HomeMy WebLinkAbout2003-11-18; City Council; 17376; Procedures for Debarment of ContractorsAB# 17,376
MTG. 11-18-03
DEPT. Attorney
CITY OF CARLSBAD -AGENDA BILL
DEPT. HD.
CITY ATTY.
TITLE:
PROCEDURES FOR DEBARMENT OF CONTRACTORS a
ciTy MGRm
~ ~~
RECOMMENDED ACTION:
Introduce Ordinance No. ~s-681 amending Carlsbad Municipal Code
Section 3.32.025 through 3.32.028 and adding Section 3.32.029 to include updated
debarment procedures, provisions for permanent debarment, and more detailed notice
requirements; and
Adopt Resolution No. 2003-299 updating the fee for filing an appeal thereunder.
ITEM EXPLANATION:
A recent court case, Southern California Underground Contractors Inc. v. City of San
Diego, (108 Cal.A~p.4'~ 533, 133 Cal.Rptr.2d 527 (May 2003)) upheld the right of a city
to permanently debar an irresponsible bidder as long as the city provides for adequate
due process. Another recent court case, Haas v. County of San Bernardino, (27 Cal 4'h
1017, 45 P.3d 280, 119 Cal.Rptr.2d 341(May 2002)), held that city ordinances must
ensure an unbiased hearing with an impartial adjudicator.
This agenda bill seeks to incorporate provisions consistent with these court cases into
Title 3, Chapter 3.32 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code to put contractors, subcontractors
and consultants on notice of the potential remedies of the City in the event that they fail
to perform the i r contractu a I ob I i g a t io n s .
Proposed revisions to the code include grounds for temporary and permanent
debarment of contractors, subcontractors and consultants. A procedure for a
debarment hearing and appeal process is included to ensure that adequate due process
is provided. The use of a private arbitrator to conduct the hearing is proposed to ensure
that the process is impartial. The final decision is made by the City Council if the matter
is appealed to it. Also included is a resolution for updating the appeal fee from the
existing fee of $120, adopted in 1995, to a fee of $400, which is consistent with the fees
charged for design review, planning commission, and housing commission appeals.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal impact is minimal. The City will share the cost of the arbitration procedures,
but this may ultimately save the City considerable money, which could otherwise be
spend in construction or other litigation.
EXHIBITS:
1. Ordinance. No. NS-681
2. Resolution No. 2003-299
3. Redline / strikeout version of ordinance
DEPARTMENT CONTACT: Ronald R. Ball, 434-2891
Item No. 5
To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
From: CITY ATTORNEY
Date: November 18,2003
DEBARMENT ORDINANCE
FOR THE INFORMATION OF
THE CITY COUNCIL
Please substitute the attached ordinance for the one in your agenda packet, since it had
an incomplete version of Section 3.32.025.
RONALD sa R. BALL
City Attorney
1
!
1(
1‘
1;
1:
14
1E
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
ORDINANCE NO. NS-681
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA AMENDING TITLE 3, CHAPTER
3.32 OF THE CARLSBAD MUNICIPAL CODE BY THE
ADDITION AND REVISION OF VARIOUS SECTIONS TO
INCLUDE AND UPDATE PROVISIONS FOR TEMPORARY
DEBARMENT, PERMANENT DEBARMENT, PROCEDURES
FOR DISQUALIFICATION, AND NOTICE
The City Council of the City of Carlsbad, California does ordain as follows:
SECTION 1 : That Title 3, Chapter 3.32.025(a) of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code to read as follows:
“3.32.025 Submitting false claims-Monetary penalties.
