Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - November 2, 2016 G-03 PHTM CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AGENDA TITLE: MEETING DATE: PREPARED BY: AGENDA ITEM G -b Public Hearing to Consider Adoption of Resolution Setting the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan Development Fees For 2017 and Updating the Fee Model for the Conservation Plan November 2, 2016 Community Development Department RECOMMENDED ACTION: Public Hearing to consider adoption of resolution setting the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan Development Fees for 2017 and updating the fee model for the conservation plan. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: On February 21, 2001, the City of Lodi adopted the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP). The Plan includes a schedule of fees to be paid by property owners who propose to develop their property with non- agricultural uses. These fees are used to mitigate for the cumulative impacts of new development on habitat lands within Lodi and San Joaquin County. It is necessary for all jurisdictions covered by the Plan to approve the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) fees in order for the jurisdiction to continue to participate in the Plan. The fees are reviewed on an annual basis. The 2017 per -acre fees for all categories of habitat land have increased over 14 percent from the prior year. In 2016 the fees went up by 9 percent over the previous year. Fees are calculated based upon appraisal value of easements. Open Space lands have increased from $7,807 to $8,905. Agriculture and Natural lands (the two largest categories) have increased from $15,596 to $17,808. Fees for Vernal Pool (grasslands) habitat lands increased from $46,869 to $66,437 and Vernal Pool (wetted lands) increased from $90,273 to $109,737 Over the past year or so, San Joaquin Council of Governments, Inc. (SJCOG) has engaged in the required five-year financial analysis to the SJMSCP fee and methodology used to calculate the fee. The last reviews were in 2007 and 2011, respectively. The goal of the update was to review, and refine as necessary, the adopted fee model which estimates the costs of implementation of the SJMSCP in compliance with the SJMSPC federal and state permits. Along with the fee updates, the City will be adopting the new cost methodology. The fee model defines the three fee categories (Category A — Acquisition; Category B — Enhancement; and Category C - Land Management/Administration). APPROVED: • - = chwa = er, ity Manager Habitat Fees Page 2 of 5 Updates/Changes to the Financial Analysis Model by SJMSCP Fee Category: I. Category A (Acquisition) — Comparables: This category addresses land valuation and is based on comparable land sales in San Joaquin County. To be included in the analysis, the land sale must have occurred in specific zones of the SJMSCP plan area (Central Zone and Delta Zone) over an established two-year period. Each year, all qualified comparables in each zone, including SJCOG, Inc. easements, are evaluated to set a weighted cost per acre using the methodology established in the 2007 and 2011 Financial Analysis Updates. 1. The 2016 update increases the size of parcels that can be considered as a valid comparable from 500 acres to 640 acres. The criteria to determine valid comparables to be used in the weighted calculation are: 1. All SJCOG, Inc. transactions (fee title and appraised value of unencumbered property) 2. Sales not Tess than 40 acres 3. Sales not greater than 500 640 acres 4. No parcels with vineyard or orchard (except SJCOG, Inc. transactions for special needs) 5. Must be land which would fulfill mitigation under the SJMSCP 6. Not greater than two years old from the date of June 30th of each year with all acceptable comparables included (criteria 1-5). A minimum of 10 acceptable comparables are required for analysis. If the minimum of 10 transactions are not available, the time period will extend at three-month intervals prior to the beginning date until 10 comparables are gathered. 2. The update also changes the index used to bring the nominal values of the older comparable values in the 24 -month set of comparables to current market values. The new approach better captures actual land market trends by changing the inflator from a flat percentage to an annual average representing the change in nominal land values represented by the prior two years of comparable transactions. 3. The 2016 update also revises the method for determining encumbered land sale values for use in the fee calculation model. Prior to this update, the model was limited to the rare resales of encumbered properties within the County. The 2016 update analysis determined that encumbered land sales, on average, represent 70 percent of the fee title value. Rather than apply an index to older encumbered property sales for use in the fee model, the 2016 revised model established the basis for calculating a weighted average cost of easement acquisition as a set 70 percent of fee title value. 4. Future fee calculations will be based on the term of the SJMSCP permits remaining (e.g., the term of the permits is 50 years and in 2016 there are 36 years remaining). Rather than calculate the fee based on the static 50 -year term of the permits, the new model takes into consideration time actually left on the permit and gives a better correlation of acres remaining to be acquired under the plan during the life of the plan. As in the previous model, the Category A analysis in the 2016 model results in costs of easement or fee title acquisition per acre by habitat type and zone and the final cost per acre for each habitat type is a function of the proportion of preserve acquisition by zone. Habitat Fees Page 3 of 5 No changes are recommended for Southwest zone grassland easement acquisition, vernal pool preserves acquisition or for transaction costs associated with preserve acquisition. II. Category B (Assessment & Enhancement) — Refined Cost Factors/Redistribution of Habitat/Consumer Price Index The changes in this category include refined cost factors for biological site assessment and preserve enhancement and management planning. 1. Refined costs to better reflect the enhancement and restoration requirements of the SJMSCP. 2. The updated analysis redistributes preserve acres across the habitat types to more accurately reflect the range and types of natural lands preserves described in the adopted SJMSCP rather than all in riparian habitat classification. 3. Annually, the California Consumer Price Index (CPI), as reported by the California Department of Finance for the preceding 12 months (July -June), inflation factor will be applied to update annual costs for site assessment, management plans, and enhancement plans. 