HomeMy Public PortalAboutResolution 23-17 Capital Improvements Plan - Final ReportCity of McCall
VALLEY COUNTY, STATE OF IDAHO
RESOLUTION 23-17
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MCCALL MAKING
CERTAIN FINDINGS; APPROVING THE MCCALL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN MCCALL FIRE PROTECTION DISTRICT IMPACT FEE
STUDY AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FINAL REPORT — JUNE, 2022; DIRECTING
THE CITY CLERK; AND SETTING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of McCall:
Section 1: Findings
It is hereby found by the City Council of the City of McCall that:
1.1
The McCall Fire Protection District's (the "Fire District") duty and responsibility is to
provide protection of property against fire and the preservation of life, and enforcement of
any of the fire codes and other rules that are adopted by the state fire marshal; and
1.2 The Fire District's boundaries include the area within the City limits of the City of
McCall (the "City") and areas surrounding the City, and the Fire District provides fire
and emergency services within the City; and
1.3 The City is experiencing and is affected by considerable growth and development; and
1.4 The Idaho Development Impact Fee Act (the "Act") codified at Chapter 82 of Title 67
Idaho Code provides for:
• the imposition, collection and expenditure of development impact fees in accordance
with the provisions of the Act; and
• the promotion of orderly growth and development by establishing uniform standards
by which local governments may require that those who benefit from new growth and
development pay a proportionate share of the costs of new public facilities needed to
serve new growth and development; and
• minimum standards for the adoption of development impact fee ordinances by
governmental entities which are authorized to adopt ordinances; and
• The contents of a capital improvements plan and the process to be followed for the
adoption of a capital improvements plan.
Resolution Approving Capital Improvements Plan- Final Report -June, 2022
September 7, 2022 Page 1 of 5
1.5 The City of McCall is a governmental entity as defined in the Act at Idaho Code § 67-
8203(14) and, as provided at Idaho Code § 67-8202(5), has ordinance authority to adopt a
development impact fee ordinance, whereas the Fire District does not have ordinance
authority and cannot adopt a development impact fee ordinance; and
1.6 The Act provides at Idaho Code § 67-8204A, that the City, when affected by development,
has the authority to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the Fire District for the
purpose of agreeing to collect and expend development impact fees for Fire District System
Improvements; and
1.7 In anticipation and in consideration of the City Council of the City of McCall adopting the
Ordinance, which is intended to provide for the collection and expenditure of development
impact fees for the Fire District, the City has established and appointed, pursuant to Idaho
Code § 67-8205, a Development Impact Fee Advisory Committee; and
1.8 The Fire District retained Anne Wescott of Galena Consulting, a qualified professional in
the field of public administration, to prepare an impact fee study and capital improvements
plan in consultation with the City of McCall Development Impact Fee Advisory Standing
Committee (the "Advisory Committee"); and
1.9 The Advisory Committee has submitted to the City Council the McCall Fire Protection
District Impact Fee Study and Capital Improvement Plan Final Report — June, 2022
prepared in accordance with the requirements of Idaho Code § 67-8208 in consultation
with the Advisory Committee as provided in Idaho Code §§ 67-8205 and 67-8206(2); and
1.10 Prior to the adoption of the Capital Improvements Plan, the Fire District Board of
Commissioners and the City Council of the City of McCall, in accordance with Idaho Code
§ 67-8206(3), have published notice and held a joint combined public hearing; and
1.11 The Capital Improvements Plan contains all the necessary elements of a capital
improvements plan as provided in the Act by Idaho Code § 67-8208; and
1.12 The Fire District has concluded all of its process for the adoption of the Capital
Improvements Plan as required in the Act by Idaho Code §§ 67-8205 and 67-8206(3); and
1.13 The City Council of the City of McCall and the Board of Commissioners of the McCall
Fire Protection District have both determined that it is in the best interests of the City of
McCall and the Fire District and the residents, persons and property within the boundaries
of the City of McCall that both shall adopt the Capital Improvements Plan.
Section 2: Action of approval of the Capital Improvements Plan
2.1 The City Council does hereby approve the Capital Improvements Plan, a true and correct
copy of which is attached hereto and marked Exhibit A and by this reference incorporated
herein; and
Resolution Approving Capital Improvements Plan- Final Report -June, 2022
September 7, 2022 Page 2 of 5
Section 3: Direction to City Clerk
3.1 The City Clerk is hereby directed to retain this resolution in the official records of the City
and to provide a certified copy of this resolution to the District Office Administrator of the
McCall Fire Protection District.
Section 4: Effective Date.
4.1 This Resolution shall be in full force and effect after its passage and approval.
PASSED BY THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of McCall this 7 day of September,
2023.
