Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2016/08/30 - Agenda Packet - West-Side Citizens' Oversight Committee WEST-SIDE CITIZENS' La OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE AGENDA AUGUST 30, 2016 .�,A&40&CAMONGA 6:00 P.M. -- RAINS ROOM Rancho Cucamonga Civic Center 10500 Civic Center Drive Rancho Cucamonga, California 91730-3801 SPECIAL FOLLOW-UP MEETING A. CALL TO ORDER Al. Pledge of Allegiance A2. Roll Call: Joey Catuara, David DeMauro,Velma Gilbert, Sean Harvath, Theresa Marji A3. Approval of Minutes: March 29, 2016 and May 3, 2016 B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS This is the time and place for the general public to address the West-Side Districts Citizens'Oversight Committee on any item listed or not listed on the agenda. State law prohibits the Committee from addressing any issue not previously included on the Agenda.The Committee may receive testimony and set the matter for a subsequent meeting. Comments are to be limited to five minutes per individual. C. ITEM(S) FOR DISCUSSION Cl. Discussion of Prior Actions and Documents Related to the West-Side Districts. C2. Improving Communications with the Community. D. ADJOURNMENT I, Linda A. Troyan, City Clerk Services Director of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, or my designee, hereby certifies that a true, accurate copy of the foregoing agenda was posted on August 25, 2016 at 5:30 pm per Government Code 54954.2 at 10500 Civic Center Drive. City of Rancho Cucamonga Linda A. Troyan, MMC City Clerk Services Director NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING Notice is hereby given that the West-Side Citizens' Oversight Committee will hold a Special Meeting on Tuesday, August 30, 2016 at 6:00 p.m. in the Rains Room at the Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, CA 91730 for the purpose of: B. Public Communications C1. Discussion of Prior Actions and Documents Related to the West-Side Districts. C2. Improving Communications with the Community. J L. Dennis Michael, Mayor August 25, 2016 COMMITTEE REPORT WEST-SIDE DISTRICTS CITIZENS'OVERSIGHT CONAUTTEE RANCHO Date: August 30, 2016 CUCAMONGA To: West-side Districts Citizens' Oversight Committee F From: Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services , Subject: SUMMER MEETING AGENDA BACKGROUND Committee members, we are looking forward to this next meeting. As you requested, we will be providing a review of various information regarding the districts under your purview; enclosed are some of the documents so that you can review them in advance of the meeting. In addition, the Committee had requested a discussion regarding how we can improve communications with property owners regarding the districts, how they operate, and how they contribute to the quality community that is Rancho Cucamonga. We are looking forward to hearing your ideas as to how the Committee could be involved in these efforts. If you have any questions in advance of the meeting, please feel free to call me or Melinda or email me at Iori.sassoonCa?cityofrc.us. CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WEST-SIDE CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES A. CALL TO ORDER — RAINS ROOM The City of Rancho Cucamonga West-Side Citizens' Oversight Committee held a Special meeting on Tuesday, March 29, 2016 in the Rains Room at the Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services called the meeting to order at 3:30 p.m. Al. Please of Allegiance. Led by Deputy City Manager Sassoon. A2. Roll Call. Present were Committee Members: Joey Catuara, David DeMauro, Velma Gilbert, Sean Harvath and Theresa Marji. Also present were: Janice Reynolds, City Clerk; Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services; Tamara Layne, Finance Director; Bill Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director; Ingrid Bruce, GIS/Special Districts Manager; Noah Daniels, Finance Manager; Chris Bopko, Management Analyst III; Dean Rodia, Parks and Landscape Superintendent and Steve Relph, Maintenance Supervisor. A3. Tour with Public Works. Committee Members were taken on a tour by Public Works staff. The tour was informative and provided an insight of the demand of Public Works within LMD 1 and PD 85. At the conclusion of the tour, Parks Staff Rodia and Relph excused themselves and did not attend the remainder of the meeting. B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS No public communications were made. C. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION Cl. Swearing-in of Committee Members. Deputy City Manager Sassoon introduced staff and City Clerk Reynolds. All Committee Members were sworn into office simultaneously. C2. Assignment of Staggered Terms for Committee Members. Straws were drawn to determine the length of each member's term. Committee Members Harvath, Gilbert and Marji were appointed to 4 year terms, whereas, Committee Members Cataura and DeMauro were appointed to 2 year terms. C3. Election of Committee Chair and Vice Chair for 2016. Discussion to determine the Chair and Vice Chair for 2016 ensued. Committee Member Harvath volunteered to be Chair and Committee Member Cataura volunteered to be the Vice-Chair. Both were unanimously agreed to by all Committee Members. WEST-SIDE CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE SPECIAL MEETING MINUTES MARCH 29, 2016 PAGE 2 D. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:20 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sean Harvath, Chair Approved: CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA WEST-SIDE DISTRICTS CITIZENS' OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE ANNUAL MEETING MINUTES 17— A. CALL TO ORDER — RAINS ROOM The City of Rancho Cucamonga West-Side Districts Citizens' Oversight Committee held their Annual meeting on Tuesday, May 3, 2016 in the Rains Room at the Civic Center, 10500 Civic Center Drive, Rancho Cucamonga, California. Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services called the meeting to order at 6:00 p.m. Al. Pledge of Allegiance. Led by Chair Harvath. A2. Roll Call. Present were Committee Members: Joey Catuara, David DeMauro, Velma Gilbert, Sean Harvath and Theresa Marji. Also present were: Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services; Bill Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director; Noah Daniels, Finance Manager; Chris Bopko, Management Analyst III; Steven Flower, Attorney, Richards Watson Gershon and Rich Kikuchi, City Auditor IF- B. