Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the User Fees topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Laguna Hills adopts updated development user fee schedule after consultant review
Summary
After a consultant presentation and council questions, Laguna Hills adopted an updated development user fee schedule that modernizes fee structure, adds a technology surcharge for permit upgrades, includes a six‑month checkup and applies annual CPI adjustments; the vote was unanimous.
Laguna Hills City Council voted unanimously April 8 to adopt an updated comprehensive user fee schedule for development, building, planning and select city services following a presentation by a consultant and questions from council members.
Consultant Jeff Wakefield told the council the study’s central goal was to “make sure that all of the development user fees for engineering, building and planning don't exceed the actual cost of providing the services,” and described a methodology that multiplies fully burdened hourly rates by average time estimates for each task. Wakefield said the consultant recommended converting many deposit/time‑and‑materials charges to flat fees to increase predictability for applicants, and proposed a technology surcharge to fund an upgrade to the city’s permitting software.
The study projects the building fee changes to be revenue neutral, a roughly $34,000 annual increase for planning and a decrease in engineering revenue tied to realized efficiencies; Wakefield summarized the net impact as approximately a $123,000 annual revenue decrease citywide. He told council staff and the consultant’s scope includes a six‑month checkup to validate revenue projections and make adjustments if needed.
Councilmembers focused questions on safeguards and comparables. Councilmember Caskey said he wanted transparency about using historical data and asked how the city would avoid being “upside down” if future workloads change; Wakefield confirmed the six‑month review and said adjustments are within the study scope. Councilmember Hazel asked whether Laguna Hills compared fees to neighboring cities; Wakefield said staff reviewed schedules from nearby cities (Mission Viejo, Aliso Viejo) and that the proposed technology surcharge is common in Orange County.
City staff told the council that certain facility rentals and non‑development charges were reviewed by internal staff (not part of the consultant’s development fee scope) and modest market adjustments were proposed for community services rates that had not been updated since 2018.
Mayor Pro Tem Kaske moved to accept the Government Consulting Partners report and adopt Exhibit A (the comprehensive fee schedule) to the staff report. The council approved the resolution by roll call (Kaske, Mathis, Hazel, Wheeler and Mayor Sweeney voting Aye). The resolution includes direction for follow‑up checks and annual CPI adjustments to keep rates current.
The resolution adopted at the April 8 meeting implements the updated fee schedule and directs staff to return with any necessary administrative adjustments after the six‑month review. Public input on this item was invited during a public hearing; staff reported no public speakers on the item at the hearing.
