PLACERVILLE – Greg Fuz, El Dorado County's development services director since January 2005, has announced his resignation.
Fuz said in a news release issued late Monday he will take some time off before exploring other professional options.
"I am looking forward to working to improve quality of life and development in this community as a private citizen," he said.
Fuz noted that he worked to implement the county's 2004 general plan as well as the merger of the Planning and Building departments.
– Cathy Locke
Many in the building related trades were unhappy with the performance of the county department headed by Greg Fuz. High fees and slow turn-around times have marked Director Fuz's tenure. Repeated outreach efforts were repeatedly met with resistance or tacit approval, but no real evidence of sincerity. Many community members that have participated in community workshops, ranging from Affordable Housing to the Winery Ordinance, have left the process of citizen involvement in government with a feeling that they have wasted their time, as the workshop input seemed to be disregarded "out-of-hand!" This quote from Director Fuz soon before coming to El Dorado County might explain the basic concern that many felt.
Director Greg Fuz ... ''is committed to working cooperatively toward a regional smart growth plan,'' but its housing decisions ''cannot be made by a consensus at a public workshop by those who are not familiar with our community goals and policies.'' [emphasis added] Many prominent vintners took many days this fall to assist with the formation of the Winery Ordinance. This is prime time for these growers, but the County had invited them to "help" because of their special expertise. After months of hard work, most members felt the process was not only abusive and demeaning, but that it took far longer then needed and that their input was not valued. It was often felt that is was actually Fuz that was, "not familiar with our community goals and policies.''
As all budgets have tightened, the patience of builders and the county Board of Supervisors has grown short when it came to seeing improvements in the performance of the department that Fuz oversees. Unnecessary time delays has cost the county general fund, the confidence of the public, and the ire of major investors like Gottschalk's. The county has invested much time and money to attract economic development in El Dorado County, only to have the companies attracted, sent away by a planning & building department that is often described as unworkable or broken. Recently, the county's Chief Administrative Officer was happy to announce that her personal deck permit took only two hours to process. This speed is a measure of success in El Dorado county, but most would agree that this is the least complex type of permit and that it should have taken 15 to 30 minutes rather then two hours. Permits on complex matter commonly take 6 months to over a year longer then expected.
Any business owner understands that time is money. Many developers were undeterred by high fees, but no amount of money or expertise helped when policies like the Oak Woodland Management Ordinance were not determined. Delays in this ordinance were recently examined and found to be wanting in proper management. Poor management of this process has cost the county nearly 6 months in implementation delays and about $100,000 in additional expenses. Although the outside contractor for this ordinance has received much criticism, it was determined that much of the time delay and added expenses were the result of unclear and often changing directives from department staff members.
After intervention by the Board of Supervisors the process appears to be back on tract, but the process would seem to remain broken. After public testimony at the Board meeting, Fuz responded in typical manner, "our real mistake was listening to the Planning Commission." At this same meeting, the Board was asked to approve, "retroactively," contracts that had expired 5 months earlier, most of which were managed by Fuz's department. Reasons for the delays included, "we didn't start soon enough", "it was delayed by county Counsel", "it was lost in other papers." One sentiment not expressed by Fuz was managerial responsibility.
No "mea culpa," no "the buck stops here, and no "I'm in charge and I take responsibility." Ultimately, the responsibility lays with the county Board of Supervisors. The Board meeting was held on Tuesday, and by Friday the county CAO had a letter on her desk from Greg Fuz, the gist of which was announced on the following Tuesday.
– Cris Alarcon
Included is a letter by Fuz justifying higher fees and a letter from an industry group detailing improvements needed within the department.
June 4, 2007
Mr. Greg Fuz, Director
El Dorado County Development Services
2850 Fairlane Court, Building C
Placerville, CA 95667
Re: Building Department Process Improvement Oversight Committee
Dear Mr. Fuz:
We look forward to working with you and other County stakeholders on
identifying and discussing solutions for process improvements. The North State
Building Industry Association (BIA), the El Dorado Builders’ Exchange, and the
Sacramento Builders’ Exchange, all feel that some process improvements can be
implemented immediately without having to increase fees. Some of our
suggestions include exempting ministerial projects from general plan review,
reducing counter hours to allow more time for application review, and updating
the application/plan checklist.
We feel our meetings to date have been productive and have generated some
good ideas. We have also made some changes for your consideration on process
improvements list provided to us on Friday, however at this time we have
removed any suggestions on the list that would require the increase of fees.
Below is a list of some process improvement ideas that we would like to see
implemented;
• During the next 12 months, the department should review expenditures and
revenues monthly with the CAO to ensure that its targets are being met. If
they are not met by January, the CAO and Department should go before the
Board again to consider further expenditure reductions.
• Consider streamlining General Plan consistency reviews for ministerial
projects.
2
• Work with the Economic Development Department to develop some public
training/outreach seminars to go over permit process/application
requirements.
• Modify/improve the plan review checklist.
• Create a "fast track" process for economic development that creates longterm
jobs in the county and affordable housing projects.
• Consider adjusting counter availability of plan checkers so that more time can
be dedicated to plan review. Cross-train other planners/techs to assist with
counter/phone questions.
• Further explore the "Portland Process" for screening residential projects for
engineering review.
• Consider implementing technology improvements, which would allow for
application submission online, review, and mark-up of plans as well as other
permit processing activities.
• Create a formal Development Oversight Commission of building industry
associations and members-at-large that can meet monthly on improving the
building process.
• Research options for using building market trends to evaluate the
department’s stance on fee increases; employee benefit increases, staffing
increases and other budgetary changes.
While this letter represents a brief discussion of some process improvements, we
look forward to working collaboratively with you and the County in further
developing these and other options.
