HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 5.C 06/21/20041
0
r
: CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
ti , N !rI
AGENDA ILL �� � � ��, � �. �
,,. Agen`da TrtTe ° ' Discussi on -. on Ainendiiig °'
and Possible Acti'
Meeting Date: June 21, 2004
Re solution`2004 -028 Regardmg Commercial Mooring Fees.
Meeting Time ® 3:00 PM
❑ 7:00 PM
Category (check one) ❑ .Consent Calendar [, Public Hearing ❑ New Business
Unfinished Business ❑ Presentation
Department
Director
Con Person
Phone Number
City Manager
Michael Bierman
Michael, Biennan
778-4345
Cost of Proposal n/a '
Account Number
Amount Budgeted
Name of-Fund:
Attachments to Agenda Packet Item
L Berthing Rates for San Francisco Bay Area Marinas dated March 2004
2. Resolution 2004 -028 N.C.S.
3. Draft Resolution
Summary Statement On May 3, 2004, in response to citizen complaint, the City Council amended
Resolution No. 2004 -028 N.C.S. to decrease the transient mooring fees at the Petaluma Turning Basin from
the $30.00 approved on March 1, 2004 to $20.00 year round, effective immediately.
At the May 3 meeting, commercial customers at the Turning Basin,complained that the rate increase for
commercial vessels from $4.50 to '$8.00. per ,foot from April through September was also too high. Council
suspended this rate increase and asked for additional comparable information from surrounding cities.
Berthing rates for the San Francisco Area marinas, as of March 2004, range from approximately
. Pay
$3.75 to $12.75.per foot, with the public.mean average being $6.34 per foot.
Recommend f S
ed City' Council' ActionlSugges "ted Motion
Amend Resolution No. 2004 -028 N.C.S. to reflect a more modest increase in commercial mooring rates.
evie ed b -Finance Director:
Review At me
A o , City Manner:
/ Date:
Date' .
To v ' ate:
Revision # and Date. Revised:
File - ode:
CITY OF PETALUIVIA, CALhFORNIA
JUNE 21, 2004
AGENDA REPORT
FOR THE DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO AMEND
RESOLUTION.NO. 2004 -02'8 'REGARDING`
COMMERCIAL BERTHING FEES IN THE TuRNiNG BASIN
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On May 3, 2004 in response to citizen complaint, the City Council amended Resolution
No. 2004 =028 N.C.S. to decrease the transient mooring fees at the Petaluma Turning
Basin from the $30.00 approved on March 1, 2004 to ,$20.00 year round, effective
immediately.
May Td g e Turning B'as'in complained that the
At the. Ma 3 meeting,, co
inmercral customers at th
rate increase for commercial vessels from $4.50 -to $,8.0.0 per foot from April through
September was also too high. Council suspended this rate increase and asked for
additional comparable information from surrounding cities.
From 1981 to 1090, cormercial users of ffie Turning Basin experienced a rate increase of
$1.75. Beginning in 2002,,.the City has tried, to recoup rising maintenance costs through
rate increases of the berthing fees. Because of protests''by several commercial boaters,
Council lowered ''thd com ercial fees in October of 2002. The costs of labor and
materials to repair docks, and perform routine maintenance;, however, have continued to
rise.
2. BACKGROUND
The following chart illustrates the recent history of rate increases at the Petaluma Turning
Basin:
Date
Resolution
October through
April through
Adopted
No.
March
September
May4, 1981
91'44
$1.25 per foot year round
April 2, '1990
90 -94
$2.00 per foot
$3.00 per foot
July 1'5.,'2002
2002 -114
$4.00 per foot
$8.00 per foot
October';21, 2002
2002 -170
$3.00 penfoot
$4.50 per foot
March ,l, 2004
2004 -028
$4:00 per foot
$8.00 per foot
All commercial boats currently berthed in the Turning. Basin are up -to -date on payments
of their monthly fees. The Marauder, a boat that was delinquent for two years, has been
evicted from the Turning Basin. The owner currently owes $3,1.03.80, which is proving
difficult- collect as the owner lived on the boat and has no forwarding address.
Berthing rates for the San Francisco /B.ay Area marinas, as of March. 2004, range from
approximately $3.75 to $12.75 per foot, with the public mean average being '$6.34 per
foot.
