My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
2005_1121_Packet
Roseville
>
City Council
>
City Council Meeting Packets
>
2005
>
2005_1121_Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2014 2:31:58 PM
Creation date
9/14/2009 10:10:15 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Roseville City Council
Document Type
Council Agenda/Packets
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
176
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
�� <br />�F <br />Memo <br />To: Mayor and City Council <br />Neal Beets, City Manager � � <br />From: Chris Miller, Finance Director � <br />Date: November21,2005 <br />Re: Discussion on the RecommendedAdjustments to the 2006 Fee Schedule <br />Date: 11/21/OS <br />Item: 4. <br />2006 Fee Schedule <br />Background <br />On November 22,2004 the City Council adopted the 2005 Fee Schedule which set forth the fees <br />and charges for service for the City's regulatory functions. The presence of a fee schedule <br />allows regulatory-type fees to be easily identified in one document, as opposed to being scattered <br />throughout City Code. In addition, a fee schedule adopted by resolution on an annual basis <br />provides the Council the opportunity to review fees for services in a comprehensive manner. <br />Review of the City's Regulatory Function Costs <br />Over the past several months, Staff has reviewed the direct and indirect costs of the City's <br />regulatory functions to determine whether fee adjustments are necessary. In general, it was <br />determined that the fees were appropriately set with a few exceptions. Based on this analysis, <br />Staff recommends adjustments to the following fees: <br />Notes: <br />a) <br />h) <br />c) <br />2006 Recommended Fee Adjustments <br />l:.kr;��c:�:• 1:�.�=,�� <br />� 2°� C�ff-�l� [��u�r Li��r�s� 4a� <br />]��iassa�c th�cra�i�t <br />�;;i[ii�r c�rvi�� f[a�ti��Y C�e <br />�.n�EOacltt�cnt a�ra���icni f�e <br />�� �I �S-�}r-k1r�H�+r+�17�Cm�«� ���J�1L�« 1�� <br />Er��i�r� �ar,�l ins ��tio�i c�rm�� b <br />---�- � � ...__:.�,� <br />Pu�li� imp�«��ea�r��ESt �[fnl��c:i (u) <br />�uifdi«� _I���init��ian r�vic�� f�cs�c' <br />� : ;1 ia .k�� � = r��r �_r�r� <br />3�,� 2�0-�� <br />7�,� 1 [�[�_�[� <br />- 1��.�� <br />_ .,. ..���0_�1[� <br />� ��L�.�� <br />- ��l�ti - 5t� L��l�r4k <br />- .� 5[�U.C�� itis 1-��� <br />S�c ���ndix. A S�� �r�nd�x �l <br />3.2% off-sale liquor license holders include grocery and convenience stores <br />Permit fees as follows: <br />1) Less than 1 acre= $180 <br />2) 1 to 5 acres =$480 <br />3) More than 5 acres =$720 <br />See narrative below <br />An overview for each proposed fee adjustment is presented below. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.