Agenda - 06-08-2004-9b - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

3. Why has the proposal recommended delaying the non-r°esidential component of the fee? Given the extent of the work necessary to develop an accurate and timely residential database, coupled with the fact that less than 10% ofnon-residential type facilities receive a direct service, staff has recommended that for the time being, the non-residential sector pay only an amoral Basic Fee (B) of $.36 initially. Staff believes that priority should be given to developing and refining t9re residential billing database, to whom the vast majority of the services are provided and where the majority of the fees will be assessed. Significant effort is underway to reconcile the existing departmental services address database with the tax property identification number database for each recycling service area. The effort, while considerable, is expected to be completed in time for testing and insertion onto the 2004 property bill Tlus corrunihnent to getting the residential billing correct in the limited timeframe requires us to make choices on where fo devote our resources. There simply wasn't time to complete anon-residential analysis. hr fact, the BOCC has still not given final approval to the proposed fee and additional changes/revisions could still be required in the residential sector. hi the stafl'report of April 1.3, we indicated that we believed the non-residential sector analysis would take place no sooner than FY 2005/06 following implementation of the initial fee schedule. Staffbelieves this approach to be a reasonable schedule with limited equity or financial implications, especially since significant conmrercial sector expansions aze unlikely in the neaz teen, Developing the required non-residential fee beyond the simple interim recornmendation included in the proposal will necessitate considerable fieldwork. Such anon-residential fee shucture would likely include developing groupings by type of business, estimations of square footage, additional address/property identification information, etc. While there are templates available from some other communities, all would require modification specifically for Orange County. Experience in other ,jurisdictions adopting non-residential fees tied to the size and use intensity of the property showed a year or more lead-time necessary to collect these data, validate them, and gain local approval. 4. What ar°e the plans regarding assessing uninhabited rural structures? For habitable residential type stnrctures in unincorporated Orange County the policy would be to charge a Basic Fee (B), with additional service fees such as (R) charged if applicable. These residences do not have to be occupied, only habitable. Those residential type structures that are not habitable (i.e. used for storage of hay, supplies, equipment, are physically uninhabitable, not actually a dwelling, etc.) should not be assessed a fee. Those that are billed may appeal that assessment and have the fee assessment eliminated (simple documentatior>/proofmay berequired). 5. What are the plans for private contractor served units? The proposed fees relate to County governmental waste reduction and recycling services and programs provided for and available to the various user sectors. We have not considered private contractor served units in our costs/revenue estimates because the proposed fees do not fund the private contractor services, the private sector provides little or no residential recycling services upon which the fees are based, and the proposed fees do not fund garbage collection or disposal whatsoever,. In the case ofneighborhoods/developments that have chosen for whatever reason to forgo available publicly provided recycling services in favor of recycling services provided by a private contractor, the various residences will be assessed the appropriate fees based on the type of service the County would provide should the County be asked to provide recycling service.