Ensuring plentiful recreational space and facilities for county residents, the Amador County Recreation Agency received support from the Amador County Board of Supervisors last Tuesday to raise both land and fee requirements for new developments to support parks and recreation.
The board voted unanimously to support ACRA’s proposals to dramatically raise mitigation fees and require the amount of land dedicated to parks and recreation. Under the current plan, developments are required to pay $150 per single family residential unit and dedicate 3 acres of land for every 1,000 population. The new ACRA plan raises the rate to $3,000 and the land to 5 acres.
Hal Paris, ACRA executive director, presented a three-fold proposal to the board. The three items included:
• Updating Ordinance 1198 for Parkland Dedication (commonly referred to as the Quimby Act)
• Updating the Park Impact Mitigation Fee collected for park construction and renovation
• Directing county staff to develop and institute the most effective means for funding on-going and long-term park/facility maintenance
The first part of the proposal raised the amount of land dedicated from 3 to 5 acres under the Quimby Act, which is the maximum amount allowed. Paris said “almost all agencies in the state take 5 acres” and that Folsom and Roseville “actually take up to 9 acres. They go after it aggressively.” He said that while 5 acres is the maximum allowed, counties or cities are allowed to ask developers to donate more.
Paris said the move from 3 to 5 acres will create opportunities for many more services. “When you take it up to the five acre standard,” he said, “you’re talking about ball fields, you’re talking about parks, picnic areas, shade shelters, basically places where people can get together and have some family time, some athletic time, some time away from the stresses of work and home life.”
Paris said that many counties and cities will use 3 to 3.2 acres of the 5acre requirement for park land and the remainder for “open space,” which he described as space for wetlands, trails, landbanks and other such uses. He said Roseville and Folsom use the 5 acres for parks and the remaining 4 acres as “open space.”
The second part of the proposal raises the mitigation fees from $150 to $3,000. While the fee increase is dramatic, Paris said it should be noted that the fee has not been altered since it was set in 1969. “We’re taking a big jump, but we should,” he said. “What we have to remember is that the fee is over 30 years old. Compare the price of a house 30 years ago and the price of a house now.”
A survey of other state agencies and their mitigation fees was given to the board. The fees varied dramatically, though none was anywhere near the county’s fee of $150. Eighteen agencies were quoted in the survey, with the fees ranging from $1,900 (North Natomas) to $9,583 (West Sacramento). The median fee was $3, 237.50 and five of the fees were less than the county’s proposed fee of $3,000.
“We know that a typical 5-acre park is going to cost in upwards of $750,000,” Paris said. “That’s a ‘bare minimum’ price tag. If you want to put sports lighting on those ball fields, if you want to put in a picnic area to hold events like family reunions, if you want off-street parking, all those costs get tagged on.”
After District 3 Supervisor Richard Vinson said, “I’m assuming that this mitigation fee is in addition to whatever you can find out there as far as grants and other moneys,” Paris said that the fees would not replace grants, but complement them. “That’s very much what we’re saying,” he said. “Three thousand dollars will get you just barely enough to build that 5-acre park. It won’t do any of the additional stuff. There still is a need to go out and get grants and community support.”
Paris pointed out that the Quimby Act and the mitigation fees were completely unrelated in law. “The Quimby Act gets you the land, the mitigation fee gets you the money to build on that land,” he said.
The third part of Paris’ proposal merely directs county staff to find a way to fund maintenance of the county’s parks. Paris said that currently “any number of groups are donating time, materials, supplies and money to maintain the parks.”
After Paris’ presentation, District 4 Supervisor Louis Boitano asked Paris if requiring 5 acres instead of 3 “excludes us from asking for more” from the developer. Paris said that it did not.
Amador City Council Member Richard Lynch addressed the board and said that Amador City supported ACRA’s proposals. “Citizens of Amador City believe in this,” he said. “We bring our support and we’ll stand behind you if you step up and catch up to where we need to be.”
When the board brought the matter to a vote, Paris reminded them that the proposal was not yet finalized. “This is conceptual,” he said. “What you’re doing is directing staff to bring something back to you at a later date. What you’re saying is that you want something like this to happen.”
The board voted unanimously in favor of ACRA’s proposal. County staff will now work on the proposal and bring it back at a later board meeting for approval. After the final documents are approved, the policies will go into effect 30 days later.
After approving the proposal, District 2 Supervisor Richard Forster said, “What this comes down to is that we’re doing this not only for the residents that are going to be moving in, but for the residents that are currently here and deserve a better quality of life, recreation, everything else that’s entailed.”
ACRA is a joint powers authority between the county, Amador City, Ione, Jackson, Plymouth, Sutter Creek, the Amador County Unified School District, the Camanche Community Services Area and the Volcano Community Services District. It was created in October, 2003.