Signed:
Robert S. Giles, Mayor
J
ATTEST:
I certify that the above Resolution was duly adopted by the City Council of the City of McCall
on September 7, 2023 by the following vote: Ayes: 5
By
BessieJo Wagne
ototin►np►►►e, Nos: 0
4 OF Af01"%Absent: 0
•
'f�
s
in
•
,y111* �,
OARO*c
Resolution Approving Capital Improvements Plan- Final Report -June, 2022
September 7, 2022 Page 3 of 5
CITY OF MCCALL
Certification of Resolution 023
STATE OF IDAHO )
ss.
County of Valley )
I certify that this is a true and correct copy of Resolution c73 --f an original record of
the City of McCall, in the possession of Bessie Jo Wagner, City Clerk of the City of McCall.
Dated: 601 l a 0 A 3
[seal]
i
LORI A WILKINS
NOTARY PUBLIC - STATE OF IDAHO
COMMISSION NUMBER 20220789
MY COMMISSION EXPIRES 3-1-2028
gnature of Notary Public
My commission expires: ✓ - 1 " v y?
W:IWorklM\McCall Fire Protection District 255561Impact FeeslCity of McCall\Clean Drafts of Impact Fee Documents vetted by Brain and
WFG106 CITY COUNCIL Resolution Adopt Capital Improvements Plan 3.16.23 xfg-Clean.docx
Resolution Approving Capital Improvements Plan- Final Report -June, 2022
September 7, 2022 Page 4 of 5
EXHIBIT A
CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS PLAN
McCall Fire Protection District Impact Fee Study and Capital Improvement Plan Final Report —
June, 2022
Resolution Approving Capital Improvements Plan- Final Report -June, 2022
September 7, 2022 Page 5 of 5
FINAL REPORT - June 2022
McCaII Fire Protection District
Impact Fee Study and
Capital Improvement Plan
Prepared By
Galena Consulting
Anne Wescott
1214 South Johnson
Boise, Idaho 83705
ErAl I : \
Section I.
Introduction
This report regarding impact fees for the McCall Fire Protection District is organized into the
following sections:
An overview of the report's background and objectives;
A definition of impact fees and a discussion of their appropriate use;
An overview of land use and demographics;
A step-by-step calculation of impact fees under the Capital Improvement Plan
(CIP) approach;
A list of implementation recommendations; and
A brief summary of conclusions.
Background and Objectives
The McCall Fire Protection District hired Galena Consulting to calculate impact fees for Fire
and EMS.
This document presents impact fees based on the District's demographic data and infrastructure
costs before credit adjustment; calculates the District's monetary participation; examines the
likely cash flow produced by the recommended fee amount; and outlines specific fee
implementation recommendations. Credits can be granted on a case -by -case basis; these credits
are assessed when each individual building permit is pulled.
Definition of Impact Fees
Impact fees are one-time assessments established by local governments to assist with the
provision of Capital Improvements necessitated by new growth and development. Impact fees are
governed by principles established in Title 67, Chapter 82, Idaho Code, known as the Idaho
Development Impact Fee Act (Impact Fee Act). The Idaho Code defines an impact fee as "... a
payment of money imposed as a condition of development approval to pay for a proportionate
share of the cost of system improvements needed to serve development."'
Purpose of impact fees. The Impact Fee Act includes the legislative finding that "... an
equitable program for planning and financing public facilities needed to serve new growth and
development is necessary in order to promote and accommodate orderly growth and development
and to protect the public health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of the state ofIdaho."'
Idaho fee restrictions and requirements. The Impact Fee Act places numerous restrictions
onthe calculation and use of impact fees, all of which help ensure that local governments adopt
impact fees that are consistent with federal law.' Some of those restrictions include:
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 1
• Impact fees shall not be used for any purpose other than to defray system
improvement costs incurred to provide additional public facilities to serve new
growth;4
• Impact fees must be expended within 8 years from the date they are collected. Fees
may be held in certain circumstances beyond the 8 -year time limit if the
governmental entity can provide reasonable cause;5
• Impact fees must not exceed the proportionate share of the cost of
capital improvements needed to serve new growth and development;'
• Impact fees must be maintained in one or more interest -bearing accounts within
the capital projects fund.'
