DIXON, CA (MPG) - During the April 15 Dixon City Council meeting, Councilmember Don Hendershot pulled Item 9.5 from the Consent Calendar for discussion and a separate vote.

Item 9.5 was a contract with CSG Consultants for an environmental review of a proposed residential development, Independence East. The 15-acre vacant site, between Vaughn Road and East Dorsett Drive, is currently zoned as commercial and industrial, so if eventually approved, the project would require General Plan and zoning amendments. 

Councilmember Hendershot said more businesses are needed in Dixon, so while he was “not pre-judging” the project, he was concerned that too many commercial areas are being rezoned for residential development.

Vice-Mayor Thom Bogue, agreeing with Hendershot, said that there are already “a lot of residential developments” in the works.  

Staff clarified that the item before the council was not to approve the residential development plan or any associated rezoning. The request at this time was to approve a contract for the required environmental review process, which will be paid for by the applicant. The project plans will eventually go to the Planning Commission and the City Council for consideration, which will require environmental review.  

After clarification, the council voted unanimously to approve the consultant contract. 

The council then considered updates to the city’s Master Fee schedule, based on the updated 2024 Consumer Price Index (CPI). Finance director Kate Zawadzki recommended a 2.4% increase to ensure that the fees cover the costs of providing the services. 

Vice-Mayor Bogue requested that fees for appealing Planning Commission and City Council decisions be charged based on the applicant, with commercial developers paying the highest fees and reduced costs for local businesses and private citizens. 

Zawadzki said changes to specific fees can be considered in the next Fee Study, which will be held in 2027. 

The council voted unanimously to approve the increased fee schedule, which will be implemented for most fees this July and for business licenses in January 2026. 

The council then considered setting the July 1 meeting as the public hearing for adding past due sewer accounts to the county’s property tax roll for collection. Zawadzki said that the city cannot turn off sewer service for non-payment, so collecting the funds through property taxes is the most efficient way for the city to recoup those costs. 

Councilmember Hendershot requested that staff do more than call or send letters to notify these owners. He asked that site visits be conducted to see if the properties are vacant. 

Zawadzki explained that many of them are commercial properties and the property owners are responsible for the sewer charges, regardless of whether anyone is using or occupying the property. 

Bogue made a motion to approve the date for the public hearing, with the additional requirement of sending code enforcement officers to visit the properties in question. The motion was seconded by Hendershot but failed 2-3, with Councilmember Kevin Johnson, Councilmember Jim Ernest and Mayor Steven Bird dissenting. 

Councilmember Ernest made a second motion to approve the recommendation for the public hearing as written, which passed 3-2, with Bogue and Hendershot dissenting. 

The council also considered setting the July 1 meeting as the public hearing for adding a past-due weed abatement account to the property tax roll. This is the second year that this particular property has required weed abatement to be performed by the city and Zawadzki said the property owner has previously contested responsibility. 

The property is in Councilmember Hendershot’s district and he said that the abatement work was necessary because weeds were invading adjacent properties. The council voted unanimously to approve the date for the public hearing. 

During general public comment, one resident shared the concerns expressed by Bogue and Hendershot about the proposed Independence East residential development.

“Do we have the business to support it?” he asked. The resident said that it would be better to deny new residential developments early in the process, before the developer has invested millions of dollars into the process. 

The next Dixon City Council meeting is scheduled for May 6.