111. Category C (Management & Administration) — Refined Cost Factors/Long Term Investment/Consumer Price Index The changes to this category include refined monitoring costs and updated management and administration costs that are based on actual SJCOG, Inc. expenditures incurred in these categories. 1. The update includes refinement to costs anticipated to be incurred once the term of the permit expires and assumes that the post permit costs will be lower than costs incurred during the permit term as many of the monitoring, reporting, and administrative compliance costs are not required post -permit. 2. Updates annual management, administrative, legal and other consultant costs associated with administration of the SJMSCP. 3. Annual cost updates will continue to use the California Consumer Price Index (CPI), as reported by the California Department of Finance, for the preceding 12 months (July — June) to keep up with inflation on an annual basis. Updated SJMSCP Mitigation Fee Formula = 2017 SJMSCP Fees The formula for fee calculation is categorized into three distinct components (discussed above) to calculate a supported fee per acre [FEE = Category A (acquisition) + Category B (assessment & enhancement) + Category C (management & administration)]. The 2017 SJMSCP fees calculated with the updated 2016 analysis are shown below. Habitat Fees Page 4 of 5 Table 1 - 2017 SJMSCP Development Fees Habitat Type Category A Category B Category C Total Fee Rounded Fee Open Space $6,806.00 $1,713.00 $385.94 $8,904.94 $8,905 AG/Natural $13,611.00 $3,426.00 $770.86 $17,807.86 $17,808 Vernal Pool (grasslands) $50,187.00 $13,902.00 $2,348.30 $66,437.30 $66,437 Vernal Pool (wetted) $49,273.00 $58,159.00 $2,305.42 $109,737.42 $109,737 Compared to the 2016, SJMSCP Fees, shown in the table below, the change is an overall increase of 14% in the Multi-purpose, Agricultural and Natural habitat classifications. The increase is due primarily to the Targe increase in Category A land acquisition costs. Also, the rarely impacted Vernal Pool Upland and Wetted habitat classifications increased 42% and 22% respectively, due primarily to enhancement and restoration costs associated with the creation of those habitat types. Table 2 - 2016 SJMSCP Development Fees Habitat Type Category A Category B Category C Total Fee Rounded Fee Open Space $5,206.81 $1,651.07 $949.55 $7,807.42 $7,807 AG/Natural $10,413.61 $3, 302.13 $1, 880.37 $15, 596.11 $15,596 Vernal Pool (grasslands) $39,415.32 $621.84 $6,831.53 $46,868.70 $46,869 Vernal Pool (wetted) $39,415.32 $44,025.87 $6, 831.53 $90,272.73 $90,273 Projects which participate under the SJMSCP benefit from a pre -determined streamlined processing of the project rather than navigating through the long and sometimes cumbersome regulatory process led by local jurisdiction staff outside the habitat plan. By opting for participation, the project can choose any number of ways to provide mitigation for the impacts of the project through the plan and even control the majority of the mitigation costs if desired. The options are: 1. Pay a fee; 2. Redesign the project to avoid/minimize impacts; 3. Provide land in lieu of the SJMSCP fee which the project will negotiate the easement/fee title costs; or 4. Any combination of the above options. Or, the project proponent can choose to not participate in the plan and fulfill mitigation requirements on their own with state and federal permitting agencies. On Thursday, September 22, 2016, the San Joaquin Council of Governments Board approved the attached HCP fee schedule for 2017. The Board coordinates the review of land costs to ensure that the attached land mitigation costs will satisfy habitat conservation and purchases. Habitat Fees Page 5 of 5 All local jurisdictions are requested to approve the new fee schedule that will take effect on January 1, 2017. FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable. FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable. Stephen chwabauer Community Development Director Attachments: 1) Fee Schedule for 2017 2) SJCOG Staff Report w/Fee Analysis Update summary Steve DeBrum CHAIR Katherine Miller VICE CHAIR Andrew T. Chesley PRESIDENT Member Agencies CITIES OF ESCALON, LATHROP, LODI, MANTECA RIPON, STOCKTON, TRACY, AND THE COUNTY OF SANJOAQUIN SJCOG, Inc. 555 East Weber Avenue • Stockton, CA 95202 • (209) 235-0600 • FAX (209) 235-0438 San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation & Open Space Plan (SJMSCP) 2017 Undated Habitat Fees* F Habitat Type Enhancement Cost/acreManagement Fee Per Acre Multi -Purpose Open Space Agricultural Habitat Lands $8,905 Natural 1 $17,808 Agriculture $770.86 $17,808 Vernal Pool - uplands $66,437 Vernal Pool - wetted Vernal Pool Grasslands $109,737 * Effective January 1, 2017 — December 31, 2017 2017 Endowment Fees with In -lieu Land** Type of Preserve Enhancement Cost/acreManagement Land Cost/acre TOTAL PER ACRE ENDOWMENT Agricultural Habitat Lands $3,426.00 $770.86 $4,196.86 Natural Lands $3,426.00 $770.86 $4,196.86 Vernal Pool Habitat Vernal Pool Grasslands $13,902.00 $2,348.30 $16,250.30 Vernal Pool Wetted $58,159.00 $2,305.42 $60,464.42 ** Effective January 1, 2017 — December 31, 2017 in lieu of fees to be used as the endowment for the dedicated land preserves (Category B + C) VELB Mitigation A special fee category shall apply when removal of the Valley Elderberry Long -horned Beatle (VELB) habitat of elderberry shrubs occurs. The fee shall be paid to SJCOG, Inc. or a VELB mitigation bank approved by the Permitting Agencies. The current fee, as established in the VELB Conservation Fund Account managed by the Center for Natural Lands Management, and approved by the USFWS, is $1,800 per VELB Unit (one unit= one stem over 1" in diameter at ground level which is removed). Fees shall be established by the JPA during preconstruction surveys (i.e., counts of stems to be removed with and without exit holes shall be completed during preconstruction surveys) and shall be paid to the JPA prior to ground disturbance or stem removal, whichever comes first. FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 Table of Contents Notes to User Fee Summary Comparison Al PerAcreCostFactorsbyZone A2 PerAcreAcquisitionCost A3 AcquisitionCostHabitatType A4 AcquisitionFEE B1 PreserveEnhancementCost B2 AssessmentEnhancementCost B3 AssessEnhancementCostAllocation B4 AssessmentEnhancementFEE C MonitoringAdminFEE For 5 -Year Update Only => C1 MonitoringCost C2 PMAdminCost C3 Endowment C4 MonitoringAdminCostAlloc C5 MonitoringAdminFEE Source for update acres => 1 SJMSCP Acres 6_4_2015 2 