Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout7/26/2005 Minutes - Special Study SessionCITY OF DIAMOND BAR CITY COUNCIL SPECIAL STUDY SESSION JULY 26, 2005 STUDY SESSION: Mayor Chang called the Study Session to order at 5:00 p.m. in Room CC -8 of the South Coast Air Quality Management District/Government Center, 21865 Copley Dr., Diamond Bar, CA. Present: Council Members Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, Mayor Pro Tem O'Connor and Mayor Chang. Also Present: Linda Lowry, City Manager; Michael Jenkins, City Attorney; David Doyle, Assistant City Manager; James DeStefano, Assistant City Manager; David Liu, Director of Public Works; Bob Rose, Community Services Director; Linda Magnuson, Finance Director and Tommye Cribbins, Executive Assistant. ► Library Ballot Measureiscussion 0.Public Comments on St dy Session Items LIBRARY BALLOT MEASURE ACM/Doyle reported that during interest in placing a ballot meas of the Diamond Bar Library. It $13,500,000. Due to time constr; order to develop a ballot measur to Council for approval no later 1 question of what amount the construction of the facility - sce with the City financing $10.5 milli cost and going out to bond for bonding $5 million. All scenarios ACM/Doyle stated that an addi- costs once the facility was consti realize about $400,000 additions portion of their property tax conte cost. The $400,000 could be pai through an annual assessment fi whether the Council wants to pl the ballot or whether the Council estimated $400,000 additional or ACM/Doyle explained that the 1 of available financing options in USSION: the July 19 Study Session, Council indicated its ire on the November ballot to fund construction is estimated that the facility would cost about tints staff needs direction from Council tonight in notice the public and bring the ballot measure han August 12, 2005. Before the Council, is the Council intends to contribute toward the iarios include: the City contributing $3 million Dn; the City contributing about half of the project �7 million; and, the City contributing more and are based on a 30 -year bond projection. anal consideration was the ongoing operating acted. Staff estimates that the new facility would cost over what the residents currently pay as a bution for a total of about $1.4 million operating i by the City or passed along to the community r the life of the property. Tonight's discussion is ce a hundred percent of the operating cost on would consider a 50 percent contribution of the :rating costs. portion of the discussion involved discussion unction with a November election. JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 2 CC STUDY SESSION ACM/Doyle referred Council to the upda packet. The first option asks the Cit, contributing the difference of $8.5 millio parcel to debt service the bond. This would pay 100% of the ongoing increas $22.51 for a combined annual parcel i conclusion of 30 years the assessmE operating costs only. The operation a escalator so that every year the assessn index. Option 2 includes 100% of the assumes a 50/50 partnership for constr City paying about $6.5 million and the r debt service for construction only amour additional ongoing operating expenses. million with the residents bonding $10.5 on the bond issue with the $22.51 for a basis. :ed MuniFinancial options included in the to pay $5 million with the residents i. The Community would pay $20.73 per scenario assumes that the Community in operating expenses for an additional ieasure of $43.24 for 30 years. At the nt would drop down to the additional sts would be put in place with a CPI ent would increase according to the CPI ongoing additional operating costs and fiction costs. Another scenario finds the ,sidents paying $7 million with the bond ting to $28.61 per parcel plus $22.51 for Option 3 proposes that the City pay $3 million at a cost of $42.38 debt service total of $64.89 per parcel on an annual ACM/Doyle stated that staff's previous report provided 2002 survey information that indicated a bond measure would be more likely to pass with a lower assessment. A $30-40 range garnered a 60% approval from those residents who were surveyed with 100 percent of theadditional costs paid by the City. Dropping the ongoing operating costs to a 50/5 split and bonding out $5 million for construction with the City contributing $8.5 million the per parcel rate for the debt service only is $20.73, and'a parcel tax rate for the operations costs of $11.25 for a total of $31.98. Table II indicates a true 50/50 partnership with the City contributing one-half of the construction cost and ongoing increased operating costs and the residents contributing one-] ialf of the construction cost and ongoing increased operating costs. This scenar o results in a $28.61 assessment for construction and $11.25 for ongoing increased operating costs for a total annual 30 -year assessment of $39.86. Table 11indicates the City's contribution of $3 million with a $10.5 million contribution from the residents through the ballot measure with a debt service amount of $A2,38 per parcel on an annual basis with ongoing increased operating costs (50percent) of $11.25 for a total 30 -year parcel measure of $53.63. Council discussion ensued. C/Herrera asked if the operating homeowners currently pay. ACM/Doyle responded that the residents $1 million toward the cost of operating the operating costs would include the addition time positions. included the $1.2 million that the are currently paying slightly more than current library. The additional ongoing two full time positions and several part JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 3 CC STUDY SESSION MPT/O'Connor asked if some County libraries were subsidized beyond the amount of the property tax collec ed through tax assessments in certain cities. ACM/Doyle said absolutely and PT/O'Connor asked why D.B. was not included in such a plan. ACM/Doyle said he believed the County told D.B. it did not have the money to run the library and that D.B. was asked to increase its assessment and responded that it was paying its fair share and would not further tax the residents. In fact, certain communities pay more than they receive from the County. C/Zirbes asked the cost of servi a from the County as opposed to the