Any contractor, subcontractor or consultant who commits any of the
following acts may be liable to the city for three times the amount of damages which the
city sustains because of the act of that contractor, subcontractor or consultant. A
contractor, subcontractor or consultant who commits any of the following acts shall also
be liable to the city for the costs, including attorney’s fees, of a civil action brought to
recover any of those penalties or damages, and may be liable to the city for a civil penalty
of up to ten thousand dollars for each false claim:
(a)
(1) Knowingly presents or causes to be presented to an officer
(2) Knowingly makes, uses or causes to be made or used a
(3) Conspires to defraud the city by getting a false claim
(4) Knowingly makes, uses or causes to be made or used a
(5) Is a beneficiary of an inadvertent submission of a false claim
This section does not apply to any controversy involving an amount
or employee of the city a false claim or request for payment or approval;
false record or statement to get a false claim paid or approved by the city;
allowed or paid by the city;
false record or statement to conceal, avoid or decrease an obligation to pay or transmit
money or property to the city;
to the city, subsequently discovers the falsity of the claim, and fails to disclose the false
claim to the city within a reasonable time after discovery of the false claim.
of less than five hundred dollars in value. For purposes of this subsection, “controversy”
means any one or more false claims submitted by the same contractor, subcontractor or
consultant in violation of this section.
Every contract performed at the expense of the city, or the costs of
which are paid for out of monies deposited in the treasury of said city, whether directly
awarded or indirectly by or under subcontract, subpartnership, day labor, station work,
piece work, or any other arrangement whatsoever, shall contain a clause reciting the
provisions of subsection (a) of this section.
committed by two or more persons.
(b)
(c)
(d) Liability under this section shall be joint and severable for any act
Ordinance No. NS-681
Page 1 of 6
d
1
1
t
5
1C
11
14
12
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
20
(e) For purposes of this section, the terms "contractor" and
"subcontractor" shall have the same definitions as found in Section 41 13 of the Public
Contract Code. The term "consultant" shall be broadly defined to include any person or
entity that provides services to the city.
demand for money, property or services made to any employee, officer or agent of the
city, or to any contractor, subcontractor, grantee or other recipient, whether under contract
or not, if any portion of the money, property or services requested or demanded issued
from, or was provided by, the city.
(9) For purposes of this section, "knowingly" means that a contractor, subcontractor or consultant, with respect to information, does any of the following:
(1) Has actual knowledge of the information;
(2) Acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information;
(3) Acts in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the
information. Proof of specific intent is not required and reliance on the claim by the city is
also not required. (Ord. NS-313 § 1 , 1995) "
(f) For purposes of this section, "claim" includes any request or
SECTION 2: That Title 3, Chapter 3.32.026 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended to read as follows:
"3.32.026 Disqualification of irresponsible contractors-Effect of disqualification.
Any contractor, subcontrzctor, or consultant who fails to comply
with the terms of its contract with the city, or ?he provisions of this Chapter may be
declared an irresponsible bidder, after a hearing in accordance with Section 3.32.028.
Upon a determination of irresponsibility, the contractor, subcontractor or consultant (or
any other entity with substantially the same officers, directors, owners or principals) shall
not be permitted to submit bids, contract, subcontract, or conduct business, on any public
work or improvement for the city for the period of the debarment. The contract of any such
person or entity may, at the option of the city manager, be canceled and in the event of
such cancellation, no recovery shall be had thereon by the contractor, subcontractor or
consultant.
Any one of the following acts or omissions may constitute grounds
for temporary debarment of three to five years:
(1 ) The contractor, subcontractor or consultant unsatisfactorily
performed a contract; or
(2) The contractor, subcontractor or consultant unjustifiably
failed to honor or observe contractual obligations or legal requirements pertaining to the
contract; or
(3) The contractor, subcontractor or consultant used
substandard materials or has failed to furnish or install materials in accordance with the
contract requirements, even if the discovery of the defect is subsequent to acceptance of
the project and expiration of the warranty thereof, if such defect amounts to intentionally
deficient or grossly negligent performance of the contract under which the defect
occurred; or
The contractor, subcontractor or consultant willfully failed to
cooperate in the investigation or hearing of the proposed debarment; or
(a)
(b)
(4)
Ordinance No. NS-68 1
Page 2 of 6
I
8
I ,
1
I
f
I
I
E
1c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(5) The contractor, subcontractor or consultant performs, or fails
to perform the contract in such a way that significant environmental damage results, or a
‘violation of environmental laws or permits is committed.