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS No public communications were made. C. ITEMS OF DISCUSSION Cl. Review and discussion of the Brown Act. Steven Flower provided Committee Members with Richards Watson Gershon Brown Act handbook. C2. Review and discussion of Independent Audit Reports for LMD1, PD85 and SLD2. Finance Manager Daniels presented the City Auditor, Rich Kikuchi, from Lance, Soll & Lunghard, LLP. A discussion ensued between staff, auditor and Committee Members. Auditor Kikuchi provided an overview of the audit report and the process. C3. Review and approval of annual written report to the City Council. Committee Member DeMauro moved to accept the Auditor's Report and the Committee's findings to the City Council. The motion was seconded by Committee Member Marji. C4. Topics and Schedules for future meetings. After discussing items requiring additional research from staff, the Committee requested a special meeting be scheduled in August to follow up with staff. Deputy City Manager Sassoon advised the Committee that they would be notified of the meeting date once a date was determined. WEST-SIDE DISTRICTS CITIZENS'OVERSIGHT COMMITTEE ANNUAL MEETING MINUTES MAY 3, 2016 PAGE 2 D. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 7:40 p.m. Respectfully submitted, Sean Harvath, Chair Approved: Frequently Asked Questions about West Side Community Facilities District Proposal RANCHO CUCAMONGA Q: What is the issue on the West Side? A: Local parks, street lighting, greenery, trails help maintain the safety and character of our neighborhoods, schools, parks, and commercial areas —keeping them desirable places to live and do business. On the City's West Side, the community maintenance districts that support these neighborhood benefits no longer have sufficient funds to maintain local street lighting, parks, and landscaping. Many of the West Side districts are at a critical financial tipping point. Q: Why is this problem only on the West Side? Shouldn't the East Side have to pay more as well? A: Property owners in the east side districts-LMDs 2, 4, and 6-have approved rate increases in recent years to provide sufficient funds for maintenance in their areas. With these increases,this districts remain financially self-sufficient. Q: How are local parks and trails impacted? A: Additional funding is needed to ensure that park bathrooms are clean, and remain open,playgrounds are safe,park lighting is maintained, and other park facilities can continue to be enjoyed. Our miles of trails are used for recreation and travel, providing our kids with safe paths to school. Additional funding is needed to ensure that they are maintained and can continue to provide a safe mode of travel. Q: How would additional funds maintain local parks and street lighting? A: Additional funds would continue to maintain and improve local parks and street lights by: • Removing graffiti from park buildings and along paseos and pathways • Maintaining common area landscaping • Maintaining parks,playground equipment and cleaning park restrooms • Fixing broken sprinklers in parks and along trails • Cleaning up trash • Maintaining street lights for safety .�• • Repairing and replacing damaged or burnt-out street lights �. • Maintaining landscaping along thoroughfares Q: What are the lighting safety needs? A: Street lighting assists in keeping the City's neighborhoods streets safe and serve as a deterrent to crime and graffiti. Additional funds are needed to continue to repair and replace damaged street lights and maintain them in order to ensure safe, walkable neighborhoods. Well lit streets allow drivers to better see traffic signs, pedestrians, and bicyclists at night. Properly maintained street lighting also helps police officers and firefighters locate a resident's home in an emergency. Q: What can be done? A: The assessments paid by property owners to maintain local parks, street lighting, trails, and greenery along neighborhood thoroughfares have not increased since 1993 and are no longer sufficient to address the needs and the growing maintenance related costs of water, electricity, labor, and equipment. One proposal that is being considered is the creation of a West Side Community Facilities District that would replace the existing assessment districts and would provide sufficient funding to properly maintain these public amenities. Q. What is a Community Facilities District and how is it created? A: A Community Facilities District, or CFD, is a form of voter-approved taxpayer funding provided in state law. A new CFD would need to be approved by 2/3 of the votes cast by registered voters in the proposed district boundary. The proposal under consideration would provide for one large West Side CFD, completely dissolving and replacing the existing West Side maintenance districts (PD 85, LMD 1, LMD 3a,LMD 3b,LMD 5, SLD 2, and SLD 6). Q: How would the replacement of the existing maintenance districts with one CFD affect rates. What would this cost? Will I pay more? A: Under the proposed West Side CFD, the existing assessments would end, and the new CFD rate would be charged. The residential rate would be $89 per year, with a 50% discounted rate for low-income seniors; commercial and industrial rates vary. About 1/3 of the residential property owners would actually see a decrease in their costs as compared to their existing assessment districts. A majority of the remaining 2/3 would see an average increase of$58 per year. The CFD would provide for an annual that would be capped at no more than 3% per year. When a property is sold for the first time it would increase to a higher rate. Q: What efforts, if any, are being done now to reduce costs? A: As a fiscally responsible community, the City of Rancho Cucamonga has instituted a series of cost- cutting measures in order to balance the district budgets. However, some of these measures have impacted the quality of services and the availability of our facilities. These measures include: • Cutting back on staffing • Naturalizing green spaces • Reduced watering • Reducing lawn mowing frequency • Partnering with sports groups to maintain West Side sports facilities • Partnering with equestrian group to maintain equestrian