In addition, the Impact Fee Act requires the following:
• Establishment of and consultation with a development impact fee advisory
committee (Advisory Committee);8
•
•
Identification of all existing public facilities;
Determination of a standardized measure (or service unit) of consumption of
public facilities;
• Identification of the current level of service that existing public facilities
provide;
• Identification of the deficiencies in the existing public facilities;
• Forecast of residential and nonresidential growth;9
• Identification of the growth -related portion of the District's Capital
Improvement Plan;1°
• Analysis of cash flow stemming from impact fees and other capital
improvement funding sources;"
• Implementation of recommendations such as impact fee credits, how impact fee
revenues should be accounted for, and how the impact fees should be updated
over time;12
• Preparation and adoption of a Capital Improvement Plan pursuant to state law
and public hearings regarding the same;13 and
• Preparation and adoption of a resolution authorizing impact fees pursuant to state
law and public hearings regarding the same.14
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 2
How should fees be calculated? State law requires the District to implement the Capital
Improvement Plan methodology to calculate impact fees. The District can implement fees of any
amount not to exceed the fees as calculated by the CIP approach. This methodology requires the
District to describe its service areas, forecast the land uses, densities and population that are
expected to occur in those service areas over the 10 -year CIP time horizon, and identify the
capital improvements that will be needed to serve the forecasted growth at the planned levels of
service, assuming the planned levels of service do not exceed the current levels of service.15
Only those items identified as growth -related on the CIP are eligible to be funded by impact fees.
The governmental entity intending to adopt an impact fee must first prepare a capital
improvements plan." Once the essential capital planning has taken place, impact fees can be
calculated. The Impact Fee Act places many restrictions on the way impact fees are calculated and
spent, particularly via the principal that local governments cannot charge new development more
than a "proportionate share" of the cost of public facilities to serve that new growth.
"Proportionate share" is defined as ". . . that portion of the cost of system improvements .. .
which reasonably relates to the service demands and needs of the project."19 Practically, this
concept requires the District to carefully project future growth and estimate capital improvement
costs so that it prepares reasonable and defensible impact fee schedules.
The proportionate share concept is designed to ensure that impact fees are calculated by measuring
the needs created for capital improvements by development being charged the impact fee; do not
exceed the cost of such improvements; and are "earmarked" to fund growth -related capital
improvements to benefit those that pay the impact fees.
There are various approaches to calculating impact fees and to crediting new development for
past and future contributions made toward system improvements. The Impact Fee Act does not
specify a single type of fee calculation, but it does specify that the formula be "reasonable and
fair." Impact fees should take into account the following:
• Any appropriate credit, offset or contribution of money, dedication of land,
or construction of system improvements;
• Payments reasonably anticipated to be made by or as a result of a new
development in the form of user fees and debt service payments;
• That portion of general tax and other revenues allocated by the District to growth -
related system improvements; and
• All other available sources of funding such system improvements.2°
Through data analysis and interviews with the District and Galena Consulting identified the share
of each capital improvement needed to serve growth. The total projected capital improvements
needed to serve growth are then allocated to residential and nonresidential development with the
resulting amounts divided by the appropriate growth projections from 2021 to 2031. This is
consistent with the Impact Fee Act.2' Among the advantages of the CIP approach is its
establishment of a spending plan to give developers and new residents more certainty about the use
of the particular impact fee revenues.
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 3
Other fee calculation considerations. The basic CIP methodology used in the fee
calculations is presented above. However, implementing this methodology requires a number of
decisions. The considerations accounted for in the fee calculations include the following:
• Allocation of costs is made using a service unit which is "a standard measure of
consumption, use, generation or discharge attributable to an individual unit22 of
development calculated in accordance with generally accepted engineering or
planning standards for a particular category of capital improvement."23 The service
units chosen by the study team for every fee calculation in this study are linked
directly to residential dwelling units and nonresidential development square feet.24
• A second consideration involves refinement of cost allocations to different land
uses. According to Idaho Code, the CIP must include a "conversion table
establishing the ratio of a service unit to various types of land uses, including
residential, commercial, agricultural and industrial."25 In this analysis, the study
team has chosen to use the highest level of detail supportable by available data
and, as a result, in this study, the fee is allocated between aggregated residential
(i.e., all forms of residential housing) and nonresidential development (all
nonresidential uses including retail, office, agricultural and industrial).
Current Assets and Capital Improvement Plans
The CIP approach estimates future capital improvement investments required to serve growth
over a fixed period of time. The Impact Fee Act calls for the CIP to ". . . project demand for
system improvements required by new service units . . . over a reasonable period of time not to
exceed 20 years."76 The impact fee study team recommends a 10 -year time period based on the
District's best available capital planning data.
The types of costs eligible for inclusion in this calculation include any land purchases,
construction of new facilities and expansion of existing facilities to serve growth over the next 10
years at planned and/or adopted service levels.27 Equipment and vehicles with a useful life of 10
years or more are also impact fee eligible under the Impact Fee Act.28 The total cost of
improvements over the 10 years is referred to as the "CIP Value" throughout this report. The cost
of this impact fee study is also impact fee eligible for all impact fee categories.
