[00:00:01]
TO THE JANUARY 20, 20, 26[CALL TO ORDER AND PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE]
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE DUBLIN CITY COUNCIL.CALL, THE MEETING TO ORDER AT 5:00 PM WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE? UM, FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, IT'S TO THE FLAG, THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY TO JUSTICE FOR ALL.
I'D JUST LIKE TO TAKE A MOMENT TO, UM, WISH THE MAYOR WHILE SHE'S A LITTLE BIT UNDER THE WEATHER THIS EVENING.
SO WE ARE, UM, ROCKING WITH FOUR OF US TONIGHT, UM, WHICH IS UNFORTUNATE, BUT IS WHAT IT IS.
[2.1 Study Session: Landscaping and Lighting Assessment Districts 1983-1 and 1999-1 and Potential Proposition 218 Proceedings ]
TO, UM, ITEM NUMBER 2.1, WHICH IS OUR STUDY SESSION, UM, ON LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS 18, 19 83 AND 1999 DASH ONE, POTENTIAL PROPOSITION TWO 18 PROCEEDINGS.AND I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE, UH, OUR CONTRACTORS FROM FRANCISCO AND ASSOCIATES, AND THIS IS ED, AND HE'LL BE GIVING OUR PRESENTATION TONIGHT.
CAN, CAN EVERYBODY HEAR ME? ALRIGHT.
IT'S A, IT'S A PLEASURE TO BE WITH YOU THIS EVENING.
AND FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME OUTTA YOUR BUSY SCHEDULES TO GIVE US THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT TO YOU, UH, WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE LAST COUPLE MONTHS IN COLLABORATION WITH YOUR EXCELLENT CITY TEAM.
SO, UM, THIS EVENING WHAT WE'LL BE DISCUSSING IS THE LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS, THE TWO SPECIFICALLY, UH, CORRESPONDING TO STREETLIGHT FUNDING.
AS YOU MAY RECALL, THE CITY ACTUALLY HAS FIVE, UM, LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS THREE, PROVIDE ANNUAL FUNDING FOR LANDSCAPING IMPROVEMENTS, AND TWO, PROVIDE FUNDING, UH, FOR STREET LIGHTING IMPROVEMENTS.
THE CITY'S REQUIRED TO APPROVE AN ANNUAL ENGINEER'S REPORT THAT'S BROUGHT FORTH, UH, FOR YOUR APPROVAL, UH, IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR, SO THAT ASSESSMENTS CAN BE, UH, PLACED ON THE PROPERTY TAX ROLE.
AND THAT'S HOW THE CITY GENERATES THE FUNDING THROUGH THESE, THESE FIVE DISTRICTS IN, UH, 2025, AS PART OF THE ANNUAL APPROVAL PROCESS, CITY STAFF BROUGHT TO COUNCIL'S ATTENTION, THE SIGNIFICANT UNDERFUNDING THAT YOUR OLDEST DISTRICT THAT WAS FORMED BACK IN 1983 IS CURRENTLY EXPERIENCING.
AND BECAUSE OF THAT UNDERFUNDING, UM, COUNCIL, UH, GAVE CITY STAFF DIRECTION TO EVALUATE OPTIONS TO ADDRESS THE UNDERFUNDING AND COME BACK WITH RECOMMENDATIONS.
AND THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THE, UH, UM, LATE, UH, 25 AND, AND GOING INTO THIS YEAR.
AND WHAT WE WANT TO PRESENT TO YOU THIS, THIS EVENING.
SO THE PROJECT OBJECTIVES ARE, ARE TWOFOLD.
UH, NUMBER ONE, ADDRESS THE INCREASING ANNUAL OPERATING DEFICIT THAT EXIST IN LAD 83 DASH ONE AND TWO, UH, STRENGTH AND COMPLIANCE WITH PROPOSITION TWO 18 AS IT RELATES TO THE CITY'S LAD.
UM, PROPOSITION TWO 18 APPLIES TO ALL ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS IN CALIFORNIA, WAS PASSED IN 1996, AND ANY NEW ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS OR MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS MUST COMPLY WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF PROP TWO 18.
SO OUR GOAL IS TO, IS TO ADDRESS BOTH OF THESE ITEMS CONCURRENTLY IN, IN THIS PROCESS WITH THE END GOAL OF FISCAL STEWARD STEWARDSHIP, UM, BY ADDRESSING THE, THE, THE DEFICIT AND ALSO REDUCING CITY LIABILITY BY, UH, UH, STRENGTHENING COMPLIANCE WITH, WITH STATE LAW.
THIS EVENING, WE'RE GOING TO, UM, PRESENT TWO OPTIONS FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.
THE, THE FIRST IS THE RECOMMENDED OPTION, WHICH IS TO CREATE A NEW CONSOLIDATED CITYWIDE LANDSCAPING LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT THAT WOULD REPLACE BOTH 83 DASH ONE AND 99 DASH ONE, WHICH ARE THE TWO, THE TWO DISTRICTS THAT THAT FUND STREET LIGHTING.
AND ALTERNATIVELY, UH, CREATE A NEW LAD TO REPLACE 83 DASH ONE ONLY.
SO WE'LL DISCUSS BOTH OF THESE OPTIONS WITH AN EMPHASIS ON, ON THE RECOMMENDED AND WE'LL WE'LL DISCUSS, UH, FURTHER WHY, WHY THAT OPTION IS, IS THE RECOMMENDED OPTION.
SO JUST A BIT OF, UH, INTRODUCTION AND, AND AND BACKGROUND.
UH, THE, THE CITY, AGAIN, FUNDS PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING.
ALL PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING IN THE CITY IS FUND BY THE, THESE TWO DISTRICTS, 83 DASH ONE AND 99 DASH ONE.
[00:05:01]
A CFD THAT WAS FORMED BACK IN 2017 THAT PROVIDES, UH, UH, FUNDING FOR STREET LIGHTING IN THE DUBLIN CROSSING OR THE BOULEVARD NEIGHBORHOOD.SO THOSE ARE YOUR THREE, UH, SPECIAL FINANCING DISTRICTS.
YOUR YOUR THREE MECHANISMS THAT GENERATE REVENUE FOR, FOR STREET LIGHTING.
THE TOTAL PROJECTED, UH, BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 26 27 IS ABOUT 1.2 MILLION.
THIS CAPTURES ALL STREET LIGHTING IN THE CITY ALONG MAJOR ROADWAYS, LOCAL STREET LIGHTING, UM, THE, THE STREET LIGHTING WITHIN, UH, WITHIN THE, UM, UM, THE, YOUR, YOUR INTERACT AREAS AND, AND ALL OF IT.
UH, JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF THE BREAKDOWN OF THE THREE DISTRICTS.
IT ENCOMPASSES ABOUT 13,000 PARCELS OR ABOUT 55% OF THE CITY.
99 DASH ONE, UH, COMPRISES 8,300 PARCELS OR APPROXIMATELY 35% OF THE CITY, UH, A LITTLE MORE THAN A THIRD.
AND THEN THE SMALLEST IS THE NEWEST, UH, DISTRICT, YOUR CFD 2017 DASH ONE, WHICH CONSISTS OF ABOUT 2000 PARCELS OR ABOUT 10% OF THE CITY.
AND AGAIN, THAT, THAT REALLY COMES DOWN TO SOLELY THE DUBLIN CROSSINGS NEIGHBORHOOD AND, UH, OTHERWISE KNOWN AS AS THE BOULEVARD.
HERE'S A MAP SHOWING THE LOCATION OF THE THREE DISTRICTS.
THE, THE LIGHT YELLOW IS THE BOUNDARIES OF, REPRESENTS THE BOUNDARIES OF 83 DASH ONE, WHICH AS YOU CAN SEE, GENERALLY SPEAKING, COVERS THE MORE ESTABLISHED OLDER PARTS OF TOWN WESTERN PORTIONS, UH, THE CENTRAL AREA OF, OF THE CITY.
YOU HAVE THE, THE DONUT HOLE THAT YOU SEE IN THE MIDDLE, UH, IN, IN LIGHT BLUE, THAT'S CFD 2017 DASH ONE OR THE DUBLIN CROSSINGS AREA, UH, THE BOULEVARD.
AND THEN, UH, ON THE EASTERN SIDE IS, IS 99 DASH ONE.
AND SO 99 DASH ONE IS, UH, DUBLIN RANCH, UH, NEIGHBORHOODS AND IN OTHER AREAS THAT HAVE BEEN ANNEXED IN.
BUT GENERALLY SPEAKING, 99 DASH ONE ARE IS THE NEWER PARTS OF TOWN WITH THE DECORATIVE LIGHTING THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED, UH, MORE RECENTLY.
AND THEN YOU HAVE CAMP PARKS, UH, THAT'S OWNED BY, BY THE US GOVERNMENT.
AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S NOT CURRENTLY WITHIN, WITHIN ANY DISTRICT, AND THAT'S WHY, THAT'S WHY THERE'S NO, NO SHADING THERE ON THE CAMP PARKS PARCELS.
SO THIS SLIDE PROVIDES AN OVERVIEW OF 83 DASH ONE.
IT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1983, AGAIN PRIOR TO THE PASSAGE OF PROPOSITION TWO 18 IN 1996.
AND FOR THAT REASON, IT'S ACTUALLY EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF OF, OF PROP TWO 18 BECAUSE IT WAS FORMED PRIOR.
UM, IT PROVIDES STREET, UH, FUNDING FOR STREET LIGHTING, PRIMARILY THE NON DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTING WITHIN THE DISTRICT.
UM, SO, UH, IT'S ALL STREET LIGHTING, WHETHER IT BE ON MAJOR ROADWAYS OR LOCAL WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT.
AND GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT'S, IT'S NON DECORATIVE IS WHAT, UH, 83 DASH ONE PROVIDES FUNDING FOR.
THE ASSESSMENT REVENUE IS STAGNANT BECAUSE THE CP UH, A CPI INCREASE IS NOT AUTHORIZED.
CPIS OR ANNUAL ESCALATORS ARE AUTHORIZED AT THE TIME OF DISTRICT FORMATION, AND THAT DID NOT OCCUR FOR THIS DISTRICT BACK IN 83.
AND SO THE ASSESSMENT REVENUE HAS BEEN STAGNANT.
IT'S BEEN CONSISTENT, UM, OVER THE YEARS.
AND AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, UH, MAINTENANCE COSTS, PG E BILLS HAVE NOT BEEN STAGNANT.
THEY'VE BEEN INCREASING AT A, AT A, AT A VERY FAST PACE, ESPECIALLY RECENTLY.
AND WHAT'S HAPPENED IS, UM, OVER TIME THE DELTA BETWEEN THE ASSESSMENT REVENUE, MAINTENANCE COSTS, AND INFLATIONARY INCREASES IN, IN PG E BILLS AND ALL THAT KEEPS GETTING LARGER AND LARGER AND LARGER, UM, WHAT THE ASSESSMENT RATES LOOK LIKE.
UH, UH, A TYPICAL SINGLE FAMILY HOME WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF 83, 1 PAYS A LITTLE UNDER $20 PER YEAR, $19 AND 34 CENTS TO BE EXACT, WHICH IS ABOUT A DOLLAR 61 PER MONTH.
THIS AMOUNT, THIS ASSESSMENT RATE WAS REACHED IN 2007, SO WE'RE GOING ON ALMOST 20 YEARS THAT THE ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN FLAT.
SO ALL SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF 83 1 HAVE BEEN PAYING THE SAME AMOUNT FOR ALMOST THE LAST, LAST 20 YEARS.
CURRENTLY, THE, THE DISTRICT IS EXP EXPERIENCING AN ANNUAL DEFICIT SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 120 AND 130,000, UH, THIS CURRENT FISCAL YEAR, 25, 26.
AND THAT DEFICIT'S EXPECTED TO, TO EXCEED 150,000, BEGINNING, FISCAL YEAR 27, 28.
AND, UH, AS I MENTIONED, UH, UH, MOMENTS AGO, THAT DEFICIT IS EXPECTED TO KEEP GOING UP YEAR AFTER YEAR BECAUSE THE ASSESSMENT OF REVENUE IS STAGNANT, RIGHT? SO AS MAINTENANCE COSTS AND, AND, UH, ENERGY COSTS KEEP GOING UP, THAT THIS DELTA, THIS DEFICIT THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE IS EXPECTED TO, TO, TO KEEP GOING UP AND WITH NO, NO WAY TO REALLY,
[00:10:01]
UH, YOU KNOW, MANAGE, MANAGE THAT FOR FISCAL YEAR 25, 26.THE DEFICIT WILL BE COVERED FROM THE REMAINING FUND BALANCE IN THE DISTRICT, BUT THAT FUND BALANCE IS EXPECTED TO, TO BE DEPLETED, UH, BEGINNING FISCAL YEAR 27, 28, AT WHICH TIME THE CITY'S GOING TO HAVE TO COVER THE DEFICIT FROM ITS GENERAL FUND OR SOME ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCE IN ORDER TO CONTINUE CURRENT LEVELS OF SERVICE.
AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY, UH, PROACTIVELY, UH, LOOKING TO AVOID, AVOID GETTING TO THAT, THAT, THAT FISCAL STATE.
AN OVERVIEW OF, OF 99 DASH ONE, UNLIKE 83 DASH ONE, UH, 99 DASH ONE WAS FORMED IN, IN 1999 FOLLOWING THE PASSAGE OF PROPOSITION TWO 18 AND 1996.
IT INCLUDES THE C THE CLIFTON PARK, DUBLIN RANCH, FALLON VILLAGE, JORDAN RANCH, TASSAJARA HILLS, FRANCIS RANCH, AND DUBLIN CENTER NE NEIGHBORHOODS.
SO THE, THE NEWER PARTS OF TOWN, IT CURRENTLY PROVIDES FUNDING FOR STREETLIGHTS, PRIMARILY DECORATIVE, BUT ALSO WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT.
SO WHETHER IT'S ALONG A MAJOR ROADWAY, STREET LIGHTS ALONG A MAJOR ROADWAY OR LOCAL, UH, IF YOU'RE WITH, IF, IF THE STREET LIGHTS ARE WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DISTRICT, 99, 1 PROVIDES THE FUNDING FOR, FOR THAT ALSO, UNLIKE 83 1, UH, THE ASSESSMENTS ARE, ARE AUTHORIZED TO INCREASE BY CPI.
AND WHAT THAT MEANS IS THE ORIGINAL, UM, ASSESSMENT ESTABLISHED BACK IN 1999, THE MAXIMUM IS ALLOWED TO INCREASE BY CPI OR INCREASES AUTOMATICALLY.
HOWEVER, C CITY STAFF AND CITY COUNCIL EVERY YEAR AT, AT YOUR DISCRETION CAN AUTHORIZE A LEVY OR AN ASSESSMENT THAT'S PLACED ON THE PROPERTY TAX ROLLS THAT'S BELOW THE MAXIMUM IN ANY GIVEN FISCAL YEAR.
AND THE REASON WHY WE PREPARE THE ENGINEER'S REPORTS BRING 'EM FORWARD TO YOU FOR APPROVAL EVERY YEAR.
AND WHAT THAT'S MEANT OVER THE YEARS WITH 99 DASH ONE IS THE ASSESSMENT RATE THAT'S BEEN REQUIRED TO COVER THE BUDGET HAS ACTUALLY BEEN MUCH LOWER THAN, THAN THE MAXIMUM.
SO WHAT YOU CAN SEE HERE, UH, ON THE, THE, UM, THE, THE TWO BULLETS THERE NEAR THE BOTTOM IS THAT FOR FISCAL YEAR 25, 26, THE ASSESSMENT FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN 99 DASH ONE WAS $47 AND 80 CENTS FOR, FOR THE YEAR.
SO THIS IS THE, THE ASSESSMENT THAT PROPERTY OWNERS SAW WHEN THEY, WHEN THEY LOOKED AT THEIR, THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILL.
HOWEVER, THE MAXIMUM THAT'S AUTHORIZED FOR 99 DASH ONE IS ACTUALLY $82 AND 68 CENTS.
SO THE, THE AMOUNT LEVIED IS MUCH LOWER THAN THE AMOUNT AUTHORIZED.
AND AGAIN, THE CITY COUNCIL HAS THE, HAS THE AUTHORITY AND, AND THE ABILITY TO, TO LEVY UP TO THE MAXIMUM AT ANY GIVEN EV ANY GIVEN FISCAL YEAR.
THE CITY'S CURRENTLY NOT CONTRIBUTING FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO COVER ASES EXPENSES BECAUSE THE ASSESSMENT REVENUE IS SUFFICIENT IN, IN 99 DASH ONE.
AND SO, UH, THERE'S NO, NO CITY CONTRIBUTION, UM, UH, AS OF AS OF, UH, PRESENT YEAR.
AND JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF 2017 DASH ONE, IT'S A COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT ESTABLISHED PURSUANT TO THEUS LAW CFD LAWS.
IT'S COMMONLY REFERRED TO, UH, AGAIN, IT, IT INCLUDES JUST THE, THE DUBLIN CROSSING NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT PROVIDES FUNDING FOR THE DECORATIVE LIGHTS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THAT DISTRICT, THE C, THE, THE CFDA LEVY SPECIAL TAXES THAT ARE NOT EITHER, THAT ARE DIFFERENT THAN ASSESSMENTS.
THERE'S A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY WHEN, WHEN, UH, LEVYING SPECIAL TAXES VERSUS ASSESSMENTS.
UM, THE SPECIAL TAXES DO INCREASE BY CPI AND THE MAXIMUM RATE IS ABOUT $70 ON AVERAGE PER SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
AND THE CITY DOESN'T CONTRIBUTE FROM THE GENERAL FUND TO, TO COVER EXPENSES, AND WE DON'T FORESEE, UM, AN UNDERFUNDING OR AN OPERATING DEFICIT IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE.
AND SO, UH, THIS EVENING, WE'RE NOT, WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHANGES TO, UH, TO 2017 DASH ONE IN THE FORM OF WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING THE PROPERTY OWNERS OR IMPACT TO THE CITY.
UH, WE JUST, UH, WE'RE PROVIDING THE BACKGROUND ON 2017, JUST AS AN OVERVIEW TO GIVE YOU THE COMPREHENSIVE PICTURE OF, OF HOW STREET LIGHTING IS, IS, IS BEING PROVIDED, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
OKAY? SO, UH, THIS MAP HERE, UM, IT, IT SHOWS, IT'S A DEPICTION OF THE STARTING POINT OR THE FIRST COMPONENT OF A BENEFIT ANALYSIS THAT, THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON IN THE LAST, LAST COUPLE MONTHS.
UM, THE, THE FIRST REQUIREMENT THAT PROP TWO 18, UM, UH, CAUSED OR IMPLEMENTED WHEN IT PASSED IN 96 IS THAT EVERY PUBLIC AGENCY INFORMING AN ASSESSMENT OR ESTABLISHING AN ASSESSMENT MUST IDENTIFY AND QUANTIFY, UH, GENERAL BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE.
AND THAT GENERAL BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE CANNOT BE ASSESSED TO PROPERTY OWNERS
[00:15:01]
VIA THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.SO THAT, THAT IS, UH, THE, THE FIRST, UH, IN, UH, REQUIREMENT OF, OF PROP TWO 18 WHEN WE'RE, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UH, ASSESSMENTS AND, AND WHAT IT TAKES TO FORM ONE AND, AND THE ANALYSIS REQUIRED.
AND SO WHAT WE, WHAT WE DID, UH, IN THE CITY OF DUBLIN, AND SPECIFICALLY FOR STREET LIGHTING, IS WE LOOKED AT WHAT IS THE, WHAT, WHAT ARE THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT HAVE THE LARGEST GENERAL BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE, RIGHT? AND, AND THAT WE CAN'T ASSESS TO, TO PROPERTY OWNERS.
AND THAT, GENERALLY SPEAKING, UH, COMES DOWN TO STREET LIGHTING LOCATED ON THE, ALONG THE CITY'S MAJOR ROADWAYS.
AND THE REASON THAT'S THE CASE, UM, THAT THAT IMPROVEMENT CATEGORY HAS THE LARGEST GENERAL BENEFIT IS BECAUSE IT'S REASONABLE TO ASSUME THAT YOU HAVE, UM, RESIDENTS AND PROPERTY OWNERS THAT ARE STARTING FROM A POINT OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN THAT UTILIZE CITY OF DUBLIN STREETS MAJOR ROADWAYS TO GO TO A DESTINATION OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN, MEANING FLOW THROUGH TRAFFIC TRAVERSING, UH, THE, THE CITY.
SO THAT'S A, A GOOD EXAMPLE OF GENERAL BENEFIT, UH, TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE.
AND WHEN WE'VE ANALYZED THAT IN, IN OTHER CITIES, WE'VE FOUND THAT THERE ALWAYS IS AN AREA, UH, A NEIGHBORING AREA THAT IS, UH, THAT IS LIKELY TO UTILIZE CITY STREETS OR TRAVERSE CITY STREETS TO GET TO ANOTHER DESTINATION OUTSIDE.
SO THE COMMON EXAMPLE IS SOMEBODY COMMUTING TO WORK, UH, ON A DAILY BASIS, OR HAS A RELATIVE OR, OR A, A, A FAMILY MEMBER THAT, THAT LIVES SOMEWHERE THAT CAUSES THEM TO, TO USE, UH, CITY OF DUBLIN STREETS.
UM, SO WE, WE LOOKED AT, UH, THE, THE, THE CITY, CITY LIMITS, AND WE LOOKED AT ALL THE NEIGHBORING AREAS AROUND THE CITY OF DUBLIN, DANVILLE, SAN RAMON, PLEASANTON, LIVERMORE.
WE EVEN WENT AS FAR EAST AS TRACY, UH, CASTRO VALLEY.
AND THE AREA THAT YOU'RE SEEING IN BLUE THERE THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN BLUE, WHAT, UH, WE WERE ABLE TO DETERMINE VIA ALL KINDS OF, FROM TWO ROUTES USING GOOGLE MAPS, ALL KINDS OF ONLINE TOOLS, AND ALSO CONFERRING WITH THE CITY'S TRANSPORTATION TEAM.
