-EVAJ~UATED PLAN REVIEW PROCESS - EXPEDITE PLAN REVIEW $45 $45 S0 PER HOUR CHARGE - AO[~ITIONAL PLAN REVIEW $45 545 $0 PER HOUR CHARGE REQUIRED BY CHANGES, ADDITIONS OR RE~IISIONS TO APPROVED PLANS - REQUESTED BUILDING INSPECTIONS FEES - SPECIAL INSPECTIONS - NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS . S45 $45 SO PER HOUR CHARGE - OUTSIDE NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS (2 HOUR MINIMUM) $45 $45 ' S0 PER HOUR CHARGE - RE-INSPECTIONS - NORMAL BusINEss HOURS $45 $45 S0 PER HOUR CHARGE -OUTSIDE NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS (2 Hour MINIMUM) $45 S45 S0 PER HOUR CHARGE - TEMPORARY SALES LOTS- PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES - TEMPORARY SALES LOTS S40 $40 SO ABOVE INCLUDES XMAS TREE & PUMPKIN LOTS. FIR~NORKS BOOTHS, PARKING LOT. TENT SALES, ETC - GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES - PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTION FEES · - GOVERNMENT STRUCTURES S0 S0 $0 EXEMPT ABOVE INCLUDES STRUCTURES AND PROPERTY OWNEO BY A FEDERAL, STATE. COUNTY OR CITY AGENCY A-5 STREET CUT INSPECTION - STREET CUT INSPECTION S130 S176 $46 . RESTRUCTURED 1 INCREASED COSTS · INSPECTION FEE DEPOSIT. $63 S88 S23 ACTUAt. O?. CO~TS CHG'O~F BI.LOPER REGUI~T~ INSPECT AFTER A.6 PUBUC IMPROVEMENT INSPECTION ' PUBUC IMPROVEMENT INSPECTION $120+0.94% X VAL $176+1.04% X VAL VARIES RESTRUC~FURED I INCREASED COSTS - MAINTENANCE. DISTRICT MAP PREPARATION FEES (REGARDING MAINTENANCE DISTRICT FORMATIONS & ANNEXATIONS) ~ NO COMPUTER DISC PROVIDED S1,700+S$3.65/LOT S1.700-S13.65/LOT -COMPUTER DISC PROVIDED $1.575+S3.15/LOT $1.575+S3.15;LOT S0 - APPORTIONMENT FEE FOR MAINTENANCE. DISTRICTS - WITH CAD DiSC PROVIDED S0 S0 - PER LOT FEE (NO DISC PROVIDED), MIN. FEE $90.00 S14.00/LOT S14,00ILOT A-7 STREET ENCROACHMENT INSPECTION $145 $150 S5 14% INCREASE PROPOSED A.8 STATE-MANDATED FIRE INSPECTION - PRE-INSPECTION CONSULTATION REQUESTS FOR IN HOME CARE FACILITIES - 25 OR LESS CLIENTS $50 $50 ~,~ FEE DETERMINED ~¥ STATE AND MAY CHANGE - 26 OR MORE CLIENTS $100 $100 ~,} FEE DETERMINED Sm STATE AND MAY CHANGE A-9 OIL WELL INSPECTION (ANNUAL) - OIL WELL INSPECTION (ANNUAL} $71 $71 SO ANNUAL INSPECTION - REINSPECTION (IF REQUIRED) $55 S55 - OIL WELL INSTALLATION S55 S55 AdO RRE SAFETY REV1EWIINSPECTION · SAFETY INSPECTIONS. PRIVATE PARTYflNSURANCE REQUESTS $60 575 S15 PER HOUR CHARGE -REINSPECTION FEE S60 S75 SI~ PER HOUR CHARGE ~ - UQUIFIED PETROLEUM GAS INSTALLATION } $134 S0 -51 ~4 DELETE. SEE ABOVE GROUND FLAMMABLE MOULD · REINSPECTION FEE $67 S0 *S67 DELETE- SEE ABOVE GROUND FLAMMABLE UGUID - TENT INSTALLATION (ONE TIME FEE) S60 S75 sg PER HOUR CHARGE · REINSPECTION FEE $66 S75 Sg PER HOUR CHARGE · AFTER HOURS TENT INSTALLATION $92 $89 -$3 PER HOUR CHARGE · AFTER HOURS REINSPECTION FEE 592 $89 -$3 PER HOUR CHARGE - PAINT BOOTHS (ONE TIME FEE) · NEW SPRAY PAINT 8GOTHS $164, $191 52? · REINSPECTION FEE S82 S75 -ST - HIGH RISE INSPECTION FEE $111 $131 S20 PER HOUR FOR 2 INSPECTORS WORKING TOGETHER -ADDITIONAL HOURS - FIRE INSPECTOR $35 $o .$35 DELETE .INAPPUCABLE - ADDITIONAL HOURS - FIRE CAPTAIN' S62 SO .562 DELETE. INAPPLICABLE - REINSPECT1ON FEE Sl 11 S131 520 PER HOUR FOR 2 INSPECTORS WORKING TOGETHER - FIRE PROTECTION EQUIPMENT · SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSPEC~ON (COMMERCIAL) - MINIMUM FEE $408 ' $490 - OTHER THAN/dINIMUM (IF OVER 30.000 SQ. FT.) 0.027 X SQ.FT 0027 X SQ F-F · .. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II · ?FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS I EXHIBIT "A" SERVICE ADOPTED PROPOSED AMT OF FEE CENTER SERVICE CENTER OESCRIFnON FEES FEES INCREASE/ HO?ES~COMMENTS NUMBER 4/30103 7/9103 OECREASE) - REINSPECTION FEE $204 $75 -$129 PER HOUR · SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSPECTION (ADDITIONS I REMODELS) · MINIMUM FEE $119 $141 $22 - OTHER THAN MINIMUM (IF OVER 5,000 sQ. FT.) 0.023 X SO,FT0.023 X SO.FT S0 · REINSPECTION FEE $60 $75 $1S PERHOUR · FIRE ALARM SYSTEM COMPONENT INSPECTION · MINIMUM FEE $165 $195 $30 - OTHER THAN MIN[MUM (OVER 30,000 SO. FT.) 0.006 X SQ.FT0.00§ X SOFT $0 · RE/NSPECTION FEE $~3 $75 ·$8 PER HOUR · COMMERCIAL VENT HOOD INSPECTION - $124 $14~ ~.4 · INSPECTION OF EACH ADDITIONAL VENT HOOD $12 $30 $18 · RE/NSPECTION FEE · . $62 $75 $13 - PERHOUR · STANDPIPE INSPECTION · iNSPECTION OF ONE STANDI~PE $82 $90 $16 · CHARGE FOR EACH ADDITIONAL STANDPIPE $25 $30 - RBNSPECTION FEE ' $41 $75 $34 PERHOUR - EXPLOSiVES PURCHASE, SALES & STORAGE INSPECTION INSPECTION & PERMIT FEE (IF MATERIAL TYPE CHANGES) - FIREr INSPECTION $150 $177 $27 · EXPLOSiVES STORAGE PERMIT . $14' $25 $11 · RE]NSPECTION FEE $75 $75 $0 PER HOUR · PYROTECHNICS INSPECTION $0 $50 $50 NEW FEE/ONE TIME FEE PER EVENT ' - NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS · '$0 $?$ $2S NEW F~E/PER HOUR $159 $0 * -$159 OELETE · FIRST INSPECTION ~ SECOND INSPECTION $128 $0 -$128 DELETE · THIRD INSPECTION $98 $0 -$98 DELETE · AFTER HOURS RATE j0 $89 $89 NEW FEE/PER HOUR - - RRST INSPECTION $216 $0 -$216 DELETE · SECOND INSPECTION $173 $O 4173 DELETE i. · THIRD INSPECTION $127 $0 -$127 DELETE " - FIREWORKS BOOTH PERMIT FEE 5101 S101 $0 A-12 RFJNSPECTION OF MUNICIPAL CODE VIOLATIONS · * - DANGEROUS BUILDING INVESTIGATIONS ~ INITIAL CONTACT AND INSPECTION SO 50 S0 , - FOLLOW-UP INSPECTIONS REQUIRED (EACH OCCURRENCE $340 $340 50 - LEGAL ACTION REQUIRED - -, ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST - COMPLAINTS AND ENFORCEMENT - INITIAL CONTACT AND INSPECTION $0 $0 50 - FOLLOW-UP INSPECTIONS REQUIRED {EACH OCCURRENCE) S147 $147 50 - LEGAL ACTION REQUIRED ACTUAL cOST ACTUAL COST A-13 HOUSING PROGRAMS - REHABILITATION INSPECTIONS - INITIAL INSPECTION I DOCUMENTATION ' * S152 $152 $0' - FIRST TIME HOME BUYERS INSPECTION $100 $100 $0 - ADDITIONAL INSPECTION COSTS I FEES - DEP/~TMENTAL PROCESSING COSTS S121 $121 - ROOF REPLACEMENT · 555 $55 I* - ELECTRICAL $76 $75 $0 - PLUMBING S7§ 576 $0 - MECHANICAL $70 $76 $0 ..~.~ -FRAME/FLOOR ._ S55 S55 $0 ' - MAXIMUM CHARGE FOR REHAB INSPECTIONS S614 S614 $0 B. LAND USE REVIEW I PERMITS B-21 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT - BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT APPROVAL - OIL WELL REVIEW $1,668 $1,668 50 REG USE PERMIT * $300 FOR ;iRE - GENERAL REVIEW (ALL ZONES) $!,359 $1,359 SO B-22 HOME OCCUPATION REVIEW - HOME OCCUPATION PERMIT , ' 525 525 S0 - LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE S25 525 SO B-23 FiRE SUPPRESSION - PERMIT PROCESSING AND PLAN REVIEW FEES 625% OF PLAN 625% OF P~-'~N · PAINT BOOTH PLAN REVIEW INSPECTION INSPECTION 50 ~N -tDDtTIOt'l TO ~RIGhgAL hNSrC. CT:ON FEE iN ~,- - NON-FLAMMABLE MEDICAL GAB SYSTEM PLAN REVIEW S100 $100 S0 40% OF pLAN 40% OF PLAN - EXISTING SPRINKLER SYSTEM ADDITION PLAN REVIEW (COMMERCIAL) INSPECTION INSPECTION 50 IN .ADDITION ~'O OR!GJNAL iN$~'ECTION FEE tN Prepared by: L. Simpson 4 of 14 7/1/2003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSED MASTER· FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" SERVICE ' ADOPTED PROPOSED AMT OF FEE CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS NUMBER 4/30103 7/9103 (DECREASE) 40% OF PLAN 40% OF PLAN - SPRINKLER SYSTEM PLAN REVIEW (COMMERCIAL) INSPECTION INSPECTION .S0 IN ADDITION TO ORIGINAL INSPECTION FEE IN AdO 40% OF PLAN 40% OF PLAN - SPRINKLER SYSTEM PLAN REVIEW (RESIDENTIAL) INSPECTION INSPEClON. SO IN ADDITION TO ORIGINAL INSPECTION FEE IN - FIRE ALARM SYSTEM PLAN REVIEW - 75% OF PLAN 75% OF PLAN INSPECTION INSPECTION $0 IN ADDITION rD ORIGINAL ~NSPECTION FEE IN A-10 125% OF PLAN 128% OF PLAN - COMMERCIAL VENT HOOD PLAN REVI~/V INSPECTION INSPECTION $0 IN ADDITION TO ORiGiNAL INSPECTION FEE IN A-10 · STANQPIPE SYSTEM PLAN REVIEW S0 40% OF PLAN INSP. VARIES NEW FEE/IN ADDITIO~I TO ORIGINAL INSP, FEE JN A-lO · PORTABLE LPG STORAGE/DISTRIBUTION (ONE TIME FEE FOR BUSINESSES W/PORTABLE PROPANE) $0 $54 $54 NEW FEE · MAIL OUT INSPECTION $0 $25 $25 NEW FEE - FIRE PREVENTION OVERSIGHT $86 $87 $2 C.O.LA. B-24 SIGN · PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTIONS FEES - SIGN. 