City going on its own. ACM/Doyle responded that the numbers were very close. LSSI argued that the City would have much more local control were they to run the program rather than the County running the prop am. MPT/O'Connor wanted to kn exempted from the parcel tax. CA/Jenkins explained that there City would determine the age, in( City does not have a lot of time be to use the same criteria the reference to the program in tl documentation to qualify. if senior citizens, disabled, etc. could be re ways to include lifeline type exemptions. The ome eligibility, etc. The only problem is that the o consider these issues. Another option would utilities uses for its lifeline service by making e ordinance. The homeowner would submit M/Chang said he would prefer to�have consideration based on low income rather than providing a blanket exempti n for all seniors. C/Herrera asked if exemptions contribution by other parcels. ACM/Doyle said he did not kn and did not know how quickly ; CM/Lowry pointed out that the uti because there are more househo certain groups would mean an increase in the how many people would qualify for exemption could obtain the information. s would not necessarily have the information than there are parcels in the City. M/Chang felt that based on the City's experience with Neighborhood Improvement the number of peo le who would qualify under low-income status would be minimal. C/Zirbes pointed out that the School District lost its bid for a bond assessment and voters claimed that exemptio s were unfair. MPT/O'Connor asked the amou4of the bond issue. JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 4 CC STUDY SESSION C/Herrera remembered that it was about $60 per parcel. The issue failed with 61 percent of the approval vote because it needed a 67% percent majority to pass. MPT/O'Connor felt that people would Because the Walnut School District we about whether the City would be able to vote favorably on educational matters. unsuccessful she would be concerned )ass the library bond assessment. C/Zirbes felt that one of the downfalls o the Walnut School District plan was the inclusion of the exemption for seniors because some did not understand the exemption and others did not apprecia a the exemption. If the library measure goes to a vote of the people the consideration should be focused on how the measure could be moved forward an what residents would argue "for" and "against." C/Tanaka said it would depend on assessment were on the low end, exemption. M/Chang said that if the City were to it be based on income rather than on Public Comments: Jerry Hamilton felt that the seniors were would campaign against this measure proposal. Many seniors moved to D.B purchase homes for $600,000 plus. ; security does not provide an adequate taxes etc, and many seniors do not ha assessments when utility bills are incre� The residents want a library, a pool, etc. for these facilities he believed that mar opposition. amount of the assessment. If the instead of $60 there should be no sider an exemption he would prefer that alone. taxed beyond their means and said he is he did against the school measure in the 1960's and 70's and did not n1niors have some income but social income to pay for medical, increased ,e the means to pay for additional tax sing and other costs are skyrocketing. tut when the residents are asked to pay seniors would speak out and vote in Marsha Hawkins said she appreciated Jerry Hamilton's remarks and the fact that he stood up for the seniors. She would like to see the City Council attempt to address that issue and ask the seniors what would appeal to them about this project and proposed assessment. She would also like for the City to figure out a way to move this forward because this m -asure must embrace all demographics. She would especially like for the seniors to be targeted in consideration of a ballot measure to see what would make t attractive and move it along. She said she knows of seniors who are in favor of the ballot measure and will be campaigning for it because the new librar 1 would be beneficial to them and would increase their property values. Kathleen Newe agreed with Marsha I consideration the residents of D.B. For kips that the Council should take into ample, certain scenarios such as J U LY 26, 2005 PAGE 5 CC STUDY SESSION $35.82 would be much more appealing to seniors and lower income residents. Because of the limited time in getting this measure on the ballot everyone needs to work together and present thE most palatable measure possible. She said that in her opinion it would be a ter Ible thing for the measure to be placed on the ballot only to have it voted d wn. She believed that Hacienda Heights and Rowland Heights voted in favor f a special assessment for their library. Lydia Plunk asked the Council to consider that demographics information would not necessarily provide the kind of information needed to move this measure forward. When her husband was out of work for two years they would never have qualified as low-income. It is not just about pitting the young against the old. There are many lines on the pr perty tax bill and if each line were increased by $30 it would bear consideration. She asked the Council Members to consider all aspects of the issue and do whz t they felt was right to do. While it is great that property values increase when you are living in a house and have no intention of selling your property it matter7 little that property values are increasing if expenses exceed income. Ruth Low felt this was a golden opportunity for the community that had been discussed for years and that people had been requesting for several years. She challenged the residents and Council to say who would pay for a new library if not the residents? If the residents do not make it happen it will not happen and the chances of it ever happening will grow slimmer and dimmer over time. Mike Shay felt that people need residents were willing to get be the swimming pool issue they what are the right things to do educating the people for the impossible to attempt to please these kinds of issues and so too J to be educated. He pointed out that unless the nd the library issue, sports complex issue and )uld not happen. The Council needs to decide >r the community and get