Laserfiche WebLink
<br />DECISION-MAKING FLOW CHART <br /> <br />Who <br />Benefits <br /> <br />Type of <br />Service <br /> <br />Tax VS. Fees <br />Policy <br /> <br />Example <br />Services <br /> <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />100% taxes <br /> <br />Po ICe patrol servlces i <br /> <br />MosIiytaxes <br />& some fee< <br /> <br />Code enfcrcenent <br />servi~s <br /> <br />,------------- <br />, <br /> <br />- <br /> <br />Mootly fces <br />& some taxes <br /> <br />Youth spcrts <br /> <br />f~ <br /> <br />100% fees <br /> <br />r~~velopmenl ""'~! <br /> <br />t <br /> <br />--+ <br /> <br />_____J <br /> <br />Stlltly Filltlillg, <br /> <br />::0 <br />(1) <br />II> <br />o <br />s: <br />0' <br />::> <br />"Z <br />'" 0 <br /><0 ' <br />(1)N <br />~O <br />~O <br />O'P <br />-0 <br />"'~ <br />coco <br /> <br />Wflile the p!.rpose of this study is to icelit ff the cost of fee-rela.:ed a:::tiy"ties, one Ol the cutcomes or the analysis is to provide a complete picture of <br />ttlC full cOSt of ail services offered. It is necessa"Y to identify all costs. whether fee~re ared or not. so that there is ;a fai.- dis:ribJtion of al <br />departmental overt1ead costS (discussed 1'1 the following sect on of thiS report) across at act.vltics. thereby cnsunng a definitive relationship bet'Nccn <br />the cost of the son-ice and the fee :hu s charged. No SCN:CC should be burdened with costs that cannot be cirecdy or indirectly linked to that <br />se'"Vice <br /> <br />Therefore. the first task in this s:udy is to separate the (ee~for-service activities (rom the non.fee activitics. Some f1on~fee rel2ted activities are <br />approoriacely funded by general func monies (or other special revenue or impact fee sources). such J.S adva.'1ccd planning services performed by the <br />P1annin~ division. T~e costs of :hese o:her sel"'lices are identmed and set aside from the user fee se."ices. <br /> <br /><T <br />>< <br />W <br />iD <br />25 <br />'" <br /> <br />MGT <br /> <br />Of fl.lIUICA. l!'Ie. <br />