RemainingPreservetoAcquire 3 Cumulative Take_Remaining 4 PreserveAcquisitionSchedule List of worksheet tabs and contents Model overview and instructions for annual updates Table showing calculated fee amounts by habitat type and category; comparison to adopted fees; linked from other sheets; includes California CPI factor for Category C annual update Per acre easement cost factors by zone based on input from comparables and appraisal analysis Weighted acquisition cost factors by habitat type based on distribution of preserves by zone; adds transaction costs Total acquisition cost by habitat type, for preserves remaining to be acquired Category A fee by habitat type, based on remaining land conversion Weighted enhancement cost factors by habitat type based on estimate of acres enhanced and detailed per acre enhancement cost factors All assessment and enhancement cost factors by habitat type Total assessment and enhancement cost by habitat type, remainder of permit term Category B fee by habitat type, based on remaining land conversion Category C fee by habitat type, based on remaining land conversion; links to summary comparison for annual update Workbook break: the following tabs for Category C are only used in the 5 -year economic analysis update Monitoring cost factors by habitat type, including post -permit annual cost Project management and administrative cost factors , including post -permit annual cost Endowment cash flow, return assumptions, and total in year 51 to support post -permit annual cost Total monitoring, management, and administrative cost by habitat type, remainder of permit term and endowment for post permit cost Category C fee by habitat type, based on remaining land conversion Workbook break: the following tabs are updated annually and every 5 years for acres inputs Land conversion and preserve acres by habitat type for the 50 -year permit term (source table) Preserve Acres, Total and Remaining to be Acquired (from Table 1 and Annual Report updates) Allowed and Remaining Incidental Take Acreage (from Table 1 and Annual Report updates) Preserve Acquisition Schedule, All Habitat Types, by Index Zone, Remaining Permit Term (from Table 2) SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - TABLE OF CONTENTS - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 Category A Category B Category C 2017 Fees - August 2016 Acquisition Assessment & Enhancement Monitoring, Management & Administration, & Post -permit Endowment Total Total Rounded Other Open Space $6,806.00 $1,713.00 $385.94 $8,904.94 $8,905 Natural/Ag Lands $13,611.00 $3,426.00 $770.86 $17,807.86 $17,808 Vernal Pool Grasslands $50,187.00 $13,902.00 $2,348.30 $66,437.30 $66,437 Vernal Pool Wetted $49,273.00 $58,159.00 $2,305.42 $109,737.42 $109,737 Category A Category B Category C 2016 Fees - Adopted Acquisition Assessment & Enhancement Monitoring, Management & Administration, & Post -permit Endowment Total Total Rounded Other Open Space $5,206.81 $1,651.07 $949.55 $7,807.42 $7,807 Natural/Ag Lands $10,413.61 $3,302.13 $1,880.37 $15,596.11 $15,596 Vernal Pool Grasslands $39,415.32 $621.84 $6,831.53 $46,868.70 $46,869 Vernal Pool Wetted $39,415.32 $44,025.87 $6,831.53 $90,272.73 $90,273 Difference Per Acre ($) Acquisition Assessment & Enhancement Monitoring, Management & Administration, & Post -permit Endowment Total Total Rounded Other Open Space $1,599 $62 ($564) $1,098 $1,098 Natural/Ag Lands $3,197 $124 ($1,110) $2,212 $2,212 Vernal Pool Grasslands $10,772 $13,280 ($4,483) $19,569 $19,569 Vernal Pool Wetted $9,858 $14,133 ($4,526) $19,465 $19,465 Percent Difference Acquisition Assessment & Enhancement Monitoring, Management & Administration, & Post -permit Endowment Total Total Rounded Other Open Space 31% 4% -59% 14% 14% Natural/Ag Lands 31% 4% -59% 14% 14% Vernal Pool Grasslands 27% 2136% -66% 42% 42% Vernal Pool Wetted 25% 32% -66% 22% 22% SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - FEE SUMMARY COMPARISON - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE A.1 SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Category A Per -Acre Acquisition Cost Factors by Zone (2016 dollars) Fee title value' Easement percent of fee title value Easement costs b axb Central Zone Primary Zone of the Delta $19,600 70% $19,629 70% $13,720 $13,740 Southwest Zone 3 na na $1,000 1. SJCOG, Inc. Fee Study Property List, Table A and Table B 2. SJCOG, Inc. Appraisals as of March 2015 3. Based on standard easement cost in Southwest Zone of $1,000/acre. SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - Al PerAcreCostFactorsbyZone - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE A.2 SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Per Acre Acquisition Cost by Preserve/Habitat Type (2016 dollars) Preserve/Habitat Type SJMSCP Zone Total Weighted Acquisition Cost Transaction s Costs Total Land Acquisition Costs Per Acre Central Zone Primary Zone of the Delta Southwest Zone Easement cost by zone 1 Agricultural Lands Percent in zone 2 Weighted costs 3 Natural Lands Non -vernal pool natural lands Percent in zone 2 Weighted costs 3 Vernal pool grasslands 4 Vernal pool wetted 4 d e d x e f d x f A B C A+B+C=D Dx5%=E D+E $13,720 $13,740 $1,000 98% 2% 0% $13,472 $248 $0 77% 4% 18% $10,600 $610 $183 n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a n/a $13,720 $11,393 $15,680 $15,680 $686 $570 $784 $784 $14,406 $11,963 $16,464 $16,464 1. See Table A.1. 2. Percent of total lands in each category assumed to be in a given zone. Based on 1996 Economic Analysis. 3. Weighted average cost based on generalized proportion of total preserve land in each zone. Assumes easement acquisition for lands categorized as agriculture and all natural lands except vernal pool habitat. 4. Assumes fee title acquisition for vernal pool lands. Vernal pool habitat fee title land costs assumed to be about 80% of average Central Zone fee title costs. 