IS THIS AREA IN BLUE, IF YOU'RE STARTING THERE, UM, IF YOU WERE TO TYPE IN A DESTINATION SOUTH OF DUBLIN, THE, THE PREFERRED ROUTE WAS THROUGH THE CITY OF DUBLIN, RIGHT? SO THAT'S WHAT THAT, THAT AREA OUT, OUT THERE IN BLUE IDENTIFIES.
IT'S, IT'S THE GENERAL BENEFIT AREA.
IT'S, IT'S THE, THE USERS OUTSIDE OF DUBLIN THAT ARE LIKELY, IT DOESN'T MEAN ALWAYS, RIGHT? UH, UH, BUT THAT ARE LIKELY FIRST OPTION IF YOU WERE TO TYPE IN A ROUTE, UH, DOWN SOUTH, THAT THEY'RE LIKELY TO UTILIZE, UH, A CITY OF DUBLIN ROADWAY.
SO THAT'S WHY THAT AREA IN BLUE HAS, HAS BEEN, UH, DELINEATED THERE, AND THAT, THAT'S THE REPRESENTATION OF THE GENERAL BENEFIT AREA, THE AREAS THAT YOU'RE SEEING, UM, CORRESPONDING TO SAN RAMON PLEASANTON.
UH, THE REASON THOSE AREAS AREN'T HIGHLIGHTED IS BECAUSE THOSE ROUTES, THE FIRST ROUTE, THE LIKELY ROUTE IS ON AN INTERSTATE, WHETHER IT BE THE, THE FIVE 80 OR SIX 80.
THE, THE, THE, THE FIRST OPTION ISN'T THROUGH DUBLIN.
SO THAT'S WHY IT, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT HIGHLIGHTED.
WHAT WAS DETERMINED IS THAT THE BLUE AREA, IT REPRESENTS ABOUT 12%, UH, IS WHAT WE WERE ABLE TO, UH, TO CALCULATE.
SO 12% OF THE, OF THE OVERALL CITY BUDGET AS IT RELATES TO STREET LIGHTING, WE'RE ATTRIBUTING TO GENERAL BENEFIT TO THE PUBLIC AT LARGE AS IT RELATES TO THE MAJOR ROADWAYS, RIGHT? THE, THE, THE, THE BUDGET, UH, FOR STREET LIGHTING ALONG MAJOR ROADWAYS.
SO THAT'S WHAT, THAT'S WHAT THIS ANALYSIS TOLD US WHEN, WHEN WE, UH, WHEN WE GOT TO THE END THERE.
SO JUST A, AN OVERVIEW OF, OF THE, THE BENEFIT ANALYSIS.
UM, AGAIN, GENERAL BENEFIT CANNOT BE PAID THROUGH ASSESSMENTS.
IT, IT HAS TO BE PAID BY AN ALTERNATIVE FUNDING SOURCE.
TYPICALLY, UH, CITY'S GENERAL FUND, UH, APPROXIMATELY 12% OF, UH, THE STREET LIGHTING BUDGET FOR MAJOR ROADWAYS IS WHAT WE'RE, UH, ATTRIBUTING TO GENERAL BENEFIT.
UM, WE ALSO, UH, ATTRIBUTE A, A SMALL, UH, MUCH SMALLER GENERAL BENEFIT TO, TO LOCAL ROADWAYS, LOCAL ROADWAYS.
THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE BENEFIT IS TO THE NEIGHBORING, UM, ADJACENT PROPERTIES, UH, WHERE WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT LOCAL ROADWAYS, IT'S IN TRACK STREETS, NEIGHBORHOOD STREETS, LOCAL STREETS.
HOWEVER, UM, IT, IT'S, IT'S THE CONSERVATIVE APPROACH TO, UH, PUT THE CITY IN A, IN A, UH, IN A, IN A, IN A STRONG POSITION, AGAIN, TO STRENGTHEN COMPLIANCE WITH STATE LAW.
AND, AND ALL THAT IN ACCORDANCE WITH PROP TWO 18 IS TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT THERE IS SOME INCIDENTAL BENEFIT ON LOCAL ROADWAYS, RIGHT? UM, YOU KNOW, PEOPLE GET LOST, THEY TAKE A WRONG TURN, GO THROUGH A LOCAL STREET, UM, ALL, ALL THAT.
SO FOR THAT REASON, WE'VE ASSIGNED A, A SMALL, YOU KNOW, A
[00:20:01]
FAIRLY, UH, NEGLIGIBLE PERCENTAGE THERE TO, TO LOCAL ROADWAYS FOR GENERAL BENEFIT.AND SO THE COMBINATION OF THOSE TWO THINGS, IT WOULD BE THE CITY'S CONTRIBUTION ON AN ONGOING BASIS SHOULD THIS, UH, EFFORT, UH, BE SUCCESSFUL AND APPROVED BY, BY PROPERTY OWNERS.
SO THE GENERAL BENEFIT IS PAID FROM THIS, THE, THE CITY'S, UH, GENERAL FUND, THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE BUDGET IS WHAT WE REFER TO AS THE SPECIAL BENEFIT.
THE SPECIAL BENEFIT IS WHAT CAN BE ASSESSED TO PROPERTY OWNERS THROUGH THE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, RIGHT? SO FROM THERE, WHAT WE, WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS THE SECOND, THE, THE SECOND COMPONENT OF, OF THE BENEFIT ANALYSIS AND, AND, AND THE, UH, PREPARATION OF THE ENGINEERS REPORT IS, UH, IS CREATE AN ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY.
THE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY IS THE METHOD THAT EVERY PROPERTY OWNER IN THE CITY IS ASSIGNED AN ASSESSMENT AND TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION PARCEL CHARACTERISTICS, LAND USE TYPES, BECAUSE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME SHOULDN'T BE ASSESSED THE SAME WAY THAT A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY IS AND, AND, AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.
AND ALSO LOOKING AT PROXIMITY TO IMPROVEMENTS AND, AND ALL THAT KIND OF THING.
SO WHEN IT COMES TO THE SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY, THE FIRST THING WE WE DID IS WE SEGREGATED, UH, THE, THE SPECIAL BENEFIT INTO TWO, TWO COMPONENTS, THE MAJOR ROADWAYS AND THE LOCAL ROADWAYS.
AND THE REASON WE DID THAT IS BECAUSE, UH, MAJOR ROAD STREET LIGHTING ALONG MAJOR ROADWAYS, WE PRO, WE BELIEVE PROVIDE A CITYWIDE BENEFIT, MEANING ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY, UH, RECEIVE A, A, A BENEFIT FROM STREET LIGHTING ALONG MAJOR ROADWAYS, AND THEREFORE ALL PROPERTIES SHOULD PAY THEIR PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF, OF STREET LIGHTING ALONG MAJOR, UH, ROADWAYS, LOCAL ROADWAY COMPONENTS, UM, THAT, THAT CAN DIFFER DEPENDING UPON WHAT PART OF THE CITY YOU'RE IN, AND ALSO WHAT TYPES OF STREET LIGHTING YOU HAVE.
SO THE THREE, THE THREE CATEGORIES WE CAME UP WITH, WITH THERE, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO LOCAL, UH, STREET LIGHTING IS DECORATIVE.
THE, THE, YOU KNOW, THE NEWER PARTS OF TOWN THAT HAVE DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTING ALONG THEIR, THEIR LOCAL ROADWAYS, THE NON DECORATIVE, WHICH IS GENERALLY SPEAKING, THE, THE COBRA HEADS, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES YOU'LL SEE THE LAMPS ATTACHED TO POWER POLES AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO THE NON DECORATIVE, UH, THAT ARE, ARE PREVALENT IN THE OLDER PARTS OF TOWN, MORE ESTABLISHED PARTS OF TOWN.
AND THEN YOU ALSO HAVE PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOODS AND PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOODS OR NEIGHBORHOODS THAT, THAT HAVE AN HOA THAT WILL FUND THE, THE STREET LIGHTING OR FOR THEIR NEIGHBORHOODS OR SOME OTHER PRIVATE ENTITY IS, IS FUNDING THE STREET LIGHTING IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS.
AND, AND IT'S NOT CITY RESPONSIBILITY, UH, TO, TO OPERATE AND MAINTAIN THOSE STREET STREETLIGHTS AND THEREFORE THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT THEY DO NOT PAY THE LOCAL COMPONENT BECAUSE THEIR LOCAL IS COVERED THROUGH THEIR HOA DUES AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
OR, OR IF YOU'RE A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, UM, UH, AND YOU HAVE A LOCAL PUBLIC STREET ADJACENT TO YOU, IT'D BE COVERED, UH, PRESUMABLY THROUGH SOME SORT OF, UH, COMMERCIAL, UM, UH, PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION.
PROXIMITY, UH, RESIDENCE IS PROXIMITY TO SOMETHING, AND I, I DIDN'T CATCH THE, THE LAST PART OF THAT.
UH, WHAT I MEANT BY PROXIMITY IS ESSENTIALLY, UM, WHAT AREA IN THE CITY YOU'RE IN AND REALLY, UM, PROXIMITY HERE IS, ARE YOU, ARE YOU ADJACENT TO DECORATIVE LIGHTING OR ARE YOU ADJACENT TO NON DECORATIVE LIGHTING, OR DO YOU HAVE PRIVATE LIGHTING? IS IS REALLY WHAT, WHAT, WHAT IT COMES DOWN TO, UM, WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, PROXIMITY.
SO, UM, MORE SO ANYTHING, IT'S, IT'S STREET STREETLIGHT TYPE, OR IN THE CASE OF PRIVATE, EVEN IF YOU HAVE A DECORATIVE LIGHT OR NON DECORATIVE LIGHT, IF IT'S HOA FUNDED, THEN UM, IT'S NOT CITY RESPONSIBILITY AND THEREFORE NOT ASSESSED THROUGH, THROUGH, WOULD NOT BE ASSESSED THROUGH, THROUGH THE CITY.
DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, COUNCIL MEMBER? THANK YOU.
UM, SO, UH, GOING, UH, GOING FURTHER ON THE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY IN TERMS OF THE, THE, THE APPROACH, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND CONDOMINIUMS, UH, THOSE ALL HAVE AN A PN, AN ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER.
SO WE'RE PROPOSING THAT, UH, THAT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES AND CONDOMINIUMS BE ASSESSED ON A PER PARCEL BASIS, WHICH IS THE COMMON APPROACH WHEN IT, WHEN IT COMES TO ASSESSMENTS THROUGHOUT THE STATE, MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL, WE'RE PROPOSING THAT, THAT THE, THAT THOSE PROPERTIES BE ASSESSED PER RESIDENTIAL UNIT.
MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL IS APARTMENT COMPLEXES, DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, QUADPLEXES.
SO DEPENDING ON THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT YOU HAVE, THAT'S WHAT, WHAT'S, WHAT'S GOING TO DRIVE YOUR ASSESSMENT FOR, FOR THOSE PARCELS.
AND THEN NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, UH, THE METHODOLOGY FOR, FOR THOSE TYPES OF PROPERTIES, COMMERCIAL, UM, INSTITUTIONAL INDUSTRIAL, UM, IT'S, IT'S BASED ON, ON TWO, TWO PARAMETERS, BOTH PARCEL AREA AND ALSO BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE.
THE REASON WE USE BOTH IS TO ACCOUNT FOR, UH, THE VARIABILITY IN, IN THESE CHARACTERISTICS, RIGHT? YOU CAN HAVE LARGE PARCEL AREAS WITH SMALL
[00:25:01]
BUILDING FOOTPRINTS.YOU COULD HAVE THE, THE INVERSE SMALL PARCELS, MULTI-STORY BUILDINGS.
AND SO WHEN WE ACCOUNT FOR BOTH, WE FOUND THAT, THAT THE ASSESSMENT CAN BE MORE, MORE EQUITABLY, UH, EQUITABLY, UM, ALLOCATED, UH, BY, BY TAKING ACCOUNT BOTH, BOTH PARAMETERS THERE.
SO WHAT DO WE MEAN BY SPECIAL BENEFIT? UH, WHEN IT COMES TO STREET LIGHTING? UM, SPECIAL BENEFITS DRIVE THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT.
AND SO IT'S IMPORTANT TO, TO UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SPECIAL BENEFITS ARE AND HOW THAT, THAT, UH, CORRELATES TO, TO THE BENEFIT FACTORS.
AND AT THE END, UH, THE, THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS THAT YOU'RE GONNA BE SEEING A, A SUMMARY OF HERE IN, IN A BIT.
SO, MAJOR ROADWAYS, GENERALLY SPEAKING, UH, IMPROVES, UH, TRAFFIC, CIRCULATION AND SAFETY THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
IT ENHANCES EMERGENCY RESPONSE AND PUBLIC SERVICES SUPPORTS ECONOMIC ACTIVITY.
AND OVERALL, IT, IT ALSO ENHANCES CITY APPEAL AND DESIRABILITY.
UH, IT'S REASONABLE TO ASSUME THAT I, IF, UH, THE STREETLIGHTS ALONG MAJOR ROADWAYS ARE PROPERLY OPERATED AND MAINTAINED, THERE'S A POSITIVE IMPACT ON PROPERTY VALUE CITYWIDE AND, AND OVERALL ENHANCES, UH, THE, THE DESIRABILITY OF, OF THE CITY.
AND THEN WHEN IT COMES TO LOCAL ROADWAYS, UH, THERE'S, THERE'S, UH, DIFFERENT BENEFITS DEPENDING ON IF YOU'RE IN A NON DECORATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD OR A DECORATIVE NEIGHBORHOOD.
NON DECORATIVE, IT IMPROVES INGRESS AND EGRESS, UH, FOR NEIGHBORHOODS, IT IMPROVES, UH, VEHICULAR SAFETY IMPROVES WALKABILITY AT NIGHT.
UH, IT ALSO REDUCES CRIME AND VANDALISM, AND THEN DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTING, UH, IT HAS THE SAME BENEFITS AS NON DECORATIVE AND THEN SOME.
AND, UH, THE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO DECORATIVE LIGHTING, ENHANCED CURB APPEAL IMPROVES UNIFORMITY FOR PEDESTRIAN COMFORT, REDUCES GLARE AND LIGHT TRESPASS TO ADJACENT HOMES, UH, IMPROVES VISIBILITY AT RESIDENTIAL ENTRANCES.
AND ALSO, IT, IT, IT PROVIDES A, A STRONGER NEIGHBORHOOD PRIDE AND DESIRABILITY.
UM, YOU KNOW, SO THAT USUALLY CORRELATES TO POSIT POSITIVE IMPACT ON PROPERTY VALUES, UH, AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UH, INCREASED, UH, UH, RENTAL VALUES AND, AND ALL THAT.
THAT COMES WITH, WITH, UM, INCREASED DESIRABILITY FOR, FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD.
HERE'S A MAP OF THE LOCAL STREET LIGHTING AREAS, UH, THROUGHOUT THE CITY.
SO STARTING FROM THE LOWEST, A ASSESSMENT, UH, CATEGORY, WHICH IS THE PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOODS, WHICH ARE SHOWN IN RED HERE ON, ON THIS SLIDE.
THE AREAS, THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN RED, THESE ARE THE AREAS THAT WILL, WOULD ONLY BE ASKED TO PAY THEIR SHARE OF THE MAJOR ROADWAYS COMPONENT, BECAUSE EVERYBODY IN THE CITY WOULD BE ASKED TO PAY THE, UH, THEIR PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF MAJOR ROADWAYS.
UM, THEN WHAT YOU SEE IN THE, IN THE, THE LIGHT YELLOW, THOSE ARE THE NON DECORATIVE STREETLIGHT AREAS.
SO GENERALLY SPEAKING, IT'S THE AREAS THAT ARE CURRENTLY WITHIN YOUR 83 DASH ONE, THE MORE ESTABLISHED PARTS OF TOWN, OLDER PARTS OF TOWN.
UM, THIS IS THE MIDDLE TIER, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO THE, THE ASSESSMENT, UH, STRUCTURE, BECAUSE THEY WOULD BE ASKED TO PAY THEIR SHARE OF THE MAJOR ROADWAYS.
AND THEN ALSO, UM, A LOCAL COMPONENT FOR THE NON DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTING.
AND THEN YOU HAVE THE, THE LIGHT PURPLE, LIGHT PURPLE AREAS, UM, ARE, WOULD BE THE HIGHEST, UH, ASSESSMENT TIER BECAUSE, UH, THEY WOULD PAY THE MAJOR ROADWAY, UH, COMPONENT AND THEN THE LOCAL COMPONENT.
BUT IT WOULD BE THE HIGHER LOCAL COMPONENT, UH, TO, UH, DUE TO ALL THOSE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS THAT WE SAW ON THE, ON THE LAST SLIDE.
SO THE AREAS IN, IN LIGHT PURPLE WOULD, WOULD EXPERIENCE THE, THE HIGHEST, UM, UH, PROPOSED, UH, ASSESSMENT THERE.
SO AN OVERVIEW OF THE, THE RECOMMENDATION, UH, TO, TO FORM THIS CONSOLIDATED LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT.
THE NEW LAD, AGAIN, THE, THE PROPOSAL HERE, THE RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONSOLIDATE YOUR EXISTING 83 1 AND 99 1.
SO THE TWO DISTRICTS WOULD BECOME ONE.
AND HENCE WHY WE'RE REFERRING TO IT AS THE, THE CONSOLIDATED, UH, LAD.
THIS LAD WOULD GREATLY STRENGTHEN COMPLIANCE WITH THE BENEFIT REQUIREMENTS ON PROP TWO 18.
UH, AND ALSO WE'D BE IMPLEMENTING CURRENT BEST PRACTICES FOR ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES.
THIS DISTRICT WAS FORMED BACK IN 99, RIGHT AFTER THE PASSAGE OF, OF, OF TWO 18.
SO, UH, A LOT OF THINGS WERE, WERE, WERE NEW BACK THEN.
AND, UM, AND SO, UH, THIS, THIS APPROACH HERE WOULD, WOULD GREATLY, UH, IMPROVE, UM, BOTH STRENGTH AND COMPLIANCE WHEN IT COMES TO GENERAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY, CURRENT BEST PRACTICES, ALL OF THAT.
WE WOULD ALSO WE'RE ALSO RECOMMENDING THAT AN ANNUAL ASSESSMENT ESCALATOR, UH, BE AUTHORIZED AS PART OF THIS, UH, PROCESS.
UM, USUALLY WHAT WE RECOMMEND IS THAT IT BE ATTACHED TO THE CONSUMER PRICE INDEX THAT'S PUBLISHED BY THE BUREAU OF LABOR
[00:30:01]
STATISTICS.IT'S A VERY COMMONLY USED INDEX THAT'S VERY ACCESSIBLE TO, TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS, ALL RESIDENTS.
AND SO, UH, WE, WE, UH, WE RECOMMEND THAT, AND THE INTENT OF, OF THAT, UH, ANNUAL ESCALATOR IS TO KEEP UP WITH THE COST OF MAINTENANCE AND, AND, AND PG E BUILDING, AND ALSO, UH, PROVIDE THE CITY WITH THE ABILITY TO GRADUALLY BUILD RESERVES FOR FUTURE CAPITAL REPLACEMENT OF CITY STREET LIGHTING.
SO WHEN, UH, CITY STREETLIGHTS HIT THEIR USEFUL LIFE, UH, THE CITY, UH, WOULD IDEALLY HAVE SOME FUNDING TO REPLACE STREETLIGHTS ON AS NEEDED, UH, BASIS AS, AS THOSE, AS THOSE THINGS COME UP.
UH, IN TERMS OF THE NUMBERS, WHAT WE'RE, UH, ESTIMATING IS THAT THE ADDITIONAL ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE IS ABOUT 400,000 PER YEAR, UH, IN FISCAL YEAR 26, 20 $7.
THAT AMOUNT WILL, WOULD INCREASE BY CPI, WHATEVER THE, THE PUBLISHED ANNUAL ESCALATOR IS, UH, THAT 400,000 IN ADDITIONAL REVENUE WOULD, WOULD INCREASE ACCORDINGLY.
AND THEN, UH, WHEN WE'RE, UM, UH, IN REGARD TO, TO THE CITY CONTRIBUTION, TO COVER THE GENERAL BENEFIT THAT WE REVIEWED ON THE EARLIER SLIDES, UM, IT'S ABOUT 85,000 IN CURRENT FISCAL YEAR 26, 27, WHICH AS, AS YOU MAY RECALL, THE CURRENT DEFICIT THAT THE CITY IS EXPECTED TO EXPERIENCE HERE IN A YEAR OR TWO IS EXPECTED TO EXCEED 150,000.
SO THE 80 85 IS A LITTLE MORE THAN, YOU KNOW, THAN THAN HALF, BUT SIGNIFICANTLY LOWER.
AND ALSO IN THE LONG TERM, IT'S, IT'S MANAGEABLE BECAUSE OF THE CPI, RIGHT? SO IT'S A, IT'S A MANAGEABLE, UM, AND PREDICTABLE, UH, CITY CONTRIBUTION VERSUS, UH, THE, THE CURRENT DISTRICT AND THE STATE THAT IT'S IN NOW, BECAUSE OF THE ASSESSMENT REVENUE IS STAGNANT.
IT, IT, THE, THE DEFICIT BECOMES A LOT LESS PREDICTABLE, BECAUSE AT THAT POINT, WE'RE, WE'RE JUST, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, WE'RE THE, THE CITY'S GONNA HAVE TO COVER THE PG E INCREASES AND INFLATION INFLATIONARY INCREASES AND, AND MAINTENANCE COSTS, AND, AND ALL OF THAT.
UNDER THIS RECOMMENDED APPROACH, NOTICES AND BALLOTS WILL BE MAILED TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE CITY EXCEPT CAMP PARKS, AND ALSO THE PROPERTIES WITHIN CFD 2017 DASH ONE OR, OR THE BOULEVARD.
SO ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN THE CITY WOULD RECEIVE A NOTICE AND BALLOT, UH, EXCEPT, EXCEPT THOSE TWO CATEGORIES THERE.