'BANNER $40 $40 SO iNCLUDES PERMIT AND IssuANcE tEE - SIGN, TEMPORARY $40 $40 50 rNCLUDES PERMIT AND ISSUANCE FEE - SIGN, PERMANENT $80 ~80 $0 INCLUDES PERMIT, ELECTRICAL AND iSSUANCE FEE · SIGN, PERMANENT · FACE CHANGE . $0 $40 $40 NEW FEE ABOVE INCLUDES STRUCTURAL, ELECTRICAL INSPECTIONS AND PLAN REVIEW B-25 TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP REMEW - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP REVIE~N - STANDARD $1,899 $1,899 S0 · OPTIONAL DESIGN OR YAROiLOT AREA MODIFICATIONS $1,725 $1.725 50 - REVISED TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP REVIEW · · STANDARD $519 $519 S0 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP REVIEW - STANDARD $2.344 $2.344 $0 - OPTIONAL DESIGN OR YARD/LOT AREA MODIFICATIONS $2,921 $2,921 - REVISED TENTATIVE TRACT MAP REVIEW - STANDARD .. $1,338 $1,336 S0 ~ * WALL AND LANDSCAPE REVIEW $905 5905 S0 B-26 MINOR LAND DIVISION REV1EW - LOT LINE ADJUS~{ENT S902 $902 SO - PARCEL MAp WAIVERS S902 5902 $0 - OWNER iNITIATED PARCEL MERGER S902 $902 SO · RIGHT OF WAY VACATION (SUMMARY VACATION ONLY) $410 $1,236 $826 RESTRUCTURED FEE S1235 + TIME/MAT N~ FEE PROPOSAL I BASE FEE TRACED BY PROJECT - RIGHT OF WAY VACATON (NON-SUMMARY VACATION) S0 OVER BASE FEE VARIES NUMBERS ESTABUSED FOR EACH NON-SUMMARY VACATIC B-27 PREUMINARY PROJECT REVIEW - REQUESTED LAND USE & ZONING REVIEW $56 $56 50 - ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVALS - ADVERTISED . $347 $347 50 - POSTED $102 $102 SO - SOUND EQUIPMENT REGISTRATION - ZONING CHECK $~0 $10 $0 8-28 SITE PLAN REVIEW - MINIMUM FEE - NO HEARING REQUIRED $200 $200 50 - MAXIMUM FEE- NO HEARING REQUIRED $2,500 $2.500 SO - OTHER THAN MINIMUM FEE UP TO MAXIMUM ,001668 x VAL. .001668 x VAL 50 - GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE. 5 YR REVIEW & UPDATE $85 SO -$65 MOVED TO SERVICE CENTER - GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE-10 YR COMPREHENSIVE REWRITE $65 SO .$65 MOVED TO SERVICE CENTER A*I - LEGAL ADVERTISING FEE - IF HEARING REQUIRED $338 5338 50 8-2g SPECIFIC PLAN REVIEW - INITIAL PREPARATION FEE $4,686 $4,686 SO - SINGI. E ELEMENT 54,166 S4,166 .$0 - MULTIPLE ELEMENTS $4,686 S4~686 S0 - DEVELOPMENT AGREEIvlENT $2,083 $2,083 SO B-30 PUD OR PCO ZONE CHANGE SO.085 $3,085 SO B-31 ZONE CHANGE REVIEW' S2,570 $2,570 SO 8-32 APPEAL PROCESSING APPLICANT OR NON-APPLICANT OUTSIDE THE NOTICE AREA. WITHIN THE 6338 S338 S0 NOTICE AREA EXEMPT. - LAND DIVISIONS 5338 5338 50 - WEED ABATEMENT APPEALS - MINIMUM FEE- NO NOTICE REQUIRED S102 S102 S0 - LEGAL ADVERTISING FEE - IF PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIRED SO38 S338 SO B-$3 GENERAL PLAN AMENDMEI~T REVIEW - SINGLE ELEMENT $3,598 S3,598 SO - MULTIPLE ELESMENTS S4,113 S4,1 ! 3 SO B-34 CONCURRENT APPECATION TIERED FEE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION · . . FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS NUMBER 4/30103 7/9103 (DECREASE) ,. EXISTING LANO USE OESIGNATION TO GPA I ZONE CHANGE . PLANNING IS PROPOSING TO CHANGE HOW THE - RESIDENTIAL. COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL, OPEN AND RESOURCE· $7,000 57,000 S0 FEE IS PRESENTED ~N THE MASTER FEE SCHEDULE * CURRENT DESIGNATION TO A HIGHER DENSITY . $4,166 $4,166 50 THE FEE CURRENTLY PRESENTED iN MANNER THAT - CURRENT DESIGNATION TO A LOWER DENSITY 27,000 $7,000 20 CONTAINS SOME REDUNDANCIES THAT HAVE - CURRENT DESIGNATION TO OTHER DESIGN. (EXCEPT OPEN SPACE') . $7,000 $7,000 S0 BEEN CONFUSING . MODIFIERS - ANY OF THE ABOVE WITH AN EIR AS PART OF THE PROJECT $7,000 $7,000 20 - ANY DESIGNATION WITH PUD OR PCD ZONE S?,000 $7,000 $0 - ANY MULTIPLE DESIGNATION CHANGES, SINGLE APPLICATION . $7,000 $7,000 - ANY OF THE ABOVE WITH CERTIFIED PROJECT LEVEL EIR LESS THAN 2 YRS OLD $4,166 $4,166 - ANY OF THE ABOVE WHICH PROPOSE CHANGES TO'PI]AN POLICIES $7,000 $7,000 S0 - TEXT & MAPS $4.567 S4,567 S0 B~35 ZONE MODIFICATION REVIEW J MODIFICATIONS -ZONEMODIFICAT)ON REVIEW-MODIFiCATiONS · 21,110 $1,110 B-36 SIGN REVIEW * COMPREHENSIVE SIGN REVIEW ' $905 $905 $0 - COMPREHENSIVE SIGN REVIEW - REVISED 2328 $328 . $0 B-37 MAP & IMPROVEMENT PLAN CHECKING ~. '. - FINAL TRACT MAPS $600-'$28/LOT$600+$28/LOT $0 - FINAL PARCEL MAPS Sl,420 $1,420 S0 -GRADING PLAN REVIEW - PROJECTS LESS THAN 5 ACRES IN SIZE $274 S274 . - PROJECTS GREATER THAN 5 ACRES IN SIZE $274+$15.201ACRE 5274+S 15.20/ACRE 20 $274 PER PLAN * $15 20 PER ADDL ACRE IN EXCESS OF $ ACRES - SUBDIVISION TRACTS - · $274+$15.20/ACRE S274*$15.20/ACRE 20 - STREET/SEWER iMPROVEMENTS - ALL OTHERS $220 + 0.80% $220 + 0.80% $0 $220 PLUS 0 80% OF VALUE OF IMPROVEMENT - ADDITIONAL PLAN SUBMll-I'AL AFTER SECOND CHECK 10.0% OF GRIG FEE 100% OF OBIG FEE $0 ~0% OF ORIGINAL FEE FOR EACH AOD1. CHECK - MINOR R~/ISICN TO PLAN AFTER PLAN APPROVED $220 $220 S0 - MAJOR REVISION TO PLAN AFTER PLAN APPROVED $220 + 080% $220 * 0,80% $0 BASED ON CURRENT IMPROVE,MENTS - MAJOR REVISION TO PLAN DURING CHECKING PROCESS S220 ~' 0.80%$220 ' 0.80% S0 EASEO ON REWSED PORTION B-38 DEVELOPMENT TIME EXTENSION REVIEW , ' $497 2497 $0 B-39 TRAFFIC MARKING REQUEST:REVIEW $152 5152 B-40 CERTIFIED UNIFIED PROGRAM AGENCY (CUPA) FEES ANNU~. =ER - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HANDLER FEES · - MATERIAL TYPE 1 284 284 20 ~*' - MATERIAL TYPE 2 5181 $181 $0 - kfATERIAL TYPE 3 $252 S252 $0 - MATERIAL TYPE 4 $335 5335 20 - MATERIAL TYPE 5 ' $127 2127 · 20 - MATERIAL TYPE 6 $250 $350 $0 - MATERIAL TYPE 7 $376 S376 - MATERIAL TYPE 8 $433 $433 20 - MATERIAL TYPE 9 $181 S181 $0 . MATERIAL TYPE 10 $335 S335 $0 . MATERIAL TYPE 11 . $433 $433 SO - MATERIAL TYPE 12 $462 $462 SO - MATERIAL TYPE 13 $250 S250 S0 - MATERIAL TYPE 14 $433 $433 S0 - I~TERIAL TYPE 15 ' $462 $462 S0 ' . - MATERIAL TYPE 10 $486 $486 20 - MATERIAL TYPE 17 INSPECTION FEE $58 S58 SO - MATERIAL TYPE 18 SMALL QTY GENERATOR S58 $58 S0 - HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMITS - CONDITIONALLY EXEMPT $96 S96 SO - PERMIT SY RULE $202 S202 S0 · CONDITIONALLY AUTHORIZED $152 S152 S0 · OVERSIGHT FOR ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES - FOLLOW-UP ON HAZARDOUS WASTE VIOLATION- FEE PER HOUR S87 . 587 S0 PER HOUR CHARGE - RISK MGT PREVENTION PLAN FEE - CHARGE PER HOUR $87 $87 SO PER HOUR CHARGE - SITE ASSESSMENT & CLEANUP OVERSIGHT- CHARGE PER HOUR $87 $87 $0 PER HOUR CHARGE - UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK OVERSIGHT - CHARGE PER HOUR $87 $87 $0 PER HOUR CHARGE - SPILL PREVENTION CONTROL & COUNTERMEASURE PLAN S87 $87 $0 PER HOUR CHARGE - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HANDLER ANNUAL INSPECTION FEE - 30 MINUTE ANNUAL INSPECTION $52 $52 S0 COVERS FIRST ~0 MINUTES OF INSP - EACH ADDITIONAL 15 MINUTES (IF NECESSARY) $28 S26 $0 Prepared by: L. Simpson 6of 14 7/I/2003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" SERVICE ADOPTED PROPOSED AMT OF FEE CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTESICOMMENTS NUMBER 4/30103 7/9103 (DECREASE) - UNDERGROUND STORAGETANK PERMITS - NEW TANK INSTALLATION S710 $710 - REINSPECTION FEE $55 S55 - ANNUAL OPERATING PERMIT $81 $81 - MANDATED LEAK DETECTION TESTING $66 $66 $0 - TANK MODIFICATION 5710 $710 S0 - TANK REMOVAL S555 $555 lO - STATE SURCHARGE - HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HANDLER FEE SET BY STATE FEE SET BY.STATE OF CALIFORNIA - HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMITS FEE SET BY STATE FEE SET BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA - OVERSIGHT FOR RISK MANAGEMENT PREVENTION PLAN FEE SET BY STATE FEE SET BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA - UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK PERMITS FEE SET BY STATE FEE SET BY STATE OF CALIFORNIA - FILE RESEARCH FEE S33 $33 S0 PER HOUR CHARGE - ABOVE GROUND FLAMMABLE LIQUID STORAGE TANK INSTALLATION INSPECTION - INSTALLATION INSPECTION OF ONE TANK S138 $138 $0 - CHARGE FOR EACH ADDITIONAL TANK S21 $21 - INSPECTION OF TANK REMOVAL $89 $89 S0 . ANNUAL FEE FOR GENERATING 10 oR MORE WASTE TIRES / YEAR S36 $36 S0 8-41 CULTURAL RESOURCE REV1EW S250 S250 S0 B-42 ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST S0 $2,500 t~I;N~UUM OEP'OS~T B-43 HISTORIC DISTRICT REt/]EW $2,500 $2.500 · l0 B-44 WIDE'OVERLOAD REV1EW - SINGLE TRIP S16 $16 - ANNUAL TRIP $90 $90 · S0 - SPECIAL SERVICE CHARGE $50 $50 $0 IF ADO1. REVIEW WORI( IS REQUIRED* PER HOUR FEE C- PUBLIC INFORMATION SERVICES FIRE REPORT COPY $5 S5 S0 POLICE RECORDING DUPLICATION SERVlCE S8 $8 S0 POLICE PHOTOGRAPH COPY SO - FIRST PRINT . $7 S7 S0 - ADDITIONAL PRINTS (EACH) 8 X 10 $7 $7 S0 - ADDITIONAL PRINTS (EACH) 5 X 7 $6 S6 · ADDITIONAL PRINTS (EACH) 4 X 5 $5 $5 · DIGITAL IMAGING SALE S7 $7 S0 C-54 DOCUMENT PRINTING AND COPYING - PHOTocoPYiNG CHARGES -STANOARD & LEGAL SIZED DOCUMENTS $0.25/PAGE $0.25/PAGE SO PER COPY CHARGE - COPY OF MICROFILMED DOCUMENTS S0.251PAGE S0.251PAGE SO PER COPY CHARGE - SPECIAL MAPS & OVERSIZED DOCUMENTS ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST SO ACTUAL COST BASED ON LABQR AND MATERIALS - PRINTED DOCUMENTS (mE BUDGET) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST S0 ACTUAL COST BASEO ON LABOR At, iQ MATERIALS · POLICE CRIME REPORTS SO 25/PAGE S0. 