Fee Calculation
In accordance with the CIP approach described above, we calculated fees by answering the
following seven questions:
1. Who is currently served by the District? This includes the number of residents
and visitors, but is more specifically tied to the number of residential and
nonresidential land uses.
2. What is the current level of service provided by the District? Since an
important purpose of impact fees is to help the District achieve its planned level of
service29, it is necessary to know the levels of service it is currently providing to the
community.
3. What current assets allow the District to provide this level of service? This
provides a current inventory of assets used by the District, such as facilities, land
and equipment. In addition, each asset's replacement value was calculated and
summed to determine the total value of the District's current assets.
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 4
4. What is the current investment per residential and nonresidential land use? In
other words, how much of the District's current assets' total value is needed to
serve current residential households and nonresidential square feet?
5. What future growth is expected in the District? How many new residential
households and nonresidential square footage will the District serve over the CIP
period?
6. What new infrastructure is required to serve future growth? For example, how
many additional stations and apparatus will be needed by the McCall Fire Protection
District within the next ten years to achieve the planned level of service of the
Distract?3o
7. What impact fee is required to pay for the new infrastructure? We calculated
an apportionment of new infrastructure costs to future residential and nonresidential
land -uses for the District. Then, using this distribution, the impact fees were
determined.
Addressing these seven questions, in order, provides the most effective and logical way to
calculate impact fees for the District. In addition, these seven steps satisfy and follow the
regulations set forth earlier in this section.
Exhibits found in Section III of this report detail all capital improvements planned for purchase
over the next ten years by the District.
See Section 67-8203(9), Idaho Code. "System improvements" are capital improvements (i.e., improvements with a
useful life of 10 years or more) that, in addition to a long life, increase the service capacity of a public facility. Public
facilities include fire, emergency medical and rescue facilities. See Sections 67-8203(3), (24) and (28), Idaho Code.
See Section 67-8202, Idaho Code.
3
As explained further in this study, proportionality is the foundation of a defensible impact fee. To meet substantive due
process requirements, an impact fee must provide a rational relationship (or nexus) between the impact fee assessed
against new development and the actual need for additional capital improvements. An impact fee must substantially
advance legitimate local government interests. This relationship must be of "rough proportionality." Adequate
consideration ofthe factors outlined in Section 67-8207(2) ensure that rough proportionality is reached. See Banbury
Development Corp. v. South Jordan, 631 P.2d 899 (1981); Dollan v. District of Tigard, 512 U.S. 374 (1994).
4
See Sections 67-8202(4) and 67-8203(29), Idaho Code.
5
See Section 67-8210(4), Idaho Code.
6
See Sections 67-8204(1) and 67-8207, Idaho Code.
7
See Section 67-8210(1), Idaho Code
See Section 67-8205, Idaho Code.
9
See Section 67-8206(2), Idaho Code.
10
See Section 67-8208, Idaho Code.
u
See Section 67-8207, Idaho Code.
12
13
14
See Sections 67-8209 and 67-8210, Idaho Code.
See Section 67-8208, Idaho Code.
See Sections 67-8204 and 67-8206, Idaho Code.
15
As a comparison and benchmark for the impact fees calculated under the Capital Improvement Plan approach, Galena
Consulting also calculated the District's current level of service by quantifying the District's current investment in
capital improvements, allocating a portion of these assets to residential and nonresidential development, and dividing
the resulting amount by current housing units (residential fees) or current square footage (nonresidential fees). By using
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 5
current assets to denote the current service standard, this methodology guards against using fees to correct existing
deficiencies.
17
See Section 67-8208, Idaho Code.
19
See Section 67-8203(23), Idaho Code.
20
See Section 67-8207, Idaho Code.
21
The impact fee that can be charged to each service unit (in this study, residential dwelling units and nonresidential
square feet) cannot exceed the amount determined by dividing the cost of capital improvements attributable to new
development (in order to provide an adopted service level) by the total number of service units attributable to new
development. See Sections 67-8204(16), 67-8208(1(f) and 67-8208(1)(g), Idaho Code.
See Section 67-8203(27), IdahoCode.
23
See Section 67-8203(27), Idaho Code.
The construction of detached garages alongside residential units does not typically trigger the payment of additional
impact fees unless that structure will be the site of a home -based business with significant outside employment.
25
See Section 67-8208(1)(e), Idaho Code.
24
22
26
See Section 67-8208(1)(h).
27
This assumes the planned levels of service do not exceed the current levels of service.
28
The Impact Fee Act allows a broad range of improvements to be considered as "capital" improvements, so long as the
improvements have useful life of at least 10 years and also increase the service capacity of public facilities. See Sections
67- 8203(28) and 50-1703, Idaho Code.
