Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Fees And Charges topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
San Dimas raises several developer fees aimed at full‑cost recovery despite resident concerns
Summary
After public comment, the council approved fee schedule updates that increase several developer-driven charges to move toward full-cost recovery; staff said most increases affect large development applications rather than routine single-family work.
Get email alerts on the Fees And Charges topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The San Dimas City Council approved updates to the citywide schedule of fees and charges on June 24 after a public hearing in which residents raised concerns about the magnitude and impact of increases on developers and small businesses.
Administrative Services Director Michael O’Brien and Community Development Director Louis Tirico said the changes follow the city’s user‑fee study and are intended to recover the actual cost of staff plan review and project processing. Tirico said the city moved toward 100% cost recovery on many developer‑driven applications and noted that an application such as a tentative tract map had previously been underpriced.
A resident who reviewed the schedule asked how formulas are calculated and pointed to a single example where fees increase markedly compared with a neighboring city. Tirico said the tentative tract‑map application had risen from a low prior fee to approximately the $8,000 range, and that comparable charges in nearby cities can be as high as $15,000 for that application. He emphasized that staff expects the increases to be borne by developers and that the intent is to stop subsidizing those applications with general‑fund resources.
Councilmembers also discussed outreach and how fee changes would be posted; staff said notices were published and the fee schedule was available on the city’s website and at City Hall for at least 45 days prior to the hearing. After discussion the council adopted Resolution 2025‑39 updating fees by a 5–0 vote.

