Memorandum
Date: August 25, 2026
To: The Honorable Brad Rasmussen, Chair, Lake County Board of Supervisors
From: Robin Borre, Special Districts Administrator
Subject: Approve Special District User Fees and Proposition 26 User Fee Study
Executive Summary: (include fiscal and staffing impact narrative):
Lake County Special Districts has been working with LT Municipal Consultants to establish miscellaneous service fees. The purpose of this memorandum is to establish a standardized schedule of administrative, water, and wastewater user fees. User fees are miscellaneous service fees that are subject to the provisions of Proposition 26 (Articles XIII A and XIII C of the California Constitution) and are distinct from monthly or bimonthly utility rates which are subject to Proposition 218. Each proposed fee is a charge imposed for reasonable regulatory costs (i.e. licenses, audits, inspections, permits) that does not exceed the reasonable cost of service. Each fee covers staff time needed to ensure compliance with various health and safety codes. The fees are NOT related to general government benefits, ongoing monthly services, or property related fees. These fees are related to specific services triggered by or requested by residents for regulatory approval and are not generalized services. A summary of the proposed fees is provided in attachment “Attachment 1: Summary of Proposed User Fees”.
The fees are intended to recover the County’s full cost of providing miscellaneous services. These costs are incurred through the County’s General and Administrative activities and are not incurred via individual service area budgets such as LACOSAN. The services provided are to ensure compliance with the County’s health and safety codes which apply County-wide and are not specific to any one service area nor are they a rate payor cost. Rate payors do not benefit or receive a needed service from these activities. The intent of the fees is to directly charge users who trigger regulatory services to relieve the financial burden on the County’s General and Administrative Funds. It should be noted that the attached fee study references the LACOSAN grease trap interceptor program to illustrate the need for a grease trap inspection fee. The grease trap inspection fee is not specific to LACOSAN and instead applies to all grease traps within the County. As another example, not everyone is required to have a backflow devise, therefore inspections and the cost of installation of the devise is not a rate payor cost and the cost needs to be recovered from the user benefiting from the service. The County may implement fees less than or up to the amounts shown in compliance with the requirements of Proposition 26. Should the County charge less than the cost of service, a funding gap is created that is potentially recovered by other County revenue sources. Special Districts administration or operations does not receive any General Fund, or funding from an outside agency such as Lake County Economic Development Corporation to provide these special services. In leu of fees these are the kinds of funds that could be provided from the county, cities or outside agencies. Burdening rate payors with paying for services they do not receive is not eligible under Prop 218.
The County should periodically review and update the fees included in this memorandum. In between comprehensive cost reviews, the County should increase the fees annually by either the annual change in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) or by labor cost increases such as step increases, staff benefit increases, or cost of living increases.
Once approved the fees will be added to the Special Districts website that is refenced on the Master Fee, Cost Recovery Schedule <https://www.lakecountyca.gov/1103/Rates>.
Moving forward the fees will be updated annually and submitted with the County Master Fee Schedule. Attached to this report is a table showing our existing fees and the proposed fees.
_____________________________________________________________________________
If not budgeted, fill in the blanks below only:
Estimated Cost: N/A Amount Budgeted: N/A Additional Requested: 0 Future Annual Cost: 0
Consistency with Vision 2028 and/or Fiscal Crisis Management Plan (check all that apply): ☐ Not applicable
☒ Well-being of Residents ☒ Public Safety ☒ Infrastructure ☐ Technology Upgrades
☐ Economic Development ☐ Disaster Recovery ☒ County Workforce ☐ Revenue Generation
☐ Community Collaboration ☐ Business Process Efficiency ☐ Clear Lake ☒ Cost Savings
If request for exemption from competitive bid in accordance with County Code Chapter 2 Sec. 2-38, fill in blanks below:
Which exemption is being requested? N/A
How long has Agreement been in place? N/A
When was purchase last rebid? N/A
Reason for request to waive bid? N/A
Recommended Action: Approve Special District User Fees and Proposition 26 User Fee Study.