29
30
This assumes that the planned level of service does not exceed the current level of service.
This assumes the planned level of service does not exceed the current level of service.
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 6
Section II.
Land Uses
The McCall Fire Protection District serves the population of the City of McCall and a portion of
unincorporated Valley County as indicated in Exhibit II -1 below.
Exhibit II -1.
District Boundaries
r
The following Exhibit II -2 presents the current and estimated future population for the District
based on U.S. Census data through 2020.
Exhibit II -2.
Current and Future Population within the boundaries of the McCall Fire Protection District
2021 2031 Net Growth Annual
Growth Rate
Population 5,411
Unincorporated 1,725
City Of McCall 3,686
6,709 1,299 2.4%
2,138 414 2.4%
4,571 885 2.4%
The District currently has approximately 5,411 persons residing within its service boundary. Over
the next ten years, it is estimated the District will grow by approximately 1,299 people, or at an
annual growth rate of 2.4%. Population alone is not an accurate indicator of growth within the
District, however, as McCall is a resort community and many of the residential units are short -
GALENA CONSULTING
FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 7
term rentals. As these units are not owner -occupied, the inhabitants are not included within the
U.S. Census as part of the residential population. These units do drive demand for fire and EMS
services and need to be considered within the study calculations.
To more accurately project growth, the study team determined the number of projected new
households and nonresidential square footage from 2021 through 2031 for the District based on
data from the Valley County Assessor's Office, the Valley County Planning Department, the
City of McCall, Idaho Power, regional real estate market reports and recommendations from
District Staff and the Impact Fee Advisory Committee.
The following Exhibit II -3 presents the current and future number of residential units and
nonresidential square feet projected for the District.
Exhibit II -3.
Current and Future Land Uses, McCall Fire Protection District
2021 2031 Net Growth Net Growth in Percent of Total
Square Feet I" Growth in SF
Population 5,411 6,709 1,299
Residential (in units) 5,838 7,239 1,401 3,502,800 94%
Nonresidential (in square feet) 875,700 1,085,868 210,168 210,168 6%
Total Square Footage Growth = 3,712,968 100%
As shown above, the McCall Fire Protection District is expected to grow by approximately 1,401
residential units and about 210,168 nonresidential square feet over the next ten years. Ninety-four
percent of this growth is attributable to residential land uses, while the remaining six percent is
attributable to nonresidential growth. These growth projections will be used in the following
sections to calculate the appropriate impact fees for the District.
Demographic and land -use projections are some of the most variable and potentially debatable
components of an impact fee study, and in all likelihood the projections used in our study will
not prove to be 100 percent correct. The purpose of the Advisory Committee's annual review is
to account for these inconsistencies. As each CIP is tied to the District's land use growth, the
CIPand resulting fees can be revised based on actual growth as it occurs.
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 8
Section III.
Impact Fee Calculation
In this section, we calculate fire and EMS impact fees for the McCall Fire Protection District
according to the seven -question method outlined in Section I of this report.
1. Who is currently served by the McCall Fire Protection District?
As shown in Exhibit II -3, the District currently serves 5,838 residential units and approximately
875,700 square feet of nonresidential land use.
2. What is the current level of service provided by the McCall Fire Protection District?
The McCall Fire Protection District provides a response time of 6.15 minutes District -wide.
Response times are approximately 4.99 minutes within the City of McCall, and can be longer than
6.15 minutes for other parts of the unincorporated County. As the number of residents and visitors
to the District grows, additional infrastructure and equipment will be needed to sustain this level
of service. Based on conversations with District staff, it is our understanding that the planned
level of service is equal to a continuation of the current level of service.
3. What current assets allow the McCall Fire Protection District to provide this level of
service?
The following Exhibit III -1 displays the current assets of the McCall Fire Protection District
utilized to provide fire protection and EMS response.
Exhibit III -1.
Current Assets —McCall Fire Protection District
Type of Capital Infrastructure
Square Replacement
Feet Value
Facilities
McCall Fire Station 81 Deinhard Lane
14,500 58,700,000
Vehicles/Apparatus
2 Engines 51,300,000
2 Ambulances $470,000
Pumper Tender $400,000
Tender $200,000
Squad $100,000
3 Support Vehicles $160,000
Fire Boat $50,000
3 Snowmobiles $45,000
UTV $25,000
Equipment
2 Stryker Auto Load
2 Stryker Cots
3 Cardiac Monitors
2 CPR Machines
Snowmobile Trailer
UTV Trailer
Extrication Tools
30 SCBAs
Plus Cost of Fee -Related Research
impact Fee Study
Grand Total
$40,000
$44,000
$120,000
530,000
$10,000
$7,000
$30,000
$180,000
$11
515,000
$11,926,000
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 9
As shown above, the District currently owns almost $12 million of capital assets. These assets are
used to provide the District's current level of service for fire and EMS response.
