Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council directs staff to explore letting fire district collect mitigation fees, asks to restore 2% administrative share
Summary
Council members signaled support for revisiting how the city collects fire mitigation fees — potentially returning collection to Lake County Fire Protection District and restoring a 2% administrative fee to the district — and asked staff to draft ordinance changes for future readings.
The Clear Lake City Council directed staff to revisit the city’s collection of fire mitigation fees and explore whether Lake County Fire Protection District should collect them directly.
City staff and Fire Chief representatives briefed the council on the mitigation-fee framework, including that the Mitigation Fee Act allows cities or counties to collect development impact fees but special districts generally cannot do so directly. The council had previously adopted updated fees based on a nexus study; the city implemented collection through building permits and established a special fund to pass revenue to the district.
At the meeting, Fire Chief (Lake County Fire Protection District) argued the district has experience collecting the fee and asked that the district be allowed to collect and keep a 2% administrative fee the ordinance currently designates to the city. The chief said collection by the district would provide a “one-stop shop” for permit applicants and simplify reconciliation.
Councilmembers discussed the trade-offs: the city’s obligation to report on fee collection and expenditures, potential additional staff effort for reporting and reconciliation, and the small dollar amount represented by the 2% administrative share. City staff said either configuration would require coordination because reporting on fee expenditures and nexus compliance remains a city responsibility.
Several councilmembers expressed support for returning collection to the fire district and reinstating the district’s 2% administrative share in order to help the district support future nexus studies and administrative costs. No formal ordinance language was adopted at the meeting; staff were asked to draft options and, if necessary, an amendment to the existing ordinance for future readings.
Council direction was framed as a request to prepare ordinance amendments and a reconciliation plan that clarifies roles and reporting obligations while ensuring compliance with the Mitigation Fee Act and existing nexus documentation.