The contractor substitutes a subcontractor in violation of
Section 4100 et. seq. of the Public Contract Code (Subletting and Subcontracting Fair
Practices Act).
(c) Any of the following may constitute grounds for permanent
debarment of the contractor, subcontractor or consultant:
(6)
(1) (2) A final conviction under any state or federal statute or
municipal ordinance, including a plea of nolo contendere, or final unappealable civil
judgment of any one or more of the grounds listed below:
a. Embezzlement, theft, fraudulent schemes and
artifices, fraudulent schemes and practices, bid rigging, perjury, forgery, bribery,
falsification or destruction of records, receiving stolen property or any offense
demonstrating a lack of business integrity, business honesty or responsibility on the part
of the contractor, subcontractor or consultant’s responsibility; or
b. A criminal offense arising out of obtaining or
attempting to obtain a public or private contract or subcontract, or in the performance of
such a contract; or
C. Violations of the California Government Code,
Section 84300 or 84301 (sections of the California Political Reform Act requiring
disclosure of the true campaign donor) or Section 1.1 3.025 of the Carlsbad Municipal
Code, relating to any city election, or any amendments to the code; or
d. Fraud or criminal offense in connection with
obtaining a public contract; or
e. Conviction under federal or state antitrust statutes
involving public contracts.
(3) Any two or more of the acts or omissions specified in Section 3.32.026( b)
In addition to all other remedies permitted by law, the city council
may, upon the recommendation of the city manager and upon advice of the city attorney,
by resolution, declare a bidder or contractor ineligible to bid on city procurement and
public works contracts based upon any debarment of the contractor, subcontractor or
consultant by another governmental agency, for the debarment period designated by the
other agency.”
Any violation of Section 3.32.025(a),
(d)
SECTION 3: That Title 3, Chapter 3.32.028 of the Carlsbad Municipal Code is
amended to read as follows:
“3.32.028 Procedures for disqualification of irresponsible contractors
(a) When an action is brought pursuant to Section 3.32.025, 3.32.026
or 3.32.02T of this chapter, the contractor, subcontractor or consultant shall be given
notice of the charges and of all evidence supporting such charges. The contractor,
subcontractor or consultant or its attorney shall be entitled to offer rebuttal evidence and
any other evidence in support of its position.
Ordinance No. NS-68 1
Page 3 of 6
, I
, ,
1
I
e
1
E
E
1c
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
(b) The city shall schedule a hearing, as soon as practicable upon
delivery of the notice to the contractor, where all evidence supporting grounds for
debarment shall be presented. The hearing shall be conducted before an unbiased
arbitrator with expertise in the area related to the contract. Any such hearing shall be
conducted pursuant to the applicable sections of the American Arbitration Association’s
Construction Industry Arbitration Rules, or other applicable arbitration rules. The arbitrator
shall follow and comply with all applicable California case, statutory, and regulatory law in
arriving at a decision. The city attorney may, in its discretion, appoint outside counsel to
prosecute the charges.
The parties shall attempt to agree upon an unbiased third-party
arbitrator. If unable to agree, each party shall select an arbitrator. The two selected
arbitrators shall agree on a third arbitrator, who will conduct the hearing. The parties shall
share the costs of conducting the hearing before an arbitrator.
A decision of the arbitrator, making a finding of irresponsibility, is
final and effective ten calendar days after a written determination and delivery of the
decision to the parties, unless within the ten-day period following delivery, the contractor,
subcontractor or consultant, or the city manager, submits a written appeal to the city
council, filed with the city clerk for the city council. The written appeal shall specifically
state the reason(s) for the appeal and the manner in which the decision of the arbitrator is
in error. Fees for filing an appeal under this section shall be established by resolution of
the city council.
The decision of the arbitrator shall be affirmed by the city council
unless the appellant shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the decision of the
arbitrator is in error or inconsistent with state law. The appeal hearing shall be held as
soon as practicable after the date of filing the appeal. Within ten days following the
conclusion of the hearing, the city council shall render its decision on the appeal. The
decision of the city council is final.