5. Transaction costs include biological baseline reporting, appraisal, escrow, and survey costs. Costs are estimated at 5 percent of acquisition cost. SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - A2 PerAcreAcquisitionCost - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE A.3 SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Total Acquisition Costs by Habitat Type, Remainder of Permit Term (2016 dollars) Preserves by Habitat Type Agricultural lands Natural lands Non -vernal pool natural lands Total for Natural/Ag Lands Vernal pool grasslands Vernal pool wetted Land Preserve Acres Acquisition Remaining to be Cost Per Acre Acquired $14,406 $11,963 $13,781 $16,464 $16,464 51,585.03 17,736.77 Total Costs of Acquisition $743,133,957 $212,184,980 69,321.80 $955,318,937 15,792.42 2,115.00 $260,006,321 $34,821,360 Sources: SJCOG, Inc., SJMSCP 2015 Annual Report, and Hausrath Economics Group. SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - A3 AcquisitionCostHabitatType - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE A.4 SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Category A Acquisition Fee Calculations (2016 dollars) Habitat Type Preserve Land Acquisition Costs associated with natural/agricultural lands conversion Natural/Agricultural land conversion (acres) , remaining Multi-purpose open space conversion (acres), remaining' Multiplier for natural/agricultural land conversion Multiplier for multi-ourpose open space conversion' Acquisition Component of Natural/Agricultural Lands Fee Acquisition Component of Multi -Purpose Open Space Fee' Costs associated with vernal pool grasslands Vernal pool grassland conversion (acres), remaining Acquisition Component of Vernal Pool Grasslands Fee $955,318,937 52,675.40 35,021.59 1 0.5 $13,611 $6,806 $260,006,321 5,180.80 $50,187 Costs associated with vernal pool wetted $34,821,360 Vernal pool wetted conversion (acres), remaining Acquisition Component of Vernal Pool Wetted Fee $49,273 1. As described in SJMSCP Section 7.4.1.2, the fee calculation allocates the costs associated with agricultural habitat and non -vernal pool natural lands preserves to conversion of both those high value lands (agricultural land and non -vernal pool natural land) and lower value multi-purpose open space. In other words, the SJMSCP does not enhance multi-purpose open space lands but allocates some of the costs of enhancements on agricultural and natural lands preserves to the conversion of multi-purpose open space lands to assist with the financing of those enhancements. 706.70 Sources: SJCOG, Inc., SJMSCP 2015 Annual Report, and Hausrath Economics Group. SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - A4 AcquisitionFEE - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE 6.1 SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Category B Assessment, Planning, Restoration and Enhancement SJMSCP Preserve land by habitat type, enhancement analysis, and enhancement cost per preserve acre (2016 dollars) Habitat Type Total Preserve Acres (including neighboring lands preserves) Perimeter Hedgerow or Percent of Acres Benefiting Other Linear Preserve Acres from Habitat Feature ( Enhanced- Enhancements acres)2 Agricultural Habitat Lands4 Natural Lands Ditches Grasslands Oak woodlands Riparian Submerged aquatic in the Delta Subtotal Other natural landss Subtotal Non VP Natural Vernal pool wetted Vernal pool grasslands Subtotal All Natural Lands Total 1 2 3 4 57,935 378 14,559 858 2,725 10 18,530 6,445 24,975 2,121 15,811 10% 5,794 33% 126 33% 4,853 33% 286 33% 908 100% 10 6,183 33% 2,148 33% 707 33% 5,270 42,907 14,309 100,842 20,103 776 Enhancement Cost per Acre3 5 $55,399 $119,049 $20,318 $31,957 $93,988 $68,550 $33,768 $33,768 $58,197 $13,579 Total Enhancement Cost $42,989,981 $15,000,124 $98,602,769 $9,139,788 $85,372,574 $685,499 $208,800,754 $72,545,599 $281,346,352 $41,145,279 $71,567,437 $394,059,069 $437,049,050 6 Enhancement Cost per Preserve Acre 7 $742 $11,265 $19,399 $4,526 See notes on following page 1. Enhancement criteria derived from the SJMSCP, Section 5.4.6. 2. Unlike most other habitat types, agricultural lands are enhanced by treating linear features that run along the edge of or through fields --features such as roads or drainage ditches. In these cases, the land area of direct enhancement activity is substantially less than that area benefiting from the enhancement. This has the advantage of minimizing impacts to agricultural land production. Installing pollinator hedgerows at the edges of fields and grassland borders along irrigation and drainage ditches, and planting nest trees and associated shrubs and grasses, are enhancements used in the cost analysis to represent the range of types of agricultural land enhancements outlined in the SJMSCP. In addition to benefits to species, these linear features offer benefits of preventing soil erosion and reducing costs for weed control and linear water conveyance infrastructure maintenance. They also enhance the entire field they are associated with, meeting the 10 percent enhancement criterion while also minimizing loss of productive agricultural land. The enhancement cost estimate for agricultural lands is therefore based on the acres of hedgerow or other linear feature multiplied by the cost per acre to install hedgerows and similar linear features. 3. The enhancement cost applies to the acres where construction and/or installation actually takes place. In the case of hedgerows or other edge features, this is only the relatively small area of activity, not the total area that is thereby enhanced. Enhancement cost includes costs for materials, construction labor, and equipment. In addition to the installation activity, the cost per enhanced acre also includes a cost for project oversight and contract adminstration and three years of maintenance and monitoring. For vernal pool wetted restoration, the cost includes 15 years of post -restoration monitoring. 4. For agricultural habitat lands, a SJMSCP describes a broad range of enhancement activities and a generalized target of 10 percent enhancement; providing benefits to species without substantially reducing the amount of agricultural land in production. This can be achieved by implementing the linear features described in footnote 2. Pollinator hedgerows or similar linear features enhance the entire field that they are associated with, thereby counting toward the 10 percent enhancement criteria while taking substantially less land out of production. 