behind the issue by ood of the community because it would be veryone on every issue. Other cities get behind an D.B. Jack Newe asked people to consider how much it hurt them financially to go out and rent one movie each month because that would be about the cost to each household per month and the benefit would include additional services to the youth and seniors. He asked re idents and Council not to sell the community short because a new library woul provide more benefits to the community than it would cost the residents. Wanda Tanaka said that last week the library had to turn away children who wanted to attend a special presentation because there was no room. Tony Torng felt that ACM/Doyle's oint that a new library would now cost the City $13.5 million instead of $10 million estimated two years ago was a point worth considering and if D.B. did not moie forward now it would not be able to catch up with inflation. A library is very important to the quality of life for children and for seniors. JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 6 CC STUDY SESSION Mrs. Hamilton said that she did not be ieve the library had to be huge like the Diamond Bar Center that is rented out to cover the cost. A new library will not be rented out for anything else. The number of people that normally use a library is not 92 people per hour. Special events attract more people but it does not make up a quarter of a million people using the library. She agreed that the parking for the current facility was inadequate but felt that there were other solutions such as using the old Alpha Beta building that was located close to schools and much more accessible to the general public The idea that seniors would walk up Grand Ave. to a library was in her opinion somewhat preposterous. She felt that since D.B. had just turned 16 it was acting like a teenager that wanted all of the bells and whistles. One small group wan s a library and other groups want a pool and sports complex. The Walnut School issue was voted down because it was an additional tax burden. Adding facilitiess results in millions and millions of dollars of cost to the homeowners and once people vote "yes" there is no end. Someone said that this was not a tax but a contribution to the community. It is not a contribution when the tax bill comes anc individuals have to pay the bill. It is an assessment - it is a tax. She felt there w 3re other avenues such as grant monies and foundation contributions and she wz s not opposed to having a new library if it could be financed without placing another debt on the homeowners. By the time the current library was built it woul J probably exceed $13.5 million in cost that would result in a larger assessment to each parcel. Kids have computers at home and at their schools. Kids do not vi 3it the library to check out books as they did years ago. M/Chang closed public comments. C/Herrera said she realized that some homeowners felt tapped out. if the City contributed $8.5 million the additional $5 million would come from the reserves that included reserves set aside for the pursuit of economic development. The point was made that when a new library actually gets built it could cost more and the City would therefore be asked to pa more. For the City to be able to afford its current debt it needs economic develo ment money for leverage and incentive to attract new businesses to the comm nity in order to generate additional tax revenue to the City, She felt that the Council could not, in good conscience, take money from economic development. The other money is being held in reserve in case the City wants to pay off the bond that it used to build the community center. A tragedy could befall the City that would require it to reduce its debt. Once the funds are gone, they are gone and there is much uncertainty about funding from the State. D.B. was fortunat this year because it received money it was not expecting. However, D.B. may n A be so lucky next year and there may be other major business decisions that would require the City to dip into its reserves. Legislators are discussing re oing the State's financial system and taking away gasoline sales tax which is D.B.'s biggest revenue source - $800,000 per year. The speaker of the house wants to convert those taxes into other taxes. Because the future is so uncertain it seems imprudent to take any more than $3 million from the City's reserves. JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 7 CC STUDY SESSION C/Zirbes felt that $3 million was City at risk. The audience and re Members to keep the City safe a hold on the purse strings of th construction is a guess because construct the library. If the projec good for the additional cost dif residents should have a right to per month to the residents. Thi biggest of which is based upon would be a mistake to pull that r the sake of trying to pass a ball adopt Table 111. i fair contribution amount that would not put the sidents have indicated they look to their Council ,id exercise strong leadership. Keeping a strong a City is important. The $13 million figure for the City really does not know what it will take to t costs $17 million the City would have to stand erence. If the community wants a library, the express their views. In reality the cost is $5.30 re are a lot of line items on the tax bills the the assessed value of the property. He felt it umber down and put the City's future at risk for of initiative. He recommended that the Council C/Tanaka said that over the yeas Council had done an excellent job of holding its reserves in check but felt that it was prudent to put the measure on the ballot at the lowest cost to the residents because it would be a good investment for the City and its future. He felt the residents wanted the City to take a risk and not burden them with an additional tax assessment. MPT/O'Connor said she agreed ballot to allow the citizens an opp library will never be less than it i; the City had built the facility two said she agreed with C/Zirbes th+ increased $1.5 million over the e forward now. The City's intent Community Center and the citizi issue. She said she had not pars, how they felt about a new libraq place the matter on the ballot. that this matter needed to be placed on the �rtunity to