3. ALTERNATIVES
a. Retain; current" fee structure for commercial vessels at $4.00 per- foot (.October
through March) and $8'.00 per foot (April through September).
b. Reduce the approved fees to the 20,02 rate schedule of $3:0.0 per :foot (October
through March) and $ - 4.50 per foot (April through September).
C. Compromise the increase to $6.00 per foot year round.
4. FINANCIAL IMPACTS
The, Cost of Services Study adopted on July 15, 2002 by the City Council,. provided the
City the ability to recover the cost.of'provi.ding services. Rates retained at ,the;2002 or
earlier levels will not keep pace with 2004 costs.
CONCLUSION
Recognizing the vitality of the Turning Bdsin and the current revitalization'of'the
downtown, a compromise is suggested to charge commercial customers $6.W per'foot
year round. This amount would be comparable to the average oftle San Francisco /Bay
Area'marinas; and would also simplify the collection of fees for both the public and staff.
The transient fees are currently charged, at a flat rate year round, and also received' a
modest increase in 2004.
6. OUTCOMES OR• PERFORMANCEMEASUREMENTS'THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR
COMPLETION:
The City will recoup fees to cover the bulk of costs to maintain the Turning Basin while
commercial users will pay a. modest increase in'berthiiig fees.
7. RECOMMENDATION
Adopt a Resolution. to reduce the commercial Turning - Basin fees 'from '$4.00 per foot
(October through March) and $8.`00 per foot (April through September) to $,6:00 per foot .
year round, effective immediately.
June 21 2004' commerciafberthing fees /Rc
"i Zv I , v-i: -50AAm r Kum LLj Y L) I r- I-u I IN I viAk-i i4A 67& totd,:St)
•
MC CAVbY
:CHANNEL
, a`
, 4 u
4, I i llejih,ROos for
RICHMOND YACHT CLUB In
5;00 4. Son Franc-
PORT SONOMA
Bay Area marilnos:
LA666
5.05 Ma . r.ch , 2604
MARTINEZ
5,) , o .
sPuD oomir
Mean Averagm
5:20 *4 3.62
PT, SAN PAOLO •
1986 3-86
EMBAAC;A,bER0 COVE • WfM
.1966
SAN FRANCISCO -
1,0$7 4A2
1988 437
PITTSBURGH
5;50 1989 4J44
NEW BRIDGE in • JIMIJIM1111WH
5.65 1990 4.73
ANTIOCH • M.
635 1991 4.96
LAURITZEN
OEM= 5.85
1"3'4.97
SM LeANDRO
1904-5AU
FIFTH AvEmuE
NUMB= 6.00 1995 536
LOUVRIE m
6.00 1994 A.?i
1"7 6;33
6-Q5 1"8 5AI
'6.06 19" 633
BERKELEY
MMMM=6.1'6 2 OW, &80
MONTEREY
6%29 2061:,6.168
2W2:6.34
COYOTE POINT
l=lmmm='b—?q
206,&46
BAIR ISL4ND m wor1=1MOMMUMMEM
6.38
MOSS LANDING HARBOR • in 1101110MMMSElIMM
6.41
ALAMEDA
6.,42 COY 6.29'
DOC"OWN "i
FORTMAIN
61 P 6blic Mean
OYSTER Pow -
6.63 A .11
yerage 6.34
PORT OF REOWOW CITY rn
NOW 6.66'
PILLAR POINT
DELTA -M
BRIMARDbOVE
TREASURE ISLAND
7:02 ,
MARWA SAY m
\. Private M600
EMERYYI fn
3 Average. 6.99
BENICIA th
sus m
7,18
OYSTER COVE
11IM1111= 7.20
GRAND MARINA m
7.30
EMGF%V'COVE m
MARINA VILLAGE M
JM7J5
JACK LONDON - M
8,00
LbqPI fA
GOUTH BEACH HARBOR
SANTA CRUZ
8.50,
PLER39
RICHARDSON SAY
A40uit m
i 4
CLIPPER m
f 4:75
PELICAN m
.12.7,5
Pubilc Motina $0.00
$2.50 t5M S7.50 $10.00 $12W $15.00
rn malmod
Price per Barth Foot (as provided by 00Ch rnotino)
rm_ It I I trw •
Resolution No.20
• o,f ' the City of Petaluma C al i f ornaa
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.