5. Estimated based on the weighted average cost for all other non -vernal pool natural lands. Sources: Table A.1, S1COG, Inc., ICF, and Hausrath Economics Group SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - B1 PreserveEnhancementCost - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE B.2 SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Category B Assessment, Planning, Restoration and Enhancement Cost Factors (2016 dollars) Remainder of Permit Term Remaining years in permit term Biological Site Assessment Number of site visits per year Annual cost Total Site Assessment cost remainder of permit term Preserve Management Plan Preparation Number of management plans per year Annual cost Total Preserve Management Plan cost remainder of permit term Preserve Enhancement Plan Preparation Number of enhancement projects per year Annual cost Total Preserve Enhancement Plan cost remainder of permit term Preserve Enhancements on Agricultural Lands Enhancement cost per preserve acre Preserve Enhancements on Non -Vernal Pool Natural Lands Enhancement cost per preserve acre Vernal Pool Creation/Enhancement Enhancement cost per preserve acre Vernal Pool Upland Grassland Enhancement Enhancement cost per preserve acre 34 10 $7,964 $270,769 10 $53,092 $1,805,128 5 $26,546 Sources: SJCOG, Inc., ICF, and Hausrath Economics Group $902,564 $742 $11,265 $19,399 $4,526 assumes 6 hours per visit assumes 40 hours per plan assumes 40 hours per plan for each enhancement project SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - B2 AssessmentEnhancementCost - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE B.3 SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Category B Assessment, Planning, Restoration and Enhancement (2016 dollars) Cost Allocation by Habitat Type Remainder of Permit Term Acres Remaining to Percent of Preserves by Habitat Type be Acquiredl Total Costs - Remainder of Permit Term Total cost allocated by preserve type percent of total perserve Cost per acre multiplied by preserve acres by type remaining to land remaining to be acquired be acquired Biological Site Assessment Preserve Management Plans Preserve Enhancement Plans Preserve Enhancements Vernal Pool Restoration Agricultural lands Non -vernal pool natural lands Vernal pool grasslands Vernal pool wetted 51,585.03 17,736.77 15,792.42 2,115.00 59% 20% 18% 2% 100% $160,126 $55,057 $49,021 $6,565 $270,769 $1,067,505 $367,046 $326,809 $43,768 $1,805,128 $533,752 $183,523 $163,405 $21,884 $902,564 $38,278,062 $199,806,829 $71,483,314 na $309,568,205 na na na $41,028,885 $41,028,885 87,229.22 1. Includes 600 acres of neighboring lands preserves. Sources: SJCOG, Inc., SJMSCP 2015 Annual Report, ICF, and Hausrath Economics Group. SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - B3 AssessEnhancementCostAlloc - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE B.4 SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Category B Assessment, Planning, Restoration and Enhancement Fee Calculations (2016 dollars) Remainder of Permit Term Habitat Type Biological Site Assessment Preserve Management Plans Preserve Enhancement Plans Agricultural and Non VP Natural Land Enhancement Total for Agricultural and Non VP Natural Land (incl. assessment and plans) Vernal Pool Restoration / Enhancement Total for Vernal Pool (incl. assessment and plans) Costs associated with natural/agricultural lands conversion $215,183 $1,434,551 $717,275 $238,084,891 $240,451,900 Natural/Agricultural land conversion (acres), remaining 52,675.4 52,675.4 52,675.4 52,675.4 52,675.4 Multi-purpose open space conversion (acres), remaining) 35,021.6 35,021.6 35,021.6 35,021.6 35,021.6 Multiplier for natural/agricultural land conversion 1 1 1 1 1 Multiplier for multi-purpose open space conversion) 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 Assessment & Enhancement Component of Natural/Agricultural Lands Fee $3 $20 $10 $3,392 $3,426 Assessment & Enhancement Component of Multi -Purpose Open Space Feel $2 $10 $5 $1,696 $1,713 Costs associated with vernal pool grasslands $49,021 $326,809 $163,405 $71,483,314 $72,022,549 Vernal pool grassland conversion (acres), remaining 5,180.8 5,180.8 5,180.8 5,180.8 5,180.8 Assessment & Enhancement Component of Vernal Pool Grasslands Fee $9 $63 $32 $13,798 $13,902 Costs associated with vernal pool wetted $6,565 $43,768 $21,884 $41,028,885 $41,101,102 Vernal pool wetted conversion (acres), remaining 706.7 706.7 706.7 706.7 706.7 Assessment & Enhancement Component of Vernal Pool Wetted Fee $9 $62 $31 $58,057 $58,159 1. As described in SJMSCP Section 7.4.1.2, the fee calculation allocates the costs associated with agricultural habitat and non -vernal pool natural lands preserves to conversion of both those high value lands (agricultural land and non - vernal pool natural land) and lower value multi-purpose open space. In other words, the SJMSCP does not enhance multi-purpose open space lands but allocates some of the costs of enhancements on agricultural and natural lands preserves to the conversion of multi-purpose open space lands to assist with the financing of those enhancements. Sources: SJCOG, Inc., SJMSCP 2015 Annual Report, ICF, and Hausrath Economics Group. SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - B4 AssessmentEnhancementFEE - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE C.5 for Annual Update SJMSCP Fee Update - 2016 (for 2017 SJMSCP Development Fee Cycle) Category C Monitoring and Program Management/Administration, including endowment for post -permit costs Fee Calculations (2016 dollars) Remainder of Permit Term Habitat Type Project Management & Administration Project Land Manager Financial Plan 5 - Monitoring Management Administration Coordination Year Updates Post Permit Costs Total Costs associated with natural/agricultural lands conversion Natural/Agricultural land conversion (acres) , remaining Multi-purpose open space conversion (acres), remaining' Multiplier for natural/agricultural land conversion Multiplier for multi-purpose open space conversion' Monitoring & Administration Component of Natural/Agricultural Lands Fee Monitoring & Administration Component of Multi -Purpose Open Space Feel Costs associated with vernal pool grasslands Vernal pool grassland conversion (acres), remaining Monitoring & Administration Component of Vernal Pool Grasslands Fee $19,920,137 53,133.4 35,288.7 $12,542,577 $5,413,076 $211,667 $411,840 53,133.4 53,133.4 53,133.4 53,133.4 35,288.7 35,288.7 35,288.7 35,288.7 $14,921,108 $53,420,405 53,133.4 53,133.4 35,288.7 35,288.7 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 $281 $177 $76 $3 $6 $211 $755 $141 $89 $38 $2 $3 $106 $378 $4,443,040 $2,797,529 $1,207,347 $47,211 $91,858 $3,328,043 $11,915,028 5,180.8 5,180.8 5,180.8 5,180.8 5,180.8 5,180.8 5,180.8 $858 $540 $233 $9 $18 $642 $2,300 Costs associated with vernal pool wetted $595,034 $374,659 $161,694 $6,323 $12,302 $445,708 $1,595,720 Vernal pool wetted conversion (acres), remaining 706.7 706.7 706.7 706.7 706.7 706.7 706.7 Monitoring & Administration Component of Vernal Pool Wetted Fee $842 $530 $229 $9 $17 $631 $2,258 Note: Accounts for existing preserve fund balances applied against these costs. 