25/PAGE f0 ELIMINATE AND USE COPY CHARGE $0 25 DER PAGE C-55 REQUEST FOR PUDMC RECORDS · REQUESTS BY SUBPOENA - DIRECT LABOR COSTS {TO LOCATE & COMPILE RECORDS) S16 S10 SO FEE SET BY LEGISLATION - PHOTOCOPYING CHARGES - STANDARD 8, LEGAL SIZE S0 S0 $0 FEE SET BY LEGISLATION - COPIES FROM MICROFILM S0 S0 SO FEE SET BY LEGISLATION - OTHER DIRECT CHARGES ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST S0 FEE SET BY LEGISLATION - REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC RECORDS - DIRECT LABOR COSTS (TO LOCATE & COMPILE RECORDS) MAX. $16 .' HR MAX. S16 / HR l0 MAXlt,,tU M CHARGE PER HOUR - PHOTOCOPYING CHARGES - STANDARD & LEGAL SIZE SO SO S0 ~O.25 PER PAGE - COPIES FROM MICROFILM S0 $0 SO $o 25 PER PAGE - OTHER DIRECT & INDIRECT CHARGES ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST $0 C-56 RESEARCH AND CERTIFICATIONS · HEARINGS AND APPEALS - APPEAL (OTHER THAN PLANNING)(NO CHARGE FOR PERMIT SUSPENSION/REVOCATION APPEAL) S101 $101 DA ' APPEAL WITH MAILED NOTICE & PUBLICATION S334 S334 S0 · RESEARCH & CERTIFICATION ' $5 $5 50 FEE ~S CHARGED PER DOCUMENT GENDAJMIMUTE MAIUNG SERVICE -AGENOA / MINUTES MAILING SERVICE - CHARGE PER YEAR $70 S70 S0 - COUNCIL AGENDA PACKET - CHARGE PER PACKET PER MEETING $30 $30 SO C-58 MUNICIPAL CODE SUPPLEMENT $69 S69 SO C-59 PUBLIC WORKS INFORMATION - SUBDIVISION/DESIGN MANUAL 515 $15 S0 R.us TAX · TRAFFIC VOLUME BOOKLET . S5 $5 $0 PLUS TAX "' CITY OF BAKERSFIELD · PROPOSED MASTER FEE' ·SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT- "A" - SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS ~ NUMBER 4~30103 719103 (DECREASE) 'D * PUBLIC SAFETY D-$1 BUSINESS REOULATION - ADULT ENTERTAINMENT · - NEW APPLICATION $487: 5487 50 - ANNUAl. PERMIT R EN~VAL S1,388 $1,388 $0 - EMPLOYEE PERMIT 530 $30 $0 - MASSAGE ESTABLISHMENTS $134 $134 S0 - MASSAGE TECHNICIAN ,573 $73 $0 · - CAROROOMS - NEW APPLICATION ' S666 S606 $0 - RENEWAL APPLICATION $1,388 $1,388 $0 - CARD DEALERS - NEW APPLICATION '~ S147 $147 S0 - RENEWAL APPLICATION $16 $16 $0 - ESCORT / DATING SERVICES - NEW APPLICATION ' $282 $282 S0 - REN~vAL APPLICATION $135 S135 SO · - - EMPLOYEE- NEW S73 573 SO · EMPLOYEE- RENEWAL $46 $46 $0 - RETAIL SALES OF FIR F. ARMS PERMIT ~' $57 $57 S0 - LIQUIDATION (CLOSEOUT) SALE-PERMIT $29 $29 ' $0 - BINGO - NEW PERMIT $29 529 50 - BINGO - RENEWAL PERMIT $29 $29 S0 - SECOND HAND DEALERS, ITINERANT PREVIOUSLY iNCLUDED AMPLIFIED MUSIC, SPEECH MERCHANTS. PUBLIC DANCE HALLS, OUTDOOR FESTIVALS AND SOUND NOW INCLUDED IN S-27 CABARETS, TEMPORARY PROMOTIONAL ACTIVITIES. HOUSE ADDRESS CURB PAINTING. JEWELRy AUCTIONS. , SPECIAL EVENTS. HOTELS & LODGING HOUSES '$29 $29 50 INCLUDES NEW HOUSE ADDRESS CURS PAiNT!NC - BAIL BOND OWNERIAGEN:FS/SOLICITORS $15 S15 SO - PUSHCART FOOD VENDORS $29. $29 S0 - MOTION PICTURE PERMIT $170 $170 S0 - RESIDENT SOLICITATION $20 S20 $0 - PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND/OR NECESSITY APPROVAL (ALCOHOL PERMIT) S304 $304 S0 FEE IS NON-REFUNDABLE B.$2 CONCEALED WEAPON PERMIT PROCESSING - CONCEALED WEAPON PERMIT $30 530 SO - RENEWAL $6 $6 S0 · D-63LIMOUSINErrAxIrroWING REGULATION - LIMOUSINE DRIVER PERMIT S15 S 15 SO - TAXI DRIVER PERMIT S15 515 S0 SET SY ORDINAl'iCE - TAXI DRIVER PERMIT RENEWAL S10 Sl0 $0 SET SY ORDINANCE - TAXI DRIVER PERMIT TRANSFER $4 S4 $0 SET 8Y ORDINANCE - TAXI DRIVER pERMIT DUPLICATE S4. $4 SO SET SY ORDINANCE . AMBULANCE VEHICLE INSPECTION $20 $20 SO INSPECTIONS CURRENTLY 0ONE BY CHP - LIMO VEHICLE INSPECTION S20 $20 $0 - TAXI VEHICLE INSPECTION $20 $20 S0 " - TOWING VEHICLE INSPECTION $32 $32 S0 D-$4 WEED ABATEMENT OR FIRE HAZARD ABATEMENT Si~4 $1 g4 S0 D.$5 HAZARDOUS MATERIAL RESPONSE . ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST S0 BILLED WITH LASCRISQUIPMENT RENTAL FEE D-65 FIRE FALSE ALARM RESPONSE $343 S343 S0 BILLED UPON 3RD ALARM WITHIN t2 MONTHS D-6? POECE FALSE ALARM RESPONSE - INITIAL ALARM PERMIT 530 $30 50 - ALARM PERMIT RENEWAL 515 $15 S0 - PERMIT RENEWAL DELINQUENCY PENALTY Sl $1 SO $11PERMIT/bIONTH (MAJ(IMUM 10 MONTHS) -ALARM REVOCATION $0 $0 50 REMOVE FROM MASTER FEE SCHEDULE - CHARGE AFTER 5TH FALSE ALARM 5111 $111 - CHARGE AFTER 10TH FALSE ALARM ' $192 S192 S0 D-68 SPECIAL EVENT SAFETY SERVICES - POLICE- SPECIAL EVENT SECURITY (LABOR AND/OR EQUIPMENT) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST - POLICE- 2NO RESPONSE TO LOUD P~.RTiES ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST - FIRE- SPECIAL EVENT SERVICES {LABOR AND/OR EQUIPMENT) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST 0-69 AUTOMOTIVE ACCIDENT INVESTIGA1]ON ' - STANDARO REPORT $0 25iPAGE $0,251PAGE S0 - SHORT FORM S0251PAGE S0.251PAGE SO O-TO FINGERPRINT SERVICE - CHARGE PER APPLICANT PER FUNCTION $10 $10 $O 0-71 VEHICLE CODE ENFORCEMENT Prepared by: L. Simpson 8of 14 7/I/2003 CITY oF·BAKERSFIELD· . PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES. INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS NUMBER 4/30103 7/9/03 (DECREASE) - UNLICENCEO DRIVER FEE (INCLUDES TOWING CHARGE) $99 sg9 $0 D-72 SCHOOL CROSSING GUARD SERVICE $0 $0 50 D-73 PARKING ORDINANCE ENFORCEMENT - VEHICLE TOWING $51 . 551 $0 - PA~KING VIOLATION N/A NIA N/A FEES SET 9Y RESOLUTION B-?4 BOARB UP OF STRUCTURES -LABOR COST PER INSPECTOR PER HOUR S43 S4~ 50 - COST OF MATERIALS ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST S0 D-75 ANIMAL REGULATION ADOPT EX/STING COUN1Y FEE SCHEDULE · LICENSE AND PERMIT FEES: FOR ANIMAL CONTROL · DEUNQUENT PENALTY $10 510 50 · DUPUCATE UCENSE $5 $5 50 - SERV1CE DOG NO FEE NO FEE ' Si) · DANGEROUS ANIMAL (PER YEAR IN ADDITION TO FEE BELOW) $120 $120 $6 - NON-COMPUANCE ' $20 $20 $6 - NATURAL DOG - ONE YEAR OPTION ' $60 $60 $6 · TWO YEAR OPTION $t20 $120 $0 · THREE YEAR OPTION $150 $150 $0 · ALTERED DOG - ONE YEAR OPTION $15 $15 $6 · ONE YEAR OPTION/SENIOR CITIZEN DISCOUNT $3 $5 · TWO YEAR OPTION $25 $25 · TWO YEAR OTIONISENIOR cI'r~ZEN DISCOUNT $10 SI0 S0 - THREE YEAR OPTION $30 $30 · THREE YEAR OPTION/SENIOR CITIZEN DISCOUNT $15 $15 $0 · KENNEL · - KENNEL: PER YEAR FOR OVER 20 DOGS $100 $100 $0 · KENNEL: PER YEAR FOR 11 TO 20 DOGS $75 575 - KENNEL: PER YEAR 1.~0 DOGS $50 S50 S0 · CATS · OWNER I.D. TAG (OPTIONAL): PER CAT PER YEAR $6 $6 - DUPLICATE LICENSE TAG $5 $5 · WILD OR EXOT1C ANIMALS - ADMINISTRATIVE FEE 50 · ONE (1) OR MORE ANIMALS PER YEAR $150 S150 $0 - INSPECTIONS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE · COMPUANCE INSPECTION FEE (PER OFFICER, PER HOUR AFTER ~aTIAL INSPEC11ON} $401HOUR S40tHOUR - CHARGES FOR CARE AND FEEDING · ANIMALS: UP TO 100LBS., PER DAY PER ANIMAL $I $ Sl $ S0 - ANIMALS: OVER 100LBS., PER DAY PER ANIMAL $2.5 S25 S0 - IMPOUND FEES - DOGS UCENSED · UNALTERED FIRST IMPOUNDMENT $25 $25 $0 - ALTERED, FIRST IMPOUNDMENT $1 $ $15 (SUBSEQUENT IMPOUNDMENTS ARE CHARGED SAME RATE AS UNUCENSED DOGS) - DOGS UNUCE/~SED · FIRST IMPOUNDMENT S40 S40 · SECOND IMPOUNDMENT $80 M0 $0 · THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT IMPOUNDMENTS $160 S160 S0 · FEMALE DOG IN SEASON PER DOG · IN ADDITION TO CARE AND FEEDING AND IMPOUND FEES AND FINES $20 $20 · SMALL ANIMALS (UNDER 25 LBS. EXCEPT DOGS) · FIRST IMPOUNDMENT $15 $15 - SECOND IMPOUNDMENT $50 S50 S0 - THIRO ANO SUBSEQUENT IMPOUNDMENTS $75 $75 $0 · LARGE ANIMALS (OVER 25 LBS. EXCEPT DOGS) - FIRST IMPOUNDMENT S50 $50 S0 · SECOND IMPOUNDMENT SIS0 S150 SO - THIRD ANO SUBSEQUENT IMPOUNDMENTS $300 $300 S0 · - DANGEROUS ANIMALS .FIRSTIMPOUNDMENT Sl00 S100 $0 - SECOND IMPOUNDMENTI $200 · $200 - THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT IMPOUNDMENTS ~100 S400 - IMPOUND FINES FOR UNALTERED CATS AND BOGS - FIRST OCCURRENCE $35 S35 S0 - SECOND OCCURRENCE $50 $S0 S0 - THIRO AND SUBSEQUENT OCCURRENCES S100 Sl00 SO Prepared by: L. Simpson 9 of ~4 7/1/2003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ' PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" '. A , SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION ' FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS L NUMBER 4/30103 7i9[03 (DECREASE) - REDEMPTION.AND ADOPTION SERVICE CHARGES * ' · VACCINATIONS, DOG OR CAT, EACH ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST · FLEA AND TICK DIP, EACH ANIMAL $5 $5 · FELINE LEUKEMIA TEST ACTUAL CO~T ACTUAL COST $0 · ADOPTION FEES · FEMALE CAT $40 $40 $0 INCLUDES: $25 SPAY/NEUTER FEE & $10 CORE VACCINATIONS FEE · MALE CAT $30 $30 $0 