OF THEHCITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA,
AND REPEALI NG PREVIOU ES AND CIiARGES FOR CITY SERVICES
ESTABLISHING A SCHEDULE OF FE
SLY ADOPTED AND CONFLICTING
FEES AND CHARGES FOR SUCH SERVICES'
WHE AS,
the 'City Council of the City of Petaluma ( "City ") has previously
established fees 'and c
barges for City services, with the intent , of recovering the City's actual and
reasonable costs to provide such services; and',
WHEREAS, the City engaged Revenue and Cost. Specialists LLC, to analyze whether
the existing fees and `charges serve to recover the City's full costs of providing such services to
the extent the City may lawfully recover such costs; and
WHEREAS, Revenue and Cost,Specialists, LLC have prepared a.report entitled "Cost of
Services Study.for the City'of Petaluma" dated January 11, 2002 ( "Cost,Report "), which report is
incorporated by reference 'as though fully set forth herein; and,
WHEREAS, Revenue and Cost Specialists, LLC have updated the Cost Report (Cost
Report Revised) with current costs consistent with the City of Petaluma Fiscal Year 2003 - 2004
Adopted Budget; arid, .
WHEREAS, the Cost Report Revised identifies the actual costs that the City incurs in
providing certain City service5,.aiid
WHE REAS ,
e Cost Report Revised recoinmeizds revising many of the existing fees
and charges reviously 1 ' established by the City to recover the full, lawfully- recoverable costs
incurred by the City in providing C services; and,
the schedule of fees and charges
b this R ion do not v and charges set forth in es adopted 11 WHER the fees ate Article XIII D of the Califoniia Constitution uusuant to I. p
0
A�a� t»aeii "t Association, of Los Angeles: County v. Cite of Los A�zgeles (2001) 24' Cal. 4th 830; and,
WHERE -XS, in accordance with Government Code §50076, fees that do not exceed the
reasonable cost of providing the service or regulatory activity for which the fees are charged and
which are not levied for general revenue purposes are not special :taxes as defined in Article 3:5
of the Government Code; arid,
WHEREAS, , in acco dance with Government Code §66014 local agency fees for:
zoini c variances;. use permits, building inspections, building peniiits,, filing and processing
applications and petitions filed' with the local agency formation cominission or conducting
Resolution No. 2004 -026 N.C.S..
proceedings filed under the, Cortese -Kmox Local Government Reorganization Act of 1985
(Government Code §560.00 et. seg.), processing maps under the Subdivision Map Act
(Go:veiniment Code §66410 at ,seg.), or .planting sei77 ces shall_ not exceed the estimated
reasonable cost of providing the service for which •file fees charged-; 'and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code §65104, fees to support the work of
p'lau ing agencies shall not exceed the reasonable cost of providing the service for °which the fee
is charged; and,
WHEREAS, it accordance with Govemment Code §65456, legislative :bodies, may; after
adopting a specific plan, impose a! specifa c plan fee upon .persons" ..seeku g, - governmental
approvals which ;are required to be consistent with the ,specific plan, and, such fees shall, in the
aggregate, defray but °not exceed- the cost of preparation, adoption and administration_ of the
specific plan; and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code . §65909.5, reasonable city fees 'for
the processing of use permits, zone variances, or'- zone changes shall not' exceed the .amount
reasonably required to administer the processing of .such permits, zone variances or changes;
d '
•
WHEREAS, in accordance with Government Code §66451:2, reasonable local agency
fees for ;the processing of tentative, final and parcel maps shall not exceed: the amount reasonably' ,
required by the agency; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with Health and' Safety Code §17951 city governing bodies
may prescribe-:fees for permits, certificates or other documents required or.atithorized concerning
implementation and ;enforcement °oftlie'Calif6mia Building .Standards. Code,, and such fees shall
not exceed the. amountreasonabl re ee stet or process those perinits certificates or.