1. The fee calculation allocates the costs associated with agricultural habitat and non -vernal pool natural lands preserves to conversion of both those high value lands (agricultural land and non -vernal pool natural land) and lower value multi-purpose open space, thereby assisting with the financing of management and monitoring on agricultural and natural lands preserves. Sources: SJCOG, Inc. and SJMSCP 2014 Annual Report (February 2015 draft), ICF, and Hausrath Economics Group. SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - C MonitorAdminFEE - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE 1 2016 Economic Analysis and Fee Update Land Conversion and Preserve Acres by Habitat Type for the 50 -year Permit Term Habitat Type Number of Preserve Total Preserve Neighboring Land Total All Acres to Land Acres for Protection Preserve Percent Land Conversion Conversion Acres Compensation Preserves Acres Total Acres Agricultural lands1 Natural Lands Ditches2 Grasslands3 Oak woodlands4 Riparians Submerged aquatic in the Delta Zone Vernal pool grasslands6 57,635 1.00 57,635 300 57,935 57% 126 3.00 378 378 0.37% 4,853 3.00 14,559 14,559 14.44% 286 3.00 858 858 0.85% 900 3.00 2,700 25 2,725 2.70% 3 3.00 10 10 0.01% VP - wetted surface area VP -upland grassland VP -Neighboring Land Protection preserves' 707 5,187 3.00 2,121 2,121 3.00 15,561 15,561 na 250 250 Other natural lands$ Subtotal Natural Lands Total 2.10% 15.43% 0.25% 2,140 3.00 6,420 25 6,445 6.39% 14,202 42,607 300 42,907 42.55% 71,837 100,242 600 100,842 100.00% NOTE: In the following footnotes, "type" refers to the mapped habitat unit identified in the SJMSCP Biological Analysis (Chapter 2). The following footnotes provide summaries only and the reader should refer to the Biological Analysis for a detailed desription of each habitat type. 1. Neighboring Land Protection Preserves consist of ditched agricultural lands providing habitat for giant garter snake and pond turtle and other lands as needed for compensation to other covered species associated with agricultural land preserves, 2. Drainage ditches (unlined) generally found in agricultural fields (D types). 3. Valley grasslands (G types) and Foothill grasslands (G2 types). 4. Blue Oak woodlands, savanna and forests (BL types), Blue Oak Conifer woodlands, savana and forests (BCN types), Valley Oak Woodland, savanna and forests (V types), and Mixed Oak Woodlands, savanna and forests (0 types). 5. This category includes those portions of rivers and major streams located outside the Primary Zone of the Delta (Mokelumne, Calaveras, Stanislaus, and San Joaquin Rivers). These were originally included in a separate "Riparian Zone" during the SJMSCP planning process (i.e., "Riparian" refers to a zone rather than to the "Riparian" habitat type. The Riparian Zone was "absorbed" or combined into its surrounding zone (i.e., Central/Central-Southwest) in the final SJMSCP. It generally included River and Deep water channel (W), Tributary Streams (W2), Creeks -intermittent and perennial (W3, W3 -i, W3 -p), Dead-end sloughs (W-4) and their associated riparian habitats (Great Valley Riparian - R, R2, R3, R5, R4, S, S2). This category includes 25 acres of Neighboring Lands Protection Preserves for Valley elderberry longhorn beetle habitat. 6. Vernal pool grasslands (G3 type) . 7. The vernal pool preserves for Neighboring Land Protection consist of existing vernal pools (no creation requirement). Enhancements will benefit the tiger salamander. 8. This category includes all natural land types except for Vernal Pools. Cost estimates in this category are an average of the costs of acquiring, restoring, enhancing the Natural Land categories specified in the preceding categories excluding Vernal Pools. This category also includes natural lands not included in other categories: All Water Features (W types), Channel islands (I types), tule island and mudflat (12) marsh, and Diablan sage scrub (S3 types) and all other types of Natural Lands. SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - 1 SJMSCP Acres 6_4_2015 - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE 2 2016 Economic Analysis and Fee Update Preserve Acres, Total and Remaining to be Acquired Preserve/Habitat Type Total Preserve Acres - 50 -year Permit Agricultural lands Natural lands Ditches Grasslands Oak woodlands Riparian Submerged aquatic in the Delta Other natural lands Subtotal non-vp natural lands Total Non VP Natural/Ag Lands Vernal pool wetted Vernal pool grasslands Total 57,935 378 14,559 858 2,725 10 6,445 24,975 82,910 2,121 15,811 100,842 Total Preserve Acres Acquired through 12/31/2015 6,349.97 7,156.83 50.80 30.60 7,238.23 13,588.20 6.00 18.585 13,612.78 Total Preserve Acres Remaining to Be Acquired (links to A.3, B.3. and C.4) 51,585.03 378.00 7,402.17 858.00 2,674.20 10.00 6,414.40 17,736.77 69,321.80 2,115.00 15,792.42 87,229.22 Sources: Table 1 and SJCOG, Inc., 2015 Annual Report Table 6 and Table 12 SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - 2 RemainingPreservetoAcquire - 08/17/2016 FINANCIAL ANALYSIS UPDATE FOR ADOPTION - August 10, 2016 TABLE 3 2016 Economic Analysis and Fee Update Allowed and Remaining Incidental Take Acreage Preserve/Habitat Type Agriculture Multi-purpose (other open space) Natural lands Vernal pool wetted Vernal pool upland grassland All other natural lands Total Take Authorizations - 50 -year Permit (including multi- purpose open space) 57,635 37,465 707 5,187 8,308 109,302 Cumulative Acres Remaining Acres of of Take through Land Conversion, ,_______ 12/31/2015 to A.4, B.4. and C.5) 12,821.69 2,443.41 0.30 6.20 446.24 15,717.84 44,813.31 35,021.59 706.70 5,180.80 7,862.09 93,584.49 Sources: Table 1, SJMSCP Table 1-1 and Table 4.2-2; SJCOG, Inc., 2015 Annual Report Table 4 (revised) SJMSCP Cost and Fee Analysis 2017 Update 20160804.xlsx - 3 Cumulative Take_Remaining - 08/17/2016 RESOLUTION NO. 2016-199 A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL SETTING THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY MULTI -SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN DEVELOPMENT FEE SCHEDULE FOR 2017, AND FURTHER UPDATING THE FEE MODEL FOR THE CONSERVATION PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi adopted an ordinance establishing the authority for collection of a Development Fee for the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP) for all new developments pursuant to the SJMSCP within the City of Lodi; and WHEREAS, a "Fee Study" dated July 16, 2001, was prepared, which analyzed and identified the costs, funding, and cost -benefit of the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the SJMSCP Development Fee is to finance the goals and objectives of the SJMSCP that include, but are not limited to, preserve land acquisition, preserve enhancement, land management, and administration that compensate for such lands lost as a result of future development in the City of Lodi and in San Joaquin County; and WHEREAS, after considering the Fee Study and the testimony received at the public hearing, the Lodi City Council approved said report; and further found that the future development in the City of Lodi will need to compensate cumulative