facility at Heritage Park • Temporarily draining Red Hill Lake to install more efficient maintenance systems • Updating park rental fees While these measures have provided balanced budgets for the moment, they do not address the medium and long-term structural fiscal deficits that each of the current assessment districts have. The new CFD _ would provide a stable funding source to keep our park, trails, and street lighting facilities safe. clean, and available for community use. Q. How is fiscal accountability and oversight being addressed? A: All revenues from the CFD must be deposited into its own separate fund that, by law, can only be spent to maintain or improve the local area's parks, trails, greenery, and street lighting. Annual independent audits will be published for public review, and a Citizens' Oversight Committee will monitor expenditures. Q: How can I find out more information? A: Go to ww",.rccommunityideas.com to learn more and share your ideas. Detailed information is available at www.cityofrc.usldistricts or by contacting Dean Rodia, Parks & Landscape Maintenance Superintendent, at(909)477-2730. To sign up for email updates,text the word DISTRICTS to 22828. 3-4-2015 City of Rancho Cucamonga Landscape Maintenance District#1-General City Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Years Ended June 30,2012 through June 30,2016 Actual Actual Actual Actual Preliminary June 30, 2012 June 30, 2013 June 30,2014 June 30,2015 June 30,2016 Revenues: Taxes $ 1,220,557.90 $ 1,198,223.52 $ 1,204,084.94 $ 1,201,753.97 $ 1,207,728.82 Intergovernmental - - - 103,803.00 - Charges for services - - - 5,148.00 5,520.56 Use of money and property 33,897.63 21,979.17 30,395.28 29,571.24 32,088.11 Miscellaneous 1,182.50 - 2,159.92 1,844.00 145.75 Total Revenues 1,255,638.03 1,220,202.69 1,236,640.14 1,342,120.21 1,245,483.24 Expenditures: Personnel services 223,662.53 224,259.52 224,872.15 82,687.77 26,684.53 Operating costs: Operations and maintenance 82,006.21 79,488.81 69,645.87 60,121.76 50,391.45 Contract services 470,796.37 557,662.85 475,979.97 513,324.87 409,873.35 Tree maintenance 63,260.00 63,260.00 50,000.00 50,000.00 49,875.00 Utilities 335,694.58 346,023.55 408,928.92 329,898.98 279,375.06 Assessment administration 65,020.00 65,020.00 65,870.00 65,870.00 65,870.00 General overhead allocation 82,190.00 67,040.00 67,040.00 73,870.00 60,020.00 Capital outlay: Computer equipment 3,517.95 - - - - Equipment - - 2,560.00 - - Total Expenditures 1,326,147.64 1,402,754.73 1,364,896.91 1,175,773.38 942,089.39 Excess(Deficiency)of Revenues Over(Under) Expenditures (70,509.61) (182,552.04) (128,256.77) 166,346.83 303,393.85 Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 835,126.72 764,617.11 582,065.07 453,808.30 620,155.13 Fund Balance, End of Year $ 764,617.11 $ 582,065.07 $ 453,808.30 $ 620,155.13 $ 923,548.98 City of Rancho Cucamonga Street lighting Maintenance District#2-Residential Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Years Ended June 30, 2012 through June 30, 2016 Actual Actual Actual Actual Preliminary June 30,2012 June 30,2013 June 30, 2014 June 30,2015 June 30, 2016 Revenues: Taxes $ 380,502.42 $ 352,243.22 $ 353,714.82 $ 354,157.83 $ 356,728.47 Intergovernmental Charges for services Use of money and property 226.69 (543.04) 316.35 17.85 (17.85) Contributions from City - - - 321,460.00 350,170.00 Developer participation 610.50 782.40 5,868.00 672.00 1,320.30 Total Revenues 381,339.61 352,482.58 359,899.17 676,307.68 708,200.92 Expenditures: Operating costs: Contract services - - - - 666.67 Utilities 280,130.65 278,759.17 247,320.99 549,398.87 720,015.52 Assessment administration 38,440.00 36,330.00 37,110.00 37,400.00 37,400.00 General overhead allocation 24,870.00 2,150.00 2,950.00 2,500.00 5,080.00 Total Expenditures 343,440.65 317,239.17 287,380.99 589,298.87 763,162.19 Excess(Deficiency)of Revenues Over(Under) Expenditures 37,898.96 35,243.41 72,518.18 87,008.81 (54,961.27) Fund Balance, Beginning of Year (41,098.51) (3,199.55) 32,043.86 104,562.04 191,570.85 Fund Balance, End of Year $ (3,199.55) $ 32,043.86 $ 104,562.04 $ 191,570.85 $ 136,609.58 City of Rancho Cucamonga Park and Recreation Improvement District#85 Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balance Years Ended June 30, 2012 through June 30, 2016 Actual Actual Actual Actual Preliminary June 30,2012 June 30,2013 June 30,2014 June 30, 2015 June 30, 2016 Revenues: Taxes $ 1,171,155.21 $ 1,159,313.44 $ 1,163,804.35 $ 1,158,329.30 $ 1,143,611.51 Charges for services - - - 9,708.00 81303.00 Use of money and property 34,604.31 102,569.49 116,780.85 116,476.79 1271834.60 Contributions from City - - 47,565.30 - - Miscellaneous - 2,166.76 - 10.25 2,303.41 Total Revenues 1,205,759.52 1,264,049.69 1,328,150.50 1,284,524.34 1,282,052.52 Expenditures: Personnel services 786,776.79 811,530.47 730,852.28 538,578.73 4691210.81 Operating costs: Operations and maintenance 126,765.33 123,046.51 69,321.39 53,227.79 32,277.95 Contract services 30,088.20 25,958.97 153,713.96 107,093.03 100,242.98 Tree maintenance 18,165.00 18,188.00 18,200.00 9,787.00 6,934.00 Utilities 326,444.85 310,109.21 287,658.68 223,794.98 237,383.14 Assessment administration 152,550.00 152,550.00 153,430.00 153,430.00 153,430.00 General overhead allocation 78,420.00 115,780.00 115,780.00 115,780.00 115,780.00 Capital outlay: Impry other than bldg - 41,693.28 - - - Capital projects 2,355.00 - - - - Total Expenditures 1,521,565.17 1,598,856.44 1,528,956.31 1,201,691.53 1,115,258.88 Excess(Deficiency)of Revenues Over(Under) Expenditures (315,805.65) (334,806.75) (200,805.81) 82,832.81 166,793.64 Fund Balance, Beginning of Year 1,781,685.85 1,465,880.20 1,131073.45 930,267.64 1,013,100.45 Fund Balance, End of Year $ 1,465,880.20 $ 1,131,073.45 $ 930,267.64 $ 1,013,100.45 $ 1,179,894.09 Question: What is our park standard per 1,000 population and what's the acreage deficit? Answer: The information below is discussed on pages CS-9 and CS-10 in Chapter 5(Community Services) of the General Plan. The park standard per 1,000 population is 5.0 acres and, based on Table CS-2 (shown below), there was a deficit of 253.8 acres in 2009, with a deficit of 163.3 aces at ultimate build out in 2030. able CS-2: Park Standards IV. 2009 2030 Park Acres Citywide 642.2 838.7 Population 179,200 200,400 Acreage Goal (5 acres per 1,000 