voice their opinion. The cost of a new today and will likely be more than it is today. If ears ago it might have saved $3.5 million. She t because the cost of the Diamond Bar Center iginal estimate the library project should move was always to place a library next to the ns have a right to vote "Yes" or "No" on the nally gone into the community to ask residents and believed the only way to find out was to ACM/Doyle stated that based on the survey and given the short amount of time to place the measure on the ballot and promote it in the public arena, the possibility of moving from a 52 percent approval to a 66 percent approval was highly unlikely. M/Chang felt that the reason the City wanted to build a library was because the community was driven to make it happen, the same reason the City built the Community Center. He believed that no Council Member had an agenda to build a new library. For many years construction of a community center and library had been a top goal for the City and it had been a direction of the community and the Council to carry out the wishes of the residents. The City is 16 years and compared to other cities D.B. is a young City. The City is doing well financially because the Council Members and staff are conservative. The question is for what is the money being saved. Money is generally saved for matters of urgency and to improve the quality of life. The community center was built and now JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 8 CC STUDY SESSION provides a great value to the residents and he believed the library would serve the community in the same manner. The City already spent $1.2 million on site improvements for the library. The Ci y is working on improving its income resources because of the unpredictabili of gas tax revenue and other budgetary concerns. He felt that the Council was rr oving forward to fulfill the people's goals. At the same time he understood residents' concerns about being taxed any further. He likes to think of this assessment as a "contribution" rather than a tax because the library belongs to all of the residents. Because the City was unsuccessful in its bid to obtain grant f nds to build a new library Council it was time to put the matter to a vote of the pe ple. MPT/O'Connor responded to a questionlabout the survey that fifty-five percent of the people that were surveyed were 50 years of age or older. M/Chang continued stating that regard always those in favor and those oppose he asked the residents to please supl Council approve the 50/50 scenario res per year ($3.50 per month) per parcel foi :ss of any proposed project there are . This facility is for all of the people and ort the venture. He proposed that the Iting in an assessment of about $40.00 30 years. C/Zirbes asked staff for an accounting of the revenue loss to the City on $8 million contribution. ACM/Doyle explained that the City's contribution would be $6.5 million and the actual "real dollar" loss of income to the City would be about $195,000 per year. With respect to the City's budget the ongoing operating expenses would add $200,000 to the budget. C/Zirbes asked how the City could afford to pay $200,000 for ongoing operating expenses when it would lose $200,000 i interest revenue? CM/Lowry explained that in theory the fund balance carryover for capital proj by $200,000. C/Zirbes felt it was a "big apple to bite." M/Chang pointed out that by bringing Bui save a minimum of $100,000 a year anc render the City more efficient. The comrr economic development and stay optimi: good investment for the community unreasonable under the 50/50 scenario. C/Zirbes said he would agree to a num City contribution of about $5 million. The now and he would not like for the City to would be whole by using more of its or reduce the annual capital projects ding and Safety in-house the City would he felt there was always other ways to unity needs to work on bringing in more tic about the future. A new library is a and the parcel assessment is not r between the $3 and $8 million for a immunity is paying the operating costs d itself not having the money JULY 26, 2005 available to keep the library than $2 per month for the re: M/Chang felt the City could sa facility. C/Zirbes said he did not know PAGE 9 CC STUDY SESSION open. The additional operating costs are less $200,000 in operating costs by running the the City could shave their overhead. M/Chang said the City could ask the County to shave their costs or take over the facility and shave the costs. C/Zirbes pointed out that the City adds items to its budget every year. To date, there have not been many projects to fill the economic development pipeline. With what the City is losing and what it knows is coming in the budget it will be less than it was two years ago. In order for him to be comfortable he would need assurance that the City could a ord the $200,000 because a Sears Essentials was moving into the City for example. Or, that the City could afford to pay for the bond on its own because a large auto mail was moving into the City. Or, that the City just annexed property off of the SR 57 that was all commercial and the City would realize revenue from tho a projects. D.B. does not have those things today. The reality is that the Cithas money in the bank and debt obligations, a large family of staff and 60,000 p us people wanting the Council to be responsible with the reserve dollars. At the e id of the day this is the citizens' money and the Council needs to be prudent abut how it moves forward to ensure that a new facility can afford to keep its door open. M/Chang felt this was a good pr, Community Center and the neic City has already spent $1.2 mill move on. And he would like to rr way to manage the money. Un residents a very reasonable proji D.B. and provide a great deal of r would provide revenue to the City better cycle than it was two year Center will happen. By the time t implement many economic devel more income. The City's bigger operating costs. ►ject for the future of D.B. Everyone enjoys the iborhood is complimented by the facility. The :)n and it can either sit on that expenditure or ave on because the City has the money and a ler his scenario the City would be giving the pct. He felt that Sears Essential would come to ,,venue