WHAT IT TAKES, UH, FOR THIS TO PASS, FOR THE, THE PROPOSED DISTRICT TO PASS IS IF A MAJORITY OF THE BALLOTS RETURNED, WEIGHTED BY PROPOSED ASSESSMENT, DOES NOT OPPOSE THE LAD, THE NEW LAD, UM, THEN CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORIZATION TO MOVE FORWARD AND, AND INFORM IT.
THE REASON IT, IT'S, IT'S DESCRIBED IN THIS WAY, DOES NOT OPPOSE, IS BECAUSE IT'S COMMONLY, UM, UH, REFERRED TO AS MAJORITY PROTESTS PROCEEDING.
SO TECHNICALLY, IF IT'S A TIE, CITY WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORIZATION TO, TO PROCEED.
AND WHEN IT COMES TO MAJORITY, UH, WEIGHTED BY PROPOSED ASSESSMENT, WHAT THAT MEANS IS, AS AN EXAMPLE, IF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME RECEIVES A BALLOT, THEIR PROPOSED ASSESSMENT IS $34, LET'S JUST SAY ANOTHER PROPERTY, THEIR PROPOSED ASSESSMENT IS $17.
THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME, ASSUMING THEY RETURN THEIR BALLOT, THAT BALLOT IS WEIGHTED TWO TO ONE AGAINST THE $17, UH, BALLOT.
SO IT'S NOT A ONE-TO-ONE ON, ON BALLOTS RETURNED.
IT'S, IT'S, IT'S BASED ON, UH, UH, PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DOLLARS.
AND THAT THAT'S VERY KEY, VERY, VERY KEY.
SO WHAT DO, WHAT DO THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS LOOK LIKE? UH, LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE, THE NON DECORATIVE, UH, CATEGORY.
FIRST MAJOR ROADWAY ASSESSMENT COMPONENT.
THIS IS THE, THE COMPONENT THAT, UH, WE WOULD ASK ALL PROPERTIES WI WITHIN THE CITY TO PAY.
AND THIS IS ALL FROM THE LENS OF A, OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
UM, BECAUSE THAT'S, THAT'S THE, THE MOST COMMON, UH, THE MOST COMMON LAND USE IN, IN, NOT JUST IN THIS CITY, BUT, UM, IN VIRTUALLY ALL, ALL CITIES.
UM, SO, UH, THE MAJOR ROADWAY ASSESSMENT COMPONENT IS, UH, PROPOSED TO BE $17 PER, PER SINGLE FAMILY HOME FOR THE NON DECORATIVE, UH, NON DECORATIVE LOCAL COMPONENT.
IT'S COINCIDENTALLY, WE ALSO DETERMINED, UH, $17 IS WHAT THE ASSESSMENT WOULD BE TO COVER THE LOCAL COMPONENT, UH, OF THE ASSESSMENT.
SO THE TWO COMBINED, UM, RESULTS IN A TOTAL PROPOSED MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT, UH, IN FISCAL YEAR 26, 20 $7 OF 34, 30 $4 PER YEAR.
AND AS, UH, UH, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER IN THE PRESENTATION, THE, THE, THE CURRENTLY PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 83 1 ARE PAYING $19 AND 34 CENTS.
SO THE TOTAL PROPOSED INCREASE IS $14 AND, AND 66 CENTS PER YEAR.
[00:35:01]
THE CHANGE IS, IS THAT DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 34 AND 1934, UH, OF 1466 PER PER YEAR.IF YOU'RE IN, UH, UH, ONE OF THE PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOODS, UH, WHAT YOU WOULD BE PROPO, WHAT, WHAT, UH, YOU WOULD GET A NOTICE IN BALLOT AND YOUR BALLOT WOULD REFLECT THE $17 FOR MAJOR ROADWAYS.
THE, IT WOULD BE ZERO ON THE, ON THE LOCAL COMPONENT.
SO THE, THE PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOODS, THE, THE NEIGHBORHOODS WITH THE HOA, THEIR, THEIR BALLOT WOULD, WOULD, UH, REFLECT THE, THE $17 FOR, FOR MAJOR ROADWAYS, DECORATIVE FOR, FOR DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTING.
UH, AGAIN, THE MAJOR ROADWAY E EVERYBODY IN THE CITY, UH, WOULD PAY THEIR SHARE.
AND THEN THE DECORATIVE, THE DECORATIVE, UH, LOCAL COMPONENT IS $42, UH, HIGHER THAN THE, THE NON DECORATIVE, DUE TO ALL THOSE ADDITIONAL BENEFITS THAT, THAT WE REVIEWED ON, ON THE EARLIER SLIDE, THE TOTAL PROPOSED MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT IN 26, 20 $7 IS $59.
UM, WHAT WAS LEVIED IN FISCAL YEAR 25, 26, MEANING WHAT PROPERTY OWNERS SAW ON THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILLS, IT, THEY WERE TO PULL A PROPERTY TAX BILL.
IF YOU LIVE IN THE, IN, IN THE 99 DASH ONE AREAS OF TOWN THAT HAVE DECORATIVE LIGHTING, UH, THEY SAW A, AN ASSESSMENT OF $47 AND 80 CENTS IS WHAT THEY ACTUALLY SAW IN THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILL.
HOWEVER, THE MAXIMUM, UH, LIKE WE SAW IN AN EARLIER SLIDE IS ACTUALLY $82 AND 68 CENTS.
SO THESE PROPERTY OWNERS, UH, THEIR NOTICE IN BALLOT WOULD, WOULD CONVEY THAT THAT PROPOSED REDUCTION IN THE MAXIMUM, RIGHT? THE AMOUNT THAT WE WOULD LEVY BEGINNING NEXT YEAR WOULD GO UP BY $11 AND 20 CENTS, BECAUSE IT WOULD GO FROM THE 47 POINT 80 TO THE 59, BUT THE MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT WOULD, WOULD GO DOWN.
AND SO THAT'S WHAT IS, IS REFLECTED THERE.
THE, UH, THE, THE ASTERISK THERE REFLECTS THAT CHANGE IN THE MAXIMUM, UH, FROM, FROM THE 82 TO THE 59, WHICH IS THAT 23, 20 $3 AND 68 CENTS DROP.
AND, UM, UH, I THINK WHAT WE CAN SEE HERE IS THAT IT CAN, IT CAN BE A ASSUMED THAT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE 99 1 AREAS, THE DECORATIVE STREET LIGHTING AREAS, UM, THEY'RE LIKELY TO PROBABLY, YOU KNOW, VOTE IN, IN FAVOR OF THIS OR, OR, UH, LIKE THIS, UM, THIS BREAKDOWN HERE IN TERMS OF THE MAXIMUM.
ANYWAY, UH, THE ALTERNATIVE AND, AND JUST, UH, UM, UM, JUST, UM, UH, FINALIZE WHY, OR, OR, UM, RECAP ON ON WHY THAT'S THE RECOMMENDED OPTION.
IT'S, IT'S REALLY, UH, TWO, UH, THREEFOLD IS, IS NUMBER ONE.
IT WOULD, UM, CREATE ONE DISTRICT WHERE EVERYBODY IN THE CITY, ALL PROPERTIES IN THE CITY ARE AN EVEN PLAYING FIELD, A UNIFORM ASSESSMENT ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY THROUGHOUT, RIGHT? UH, NO MATTER WHERE YOU ARE IN THE CITY, IT'S JUST A, A MATTER OF WHETHER YOU LIVE IN ONE OF THE DECORATIVE NEIGHBORHOODS, NON DECORATIVE.
BUT THE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY IS THE SAME, UM, WHICH ISN'T, WOULDN'T BE THE CASE IF LAD 99 1, UH, REMAINED BECAUSE THAT DISTRICT WAS FORMED BACK IN, IN 1999.
UM, AND THEN, UM, ALSO, UH, THERE WOULD BE SOME, SOME COST EFFICIENCIES ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE SIDE GOING FORWARD, BECAUSE WE'D BE CONSOLIDATING THE DISTRICT INTO ONE VERSUS, UM, IT'S TWO TODAY.
UH, SO IF WE WERE CONSOLIDATING INTO ONE THAT MEANS ON AN ONGOING BASIS, IT'S ONE ENGINEER'S REPORT, ONE SET OF COUNCIL DOCUMENTS, ALL THAT.
AND ALSO ON THE ACCOUNTING SIDE, IT'S, UH, ONE FUND, UH, BUDGETING, EXPENDITURE, CODING, ALL THAT KIND OF THING.
SO THERE'S, THERE'S A, A COUPLE THINGS THERE.
AND THEN, UM, ALSO WE WOULD BE ABLE TO, UH, BETTER STRENGTHEN COMPLIANCE WITH PROP TWO 18 AS IT RELATES TO GENERAL BENEFIT AND, AND ALL THAT KIND OF THING WITH, WITH, UH, WITH, UH, THIS, THIS NEW DISTRICT, BECAUSE WE WOULD BE REPLACING THE OLD, SO THE CITY WOULD BE IN A STRONGER POSITION WHEN IT COMES TO STATE LAW, PROP TWO 18, ALL, ALL THAT.
SO, UH, THIS IS THE, THE ALTERNATIVE VERSION.
UH, THE ALTERNATIVE VERSION, THE, THESE ARE THE, THE, THE ESSENTIAL BULLET POINTS.
THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE IS THAT UNDER THIS ALTERNATIVE, WE WOULD BE REPLACING 83 DASH ONE ONLY, AND LAD 99 DASH ONE REMAINS IN PLACE.
WHAT THAT ALSO MEANS IS THAT NOTICES AND BALLOTS WOULD ONLY BE MAILED TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 83 1 ONLY.
SO THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE DECORATIVE, UH, PARTS OF TOWN, THE, UH, YOU KNOW, THE, THE PROPERTIES WITHIN 99 DASH ONE WOULD NOT RECEIVE A NOTICE AND BALLOT.
AND, UH, THE APPROVAL PROCESS, IT WORKS THE EXACT SAME WAY.
[00:40:01]
MAJORITY OF THE BALLOTS RETURNED, WAITED BY THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DOES NOT OPPOSE THE ESTABLISHMENT OF THE LAD, CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE IT.UM, WE WOULD RECOMMEND UPDATING, UH, 99 DASH ONE, THE ENGINEERS REPORT TO THE, THE BEST WE CAN TO STRENGTHEN COMPLIANCE, BUT AGAIN, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO DO IT TO THE EXTENT THAT WE COULD.
UM, IF WE HAVE A, A, A, A NEW DISTRICT TO REPLACE, UH, THE, THE EXISTING, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO DO, UH, ADDRESS SOME, SOME THINGS, BUT, UM, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO START CLEAN LIKE WE WOULD WITH, WITH THE NEW DISTRICT.
UM, THE ANNUAL REVENUE AND THE CITY CONTRIBUTION IS ANTICIPATED TO BE SIMILAR AS THE CONSOLIDATED OPTION.
AND THE REASON THAT IS, IS BECAUSE WE WOULD STILL TAKE A HOLISTIC APPROACH TO ALLOCATE COSTS.
WE WOULD ASSIGN 99 1 THEIR SHARE OF THE COST BASED ON THIS, THIS HOLISTIC, UH, UH, ANALYSIS.
HOWEVER, THE ASSESSMENTS THAT GET APPLIED TO THE, THE 99 1 DISTRICT WOULD BE ASSESSED DIFFERENTLY WITHIN THE DISTRICT VERSUS THE NEW, BECAUSE THE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES ARE DIFFERENT.
AND THAT'S NOT, THAT'S NOT, UM, YOU KNOW, UH, IDEAL TO, TO HAVE THAT.
SO, UM, SO FOR THAT REASON IS WHY WE'RE RECOMMENDING THE, THE CITYWIDE, THE, THE, THE HOLISTIC REPLACEMENT OPTION.
IT ALLOWS US TO, TO BEST, UH, ADDRESS, UH, THE PROP TWO 18 REQUIREMENTS.
UH, THE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES UNIFORM THROUGHOUT FOR ALL LAND USE TYPES, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, MULTI-FAMILY, NON-RESIDENTIAL, UM, AND, AND HAVE, HAVE EVERY, EVERYBODY ON A, ON AN EVEN PLAYING FIELD.
AS, AS IT RELATES TO HOW THE, THE ASSESSMENTS ARE APPLIED, PROPOSITION TWO 18 TIMELINE, THE, THE, IN TERMS OF PROCESS AND MAJOR DEADLINES, THE, THE BIGGEST DEADLINE IS AUGUST 10TH.
THE REASON THAT'S THE BIGGEST DEADLINE IS BECAUSE THAT'S THE COUNTY AUDITOR'S DEADLINE EVERY YEAR, NOT JUST IN 2026, BUT EVERY YEAR, UM, EVERY PUBLIC AGENCY IN, IN, IN THE STATE, UH, ALAMEDA COUNTY, UM, UH, DEFINITELY, UH, WE'RE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT ALL ASSESSMENTS AND SPECIAL TAXES TO THE COUNTY AUDITOR BY AUGUST 10TH.
WHAT THAT MEANS IS THE COUNCIL MEETING PROCESS, PUBLIC HEARING, ALL OF THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE AHEAD OF THAT DEADLINE IN ORDER TO, UH, PLACE THE ASSESSMENTS ON THE UPCOMING PROPERTY TAX ROLE.
SO, UH, THAT'S THE REASON WHY IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THIS PROCESS BE DONE FROM BEGINNING TO END, UH, IN THE FIRST HALF OF THE YEAR.
SO, WITH THAT IN MIND, UH, WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING, UH, AS REMAINING STEPS IS, UH, ASSUMING WE, WE GET, UH, DIRECTION FROM, FROM CITY COUNCIL THIS EVENING, UH, AT THE FEBRUARY 17TH CITY COUNCIL MEETING, CITY COUNCIL WOULD ADOPT THE RESOLUTION OF INITIATION AUTHORIZING THE PROP TWO 18, UH, PROCEEDINGS FOR FISCAL YEAR 26 27, UM, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE, UM, YOU KNOW, THE APPROVAL OF FORMING THE, THIS CONSOLIDATED, UH, CITYWIDE DISTRICT.
AND ALSO WE WOULD RUN IT CONCURRENTLY WITH THE APPROVAL OF YOUR THREE OTHER DISTRICTS THAT FUND LANDSCAPING.
SO WE WOULD, UH, WE WOULD, UH, UH, RUN THOSE, THOSE THAT APPROVAL PROCESS CONCURRENTLY.
THAT'S ALSO FOLLOWING THAT MEETING IS WHEN, UH, THE CITY CAN BEGIN PUBLIC OUTREACH IN, IN WHATEVER FORM, UH, YOU DESIRE, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO, TO PUBLIC OUTREACH.
AND THEN FOLLOWING THAT FEBRUARY 17TH MEETING ON APRIL 7TH IS WHEN, UH, CITY COUNCIL WOULD ADOPT A RESOLUTION OF INTENTION.
YOU WOULD PRELIMINARILY APPROVE THE ENGINEER'S REPORT THAT WOULD CONTAIN THE, THE BUDGETS, THE PROPOSED RATES.
UH, IT WOULD BE THE NARRATIVE BEHIND THE BENEFIT ANALYSIS, ALL THE, ALL THE DIAGRAMS. IT'S, IT'S THE, UH, THE, THE ENGINEERING STUDY, IF YOU WILL, BEHIND, BEHIND ALL OF THIS.
FOLLOWING THAT MEETING ON THE SEVENTH ON, ON APRIL 17TH, UH, IS THE DEADLINE TO MAIL THE NOTICES AND BALLOTS TO ALL THE, ALL THE AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNERS.
THE REASON WE'RE CALLING THAT THE DEADLINE IS BECAUSE, UH, UH, IN ACCORDANCE TO PROP TWO 18, THE NOTICES AND BALLOTS MUST BE MAILED A MINIMUM OF 45 DAYS PRIOR TO THE PUBLIC HEARING.
AND WE ARE, UH, UH, PROPOSING THAT THE PUBLIC HEARING BE HELD ON JUNE 2ND.
SO, IF THE PUBLIC HEARING IS HELD ON JUNE 2ND, WE WOULDN'T NEED TO MAIL THE NOTICES AND BALLOTS BY APRIL 17TH TO MEET THAT 45 DAY REQUIREMENT.
THAT PUBLIC HEARING ON JUNE 2ND IS WHEN, IS ALSO THE, THE CLOSE OF THE BALLOT PERIOD.
SO THAT EVENING IS THE LAST DAY, THE LAST OPPORTUNITY THAT ANY AFFECTED PROPERTY OWNER CAN SUBMIT, CHANGE OR WITHDRAW THEIR BALLOT.
THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION OF, OF THE PUBLIC HEARING THAT, THAT EVENING FOLLOWING, UH, THE CLOSE OF THE PUBLIC INPUT PORTION, CITY
[00:45:01]
COUNCIL WOULD CONTINUE THE ITEM.AND THE REASON, UH, WE'D ASK YOU TO CONTINUE THE ITEM IS SO THAT, UH, WE CAN TABULATE THE BALLOTS THE NEXT DAY.
THE, THE BALLOTS ARE REQUIRED TO BE TABULATED IN A PUBLIC SETTING, WHETHER IT BE CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, OR SOME SORT OF COMMUNITY BUILDING.
THEY WOULD BE THE, ALL THE RETURN BALLOTS WOULD BE TABULATED IN A PUBLIC SETTING.
UH, WE'RE, UH, WE'RE ANTICIPATING THAT IT COULD BE, IT COULD BE DONE IN, IN ONE DAY, BUT DEPEND, IT'LL DEPEND ON THE NUMBER OF BALLOTS WE GET BACK.
WE USUALLY SEE, UH, ANYWHERE BETWEEN 30 AND 40% RETURN RATE ON, ON THE OVERALL NUMBER MAILED OUT.
SO, UH, THE TABULATION TIME WILL, WILL DEFINITELY BE DRIVEN BY, BY THE NUMBER OF BALLOTS WE GET BACK.
AND THEN ON, ON JUNE 16TH, IS WHEN CITY COUNCIL WOULD DECLARE THE RESULTS OF THE BALLOT TABULATION, AND ASSUMING, UH, A FAVORABLE, UH, OUTCOME OR, UM, PROPERTY OWNERS APPROVE THE, THE PROPOSED DISTRICT CITY COUNCIL WOULD ADOPT THE FINAL RESOLUTION.
YOU'D CONFO, UH, CONFIRM, UH, THE FORMATION OF THE NEW LAD, AND THAT THERE'S NO MAJORITY PROTEST.
AND THEN WE WOULD TAKE IT FROM THERE, COORDINATE WITH THE CITY, OR SORRY, THE COUNTY, TO SUBMIT THE ASSESSMENTS, AND PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD SEE THE, THE NEW LINE ITEM ON THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILL IN THE FIRST INSTALLMENT.
UH, THAT'S DUE DECEMBER 10TH OF 26TH, WITH THE SECOND INSTALLMENT DUE, UH, APRIL 10TH OF, OF 27 THIS EVENING.
WE'RE ASKING, UH, SOME DIRECTION FROM, FROM CITY, FROM FROM CITY COUNCIL.
UH, FIRST AND FOREMOST IS YOUR, UH, APPROVAL TO PROCEED WITH THE CONSOLIDATED OPTION OR, UH, THE ALTERNATIVE, UH, IF, IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION YOU'D LIKE TO GO.
UH, AND THEN FROM THERE, ALSO BEGIN DEVELOPING THE, THE PUBLIC OUTREACH STRATEGY.
UH, SO, UM, THAT, UH, IN TERMS OF PUBLIC OUTREACH, IT COULD, IT COULD BE ANY NUMBER OF THINGS FROM, FROM WEB, UH, DEDICATED WEBPAGE TO COMMUNITY TOWN HALLS, VIRTUAL IN PERSON, HOA ENGAGEMENTS, UH, DOOR HANGERS, INFORMATIONAL MAILERS, SOCIAL MEDIA, UH, IN WHATEVER WAY YOU, YOU CHOOSE TO INFORM YOUR, YOUR CONSTITUENTS, UM, WE'D BE HAPPY TO, TO, TO ASSIST IN, IN SEEING THAT THROUGH.
AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION THIS EVENING.
WE'D BE HAPPY TO ADDRESS ANY, ANY QUESTIONS YOU OR, OR ANY MEMBERS OF, OF THE PUBLIC MAY, MAY HAVE.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR THAT VERY THOROUGH PRESENTATION.
UM, DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? JOHN, YOU WANNA START? UM, ACTUALLY, I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AS WELL AS FOR OUR PRESENTERS.
SO, UH, ANY PARTICULAR ORDER YOU WANT ME TO ASK THOSE QUESTIONS? UH, NOT, NOT REALLY
UH, AND LET ME ASK, UH, UH, IS OUR, IS OUR CITY DIRECTOR OF FINANCE AVAILABLE THIS EVENING? UH, QUESTION FOR YOU, JAY, IF I MAY.
UM, DO WE DEPRECIATE, OR DO WE, DO WE DO ANY DEPRECIATION AROUND THE ASSETS OF LAMPS AND LIGHTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT? IS THAT NOT A NORMAL ACCOUNTING PRACTICE? DO WE, WE DEPRECIATE ALL OF OUR ASSETS, SO I, WE, I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY, UM, WHAT THAT WOULD BE, BUT I, I CAN CONFIRM, UM, SINCE WE OWN THEM, I WOULD SAY YES, BUT I CAN CONFIRM THAT.
UH, I JUST NEEDED TO KNOW IF IT WAS A YES OR NO, BUT, UH, AND, BUT IS IT LAMPS? WE DE DO WE DEPRECIATE LAMPS ON OUR STREETS? YES, WE DEPRECIATE ALL OF OUR ASSETS.
UH, AND THEN, UH, I HAVE A QUESTION ACTUALLY FOR, I'M SORRY, YOUR NAME WAS ED ESPINOZA? UH, I'M SORRY IF I DID.
I INTRODUCED MYSELF, ED, ED ESPINOZA WITH FRANCISCAN ASSOCIATES.
UM, UH, IN THE REPORT, UH, WE DID NOT RECEIVE SORT OF THE FINANCIAL MODELS THAT WERE USED AND SPOKEN TO TODAY.
WILL WE GET ACCESS TO THOSE FINANCIAL MODELS? YES.