896.0 1,002 persons) Park Deficit (needed parkland acreage to meet goal) 253.8 163.3 Source: Hogle-Ireland, Inc. Existing Land Use Database and Land Use Build Out Projection, 2009. Note: Population data is only for incorporated areas of Rancho Cucamonga and does not include Sphere of Influence. FY2016-17 RATES District CPI% Single-Fam Condo Multi Co/Ind Vac/School Public/Fire Max Tax CPI Cap FORMED LMD 1 $92.21/DU $46.11/DU $46.11/DU :Ift 184.42/ACRE 10/01/79 LMD 2 2.41% $476.19/DU $350.65/DU $333.33/DU $2,251.08/ACRE $95.24/ACRE $129.87/ACRE $476.19 3.00% 09/01/82 LMD 3A - $413.74/LOT 10/05/83 LMD 3B ( 20%) $282.24/ACRE 05/06/87 LMD 4 $252.50/DU 148.36/DU $222.00/DU $382.99/ACRE f $37.12/ACRE 07/18/84 LMD 4-R 2.41% $418.05/DU $334.44/DU $292.64/DU $1,358.66/ACRE $104.51/ACRE $418.05 3.50% 12/02/09 LMD 5 $56.65/DU 06/20/84 LMD 6 $246.97/DU 06/04/86 LMD 6-11 2.41% $402.65/DU Zone 1 and$301.99/DU Zone 2 $100.66/ACRE $402.65 3.00% 09/01/10 LMD 7 $307.05/DU 06/21/89 LMD 8 $151.45/DU 11/01/89 LMD 9 No Increase $80.00/DU $80.00/DU $160.00/ACRE $551.35 March 06/21/00 LMD 10o Increase $711.71/DU $1,423.42/ACRE $848.43 March 03/20/02 SLD 1 $17.77/DU $17.77/DU $35.54/ACRE 08/03/83 SLD 2 $39.97/DU $39.97/DU $79.94/ACRE08/03/83 SLD 3 $47.15/DU $47.15/DU $94.30/ACRE 09/01/82 SLD 4 $28.9 DU $14.48/DU $57.92/ACRE 06/20/84 SLD 5 $34.60/DU 06/04/86 SLD 6 , $51.40/ACRE 07/15/87 SLD 7 $33.32/DU 07/18/90 SLD 8 $30.60/DU $61.20/ACRE 09/19/90 PD 85 $31.00/DU $31.00/DU $31.00/DU <1.5 ACRES $15.50/LOT 1985 1.51-3.5 ACRES $46.50/LOT 3.51-7.0 ACRES $108.50/LOT 7.1-14.0 ACRES $217.00/1-OT 14.1-25.0 ACRES $434.00/LOT >25.01 ACRES $775.00/LOT Maior Deferred Capital Projects LIVID-11 and PD-85 LIVID-1 Old Town Park ball field lighting replacement--$62,000 Old Town Park playground resurfacing--$54,500 Church Street Park playground resurfacing--$26,000 Bear Gulch Park playground resurfacing--$8,000 Hermosa Park playground resurfacing—$54,500 Irrigation Master Control Upgrade--$900,000 PD-85 Heritage Park • (5) bridge repairs– $1.1-$1.25M • Ball field lighting replacement--$265,000 • Playground rubberized resurfacing--$95,000 • Walking/jogging path resurfacing-- $125,000 Red Hill Park • Ball field light pole replacement--TBD • Walking/Jogging path resurfacing -- $125,000 • Playground rubberized resurfacing--$42,000 • Perimeter fence replacement--$122,000 • Amphitheater wood replacement -- $150,000 -- 200,000 P226 STAFF REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES GROUP Date: March 4, 2015 RANCHO CUCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council John R. Gillison, City Manager From: Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services Bill Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director Ingrid Bruce, Special Districts Manager Erika Lewis-Huntley, Management Analyst III Subject: CONSIDERATION OF FORMATION OF WEST-SIDE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT (CFD) TO FUND PARKS, LANDSCAPING, TRAILS, AND STREET LIGHTS IN THE CITY'S WEST-SIDE NEIGHBORHOODS Background At the February 18, 2015 City Council Study Session, staff reviewed results from the West-side Parks and Street Lighting Districts public engagement project and recommended that the City Council consider the formation of a West-side Community Facilities District (CFD). For more information and details regarding the CFD concept, please see the February 18 staff report (Exhibit A). The CFD, if approved, would completely dissolve the existing West-side districts and establish one large district. The existing LIVID assessments would be eliminated and a special tax would be levied annually against the private residential and non-residential properties that are located within the boundaries of the CFD to fund neighborhood parks, street lights, and landscaping in that area. During the study session,the City Council engaged in considerable discussion regarding the West-side CFD option. Council Member Alexander indicated he would prepare a list of his concerns to share with his colleagues before the next City Council meeting. That list is attached to this staff report as Exhibit B. Overview of West-side CFD Key details regarding the proposed West-side CFD include the following: • A CFD requires 2/3 voter approval. - • It would replace the existing PD 85, LIVID 1, LIVID 3a, LMD 3b, LIVID 5, SLD 2, and SLD 6 districts; these districts would be dissolved and their assessments eliminated. • The new rate would be $89 per year per residential unit. Commercial/industrial rates vary by parcel size. o 50% discount for low-income seniors o Rate increases to $178 when the home is sold for the first time to a new property owner o Over 1/3 of the residential property owners would actually see a decrease in their rate, while the majority of the remaining 2/3 would see an average increase of$58 per year, or less than $5 per month. • Similar to other recently-approved Landscape Maintenance Districts, rates go up each year based on actual costs or 3%, whichever is less. This allows the rate to keep pace with utilities, primarily water. P227 March 4, 2015 Page 2 • The existing Citizens' Oversight Committee's purview would be expanded to review audits and provide public reports regarding the new CFD, to provide fiscal oversight and accountability. • Passage of a CFD would allow parks, trails, and green spaces to be properly maintained, including graffiti removal, restroom cleaning, trash pick-up, lighting repairs, etc., in addition to keeping street lights operational. Capital improvements could be made in the future in parks, trails, and street lighting. Process and Tentative Schedule of CFD Formation The process for establishing a CFD requires specific actions by the City Council and subject property owners. Included below is a summary of the key steps and tentative schedule to be undertaken for the formation of the CFD: DATE ACTION March 4, 2015 Approve initiation of CFD April 1, 2015 Adopt Resolution of Intention to establish CFD and authorize levy of special taxes sets hearing date April 16, 2015 Record Boundary Ma May 5-13, 2015 Mail and Publish Notice of Hearin May 20, 2015 Conduct Public Hearing Adopt Resolution of Formation establishing CFD Adopt Resolution calling Special Election for November 3, 2015 Adopt Resolution requesting Coun consolidate Special Election August 7, 2015 Submit Resolution to County November 