to the City. If not, another company that would come to D.B. in its place. The City is in a ; ago and it knows that the Country Hills Town ie library is constructed the City will be able to )pment projects. Site D also offers potential for t risk is on the $200,000 additional ongoing C/Zirbes pointed out that the City is also losing $200,000 on the lost operating revenue. He asked ACM/Doyle h w quickly the new library would be constructed if the ballot issue were approved in November. ACM/Doyle responded that if the bond measure passed in November the bonds would probably not be issued until the bond market was more favorable. In the meantime design work and archit cts and engineering work could move forward JULY 26, 2005 PAQE 10 CC STUDY SESSION and be completed in nine months or sc until a contractor was hired and constru months after award of contract. It would most likely be a year or longer ion would probably commence 14 to 16 C/Zirbes asked if the estimate of 13.5 million to complete construction considered the three-year timeline. ACM/Doyle responded that staff built a three-year escalator into the 35% increase and based the $13.5 million on the original estimate using those factors. M/Chang felt that the Friends of the for construction of the library. C/Herrera pointed out that if the City additional cost to hire and pay em additional operating expenses to the Ci M/Chang said he believed that if the Coi for $1.4 million the City could run th. additional $200,000 operating expenses C/Zirbes said he felt it would be great f He knows that the kids use home com they do not have a facility that provi information. He felt a new library would He also believed that $5 per month as it scenario to members of the community. believed that whether the cost was $3 purpose. The people of the community h new library at the top of the hill is somet matter whether it was $3 per month or $; them whether the City officials were tryin put other things at risk such as staff, car development. He felt that Table III circumstances. He said he could remem straights and the City gave money to the with very limited hours and that he wog position again without ensuring that the r Valley - could keep its doors open. M/Chang agreed that if the people wan reason he recommended the 50150 scei feel more comfortable to approve the pr be better for the project if people were rn some cases people care about paying ; more per year per parcel. He would be pl would mount an effort to raise funds to run the library there would be an es over and above the $200,000 ty or private sector could run the library facility for $1.2 million and save the )r the community to have a new library. )uters but perhaps they do so because les them 21St Century accessibility to add a new dimension to the community. dicated in Table 111 offered an affordable :or him it boiled down to whether people )r $5 a month it would not change their ave to believe as Council believes that a ling they want and for them it would not per month. It would, however, matter to g to falsely dilute the $5 down to $3 and ital improvement projects and economic was the best scenario under the ber a time when the County was in dire County to keep the library doors open Id not want the City to put itself in that ew library - the jewel of the San Gabriel the library they should pay for it. The ►rio was because he felt people would ect on that basis. He also felt it would arguing about who would pay for it. In more. In this case it amounts to $14 ased if the Council could reach a JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 11 CC STUDY SESSION consensus and the residents would support the proposal by approving a reasonable assessment. C/Zirbes said that $14 was about a dollar a month and it would keep the City safe and keep the library doors open. C/Tanaka felt that $1 per month would make the difference between someone voting approval or disapproval. C/Zirbes disagreed. C/Tanaka felt that the term "tax" ad a negative connotation. Bottom line was that it would be a "tax" and not a "contribution." Because the project was very important to the City and to the residents and youth it needed to be positive and it needed to move forward. His feeling was that he would like to have the residents taxed the lowest amount possi le. However, 50/50 would be his compromise. With the excellent staff and thei hard work and the Council practicing fiduciary responsibilities the City is very fiscally responsible. The opportunity presents itself now and it would be too expensive to build later on. There is an opportunity now to do something positive an if the Council Members are risk -takers and the leaders and the visionary body that can lead the City forward to the next level the Council needs to step up ands pport the project 100 percent. Once the Council reaches a consensus every Council Member needs to engage in an education program to inform the public. 01 almost every issue the public is not aware of what is happening in the City u iless the press reports it accurately and in this case the people would not otherNise know the benefits to the community. As an example, one of the projects ft at the press misrepresented in the paper was information that discussed 180 r sidential units being built above Target and now in addition to that there would be another 180 units and that is the way that it was reported in the newspaper. C/Herrera said she did not bE Members to take risks with their Council in order to make the pu this body chooses. She empha strong fiscal responsibility to m future solvency of the City and sl She would not be able to suppo contributes $3 million and th construction and the ongoing op( C/Zirbes said he agreed with Ci grant funds the Council agreed t the Council told the community v The application failed and the complete the project. Therefore, toward the project and ask the re ieve that the residents expected the Council money and Council Members do not sit on the )lie more comfortable about what dollar amount ized that she believed the Council had a very ke certain that monies were set aside for the e would not take action to risk the City's coffers. t any other scenario than one in which the City homeowners pay for the balance of the ration. -lerrera. When the