4. What is the current investment per residential unit and nonresidential square foot?
The McCall Fire Protection District has already invested $1,927 per existing residential unit and
$0.77 per existing nonresidential square foot in the capital necessary to provide the current level
of service for fire protection and emergency medical response. These figures are derived by
allocating the value of the District's current assets among the current number of residential units
and nonresidential square feet.
We will compare our final impact fee calculations with these figures to determine if the two
results will be similar; this represents a "check" to see if future District residents will be paying
for infrastructure at a level commensurate with what existing District residents have invested in
infrastructure.
5. What future growth is expected in the McCall Fire Protection District?
As shown in Exhibit II -3, the McCall Fire Protection District is expected to grow by approximately
1,401 residential units and 210,168 square feet of nonresidential land use over the next ten years.
6. What new infrastructure is required to serve future growth?
The following Exhibit III -2 indicates the density of calls for both fire protection and emergency
medical services for the McCall Fire Protection District in 2018-2019.
Exhibit III -2.
Incident Density 2018-2019 — Fire and EMS Calls for Service
Volley C3 My %OI,Gt
MCCALL RFR()
Fire station
el 6cfol w/ALS Mock:
crstrct
Incident Density
FIRES t OTHER CALLS
(Ale -101,1
• inc Cent
0.1 . 1 o/sq. mie
- ". '. . 25/sq. mie
- e0/sq. mile
40.1 • 65/sq. mib
IN 65.1 - 86/sq. mie
Hlct•ent Demey
PALS CALLS
1eelMRetq
• R,cidert
• I5/sq. mile
6 . e0/sq. mud
el - 75/sq. mein
ill 76 - Ito/sq. Wee
111 . 150/sq. mie
FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 10
GALENA CONSULTING
As shown above, the highest incidence of calls for service come from within the City of McCall
and its immediate surroundings. The existing Station #1 is well -located geographically to respond
to the areas of highest density within the desired amount of time.
Of greater concern to the District than location, however, is the issue of concurrency of calls. The
District participated in a study of the Valley County EMS District conducted by ESCI in 2020 in
partnership with Valley County, the Donnelly Fire Protection District and the Cascade Fire
Protection District. This study determined that 15% of the time the District was responding to
more than one call (175 calls out of 1,147 in 2019). Without adequate staffing and apparatus,
concurrent incidents result in response times beyond standards to reduce loss of life and property.
It was recommended that an additional ambulance be acquired as a reserve ambulance to be shared
among the three fire and EMS districts, and that the McCall Fire Protection District move toward
staffing an additional ambulance at Station #1.
The District intends to add nine firefighter/EMTs, increasing the size of each shift from four to
seven, and the minimum manning from the current model of three firefighter/EMT's to six. This
will would allow the district to staff an engine, and two ambulances with at least two people on
each apparatus to further ensure the level of service does not decline as growth occurs.
The McCall Fire Protection District has developed its capital improvement plans (CIPs) based on
the recommendations of the ESCI study and its increased staffing initiative. The following Exhibit
III -3 displays the capital improvements planned for purchase by the McCall Fire Protection District
over the next ten years for fire protection response.
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 11
Exhibit III -3.
McCall Fire Protection District CIP 2021 to 2031
Type of Capital Infrastructure
CIP Growth Amount to Amount from
Value Portion Include in Fees General Fund
Facilities
Addition to Station #1 to accommodate
9 additional FF/EMTs for growth
$ 2,500,000 100% $ 2,500,000
Vehicles
Additional command vehicle for growth $ 60,000 100%
Additional Ambulance - shared by 3 districts $ 78,333 100%
Engine Replacement $ 650,000 0%
Equipment
PPEs/Radios for 9 additional Firefighters $ 45,000 100%
1 Stryker Cot $ 22,000 100%
1 Stryker Auto Load $ 20,000 100%
60,000
78,333
45,000
22,000
20,000
$
650,000
Total Infrastructure
$ 3,375,333 $ 2,725,333 $ 650,000
Plus Cost of Fee -Related Research
Impact Fee Study
$ 15,000 100% $ 15,000
Grand Total $ 3,390,333 $ 2,740,333 $ 650,000
As shown above, the District plans to purchase approximately $3.4 million in capital
improvements over the next ten years, $2.7 million of which is impact fee eligible. These new
assets will allow the District to continue its current level of fire protection and emergency
medical service as the community grows.