INCLUDES: $15 SPAY/NEUTER FEE & $10 CORE VACCINATIONS FEE · DOG ,- ~60 $60 $0 INCLUDES: ~0 SPAY/NEUTER FEE & $10 CORE VACCINATIONS FEE · ADOPTION FEES FOR OTHER ANIMALS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR OI~ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES VARIABLE VARIABLE ' $0 ' · RESPONSE TO LOOSE, INJURED OR DEAD ANIMALS $401HOUR $401HOUR ~0 FEE IS PER HOUR PER OFFICER · · EUTHANASIA AND DISPOSAL OF CATS AND DOGS AT 0WNER'S REQUEST ' · DEUVERED TO THE SHELTER, PER ANIMAL NO CHARGE NO CHARGE $0 - PICKED UP BY ANIMAL CONTROL, PER ANIMAL ~ ~ $0 · ' E- RECREATION I CULTURAL E-82 PARK FACILITY RENTAL · -RESIDENT - CENTENNIAL PLAZA ,.. '- PARK AREA RENTAL.ONE AREA W/ALCOHOL PERMIT-4HR BLOCK $28 $40 $12 FEE HAS ROT INCREASED SINCE 199~ · EACH ADDITIONAL HOUR ' $0 $10 $10 NEW FEE - PARK AREA RENTAL · EACH ADDITIONAL AREA $18 $20 $2 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1997 - EACH ADDITIONAL HOUR S0 $5- · S5 NEW FEE · SPORTS REID RENTAL $28 . -~ $4~ ~20 FEE HAS NOTINCREASED SINCE 199~ '(PLUS 10% OF GROSS RECEIPTS IF 'FOR PROFIT' AND ACTUAL CHARGES FOR ANY ADOmONAL COSTS SUCH AS FIELD PREP WORK THAT MAY BE INCURRED) - SPORTS FIELD LIGHTING $6 $6 S0 CH~RG E PER HOUR- 2 HOUR UINIMU~,I -MISCELLANEOUS PARKS.SERVICES · ALCOHOL PERMIT · WITH FACIUTY RESERVATION $4 $0 .$4 DELETE/INCLUDED WITH PARK AREA RES. · WITHOUT FACILITY RESERVATION (NON REFUNDABLE) $8 SI0 $2 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE ;993 - OPEN'TO THE PUBUC · SPECIAL EVENT RESERVATION FEE $60 $100 $40 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1997 (BASED ON SIZE OF EVENT, ADD'L CHARGES WILL BE INCURRED BASED ON ACTUAL COSTS) MINIMUM FEE -SOUNO PERMIT S25 S25 S0 - RESCHEOUUNG FEE ON FACILITY RENTALS $8 $8 20 - CANCELLATION FEE ON FACILITY RENTALS S14 Si4 $0 NON-RESiDENT · CENTENNIAL PLAZA ' PARK AREA RENTAL-ONE AREA W ALCOHOL PERM T-4HR BLOCK $36 $50 222 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED aNCE 1999 - EACH ADDITIONAL HOUR $0 SI 2 $12 NEW FEE - PARK AREA RENTAL · EACH ADDITIONAL AREA $I 6 S25 $7 FEE NAS HOT INCREASED SINCE 1997 · - EACH ADDITIONAL HOUR $0 $6 $6 NEW FEE - SPORTS FIELD RENTAL $28 $60 $32 FEE HAS riOT INCREASED SINCE 199S (PLUS 10% OF GROSS RECEIPTS IF 'FOR PROFIT' AND ACTUAL CHARGES FOR ANY ADDITIONAL COSTS SUCH AS FIELD PREP WORK THAT MAY SE INCURRED) - SPORTS FIELD LIGHTING S6 $6 50 CHARGE PER HOUR- 2 HOUR ~,flNIMUM .MISCELLANEOUS PARKS SERVICES · ALCOHOL PERMIT - WITHOUT FACIUTY RESERVATION (NON REFUNDABLE) 28 $12 $4 FEE HAS ROTINCREASED $1~E -~ · OPEN TO THE PUBUC · SPECIAL EVENT RESERVATION FEE $60 Si 25 ,~$ FEE HAS ROT INCREASED SINCE 1997 (BASED ON SIZE OF EVENT, ADD'L CHARGES WILL BE INCURRED BASED ON ACTUAL COSTS} MINIMUM FEE - SOUND PERMIT $25 S25 $0 - RESCHEDULING FEE ON FACILITY RENTALS S8 58 20 - CANCELLATION FEE ON FACILI~'Y RENTALS $14 $14 S0 E-63 RECREATION CENTER RENTAL CATEGORY A * NON PRORT- NO CHARGE TO THE PUBLIC (THE FOLLOWING CHARGES ARE FOR ONE HOUR OF RENTAL A 3~/O HOUR MINIMUM RENTAL IS REQUIRED, AN EXTENDED HOUR RATE SCHEDULE IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST) ' ' * · MLK · ROOM RENTAL $10 $20 $10 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE t993' - STRONG ROOM $10 $0 *$i 0 DELETFJONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · GREEN ROOM $10 S0 o$10 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - STRONG I GREEN ROOMS S12 S0 -215 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · YOUNG (GAME) ROOM $12 $0 -$t2 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - 5ROWti 0NEiGHT~ ROOM $15 $0 .$15 OELETFJONE FEEPROPOSED FORALL ROOMS - YOUNG I BROWN ROOMS $20 $0 '$20 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - W1LUAMS MULTI PURPOSE ROOM (GYM) S12 $40 $25 PROPOSED FEE INCLUDES SLEACHERS Prepared by: L. Simpson 10 of 14 7/1/2003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD '. , .' ·PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" CENTER - ADOPTED PROPOSED ANT OF FEE SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NUMBER NOTES/COMMENTS 4/30103 7/9/03 (DECREASE) · WILUAMS ROOM (GYM) W/BLEACHERS $20 $0 420 OELEFE · CONFERENCE ROOM $3 $0 .$3 DELETE/ROON PART OF AN OFFICE - XITCHEN (WITH ROOM RENTAL) · ' $4 $4 - SURCHARGE AFTER 10 P.M.. CHARGE PER HOUR $50 $50 - CITY STAFF CHARGES - SUPERVISION ( 2 HOUR MINIMUM) ACTUAL COST · ACTUAL COST $0 PER HOUR CHARGE - CUSTODIAL ( 2 HOUR MINIMUM) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST S0 PER HOUR CHARGE - SILVER CREEK COMMUNITY CENTER · EACH ROOM $12 $35 $23 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED S~NCE lg93 - MEETING ROOM #1. $12 $0 -S12 DELETE/ORE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS o MEETING ROOM #2 $12 $0 -$12 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - MEETING ROOM #1 & #2 $20 $0 -$20 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · COVERED PAVIUON $8 $30 $22 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE lg93 - COVERED PAVILION W/LIGHTiNG $12 S0 -$12 DELETE/NO SEPARATE FEE FOR UGHTENING · KITCHEN (WITHOUT MEETiNG ROOM RENTAL) $8 $0 ·SO DELETE/ROOM RENTAL REQUIRED W/KITCHEN · KITCHEN (WITH MEETING ROOM RENTAL) $4 $8 $4 FEE REFLECTS COST TO OPERATE · TABLE AND CHAIR SET UP $0 $36' $36 NEW FEE I # OF REQUESTS FOR THIS SERVICE - OTHER USE SURCHARGE AFTER 10 P.M, · CHARGE PER HOUR $10 $50 $40 TITLE CRANGE~:E~ LEFT OFF ~02 SCHEDULE - CITY STAFF CHARGES - SUPERVISION ( 2 HOUR MINIMUM) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST $0 PER HOUR CHARGE -CUSTOOIAL ( 2 HOUR MINIMUM) ,~CTUAL COST ACTUAL COST S0 PER HOUR CHARGE · CATEGORY B · PRIVATE USE · ALL CHARGES TO THE PUBMC PROHIBITED (THE FOLLOWING CHARGES ARE FOR ONE HOUR OF RENTAL, A TWO HOUR MINIMUM RENTAL IS REQUIRED, AN EXTENDED HOUR RATE SCHEDULE S AVA I. ABLE UPON REQUEST} · MU(. ROOM RENTAL ~25 $30 $5 FEE ~AS NOT I~REASE0 SINCE · STRONG ROOM $25 SO -$25 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · GREEN ROOM $35 S0 -$25 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · STRONG I GREEN ROOU $40 SO .$40 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · YOUNG (GAME) ROOM $30 SO -$30 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · BROWN (WEIGHT) ROOM· $40 S0 -S40 PELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · YOUNG / BROWN ROOMS . $55 $0 -$35 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALt. ROOMS · WILUAMS MULTI PURPOSE ROOM (GYM) $25 $60 $35 PROPOSED FEE INCLUDES BLEACHERS · WILUAMS ROOM (GYM) W/BLEACHERS $30 SO -$30 DELETE - CONFERENCE ROOM $5 $0 ·SS DELETE/ROOM PART OF A,q OFFICE - KITCHEN (WITH ROOM RENTAL) S4 S4 $0 · SURCHARGE AFTER 10 P.M. - CHARGE PER HOUR· S50 SS0 S0 - CITY STAFF CHARGES - SUPERVISION ( 2 HOUR MINIMUM) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST $0 PER HOUR CHARGE - CUSTODIAL ( 2 HOUR MINIMUM) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST $0 PER HOUR CHARGE · SILVER CREEK COMMUNITY CENTER · EACH ROOM $30 $50 $20 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 19~3 · MEETING ROOM #1 $30 $0 .$30 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALt. ROOMS - MEETING ROOM #2 $30 $0 -$30 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL RooMS · MEETING ROOM #1 & #2 $45 $0 '$4§ DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - COVERED PAVlUON $12 $45 $33 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1963 · COVERED PAVIUON W/LIGHTING SJ 5 ~0 -$15 DELETE/NO SEPARATE FEE FOR - KITCHEN (WITHOUT MEETING ROOM RENTAL) $12 $5 -$12 DELETE/RO~M RENTAL REQUIRED W/KITCHEN · KITCHEN (WITH MEETING ROOM RENTAL) $5 $12 $7 FEE REFLECTS COST TO OPERATE · TABLE AND CHAIR SET UP SO $36 $36 NEW FEE I # OF REQUESTS FOR mis SERVICE · OTHER USE SURCHARGE AFTER 10 P.M.. CHARGE PER HOUR $10 $50 ~ TITLE CHANGE/FEE LEFT OFF 2002 SCHEDULE - CITY STAFF CHARGES - SUPERVISION ( 2 HOUR MINIMUM) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST $0 PER HOUR CHARGE - CUSTODIAL 2 HOUR MINIMUM) ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST SO PER HOUR CHARGE E.84 CITY ADULT PROGRAMS AND ACTiVITiES - CITY ADULT VOLLEYBALL PROGRAM - WITH OFFICIALS S200 S200 $0 · WITHOUT OFFICIALS $700 5100 S0 - PRIVATE LEAGUES ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST $0 - CITY ADULT SOFTBALL PROGRAM · LEAGUE ENTRY FEE PER TEAM WITH OFFICIALS S450 S450 SO O - RESCHEDULING FEE $35 S35 S0 sss oD PER DAME - PRIVATE LEAGUES ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST S0 - CITY ADULT BASKETBALL PROGRAM - MENS PROGRAI~t - CITY LEAGUE S350 S350 S0 PLUS ~39001 EACH 4,00; T:C~%AL GAME - &,lENS PROGRAM - PRIVATE LEAGUES ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST SO - DROP-INS ATHLETICS PROGRAM (MLK} - EVENT DAY - REGISTRATION $2 $0 -$2 DELETE/PROGRAM NO LONGER OFFERED - ADULT FLAG FOOTBALL- CHARGE PER TE.