Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fee Schedule topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Riverside LAFCO to revisit fee schedule after staff proposes 35.7% CPI increase and new pre‑application charge
Summary
Staff proposed updating LAFCO’s processing fees (last revised 2015) using a 35.7% CPI adjustment, adding a pre‑application review fee (one meeting, up to three hours) and raising the hourly rate from $80 to $135; commissioners agreed to keep the public hearing open and continue the item to Feb. 27 for agency review.
Riverside Local Agency Formation Commission staff proposed a multi‑part update to the agency’s processing fee schedule, citing inflation and increased staff time as the rationale for higher charges. At the Jan. 23 meeting, Crystal Craig, assistant executive officer, said the last fee revision was in 2015 and recommended applying a Los Angeles‑region CPI increase of "approximately 35.7%" to existing line items, adding a new pre‑application review fee and raising the hourly billing rate from $80 to $135.
Craig said the proposed pre‑application review would include one meeting and up to three hours of staff assistance, a GIS technical review of a single polygon and that any additional time would be billed at an hourly rate. "So the pre application review would include 1 meeting and there would be staff assistance to up to 3 hours maximum for any type of boundary change," Craig told commissioners.
Why it matters: LAFCO’s fees are intended to recover a portion of the agency’s processing costs; commissioners noted that spreading increases annually could reduce the fiscal shock on applicants. Commissioner Steve Sanchez said the commission should consider more frequent reviews so increases are not a "big hit when it's all at once." Craig said some neighboring LAFCOs use CPI indexing, and staff reviewed comparable agencies in the Southern region though structures vary.
What happened at the meeting: Commissioners opened the public hearing on the fee schedule but received no public speakers. After discussion of methodology (CPI indexing vs. an external fee study), the commission voted to continue the public hearing to a date‑certain — Feb. 27 — to allow affected agencies time to review the proposal and comment. Crystal Craig told the commission staff would bring back a resolution next month after the public review period.
Context and process notes: Craig said staff also recommends setting a regular review cadence for fees going forward (annual, biennial or triennial options were discussed). She referenced a 2023 market salary study and noted the commission previously adopted a three‑year review policy for staff salaries. Commissioners asked about the potential cost and benefit of commissioning an external fee study; staff said it is possible but would require budgeting and might be expensive.
What’s next: The Commission continued the hearing to Feb. 27 and directed staff to republish the item with the amended language and supporting documentation so member agencies can provide feedback before final action.