All proceedings shall be as informal as is compatible with the
requirements of justice. The arbitrator andlor city council need not be bound by the
common law or statutory rules of evidence and procedure, but may make inquiries in the
matter through all means and in a manner best calculated to make a just factual
determination.’’
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
SECTION 4: That Title 3, Chapter 3.32 of the Carlsbad Municipal is amended by
the addition of section 3.32.029 to read as follows:
“3.32.029 Notice
Whenever a notice is ‘required to be delivered under Chapter 3.32, the
notice shall be delivered by any one of the following methods. Service is effective as
described herein unless different provisions are specifically stated to apply:
(a) Personal delivery: service shall be deemed effective on the date of delivery. Proof of delivery of notice may be made by the certification of any designated
person over the age of eighteen years by declaration under penalty of perjury. The proof
shall show that the delivery was done in conformity with this section or other provisions of
law applicable to the subject matter concerned.
Certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested: service
shall be deemed effective on the date of mailing. If a notice is sent simultaneously by
regular mail and the notice of certified mail is returned unsigned, then service by regular
mail will be deemed effective on the date mailing provided the regular mail notice is not
returned .
(b)
Ordinance No. NS-681
Page 4 of 6
11
1
11
1:
14
If
1f
17
1E
19
20
21
22
23
(c)
EFFECTIVE DATE: This ordinance shall be effective thirty days after its
adoption; and the city clerk shall certify the adoption of this ordinance and cause it to be
published at least once in a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Carlsbad within
fifteen days after its adoption.
Publication: Service shall be deemed effective on the first date of publication.”
INTRODUCED AND FIRST READ at a regular meeting of the Carlsbad
City Council on the 18th day of November , 2003, and thereafter
Ordinance No. NS-68 1
Page 5 of 6
PASSED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the City Council of the
City of Carlsbad on the day of
to wit:
, 2003, by the following vote,
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
APPROVED AS TO FORM AND LEGALITY
RONALD R. BALL, City Attorney
CLAUDE A. LEWIS, Mayor
ATTEST:
LORRAINE M. WOOD, City Clerk
Ordinance No. NS-68 1
Page 6 of 6
RESOLUTION NO.DO03-299
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, REVISING THE FEE FOR AN
APPEAL OF CONTRACTOR DISQUALIFICATION
WHEREAS, the City Council has determine it to be in the public interest to
establish a fee for the purpose of filing an appeal of the decision of the arbitrator to
disqualify a contractor, subcontractor or consultant from bidding on City contracts, and
WHEREAS, the current fee has not been updated since 1995,
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of
Carlsbad, California, as follows:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct
2. That the City Council of the City of Carlsbad hereby sets an appeal fee
in the amount of ($400) (four hundred dollars) to apply to any appeal filed pursuant to
Carlsbad Municipal Code Section 3.32.028 of a decision of disqualification from bidding
on City contracts.
3. The fees imposed by this resolution shall become effective
immediately upon its adoption.
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
Ill
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a Regular Meeting of the City
Council of the City of Carlsbad on the I8th
following vote:
day of November , 2003, by the
AYES: Council Members Lewis, Finnila, Kulchin, Hall and Packard
NOES: None
ATTEST:
!_/(SEAL) v
Page 2 of 2 of Resolution -2-
NO. 2003-299
ORDINANCE NO.
REDLINE/STRIKEOUT VERSION
3.32.025 Submitting false claims--Monetary penalties.
Any contractor, subcontractor or consultant who commits any of the following
acts W may be liable to the city for three times the amount of damages which I
the city sustains because of the act of that contractor, subcontractor or consultant.
A contractor, subcontractor or consultant who commits any of the following acts
shall also be liable to the city for the costs, including attorney's fees, of a civil
action brought to recover any of those penalties or damages, and may be liable to
the city for a civil penalty of up to ten thousand dollars for each false claim:
(1) Knowingly presents or causes to be presented to an officer or employee of
the city a false claim or request for payment or approval;
(2) Knowingly makes, uses or causes to be made or used a false record or
statement to get a false claim paid or approved by the city;
(3) Conspires to defraud the city by getting a false claim allowed or paid by
the city;
(4) Knowingly makes, uses or causes to be made or used a false record or
statement to conceal, avoid or decrease an obligation to pay or transmit
money or property to the city;
Is a beneficiary of an inadvertent submission of a false claim to the city,
subsequently discovers the falsity of the claim, and fails to disclose the
false claim to the city within a reasonable time after discovery of the false
claim.
