Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
National City adopts updated user-fee schedule, sets August effective date
Summary
After a public hearing, the National City Council adopted a comprehensive user-fee and cost‑allocation study that raises fees across departments and sets a master fee schedule effective Aug. 6, 2025; council directed staff to return with options to lessen impacts for low‑income and disabled residents.
Get email alerts on the Municipal Finance topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The National City Council voted to adopt a comprehensive user‑fee and cost‑allocation plan on a motion taken during its June meeting, setting the master fee schedule to take effect Aug. 6, 2025.
Consultant Mike Medvie of Willdan told the council the study measured full cost recovery across departments and recommended fee adjustments based on fully burdened staff rates and departmental overhead. He summarized department-level averages, saying building fees would rise by about 27% on average, the City Clerk’s fees showed an average increase of 104% (noting these cover small base amounts), and police-related fees showed a larger average increase of about 118% for fees that have historically been underpriced.
“Why update user fees? One of the few ways under California law for cities to recover costs is to update fees to reflect the full cost of providing those services,” Medvie said during the presentation (staff report and slide deck on file with the city).
Council members and residents asked for clarifications about the inputs used and whether some fees should remain subsidized for equity reasons. Council members emphasized that although the consultant presented maximum recoverable fees, the council could set rates below full cost for policy reasons. City Manager Scott Huth confirmed staff would return with follow-up work, including a second phase of the study for community services and certain fire fees the consultant had not fully analyzed.
Several public commenters urged caution and asked for more detail. Edward Nieto told the council the city faces an $8.4 million deficit and urged the city to confirm total costs and allocations before finalizing fee policy. “We have to first figure out what our cost is before we start calculating and making fee waivers,” he said.
Council member proposals during discussion included directing staff to prepare options that would protect vulnerable residents, such as low‑income homeowners and seniors, from onerous upfront costs. The council voted to adopt the study and master fee schedule but modified the effective date so the schedule would not come into force until Aug. 6, 2025, offering time to return with potential fee‑relief or deferral options.
The fee schedule and underlying exhibits are available on the city’s agenda portal for public review; staff said the schedule can be adjusted downward later if the council chooses. The city’s materials note that some fees not fully analyzed in the initial scope will be addressed in a follow-up phase and that annually indexing fees to a CPI or other index is recommended.
What happens next: staff will publish the adopted master fee schedule, begin implementation planning and return to council with options to mitigate impacts for disadvantaged residents and with the phase‑two analyses for fees not yet fully evaluated.
Sources: presentation by Mike Medvie (Willdan), staff responses from City Manager Scott Huth, public comments and the city agenda packet provided at the meeting.