other forms or documents and shall not lev levied for
general revenue purposes; an
WHEREAS; in accordance .with -Health, and Safety Code §19:1313, city govein zg
bodies may adopt fees for filiiig'buildill permit applications, and. such fees shall not exceed.the;
an 1 o unt reasonably required for the local enforcement agency to issue such permits and shall not
atn
evied.for°general revenue. purposes and,
WHEREAS, in accordance with Health and Safety Code §19852, city governir'a' bodies
may prescribe such fees as will pay °the expenses incurred by the 'building ,department in
inaintainuag the official copy of the plans of buildings for which building permits have been
issued, but such fees shall not exceed the amount reasonably required in maintaining the official
copy of the plans for wlich.building pei -nits Have been issued; :and,
WHEREAS, fees adopted pursuant. t
65909.5; and 6.646'1.2, ' and Health and Safety
imposed pursuant to §66016 of the: Govenlr
requirements, and,
i Govennment Code §66014, 65104, 65456,
Code §1795.1, 19132:3, and 19852, are to be.
ent . Code, which imposes certain. procedural
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Government, Code §660.1.6, the Cost Report Revised .
was available for public review and comment for ten days prior to the public hearing at which
this Resolution was adopted; and,
WHEREAS,, in accordance with .Government Code §660.16, at least 14 days prior to the
public hearing at which this resolution was adopted, notice of the time and place of the hearing
was mailed to eligible interested parties who 'filed written requests•with the City for mailed
notice of meetings or new or increased fees or service charges; and,
MIMR.EAS, 10 days advance notice of the public hearing' at which this Resolution was
adopted was given by publication in accordance with . §6 of the Government Code; and,
FINDINGS
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Petaluma finds as follows:
A. The purpose. pf the ,fees, and charges set forth in Section 4 of this Resolution is to
recover up to the full, , lawfully recoverable, costs incurred by the City in providing
various City services, and such fees and charges:-not levied for general revenue
purposes,
B. After consideration of the Cost Report .Revised the testimony received at this
noticed public hearing, the 'agenda report, the• back
gr
ound documents to the
agenda report; and all correspondence received (togeter ".Record "), the City
Council' of the City of Petaluma approves and adopts the. Cost Report Revised,
C. Adoption of the fees and °'charges set forth in this Resolution is untended to recover
costs necessary to maintain such services witlii the City. The City currently
provides the services listed in this resolution,, 'and the fees set forth in this
Resolution Will be used to maintain current service'levels. As such, such fees as
y provision of developf rent related services within the City are not a
the relate to
"project" within the meaniing, of the California Environmental Quality Act or
C.E.Q.A. (Public Resources •Code §21080(b)(8)(D)).
D. In adopting tha : fees set forth in this Resolution, the City Council of the City of
Petaluma -is exercising its powers under Article XI, Section 6 of the California
Constitution.
E. 'The Record ;establishes 'that the costs listed. in the Report Revised as those
incurred vy the City in providing City services. are reasonable estimates of the
cost of providing such services, and that the revisions recommended in the Cost
Report Revised to existing fees for such services are necessary to recover the
reasonable, estimated cost of providing -such services - in accordance with the
analyses contained in the Cost Report Revised.
A:DOPTION OF FEES
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the C*
ity
ofPetaluma does resolve as follows:
Section 1. Fee Schedule, Adoption. T11e fee schedule (Exhibit A) lists fees and charges. set
0 rth .are.hereby directed to be computed by and applied by the various: City departments,
and to be collected by the; City Finance Department for the Herein listed special,services
when provided by the City, or-its designated contractors.
Section 2. Separate. Fee for Each Process. All fees, set by this resolution are far each
identified process;. additional fees shall be required for each additional'process or service
q q per -unit of measurement
that is requested nested or required., Where. fees are indicated on a
basis, the fee is for. each identified unit or -portion thereof within the indicated ranges of
such units.
A. Added Fees and Refunds. Where additional fees need to be charged and collected for
completed staff'work, or where; a refiuid of excess deposited monies is due, ,and, where
such charge or refund is teri; dollars ($10.'00) or.less, a charge or refund need not be
made, pursuant to California Government Code §29373:1' and 29375.1 and
amendinents thereto.
B ; Deposits Plus Staff Time and. Materials. This means that the applicants will be billed
for "the full cost of processing the application based on staff time ,(including City-
retained consultants)' and materials over;
and above the amount 'of the deposit. Staff,
hourly rates shall be fully 'burdened and be determined by regular work rates
established by the City 'of Petaluma Finance Director for the 'I ven fiscal years) iii
wluch the application is processed: .For applications requesting multiple entitleiments,
the deposit .shall be the sum of the individual amounts. The Con= m Development
Director shall have the authority to modify or waive: staff. time and material costs
when circumstances warrant.