3, 2015 Election conducted by County November 18, 2015 Adopt Resolution declaring results of Special Election Public Information and CFD Formation Costs With the proposed timeline, it is recommended that the City engage in a very focused and extensive community engagement effort similar to the efforts previously undertaken. We anticipate working with the general public as well as many stakeholder groups that would be impacted, including sports groups, equestrian groups, the business community, and others that have vested interests in the West-side parks, lighting, and other amenities. In the end, this will allow property owners to make a fully informed decision regarding the West-side CFD option. City staff would once again work with the Lew Edwards Group, an advisory firm that would assist with outreach during this process; approval of an agreement with the firm is recommended as part of the Council's action at this meeting. A tracking survey would also be conducted of property owner views regarding the proposed CFD. In addition, costs would be incurred for the various outreach methods employed; i.e:, informational mailers and the MindMixer community engagement platform. The total cost for all of the new public information efforts and survey is estimated at $137,500 through November 2015. In addition, the actual formation of the CFD requires several professional services and other City costs to be incurred. These costs would include legal services, engineering services, notice mailing, P228 March 4, 2015 Page 3 and incidental County recording fees, and other related costs. . The cost of placing a measure on the ballot with the County Registrar of Voters varies depending on the total number of measures, and will not be determined by ROV until sometime in April. However, based on previous election costs, staff estimates the cost at$100,000. Including that estimate, the total cost for CFD formation, is estimated at $168,300. Staff's recommendation includes funding these costs in the FY 2014/15 General Fund budget except for the election costs which will be appropriated in FY 2015/16 once the figure is confirmed by the County. If the measure is successful, the General Fund would be reimbursed for the election costs by the new CFD. Recommendation: It is recommended that City Council direct staff to initiate the formation of a West-side CFD including the following actions: 1) Appropriate $205,800 for the CFD formation (not including election costs) and public engagement project from General Fund Reserves for Change in Economic Circumstances into Account No. 1001001-5300. 2) Approve the professional services agreement with the Lew Edwards Group for the West-side CFD public engagement project (documentation on file in Purchasing). Attachments: 1) EXHIBIT A—Staff Report from February 18, 2015 Study Session 2) EXHIBIT B - Council Member Alexander's Concerns Regarding West-Side CFD EXHIBIT A P229 STAFF REPORT ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES GROUP Date: February 18, 2015 RANCHO CUCAMONGA To: Mayor and Members of the City Council John R. Gillison, City Manager From: Lori Sassoon, Deputy City Manager/Administrative Services Bill Wittkopf, Public Works Services Director Ingrid Bruce, Special Districts Manager Erika Lewis-Huntley, Management Analyst 111 Subject: REVIEW OF RESULTS FROM THE WEST-SIDE PARKS AND STREET LIGHTING DISTRICTS PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PROJECT, AND CONSIDERATION REGARDING NEXT STEPS Background In September 2013, the City Council held two study sessions to discuss various options regarding the serious structural deficits in several of the City's West-Side parks, landscaping, and street lighting districts. The Council engaged in considerable discussion regarding the fiscal challenges in these districts, the diversity among the amenities provided in various areas, the need to involve the community in discussing the options, and the importance of an intense communication effort regarding the issues before any decisions were made. The Council will recall that the proposed plan would replace the existing West-side parks and street lighting districts, which have not had rate increases in more than 20 years, with eight (8) new neighborhood-based districts so that each property pays a single, updated rate for the services provided to that property that is equivalent to the costs to provide that service. Implementation of the replacement districts would require approval by a majority of the property owners voting in a Prop 218 mail ballot process. From September—December 2013, staff conducted a very focused and extensive community engagement effort,during which the City initiated a dialogue with property owners about their priorities for local parks, lighting and landscaping, and shared information as widely as possible regarding the services provided and fiscal realities, the proposed new structure of 8 community districts; and the possible community impacts if a new structure was not approved. The goal of this process was to allow property owners to make a fully informed decision regarding the options available. In January 2014, a statistically valid survey was conducted by EMC Research of property owner views regarding the implementation of maintenance reductions as compared to the establishment of the eight new districts and associated new assessment rates. At the regularly scheduled City Council meeting on February 5, 2014, the City Council was presented with the survey results and property owner perspectives regarding the West-Side Parks and Street Lighting District process. At that time, the research showed that property owners valued well maintained, clean and attractive parks, trails, and landscaping, however most were not aware that these parks and lights are maintained by special property assessments. A majority of West-side property owners did not support the proposed West-side district structure and its related assessment rates. Update on Budget-Balancing Measures & Community Engagement Efforts Given the lack of majority community support for the replacement districts plan at that time, staff was directed_to implement a set of budget-balancing measures in LMD 1 and PD 85 that were adequate in the near term to bring revenues and expenditures nearly into alignment, while continuing to backfill P230 February 18, 2015 