City applied to the State for give the project $2.5 million and that was what as the City's investment toward the new library. ',ouncil wants to continue to move forward to the City should offer up the initial seed money ;idents if they are willing to support the issue. JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 12 CC STUDY SESSION Table III offers the best solution becaus project. When he served on the task for of $5.5 and now that figure is $13.5 mil this matter on the ballot to give the publ And this is an affluent community an libraries in the East San Gabriel Valle, difference of $1 per month per parcel t security and security that the library do levels would remain up. He reiterated th MPT/O'Connor wondered whether the than proposed would the assessment assumption that the library would c� Municipal Bond Attorney, explained maximum rate for the bond and if it �A levy could be reduced by Council ordin MPT/O'Connor said she was comfo agree to Table III. the Council is assuming a $13.5 million ;e the body assumed a total project cost on. There is no doubt the Council wants an opportunity to say it wants a library, I this City will have the showplace of . When the discussion boils down to a e opposite side of the coin is the City's yrs would remain open and the staffing t he favored Table III. 1ual cost to build the library was lower set for the 30 -year period based on the $13.5 million to build. Brian Jewett, t the parcel tax would be set at the determined that less was required the with Table III or Table II and would C/Zirbes moved, C/Herrera seconded, to approve Table III. M/Chang recessed the Study Session at :45 M/Chang reconvened the Study Session at 6:50 C/Tanaka said the project was important and he wanted to see it succeed and in his opinion, it would only succeed if th tax were kept at the lowest possible amount. M/Chang appreciated the motion and was serious about moving forward to the initiative. He said he agreed with C/Tanaka and rE assessment around $40 and believe unacceptable to the residents and espec d because it showed that the Council the matter on the ballot and support :rated that he would prefer to keep the that anything over that would be ly the senior citizens. C/Zirbes asked M/Chang if he were willi g to vote for Option 11 wherein the City would pay $3 million plus the overrun and 50/50 on the ongoing additional operating costs. M/Chang and C/Tanaka agreed. M/Chang asked C/Zirbes if he would cosider dropping the assessment amount from $65 to $40 because he believed it would help the seniors support the program. JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 13 CC STUDY SESSION C/Zirbes felt the best way to build the library was for the City to just build it but the City did not have the money to build it. The City saved and saved and decided to pay cash to build the community center. At the end of the day and at the 11t" hour the Council decide it would leave the City in a bad cash position and wanted money for economi development so the City borrowed money to pay for the community center. So that money is really dedicated to economic development and the City shoulc not be using economic development monies to build a library or city hall or anything else because that was not the purpose of the loan. The best way to build a library is to pay cash for it but the City is not in a position to do so. And, the City is not in the best cash position at this time. He believed that given the unknown variables that could occur and that the Council had to make a decision at this point in history and fix an exact amount that the Council would ask the residents to pay on a parcel tax without Knowing what else would happen and what future budgets might look like $50 a year versus $60 a month. M/Chang said he respected C Zirbes' concerns from the standpoint of the financial condition of the City and he agreed with a solid fiscal approach. MPT/O'Connor said she was concerned about the City dropping its reserves down to $7 million. Option III anc paying half of the additional ongoing operating costs would put the City at $3-5 million coming out of the City's reserves and she felt it was a much more comfortable position for the City. C/Zirbes revised his motion to ap rove Table III - $11 bond issue with the City to pay the remainder of the construction cost and split the additional ongoing operating costs 50/50 ($200,0010 from the City annually and $200,000 plus escalation from the residents). /Herrera seconded the revised motion. Motion carried by the following Roll Calivote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBE S: None DISCUSSION OF AVAILABLE FINANCING OPTIONS IN CONJUNCTION WITH A NOVEMBER ELECTION: Chris Fisher, MuniFinancial, sta November ballot the Council wo election and submit it to the regisi post a Notice of Special Electic Ordinance to the registrar (88 c Following that the arguments we Registrar (due 77 days prior to th{ argument against), ad that in order to get the measure on the Id need to adopt an ordinance calling for an ar no later than August 12. Next the City would i immediately following the submittal of the iys prior to the election date — August 18). ild be submitted to the City Clerk and to the election date — August 22 — argument for and J U LY 26, 2005 PAGE 14 CC STUDY SESSION MPT/O'Connor asked if this was the po "opposition" arguments were submitted? Chris Fisher responded affirmatively. MPT/O'Connor felt it would be prud arguments. C/Herrera agreed and sugj of the year." Chris Fisher stated that the impartial drafted and submitted to the City Clerk a date (August 22). Rebuttals to the argu City Clerk and Registrar by August 22. October (September 29 and October 1E each registered voter eligible to vote or places would be established and voter: prior to the election date (October 11) within 28 days after election the Regi. invoice to the City Clerk requesting payn the election date. MPT/O'Connor asked who could provide ACM/Doyle said that staff would r produce arguments for and against for rebuttal arguments. MPT/O'Connor wanted to know how the against were factual. Chris Fisher said that if the County Reg there are mechanisms for the County to the argument would not necessarily gi rebuttal. CM/Lowry said that after learning the