impacts to threatened, endangered, rare, and unlisted SJMSCP Covered Species and other wildlife and compensation for some non -wildlife related impacts to recreation, agriculture, scenic values and other beneficial Open Space uses; and WHEREAS, an "Updated Fee Study" dated November 2, 2006, was prepared, which analyzed and identified the costs, funding, and indexing of the SJMSCP; and WHEREAS, the SJMSCP Development Fees are divided into four categories: multi- purpose open space conversion; natural land and agricultural habitat land; and vernal pool habitat; and WHEREAS, the SJMSCP Development Fees for these four categories will be increased consistent with the Updated Fee Study findings for the year 2016; and WHEREAS, to ensure that the SJMSCP development fees keep pace with inflation, annual adjustments, based on the method set forth in this resolution, shall be made to the fees annually; and WHEREAS, the method of annual adjustments was modified in 2011 and again in 2016; and WHEREAS, the Updated Fee Study with the SJMSCP and the fee amendment were available for public inspection and review in the office of the City Clerk for more than ten days prior to the date of this Public Hearing. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED AND DETERMINED by the City Council of the City of Lodi as follows: 1. The City Council finds and declares that the purposes and uses of the Development Fee, and the determination of the reasonable relationship between the fees' uses and the type of development project on which the fees are imposed, are all established in Ordinance No. 1707, and remain valid, and the City Council therefore adopts such determinations. 2. The City Council finds and declares that since adoption of Ordinance No. 1707, the cast of land has increased in San Joaquin County; and that in order to maintain the reasonable relationship established by Ordinance No. 1707, it is necessary to increase the Development Fee for the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan. 3. The Development Fee for natural lands, agricultural land, vernal pool habitat and multi- purpose open space conversion shall be consistent with the table identified in Exhibit "A" and attached hereto. 4. The modification to the method of annual adjustments as set forth on Exhibit "B" is hereby adopted. 5. The Fee provided in this resolution shall be effective on January 1, 2017. 6. The Lodi City Council hereby approves the proposed Habitat Conservation and Open Space fee adjustment. Dated: November 2, 2016 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2016-199 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held November 2, 2016, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Johnson, Kuehne, Mounce, Nakanishi, and Mayor Chandler NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None NNIFE City Clerk 2016-199 M. FERRAIOLO cLerre&rym CHAIR KAIrried . 1/2117 Audra. T. CJ1:1-p FEPECENT Agewix cCF WACC 7HECOLD4 a or SANIChKOMI EXHIBIT "A" WOG, Inc. 5-5.5 East Weber Ac eiiae . Stockton, CA 95202 . (2D9) 235-0600 . FAX (209) 235-0438 San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation) & Open Space Plan (SjAfSCP) 2017 Undated Habitat Fees* Habitat Type Fee Per Acre Multi-Puipase Open Space $8,905 Natural $17,808 Aaricultu e $17,808 Venal Pool - uplands $66,437 Vernal Pool - wetted $109,737 *Effective January 1.201 7 — December 31. 2017 2017 Endowment Fees with In -lieu Land** Type of Preserve ErPT1arrrerr�er�t Cost/acre Laud lfaPIagement Cost/acre TOTAL PER ACRE ENDOWMENT gricultural Habitat Lauds $3,426.00 $770.86 $4196.86 Natural Lands $3,426.00 S770.86 $4,196.86 Vernal Pool Habitat Verna/ Pool Grasslands 513,902.00 $2;34830 516,250,30 Vernal Pool Wetted $58,159.00 $2,305.42 560,464.42 ** Effective Januaq 1. 2017 — December 31. 2017 in lieu of fees to be used as the endowment for the dedicated land preserves (Calegor, B + C) VELB Mitigation A special fee category shall apply when removal of the Valley Elderberry Long -homed Beate (VELB) habitat of elderberry shrubs occurs. The fee shall be paid to SJC:GG, Inc. or a VELB mitigation back approved by the Permitting Agencies. The current fee, as established in the VELB Conservation Fund Account managed by the tenter for Natural Lands Management, and approved by the USFWS, is $1,800 per VELB Unit (one unit= one stem over 1" in diameter at grrnwd level wluch is removed). Fees shall be established by the JPA during preconsruction surveys (i.e_, counts of stems to be removed with and without exit holes shall be completed during precons-truction surveys) and shall be paid to the PA prior to ground disturbance or stem removal, whichever comes first_ EXHIBIT "B" 2016 SJMSCP Financial Analysis Model Updates Updates/Changes to the Financial Analysis Model by SJMSCP Fee Category: I. Category A (Acquisition) — Comparables: This category addresses land valuation and is based on comparable land sales in San Joaquin County. To be included in the analysis, the land sale must have occurred in specific zones of the SJMSCP plan area (Central Zone and Delta Zone) over an established 2 -year period. Each year, all qualified comparables in each zone, including SJCOG, Inc. easements, are evaluated to set a weighted cost per acre using the methodology established in the 2007 and 2011 Financial Analysis Updates. 1. The 2016 update increases the size of parcels that can be considered as a valid comparable from 500 acres to 640 acres. The criteria to determine valid comparables to be used in the weighted calculation are: 1. All SJCOG, Inc. transactions (fee title and appraised value of unencumbered property) 2. Sales not less than 40 acres 3. Sales not greater than 500 640 acres 4. No parcels with vineyard or orchard (except SJCOG, Inc. transactions for special needs) 5. Must be land which would fulfill mitigation under the SJMSCP 6. Not greater than 2 years old from the date of June 30th of each year with all acceptable comparables included (criteria 1-5). A minimum of 10 acceptable comparables are required for analysis. If the minimum of 10 transactions are not available, the time period will extend at 3 month intervals prior to the beginning date until 10 comparables are gathered. 2. The update also changes the index used to bring the nominal values of the older comparable values in the 24 -month set of comparables to current market values. The new approach better captures actual land market trends by changing the inflator from a flat percentage to an annual average representing the change in nominal land values represented by the prior two years of comparable transactions. 