Page 2 SLD 2 with Gas Tax funds. These measures were in addition to the reductions that had already been in place for the last several years. Further changes included reducing park maintenance to less than a "C" service level, reducing mowing and overall maintenance, naturalizing green space, deferring replacement of equipment, reducing staff and contracting for more services, partnering with sports and equestrian groups to maintain sports fields and the equestrian facility at Heritage Park, and temporarily draining and fencing the Red Hill lake feature while developing more efficient maintenance options. Other measures implemented include the establishment of new fees for the use of City sports fields by out-of-town sports organizations, as well as adoption of a new Park Maintenance Fee for the use of picnic shelters, sports fields, and special event areas. A comprehensive summary of the budget-balancing measures to date can be found in Attachment#1. While these maintenance changes took place, staff has continued the outreach effort to provide information and gather feedback regarding the West-side districts issues and options. In addition to the previous outreach methods (i.e., informational letters, fliers, postcards, newsletter articles, presentations at community meetings, a dedicated page on the City website, online surveys, social media, electronic billboards, RCTV-3 bulletins, videos, and informational booths at community events), staff also employed new strategies to continue the dialogue with residents. An interactive community engagement website, www.RCCommunityldeas.com, was launched to provide a virtual Town Hall environment where residents can learn more and provide feedback. The City created a special edition of the Rancho Reporter newsletter focused on the assessment districts, as well as an electronic newsletter to provide monthly updates on the status of the districts. Park signage with direct messaging encouraging the community to join the conversation on the West-side Districts was also used. A comprehensive summary of the communication efforts employed during this community engagement project can be found in Attachment#2. This most recent engagement effort spanning the last year, culminated in a telephone survey conducted by EMC Research in December 2014. The survey was conducted in four of the eight proposed new districts to see if attitudes towards the proposed West-side districts structure had changed following the nearly yearlong community engagement process and the implementation of the budget-balancing measures. The survey results indicate that even after extensive outreach and moderate service cuts, awareness and support for the assessment has remained virtually unchanged. Results show that trust in the City remains very high and the vast majority of residents continue to feel that the parks, trails, and facilities are well maintained. Awareness of the current assessment remains low and anti-tax sentiment persists; more than half of residents agree they are likely to oppose a new tax measure no matter what it is for. Moving Forward: Consider West-side Community Facilities District (CFD) Implementation of the budget-balancing measures has balanced revenues and expenditures in PD 85 and LIVID 1, at least in the short term. That state of balance, however, is a fragile one, as reserves remain depleted, and capital repairs in the parks cannot be deferred indefinitely; as water, electricity, and contract labor costs rise, the budget will once again be out of balance. Gas Tax funds continue to make up the deficit in SLD 2, which diminishes the City's ability to repair and repave our City streets as they age. The structural budget deficits that result from increasing costs and flat revenue must ultimately be addressed, either with significant reductions in maintenance expenditures, or with property owner approval of adjusted assessment rates. In summary, while we are in budget balance today, the medium and long-term problem remains unsolved. Property owners have provided the City with insight into their perspectives regarding the West-side eight districts concept. It is clear that Prop 218 elections are not viable in any of the proposed districts, so staff would not recommend pursuing those elections. However, as we have been discussing over the last several years, several of these large districts are now at a financial tipping point. P231 February 18, 2015 Page 3 Given the immediate need to address these issues and the community's opinions regarding the 8 district plan, staff recommends proceeding with an alternative option.The Council may recall that the CFD option is one that was considered early in the process of looking at the West-side districts. One advantage is that its legal structure permits a single large district, which is no longer a feasible option under assessment district law. The CFD, if approved, would completely dissolve the existing West- side districts and establish one large district. The formula would include a tiered residential rate so when a property is sold for the first time it would increase to a higher rate, as well as'provide for an annual inflator. The distinct disadvantage with a CFD is that it requires two-thirds approval by voters. In the West-side CFD scenario, assuming services were to be restored to a "B" level, the residential rate would be approximately $89 per year per residential unit, with a 50% discounted rate for low income seniors. Commercial and industrial rates vary.With the implementation of the West-side CFD, over 1/3 of the residential property owners would actually see a decrease in their rate, while the majority of the remaining 2/3 would see an average increase of $58 per year. EMC Research conducted a separate survey in January 2015 of likely voters in the west-side of Rancho Cucamonga to test the viability of this West-side CFD as an alternative. Staff from EMC Research will present an overview of the survey results to the City Council at its February 18th meeting. In summary, the research shows that only a simple majority of west-side voters support the CFD initially, which is below the two-thirds needed to pass. Although support for the tax is low,support for the projects is very high. As with the property owners, information about safety, accountability, and clean, enjoyable parks are the most important