The primary impact fee eligible expenditures are the expansion of Station #1 to accommodate
living and dormitory space for the 9 additional firefighters/EMTs recommended in the ESCI
study, the District's proportional share of an additional ambulance and equipment to be used by
all three districts providing EMS in Valley County, personal protective equipment and radios for
the 9 firefighters/EMTs, and an additional command vehicle for the expanded crew. 100% of
these expenditures are necessitated by growth and are required to maintain the current level of
service. The replacement of the existing engine is not impact fee eligible and must be funded
through other sources.
The remaining $650,000 is the price for the District to replace an existing engine. Replacement
of existing capital is not eligible for inclusion in the impact fee calculations. The District will
therefore have to use other sources of revenue including all of those listed in Idaho Code 67-
8207(iv)(2)(h). The District has identified property tax revenue as the source for funding non -
growth -related capital improvements.
It should be noted that the participation amount associated with purely non -growth
improvements like apparatus replacements is discretionary. The District can choose not to fund
these capital improvements (although this could result in a decrease in the level of service if the
deferred repairs or replacements were urgent).
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 12
7. What impact fee is required to pay for the new capital improvements?
The following Exhibit I1I-4 takes the projected future growth from Exhibits II -3 and the growth -
related CIP for Fire from Exhibit III -3 to calculate fire and EMS impact fees for the McCall Fire
Protection District.
Exhibit III -4.
Impact Fee Calculation, McCall Fire Protection District
Impact Fee Calculation
Amount to Include in Fee Calculation $ 2,740,333
Distribution of Future Land Use Growth
Residential
Nonresidential
94%
6%
Future Assets by Land Use
Residential $ 2,585,220
Nonresidential $ 155,113
Future Land Use Growth
Residential
Nonresidential
Impact Fee per Unit
Residential
Nonresidential
$
1,401
210,168
1,845
0.74
As shown above, we have calculated impact fees for the McCall Fire Protection District at
$1,845 per residential unit and $0.74 per non-residential square foot. In comparison, as indicated
in question #4 above, property taxpayers within the District have already invested $1,927 per
residential unit and $0.78 per nonresidential square foot in the capital inventory necessary to
provide today's level of service.
The District cannot assess fees greater than the amounts shown above. The District may assess
fees lower than these amounts, but would then experience a decline in service levels unless the
District used other revenues to make up the difference.
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 13
Section IV.
Fee Analysis and Administrative Recommendations
A comparison of the calculated Fire and EMS impact fees to similar fees being assessed by fire and
EMS departments/districts within Southwest Idaho is shown in Exhibit IV -1:
Exhibit IV -1.
Impact Fee Comparison
McCall Fire Cascade Fire Ada County/ Canyon Co/ Gem County/ Twin Falls Co/ Elmore Co/ Payette Co/
District District Kuna Fire Nampa Fire Gem Fire Rock Creek Mtn Home Parma
DRAFT DRAFT District District District Fire District Fire District Fire District
DRAFT DRAFT DRAFT
Fire and EMS
per Residential Unit $ 1,845 $ 2,891 $ 1,973 $ 1,567 $ 1,808 $ 1,661 $ 2,111 $ 2,316
per Non -Residential sf $ 0.74 $ 1.16 $ 0.80 $ 0.63 $ 0.71 $ 0.66 $ 1.80 $ 1.90
Some communities express concem that impact fees will stifle growth. Empirical data indicates
impact fees are not a primary reason for a decision to build or not build in a particular area. Factors
including the price of land and construction, market demand, the availability of skilled workers,
access to major transportation modes, amenities for quality of life, etc. all weigh more heavily in
decisions to construct new homes or businesses, as well for business relocation. Ultimately the
impact fee, which is paid at the time of building permit, is passed along to the buyer in the purchase
price or wrapped into a lease rate. Therefore, in a market with a high demand for development, an
impact fee higher than other jurisdictions is unlikely to slow growth.
An impact fee program will enable the District to plan for growth without decreasing its service
levels (response time), which can decrease buyer satisfaction and cause property insurance
premiums to increase. It will also allow the District to collect a proportionate share of the cost of
capital improvements from growth instead of funding future capital through property taxes.
As the District Commission evaluates whether or not to adopt the Capital Improvement Plan and
impact fee presented in this report, we also offer the following information regarding District
participation in funding, and implementation recommendations for your consideration.
Implementation Recommendations
The following implementation recommendations should be considered:
Intergovernmental Agreements. The McCall Fire Protection District is enabled under Idaho
Code as a governmental entity to adopt impact fees. However, because impact fees are paid
upon building permit, and the District does not participate in this process, it needs another
governmental entity to collect these fees on its behalf. Idaho Code 67-8204(a) authorizes the
District to enter into an intergovernmental agreement with the City of McCall and Valley
County to collect fire and EMS fees on their behalf.