(5)
This section does not apply to any controversy involving an amount of less than
five hundred dollars in value. For purposes of this subsection, "controversy"
means any one or more false claims submitted by the same contractor,
subcontractor or consultant in violation of this section.
Every contract performed at the expense of the city, or the costs of which are paid
for out of monies deposited in the treasury of said city, whether directly awarded
or indirectly by or under subcontract, subpartnership, day labor, station work,
piece work, or any other arrangement whatsoever, shall contain a clause reciting
the provisions of subsection (a) of this section.
Liability under this section shall be joint and severable for any act committed by
two or more persons.
For purposes of this section, the terms "contractor" and "subcontractor" shall have
the same definitions as found in Section 41 13 of the Public Contract Code. The
term "consultant" shall be broadly defined to include any person or entity that
provides services to the city.
For purposes of this section, "claim" includes any request or demand for money,
property or services made to any employee, officer or agent of the city, or to any
contractor, subcontractor, grantee or other recipient, whether under contract or
not, if any portion of the money, property or services requested or demanded
issued from, or was provided by, the city.
1 08/29/03
(g) For purposes of this section, "knowingly" means that a contractor, subcontractor
or consultant, with respect to information, does any of the following:
(1)
(2)
(3)
Has actual knowledge of the information;
Acts in deliberate ignorance of the truth or falsity of the information;
Acts in reckless disregard of the truth or falsity of the information. Proof
of specific intent is not required and reliance on the claim by the city is
also not required. (Ord. NS-313 0 1, 1995) "
3.3 2.026 Disqualification of irresponsible con trac tors--Effec t of disqualification.
{a) @)-Any contractor, subcontractor, or consultant who fails to comply with the
terms of its contract with the city, or the provisions of this Chapter
may be declared an irresponsible bidder 5 <, after a hewing in accordance with Section
3.32.028. Upon &> determination of irresponsibility, the contractor,
subcontractor or consultant (or any other entity with substantially the same
officers, directors, owners or principals) shall not be permitted $e ZL A, ct
t Y' to submit bids, contract, subcontact, or
conduct business, -on any public work or improvement for the city for the period
The contract of any such person or entity may, at the option of the city
manager, be canceled and in the event of such cancellation, no recovery shall be
had thereon by the contractor, subcontractor or consultant.
Anv one of the following acts or omissions may constitute grounds for temporary
debarment of three to five years.
The contractor, subcontractor or consultant unsatisfactorily performed a
contract;=
The contractor, subcontractor or consultant unjustifiably failed to honor or
observe contractual obligations or legal requirements pertaining to the
contract ;or
The contractor, subcontractor or consultant used substandard materials or
has failed to furnish or install materials in accordance with the contract
requirements, even if the discovery of the defect is subsequent to
acceptance of the project and expiration of the warranty thereof, if such
defect amounts to intentionally deficient or grossly negligent performance
of the contract under which the defect occurred; or
The contractor, subcontractor or consultant willfully failed to cooperate in
thc investigation or hearing of the proposed debarment;=
{S) The contractor. subcontractor or consultant performs. or fails to
perform the contract in such a way that significant environmental
damage results, or a violation of environmental laws or permits is
committed.
.+ rn r
of the debarment.- cf q 2:: > ,.7 I.