C. Flat. Fee Applications. Tlus is, an application fee that doesi,'not iuclude,staff time and
materials..
D. Full, Cost Recovery Applications., This- includes'a deposit amount and the actual costs
of the staff time and required materials.
Section.3;. Annual Cost Increases'. The Finance'Director shall increase f e es as set; forth in
Section 4 on July l" of each year by the, inci ease in the Consumer Price Index —All Items
Index (SarrFrancisco- Oalcland -Sail Jose).
Section _4. Special Service Fees. The fee schedule, - as set forth in Exhibit A., shall 'be
charged' and collected for the following enumerated services as indicatedon Exhibit A.
Section 5. Interpretations. This Resolution. array be interpreted by the several- City
department heads in consultation with the City Manager and, should there be a conflict
between two fees, then the Power in dollar ainou.nt of the two shall be applied:
r I
•
Section 6. Use of Fees Revenue. The revenues raised by payment of the fees and charges
established by this Resolution shall be used to fund the estimated reasonable cost of
providir7g the services for which the fees are charged, and the revenues from such fees
and charges shall not be used for.general revenue purposes.
Section 7. Subsequent Analysis and:Revision of the Fees. The fees and charges set herein
are adopted, and implemented by the City. Council in reliance on the Record identified
above. The City may continue to 'conduct further study and analysis'to. determine whether
the fees and, charges for City services should be revised. When additional information is
available, the fCity, Council may, review the fees and`' charges to determine that the
amounts do not exceed the est imated reasonable, cost of providing the services for which
the fees and charges are charged.
Section ,:8. Effective Date."' This Resolution shall become effective immediately. In
accordance with Goverrunent Code §66017, the fees and charges established herein shall
be effective 60 days from the effective date of this Resolution.
Section 9. Repeafer._These fees- and charges shall supersede the _corresponding fees
previously established and adopted by the'City Council. ,All resolutions and other actions
of the City Council in conflict with the contents of this Resolution are hereby repealed.
Section 10. Severability. The individual fees and charges set forth in Section 4 of this
Resolution and all portions of this Resolution are severable. Should any of the fees or
charges or any portion of this Resolution be adjudged to be invalid and unenforceable by
a body of competent jurisdiction, then the .remaining fees, charges and /or Resolution
portions shall be and continue in full force and' effect, except as to those fees, charges,
and /or Resolution portions that have been adjudged invalid. The City Council of the City
of Petaluma hereby declares that. it would .have adopted each of the fees and charges set
forth in Section.3 of this Resolution, and this 'Resolution and each section, subsection,
clause, sentence, phrase' and other portion thereof, irrespective of the fact that one or
more of the fees, charges, or sections, subsections, clauses, sentences, phrases or other
portions oftlus Resolution may be invalid or unconstitutional.
Under the;power and authority conferred upon this Council by _the Charter 'of said City
REFERENCE: I hereby certify'fhe..foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the Approved as to
Council of the City of Petaluma at a (Regular) (Adjourned) (Special) meeting 7L on the ......... ............. day of ..... M.�oh................... 20.04., :by the
following vote: ....................
I y Attorney
A E5: Mayor Glass, Harris, Healy, Torliatt
ss: Vice Mayor Moynihan
ABSENT: O' rien, Tho op n
ATTEST:
..... . ..... ...:..
City Berk
Mayor
•
DRAFT
RESOLUTION AMENDING RESO'LUT'ION NO., 2004 -208 N.C.S.
RELATING TO THKESTABLISHMENT OF COMMERCIAL FEES FOR
MOORING SERVICES
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Petaluma ( "City ") has previously
established fees and charges for City services, with the intent of recovering the City's actual and
reasonable costs to provide such services; and
WHEREAS, the City wishes to revise fees for mooring services from the present
schedule as adopted in Resolution No. 2004 -208 N.C.S.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
40 Petaluma does hereby resolve to revise, effective immediately, the commercial mooring fees for
the Petaluma Turning Basin as follows:
Commercial Mooring Fees:
$6.00 per foot, year round