3. The 2016 update also revises the method for determining encumbered land sale values for use in the fee calculation model. Prior to this update, the model was limited to the rare resales of encumbered properties within the County. The 2016 update analysis determined that encumbered land sales, on average, represent 70% of the fee title value. Rather than apply an index to older encumbered property sales for use in the fee model, the 2016 revised model established the basis for calculating a weighted average cost of easement acquisition as a set 70% of fee title value. 4. Future fee calculations will be based on the term of the SJMSCP permits remaining (e.g., the term of the permits is 50 years and in 2016 there are 36 years remaining). Rather than calculate the fee based on the static 50 -year term of the permits, the new model takes into consideration time actually left on the permit and gives a better correlation of acres remaining to be acquired under the plan during the life of the plan. As in the previous model, the Category A analysis in the 2016 model results in costs of easement or fee title acquisition per acre by habitat type and zone and the final cost per acre for each habitat type is a function of the proportion of preserve acquisition by zone. No changes are recommended for Southwest zone grassland easement acquisition, vernal pool preserves acquisition or for transaction costs associated with preserve acquisition. II. Category B (Assessment & Enhancement) — Refined Cost Factors/Redistribution of Habitat/Consumer Price Index The changes in this category include refined cost factors for biological site assessment and preserve enhancement and management planning. 1. Refined costs to better reflect the enhancement and restoration requirements of the SJMSCP. 2. The updated analysis redistributes preserve acres across the habitat types to more accurately reflect the range and types of natural lands preserves described in the adopted SJMSCP rather than all in riparian habitat classification. 3. Annually, the California Consumer Price Index (CPI), as reported by the California Department of Finance for the preceding 12 months (July -June), inflation factor will be applied to update annual costs for site assessment, management plans, and enhancement plans. III. Category C (Management & Administration) — Refined Cost Factors/Long Term Investment/Consumer Price Index The changes to this category include refined monitoring costs and updated management and administration costs that are based on actual SJCOG, Inc. expenditures incurred in these categories. 1. The update includes refinement to costs anticipated to be incurred once the term of the permit expires and assumes that the post permit costs will be lower than costs incurred during the permit term as many of the monitoring, reporting, and administrative compliance costs are not required post -permit. 2. Updates annual management, administrative, legal and other consultant costs associated with administration of the SJMSCP. 3. Annual cost updates will continue to use the California Consumer Price Index (CPI), as reported by the California Department of Finance, for the preceding 12 months (July — June) to keep up with inflation on an annual basis. Please immediately confirm receipt of this fax by calling 333-6702 CITY OF LODI P. O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS SUBJECT: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION SETTING THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY MULTI -SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN DEVELOPMENT FEES FOR 2017 AND UPDATING THE FEE MODEL FOR THE CONSERVATION PLAN PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 22, 2016 LEGAL AD TEAR SHEETS WANTED: One (1) please SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: LNS ACCT. #0510052 JENNIFER M. FERRAIOLO, CITY CLERK City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 DATED: THURSDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2016 ORDERED BY: JENNIFER M. FERRAIOLO CITY CLERK Th Atuiret) MELA ARRIS EPUTY C Y CLERK ELIZABETH BURGOS ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK Verify Appearance of this Legal in the Newspaper — Copy to File Emailed to the Sentinel at dianer@lodinews.com at (time) on (date) (pages) LNS Phoned to confirm receipt of all pages at (time) EB PMF (initials) forms\advins.doc DECLARATION OF POSTING PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING A RESOLUTION SETTING THE SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY MULTI -SPECIES HABITAT CONSERVATION AND OPEN SPACE PLAN DEVELOPMENT FEES FOR 2017 AND UPDATING THE FEE MODEL FOR THE CONSERVATION PLAN On Thursday, October 20, 2016, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a Notice of Public Hearing to consider adopting a resolution setting the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan Development Fees for 2017 and updating the fee model for the Conservation Plan (attached and marked as Exhibit A) was posted at the following locations: Lodi City Clerk's Office Lodi City Hall Lobby Lodi Carnegie Forum WorkNet Office I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on October 20, 2016, at Lodi, California. pir ,AAMELA FARRIS DEPUTY C TY CLERK ORDERED BY: JENNIFER M. FERRAIOLO CITY CLERK ELIZABETH BURGOS ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK N:\Administration\CLERK\Public Hearings \AFFADAVITS\DECPOSTCDD2.doc 1 CITY OF LODI Carnegie Forum 305 West Pine Street, Lodi NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Date: November 2, 2016 Time: 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Jennifer M. Ferraiolo City Clerk Telephone: (209) 333-6702 J .N u'I- I 1 h LA NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, November 2, 2016, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following item: a) Adopting a resolution setting the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan Development Fees for 2017 and updating the fee model for the Conservation Plan. Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Community Development Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6711. All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk, City Hall, 221 West Pine Street, 2nd Floor, Lodi, 95240, at any time prior to the hearing scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said hearing. If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the close of the public hearing. By Order of the Lodi City Council: Thr\ AU Je nifer M. erraiolo 'C ty Clerk Dated: October 19, 2016 A• proved as to form: Janice D. Magdich City Attorney AVISO: Para obtener ayuda interpretative con esta noticia, por favor Ilame a la oficina de la Secretaria Municipal, a las (209) 333-6702. CLERK\PUBHEAR\NOTICES \NOTCDD_DevFees doc 10/13/16