appear unnecessary to divide the t construction and ongoing costs and the b the construction portion would sunset in remaining. Due to the lack of time for ad, was hoping the Council would discuss possibly in June rather than this Noveml success. at which the "in favor" arguments and to ask teachers to submit "in favor" ed that it should perhaps be a "teacher ialysis by the City Attorney would be d Registrar 77 days prior to the election lent would need to be submitted to the etween the end of September and mid the sample ballots would be mailed to the D.B. Special Tax Measure. Polling notified of the polling places 29 days The election is held on November 8; trar would certify the results send an mt for election services thirty days after uments against. that it exercise its option whether to there was no time left in the process ouncil would be certain the arguments Lr were alerted to gross inaccuracies accordingly. Merely disagreeing with ntee the Council an opportunity for Council's intent this evening it would allot issue into two items between illot wording would inform the voter that 30 years with only the operating costs quate education and campaigning staff putting the election out to next year er in order to improve the likelihood of Habib Isaac said that the City had the option to call a special election. J U LY 26, 2005 PAGE 15 CC STUDY SESSION MPT/O'Connor said the City rcently called a special election that cost City $85,000. Mr. Isaac said that this matter involves a multi-million dollar bond issue and investing $85,000 to make asingle-issue ballot. It gives the community an opportunity to investigate both sides thoroughly and it gives the "Friends of the Library" an opportunity to put a campaign together and focus the issue squarely on the library. MPT/O'Connor asked about toe success of single -issue ballot measures. Mr. Isaac said he did not have a crystal ball but felt that if the election were postponed more time would be available to pursue the issue in the form of education, campaign, discussion, and possibly re -surveying the residents (at an estimated cost of $10-11,000). C/Zirbes felt it would lose on tl Fund issue would be on the san March election that would prob because it would provide additi people who would vote in favor out and vote for a library. e June ballot because the State Library Grant ballot so in all likelihood the City would go to a bly be more expensive but essentially smarter mal time for an educational campaign and the :)f the library would take the time to actually go MPT/O'Connor said the longer t e matter was delayed the more expensive the construction would be. C/Zirbes said he could go either direction. He was merely trying to figure out how the issue would get the most support and have best opportunity for success. And, he felt staff would not have brought up the issue unless it was important. ACM/Doyle said that in the sur approval rate was at about 50 p around the percentages of that n the field would advise that it wou to that limit within two to three rr dictate that the matter be pushes to be successful. ?y numbers, based on the amount of tax, the rcent. He felt that by the time November rolled mber reaching 66 percent were slim. Experts in I be difficult at best to increase the percentages nths. A higher potential level of success would out to provide time for the education campaign C/Herrera allowed that whoever was running the pro -campaign would need time for fundraising before literature could be produced. There is a lot to do in a very short period of time. MPT/O'Connor argued that the City would be looking at an $80,000 election cost. Chris Fisher said the next regular County election date after November would be April 11, 2006. JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 16 CC STUDY SESSION MPT/O'Connor pointed out that there the City would save the cost by placing a Council election in November and matter on the November ballot. C/Herrera suggested it be placed on the (November 2006 ballot. C/Tanaka said it was too far out. MPT/O'Connor said that by delaying increase an additional 20 percent. Mr. Isaac said that it was obvious because there has been a lot of give a an important issue the City would be k election. MPT/O'Connor asked what kind of ed Mr. Fisher said that once the issue was could act in their own capacity to get be or against the ballot measure and campaigning for the ballot measure. Inc own time to promote the issue however. MPT/O'Connor asked if the City could h Mr. Fisher responded if it was prior to p ordinance is passed the City can pr promote or oppose the measure. Mr. Is place the matter on the April 11 ballot pass an ordinance next Tuesday. MPT/O'Connor asked what it would November ballot? CM/Lowry responded $60,000. Mr. Is the extra $25,000 for a special elec� have a better chance of succeeding ui r year the construction costs would him that this Council was committed take. He felt that because this was such t served by going to the April 11 County the City could provide. in the ballot individual Council Members ind the issue. The City could not act for could not devote staff time toward vidual staff members could act on their town forums? -ing the matter on the ballot. Once the ride information and cannot actively is explained that if Council decided to r instance, Council would not have to the City to place the measure on the said that it would be prudent to spend if the Council felt the measure would those circumstances. CM/Lowry reported that according tote City's Contract City Clerk, when the normal November election is held in odd years and the City consolidates with the County three ballot measures are included in the cost. Therefore, if this were held during a regular November City Council election period the impact would be zero versus adding D.B's measure onto another election for $60,000 or holding a special election at a cost of $85,000. Since the City is 16 years old and has never had a tax measure on the ballot there would be an extra incentive not to fail and by giving the City the extra time to educate the public there would be more JULY 26, 2005 PAGE 17 CC STUDY SESSION chance for success. Of all of the taxes the residents are paying none were imposed by the City Council of D.B. she pointed