~I $263 S263 $0 CHARGE PER TEAM · ADULT SPORTS TOURNAMENTS 85.0% OF COST85 0% OF COST SO TO RECOVER 85% OF TOURNAMENT COSTS PrePared bv: L. Simosc)n ~/: ' .'. ClTY OF BAKERSFIELD I ' ' ' PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II · FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS. EXHIBIT ,A" SERVICE CENTER DESCRIFRON FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTEs/COtfiMENTS I I HUMBER 4/30103 7/9103 (DECREASE) - ADULT PUBLIC COURTS TEAM TENNIS - PER TEAM $97 $97 $0 - PER PLAYER $16 516 S0 - CORPORATE TEAM CHALLENGE. CHARGE P~R TEAM $294 S294 $0 CHARGE PER TEAM E.a5 CiTY YOUTH PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES RESIDENT - CITY YOUTH FLAG FOOTBALL PROGRAM · CHARGE PER PLAYER WITH COACHES PROVIDED $50 $0 -$50 DELETE · CITYYOUTH FLAG FOOT'EAU. PROGRAM S25 ~25 , S0 TITLE CHANGEONLY · CITY YOUTH SOFTBALL PROGRAM · CHARGE PER PLAYER WITH COACHES PROVIDED S40 ' $0 -$40 DELETE · CITY YOUTH SOFTBALL PROGRAM $20 . $20 $0 TITLE CHANGE ONLY · CITY YOUTH BASKETBALL PROGRAM - CHARGE PER PLAYER WITH COACHES PROVIDED $55 $0 .$55 DELETE · CITY YOUTH BASKETBALL PROGRAM $30 $40 S10 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1~9~ - YOUTH SPORTS TOURNAMENTS 50,0% OF COST50.0% OF COST $0 ~0 RECOVER 50% OF TOURNAMENT COSTS - CROSS COUNTRY EVENT - PRE REGISTRATION $3 $3 S0 - LATE REGISTRATION ~4 $4 ,$0 - YOUTH SPORTS CLINICS - CHARGE PER PLAYER PER CLINIC S20 S20 S0 CHARGE IS PER ;:LAYER - VARIOUS YOUTH EXCURSIONS .. '50.0% OF COST 50.0% OF COST SO TO RECOVER 50% OF EXCURSION COST~. A LATE FEE WILL BE CHARGED DP $1.00 PER MINUTE - UP TO 15 MINUTES IF CHILD IS NOT PICKED UP BY CLOSING TIME. · MIA YOUTH DAY CAMP · 7 WEEK PROGRAM .* * S0 $35 $3,5 THIS EQUATES TO $1 PER DAY · YOUTH DAY CAMP · PER WEEK . S88 $110 $22 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 20M · YOUTH DAY CAMP · 10 DAY SUMMER PROGRAM * $170 $0 -$170 DELETE/NO NEED FOR A *10 DAY RROGHAU · CANCELLATION FEE $75 $75 . S0 · YOUTH TALENT CONTEST $3 S0 .$3 DELETE/PROGRAM NO LONGER OFFERED · YOUTH DANCE PROGRAM $3 · CHILDREN'S CARNIVALS' S3 S0 -$3 DELETE/PROGRAM NO LONGER OFFERED - YOUTH CROSS COUNTRY CLUB - $40 540 50 - HIGH SCHOOL SUMMER LEAGUES $10 $10 50 ' CHARGE IS PER PLAYER, PER ACTIVITY - IN*LINE HOCKEY S60 560 S0 CHARGE IS PER pARTICJPAi'~T - YOUTH TEE BALL $20 $30 $10 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1998 - MLK/LOWELL DROP-iN YOUTH PROGRAM $0 S0 S0 · SPECIAL EVENT FEE $1 , $2 $1 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 2000 :" - PER WEE SPORTS S20 S20' · PARTY MOBILE S0 S80' $80 NEW FEE~ROG RAM SERVICES TO COMMUNITY - SILVER CREEK AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM S0 S12 ' $12 NEW FEE I FEE IS PER WEEK NON-RESIDENT · CiTY YOUTH BASKETBALL PROGRAM $0 ~0 $50 NEW FEE - YOUTH SPORTS TOURNAMENTS 50,0% OF COST 50.0% OF COST S0 ;o RECOVER 5~% OF TOURNAMENT COG'S - CROSS COUNTRY EVENT · · - PRE REGISTRATION $3 - LATE REGISTRATION $4 $4 S0 - YouTH SPORTS CLINICS - CHARGE PER PLAYER PER CLINIC 520 520 $0 CHARGE IS PE~ PLAYER - VARIOUS YOUTH EXCURSIONS 50,0% OF COST50.0% OF COST S0 TO RECOVER 50% OF EXCURSION COSTS A LATE FEE WILL BE CHARGED OF $1,00 PER MINUTE- UP TO 15 MINUTES IF CHILO IS NOT PICKED UP BY CLOSING TIME. . · MIA YOUTH DAY CAMP· 7 WEEK PROGRAM $0 ~45 $35 NEW FEE · YOUTH DAY CAMP. PER WEEK S88 5140 S52 FEE HAS NOT INCREASEO SINCE 2000 -*** ~ · YOUTH DAY CAMP· 10 DAY SUMMER PROGRAM $170 S0 -$170 DELETE/NO NEED FOR A ~00AY PROQHAI,! . - CANCELLATION FEE 575 S75 50 - YOUTH CROSS COUNTRY CLUB S40 S40 ' $0 - HIGH SCHOOL SUMMER LEAGUES SIO 510 SO CHARGE I$ PER PLAYER* PER AC TIVtT~ -IN-LINE HC~KEY 560 $60 50 CHARGE ~S PER PARTICIPANT · .~ - YOUTH TEE BALL S20 $40 520 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 19~J8 - MLK/LOWELL DROP-IN YOUTH PROGRAM S0 S0 50 ' · SPECIAL EVENT FEE Si $2 51 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 2000 -PER WEE SPORTS S20 520 50 - PARTY MOBILE ~0 5100 $100 NEW FEE/PROGRAM SERV/CES TO COMMUNITY · SILVER CREEK AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM S0 SiS Si5 NEW FEE I FEE IS PER WEEK ii' E-86 AQUATIC PROGRAMS- RECREATIONAL SWIMMING' ' ' RESIDENT · RECREATIONAL SWIM. DALLY 51 S2 Sl FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1993 [~LVER CREEK, MLK & JEFFERSON) I - RECREATIONAL SWIM · DAILY - MCMURTREY FAClUTY $0 $3 $3 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUAU~r' SWIM FACILITY Prepared by: L. Simpson 12 of 14 7,1.2003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR ClTY. SERVICE 'CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASFJ NOTESJCOMMENTS NUMBER 4/30103 7FJI03 ' (DECREASE) - RECREATIONAL SWIM. PUNCH PASS $30 $~;5 $25 FEE IS GOOD FOR 30 POOl ADMISSIONS (SILVER CREEK, MLK, & JEFFERSON) · RECREATIONAL SWIM · PUNCH PASS · MCMURTREY FACIUTY $5 $30 $80 ' FEE IS DODO FOR 3O POOl. ADMISSIONS · LAP SWIM DAILY. ALL POOLS $2 $3 $1 FEE HAS HOT INCREASED SINCE · LAP SWIM. PUNCH PASS $.10 $80 $50 ' FEE IS GOOD FOR 3O POOL AD~a~SS~ONS · WATER MOVIES - PER PERSON (53.00 D~SCOUNT FOR FAMILY OF FiVE OR MORE $3 $3 $0 - SPECIAL AQUATIC EVENTS (PER PARTICIPANT - PER DAY) S5 55 SO PER PARTICIPANT - PER DAY - TRAINING · SWIM INSTRUCTOR TRAINING $40 $30 -SI0 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRAINING · NEW LIFEGUARD TRAINING $75 $60 .St S REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRAINING · RENEWAL UFEGUARD TRAINING $60 $50 -$10 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRNNIHO -AQUATIC PROGRAMS - SWIMMING LESSONS - SWIM LESSONS $28 ~ $12 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 200~ · PRIVATE LESSONS · ALL POOLS $50 $50 $10 FEE HAS NOTINCREASEE S~NCE 199S · SEMI-PRIVATE LESSONS $31 $0 .$31 DELETE/PROGRAM NO LONGER OFEEREO · SWIM LESSONS AT MIX $5 $10 $5 FEE HAS NOTINCREASED sINcE 20eO ' · COMPETITIVE SWIMMING - ALL POOLS $40 $65 $25 FEE ADJUSTED TO RECOVER COSTS · POOL PARTY RENTAL $45 SS0 $3 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 2000 (ALL POOLS EXCEPT MCMURTREY. MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL OETERMINE ADO'L COSTS FOR UFEGUARDS ADOEO TO MINIMUM FEE) · POOL PARTY RENTAL-RECREATIONAL POOL · MCMURTREY FACILITY S0 $90 $90 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUAUTY S~IM FACIUTY (MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO S0 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE AOD'L COSTS FOR LIFEGUARDS ADDED TO MIN. FEE) · POOL PARTY RENTAL-COMPETITIVE POOL - MCMURTREY FACIUTY $5 $130 $130 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUAUTY SI~IM FACIUTY (MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. S~ZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE ADD'L COSTS FOR UFEGUARDS ADOED TO MIN. FEE) 51 - 100 PEOPLE $50 S0 .$50 DELETE 101 · 2~)0 PEOPLE $55 SO .$~15 DELETE -ALL OTHER POOLS I - 50 PEOPLE $40 $0 -~40 DELETE 51 - 100 PEOPLE $45 $0 -$45 DELETE t01 · 200 PEOPLE $50 $5 .$50 DELETE · SWIM CLUB RENTAL · HOURLY (EXCEPT MCMURTREY) 535 $40 $5 FEE LAST INCREASED IN 2002 · SWIM CLUB RENTAL · HOURLY. MCMURTREY FACILITY $0 $50 550 NEW FEE/HIGRER QUAUTY SWIM FAC~UTY (RENTAL OF 8 - 25 YARD LANES) · SWIM CLUB RENTAL · HOURLY · MCMURTREY FACILITY $0 $110 S110 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUALITY SWIM FACILITY (RENTAL OF 8- 50 METER LANES) · - POOL SECURITY FEE $90 $90 50 NON.RESIDENT · RECREATIONAL SWIM. DALLY $1 52 $I FEE HAS HOT INCREASED SINCE 1993 (SILVER CREEl(, MIX & JEFFERSON) - RECREATIONAL SWIM · DAILY· MCMURTREY FAClUTY $0 S3 $3 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUAUTY SWIM FACILITY - RECREATION.~,L SWIM · PUNCH PASS $30 5?0 $40 FEE IS GOOD FOR 30 POOL ADMISSIONS (SILVER CREEK, MIX, & JEFFERSON) · RECREATIONAL SWIM. PUNCH PASS. MCMURTREY FACILITY $O 5100 5100 FEE ~S GOOD FOR 30 POOL ADMISSIONS · LAP SWIM DALLY. ALL POOLS 52 ~3 SI FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1992 - LAP SWIM- PUNCH PASS $30 Sll 5 585 FEE IS GOOD FOR 30 POOL ADMISSIONS - WATER MOVIES · PER PERSON (53,00 DISCOUNT FOR FAMILY OF FIVE OR MORE) 53 53 50 - SPECIAL AQUATIC EVENTS (PER PARTICIPANT - PER DAY) 55 55 SO PER PARTICIPANT- PER DAY - TRAINING · - SWIM INSTRUCTOR TRAINING ' $40 $30 410 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRAINING - NEW LIFEGUARD TRAINING S?5 S60 .