among west-side voters. The research showed that hearing additional information, specifically the benefits of the program, has a big impact on West- side voter support, boosting it nearly 15 points. Although peak support obtained for the CFD in the survey still lags six points under the two-thirds required for approval, this is without any community outreach on this specific option. Therefore, in order for a CFD measure to be successful, there will need to be a very well-planned public information campaign effort. Alternative Options Considered and Not Recommended Given the results of the extensive community outreach, the results of the opinion surveys, and the immediate need to address the fiscal challenges in the West-side districts, at this time, a CFD is the best of the available options. Staff also considered other alternatives to the West-side CFD, however, the other options discussed below are less viable and not recommended. • Consider a Citywide CFD. A preliminary look at one large citywide CFD indicates it would be very difficult because the city's population distribution is skewed to the west and would require extensive engineering efforts to determine costs and rates. This option would require extensive planning, research, and analysis regarding the issues. • Make reductions in other General Fund programs, and use General Fund dollars to backfill existing districts. This option is not recommended, for several key reasons. First, cutting General Fund programs to help West-side districts would cause services citywide to decline, while the resulting savings would only benefit West-side property owners. Secondly, property owners in most of the planned communities (LMD's 2, 4, and 6) have recently voted to increase their assessments in order to preserve maintenance levels. In LIVID 8, when residents did not approve an assessment rate increase, maintenance was cut and in some cases totally discontinued. Consistency and fairness across the community would advise that this pattern continue, with each district being required to live within its means. P232 February 18, 2015 Page 4 • Use General Fund reserves to backfill existing districts. When facing difficult budget decisions, stakeholders often point to reserves as a possible source of immediate relief. The use of reserves is certainly appropriate for capital expenditures, or in extenuating economic circumstances, such as the City's temporary use of reserves to moderate the impact of the recent recession. The budget deficits in the West-side districts are not one-time challenges; they are structural in nature and can only be expected to worsen, not get better. The use of one-time funds (reserves) for ongoing expenditures is not in keeping with Rancho Cucamonga's history of prudent fiscal practices and would have long-term negative financial consequences. It would negatively affect the City's credit rating, negatively impact the replacement and repair of citywide facilities and equipment, and negatively impact the ability to fund future infrastructure projects. It would also raise the same issues of consistency and fairness between property owners in these areas and the other assessment districts. Staff would strongly recommend against the use,of reserves to backfill the existing districts. Recommendation Given the immediate need to address the fiscal challenges of the West-side districts and the community's opinions expressed through the extensive community engagement efforts and polling surveys, staff recommends a West-Side Community Facilities District as the most viable option for a long-term revenue source. Staff recommends that the City Council consider a West-side Community Facilities District and provide direction to staff at the next regularly scheduled City Council Meeting on March 4, 2015. The process for establishing the CFD requires specific actions by the City Council and subject property owners. The City Council acting as the legislative body for the proposed CFD will need to adopt a resolution formally starting the process for formation of the CFD. At the March 4"' meeting, staff will provide a legal schedule and the costs of placing a CFD measure on the ballot. Attachments: 1) Summary of Budget-Balancing Measures 2) Summary of Community Engagement Efforts ATTACHMENT 1: P233 Proposed Budget-Balancing Measures in LIVID 1 and PD 85 Phase I—January 2014 LIVID 1 To continue addressing some of the current and future shortfalls in LMD1, the Public Works Services Department has developed a cost savings and service area reduction plan for Bear Gulch Park, East & West Beryl Parks, Church Park, Golden Oak Park, Hermosa Park, Old Town Park and the landscape areas within LMD1. • All sports field maintenance will be performed by the sports group scheduled for that site during their playing season. City staff will provide oversight and maintenance of the irrigation systems and facilities. City staff will also perform turf and field renovation during the 8-10 weeks of scheduled closure period. • Removal of sports field mowing and annual fertilization and aerification from the current maintenance contract. • Change to year round bi-weekly mowing for all general use park areas. • Reduction of Operations and Maintenance accounts. • Eliminate one full-time Maintenance Worker position. • Fully contract out the maintenance of Golden Oak Park, Hermosa Park and Old Town Park. These parks could be maintained through contract services. • Cost savings in landscape areas due to service reductions and/or abandonment of locations. • Eliminate all part-time positions. • Do not replace broken equipment. PD 85 All sports field maintenance will be performed by the sports group scheduled for that site during their playing season. City staff will provide oversight and maintenance of the irrigation systems and facilities. City staff will also perform turf and field renovation during the 8- 10 weeks of scheduled closure period. • Removal of sports field mowing and annual fertilization and aerification from the current maintenance contract. - • Change to year round bi-weekly mowing for all general use park areas. • Reduction of Operations and Maintenance accounts. • Turn over the equestrian center at Heritage Park to an outside management company or group. • Perform water audit and turn off the water to the large mulch areas. • Redesign Lake