SO THE BENEFIT ANALYSIS, THE BUDGET, ALL OF THAT IS REQUIRED TO BE, UM, INCLUDED IN THE ENGINEER'S REPORT THAT'S REQUIRED TO BE PREPARED, UH, PER PROP TWO 18.
SO, UH, THAT, THAT'S THE STUDY.
I'M, I'M ASSUMING THAT, THAT YOU'RE, YOU'RE REFERRING TO IT, IT WOULD BE THAT, THAT ENGINEER'S REPORT, IT WOULD BE, UH, BROUGHT FORTH FOR CITY COUNCIL AT THE APRIL 7TH, UH, CITY COUNCIL MEETING.
BUT, UH, WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF, OF PREPARING THE INITIAL DRAFTS AND, AND, UH, WE'D BE HAPPY TO CIRCULATE IT AHEAD OF TIME.
UH, JUST TO ROUND OUT THE FULL ANALYSIS THAT WE HAVE HERE.
UH, THEN ALLOW ME TO GET INTO SOME MORE DETAILED QUESTIONS, UH, ON THE
[00:50:01]
COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE.THE, THE FIRST ONE THAT I HAVE IS, UH, AROUND PRECEDENTS.
WHICH OTHER CITIES NEAR US HAVE GONE THROUGH THIS EXERCISE, AND WHAT WAS THE OUTCOME OF SAID EXERCISE? SURE.
THAT'S A, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
SO, UM, DUBLIN IS NOT UNIQUE BY ANY MEANS IN, IN TERMS OF THE UNDERFUNDING WITH LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS.
A LOT OF THEM, MANY OF THEM, MAYBE MOST OF THEM WERE FORMED, UH, PRIOR TO PROP TWO 18.
AND THIS, THIS, UH, NO ANNUAL ASSESSMENT ESCALATOR THING IS, IS VERY COMMON.
UM, SO WE'RE WORKING WITH CITIES ALL ACROSS THE STATE IN ADDRESSING THESE.
THIS, UH, IN 2025 ALONE, WE ASSISTED SIX CITIES, UM, WITH PROP TWO 18 EFFORTS.
THE ONE THAT, UM, IS, COMES TO MIND, UH, FIRST IS THE CITY OF DANVILLE, UH, OR TOWN OF DANVILLE, UH, EXCUSE ME.
UH, WE, UH, WE ASSISTED THEM, UH, WITH A VERY SIMILAR, UH, VERY SIMILAR PROCESS.
WE, THEY HAD A, A DISTRICT, UH, THAT WAS SWORN BACK IN 83, ACTUALLY, UH, EXACTLY, UH, THE SAME, SAME YEAR AS THIS, THIS ONE, UM, THAT DISTRICT WAS ACTUALLY MORE COMPREHENSIVE.
IT INCLUDED, UH, LANDSCAPING, PARKS, AND STREET LIGHTING.
AND WE SUCCESSFULLY, UH, UH, APPROVED, UH, COORDINATED, UH, IN, IN, IN EXTENSIVE COLLABORATION WITH THEIR, THEIR TEAM.
UH, GREAT, GREAT TEAM OVER, UH, OVER THERE.
AND, UM, AND THEIR COUNCIL, UH, TO APPROVE THE CITYWIDE, UH, NEW LAD THAT REPLACED THEIR EXISTING ONE THAT, THAT, UM, THAT, UH, WAS FORMED BACK IN 83.
SO THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF A CITYWIDE EFFORT.
THIS YEAR, UH, WE'RE WORKING WITH A COUPLE OTHER CITIES, UH, SIMILAR TO DUBLIN, UH, THAT WE'RE WORKING ON CITYWIDE EFFORTS AS, AS WELL, AND, AND THEY'RE UNDERWAY.
UM, LAST YEAR WE WERE, UM, UH, WE WERE, UH, FIVE FOR FIVE, ANTHONY, I BELIEVE WE WERE FIVE FOR FIVE, UH, THE CITY, UH, OF HERCULES.
UH, WE APPROVED THAT, THAT WAS FOR ONE NEIGHBORHOOD, 800 HOMES.
UH, WE, UM, THERE THOUGH IT WAS ALSO A MORE COMPREHENSIVE DISTRICT.
IT INCLUDED LANDSCAPING, PARKS, STREET LIGHTING, UH, BUT AGAIN, THAT WAS ONE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 800 HOMES.
WE APPROVED, UH, UM, AN ASSESSMENT IN, UM, IN, IN CLAYTON, UH, A GEOLOGIC HAZARD ABATEMENT, UH, ASSESSMENT THAT WAS ALSO APPROVED LAST YEAR.
UM, CLOVIS, THAT WAS AN ASSESSMENT INCREASE.
UH, THERE WAS, FOR LANDSCAPING, IT WASN'T STREET LIGHTING, BUT, UH, WE APPROVED AN A, AN ASSESSMENT INCREASE IN THE CITY OF CLOVIS.
UM, MISSING, MISSING A COUPLE
SO, UH, SO, UM, ALL THAT IS TO SAY THAT, UM, THEY, THESE EFFORTS CAN BE SUCCESSFUL, BUT EVERY CITY'S DIFFERENT.
UM, BUT THE RESULTS HAVE BEEN GOOD AS OF, AS OF LAST YEAR AND, AND THE, AND THE, THE EFFORTS WE'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN.
AND, UM, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD, WE HAD POSITIVE RESULTS ON THIS.
UH, NEXT QUESTION IS, UM, I WANNA TALK ABOUT THE, UH, COMMENT MADE ABOUT THE CPI.
AND, AND, UH, LOOKING AT THE ESCALATOR AND MATCHING IT TO THE CPI, UH, WHY CHOOSE THAT OVER, LET'S SAY, THE STANDARD INFLATION RATE? THE, WHEN YOU SAY THE, THE STANDARD INFLATION RATE? UM, THE, THE REASON THE, THE CONSUMER PRICE PRICE INDEX, UM, IS USED FROM, THAT'S PUBLISHED BY THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE REGIONAL, UM, INDICES.
AND SO THE INDEX THAT IS COMMONLY USED FOR THIS AREA, FOR IN, IN ALAMEDA COUNTY IS THE, IS THE SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA.
UM, AND SO THAT IS COMMONLY, UM, UH, PERCEIVED TO BE THE, ON AVERAGE, THE INFLATION RATE IN THIS REGION, IN THIS AREA.
AND SO, UH, WHEN YOU SAY THE, THE STANDARD, UH, INFLATION RATE, CAN, CAN YOU MAYBE ELABORATE? THE, THE ONE THAT THE FED USES? RIGHT.
AND, AND GIVES US ACROSS FOR THE ENTIRE COUNTRY.
UH, MANY PEOPLE ARE MORE ACCUSTOMED TO HEARING ABOUT THE STANDARD INFLATION RATE, THEN CPI MM-HMM
UH, SOME OF US OBVIOUSLY KNOW MORE THE, KNOW THE DIFFERENCE.
SO I'M ASKING THE QUESTION IN CLARIFICATION FOR THE PUBLIC, UH, GOT IT.
JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE DIFFERENCE IS.
THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION, COUNCILMAN MIRANDA.
SO MAYBE TO SIMPLIFY THE, THE ANSWER A LITTLE BIT FURTHER, SO THE, THE INDEX IS A FED, IT'S THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS.
SO IT'S A, IT'S A FEDERAL AGENCY.
THE INDEX THAT IS USED THOUGH IS A REGIONAL INDEX THAT THAT'S PUBLISHED.
UH, TWO MORE QUESTIONS, THEN I'LL HAND IT BACK ABSOLUTELY.
UH, THE SECOND QUESTION I HAVE IS, UM, I AM, UH, I'M ACTUALLY CURIOUS ABOUT THE WAITING.
[00:55:01]
THE, THE WEIGHTING OF THE VOTES, UH, THAT CONCEPT OF WAITING COULD BE PERCEIVED AS UNFAIR IN SOME CASES, UM, OR IT COULD BE FAIR IN OTHER CASES.SO IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND, GIMME TWO MORE MINUTES ON WHY WAITING MAKES SENSE IN OUR PARTICULAR CASE AND HOW THAT, UM, HOW THAT CAN BE PERCEIVED BY OUR RESIDENTS.
AND THAT'S A, THAT'S ALSO A GREAT QUESTION.
SO, UM, WHY WAITING IS, UH, THE SIMPLE ANSWER IS BECAUSE IT'S REQUIRED, PROP TWO 18 REQUIRES THAT FOR ASSESSMENTS, THE BALLOTS RETURN BE WEIGHTED BY, BY PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS.
SO THIS ISN'T UNIQUE TO DUBLIN OR, OR THIS, THIS PROPOSAL, IT'S CITYWIDE, OR SORRY, STATEWIDE.
UM, EVERY CITY, EVERY COUNTY, ANYWHERE WE FORM A LADDER OR ANY OTHER TYPE OF ASSESSMENT, WE MUST WAIT THE BALLOTS.
UM, TO YOUR POINT ABOUT, UM, HOW DO WE CLARIFY IT FOR PROPERTY OWNERS AND, AND YOUR, YOUR, UM, YOUR COMMUNITY, UM, IT'S, YOU KNOW, ASSESSMENTS.
THE, THE, THE VOTING PROCESS IS DEFINITELY VERY DIFFERENT THAN THE TYPICAL, UH, VOTING PROCESS AT THE BALLOT BOX.
AND FOR THAT REASON, AND IT'S ALSO PROPERTY OWNERS THAT, UM, CAN VOTE, WHICH IS VERY DIFFERENT THAN REGISTERED VOTERS.
AND SO IT'S JUST A, A LOT OF, UM, INFORMATIVE, YOU KNOW, JUST, UM, DISSEMINATING INFORMATION TO YOUR, YOUR CONSTITUENTS IN THAT REGARD AS FAR AS IT'S REQUIRED AND ALSO HOW IT WORKS.
BUT, BUT IT'S A REQUIREMENT, SO THERE'S NO, THERE'S NO, UM, THERE'S NO WAY AROUND IT WHEN IT COMES TO, TO ASSESSMENTS.
I, IF I MAY, I JUST, CAN I GIVE AN EXAMPLE? SURE.
SO IF I OWN A 6,000 SQUARE FOOT MCMANSION YES.
VERSUS A 1000 SQUARE FOOT BUNGALOW, I GET SIX TIMES THE NUMBER OF WEIGHT IN MY VOTE.
UM, SO, UH, PROP TWO 18, WE, WE CAN'T, UM, SO FOR ONE, WE CAN'T SOLELY LOOK AT PROPERTY VALUES AS A, AS A, AS A REASON TO, OR, OR A, A FACTOR IN TERMS OF ASSESSING PROPERTY WHEN IT COMES TO, AND GENERALLY THAT THAT'S KIND OF WHAT THAT, THAT DISPARITY WOULD BE LIKE 6,000 HOME VERSUS, OR 6,000 SQUARE FOOT HOME VERSUS A THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT HOME.
SO GENERALLY, WHEN IT COMES TO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, WHEN IT COMES TO ASSESSMENTS, IT, IT'S REALLY, UM, ON A PER UNIT BASIS, IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT ON A, ON A PER BUILDING SQUARE FOOT BASIS, NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.
HOWEVER, UM, AS WE SAW IN ONE OF THE EARLIER SLIDES, WE DO ACCOUNT FOR, FOR BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE, BUT WHEN IT COMES TO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, UM, SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WOULD PAY THE SAME CONDOS ARE PROPOSED TO PAY ABOUT 75% OF A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.
AND THEN IF YOU'RE A, A, A MULTIFAMILY, UH, PROPERTY, APARTMENT COMPLEXES, DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES, YOU PAY LESS PER UNIT THAN BOTH CONDO AND SINGLE FAMILY.
SO REALLY, THE, THE DIFFERENTIATING FACTORS ARE SINGLE FAMILY CONDOMINIUM, UM, AND THEN ALSO, UM, APARTMENTS, UM, IF YOU HAVE AN A DU, UM, THOSE ARE ASSESSED, UH, A A LITTLE MORE.
UM, BUT, BUT IT'S NOT THE, THE 6,000 AND THE 1000, UM, IN THEORY WOULD, WOULD PAY THE SAME.
SO IT'S IT'S TYPE OF HOME TYPE OF HOME.
AND THEN THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE, AND I'LL HAND IT BACK OVER TO MY COLLEAGUES HERE, IS THAT, UM, THE PROPOSED, UM, $400,000, UM, INCREASE, RIGHT? UH, I HEARD YOU SAY THAT THAT WOULD ALSO START TO BUILD A RESERVE FOR THE FUTURE.
WHICH I THINK MAKES VERY REASONABLE SENSE.
UM, JUST, BUT I'M, I'M GONNA DO THE MATH REALLY QUICK IF I MAY.
SO THE COMMENT MADE WAS THAT WE WOULD HA WE WOULD HAVE A $150,000 DEFICIT, RIGHT? CORRECT.
UH, AND THEN WE WOULD POTENTIALLY PASSING THE CONSOLIDATED 83 DASH 180 9 DASH ONE, UH, TOGETHER, UH, CONSOLIDATING.
THEN WE WOULD THEN EVENTUALLY HAVE A POSITIVE OUTCOME OF $400,000 IN 26 27.
IS THAT, OKAY, SO THEN, UH, THAT WOULD LEAVE US WITH A $250,000 RESERVE BE BEGINNING OF A RESERVE, RIGHT? UH, YES.
LET ME, LET ME CLARIFY, UH, A, A COUPLE THINGS.
SO THE, THE 150,000, UH, DEFICIT IS, UM, EXISTING, UM, EXISTING BUDGET, E EXISTING, UM, UM, UM, LIGHTS AND ALL THAT.
WHAT WE DID WHEN WE CAME UP WITH THAT AGGREGATE 1.2 MILLION THAT YOU SAW, WE ACTUALLY ANTICIPATED THE, UM, STREETLIGHTS BEING
[01:00:01]
TURNED OVER TO THE CITY.THERE'S, THERE'S, UH, HUNDREDS OF STREETLIGHTS, UH, RIGHT NOW THAT ARE IN, IN PROCESS, MEANING NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE TURNED OVER TO THE CITY.
SO THE BUDGET IS, IS EXPECTED TO, UM, TO INCREASE IN, IN CERTAIN AREAS IN 91 AREAS.
SO, UM, THAT 400,000 IS A COMBINATION OF THE BUDGET BEING SLIGHTLY HIGHER, AND THEN ALSO, UM, ACCUMULATION OF RESERVES, AND THEN ALSO, UM, ACCOUNTING FOR, UH, YOU KNOW, SOME CONTINGENCY FACTORS AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BECAUSE WE ONLY GET ONE, ONE OPPORTUNITY TO ESTABLISH THE, THE NEW ASSESSMENT.
IT'S A COMBINATION OF, OF A COUPLE THINGS THERE.
UH, I CAN APPRECIATE ALL THAT HARD WORK YOU WENT THROUGH SITTING THERE AND GOING, MAN, THAT'S A CALCULUS EQUATION,
UM, BUT I DO HAVE JUST SOME CLARIFICATION QUESTIONS.
UM, I'LL START OFF BY, UH, BY ASKING, UH, ON 99 DASH ONE, ARE YOU PROJECTING AN OP OPERATING DEFICIT AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE? I, I WAS NOT CLEAR FROM YOUR SLIDE, AND THEY, I'M GETTING TO A POINT MM-HMM
UM, THAT'S A GREAT QUE UH, QUESTION COUNCIL MEMBER.
SO, NO, UM, WE'RE, WE'RE NOT, UM, WE'RE NOT EXPECTING A, A, AN OPERATING DEFICIT IN THE IMMINENT FUTURE.
UM, WITH THAT SAID, THE WAY 99 1 IS SET UP RIGHT NOW IS ITS FUNDING STREETLIGHTS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF, OF THE DISTRICT.
AND THAT, THAT'S THE DISTINCTION.
UM, BECAUSE 99 1, IF YOU LOOK AT THOSE BOUNDARIES, IT INCLUDES MAJOR ROADWAYS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND SO WHEN WE LOOK AT THE PICTURE HOLISTICALLY THE WAY, UM, WHEN WE ASSIGN THE SHARE OF COST TO 99.1, IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT THAN, THAN THE WAY IT IT IS TODAY.
BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, AS IT CURRENTLY SITS TODAY, THE, THE ANSWER IS NO IN TERMS OF THE AN IN IMMINENT OPERATING DEFICIT.
I, I WAS TRYING TO GET A, A GRASP WITH AND TO, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER MARTA'S POINT, UM, I THINK WE'RE USED TO LOOKING AT SPREADSHEETS AND LOOKING AT, OKAY, HOW THIS ALL FLOWS.
SO SOMETIMES IT'S HARD WHEN WE'VE GOT ALL THESE DATA POINTS HERE.
AND ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS, I WAS TRYING TO GRASP WAS, UH, YOU HAVE 99 1, WHICH, UH, WHICH IS, UM, WHICH IS 35% OF THE SENATE IS CITY, WHICH IS NON, PRIMARILY NON DECORATIVE.
DON'T JUST SAY NO OR YES, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT GOING ON HERE.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THE ASSESSMENT.
UH, AND AGAIN, IT WOULD'VE BEEN GREAT IF WE HAD, THERE'S A LITTLE TABLE HERE,
IF YOU COULD GO BACK TO THAT, JUST SURE.
TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE THEN IT GETS DOWN TO, OKAY, NET RESULT IS WE'RE GONNA ASSESS AND DO ALL THESE ASSESSMENTS.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND THAT.
THAT, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
SO, UH, THIS SLIDE FOUR, UM, 83 1 IS ABOUT 55% OF THE CITY.
SO THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE HIGHEST, UH, ASSESSMENT TIER IN THEORY.
THE, THE 30, 35%, A LITTLE OVER A THIRD AND CCF D 2017 DASH ONE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE UNAFFECTED BY THIS BECAUSE, UH, THEY'RE PAYING FOR STREET LIGHTING THROUGH CFD 2017 DASH ONE.
THEY WOULD NOT RECEIVE A NOTICE IN BALLOT, BUT THEY, THEY REPRESENT ABOUT 10% OF THE CITY.
AND THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT I UNDERSTOOD.
SO IF WE WERE TO, UH, JUST, UH, KIND OF PUT THAT BACK, YOU'RE BASICALLY SAYING, HEY, LOOK, BASED ON OUR, UM, A COMBINATION, IF YOU DO A COMBINATION, UH, YOU, YOU'VE GOT, UH, THE, UH, 99 DASH ONE, THEIR RATES ARE GONNA GO UP FROM 19 BUCKS ROUNDED TO $34.
AND THEN, UH, THE, UH, ONE AGAIN, SORRY, BRAIN DEAD, UH, 99 DASH ONE IS WHAT I DIDN'T MEAN TO SAY.
I MEAN, 1983 IS GOING UP AND 99 DASH ONE IS GOING UP BASICALLY WITHOUT, WITHOUT THE CAPS AND EVERYTHING ELSE IS BASICALLY GOING UP FROM 47 TO 59 BUCKS.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THAT.
THE, THE ONLY CLARIFICATION I'LL MAKE TO THAT IS THE PRIVATE NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD BE PAYING THE 17.
UM, THAT'S, THAT'S THE ONLY, AND, AND THOSE, THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS COULD BE IN EITHER AREA.
NON DECORATIVE OR, OR DECORATIVE.
AND, AND THAT'S SOMETIMES HARD FOR ME, RIGHT.
FOR ME TO ABSORB THAT AS I SEE A LITTLE A TABLE OR SOMETHING.
UM, AND GETTING BACK TO THE FUN STUFF, UH, I'M GOING TO LEVERAGE OFF OF, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER MARTA'S, UH, QUESTION ON, ON THE ACCELERATOR.
UH, HAVE YOU, UM, I, I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE METHODOLOGY.
HAVE YOU CONSIDERED, UH, OTHER TYPES OF, UH, INDEXES, UH, THAT MIGHT BE, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A STANDARD MM-HMM
AND THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE GETTING ALL THE REVENUE GENERATION
[01:05:01]
BASED ON THAT.BUT I, I'M JUST WONDERING, WERE THERE ANY OTHER CONSIDERATIONS, ANY OTHER INDEXES THAT YOU WERE LOOKING AT? AND, UM, UH, PART B TO THAT IS THE CAP PART.
UM, I, IN 99 DASH ONE, YOU'VE GOT, YOU'VE GOT A MAX MM-HMM
SO IN THIS NEW ASSESSMENT, I, I'M, YOU CAN TELL ME IF I JUST MISSED IT, BUT IS THERE A PROPOSAL FOR, FOR A MAX ON THIS NEW
SO YEAH, SOMETIMES MY NOTES ARE JUST, SO THE MAX IS, THE MAX IS 59.
WE'RE, WE'RE ESSENTIALLY, UM, PROPOSING A, A, A DROP.
THE, THE AMOUNT LEVIED GOES UP, AS YOU SAID, UH, FROM THE 47 80 TO THE, THE 59.
BUT THE MAXIMUM GOES, UH, WOULD GO, WOULD GO DOWN.
SO THE, SO THE, UH, ESCALATION METHODOLOGY WOULD BASICALLY BE CONSISTENT WITH AS FAR AS THE PROPOSED ON A COMBO WITH WHAT WE HAVE MORE OR LESS WITH, WITH 99 DASH IT WOULD, IT WOULD BE, IT WOULD BE DIFFERENT.
I WOULD SAY THAT YOUR EXISTING 99 1 HAS ONE OF THE MOST, UH, UNIQUE, UH, ANNUAL ESCALATORS.
IT COMBINES, UH, UH, AN, AN INDEX, UH, AND ALSO, UH, A, A BUDGET INCREASE IN, IN, UH, YOUR STREET LIGHTING BUDGET.
IT'S, IT'S LIKE A COMBINED CALCULATION.
IT'S DEFINITELY NOT, NOT, NOT THE TYPICAL OR, OR THE COMMONLY SEEN, UH, UH, UM, UM, ANNUAL ESCALATOR.
BUT TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, IT, IT'S SIMILAR, RIGHT? IT, IT, THE ASSESSMENT GOES UP BY, BY CPI, UH, GOING BACK TO YOUR, YOUR ORIGINAL QUESTION IS, UH, ABOUT DID WE CONSIDER OTHER INDICES MM-HMM
UH, THERE'S OTHERS THAT ARE OUT THERE.