$15 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRAINING - RENEWAL UFEGUARD TRAINING S60 S5(~ -S10 REFLECTS ACTUAL COSTOF TRAINING -AQUATIC PROGRAMS · SWIMMING LESSONS · b~M LESSONS $41 550 59 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 2~00 - PRIVATE LESSONS· ALL POOLS $50 575 52S FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1992 · SW1M LESSONS AT MIX S0 $15 $15 NEW FEE I SPUT FROM CITY RESIOENTS · COMPETITIVE SWIMMING - ALL POOLS $51 ~80 529 FEE ADJUSTED TO RECOVER COSTS · POOL PARTY RENTAL $50 $65 515 FEE HAS NOT INCREASEO SINCE 2000 (ALL POOLS EXCEPT MCMURTREY. MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE ADD'L COSTS FOR LIFEGUARDS ADDED TO MINIMUM FEE) Prepared by: L. Simpson 13of14 71112003 ~: ·, " · ' CITY OF BAKERSFIELD· ' - ' ' " PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 · PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "A" ' SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS ' I NUMBER 4/30/03 ?19103 (DECREASE ~ '- - '- POOL PARTY RENTAL-RECREATIONAL POOL- MCMURTREY FACIUTY ' ' 20 5115 2116 NEW TEE/HIGHER QUAUTY SWIM FACIU~Y (MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 5(I PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY W1LL DETERMINE ADD'L COSTS FOR UFEGUARDS ADDED TO MIN. FEE) · POOL PARTY RENTAL-COMPETITIVE POOL · MCMURTREY FACILITY . $0 ' 2165 $165 NEW FEE/H~G:q ER QUAUT~f ~/IM FACIUTY (MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE ADO'L COSTS FOR UFEGUARDS ADDED TO MIN. FEE 51 - 100 PEOPLE $50 $0 .$56 DELETE 101 - 200 PEOPLE $56 20 -$55 DELETE · ALL OTHER POOLS 1 · 50 PEOPLE $45 20 ' .$45 DELETE 51 - 100 PEOPLE $50 $0 .260 DEtETE 101 - 200 PEOPLE . $55 ' $0 .$55 DELETE - SW1M CLUB RENTAL · HOURLY (EXCEPT MCMURTREY} $35 25(] 215 'FEE LAST ~NCREASED IN 2002 - SWIM CLUB RENTAL- HOURLY· MCMURTREY FACIUTY $0 265 265 NEW FEFJHIGHER QUAUTY SWIM FACIUTY (RENTAL OF 8 · 25 YARD LANES) - SVVIM CLUB RENTAL- HOURLY ~ MCMURTREY FACIUTY $0 2140 $140 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUALITY SWIM FAC~UTY (RENTAL OF 8 - 50 METER LANES) - POOL SECURITY FEE $90 $90 20 E-87 LEISURE CLASSES A PERCENTAGE OF CLASS REGISTRATION FEE · MLK LEISURE CLASSES · RESIDENTS $0 $5 25 NEW FEE. - · MLK LEISURE CLASSES - NON-RESIDENTS $0 $7 27 NEW FEE - CITY PROVIDES FACILITY 20 20 "$0 · - CONTRACTOR PROVIDES FACIUTY $0 $0 20 F -MISCELLANEOUS FEES F-9! FIRE HYDRANT DISTRIBUTION AND INSTALLATION INSPECTION 2967 5967 $0 FEE ~F.R HY[}RANT - HYDRANT FLOW AND TES'RNG $47 $47 S0 I .- AFTER HOURS TESTING $64 S64 20 F-93 PROCESSING SCHOOL FACILITY FEES $10 $10 20 F-94 . COMPUTER DATA ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST 0 F·95 ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FEES - FAIR HOUSING WORKSHOP FEE . 2300 5300 -TOP FLOOR RENTAL $150 +.$12 / HR 2150 ~-512/HR 0 F.96 GEOLOGICAL SURVEY STREET USE S220 S220 S0 F-97 CHECI( COLLECTION $15 515 F-98 CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER RENTAL ' $300 S300 $0 F-99 BROADCAST CHARGES FOR CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS - EQUIPMENT CHARGES · VIDEO PRESENTATION SYSTEM 20 534 234 NE'//FEE I CHG PER HOUR - BROADCASTING EQUIPMENT $0 5100 2~00 NEW FEE I CHG PER HOUR · STAFF CHARGES ' $0 ACTUAL COST VARIES NEWFEE · TAPE DUPUCATION $0 ACTUAL COST VA~qJES NEW FEE F.100 BUSINESS UCENSE PROCESSING FEES: 20 $5 $5 NEWFEE - INITIAL BUSINESS LICENSE PROCESSING S0 S5 S5 · · · RENEWAL BUSINESS UCENSE PROCESSING. $0 $5 $5 NEW FEE Prepared by: L. Simpson 14 of 14 7/1/2003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CIT~ SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "B" - PROPOSED CHANGES ONLY ADOPTED PROPOSED AMT OF FEE CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION - FEES FEES INCREASE/ ROTES/COMMENTS NUMSER 3125103 ?19103 (DECREASE} A - INSPECTION FEES & SERVICES A-I NEW RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION · GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE $65 $65 $6 MOVED FROM n-2~ A-5 STREET CUT INSPECTION · STREET CUTINSPECTION $130 $176 US · RESTRUCTURED/INCREASED COSTS · INSPECTION FEE DEPOSIT $65 $68 $23 REQUESTS iNSPECT AFTER STANDARD WORHDAY ?A~-4PM MON. A-6 PUBUC IMPROVEMENT INSPECTION - PUBUC IMPROVEMENT INSPECTION $120+0,94% X VAL $176+1,04% X VAL VARIES RESTRUCTURED I INCREASED COSTS A-7 STREET ENCROACHMENT INSPECTION $145 $150 $5 3.4% INCREASE PROPOSED A-16 FIRE SAFETY REVIEW/INSPECTION · SAFETY INSPECTIONS. PRIVATE PARTY/INSURANCE REQUESTS $60 $75 $15 PER HOUR CHARGE · REINSPECTION FEE $60 $75 $15 PER HOUR CHARGE , · UQUIFIED PETROLEUM GAS INSTALLATION $134 $0 -$134 DELETE. SEE ABOVE GROUND FLAMMABLE UQUID · RE/NSPECTION FEE ~67 $0 ·$67 DELETE. SEE ABOVE GROUND R.~MABLE UQUID · TENT INSTALLATION (ONE TIME FEE) $66 ST§ $9 ,. PER HOUR CHARGE · REINSPECTION FEE $66 $?$ $9 PER HOUR CHARGE - AFTER HOURS TENT INSTALLATION $92 $89 -~3 PER HOUR CHARGE · AFTER HOURS REINSPECTION FEE $92 $89 -$3 PER HOUR CHARGE · PAINT BOOTHS (ONE TIME FEE) · NEW SPRAY PAINT BOOTHS $164 $191 $27 · REINSPECTION FEE $92 S75 -$7 · HIGH RISE INSPECTION FEE $111 S131 ,$20 PER HOUR FOR 2 INSPECTORS WOlfING TOGEI'HER · ADDITIONAL HOURS · FIRE INSPECTOR $35 $6 .$35 DELETE. INAPPUCABLE · ADDITIONAL HOURS - FIRE CAPTAIN $62 . $6 -$92 DELETE. ~NAPPUCABLE · REINSPECTION FEE $I! 1 $131 $20 PER HOUR FOR 2 INSPECTORS WORKING TOGETHER · FIRE PROTECTION EQUIPMENT · SPRINKLER SYSTEM INSPECTION (COMMERCIAL) · · MINIMUM FEE ' ' $408 $490 $82 · REINSPECTION FEE $204 $75 .S129 PER HOUR · SPRINKLER SYSTEM iNSPECTION (ADDITIONS I REMODELS) · MINIMUM FEE $119 $t41 ,$22 · REINSPECTION FEE $60 $75 $15 PER HOUR · FiRE ALARM SYSTEM COMPONENT INSPECTION · MINIMUM FEE $165 $195 $30 · RE/NSPECTION FEE $83 $?S -$6 PER HOUR · COMMERCIAL VENT HOOD INSPECTION $124 $148 $24 · INSPECTION OF EACH ADDITIONAL VENT HOOD S12 S30 $18 · RE/NSPECTION FEE $62 $75 $13 PER HOUR · STANDPIPE INSPECTION · INSPECTION OF ONE STANDPIPE $82 $98 $16 · CHARGE FOR EACH ADDITIONAL STANDPIPE $25 $30 $5 ' - ' · REINSPECTION FEE $41 $75 $34 PER HOUR · EXPLOSNES PURCHASE. SALES & STORAGE INSPECTION INSPECTION & PERMIT FEE (IF MATERIAL TYPE CHANGES) - FIRST INSPECTION $150 $177 $27 · EXPLOSIVES STORAGE PERMIT $14 $25 $11 · REINSPECTION FEE $75 S75 S0 PER HOUR · PYROTECHNICS INSPECTION $6 $50 $50 NEW FEE I ONE TIME FEE PER EVENT - NORMAL BUSINESS HOURS $6 $75 $75 NEW FEE I PER HOUR · FIRST INSPECTION $159 ,$0 -$159 DELETE · SECOND INSPECTION S128 S0 .S128 DELETE . THIRD INSPECTION $98 S0 ·$98 DELETE · AFTER HOURS RATE $0 $89 S/I9 NEW FEE I PER HOUR - FIRST INSPECTION $216 $0 .$216 DELETE · SECOND INSPECTION S173 S0 -$173 DELETE · THIRD INSPECTION $127 S0 -$127 DEi. ETE - LAND USE REVIEW I PERMITS 8-23 FIRE SUPPRESSION. PERMIT PROCESSING AND PLAN REVIEW FEES · STANDPIPE SYSTEM PLAN REVIEW $0 40% OF PLAN INSP.VARIES iN ADOITION TO ORIGINAL INSPECTION FEE IN · PORTABLELPGSTORAGFJOISTRIBUTION(ONETiMEFEEFOR BUSINESSESWIPORTABLE PROPANE $0 $54 $,~4 NEW FEE . MAIL OUT INSPECTION $0 $25 S25 NEW FEE · FIRE PREVENTION OVERSIGHT S/IS $87 S2 C,O.L.A. B.24 SION- PERMIT PROCESSING AND INSPECTIONS FEES - SIGN, PERMANENT. FACE CHANGE S0 S40 $40 NEW FEE B-26 MINOR LAND DMSION REVIEW - RIGHT OF WAY VACATION $410 $1,235 $825 RESTRUCTURED FEE Prepared by: L. Simpson 1 of 6 7/112003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II. : ~: FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "B" - PROPOSED CHANGES ONLY SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTE NUMBER 3/26/03 7/9103 DECREASE) $! 