(b)
(1)
(2)
j3)
(4)
2 0 8/29/03
16) The contractor substitutes a subcontractor in violation of Sections
4100 et. seq. of the Public Contract Code (Subletting and
SubcontractinP - Fair Practices Act)
IC) contractor, subcontractor or consult ant :
Any of the following may constitute grounds for peimanent debarment of the
(1) Any violation of Section 3.32.025(a),
(3 ) A final conviction under any state or federal statute or municipal
ordinance. including a plea of nolo contendere, or final unappealable civil
judgment of any one or more of the grounds listed bclow:
a. Embezzlement, theft. fraudulent schemes and artifices, fraudulent
schemes and practices. bid rigging, periury, forgery. bribery,
falsification or destruction of records, receiving stolen property or any
offense demonstrating a lack of business integrity, business honesty or
responsi bility on the part of the contractor, subcontractor or
consult ant ’ s responsibility; or
b. A criminal offense arising out of obtaining or attempting to obtain a
public or private contract or subcontract, or in the perforniance of such
a contract; or
c. Violations of the California Government Code, Section 84300 or
84301 (sections of the California Political Reform Act requiring
disclosure of the true campaign donor) or Section 1.13.025 of the
Carlsbad Municipal Code, relating to any city election. or any
amendments to the code; or
d. Fraud or criminal offense in connection with obtaining a public
contract; or
e. Conviction under federal or state antitrust statutes involving public
contrdcts.
13) Any two or more of the acts or omissions in Section 3.32.0260~)
In addition to all other remedies permitted by law, the city council may, upon I
the recommendation of the city manager and upon advice of the city attorney, by
resolution, declare a bidder or contractor ineligible to bid on city procurement and
public works contracts based upon any debarment of the contractor, subcontractor
or consultant by another governmental agency, for the debarment period
designated by the other agency. (Ord. NS-342 $9 I, 2, 1996; Ord. NS-313 0 2,
1995)
3.32.028 Procedures for disqualification of irresponsible contractors.
I =@+-When * an action is brought pursuant to Section 3.32.025, 3.32.026
or 3.32.027 of this chapter, the contractor, subcontractor or consultant shall-bke
given notice of the charges and of all evidence supporting such charges. The
contractor, subcontractor or consultant or its attorney shall be entitled to offer
rebuttal evidence and any other evidence in support of its position. I
3 08/29/03
, 1, .. r, 0,. . I, b
hxr u w, , The city shall uu
shall be presented. > e, w "' Adel %-' be
.,
schedule a hearincr as soon as practicable upon delivery of the notice to the contmc tor. where- ,- b 6 all evidence supporting grounds for debarment
,I .. . n 1. r\I In .. 3Thc r. hexing
shall be conducted before an unbiased arbitrdtor with expertise in the area relating
to the contract. Any such hearing shall be conducted pursuant lo the applicable
scctions of the American Arbitration Association's Construction Industry
Arbitration Rules or other applicable arbitration rules. The arbitrator shall follow
and comply with all applicable California case, statutory, and regulatorv law in
arriving at u decision The city attorney may, in its discretion, appoint outside
counsel to prosecute the charges.
(c) The parties shall attempt to agree upon an unbiased third-party arbitrator. If
unable to amce, each party shall select an arbitrator. The two selected arbitrators
shall agree on a third arbitrator, who will conduct the hearing. The parties shall
share the costs of conducting - the hearing before an arbitrator.
m@ A decision of the arbitrator, making a finding of irresponsibility,
is final and effective ten calendar days after a written determination and delivery
of the decision to the parties- b, unless within ten-day period
following delivery, the contractor, subcontractor or consultant, or the city
manager, 43-k~ submits a written appeal to the city council filed with the citv clerk
for the city council. The written appeal shall specifically state the reason(s) for the
appeal and the manner in which the decision of - the arbitrator is
in error. Fees for filing an appeal under this section shall be established by
resolution of the city council;
@@)-The decision of the &+EW+WF I, arbitrator shall be affirmed by the city council
unless the appellant shows by a preponderance of the evidence that the decision of
-the I, arbitrator is in error or inconsistent with state law. The
appeal hearing shall be held . as soon as practicable after the date
of filing the appeal. Within ten days following the conclusion of the hearing, the
city council shall render its decision on the appeal. The decision of the city
council is final. (Ord. NS-313 0 4, 1995)
(0 All proceedings shall be as informal as is compatible with the requirements of
justice. The arbitrator and/or citv council need not be bound by the common law
or statutory rules of evidence and procedure, but may make inquiries in the matter
throudi all means and in a manner best calculated to make a just factual
determination.