Feature. • Do not backfill two recently vacated positions. • Operate all lighting at these facilities during assigned park hours only. The site goes dark when the park is closed (not implemented due to safety concerns). • Eliminate all part-time positions. • Do not replace broken equipment. Additional Budget-Balancing Measures in LIVID 1 and PD 85 P234 Phase II —January 2015 LMDI Contract Landscape Areas: • All common areas sites will only receive the most basic level of service. This is a level of service less than "C". • Stopped irrigation repairs.We will turn water off to the area that is broken and log the site for future repair. • Stopped all projects within this district. • Reduced water consumption by 35%only applying enough water to keep landscape material alive. • Removed turf to reduce water and maintenance costs. • Only completing emergency and safety repairs as necessary. Parks: • Maintaining a bi-weekly mowing schedule. • There will be no significant field or turf renovation work. • Basic park maintenance handled by contract at minimum level (approximateiy"C" level). • Reduced water consumption by 35%. • Stop all facility and playground repairs except for emergency and safety related items. PD85: • Reducing our water usage by 50%by turning off the water to most areas in the park.Only watering the Sports Turf areas, around the playgrounds and entries. • Tree planted areas at Red Hill and Heritage are being deep watered 1x/month. • Redwood grove at Red Hill is being watered regular, alternating with potable water from the building due to plant decline from excessive salts in the water. • Stop all facility and playground repairs except for emergency and safety related items. • General park maintenance services are being provided at a minimum level (approximately "C" level). P235 ATTACHMENT 2: Summary of West-Side Districts Community Engagement Efforts • The City mailed out two informational mailers in December 2013. The first mailer provided property owners with a survey to discuss issues concerning their neighborhood parks and lighting districts. Each mailing totaled over 26,000 mailers. • The City set up an online surrey mimicking the mailer survey using Survey Monkey. Between the two surveys the City received over 1,400 responses. • The City had articles featured in the 909 Magazine, school newsletters, and the Alta Loma Riding Club newsletter. • The City mailed out an Informational letter and Frequently Asked Questions article to community leaders. • Over the last five months, two different Parks and Lighting informational messages have been posted to the Electronic Billboards on Archibald and Foothill and the 15 freeway. • A dedicated City website (www.cityofrc.ustdistricts) was created to provide property owners to get the latest information concerning the Proposed Districts and have access to the online survey. Additionally, a GIS web application was developed that allowed property owners to determine their current and proposed assessments. • A total of 35 presentations have been done since October 2013 at City boards and commissions, Council, school boards, real estate group, sports groups, Superintendents' meetings and individual homeowners. • The City asked school district and sports groups to share the City's Proposed Parks and Lighting District information with their participants. • City staffed manned an informational booth for four consecutive Saturday's in November at Red Hill Park. • Staff has continually dispersed informational signage and flyers at libraries, community centers and City Hall. • Staff sent three informational emails using Constant Contact software on the current status of the districts. The first was sent on February 13, 2014 to 598 contacts, the second email was sent on April 8, 2014 to 1,022 contacts, and the third was sent on May 8, 2014 to 1641 contacts. The contacts were developed from the responses to the City survey, Constant Contact signups and through the City's webpage. • City staff utilizes social media sites Facebook and Twitter to update property owners on the most current information and status of the Proposed Districts. • City staff has developed a new interactive Community Engagement website www.RCCommunityideas.com utilizing MindMixer. The purpose of this site is to engage the community and increase awareness of current issues pertaining to the Special Assessment Districts on the West-side. This includes neighborhood parks, street lighting, and the Lake at Red Hill Park. P236 • Staff has developed eight different postcards to hand out at city events and city facilities bringing increased awareness to the current issues relating to the Special Assessment Districts on the West-Side. Additionally, staff has developed posters based on the postcards and provided the posters to local little leagues to post at the games. • City staff emailed the RC Connection E-newsletter in April and May 2014 to over 15,000 contacts highlighting the issues related to the Special Assessment Districts on the West- side. • Staff developed a special informational Rancho Cucamonga Reporter insert for the Summer 2014 Edition of the Grapevine. This eight page special edition focused on "Your Neighborhood Districts"and how the City is sharing information on Landscape Maintenance and Lighting Districts, how the City funds our parks and street lights, re- imagining a more sustainable and energy-efficient Red Hill Lake, partnerships with sports groups, and more. P237 EXHIBIT B Council Member Alexander's Concerns Regarding West-Side CFD 1. Should come as an initiative from the residents 2. More outreach to the community. Let residents have a genuine say and be more inclusive 3. Are water savings quantified and reflected in the budgets 4. Are we going to work with all the sports groups to address their concerns 5. People don't like the signs in the park (wording is insulting) and the mulch areas 6. We need to talk about property value stability from the parks and landscaping 7. It seems like we have forgotten the Central Park promise 8. Let park updates and improvements be driven by the public, not staff 9. Public perception of the need, or lack of need, for a tax increase is driven by the high cost of city salaries 10.Look at getting rid of the LIVID 5 Tot lot and selling off the property; no one uses it 11.Don't make the cutbacks at the parks sound punitive