235 + TIME/MAT NEW FEE P ROPO SAL I BASE FEE TRACED 9Y PROJECT NUMBERS - RIGHT OF WAY VACATON (NON-SUMMARY VACATION) $0 OVER RASE FEE VARIES ESTABUSED FCR EACH NON-SUMMARY VACATION B-28 SITE PLAN REVIEW · GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE · 5 YR REV1EW & UPDATE $65. S0 -S65 MOVED TO SERV1CE CENTER A.1 - GENERAL PLAN MAINTENANCE-10 YR COMPREHENSJVE REWRITE $65 S0 -S65 MOVED TO SERVICE CENTER A-1 D-TS ANIMAL REGULATION . ADOPT EYJSTI,u43 COUNTY FEE SCHEDULE · UCENSE AND PERMIT FEES: - FOR ANIMAL CONTROL · DELINQUENT PENALTY ' $10 $10 $0 · DUPLICATE UCENSE . ~5 $5 S0 · SERVICE DOG NO FEE NO FEE S0 · DANGEROUS ANIMAL (PER YEAR IN ADDITION TO FEE BELOW) $120 St20 S0 - NON-COMPUANCE $20 $20 S0 - NATURAL DOG · ONE YEAR OPTION $80 $60 · TWO YEAR OPTION $120 $120 . . THREE YEAR OPTION S150 S150 $0 · ALTERED DOG · ONE YEAR OPTION $t5 $15 $8 · ONE YEAR OPTION/SENIOR CITIZEN DISCOUNT $5 $5 S0 · TWO YEAR OPTION ~. $25 $25 $0 ~ TWO YEAR OTION/SENIOR CITIZEN DISCOUNT S10 $10 SO , - THREE YEAR OPTION [10 $30 ' - THREE YEAR OPTIONISENIOR CITIZEN DISCOUNT $15 $15 S0 · KENNEL - KENNEl: PER YEAR FOR OVER 20 DOGS $100 $100 $8 · KENNEL: PER YEAR FOR 11 TO 20 DOGS $75 $75 $0 · KENNEL: PER YEAR 1-10 DOGS $50 $50 S0 · CATS - OWNER I.D. TAG (OPTIONAL): PER CAT PER YEAR $6 S6 · DUPUCATE UCENSE TAG $5 $5 -WlLD OR EXOTIC ANIMAL~- ADMINISTRATIVE FEE SO - ONE (1) OR MORE ANIMALS PER YEAR $150 $150 $0 · INSPECTIONS TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE - COMPUANCE INSPECTION FEE (PER OFFICER, PER HOUR AFTER iNITIAL INSPECTION) $40~'IOUR . $40~HOUR SO · CHARGES FOR CARE AND FEEDING · ANIMALS: UP TO 100L6S. PER DAY PER ANIMAL $18 $15 $8 - ANIMALS: OVER 100LBS., PER DAy PER ANIMAL $25 S2S $0 · IMPOUND FEES · -DOGSECENSED .. · UNALTERED FIRST IMPOUNDMENT $25 $25 · ALTERED. FIRST IMPOUNDMENT $15 $15 (SUBSEQUENT IMPOUNDMENTS ARE CHARGED SAME RATE AS UNUCENSED OOGS) - DOGS UNECENSEO - RRST IMPOUNDMENT $40 $40 $0 - SECOND IMPOUNDMENT $80 S80 S0 · THIRD AND SUBSEQUENTIMPOUNDMENTS · ' $160 S160 $6 - - FEMALE DOG IN SEASON PER DOG , - IN ADDITION TO CARE AND FEEDING AND IMPOUND FEES AND FINES $20 $20 $0 - SMALL ANIMALS (UNDER 25 LBS. EXCEPT DOGS) - RRST IMPOUNDMENT S15 $15 S0 ~ ? · SECOND IMPOUNDMENT · $50 $50 S0 - THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT IMpouNDMENTS $75 $75 SO - LARGE ANIMALS (OVER 25 LBS. EXCEP~ DOGS) · FIRST IMPOUNDMENT $50 $50 S0 ·' - SECOND IMPOUNDMENT $150 $150 S0 · THIRD AND SUBSEQUENTIMPOUNDMENTS S300" S300 S0 - DANGEROUS ANIMALS · RRST IMPOUNDMENT $100 $100 - SECOND IMPOUNDMENT S200 $200 - THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT IMPOUNDMENTS $400 $400 · IMPOUND FINES FOR UNALTERED CATS ANO DOGS - fiRST OCCURRENCE $55 S35 - SECOND OCCURRENCE $50 $50 S0 -THIRD AND SUBSEQUENT OCCURRENCES S100 S100 S0 -REDEMF~O[~ ~NO ADOPTION SER~/ICE CHARGEs - VACCINATIONS. DOG OR CAT~ EACH ACTUAL COST ACTUAL COST Prepared by: L. Simpson 2cf$ 71112003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS . EXHIBIT "Bi' - PROPOSED CHANGES ONLY ADOPTED PROPOSED AMT OF FEE CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES . INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS NUMBER 3/26103 7FJ/03 (DECREASE) · FLEA AND TICK DIP, EACH ANIMAL $5 $5 ·FEUNE LEUKEMIA TEST ACTUAL COST . ACTUAL COST - ADOPTION FEES · FEMALE CAT $40 $40 $0 INCLUDES: S25 SPAY/NEUTER FEE & $10 CORE VACCINATIONS FEE - MALE CAT $30 $30 S0 INCLUDES: $15 SPAY/NEUTER FEE & $10 CORE VACCINATIONS -OOG $80 $60 $0 INCLUOES: $40 SPAY/NEU 1ER FEE & $10 CORE VACCINATIONS FEE - ADOPTION FEES FOR OTHER ANIMALS TO BE DETERMINED BY THE DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERV1CES VARIABLE 'VARIABLE · RESPONSE TO LOOSE, INJURED OR DEAD ANIMALS NO/HOUR $40/HOUR $0 FEE IS PER HOUR PER OFRCER - EUTHANASIA AND DISPOSAL OF CATS AND DOGS AT OWNER'S REQUEST - DEUVERED TO THE SHELTER, PER ANIMAL NO CHARGE NO CHARGE · PICKED UP BY ANIMAL CONTROL, PER ANIMAL $40 MO RECREATION I CULTURAL E-82 PARK ~AClLJTY RENTAL RESIDENT · CENTENNIAL PLAZA · PARK AREA RENTAL-ONE AREA W/ALCOHOL PERMIT-4HR BLOCK $28 MO $12 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1991 · EACH ADDITIONAL HOUR ~'$0 $10 $10 NEW FEE · PARK AREA RENTAL · EACH ADDITIONAL AREA $18 $20 $2 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1~97 · EACH ADDITIONAL HOUR $0 $5 $5 NEW FF.; - SPORTS FIELD RENTAL · $28 $48 $20 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1991 -MISCELLANEOUS PARKS SERVICES - ALCOHOL PERMIT · WITH FAClUTY RESERVATION . $4 $0 .$4 DELETE/INCLUDED WITH PARK AREA RES. · WITHOUT FACIUTY RESERVATION (NON REFUNDABLE) $8 $10 $2 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1993 - OPEN TO THE PUBLIC· SPECIAL EVENT RESERVATION FEE $60 $100 $40 FEE NAS NOr INCREASED SINCE 1997 (BASED ON SIZE OF EVENT, ADD'L CHARGES WILL BE INCURRED BASED ON ACTUAL COSTS) MINIMUM FEE NON-RESIDENT · CENTENNIAL PLAZA · PARK AREA RENTAL-ONE AREA W/ALCOHOL PERMIT',HR BLOCK S2.8 $50 $22 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE · EACH ADDITIONAL HOUR $0 $12 $12 NEW FEE - PARK AREA RENTAL · EACH ADDITIONAL AREA $18 $25 $7 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED S~NCE 1~97 · EACH ADDITIONAL HOUR S0 $8 $6 NEW FEE · SPORTS FIELD RENTAL $28 S60 $32 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE l~Ja -MISCELLANEOUS PARKS SERVICES · ALCOHOL PERMIT - W/THO!IT FACIUTY RESERVATION (NON REFUNDABLE) $8 $12 $4 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1993 · OPEN TO THE PUBUC. SPECIAL EVENT RESERVATION FEE $60 · $125 $65 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1997 ' * ' ' (BASED ON SIZE OF EVENT, ADD'L CHARGES WILL BE INCURRED BASED ON ACTUAL COSTS) MINIMUM FEE E-83 RECREATION CENTER RENTAL · CATEGORY A · NON PROFIT · NO CHARGE TO THE PUBUC (THE FOLLOWING CHARGES ARE FOR ONE HOUR OF RENTAL, A TWO HOUR MINIMUM RENTAL IS REQUIRED, AN EXTENDED HOUR RATE SCHEDULE IS AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST) · MLK · ROOM RENTAL $10 $20 $10 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1993 - STRONG ROOM $10 $0 .$I;1 DELETE/ORE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - GREEN ROOM $10 $0 ,$10 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · STRONG I GREEN ROOMS $I 5 $0 .$15 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - YOUNG (GAME) ROOM $12 $0 -$I 2 0ELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · BROWN (WEIGHT) ROOM $15 $0 -$15 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - YOUNG I BROWN ROOMS $20 $0 -$20 DELETE/ORE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · WILUAMS MULTI PURPOSE ROOM (GYM) $15 $40 S25 PROPOSED FEE INCLUDES BLEACHERS · WILLIAMS ROOM (GYM) W/BLEACHERS $20 $0 -$20 DELETE - CONFERENCE ROOM $3 $0 .$3 DELETE/ROOM PART OF AN OFFICE - SILVER CREEK COMMUNITY CENTER · EACH ROOM $12 $35 $23 FEE HAS NOT INCREARED SINCE 1993 - MEETING ROOM #1 $12 $0 -$12 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSEO FOR ALL ROOMS - MEETING ROOM #2 $12 $0 -$12 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - MEETING ROOM #1 & #2 $20 $0 -$20 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS - COVERED PAVIUON $8 S30' $22 FEE HAS NOT tNCREASED SINCE 1993 · COVERED PAVIUON W/UGHTING $12 S0 -$12 DELETE/NO SEPARATE FEE FOR UGHTENING - KITCHEN (W1THOUT MEETING ROOM RENT~L) $8 S0' -$8 DELETE/ROOM RENTAL REQUIRED W/KITCHEN · KITCHEN (WITH MEETING ROOM RENTAL) $4 $8 $4 FEE REFLECTS COST TO OPERATE - TABLE AND CHAIR SET UP $0 $36 $36 NEW FEE I il OF REQUESTS FOR THIS SERVICE - OTHER USE SURCHARGE AFTER 10 P.M.. CHARGE PER HOUR $I 0 $50 $40 TITLE CHANGFJFEE LEFT OFF 2~02 SCHEDULE -CAI~GORY 8 · PRIVATE USE · ALL CHARGES TO THE PUBUC PROHIBITED (THE FOLLOWING CHARGES ARE FOR ONE HOUR OF RENTAL A ~NO HOUR MINIMUM RENTAL IS Prepared Dy: L. Simpson $ of 6 7/1/2003 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD pROpOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS ' EXHIBIT "B, - PROPOSED CHANGES ONLY SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTESICOMMENTS I NUMBER 3/26103 7/9103 (DECREASE) REQUIRED, AN EXTENDED HOUR RATE SCHEDULE Is AVAILABLE UPON REQUEST) ' - : - MLK · ROOM RENTAL $25 $30 , $5 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1993 · STRONG ROOM $25 $8 °$25 OELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · GREEN ROOM $25 $0 -$25 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · STRONG I GREEN ROOM $40 $8 -MO DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSEO IDA ALL ROOMS · YOUNG (GAME) ROOM ' $30 $8 -$30 DELETEE~E FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · BROWN (WEIGHT) ROOM $40 $8 , -$40 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · YOUNG I BROWN ROOMS $55 ' $0 -$55 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · WILUAMS MULTI PURPOSE ROOM (GYM) $25 $50 $5§ PROPOSED FEE INCLUDES BLEACHERS - · WILLIAMS ROOM (GYM) W/BLEACHERS $50 $8 -$30 DELETE · CONFERENCE ROOM $$ $8 -$5 DELETE/ROOM PART OF AN OFFICE - SILVER CREEK COMMUNITYCENTER .EACH ROOM $30 $50 ' $20 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1993 · MEETING ROOM #1 $50 ~) -$30 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS · MEETING ROOM #2 $30 $0 -$50 DELETE/ONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL RooMS · MEETING ROOM #1 & 12 $45 $0 -$45 OELETEJONE FEE PROPOSED FOR ALL ROOMS' _ · . · COVERED PAVIUON $12 $45 $33 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1995 - COVERED PAV1UON W/UGHTING $15 $0 -$15 DELETE/NO SEPARATE ~EE FOR LIGHTENING · KITCHEN (WITHOUT MEE11NG ROOM RENTAL) $12 S0 -$12 OELETF. JROOM RENTAL REOUIREO W/KITCHEN · KITCHEN (WITH MEETING ROOM RENTAL) * $5 $12 $7 FEE REFLECTS COST TO OPEHATE · · TABLE ANO CHAIR SET UP $0 $36 $36 NEW FEE I J~ OF REQUESTS FOR THIS SERVICE - OTHER USE SURCHARGE AFTER 10 P.M. - CHARGE PER HOUR :'$10 $50 ~0 TITLE CHANGE/FEE LEFT OFF 2002 SCHEDULE E-84 CITY ADULT PROGRAMS ANO ACTIVITIES · OROP·tNS ATHLETICS PROGRAM (MLK) - EVENT DAY - REGISTRATION $2 $0 -$2 OELETE· E-BE CITY YOUTH PROGRAMS AND ACTIVITIES · RESIDENT - CITY YOUTH FLAG FOOTBALL PROGRAM · CHARGE PER PLAYER WITH COACHES PROV1DED $50 $0 -$30 · CiTY YOUTH FLAG FOOTBALL PROGRAM *' $25 $25 $0 TITLE CHANGE ONLY · CITY YOUTH SOFTBALL PROGRAM - CHARGE PER PLAYER WiTH COACHES PROVIDED $40 ~0 -.