THE CONSTRUCTION COST INDEX THAT'S PUBLISHED BY THE E AND R, THE ENGINEERING NEWS RECORD, UM, THAT'S USED FROM, FROM TIME TO TIME.
USUALLY WE SEE IT ON, ON SEWER, UH, IMPROVEMENTS AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, THE, THE BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS IS JUST THE MOST, IT'S WIDELY ACCEPTED, UH, EASILY ACCESSIBLE BY ALL, UM, IT'S THE MOST CREDIBLE, UH, LET'S JUST SAY INDEX OUT THERE.
AND IN TERMS OF, YOU KNOW, WHAT, WHAT IS, UH, WIDELY, UM, ACCESSIBLE, LET'S JUST SAY.
UM, AND THEN GENERALLY SPEAKING, WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS, IS OF COURSE, FROM YEAR TO YEAR, THE PUBLISHED, UH, INDEX NUMBER IS GOING TO BE DIFFERENT DEPENDING UPON WHEN, WHAT INDEX YOU USE.
BUT OVER THE LONG TERM, IT, IT, THE, THE TREND IS GENERALLY SIMILAR.
UM, SO WHAT WE SAW BEFORE, INFLATION WENT THROUGH THE ROOF, THE LAST, UH, UH, YOU KNOW, FEW TO A HANDFUL OF YEARS OR SO, THE 10 YEAR AVERAGE WAS ABOUT 3%.
SO SOME YEARS IT WAS IN THE TWOS, SOME YEARS IT WAS IN THE THREES, FOUR MM-HMM
ONES, BUT 10 YEAR AVERAGE WAS, WAS IN THE, THE 3%, UH, FOR, FOR THE LONG TERM.
AND SO, GENERALLY SPEAKING, YOU KNOW, THE, ALL THE INDICES AT THE END, YOU, YOU GET A, A SIMILAR TREND.
IN THAT REGARD, PARDON ME IF I WENT BRAIN DEAD, BUT, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU ESTABLISH A BASE RATE AND THEN YOU'VE GOT A MAX OF WHATEVER, IT'S 59 IN THIS, IN THIS CASE MM-HMM
UM, WHAT IN THE FORMULA IS CREATING THAT RANGE? THAT'S A GREAT, YOU GOT 49 AND YOU GOT THE 47 80, AND YOU GOT 59, AND SO YOU GOT THIS BASE RATE THING.
AND, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE TO GET IT TOO FAR DOWN
SO I'M GONNA, I'M GONNA TRY TO EXPLAIN IT WITHOUT, WITHOUT GETTING TOO MUCH INTO THE WEEDS.
AND I'M GONNA TRY MY BEST
UH, SO, UM, IT'S, IT'S TWO THINGS, RIGHT? SO THERE'S THE MAJOR ROADWAY COMPONENT AND THE, THE LOCAL COMPONENT.
SO THE FIRST THING WE DID IS WE LOOKED AT WHAT PORTION OF THE CITY'S BUDGET IS MAJOR ROADWAY, STREET LIGHTING VERSUS LOCAL.
SO WHAT THAT CAME DOWN TO IS COUNT MM-HMM
SO WE HAVE, UH, WE USED GIS COORDINATED WITH YOUR CITY TEAM TO, TO OBTAIN ALL THE CITY'S STREET LIGHTING WITHIN, UH, CITY LIMITS THAT THE CITY'S BEING BILLED FOR.
WE, WE OBTAINED THAT REPORT FROM PG E CONFIRMED ALL THAT.
UM, AND THEN, SO WE, WE KNOW THE COUNT ON, ON, ON LIGHTS ALONG MAJOR ROADWAYS.
WE KNOW THE COUNT IN DECORATIVE AND NON DECORATIVE AREAS.
THEN FROM THERE, WHAT WE DID IS WE ASSIGNED BENEFIT FACTORS BASED ON THIS SLIDE HERE.
SO IT'S A COMBINATION OF STREETLIGHT COUNTS, LOOKING AT SEGREGATING BUDGETS BASED ON THOSE COUNTS, AND THEN, AND THEN, UH, APPLYING BENEFIT FACTORS THAT DRIVE THO THOSE, THOSE ENDGAME PROPOSED ASSESSMENTS.
SO THAT'S WHAT KIND OF CREATED THE DIFFERENCE.
I HAVE TWO MORE FUN QUESTIONS FOR YOU.
UH, IN, UM, OPTION, UH, IN, IN OPTION TWO, UM, ARE THERE COST EFFICIENCIES, UM,
[01:10:02]
EFFICIENCIES IN GENERAL IN SELECTING AN OPTION TWO OVER A COMBO, UH, EFFICIENCIES FOR THE LONG TERM? UH, DEFINITELY NOT.UH, BECAUSE YOU, YOU HAVE TWO DISTRICTS AND, AND EVERYTHING THAT COMES WITH THAT.
UH, THE ONLY, UM, LET'S JUST SAY COST, UH, EFFICIENCY SAVINGS IS, IS UPFRONT ONE TIME.
UH, IN THE NOTICING AND BALLOTING BECAUSE THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN, UH, THE 99 1 AREA WOULD NOT RECEIVE A NOTICE IN BALLOT.
SO IT'S, IT, IT'D BE A ONE-TIME, UM, UH, SAVINGS.
BUT IN THE LONG TERM, UH, FOR THE CITY, UH, COST EFFICIENCIES, DE DEFINITELY, I WOULD SAY NO ON, ON THAT.
AND, AND I DID SKIP ONE QUESTION, APOLOGIZE.
UM, TECHNICALLY OR LEGALLY SPEAKING, WHY WOULD, UH, TWO 17 NOT BE INCLUDED IN THIS, THIS COMBINATION? IS THERE SOMETHING, UH, PART OF THAT STRUCTURE THAT WOULD PROHIBIT US FROM INCLUDING THEM IN THIS, UH, OPTION CFD 2017? THE DUBLIN CROSS THING? YEAH.
THE, THE CITY COULD, UM, THERE'S NOTHING THAT, THAT, UH, PRECLUDES THE CITY FROM INCLUDING THEM IN THIS EFFORT.
THE REASON THEY'RE NOT INCLUDED IS SIMPLY BECAUSE, UH, THEY'RE A NEWER DEVELOPMENT WITH THE CFD SPECIAL TAX, THE CITY CAN GENERATE ENOUGH FUNDING TO COVER STREET LIGHTING.
UM, AND SO ALL WE'RE GONNA DO IS WE'RE GONNA COORDINATE WITH THEIR CITY TEAM EVERY, EVERY YEAR TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE PAYING THEIR SHARE OF THE MAJOR ROADWAYS, RIGHT? SO THEY'RE GETTING ASSIGNED THEIR SHARE, THEY'RE PAYING IT THROUGH THE SPECIAL TAX, AND THEN FROM THERE, THE SPECIAL TAX JUST PAYS THEIR LOCAL, UH, LOCAL LIGHTING.
SO, UH, THEY JUST, UM, THERE'S NOTHING PRECLUDING THE CITY FROM DOING IT.
THERE'S JUST NO, IS THERE ANY BENEFIT THAT THAT'S WHERE I, AND UH, THE OTHER THING IS THAT BECAUSE IT'S A CFD, YEAH.
ALL THE ASSESSMENT, ALL, ALL THE THINGS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, BENEFIT NEXUS ASSESSMENT, ALL THAT DOES NOT, DOES NOT APPLY.
SO, UM, AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS, I WAS FOCUSING, IT'S A LITTLE MORE TECHNICALLY, UH, IT IT'S DIFFERENT.
AND, UH, FROM A FUNDING AND JUST PRACTICALITY, LEGAL, UH, STANDPOINT, THERE'S, THERE'S REALLY NO MATERIAL REASON.
LET'S JUST SAY TO, AND THEN THIS IS ONE LAST QUESTION, I PROMISE YOU, UM, JUST ROUNDING IT UP, AND IT MIGHT BE KIND OF A QUESTION FOR, FOR THE CITY AND YOU, BUT WHEN WE LOOK AT, UM, YOU, JOHN MENTIONED, UH, DEPRECIATION.
I, I THINK I KNOW WHERE HE WAS GOING ON THAT.
UM, BUT WE TALK ABOUT TECHNOLOGIES AND EFFICIENCIES AND, UM, HAS THE CITY DEPLOYED, UM, UH, THE LATEST AND GREATEST IN TERMS OF LIGHTING STRUCTURES AND, UM, YOU KNOW, SO, SO WE EXTEND THE, LIKE, LIFE OF THESE THINGS.
SO THE COST, SO IT MIGHT IMPROVE THE COST.
I MEAN, HAVE WE, HAVE WE DONE ANYTHING LIKE A BIG PICTURE QUESTION? SURE.
I'LL, I'LL, I'LL, UM, I'LL, I'LL MAYBE TAKE A STAB AT THE INITIAL RESPONSE, BUT THEN I'LL DEFER TO YOUR, YOUR CITY STAFF TEAM.
'CAUSE THEY CAN PROBABLY GIVE YOU A, A MORE, UH, DETAILED ANSWER.
UH, I DO KNOW THAT, UH, THE CITY HAS UNDERGONE, UH, LED, UH, LAMP UPGRADES, UH, IN, IN, IN RECENT YEARS.
AND AS I'M SURE YOU'RE, YOU'RE AWARE, UM, LED LAMPS, UH, DO PROVIDE, UM, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF ENERGY SAVINGS.
THEY, THEY TYPICALLY HAVE LONGER, UH, UH, LIFESPANS AND, AND ALL THAT.
SO, SO FROM A, A LAMP, UH, STANDPOINT AND, AND ENERGY AND, AND PG E BUILDING AND ALL THAT, I, I, I DO, UH, BELIEVE, UM, THAT THE CITY HAS, HAS DONE THAT.
WHETHER THAT'S FULLY COMPLETE OR NOT.
I'M, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE IF THERE'S MORE TO DO, BUT, UH, PERHAPS WOULD, WOULD THAT, WOULD THAT HELP DRIVE, UM, A SOLUTION TO THIS AS WELL GOING FORWARD? I THINK THAT'S WHAT I'M GETTING AT.
WELL, I, I'LL, I'LL JUST JUMP IN.
WE ARE CONSTANTLY, SO WE REPLACE ALL OF OUR EQUIPMENT THAT WE OWN, RIGHT? SO, UM, WE'RE CONSTANTLY LOOKING AT NEWER AND BETTER TECHNOLOGIES THAT ARE GONNA SAVE US COSTS.
UM, LAMPS ARE, OR AN EASY THING TO SORT OF UNDERSTAND, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S THE NEWEST, LATEST AND GREATEST THING.
SO IF WE CAN ACHIEVE SAVINGS THERE, WE ABSOLUTELY WILL.
UM, AND THE DISTRICT, UH, THE FUNDING MECHANISM PAYS FOR, UM, MAINTENANCE AND, AND REPLACEMENTS THAT WE WOULD GO THROUGH.
GOT A FEW, BUT THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTIONS.
UH, THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
UM, SO I THINK I'M MISSING A NUMBER.
UH, YOU MENTIONED 1.2 PROPOSED BUDGET FOR 26 27 MM-HMM
UH, YOU MENTIONED 12% OF THAT WAS MAJOR ROADWAYS.
UM, BUT THEN I THOUGHT I SAW YOU PUT 80 5K, WHICH IS OBVIOUSLY NOT 12% OF 1.2.
THAT, THAT'S A, THAT'S A GREAT, A GREAT QUESTION.
SO, UH, LET, LET'S, UH, LET'S GO BACK TO THE, THE FIRST SLIDE AND LEMME SEE IF I CAN, I CAN CLARIFY THIS FOR YOU.
SO THE 1.2 MILLION IS THE AGGREGATE BUDGET, ALL STREET LIGHTING IN THE CITY, MAJOR ROADWAY AND LOCAL RIGHT.
[01:15:01]
SOLELY APPLIES TO THE MAJOR ROADWAY STREET LIGHTING PORTION OF THE BUDGET, WHICH ISN'T THE ENTIRE 1.2.IT'S, UM, I'M GONNA GET THE EXACT NUMBERS, UH, WRONG HERE, BUT IT, IT'S PROBABLY ABOUT HALF OR MAYBE A LITTLE LESS, A LITTLE MORE THAN HALF.
SO THE 12% IS THE MAJOR, THE STREET LIGHTING ALONG MAJOR ROADWAYS PORTION OF THE 1.2.
AND THEN THE REMAINING, UH, PORTION OF THE 1.2 OF THAT, OF THE AGGREGATE BUDGET CORRESPONDS TO THE LOCAL, THE STREET LIGHTING ALONG LOCAL ROADWAYS.
AND THAT'S WHAT, UM, UH, GETS THAT, THAT, UH, MUCH LOWER 2% GENERAL BENEFIT APPLIED.
SO THE, THE 85 GRAND, 80 GRAND IS, IS THE, UM, LET'S JUST SAY, UH, WEIGHTED OR, OR KIND OF COMBINED NUMBER WHEN WE, WHEN WE DISSECT THE BUDGET IN THAT WAY.
UM, THE, ON THE ESCALATOR, UH, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE THE, THE LEVIED AND THE, THE MAX.
UH, IS THE MAX COMPOUNDING, LIKE, DOES THAT GET TO ESCALATE WHATEVER CPI IS EVERY YEAR? OKAY.
AND THEN BASED ON THE ENGINEERING REPORT, THAT COULD BE LOWER, LIKE THE, THE LEVIED AMOUNT IS, CAN BE LOWERED E EXACTLY RIGHT.
SO EVERY YEAR, UH, PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND AND LIGHTING ACT OF, OF 1972, UH, WE'RE GONNA BRING FORWARD THE ENGINEERS REPORT FOR YOUR APPROVAL.
IT'LL HAVE A BUDGET, THE RECOMMENDED ASSESSMENT RATE AT, AT CITY COUNCIL'S DISCRETION, YOU CAN LEVY AT THE MAX OR ANY NUMBER LOWER ANY GIVEN FISCAL YEAR.
UM, AND THEN DEFINITION CLARIFICATION ON A DEFINITION, YOU MENTIONED, UH, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES AND CONDOS.
COULD YOU EXPLAIN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A CONDO AND MULTIFAMILY RESIDENCE? SURE.
UM, YES, THAT, THAT'S, UH, A GOOD QUESTION.
SO, CONDOMINIUMS IN APARTMENTS, UM, A LOT OF TIMES THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE COMMONLY, UH, LOOKED AT AS THE SAME.
THE, THE PRIMARY DIFFERENCE IS THAT CONDOMINIUMS HAVE THEIR OWN ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER, MEANING, UH, ANY, ANY PERSON CAN BUY A CONDOMINIUM.
IF, IF YOU, WHEN YOU GET YOUR PROPERTY TAX BILL, YOU HAVE AN ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER, AN INDIVIDUAL OWNS THAT CONDOMINIUM.
AN APARTMENT OR, OR AN MFR IS A ONE PARCEL WHERE MULTIPLE UNITS ARE ON THE ONE PARCEL.
SO DUPLEX, TRIPLEX, APARTMENT COMPLEX, IT'S ONE PARCEL WITH MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL UNITS.
AND THE REASON, UH, THERE'S A DIFFERENCE IN THE ASSESSMENT IS 'CAUSE CONDOMINIUMS, BECAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE, UM, INDIVIDUALLY OWNED GENERALLY ARE, ARE LARGER ON AVERAGE.
UH, ON, UH, ARE LARGER THAN YOUR TYPICAL APARTMENT OR DUPLEX UNIT, TRIPLEX UNIT, UH, THINGS LIKE THAT.
UM, YOU MENTIONED A CURRENT, UH, YOU, YOU MENTIONED A CURRENT POSITIVE BALANCE ON THE 99, UH, UH, UH, DISTRICT.
HOW DOES THE DEFICIT OF THE 83, UH, DISTRICT IMPACT THIS NEW PROPOSED, COMBINED, UH, DISTRICT OR NOT? UH, UM, HOW DOES THE DEFICIT OF 83 1 COMBINE OR, OR AFFECT, UM, UM, THE, THIS NEW PROPOSED DISTRICT, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU'RE COMING IN WITH 99 WITH A POSITIVE BALANCE MM-HMM
83 WITH THE DEFICIT WHEN THEY'RE COMBINED, HOW DOES THAT IMPACT OR, OR DOES IT NOT? UM, WELL, IT IMPACTS IT IN THE SENSE THAT WHEN WE, THIS STUDY HERE, THIS ANALYSIS LOOKED AT THE, THE, THE HOLISTIC PICTURE, RIGHT? SO THE RATES THAT WE CAME UP WITH, THOSE ARE THE RATES.
WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE, THE CURRENT STATE OF 99, 180 3 1, THE BUDGET, THE BALANCES, ALL THAT.
SO WE LOOKED AT IT HOLISTICALLY.
SO MAYBE THE SIMPLEST ANSWER IS THAT THE IMPACT IS WHAT YOU'RE SEEING TONIGHT IN THE FORM OF THE ASSESSMENTS AND, AND, AND THE PROPOSAL HERE, UH, IS, AND IS THAT COMMON FROM LIKE AN EQUITY STANDPOINT, RIGHT? SO ESSENTIALLY 99 IS COVERING THE DEFICIT FOR 83 IS, IS THE WAY I'M LOOKING AT IT.
UM, I, I, I WOULDN'T SAY THAT CURRENTLY 99 IS, IS COVERING THE, THE DEFICIT FOR 83 BECAUSE THEY'RE, THEY'RE, THEY'RE SET UP, THEY WERE SET UP FROM A DIFFERENT LENS, RIGHT? THE, THE WAY THAT THEY'RE BOTH BEING BUDGETED AND, AND, UH, THE, THE BUDGETS ARE BEING PREPARED AND EVERYTHING IS STREETLIGHTS WITHIN EACH RESPECTIVE DISTRICT, WHICH DOESN'T NECESSARILY CORRELATE TO WHICH STREETLIGHTS ALL PROPERTIES BENEFIT FROM AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO I, I WOULDN'T, I WOULDN'T SAY THAT PRESENTLY 99 1 IS SUBSIDIZING 83 1, BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, GOING BACK TO THE, THE POINTS ABOUT BRINGING METHODOLOGIES AND THE DISTRICTS UP TO CURRENT BEST PRACTICES, IF WE HAD A CLEAN SLATE AT IT, WHICH TECHNICALLY WE DO, RIGHT? THIS IS WHAT WE'RE, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, UM, WE WOULD REPLACE IT WITH SOMETHING
[01:20:01]
UNIFORM BETTER CITYWIDE.UM, AND IS, IS IT COMMONLY DONE? UH, I WOULD SAY IN CIRCUMSTANCES LIKE THIS, YES.
IT'S, IT'S THE PREFERRED OPTION IF, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY IF CIRCUMSTANCES ALLOW AND, AND ALL THAT.
BUT, UM, YOU KNOW, BEING UP TO CITY STANDARD OR, OR BEST PRACTICES AND STRENGTHENING PER PROP TWO 18 IS ALWAYS THE, THE IDEAL, THE IDEAL SCENARIO THERE.
UM, SO KIND OF CARRYING, CARRYING THAT THEME OF, OF, UH, THE 99, 83 PIECE OF IT, UM, I'M, I'M ASSUMING THEY, IF, IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS NEW DISTRICT, THEY, EVERYONE WOULD BE VOTING BOTH 90, 99 AND 83 TOGETHER, SAME BALLOT THAT THAT'S CORRECT.
EVERY BALLOT, THOUGH, IS CUSTOMIZED AND, AND SPECIFIC TO THAT PROPERTY BASED ON THE NEW PROPOSED, YES, YES.
BUT, BUT YES, EVERYBODY EXCEPT THE PRO DUBLIN CROSSINGS AND THE THE CAMP.
UM, YOU MENTIONED, UH, YOU MENTIONED EFFICIENCIES AROUND THE ADMIN FEES AND IN CONSOLIDATING INTO ONE DISTRICT, UM, WHAT WOULD THAT LOOK LIKE, YOU KNOW, BALLPARK, IN TERMS OF A EITHER PURE ADMIN FEE OR, OR TAX BILL.
WHAT, WHAT WOULD THE SAVINGS BE IF YOU HAD IT SEPARATED VERSUS COMBINED? SURE.
UH, SO THE, I I I, I DON'T KNOW IF I CAN GIVE, UM, SPECIFIC, SPECIFIC DOLLAR AMOUNTS, UH, THIS EVENING, BUT WHAT IT MEANS, UH, JUST PRACTICALLY AND, AND, UM, AND PROCEDURALLY IS IT'S, IT WOULD BE ONE ENGINEER'S REPORT THAT IS PREPARED VERSUS TWO.
UM, UH, ONE SET OF COUNCIL DOCUMENTS, THERE'S, THERE'S THREE COUNCIL MEETINGS EVERY YEAR, RIGHT? SO THERE'S THREE SETS OF COUNCIL DOCUMENTS, UM, AND, AND THE ENGINEER'S REPORT.
THERE'S ALSO THE COORDINATION WITH THE COUNTY TO LEVY ASSESSMENTS.
UM, YOU KNOW, WITH TWO DISTRICTS, IT'S, IT'S A SEPARATE PROCESS.
SO THERE'S THAT ASPECT OF IT JUST IN TERMS OF COUNCIL PROCESS, ENGINEERS REPORT, ALL THAT.
AND THEN THERE'S ALSO THE BEHIND THE SCENES, UH, EFFICIENCIES FROM AN ACCOUNTING, A BUDGETING, EXPENDITURE CODING, UH, SIDE OF THINGS, UH, WHICH I, I WOULD IMAGINE ARE, ARE CONSIDERABLE, YOU KNOW, WE'RE, WE WOULD IN, IN THEORY HAVE ONE BUDGET EXPENDITURE CODE ACCORDINGLY, AND, AND, UM, AND IT WOULD BE A MORE, MORE STREAMLINED PROCESS IN, IN THAT SENSE.
BUT EXACTLY WHAT THE SAVINGS ARE, I DON'T, I DON'T KNOW IF I, I CAN TALKING 50 K, A HUNDRED K
I, I, I DON'T KNOW IF I, IF I CAN, UH, I CAN DO THAT.