Sincerely,
Linda Mott Joshua Wood
El Dorado Builders’ Exchange Sacramento Builders’ Exchange
John Costa
North State Building Industry Association
Cc: El Dorado County Board of Supervisors
Laura Gill, Chief Administrative Officer, El Dorado County
This is the html version of the file http://www.co.el-dorado.ca.us/bos/wwwroot/Attachments/93bc7dcf-b8cd-4cf9-9d7d-4344365e73cc.pdf.
To The BOSONEIPVIEDC@TCP, The
BOSTWOIPVIEDC@TCP, The BOSTHREEIPVIEDC@TCP,
The BOSFOUR/PVlEDC@TCP, The
cc
Laura
S
GillIPVlEDC@TCP, Marianne
OliphanVPV/EDC@TCP, Jeffrey L Meyer/PV/EDC@TCP,
Larry
S
LohmanlPVIEDC@TCP
bcc
Subject More Information re: Building Services Fee Update
Board Members,
Our Building Official Larry Lohman attended the Sacramento Valley Association of Building Officials
meeting today and obtained the following information about what other jurisdictions are doing re: building
fees:
County of Sacramento: 32% Fee increase going to their Board of Supervisors next
week
(El Dorado
County's building fees are based on the same methodology as Sacramento County's fees)
City of Citrus Heights: 5% Fee increase effective May 2007
Butte County: 12% increase so far in 2007
City of Rockin: 28% increase being proposed
City of Sacramento: Fee study in progress
City of Davis: 28% fee increase being proposed
City of Yuba City: 10% increase
This indicates that jurisdictions throughout the region are facing similar issues and are moving toward
higher fees.
Greg
Gregory
L.
Fuz, Director of Development Services
El Dorado County Development Services Department
2850 Fairlane Court
Placerville, CA 95667
530.621.5445
(w)
530.642.9025
(9
Email:
greg.fuz@co.el-dorad0.ca.u
Page 2
Gregory
L
FuzIPVlEDC
To The BOSONE/PV/EDC@TCP, The
0511 112007 12:17 PM
BOSTWOIPVIEDC@TCP, The BOSTHREEIPVIEDC@TCP,
The BOSFOURIPVIEDC@TCP, The
*
.
cc Laura
S
GiII/PV/EDC@TCP, Marianne
I
L
OliphantlPV/EDC@TCP, Larry S LohmanlPVIEDC@TCP,
Jeffrey L Meyer/PV/EDC@TCP, Terri KnowltonlEDC@TCP
bcc
Subject Supplemental Information for Building Fee Item
Board Members,
Per Supervisor Sweeney's request, I've compiled the attached data for your review. It includes a summary
of expenditures, permit application and inspection activity, and a list of the measures that we've been
taking over the past year to respond to declining activity in single family construction.
Regarding the issue of time tracking for building services, I just want to clarify that when I mentioned it
would be 1 to 2 years before that system is in place, I meant that the data from the system would not be
available for us to analyze for one to two years. The actual time tracking system for building has been
designed, is currently undergoing final management review, and will be implemented in building plan
check this summer after appropriate training with staff
...
then it will take one to two years of data from the
system to review if we want to establish fees based on a time and material system for building. Planning
has been using a time tracking system since your Board approved time and materials billing in Planning
last summer. Grading is also currently using a time and materials system. I hope this information is
helpful.
Greg
Summary of Measures
Taken.doc
Fiscal Year
End
Activity.doc
Gregory L. Fuz, Director of Development Services
El Dorado County Development Services Department
2850 Fairlane Court
Placerville, CA 95667
530.621.5445 (w)
530.642.9025 (f)
Email: greg.fuz@co.el-dorad0.ca.u
Page 3
Building Services Budget and Staffing Data
Fiscal Year
Projected Year
Proposed
End
End
Budget
Fiscal Year
05/06
06/07
07/08
Expenditures
Revenues
Shortfall
1,436,665
2,048,666
2,269,418
Positions Allocated
Positions Filled
Summary of Permit Applications Received
FY 05-06
FY 06-07
(through
511 0107
=
86%
of
fiscal
year)
Residential Single Family
Residential Second Units and
(additions, re-roofs, plumbinglelectrical,
some minor structures)
Temporary Dwellings
Residential Remodels
Accessory Buildings
Swimming Pools
Other Residential
New Non-Residential Buildings
(
136
(
71
1387
218
838
139
554
116
608
3712
377
103
380
3111
Tenant Improvements
Signs & Other Non-Residential
TOTAL
1 54
31 1
Inspection
Stops
127
298
71 96
5444 (YTD)
FY 05-06
36,864
FY 06-07
(through 5110107
=
86% of
fiscal
year)
26.237 YTD
Page 4
Summary of Measures Taken in Response
to Declining
Activity:
2
Building Inspectors Assigned to Code Enforcement
(otherwise would have been filled with new hires)
One Building Inspector and One Operations Supervisor
Assigned to Grading (otherwise positions would have been
filled with new hires after transfer of vacant positions from DOT)
2 Building Inspections Positions Not Filled After Becoming
Vacant
Overtime Hours Substantially Reduced
Use of Contract Plan Check Services Substantially Reduced
Remaining Vacant Positions Proposed to be Eliminated
(except two engineering positions)
Exploring Options for Agreement with South Lake Tahoe to
Assume Inspection Services
Cross Training Field lnspectors to assist with Non-Residential
Plan Check
Ongoing Monitoring of Activity, Revenues and Expenditures
with CAO's Office
Increasing Training Activities
Implemented Performance Measures
Moving Toward Implementing Time Tracking in Building
Services (System has been designed; currently undergoing
management review; expect implementation this summer for
plan check function; data should be available by the end of FY
07-08)