~0 DELETE - CITY YOUTH SOFTBALL PROGRAM $20 $20 $0 TITLE CHANGE ONLY - CITY YOUTH BASKETBALL PROGRAM . - CHARGE PER PLAYER WITH COACHES PROVIDED . $55 S0 .$55 DELETE - CITY YOUTH BASKETBALL PROGRAM $30 $40 $10 FEE HAs NOT ;NEREASED SINCE 1~ · MLK YOUTH OAY CAMP· 7 WEEK PROGRAM $5 $35 * $35 NEW FEE · YOUTH OAY CAMP · PER WEEK $88 $110 $22 FEE HAS NOT iNCREASED SINCE 2OOO · YOUTH DAY CAMP · 10 DAY SUMMER PROGRAM $170 $0 .$170 OELETE/NO NEED FOR A 10 DAY PROGRAM · YOUTH TALENT CONTEST $3 S0 .$3 OELETF./PROGHAM NO LONGER OFFERED · YOUTH DANCE PROGRAM $3 $0 .$5 DELETE/PROGRAM NO LONGER OFFERE0 ~ CHILDREN'S CARNIVALS $3 $0 -$3 DELETE/PROGRAM NO LONGER OFFEREO · YOUTH TEE BALL S20 $30 $10 FEE HAS NOT INCREASEO SINCE 1998 -SPECIAL EVENT FEE $1 $2 $1 · PARTY MOBILE $0 ,~0 $80 NEW FEE/PROGRAM SERVICES TO COMMUNITY · SILVER CREEK AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM $5 $12 $12 NEW FEE I FEE IS PER WEEK NON-RESIDENT · CITY YOUTH BASKETBALL PROGRAM $0 $50 $50 NEW FEE - MLK YOUTH DAY CAMP - 7 WEEK PROGRAM $0 $45 $45 NEW FEE' - YOUTH DAY CAMP - PER WEEK ~88 $140 $52 . FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 2000 - YOUTH DAY CAMP· 10 DAY SUMMER PROGRAM $1 ?0 $0 .$170 DELETE/NO NEED FOR A 10 DAY PROGRAM · YOUTH TEE BALL $20 S40 $20 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE ~ ~ - SPECIAL EVENT FEE' Sl S2 $1 · PARTY MOBILE $0 Sl00 $100 NEW FEE/PROGRAM SERVICES TO COMMUMTY · .- SILVER CREEK AFTER SCHOOL PROGRAM S0 $15 Sl 5 NEW FEE t FEE iS PER WEEK E-85 AQUATIC PROGRAMS. RECREATIONAL SWIMMING . ~ RESIDENT - RECREATIONAL SWIM. DALLY S1 S2 S1 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1903 {SILVER CREEK, MLK & JEFFERSON) - RECREATIONAL SWIM -OAILY - MCMURTREY FACIUTY S0 $3 '$3 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUALITY' SWIM FACILITY - RECREATIONAL SWIM. PUNCH PASS $30 SSS $25 FEE IS GOOD FOR 30 POOL ADMISSIONS (SILVER CREEK, MLK, & JEFFERSON) - RECREATIONAL SW1M. PUNCH PASS. MCMURTREY FACIETY S0 $80 $80 FEE IS GOO0 POR :30 POOL ADMISSIONS · LAP SWIM DALLY. ALL POOLS S2 $3 $1 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1992 - LAP S~NIM · PUNCH PASS $30 $80 $50 FEE iS GOO0 FOR 30 POOL ADMISSIONS · SYaM INSTRUCTOR TRAINING S40 $30 -$10 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRAINING - NEW LIFEGUARD TRAINING $75 SE0 -$15 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRAJNING · RENEWAL UFEGUARD TRAINING $80 $50 -El 0 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRAINING Prepared t~y: L. Simpson 4 Of 6 711i2003 · '. ' CITYOF BAKERSFIELD '' PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR2003 ~ PHASE II · ' FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS . EXHIBIT "B" - PROPOSED.CHANGES ONLY CENTER SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NdTEs/COMMERTS NUMBER 3/26103 ' 7FJ/03 (DECREASE) -AOUATIC PROGRAMS · SWIMMING LESSONS - S~M LESSONS $28 $40 · $12 FEE NAS NOT~NCREASED S~NCE ~ · PRNATE LESSONS · ALL POOLS ' $50 SE0 $10 FEE HAS NOTINCREASED SINCE 1992 - SEMI-PRIVATE LESSONS $31 $0 -$3t DELETE/PROORAM NO t. ONGER OFFERED · SWIM LESSONS AT MLI( $5 $10 $5 FEE HAS NOTINCREASED SINCE - COMPETITIVE S~qMMING · ALL POOLS $40 $65 $25 FEE ADJUSTED TO RECOVER COSTS o POOL PARTY RENTAL $45 ' $50 $5 FEE NAS NOT iNCREASED SINCE 20~0 (ALL POOLS EXCEPT MCMURTREY. MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE ADD'L COSTS FOR UFEGUAROS ADDED TO MINIMUM FEE) - POOL PARTY RENTAL-RECREATIONAL POOL · MCMURTREY FACIUTY $0 $9(] S90 NEW FEEJHIGHER QUAUTY SW~M FACIUTY (MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WiLL DETERMINE AOD'L COSTS FOR LIFEGUARDS ADDED TO MIN. FEE) ' · POOL PARTY RENTAL.COMPETITIVE POOL · MCMURTREY FACIUTY ~0 $130 $t 30 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUAUTY $1MM FACILITY (MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE ADD'L COSTS FOR EFEGUARDS ADDED TO MIN. FEE) 51 - 100 PEOPLE $50 $0 .S50 DELETE 101 · 200 PEOPLE ~5 $0 ·$55 DELETE - ALL OTHER POOLS '1.50 PEOPLE ~40 $0 .$40 nELETE 51 · 100 PEOPLE $45 $0 -.~,5 DELETE 101 · 200 PEOPLE $50 $0 -$50 DELETE - SWIM CLUB RENTAL · HOURLY (EXCEPT MCMURTREY) $35 ~40 $3 FEE LAST INCREASED IN 2~0Z - SWIM CLUB RENTAL · HOURLY* MCMURTREY FACIUTY $0 $50 $50 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUALITY SVWM FACIUTY (RENTAL OF 8 · 25 YARD LANES) - SWIM CLUB RENTAL- HOURLY · MCMURTREY FACIUTY $0 $110 $110 NE~ FEE/HIGHER QUAUTY SWIM FACIUT~ (RENTAL OF 5 · 50 METER LANES) NON-RESIDENT - RECREATIONAL b~MM · DAILY $1 $2 $1 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1993 (SILVER CREEK, MLK & JEFFERSON) · RECREATIONAL SWIM · ONLY · MCMURTREY FACIUTY $3 $3 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUAUTY SW~M FACILITY · RECREATIONAL SWIM · PUNCH PASS $30 $70 $40 FEE IS GOOD FOR 30 ~OOL ADMiSSiONS (SILVER CREEK, BLK, & JEFFERSON) - RECREATIONAL SWIM · PUNCH PASS· BCMURTREY FACILITY $0 $100 $100 ~ IS GOOD FOR 30 ~OOL ADMISSIONS - LAP SI~M DAILY- ALL POOLS $2 $3 $1 FEE NAS NOT iNCREASED SINCE 1992 - LAP SWIM. PUNCH PASS $30 SI 15 $85 FEE IS GOOD FOR 30 POOL ADMISSIONS - SWIM INSTRUCTOR TRAINING $40 $30 -$10 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRAINING - NEW UFEGUARD TRAINING $75 $60 -$15 REFLECTS ACTUAt. COST OF TRN NJNO - RENEWAL UFEGUARD TRAINING $60 $50 -$10 REFLECTS ACTUAL COST OF TRN NING -AQUATIC PROGRAMS ' ' ~ ' · SWIMMING LESSONS - SWIM LESSONS $41 $50 $9 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 2000 - PRIVATE LESSONS - ALL POOLS $50 $75 - $25 FEE NAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 1992 · SWIM LESSONS AT MU( S0 $1S $15 REW FEE I SPUY FROM CITY RESIDENTS - COMPETITIVE SWIMMING. ALL POOLS $51 $80 $29 FEE ADJUSTED TO RECOVER COSTS · POOL PARTY RENTAL $50 $65 $15 FEE HAS NOT INCREASED SINCE 2000 (ALL POOLS EXCEPT BCMURTREY. MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE ADD'L COSTS FOR UFEGUARDS ADDED TO MINIMUM FEE) · POOL PARTY RENTAL-RECREATIONAL POOL - MCMURTREY FACILITY $0 Sl 15 $115 NEW FEEIHIGHER QUAUTY SW1M FACIUTY (MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE AOO'L COSTS FOR UFEGUARDS ADDED TO MIN. FEE) · POOL PARTY RENTAL-COMPETITIVE POOL. MCMURTREY FAC[UTY $0 $165 $165 NEW FEE~HIGHER GUAUTY sV~qM FACIUTY (MINIMUM FEE FOR UP TO 50 PEOPLE. SIZE OF POOL PARTY WILL DETERMINE ADO'L COSTS FOR UFEGUARDS ADDED TO MIN. FEE) 51 - 100 PEOPLE $50 $0 -$50 DELETE 101 - 200 PEOPLE $55 $0 .$55' OE~-TE · ALL OTHER POOLS !. 50 PEOPLE $45 $0 -$45 DELETE [. 51 · 100 PEOPLE $EO S0 -550 DELETE 101 - 200 PEOPLE $55 ~0 .$55 DELETE · S~M CLUB RENTAL· HOURLY (EXCEPT MCMURTREY) $35 SE0 $15 FEE LAST INCREASED IN 2~02 · SWIM CLUB RENTAL. HOURLY · MCMURTREY FACILITY $65 $65 NEW FEE/H~GHER QUAUTY SWIM FAC~UTY ' (RENTAL OF 8 - 25 YARD LANES) . SWIM CLUB RENTAL. HOURLY · McMuRTREY FACIUTY $0 $140 $140 NEW FEE/HIGHER QUAUTY SWIM FACILITY (RENTAL OF 8- 50 METER LANES) Prepared by: L. Simpson 5of6 7/1/2003 . - : - CITY OF BAKERSFIELD ',. · ' PROPOSED MASTER FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2003 · PHASE II FOR CITY SERVICE CENTERS EXHIBIT "B" - PROPOSED CHANGES ONLY SERVICE CENTER DESCRIPTION FEES FEES INCREASE/ NOTES/COMMENTS NUMBER 3/26/03 7/9i03 (DECREASE) E-87 LFJSURE CLASSES A PERCENTAGE OF CLASS REGISTRATION FEE ' · MLK'LEISURE CLASSES · RESIDENTS ' $0 $,5 $5 NEW FEE - MLK LEISURE CLASSES · NON-RESIDENTS , $0 $7 $7 NEW FEE MISCELLANEOUS FEES F.99 BROADCAST CHARGES FOR CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS ' ' · EQUIPMENT CHARGES · VIDEO PRESENTATION SYSTEM , ' $0 $,14 $34 NE1N FEE I CHG PER HOUR -'BROADCAST/NG EQUIPMENT $0 $100 $100 NEW FEE I CHG PER HOUR - STAFF CHARGES $5 ACTUAL COST VARIES· NEW FEE · TAPE DUPMCATION $5 ACTUAL COST VARIES NEW FEE F-100 BUSINESS UCENSE PROCESSING FEES: $0 $5 $5 NEW FEE · - INITIAL BUSINESS UCENSE PROCESS NG $0 $$ $5 NEW FEE - RENEWAL BUSINESS UCENSE PROCESSING $0 $5 $5 NEW FEE Prepared by: L. Simpson 6 of 6 7/1/2003