I WOULD SAY THEY'RE CONSIDERABLE.
UM, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S PROBABLY IN THE TENS OF THOUSANDS.
I, I JUST DON'T, DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT MAGNITUDE THAT THAT WOULD BE.
UH, AND THEN FINAL QUESTION, WE, WE DO HAVE OTHER, I KNOW IN THE LAST SLIDE YOU HAD SOMETHING AROUND THE, THE LANDSCAPING DISTRICTS.
UM, WHAT ARE, I KNOW, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, WE HAVE MORE THAN THREE.
UH, WHAT ARE WE DOING ABOUT THE REMAINING LANDSCAPING DISTRICTS? AND IS THAT ACTUALLY BEING COMBINED WITH THIS, OR ARE THEY GONNA BE SEPARATE? UH, NO.
SO THE, WHAT WHAT'S BEING DISCUSSED THIS EVENING IS, IS, UH, IS THE STREET LIGHTING, UH, ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS.
THE OTHER THREE WOULD RUN THE, THE TYPICAL APPROVAL PROCESS.
SO, UM, IN THE, UH, IN THE SCHEDULE HERE AT, AT THE END, UM, THE FEBRUARY 17TH MEETING ON, ON FEBRUARY 17TH, 2026, UH, CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE ASKED TO ADOPT THE RESOLUTION OF INITIATION AUTHORIZING THE PROP TWO 18 PROCEEDINGS FOR THIS NEW DISTRICT.
AND ALSO AT THAT SAME MEETING, WE WOULD INITIATE THE PROCESS FOR YOUR THREE LANDSCAPING DISTRICTS.
SO IT'D JUST BE A, A MORE EXTENDED PROCESS THAN YOU'LL, YOU'LL TYPICALLY SEE BECAUSE OF THE 45 DAYS, THE NOTICING AND BALLOTING, THE CONTINUED, UH, UH, PUBLIC HEARING TO TABULATE BALLOTS.
BUT, BUT YOUR OTHER THREE DISTRICTS, IT'S, IT'S A VERY SIMILAR, UH, PROCESS.
SO THE SAME SIMILAR DOCUMENTS AND, AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
WE DON'T HAVE JUST THREE LANDSCAPING DISTRICTS, CORRECT? YOU HAVE, YOU HAVE THREE LANDSCAPING LIGHTING ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS? THREE? YEAH, WE HAVE FIVE TOTAL DISTRICTS.
UH, THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS.
THE BENEFIT OF GOING LAST IS SOME OF MY QUESTIONS HAVE ALREADY BEEN ANSWERED, SO THAT'S GOOD.
UM, I DO HAVE, UH, ALTHOUGH, YOU KNOW, WITH ME, I ALWAYS GET A FOLLOW UP QUESTION FROM SOMETHING SOMEBODY SAID.
SO I, I'M GONNA START WITH MY FOLLOW UPS.
UM, I WANNA, UM, JUST MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND THE RESERVES
[01:25:01]
THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN 99 1 MM-HMMWOULD BE ROLLED INTO A NEW DISTRICT AND NOT THEN PAID SPECIFICALLY USED JUST IN THE AREA THAT IS CURRENTLY 99 1.
CORRECT? I UNDERSTAND THAT, CORRECT? THAT'S RIGHT.
WE, WE WOULD, WE WE'RE LOOKING AT EVERYTHING HOLISTICALLY, AND WE WOULD OPTIMIZE YOUR EXISTING RESERVES AND WE WOULD APPLY IT TO THE, THE NEW DISTRICT, NEW DISTRICT.
AND SO THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE BEEN LIVING IN 99, 1 SINCE 1999 AND HAVE BEEN PAYING THOSE, AND IN THOSE RESERVES, UM, LEGALLY, WOULD THEY HAVE A CHALLENGE TO SAY, LOOK, THIS MONEY WAS COLLECTED FOR THIS AREA OF THE CITY.
HOW CAN IT NOW BE? IS IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE VOTED THAT THEY DON'T HAVE THAT THEY COULDN'T COME BACK AND SAY, HEY, HOW COME, HOW CAN YOU USE THAT MONEY TO DO SOMETHING CITYWIDE? MM-HMM
THAT'S A, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
SO, UH, WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS HOLISTICALLY, WHAT YOU CAN SEE BASED ON THE PROPOSED ASSESSMENT AND WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY PAYING, IS THAT ESSENTIALLY, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT IT FROM A, A BENEFIT STANDPOINT, HOLISTICALLY, THERE'S AN ARGUMENT TO BE MADE THAT OVER TIME PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 99 1 HAVE BEEN UNDERPAYING THEIR SHARE, IF WE'RE LOOKING AT IT THAT WAY, ALONG WITH ALSO 83 1.
AND SO, UM, BY, BY NATURE OF HOW WE'RE ASSIGNING THE, THE ASSESSMENTS, MEANING THE FACT THAT DECORATIVE LIGHTING AREAS HAVE A HIGHER ASSESSMENT MM-HMM
THEY ARE, UH, ALSO GOING TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE LARGER SHARE OF THE FUND BALANCE WHEN IT COMES TO, UH, RESERVES AND, AND ALL THAT.
SO THE, THE BENEFIT FACTORS KIND OF DRIVE LIKE THAT, THAT SHARE OF, OF, OF BENEFIT, IF YOU WILL, THEY'RE GONNA HAVE, UH, PRIORITY ACCESS TO, TO THE FUND BALANCE BECAUSE OF THAT, THAT HIGHER BENEFIT, UM, DIFFERENTIATION THERE.
WOULD THERE BE A MECHANISM FOR DESIGNATING THE RESERVES THAT COME IN THAT ARE ALREADY PART OF 99 1 INTO, YOU KNOW, WITHIN THE NEW STRUCTURE, THEY WOULD BE RESERVED FOR THE DECORATIVE LIGHTING, FOR EXAMPLE, AS IT'S MOVING FORWARD? YES.
THAT, THAT'S, UM, THAT'S, UH, UH, PART OF THE, THE PROCESS.
UM, WE WOULD ASSIGN THE, THE FUND, LIKE THE LOCAL, THE NON DECORATIVE, THE DECORATIVE MAJOR ROADWAY.
UM, IT WOULDN'T BE JUST ANNUAL ASSESSMENT REVENUE.
WE'D ALSO BE LOOKING AT IT FROM A FUND BALANCE STANDPOINT AS WELL.
SO THERE WOULD BE A, A WAY TO, UM, ONCE THESE WERE ROLLED IN TOGETHER TO ADDRESS THE ISSUE THAT, UM, WAS JUST BROUGHT UP THAT, YOU KNOW, 83 DASH ONE HAS A DEFICIT MM-HMM
BUT WE, THEY STILL HAVE SOME RESERVES, BUT WE'RE, THEY'RE ALMOST EXHAUSTED.
99 1 HAS MORE IN RESERVE MM-HMM
AND THAT, YOU KNOW, SINCE THERE WILL BE DESIGNATED FUNDS WITHIN THE NEW, UM, UH, LAD, IF IT'S WERE TO BE FORMED, WE COULD DESIGNATE THOSE RESERVES INTO THEIR RESPECTIVE BUCKETS, IF YOU WILL, AS AT FORMATION.
AND THEN THAT TAKES CARE OF ANY PERCEIVED INEQUITIES FROM THE COMBINATION.
WE, WE, WE COULD, UH, AND I, I BELIEVE THE, THE RESERVES I, I HAVE TO, UH, TAKE A LOOK AT, AT THE NOTE, BECAUSE THERE'S, THERE'S TWO TYPES OF, OF RESERVES, UH, WHEN IT COMES TO THESE TYPES OF ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS, THERE'S WHAT'S REFERRED TO AS OPERATING RE RESERVES, AND THOSE ARE ACCUMULATED REALLY FOR CASH FLOW PURPOSES.
AND WHAT IT IS, IS THE SIX MONTHS, YOU KNOW, AND I, I BELIEVE THAT'S, UH, THAT MAY BE WHERE WE ARE WITH 99 1.
UH, THERE'S NOT, YOU KNOW, SUBSTANTIAL, UH, CAPITAL, BUT, BUT TO YOUR POINT, YES, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT FUND BALANCES AND, AND, UM, AND ALLOCATING THEM, UH, APPROPRIATELY BASED ON WHEN WE GET THE ENGINEERS REPORT, WE HAVE, UM, USUALLY, YOU KNOW, OPERATING, WHAT DO WE NEED FOR OUR FORECAST TO OPERATING REVENUE AND WHAT DO WE NEED FOR SPECIAL PROJECTS? AND I THINK WE, MY MEMORY COULD BE FAULTY, BUT I THOUGHT WE WERE, UM, ADDING IN 99 1 FOR REPLACING SOME OF THOSE DECORATIVE POLES THAT ARE GETTING DAMAGED.
SO I THINK THERE MAY BE SOME, YOU GUYS CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, SOME CAPITAL RESERVES AS WELL, BUT THAT COULD ALL BE WORKED OUT DOWN THE ROAD.
SO I, WE DON'T GET THAT, THAT ANSWER RIGHT THIS MOMENT.
AND I'LL, I'LL MAKE A NOTE OF THAT.
THE, UH, QUICK FOLLOW UP ON CONDOS VERSUS, UM, MULTIFAMILY.
THE, UM, THE REASON WE TREAT 'EM DIFFERENTLY IS BECAUSE CONDOS HAVE A SINGLE OWNER FOR EACH UNIT, RIGHT.
AND MULTIFAMILY, THERE'S ONE OWNER FOR THE WHOLE BUILDING MM-HMM
SO WE NEED TO KNOW WHO TO ASSESS, CORRECT.
WE, WE, WE, WE TREAT 'EM DIFFERENTLY FOR, UM, TWO REASONS IS, IS GENERALLY CONDOMINIUMS ARE, ARE LARGER IN SIZE, UM, THAN, THAN APARTMENT UNITS OR DUPLEXES, TRIPLEXES.
UH, SO THAT'S WHY GENERALLY CONDOMINIUM CONDOMINIUMS HAVE A HIGHER ASSESSMENT.
AND THEN, UH, PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, IN TERMS OF HOW IT'S PLACED ON THE ASSESSMENT OR ON THE PROPERTY TAX ROLL, IT COMES DOWN TO WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY.
AND SO WITH CONDOMINIUMS, IT'S INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS THAT GET THE, THE TAX BILL AND, AND PAY THE ASSESSMENT FOR THAT CONDOMINIUM.
UH, FOR APARTMENT COMPLEXES IS TYPICALLY,
[01:30:01]
UM, AN LLC OR, YOU KNOW, UH, WHOEVER.AND IT'S ONE PARCEL, ONE PROPERTY TAX BILL.
UM, I ALSO WANNA EXPLORE THE, THE, UM, CFDA LITTLE BIT BECAUSE WE KEEP SAYING THAT EVERYBODY IN THE CITY WOULD BE PAYING FOR THE GENERAL BENEFITS.
AND IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND GOING BACK TO THAT SLIDE ON THE, THE, THE BENEFITS, NOT THE GENERAL BENEFITS, THE SPECIFIC SPECIAL BENEFITS ONE.
BECAUSE THE CFD IS SPECIFICALLY FOR, UM, WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE BOULEVARD, CORRECT? THE, THE CFD, UM, YOU'RE SAYING LIKE THE B WHO PAYS THE C, FD, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE BOULEVARD, THEY PAY THEIR CFD, UM, IT, IT CAN ONLY BE USED FOR THINGS WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE BOULEVARD, CORRECT? UH, NO, I ACTUALLY, WITH CFDS, UH, THE CITY HAS A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY BECAUSE IT'S A SPECIAL TAX THAT'S LEVIED.
SO THERE DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A, A VERY STRICT OR A, A BENEFIT NEXUS THERE, THERE'S A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY IN THAT REGARD.
AND SO, I, I BELIEVE THE WAY, WHAT, WHAT, WHAT, UM, AUTHORIZES A CITY TO FUND SOMETHING OR NOT THROUGH A CFD IS WHAT'S DESCRIBED IN THE AUTHORIZED SERVICES AT THE TIME OF FORMATION.
AND FOR THIS CFD, UM, I, I BELIEVE THE WAY IT'S, IT'S, IT'S DESCRIBED IS STREET LIGHTING, YOU KNOW, IN GENERAL IN GENERALITIES, UH, IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED OR, OR, OR, UM, YOU KNOW, UM, UH, PUBLIC STREET LIGHTING, PUBLIC UH, LANDSCAPING, THINGS LIKE THAT.
SO, UM, IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE WITHIN THE, THE BOUNDARIES OF, OF THE CFD.
THE STREET LIVES DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE WITHIN THE, THE BOUNDARIES.
UH, WHAT WE WOULD DO IS WE WOULD ASSIGN THE CFDA PORTION OF THEIR COST, AND THAT WOULD BE, UH, INCLUDED IN THEIR ANNUAL BUDGET.
AND THAT'D BE A BASIS FOR WHAT THEY GET TAXED ON, ON THE PROPERTY TAX ROLL.
UH, BUT, UM, WE, WE HAVE THAT, THAT FLEXIBILITY THERE.
SO SOMEBODY LIVING IN THE BOULEVARD WOULD BE BASICALLY PAYING OUT OF THEIR CFD THE SAME $47 FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT SOMEBODY LIVING NOT IN THE CFD, DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF LIGHTING THAT IS WITHIN THE BOULEVARD, CORRECT? YES.
IT'S A VERY SIMILAR YEAH, VERY SIMILAR PROCESS.
EXCEPT IT'S BEING PAID THROUGH A CFD VERSUS VERSUS THE, THE ASSESSMENT.
AND THERE'S THE ABILITY FOR, UM, THAT TO GO UP THE SAME WAY IT GOES UP FOR EVERYBODY ELSE.
THE, THE CFD INCLUDES AN, AN AUTHORIZED, UH, ANNUAL ESCALATOR.
I, I'M NOT, UH, WE DON'T, WE DON'T ADMINISTER THAT DISTRICT.
I'M NOT, I'M NOT EXACTLY SURE WHAT, WHAT THAT INDEX IS FOR THAT, FOR THAT DISTRICT, BUT I, I DO KNOW IT DOES HAVE A-A-C-P-I ON IT.
BUT IT ALSO COVERS A LOT OF OTHER THINGS.
IT'S NOT JUST FOR, I, I BELIEVE IT, IT'S A, A, A COUPLE, UH, A FEW MEDIAN IMPROVEMENTS.
UM, I, I WANNA SAY THAT THAT'S THE, THAT'S THE EXTENT OF IT.
THEN THE, UM, SPECIAL BENEFITS, PARTICULARLY UNDER MAJOR ROADWAYS, THAT LOOKS LIKE GENERAL BENEFITS TO ME.
SO WHAT WE REALLY MEAN IS BENEFITS TO DUBLIN RESIDENTS VERSUS BENEFITS TO WHOEVER MIGHT HAPPEN TO BE IN DUBLIN.
SO WHEN IT SPECIAL BENEFITS, SO WHEN IT COMES TO, UM, MAJOR ROADWAYS, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS SPECIAL BENEFIT IS, IS ESSENTIALLY ALL PROPERTIES WITHIN CITY LIMITS.
THE GENERAL BENEFIT IS THAT BLUE AREA, UH, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT MAJOR ROADWAYS, UM, IS THAT BLUE AREA OF PROPERTY OWNERS OR USERS OUTSIDE OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN THAT ARE LIKELY TO TRAVERSE MAJOR STREETS.
SO, SO THAT'S WHY IN THE CASE OF MAJOR ROADWAYS, THAT'S THE CONTEXT.
SPECIAL BENEFIT IS CITY LIMITS.
SO IT'S A, IT'S A BENEFIT TO ANYONE WHO LIVES IN THE CITY FOR US TO, UM, ENHANCE CITY APPEAL AND, AND SUPPORT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND THINGS LIKE THAT, EVEN THOUGH IT'S LITERALLY EVERYBODY MM-HMM
IT'S JUST A DIFFERENT WAY OF THINKING ABOUT IT, THAT THAT'S RIGHT.
SO IT'S SORT OF LIKE YOU'RE, YOU'RE WITHIN THE DUBLIN CLUB, SO
UM, I THINK WE'VE GOT THE MAX UNDERSTOOD.
WE, THE MAX IS BASED ON THE ENGINEER'S REPORT.
WHICH DON'T ALWAYS LOVE IT, WHICH IS WHY THE, BUT, BUT WHAT YOU SHOWED US, THE COST YOU SHOWED US WAS BASICALLY THE MAX BASED ON WHAT YOU'RE ANTICIPATING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT'S GONNA SHOW.
AND WOULD BE RECOMMENDING TO US THAT WE LEVY THE MAX BASED ON THE NEW ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR THE NEW SAFETY F CORRECT.
AS OPPOSED TO WHAT WE HAVE NOW WHERE WE, WE KNOW WHAT THE MAX IS BASED ON THE ENGINEERS REPORT, BUT FOR 99 1, WE'RE NOT ASSESSING THE MAX.
WHICH IS WHY THERE WOULD BE A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE MAX WILL GO DOWN, BUT THE ACTUAL ASSESSMENT WOULD GO UP FOR 99.1.
WHAT PROPERTY OWNERS, THE, THE NOTICES AND BALLOTS MUST REFLECT THE MAX, UH, ANYTIME WE, WE ESTABLISH A, A, A DISTRICT.
AND SO, SO THAT'S WHAT WOULD PROPERTY OWNERS WOULD BE ASKED TO APPROVE IS, IS THE MAXIMUM.
AND, AND EXACTLY LIKE YOU SAID, UH, ASSUMING PROPERTY OWNERS VOTE FAVORABLY, WE WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THE MAX BE LEVIED, AT LEAST IN THE SHORT TERM.
TWO, THREE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, YOU CAN, UH, REALLY ANY GIVEN FISCAL YEAR, YOU AT CITY COUNCIL'S
[01:35:01]
DISCRETION, YOU CAN ALWAYS CHOOSE TO LEVY BELOW THE MAX IF FOR WHATEVER REASON THE BUDGETS, UM, YOU KNOW, MAKE THAT APPROPRIATE.SO THE BALLOTS WOULD GO OUT LISTING ONLY THE MAX OR WHAT WE INTEND TO LEVY IT, WOULD IT, IT THE MAX, THE, THE MAXIMUM, THE PROPOSED MAXIMUM RATES IS WHAT THE NOTICES AND BALLOTS WILL, WILL CONVEY.
I, I CAN SEE SOME OUTRAGE MM-HMM
IF WE SEND BALLOTS TO EVERYBODY IN 99, 1 SAYING, YOUR MAX IS NOW 87, AND IT'S ABOUT TO BE 59, AND EVERYBODY'S GONNA GO SIGN ME UP, AND THEN WE GO, GUESS WHAT? YOU WERE PAYING 47 BEFORE AND NOW YOU'RE GONNA PAY.
SO I, I THINK, UM, ALTHOUGH IT'S NOT REQUIRED BECAUSE OF THAT NUANCE IN THE NOTICE, UH, I, I DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S APPROPRIATE TO ADDRESS THAT.
WHAT, WHAT'S ACTUALLY BEEN LEVIED AND MM-HMM
AND WE WOULD COORDINATE WITH YOUR CITY TEAM TO, TO PROPERLY ADDRESS THAT AND DISSEMINATE, UH, INFORMATION AND, AND MAKE SURE IT'S UNDERSTOOD THAT, OKAY, YOUR MAX IS UP HERE, BUT WAS ACTUALLY HAS BEEN LEVIED IS IS DOWN HERE.
SO THAT'S A GREAT, GREAT, GREAT POINT.
I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE ALL UN UNDER THE GLASS LINE AND I'LL COME RIGHT BACK TO YOU.
AND THEN, UM, I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, BASED ON WHERE YOU LIVE, WHETHER YOU WOULD GET, UM, ASSESSED FOR MAJOR ROADWAYS ONLY, UM, MAJOR ROADWAYS PLUS, UH, DECORATIVE OR, UM, NON DECORATIVE.
DO WE HAVE, AND THIS IS PROBABLY A A QUESTION FOR STAFF, DO WE HAVE ANY PLANS TO, UM, UPGRADE ANY OF THE NON DECORATIVE LIGHTS TO DECORATIVE LIGHTS AT ANY TIME? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT, THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT'S PLANNED? IS IT STAFF IS, UH, SHAKING THEIR HEAD NO.
IF, UH, JUST, UM, JUST TO CLARIFY MAYBE ON THAT POINT IN, IN CASE, UM, THIS IS HELPFUL IS, UM, THE, THE, THE ENGINEER'S REPORT WILL BE DRAFTED IN A WAY WHERE IT'S NOT, UM, STRICT TO, TO GEOGRAPHIC BOUNDARIES.
THE METHODOLOGY IS WRITTEN IN A WAY, WILL BE WRITTEN IN A WAY WHERE IF A NON DECORATIVE AREA BECOMES DECORATIVE, WE CAN ASSESS THEM AT THE DECORATIVE RATE.
I, UNDER, I, I, I SORT OF ASSUMED THAT MAYBE I SHOULDN'T HAVE.
BUT IT WAS MORE FOR JUST INFORMATION.
AGAIN, ABOUT BAIT AND SWITCH FOR PEOPLE WHO, UM, FEEL LIKE THEY'RE VOTING ONE WAY AND THEN FIND OUT, OH, WAIT A MINUTE, NOW I'M IN A, AN AREA THAT SURE.
I WASN'T EXPECTING TO HAVE TO, TO PAY, UM, THAT PARTICULAR THING.
AND THEN, UM, THE, THE GENERAL BENEFIT, UM, THE 12% MM-HMM
WE CALCULATE THE, UM, THE TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF THE, THE 1.2 MILLION THAT IS MAJOR ROADWAYS.
AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE GETTING 80,000 PLUS THE EXTRA FOR THE 2% OF THE PART THAT'S LOCAL.
UM, THINK THAT WAS THE EXTENT OF MY QUESTIONS, AND I KNOW THAT YOU HAD, UM, ANOTHER QUESTION.
SO, UM, I, I FEEL LIKE I'M MISSING SOMETHING HERE.