3.32.029 Notice
4 08/29/03
Whenever a notice is required to be delivered under Chapter 3.32, the notice shall be
delivered by any one of the followinn methods. Service is effective as described herein
unlcss different provisions are specifically statcd to apply:
(a) Personal delivery: service shall be deemed effective on the date of delivery. Proof
of delivery of notice may be made by the certification of any designated person
over the age of eighteen years by declaration under penalty of periury. The proof
shall show that the delivery was done in conformity with this section or other
provisions of law applicable to the subiect matter concerned.
(b) Certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested: service shall be deemed
effective on the date of mailing. If a notice is sent simultaneously by regular mail
and the notice of certified mail is returned unsimed, then service by regular inail
will be dceined effective on the date mailing __ provided the regular miti1 notice is
not returned.
(c) Publication: Service shall be deemed effective on the first date OF publication.
5 08/29/03
CITY OF CARLSBAD FEE SCHEDULE
DEVELOPMENT RELATED SERVICE FEES
DECEMBER 1997
0
Additional Planning Inspections (first lnsp induded in plan check fee)
Adjustment Plat
Affordable Housing Credit Per Unit
&peal - City Council (+ noticing costs) - fee refunded if appeal b won
Appeal -nousing and Redevelopment Commission (t noticing costs),- fee
refunded if appeal is won
Appeal - Redev. Design Review Board (+ notiang costs) - fee refunded if
appeal is won
BuiUIng Permit Fees
Building Plan Check - 65% of Bldg Pennit (8% dismunt on repetitive plan checks)
Building Code Enforcement
Certificate of Compliancs
Certificate of Compl. in lieu of Parcel Map
Certificate of Corredlon
Community Facilities Distrid Annexation
Constnction Change Review - Minor (fee plus $165 per sheet)
Construction Change Review - Major (fee plus $165 per sheet)
Coastal Development Permit (CDP) -Single Family Lot
CDP - 2 - 4 unit or lot SUbdNiSiOn (per permit)
CDP - 5 or more unit or lot subdivision (per permit)
CDP Amendment = 50% of current permit cost
CDP Emergency Permit
CDP Exemption
CDP Extensions = 25% of current permit cost
CDP - Non-Redevelopment Area - Minor Permit
COP Non-Residential.; 10 cents per square foot
COP - Redevelopment Area
CUP
CUP -Amendment
CUP - Bio Habitat Preserve
CUP - Extension
DayCare Permit
DayCare Permit - Extension
Design Review - Prellminaty Review - Major
Design Review - Preliminary Review - Minor
Developer Agreements - Deposit $10,000 increments
Duplicate Tracing Fees - Final Parcel Maps (fee plus S4 per sheet)
Duplicate Tracing Fees - Final Trad Maps (fee plus $24 per sheet)
Easement Document Processing and Recording
EIA - All Others
EIA - Single Family Lot
EIR Review (base fee + deposit in $5.000 inuements aRer the first 160 hn Of
project planner and 40 hn project engineer)
EIR -Addendum (i deposit in $1,000 increments after 1st 70 hn of project planner)
EIR - Focused/Suppiemental (Requiring a Public Hearing) - (fee + deposit in $5,000
increments after the 1st 100 hn of project planner and 20 he of project engineer)
ing costs) -fee refunded if appeal is won
Fee Oascrintion
December 16, 1997
-
Note Fa
50.00
760.00
30,100.00
600.00
400.00
400.00
400.00
court cos0
620.00
2.250.00
490.00
820.00
290.00
410.00
740.00
1,350.00
2,120.00
260.00
140.00
530.00
400.00
2.680.00
1,440.00
500.00
540.00
125.00
55.00
275.00
55.00
Actual cos
10.00
10.00
390.00
1.030.00
560.00
12,000.00
1.500.00
8,400.00
,
2-1