In the case that any one of these jurisdictions chooses not to collect the fees on the Fire
District's behalf, inequities will result. Developers will have to pay an impact fee in one part
of the District but not another, and the growth in the non -participating jurisdictions will
essentially be subsidized by the growth in the participating region. Should this occur, it is
recommended that the fee calculation be revised to more accurately reflect demand from the
participating jurisdictions. Alternatively, jurisdictions not wishing to collect impact fees on
behalf of the District may be encouraged to include the payment of the fee amount in their
development agreements to be paid directly to the District.
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 14
Capital Improvements Plan. Should the Advisory Committee recommend this study to the
District Commission and should the Commission adopt the study, the District should also
formally adopt this Capital Improvement Plan. While not subject to the procedures of the Local
Land Use Planning Act (LLUPA), the adoption of the Capital Improvement Plan would comply
with the Act's requirements of other governmental entities to adopt capital improvement plans
into a Comprehensive Plan as part of the adoption of impact fees.
Each participating jurisdiction will need to also adopt the Capital Improvement Plan into their
Comprehensive Plan via amendment.
Impact Fee Ordinance. Following adoption of the Capital Improvement Plan, the Commission
should review the proposed Impact Fee Ordinance for adoption via resolution as reviewed and
recommended by the Advisory Committee and legal counsel. Each participating jurisdiction
will also need to adopt the impact fee ordinance.
Advisory Committee. The Advisory Committee is in a unique position to work with and advise
Commission and District staff to ensure that the capital improvement plans and impact fees are
routinely reviewed and modified as appropriate.
Impact fee service area. Some municipalities have fee differentials for various zones under
the assumption that some areas utilize more or less current and future capital improvements. The
study team, however, does not recommend the District assess different fees by dividing the areas
into zones. The capital improvements identified in this report inherently serve a system -wide
function.
Specialized assessments. If permit applicants are concerned they would be paying more than
their fair share of future infrastructure purchases, the applicant can request an individualized
assessment to ensure they will only be paying their proportional share. The applicant would be
required to prepare and pay for all costs related to such an assessment.
Donations. If the District receives donations for capital improvements listed on the CIP, they
must account for the donation in one of two ways. If the donation is for a non- or partially
growth -related improvement, the donation can contribute to the District's General Fund
participation along with more traditional forms, such as revenue transfers from the General Fund.
If, however, the donation is fora growth -related project in the CIP, the donor's impact fees should be
reduced dollar for dollar. This means that the District will either credit the donor or reimburse the
donor for that portion of the impact fee.
Credit/reimbursement. If a developer constructs or contributes all or part of a growth -related
project that would otherwise be financed with impact fees, that developer must receive a credit
against the fees owed for this category or, at the developer's choice, be reimbursed from impact
fees collected in the future." This prevents "double dipping" by the District.
The presumption would be that builders/developers owe the entirety of the impact fee amount
until they make the District aware of the construction or contribution. If credit or reimbursement
is due, the governmental entity must enter into an agreement with the fee payer that specifies the
amount of the credit or the amount, time and form of reimbursement.38
Impact fee accounting. The District should maintain Impact Fee Funds separate and apart
from the General Fund. All current and future impact fee revenue should be immediately
deposited into this account and withdrawn only to pay for growth -related capital improvements
of the same category. General Funds should be reserved solely for the receipt of tax revenues,
grants, user fees and associated interest earnings, and ongoing operational expenses including the
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 15
repair and replacement of existing capital improvements not related to growth.
Spending policy. The District should establish and adhere to a policy governing their
expenditure ofmonies from the Impact Fee Fund. The Fund should be prohibited from paying
for any operational expenses and the repair and replacement or upgrade of existing infrastructure
not necessitatedby growth. In cases when growth -related capital improvements are constructed,
impact fees are an allowable revenue source as long as only new growth is served. In cases when
new capital improvements are expected to partially replace existing capacity and to partially
serve new growth, cost sharing between the General Fund or other sources of revenue listed in
Idaho Code 67-8207(I)(iv), (2)(h) and Impact Fee Fund should be allowed on a pro rata basis.
Update procedures. The District is expected to grow rapidly over the 10 -year span of the CIPs.
Therefore, the fees calculated in this study should be updated annually as the District invests in
additional infrastructure beyond what is listed in this report, and/or as the District's projected
development changes significantly. Fees can be updated on an annual basis using an inflation
factor for building material from a reputable source such as McGraw Hill's Engineering News
Record. As described in Idaho Code 67-8205(3)(c)(d)(e), the Advisory Committee will play an
important role in these updates and reviews.
37
See Section 67-8209(3), Idaho Code.
38
See Section 67-8209(4), Idaho Code
GALENA CONSULTING FINAL REPORT -- PAGE 16