UH, SO FOR 99 DASH ONE MM-HMM
UH, THAT IS IN A POSITIVE BUDGET POSITION, UM, WHAT'S THE COMPELLING REASON TO COMBINE YOU, YOU MENTIONED THE ADMIN FEE.
I WOULD IMAGINE THERE'S ALSO AN ADMIN FEE AROUND VALIDATING THE ADDITIONAL 35% OF, OF DUBLIN IN ORDER TO COMBINE IT.
BUT KIND OF LOOKING AT THE LAYOUT, IT'S GOING FROM FIVE DISTRICTS TO FOUR DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT'S THAT BIG OF A SAVINGS FROM THE ENGINEERING AND THE ASSESSMENT AND, AND ALL OF THAT.
I, WHAT AM I MISSING? YEAH, THAT, THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.
SO, YOU KNOW, THE COST EFFICIENCIES ON THE ADMINISTRATIVE THING, THAT THAT'S A POSITIVE, BUT THAT'S NOT THE PRIMARY REASON, UH, FOR THE RECOMMENDATION TO DO THE, THE CONSOLIDATED, THE, THE, THE PRIMARY REASON IS BECAUSE IF WE DO THE CONSOLIDATED THE ENTIRE CITY, WE WOULD BE ABLE TO APPLY, UH, A UNIFORM ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGY VERSUS IF 99 1 WERE TO REMAIN, THE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES FOR THE NEW DISTRICT THAT WOULD REPLACE 83 1 WOULD BE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT THAN 99 1.
SO AS AN EXAMPLE, UH, NON-RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY IN 99 1, IT'S, UM, IT'S ASSESSED SOLELY BASED ON ACREAGE PARCEL AREA.
UM, UH, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, SINGLE FAMILY MULTIFAMILY CONDOMINIUMS PAY THE SAME RATE.
SO I, IF, IF WE WERE ALLOWED, IF LAD 99 1 WOULD CONTINUE, WHAT WOULD HAPPEN IS THE ASSESSMENT METHODOLOGIES WHEN IT COMES TO NON-RES, NON-RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY, THE APPROACH, THE, THE FRAMEWORK OF THE ASSESSMENT, THE PROPORTIONALITY WOULD NOT BE THE SAME.
AND, UM, AND GOING BACK TO, UH, THE SECOND OBJECTIVE OF, OF COURSE, THE FIRST IS, IS ADDRESSING, UH, THE, THE FUNDING SHORTFALL, WHICH IS VERY IMPORTANT.
[01:40:01]
BUT ALSO CONCURRENTLY WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO IS PUT THE CITY IN A, IN A STRONGER POSITION WHEN IT COMES TO PROP TWO 18 COMPLIANCE, UM, CURRENT BEST PRACTICES AND, AND ALL OF THAT.SO THE, THE, THE PRIMARY REASON IS, UM, IS HAVING THE ABILITY TO ASSIGN ASSESSMENTS CITYWIDE THAT ARE PROPORTIONATELY UNIFORM, SAME METHODOLOGY, EVERYBODY IN THE CITY'S ON A, ON AN EVEN PLAYING FIELD, IF YOU WILL.
UM, AND THEN ALSO, UM, STRENGTHENING COMPLIANCE WITH, WITH STATE LAW AND THEN ALL THE ADMINISTRATIVE, UH, EFFICIENCIES, COST EFFECTIVENESS.
THAT'S, THAT'S, UM, YOU KNOW, AN ADDED POSITIVE, LET'S JUST SAY, I, I GUESS I'M NOT SEEING IT.
'CAUSE WE ALREADY HAVE THE TWO CFDS, WE ALREADY HAVE THE THREE ADDITIONAL LIGHTING DISTRICTS.
I, I'M NOT SEEING THE UNIFORMITY PIECE OF IT THERE.
UM, I, I'M SEEING A RISK IN TERMS OF GOING TO A HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE RESIDENT OR PROPERTY OWNERS IN, IN DUBLIN TO APPROVE SOMETHING THAT REALLY IMPACTS 55%.
UH, AND, AND I'M NOT SURE, I MEAN, JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT THE NUMBERS TO, TO, I GUESS MAYOR PRO TEMS,
I'M NOT SURE, YOU KNOW, IF PEOPLE WILL NOTICE AND IF THEY WILL PROTEST OR NOT, BUT IT, IT, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THE OPTICS DON'T SEEM RIGHT TO ME, AND I'M, I'M NOT, I'M, I'M STILL NOT SEEING THE VALUE MM-HMM
UH, IN, IN THAT UNIFORMITY OUTSIDE OF GETTING 83 UP TO CODE OR IN, IN, IN COMPLIANCE RATHER.
SO JUST, UH, UH, CLARIFY, UM, THE REASON CFD IS 2017 DASH ONE ISN'T, ISN'T A CONCERN.
UM, AND THERE'S NO NEED TO, LET'S JUST SAY, BRING IT UP TO, TO DATE ON, ON STATE LAW IS BECAUSE IT'S SPECIAL TAX, RIGHT? SO ALL THESE BENEFIT, UH, REQUIREMENTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT REALLY DON'T APPLY TO THE CFD.
SO IT'S A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, A DIFFERENT THING.
UM, IN TERMS OF THE, UM, THE, FROM A PROPERTY OWNER'S PERSPECTIVE, IT IS TRUE THAT THE MAXIMUM IS 82 TODAY.
HOWEVER, THE ACTUAL AMOUNT LEVIED HAS HISTORICALLY ALWAYS BEEN MUCH LOWER.
SO, UM, FISCAL YEAR 25, 26, IT'S THE $47 AND 80 CENTS.
SO IN THEORY, IN EFFECT, THE PROPERTY OWNERS IN 99 1 AND THE MESSAGING TO PROPERTY OWNERS IN 83, 1 IS THAT PROPERTIES WITHIN 99 1 WILL EXPERIENCE AN INCREASE AS PART OF THIS WHOLE EFFORT.
IT'S JUST THAT, UM, THE MAXIMUMS ARE, ARE, ARE DIFFERENT IN, IN, IN THE TWO, IN THE TWO DISTRICTS.
SO, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD TAKE SOME EFFORT, I THINK, UH, A, A FRONT IN TERMS OF, UM, AND WHEN WE PREPARE THE, THE MATERIALS THAT GO OUT TO PROPERTY OWNERS IN, IN TERMS OF ADDRESSING THAT AND CONVEYING THAT.
BUT IT'S NOT, UH, TODAY WE'RE NOT ASSESSING AT THAT $82, RIGHT? SO THE, WHAT PROPERTY OWNERS, WHAT THEY SEE ON THEIR TAX BILL IS NOT THE 82 THAT, THAT DROP, IF YOU WILL, THAT THAT'S BEING EXPERIENCED.
UM, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM? I HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS ITEM.
AT THE, UM, WITH THAT THEN WE'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE DECLARATION.
DOES ANYBODY HAVE, UM, COMMENTS? GO AHEAD.
SO, UM, THERE'S A LOT TO CONSUME HERE,
UM, I STILL WANT THAT MODEL THOUGH, SO ABSOLUTELY.
WE'RE GONNA, WE'RE GONNA HAVE TO GET TO THAT.
UH, BUT, UH, FOR ME, I THINK THE, UM, YOU KNOW, MODERNIZING OUR POLICIES TO CREATE MORE OPERATIONAL EFFICIENCY, I THINK THESE ARE CONVERSATIONS WE HAVE TO HAVE, RIGHT? AS OUR WORLD MOVES ON, TIME MOVES ON, WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH THESE EXERCISES.
UM, AND I'M GOING TO, UH, SAY THAT, YOU KNOW, I, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US TODAY.
UH, I THINK THERE ARE, UM, KEY BENEFITS TO, TO WHAT WE SAW.
UM, I ALSO WANT TO, UH, COMMEND, UH, VICE MAYOR'S COMMENT AROUND, WE, WE CERTAINLY NEED TO MANAGE THE MESSAGING AROUND HERE MM-HMM
UM, BECAUSE IT'S REALLY IMPORTANT THAT, UH, WE DON'T APPLY A SHOCK AND AWE APPROACH TO OUR RESIDENTS WHEN THEY SEE THIS FOR THE VERY FIRST TIME, UH, UH, MEANING WHEN IT COMES UP IN, IN IN FEBRUARY.
SO, UH, MY COMMENTARY IS THAT, AGAIN, I'M, I'M NOT OPPOSED TO IT.
I THINK WE NEED TO MANAGE IT WELL AND PROPERLY.
UM, ALSO, I AM GONNA RECOMMEND THAT IN TERMS
[01:45:01]
OF THE INDEX THAT YOU USE, UH, WE LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS.UM, I'M NOT REALLY A FAN OF BLS AT THE MOMENT.
UH, YOU COULD ASSUME YOU CAN KNOW WHY, RIGHT? SO YES, LET'S LOOK AT OTHER OPTIONS.
UM, AND THEN, UH, AM I NOT ASK A QUESTION? SURE.
UM, LISTENING TO, UM, COUNCIL MEMBER CADRE, IS IT POSSIBLE, UH, JUST SPECULATING HERE, THAT WE CAN BRING IT TO THE PUBLIC, IT RECEIVES A FAVORABLE OPINION, BUT WE DON'T ACTIVATE IT FOR TWO YEARS? IS THAT POSSIBLE? WELL, UM, WHEN YOU SAY ACTIVATE IT, YOU COULD, YOU COULD CHOOSE, UH, TO LEVY RATES THAT ARE MUCH LOWER, WHICH ARE, THAT COULD, COULD, UH, REFLECT CLOSER TO PRESENT DAY RATES.
UM, I, I THINK WE COULD ALSO, UH, NOT DISSOLVE YOUR EXISTING DISTRICTS AND, UH, AND, YOU KNOW, SHOULD THE NEW ONE BE APPROVED, IT WOULD BE APPROVED.
AND WE COULD IN THEORY, UM, KEEP GOING WITH YOUR EXISTING DISTRICTS BY, BY NOT DISSOLVING THEM.
UM, I WOULD SAY THAT IT COULD COMPLICATE THE MESSAGING A LITTLE BIT IN THE NOTICING AND BALLOTING, BECAUSE USUALLY THE MESSAGING IS THIS DISTRICT WILL REPLACE YOUR EXISTING TWO DISTRICTS, AND IT'S A VERY CLEAR, YOU KNOW, UH, CONCISE MESSAGE.
SO CAN WE DO IT? I I, I THINK WE COULD.
UM, I THINK IT WOULD JUST BE A MATTER OF, OF, UM, OF WORKING TOGETHER TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT, WHAT THAT MESSAGING LOOKS LIKE, AND, AND HOW WOULD WE, WE WOULD APPLY IT, BUT I, I BELIEVE IT, IT, IT CAN BE DONE IF THAT'S, THAT'S SOMETHING YOU'D WANNA DO.
UH, I JUST HAD TO ASK THE, YEAH.
THE, FOR, FROM MY COLLEAGUES, THE RATIONALE BEHIND THAT IS WE ARE IN A CERTAIN UNCERTAIN TIME.
WE ARE CERTAINLY IN UNCERTAIN TIMES, UH, GIVEN THAT THERE ARE INSECURITIES THAT OUR RESIDENTS FACE IN TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT OR FOOD INSECURITY, I'M, I TEND TO LEAN TO THAT SIDE OF HOW WE, HOW WOULD THIS IMPACT THEM GIVEN OUR TIME AT THE MOMENT.
UM, SO AGAIN, AGAIN, JUST ASKING, YOU KNOW, IT JUST FOR US TO THINK ABOUT AS ANOTHER OPTION.
UH, I'M WONDERING IF YOU COULD, UM, OH, SORRY.
I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND AND, AND KNOW WHAT WE NEED TO DO HERE.
SO THIS IS ALL ABOUT JUST GIVING YOU FEEDBACK.
AND I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING FROM EVERYBODY HERE IN MANY DIFFERENT WAYS, INCLUDING MY OWN, IS THAT WE NEED TO BE CLEAR WITH THE MESSAGE.
WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE DETAILS OF, UM, WE DEFINITELY NEED TO UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT HOW THESE ARE ASSESSED.
AND, UH, WHEN I PICK UP SOMETHING OUTTA THE MAIL AS A RESIDENT, I UNDERSTAND WHAT I'M LOOKING AT, RIGHT? MM-HMM
BUT I THINK THAT SHOULD BE VETTED OUT A LITTLE BIT CLEARER HERE.
AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S, YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK, I GET IT.
RIGHT? BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE, UM, AND THE REASON I BROUGHT THIS UP, UH, BY OUR, UM, ADOPT A RESOLUTION, IF WE COULD JUST HAVE A LITTLE MORE COLOR ON THE METHODOLOGY AND, AND THE, UM, YOU KNOW, SO ANYBODY HERE ON COUNCIL AND ANYBODY WHO AT THAT TIME IS LOOKING AT THAT CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE GETTING INTO.
AND I DO HAVE, UH, AND MAY I ASK A QUESTION,
SO THERE, I WAS GETTING BACK TO THIS AND I ASKED YOU ABOUT THE MAX AND ALL THAT.
I'LL GET DOWN THERE, BUT IT SEEMED, THERE'S A QUESTION BY, UH, COUNCIL MEMBER CADRE ABOUT THE 84 80 $4.
I, I, I WANNA MAKE SURE I GOT THE RIGHT MATH.
YOU SAID THE MAX IS, WOULD BE FOR THAT, UH, DECORATIVE ROADS, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE 35% OF THE POPULATION, RIGHT? AM I GOT THAT RIGHT? THAT'S THAT'S RIGHT.
THE, THE CURRENT MAXIMUM IS, IS THE 82.
AND, AND THE MAX IS GONNA GO DOWN TO 59.
AND, AND SO THE ACTUAL RANGE, FOR SOME REASON I WROTE DOWN, UH, WAS 1742 ON THAT, AND I WAS PROBABLY IN PLUTO, BUT 17 42, 2, UH, BUT I $17, UH, AND 42, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT WAS JUST, SO THERE IT IS RIGHT THERE.
SO, UH, THAT'S THE MAJOR ROADWAY COMPONENT.
AND THEN THE MAXIMUM ASSESSMENT IS A TOTAL OF 59 FOR THE, UM, FOR THE WHOLE THING, BASICALLY.
SO I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE, AND I DIDN'T, I DIDN'T KNOW WHERE YOU WERE GOING ON THAT, BUT, UM, IT WAS LIKE THE, THIS COUNCILMAN MARTA SAID, SHOCK AND AWE, WHATEVER, HOWEVER WE WANNA REFER TO IT.
[01:50:01]
WE TALK TO OUR, OUR FOLKS, IT'S, I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHERE THAT'S ALL GOING.SO IT IS, IT'S 59, IT'S NOT LIKE 80 OR WHATEVER THAT'S RIGHT.
BEYOND THAT, RIGHT? IT, IT, IT'S 59.
SO, UH, IF A PROPERTY OWNER WOULD LOOK AT THEIR PROPERTY TAX BILL TODAY, IT WOULD SHOW THE 47 80.
SO IN EFFECT, UM, IN COMPARISON TO THE PROPERTY TAX BILL THEY WOULD RECEIVE LATER THIS YEAR, UH, IT'D BE THAT $11 AND 20 CENTS DIFFERENCE.
UH, THE MAXIMUM, UH, FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES, UNLESS A, A PROPERTY OWNER WOULD LOOK AT IT, AN ENGINEER'S REPORT, UH, FROM PRIOR YEARS, THEY DON'T, YOU WOULDN'T KNOW THE MAXIMUM UNLESS YOU LOOKED AT THE ENGINEER'S REPORT.
YEAH, BECAUSE IT'S THE $82 AND 68 CENTS, THE, THE MAXIMUMS ARE NEVER, ISN'T WHAT'S REFLECTED ON PROPERTY TAX BILLS AND WHAT'S COMMONLY SEEN.
IT'S, IT'S WHAT, WHATEVER THE AMOUNT IS LEVIED.
SO IT WOULD, UM, REALLY COME DOWN TO LOOKING AT PRIOR YEAR ENGINEER'S REPORTS.
THAT'S THE ONLY WAY THAT YOU WOULD SEE THE MAXIMUM UNDERSTAND, AND I DID NOT WANT TO, TO GO TANGENTIALLY OFF THIS, BUT I, I, I THINK THE MESSAGE IS JUST A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ON SOME OF THE DETAILS AS WE MOVE THROUGH THE PROCESS.
SO I, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE YOU ARE, UM, OKAY WITH I'M, YEAH, I'M, I'M FINE.
UH, AND THAT WAS THE OTHER THING, IS THAT, UH, DO WE NEED TO MAKE A DECISION ON OPTION ONE OR TWO? YOU PROPOSED TWO AND I ASKED YOU ONE, UH, I THOUGHT THERE WAS ONE OR TWO, RIGHT? JUST APPLICATION FOR, OR WAS THE RECOMMENDATION ONE, ONE THE ONE THE, THE ONE DISTRICT, NOT A OR B.
ONE, ONE DISTRICT TO REPLACE THE, THE TWO.
UM, I, SO I'M HAVING RESERVATIONS AROUND THE, I'M NOT SEEING, I'M STILL NOT SEEING THE VALUE OF, OF COMBINING THE 99 WITH, WITH THE 83 FROM THE 99 PERSPECTIVE.
UM, I'M SEEING IT AS AN INCREASE OF $11 AND 20 CENTS, WHICH IS RELATIVELY SMALL AMOUNT, BUT FOR FOLKS, UH, THAT COUNCIL MEMBER MARDO IS MENTIONING, RIGHT.
SENIORS ON FIXED INCOME, FOLKS THAT ARE NOT SENIORS THAT ARE ON FIXED INCOME, RIGHT.
THAT THAT COULD, THAT COULD INCREASE, RIGHT.
UM, THE OTHER SIDE OF IT IS THE RISK OF REACHING OUT TO 35% ADDITIONAL.
SO, SO, SO THE MESSAGING AROUND 83 DASH ONE MAKES SENSE, RIGHT? LIKE, HEY, LOOK, THIS DISTRICT IS IN A DEFICIT.
IT THAT DEFICIT IS INCREASING YEAR ON YEAR.
WE NEED TO MODERNIZE TO MATCH NEW TWO 18 STANDARDS AND GET US OUT OF THIS DEFICIT.
LIKE THAT, THAT MESSAGING SEEMS CLEAR TO ME, BUT I'M NOT, I'M NOT SEEING THE VALUE IN 99 AND I'M NOT SEEING, UH, WHY YOU WOULD, WOULD PULL THEM IN AND SORT OF CONFLATE THE ISSUE AND, UH, RISK IN ISSUE WITH, WITH THE, WITH MAJORITY OF THE VOTERS, UM, PROTESTING.
SO WE'RE WE'RE DONE WITH CLARIFYING QUESTIONS.
WE'RE WE'RE TALKING AMONGST OURSELVES NOW AT THIS POINT, RIGHT? SO, UM, I'M GONNA JUMP IN IF YOU DON'T MIND.
UM, I DO SEE THE VALUE OF THAT FOR 99.
ONE, UM, I UNDERSTAND YOUR PERSPECTIVE AS A HOMEOWNER, UM, IN DISTRICT 99 1, BUT ALSO REPRESENTING THE HOMEOWNERS IN DISTRICT 99 1 AND, AND SAYING, WHY WOULD I WANT MINE TO GO UP $11? UM, WHEN, YOU KNOW, IT'S, IT'S THE, THE DEFICIT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN, BUT WE HAVEN'T REALLY TALKED ABOUT THE PERSPECTIVE OF, UM, UH, COMMERCIAL AND RIGHT NOW, UM, IF WE, THE, THE WAY THEY ARE CURRENTLY, AND IF WE WERE TO HAVE ONLY, IF WE ONLY MODERNIZE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, UM, 83 1, THEN THE, UM, COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ON EACH SIDE OF TOWN ARE BEING ASSESSED QUITE DIFFERENTLY.
AND THE, AT SOME POINT, THE, THE BURDEN IS GONNA BECOME ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ON ONE SIDE OF THE TOWN, UH, TOWN VERSUS THE OTHER FOR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS AND LIGHTING AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
AND WE'RE TRYING TO DO A SORT OF HOLISTIC ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ACROSS THE CITY.
SO THAT'S ONE BENEFIT, IN MY OPINION, OF GOING HOLISTICALLY.
UM, ALSO POTENTIALLY FOR 99, 1 COUNCILS CAN IMPOSE UP TO THE MAX ON THE ENGINEERS REPORT.
UM, WE DIDN'T ASK THE QUESTION OF WHY AREN'T WE IMPOSING THE MAX, UM, AND WHY THE ENGINEERS REPORT IS COMING IN SO MUCH HIGHER THAN WHAT WE ARE DOING OPERATIONALLY.
UM, SO THAT'S, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A QUESTION WE SHOULD BE ASKING ALL THE WAY ALONG THE LINE IS HOW ARE WE JUSTIFYING THESE ENGINEERS REPORTS THAT HAVE A MAX THAT IS, UM, ALMOST TWICE AS MUCH AS WE ACTUALLY NEED, UM, WHEREAS THIS RIGHT SIZE IS SORT OF WHAT THE MAX POTENTIALLY COULD BE.
UM, BECAUSE I COULD SEE IN, IN A SITUATION WHERE THE ENGINEERS REPORT ALLOWS US TO JUSTIFY GOING UP SIGNIFICANTLY FOR WHAT WE ARE IN 99 1 AND, UM, POTENTIALLY TAKING
[01:55:01]
SOME OF THE, UM, MAJOR ROAD STUFF, MAKING THAT EVEN HIGHER THAN IT IS RIGHT NOW.SO I'M SUPPORTIVE OF COMBINING THE TWO, UM, NOT BECAUSE OF, UM, YOU KNOW, THE, THE ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS AND THINGS THAT WOULD BE A, A, A NICE BENEFIT, BUT IT'S GONNA BE A SMALL BENEFIT, RIGHT? IT'S NOT THE, IT'S NOT THE LARGER BENEFIT.
TO ME, THE LARGER BENEFIT IS, UM, GETTING, UH, EVERYTHING TOGETHER IN ONE BUT THE OTHER AND, AND MAKING SURE THAT IT'S THE SAME METHODOLOGY, KILLING THE STRUCTURAL DEFICIT THAT IS GOING TO BE BORNE BY THE, THE CITY, WHICH RESIDENTS IN BOTH SECTIONS ULTIMATELY PAY FOR WHEN THE DEFICIT GOES UP AND UP AND UP.
UM, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, EVENTUALLY WE'LL HAVE TO COVER THAT COST.
UM, SO I, I THINK THAT THERE ARE BENEFITS THAT AREN'T JUST WHAT AM I SEEING ON MY PROPERTY TAX AS A HOMEOWNER? UM, AND I THINK THAT THE BENEFITS OVERALL OUTWEIGH THE, UM, THE NEGATIVES OF ONLY DOING WITHIN ONE.
SO THAT WOULD BE, THAT WOULD BE WHERE I'M AT.
YOU BROUGHT UP A GOOD POINT AROUND THE COMMERCIAL SIDE.
I'D BE CURIOUS TO, TO LOOK AT THE NUMBERS THERE.
UH, WHAT, WHAT ARE, WHAT ARE THE TYPICAL ASSESSMENTS CURRENTLY AND WHAT WOULD THEY BE PROJECTED TO BE? UM, UH, BUT YEAH.
AND THEN, SO IT, IT SOUNDS LIKE WE HAVE CONSENSUS, NOT, NOT CONSENSUS, BUT AT LEAST DIRECTION TO MOVE, UM, TO, UM, OPTION ONE.
UH, THE SECOND ACTION THAT WE WERE ASKED TONIGHT WAS TO, UM, TALK ABOUT THE TYPE OF PUBLIC OUTREACH THAT WE WERE INTERESTED IN.
UM, AND TO MY WAY OF THINKING, IT'S A YES AND
UM, FOR SURE WE WOULD WANT, UM, SOME TOWN HALLS.
I THINK THAT WE WANT THE HOAS INVOLVED BECAUSE THE DIFFERENT HOAS HAVE DIFFERENT, THEY WOULD BE PAYING DIFFERENT ASSESSMENTS BASED ON WHETHER THERE'S PRIVATE STREETS OR NOT PRIVATE STREETS BASED ON WHETHER THEY HAVE, UM, UH, DECORATIVE STREETLIGHTS OR NOT DECORATIVE STREETLIGHTS, DEFINITELY SOCIAL MEDIA.
I THINK A DEDICATED WEBPAGE IS NOT A BIG ASK.
UM, DOOR HANGERS I'M NOT SURE ABOUT BECAUSE OF THE, THE COST OF THAT INFORMATIONAL MAILERS FOR SURE.
UM, I DON'T KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE MANPOWER TO BE GOING DOOR TO DOOR, UM,
THE TWO COMMENTS THAT I HAD, ONE WAS THE, UH, THE DUBLIN DIGEST, UH, THE EMAIL, UH, ELECTRONIC, IT RELATIVELY QUICK AND EASY THERE.
UM, THE OTHER SUGGESTION WOULD BE ST.
PATRICK'S DAY AND, UH, THE, THE FARMER'S MARKET AND JUST TRY TO, TRY TO GET THE, THE PUBLIC ENGAGED AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
I THINK THE INFORMATION PIECE OF IT IS GONNA BE CRITICAL.
THE COUNCIL MEMBER BEAT ME TO IT.
I WAS GONNA SAY THE PLAN WOULD BE ALL THIS AND, UM, AND INCLUDING ON SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU KNOW, OUR, UM, OUR VIDEOS HAVE BEEN PRETTY SUCCESSFUL, SO WE COULD DO, UH, A VIDEO ABOUT THAT, BUT I WAS THINKING, YEAH, BOOTHS AT, UH, ANYTIME WE'RE IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC, UM, THE NEXT ONE WILL BE ST.
PAT'S THAT WE WOULD PUT THAT INFORMATION OUT THERE.
I WOULD THINK WE WOULD WANNA DO SOME TOWN HALLS SPECIFICALLY IN THE AREA OF 99 1.
UM, BECAUSE I THINK THAT'S WHERE THERE'S GONNA BE MORE CONFUSION.
WE PROBABLY WANNA DO 'EM IN BOTH AREAS.
UM, 99 1, I'M, I'M VERY WORRIED THAT, UH, THE MESSAGING IS GOING TO BE CONFUSED.
WAIT A MINUTE, I, I WAS, MY BALLOT SAYS MY TAXES ARE GONNA GO DOWN.
HOW DID MY TAXES GO UP? AND, UM, THE MESSAGING ON THE OTHER SIDE OF TOWN IS, WAIT A MINUTE, MY TAXES ARE GONNA GO UP.
AS OPPOSED TO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHERE THE BENEFIT FOR THE CITY IS.
SO, UM, DIFFERENTLY MESSAGED TOWN HALLS, BUT I THINK TOWN HALLS, UM, WOULD BE QUITE IMPORTANT.
ANYTHING ADDITIONAL YOU'D LIKE TO ADD? AND, AND YOU DID SAY YOU WERE, UH, INFORMATIONAL MAILERS.
INFORMATIONAL MAILERS FOR SURE ARE DOOR HANGERS.
I, YEAH, I'M, I'M, I'M FED UP IN THE C TO THAT ONE.
I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S INCREMENTAL VALUE.
YOU SEE INFORMA INFORMATIONAL MAILERS AS BEING MORE IMPORTANT AS WELL AS THE OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA.
UH, LAST CHANCE FOR COMMENTS ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
STAFF, DO YOU HAVE WHAT YOU NEED FROM US? WE DO.
THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION.
[3.1 Urgency Interim Ordinance Prohibiting the Establishment, Expansion, or Relocation of Firearms Retailing and Shooting Range Uses (PLPA-004331-2026)]
OUR, UM, OUR NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS NEW BUSINESS 3.1 IS AN URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT EXPANSION OR RE RELOCATION OF FIREARMS RETAILING AND SHOOTING RANGE USES.UH, SO YES, SO THIS EVENING, UH, THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE CONSIDERING AN INTERIM URGENCY ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT EXPANSION, RELOCATION OF FIREARMS RETAILING, AND SHOOTING RANGES.
SO JUST FOR A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON THIS, RETAIL FIREARMS SALES ARE PERMITTED BY WRIGHT IN COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.
UH, INDOOR SHOOTING RANGES ARE PERMITTED THROUGH EITHER A ZONING CLEARANCE OR A MINOR USE PERMIT.
AND THEN JUST FOR CONTEXT, IN CASE THE QUESTION COMES UP, UM, OUTDOOR REQUIRE A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, UH, WE'RE GONNA TALK ABOUT OUTDOOR TODAY.
UH, SO STAFF IS BRINGING THIS DISCUSSION FORWARD IN RESPONSE TO A RECENT INQUIRY RECEIVED AT THE PLANNING COUNTER.
[02:00:01]
INQUIRY WAS FOR A PROPOSED FIREARMS DEALERSHIP WITHIN, UH, WITHIN OUR DOWNTOWN.AND, UH, IT WAS ALSO GOING TO INCLUDE AN INDOOR SHOOTING RANGE ADJACENT TO A SCHOOL THAT'S CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
SO WE KIND OF TOOK A STEP BACK.
WE LOOKED AT WHAT THE STATE AND, UH, FEDERAL LAWS, UH, SPEAK TO THIS.
WE ALSO, OF COURSE, STARTED WITH THE DOUBLING MUNICIPAL CODE AND DISCOVERED THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS SOME RESTRICTION RELATED TO, IN THE STATE AND FEDERAL LAW RELATED TO, UH, FIREARM POSSESSION WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF A SCHOOL.
UH, BUT THEY DON'T PROHIBIT SUCH THINGS.
THERE ARE WAYS TO, UH, SAFELY CARRY A GUN AROUND THAT.
UM, BUT ALL OF THIS REALLY JUST PROMPTED STAFF TO LOOK AT THE REGULATIONS.
SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT WE ADOPT AN URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE, ESTABLISHING A CITYWIDE MORATORIUM.
UH, THE MORATORIUM WOULD PREVENT NEW APPROVALS.
WHY THE CITY CONDUCTS A COMPLETE REGULATORY REVIEW.
UH, ESSENTIALLY THE PURPOSE OF IT IS TO ALLOW STAFF TO STUDY THE ISSUE IN MORE DETAIL SO THAT WE CAN COME BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND HAVE, UH, MORE OF A POLICY DIRECTIVE DECISION ON HOW WE WOULD WANNA REGULATE THESE.
UM, SO THE ADOPTION OF AN INTERIM, AN URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE, I KEEP FLIPPING THOSE IN MY BRAIN, REQUIRES A FOUR FIFTHS VOTE OF THE CITY COUNCIL, AND IT WOULD BE EFFECTIVE FOR AN INITIAL 45 DAYS.
SO THERE IS A POSSIBILITY FOR EXTENSIONS.
UH, FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE HAD TO AMEND THE DOWNTOWN DELMAN SPECIFIC PLAN, WE WOULD COME BACK TO YOU TALK ABOUT THAT.
THAT REQUIRES, THAT COULDN'T BE DONE IN 45 DAYS, SO WE WOULD BE HAVING THAT DISCUSSION.
SO IT WOULD JUST BE AN INTERIM 45 DAYS WITH THE, UM, IDEA THAT WE WOULD PROBABLY COME BACK TO YOU, UM, BEFORE, WE WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU BEFORE THEN TO HAVE A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION.
UH, SO THE ORDINANCE ITSELF IS EXEMPT PER SQA GUIDELINE, SECTION 1 5 0 6 1, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THE COMMON SENSE RULE OF CQA THAT SAYS THAT THERE'S NO POSSIBILITY OF HAVING A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT JUST BY ESSENTIALLY SUSPENDING, UH, THE REGULATIONS.
AND SO AT THIS POINT, THE RECOMMENDATION BEFORE THE COUNCIL IS TO WAIVE THE READING AND ADOPT AN URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT EXPANSION, RELOCATION OF FIREARMS RETAILING, AND SHOOTING RANGE USES.
STAFF IS AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.
UH, CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? YES.
THANK YOU FOR THE QUICK PRESENTATION.
JUST, JUST SO I'M CLEAR, UM, THIS ISN'T SAYING YES OR NO APPROVING DENYING.
THIS IS JUST SAYING WE'RE GONNA LOOK AT THE POLICY AND THEN DECIDE WHAT WE WANNA DO.
IT SAYS WHAT IT, WHAT IT DOES IS IT SAYS WE WANNA LOOK AT THE POLICY AND WHY WE'RE LOOKING AT THE POLICY.
WE'RE GOING TO SUSPEND APPROVALS FOR ESTABLISHING NEW RELOCATION AND EXPANSION.
ADDITIONAL CLARIFYING QUESTIONS? YEAH.
UH, UH, FOR THE RESEARCH THAT WE'RE GOING TO DO, UH, COULD YOU SHARE WITH ME WHO THE PARTIES WILL BE, WHO WILL BE INVOLVED IN THE RESEARCH AND PROVIDING YOU OPINION? SURE.
UH, TYPICALLY WHEN WE LOOK AT AN ORDINANCE, WE'RE PULLING, UH, WE STARTED AT A STAFF LEVEL, RIGHT? UH, WE LOOK, WE REACH OUT TO ADJACENT JURISDICTIONS, WE FIGURE OUT THAT RESEARCH, AND THEN WE KIND OF FIGURE OUT WHO ARE, UH, SORT OF THE, UH, MAYBE THE SUBJECT MATTER EXPERTS IN THE FIELD, RIGHT? UH, REACH OUT TO THOSE.
UH, THIS, THIS PARTICULAR ONE CAME FROM, UH, YOU KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES WHEN A INQUIRY IS, UH, OR YOU CHANGE AN ORDINANCE OR YOU'RE MAKING A POLL DECISION BASED ON AN INQUIRY, A LOT OF TIMES YOU REACH OUT TO THAT PERSON WHO DID THE, THAT DID THE ORIGINAL INQUIRY.
UH, YOU DON'T ALWAYS, BUT, YOU KNOW, AND SOMETIMES THEY WANNA BE INVOLVED AND DOESN'T WANNA BE INVOLVED.
UM, ALL OF THAT THOUGHT PROCESS, IT HASN'T FULLY SHAPED YET.
BUT THE, BUT THE ANSWER IS THAT WE WILL ABSOLUTELY BE REACHING OUT TO OUR LOCAL JURISDICTIONS AND DIGGING INTO, UH, SOME OF THE REQUIREMENTS.
UH, I'M GONNA ASK A QUESTION TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY.
WILL, UM, COUNSEL BE PROVIDED BY, LET'S SAY, A CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYER WITH REGARD TO THE RESEARCH BEING DONE BY CITY STAFF? UH, THE QUESTION IS WHETHER SECOND AMENDMENT ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH SUCH AN ORDINANCE? UH, CORRECT.
WELL, WE'LL BE DOING THAT KIND OF RESEARCH.
I DON'T THINK WE'RE GONNA REACH OUT TO ANY, UM, SPECIALISTS FOR, UH, SECOND AMENDMENT LAWYERS TO DO THAT RESEARCH.
IT'S COMMONLY DONE BY PUBLIC AGENCY LAWYERS.
UM, SO, UH, YOU'LL BE RELYING ON, ON OUR LEGAL OPINIONS, I WOULD CONSIDER MYSELF A CONSTITUTIONAL LAWYER.
NOW, YOU KNOW, I WAS A CONSTITUTIONAL STUDENT, CONSTITUTIONAL LAW STUDENT, SO, OKAY.
MY QUESTIONS, UH, CLARIFYING QUESTIONS, NOT, YEAH, YEAH, I DO.
AND IT, IT DOES GO ALONG THAT LINE.
UH, COUNSEL NEEDS TO BE REALLY WELL INFORMED ON, UM, THE DIFFERENCES IN, IN THE RIGHTS
[02:05:02]
OF, OF MERCHANTS, UH, UH, AS IT PERTAINS TO BOTH RETAIL FIREARMS AND SHOOTING RANGES.AND THAT'S KIND OF A, A, A NO-BRAINER POINT, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE, UM, UH, SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE WHEN THIS COMES BACK, THAT WE HAVE A STRONG FOOTING ON WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO.
AND TONIGHT IS NOT A NIGHT TO BE DISCUSSING THAT, OF COURSE, BUT I WANNA MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT THE CITY CAN AND CANNOT DO.
WAS THE QUESTION, UM, TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN THIS COMES BACK TO US, WE'RE, UM, WE HAVE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN, UH, RETAIL AND RANGES, UH, CORRECT.
AND, AND WHAT, WHAT OUR, UM, WHAT THE CITY'S POSITION CAN BE OR HOW THAT MIGHT DIFFER FROM, UH, FEDERAL LAW.
UH, AND, UH, YOU KNOW, IT SAYS IT VERY CLEARLY HERE, BUT I, I REALLY WANNA UNDERSTAND WHAT WE CAN DO BECAUSE I THINK THERE'S A LOT WE CAN DO, UH, TO, TO EXAMINE THIS.
AND I WANNA MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND.
I DON'T WANNA BE HIT UP WITH SOMETHING IF I MAKE A PROPOSAL AND THIS SAYS, WELL, EH, YOU KNOW, SO I WANNA BE WELL GROUNDED BY THAT TIME.
WE'RE STILL IN CLARIFIED QUESTIONS.
I THINK WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT.
UM, DO WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT? I DO.
I HAVE TWO SPEAKERS HERE IN THE CHAMBER.
UH, THE FIRST SPEAKER IS LIZ SCHMIDT.
ACCORDING TO THE CDC, THE LAST RECORDS OF 2023, APPROXIMATELY 46,000 PEOPLE WERE KILLED BECAUSE OF GUN INJURIES, ZERO TO THE AGE OF 17.
MOST INJURIES ARE, UH, AND DEATHS ARE CAUSED BY GUNS.
SO I WANT TO SAY, PLEASE PASS THIS URGENT, UM, INTERIM IN ORDINANCE, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR TAKING IT UNDER CONSIDERATION.
WE HAVE ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT.
THE NEXT SPEAKER IS BRENT SANJI.
THIS ISSUE IS DEFINITELY NOT URGENT.
UH, I'D LIKE TO PROPOSE THAT WE MOVE IT TO THE NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED MEETING.
FIRST OF ALL, I THINK THIS IS AIMED AT MIKE GRANT.
UH, HE'S A RESIDENT IN OUR CITY.
HE COMES TO A LOT OF THE COUNCIL MEETINGS.
HE SAYS HE'S A GUN RETAILER IN THE CITY.
UM, THE IMMIGRATION HAS BEEN A BIG ISSUE IN OUR CITY, AND IT'S, UH, THE LAST SEVERAL MEETINGS.
MIKE GRANT SPOKE OUT IN FAVOR OF IMMIGRATION ENFORCEMENT.
UM, AND NOW THERE'S A LIKE URGENT ORDINANCE TARGETING GUN RETAILERS IN THE CITY.
AND SO I'M WONDERING, UH, HOW DID THIS GET ORIGINATED? HOW DO YOU GO FROM A SINGLE INQUIRY TO AN IMMEDIATE, UH, CITYWIDE MORATORIUM ON ALL FIREARM RETAILERS IN THE CITY? HOW DID THAT HAPPEN? CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT ONE SINGLE INQUIRY? UM, SECOND OF ALL THE, WHO ARE THE FOUR? YOU NEED FOUR OUT OF FIVE VOTERS.
UH, FOR THIS, I WOULD LIKE THE MAYOR TO BE PRESENT BECAUSE SHE IS AN IMMIGRANT.
AND I'M WONDERING IF YOU'RE USING OUR GOVERNMENT TO TARGET MIKE GRANT FOR HIS COMMENTS ABOUT IMMIGRATION.
SHE'S CONVENIENTLY NOT HERE TONIGHT.
I THINK SHE'S SICK, BUT I WOULD LIKE HER TO VOTE ON IT AND MAKE COMMENT, COMMENT ON IT.
SO WE SEE WHERE SHE'S COMING FROM.
SHE IMMIGRATED TO THIS COUNTRY AND SHE'S IN OUR GOVERNMENT.
IS SHE USING OUR GOVERNMENT TO GO AFTER ONE OF OUR RESIDENTS FOR HIS COMMENTS ON IMMIGRATION? I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT.
SO PLEASE POSTPONE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING.
WE'RE NOT IN DANGER IN DUBLIN FROM GUN RETAILERS.
SO PLEASE POSTPONE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING.
DO WE HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL PUBLIC COMMENT? I DO NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKER SLIPS.
UM, I CAN MAKE MOTION TO APPROVE ON A SECOND.
WE STILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF, UH, I MEAN, YOU CAN MAKE YOUR MOTION IF YOU WANT TO, BUT WE STILL, AS SOON AS WE'RE DONE DELIBERATION YEAH.
DELIBERATION TO, TO GO FORWARD.
UM, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO SAY IN, IN, UM, RELATION TO THE PUBLIC COMMENT WE JUST HEARD? UH, WELL, I, THE INQUIRY WASN'T RELATED TO MIKE GRANT.
UM, THIS WOULDN'T IMPACT ANY EXISTING BILL, UH, E EXISTING RETAILERS.
UH, IT WOULD NOT, THIS WOULD ONLY BE PERTAINING TO NEW PERMITS OF SOMEBODY SIDE OR RELOCATIONS, AS YOU MENTIONED EARLIER, A RELOCATION THAT REQUIRED A PERMIT.
UM, THE, THE QUESTION CAME UP ABOUT, UM, THE REASON FOR THE URGENCY AND, UM, I'M GOING TO REITERATE WHAT I, WHAT I HEARD IN OUR STAFF REPORT, AND CORRECT ME IF I GOT ANYTHING WRONG, BUT WE HAD AN INQUIRY TO OPEN A NEW, UH, FIREARMS RETAILER THAT INCLUDED A RANGE WITHIN A THOUSAND FEET OF A SCHOOL, BASICALLY ADJACENT TO A SCHOOL.
UM, AND IF WE DON'T DO AN, UH, MORATORIUM, THEN, UM, THAT COULD MOVE FORWARD POTENTIALLY, UM, BEFORE WE HAVE HAD STAFF HAS HAD A CHANCE TO RESEARCH WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO FROM A POLICY IN A WHOLE CITYWIDE, UM, HOLISTIC CITYWIDE, UM, I'VE LOST MY WORDS POLICY.
[02:10:01]
THE URGENCY.IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH ANY SPECIFIC INDIVIDUAL OR ANY SPECIFIC MEMBER OF COUNCIL.
IT WAS, UM, A, UH, AN INQUIRY BASED ON A VACANT RETAIL PARCEL THAT SOMEBODY IS CONSIDERING TURNING INTO A, UM, UH, SUCH A RETAILER.
THE ONLY CLARIFICATION, AND I THINK YOU SAID IT WAS THAT IT WAS, IT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO, TO A SCHOOL.
ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS? I BELIEVE, UM, WE HAVE SOMEBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION.
I WILL, I JUST WANNA MAKE SURE I, I JUST WANNA POINT OUT THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR PUTTING THAT, PUTTING THAT CLARIFICATION IN PLACE.
UM, BUT YES, I DO WANNA MAKE A MOTION, UH, TO ADOPT AN, UH, AN ER URGENCY INTERIM ORDINANCE PROHIBITING THE ESTABLISHMENT EXPANSION OR RELOCATION OF FIREARMS RETAILING AND SHOOTING RANGE USES.
AND YOUR MOTION, UM, INCLUDES WAIVING THE READING, CORRECT? AND IT INCLUDES WAIVING THE READING.
UM, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND AND WE DO NOT NEED A ROLL CALL VOTE.
ANY OPPOSED? AND NO ABSTENTIONS.
EVERYBODY VOTED THAT PASSES FOUR TO ZERO, WHICH, UM, DOES SATISFY THE FOUR FIFTHS OF THOSE PRESENT AND VOTING.
UM, SO THAT HAS PASSED, AND, UH, AT THIS POINT, WE WILL STAND ADJOURNED AT SEVEN 12 UNTIL OUR NEXT REGULARLY SCHEDULED COUNCIL MEETING ON FEBRUARY 3RD.