out — not one dime. C/Tanaka felt that the benefit of this tax was that it would directly benefit the community. Mr. Isaac explained that a 10- ay public notice was required prior to Council adoption of a resolution. Therfore, it could not be approved at the regular August 2 meeting. MPT/O'Connor felt that April would work better for the ballot measure. Mr. Fisher said that the majority of ballot measures that pass usually pass when there is consensus among the Council, City staff and the residents who are pulling together and not rushing forward and have time to build community support and consensus. The measures that failed were rushed through the system and the cities hadnot h red PR consultants and had not done the extra work to get the community supe rt upfront. PUBLIC COMMENTS: Jack Newe expressed his concern that the recent Special Election cost the City $85,000. He urged the Council to move forward to place the measure on the November ballot. Marsha Hawkins agreed with P whereas the seniors were willi Council has now presented the Friends are revved up to go wi the Friends and the public hav The Friends would be most han the Council Members were v momentum needed to pass the r. Newe. A Special Election costs the City and g to consider the lower amount of money the riends of the Library with a double negative. The i its fundraisers, their committee is forming and been working toward this goal for a long time. icapped by putting it off until April. She felt that if fling to push the issue it would provide the ieasure in November. Jerry Hamilton believed that � there were other County and State ballot measures in November it would diminish the City's goal. Kathleen Newe said that althou h the Friends of the Library were prepared to move forward she recognized the wisdom of waiting until April. People are committed to moving forward. For instance, the Friends have a meeting scheduled for tomorrow night and she hoped that the City would put money behind an educational program if the matter were extended to April. The Friends will participate with fundraisers and outreach programs because the group is committed to doing whatever it needs to do. M/Chang closed Public Com J U LY 26, 2005 PACE 18 CC STUDY SESSION MPT/O'Connor said she believed that e pass and relying on the expertise of the measures speeding it up to NovembE favorable result. Since the Council is needs to afford the ballot measure the the residents. C/Zirbes felt it would also afford the C about firm numbers regarding potential C/Herrera agreed with MPT/O'Connor matter should be moved out to April 11. C/Tanaka said he was inclined to go wit so much momentum over the years. residents with the help of the Friends of He also said he wanted to eliminate the i MPT/O'Connor said that if this measurE reason it made sense to her that the c should do everything possible to ensure experts delaying the ballot measure we educate the public. M/Chang felt that delaying the ballot by momentum. The delay would provide me the entire community together to move the $85,000 for a special election we C/Zirbes said that if the City waited 50 d into a regular election for $60,000. M/Chang moved to place the measure ballot and to place the item on the Counc town hall meetings and public education. ACM/Doyle responded to Marsha Haw Council what was currently on the balls meeting. However, because the State I ballot it would be better to put the measu �ry Council Member wanted the issue to who understand the business of ballot would not necessarily give the City a ommitted to getting the library built it ;st possible opportunity for approval by it an opportunity to become educated oval percentages. the advise of the experts that the the November date because there was Likewise, he had confidence that the the Library would approve the measure. egativity of another special election. failed in November then what. For that ouncil, the Friends, staff and residents Success and based on the advise of the ild give the City more time to properly only five months would not diminish the re time to educate the citizens and bring he issue forward. However, he felt that uld be a problem for the community. Sys and moved it to June it would be tied m the April 11 or regular June election it Goals & Objectives, provide money for ns that staff would be able to advise for June by the August 2 City Council rllot measure was slated for the June on the ballot in April. C/Zirbes said it was a special matter and felt a special election would be appropriate. ACM/Doyle pointed out that it would be date other than this November or two y is whether it is a standalone election or c i special election if it were held on any irs from this November. The difference nsolidated election with the County. J U LY 26, 2005 CM/Lowry said that in her opinic candidate for Council would u included rhetoric about why resit whether that individual won a because they would have mar negative aspect that any voter why would the Council want to c the community endorse a comm and its success. PAGE 19 CC STUDY SESSION n by placing the item on the November ballot a idoubtedly come forth with a campaign that ents should not vote in favor of a new 'tax." And Council seat would be somewhat irrelevant aged to have the opportunity to voice every would consider about this ballot measure. And o that with the City's very first attempt at having inity project. And why take a risk with the library MPT/O'Connor felt that whether the measure was put on November, April or June there would be a candidat that would use the "tax" as ammunition against the measure. C/Zirbes moved, C/Herrera seconded to direct staff to provide information regarding the feasibility of placing the tax measure on the March or April 2006 ballot and provide information regarding the City's potential for participating financially in the promotion of the measure as deemed appropriate. Motion carried by the following Roll Call vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: Herrera, Tanaka, Zirbes, MPT/O'Connor, M/Chang NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: None ADJOURNMENT: With no further business to come before the City Council, M/Chang adjourned the Study Session at 7:20 p.m. The foregoing minutes are he 2005. WEN CHANG, M •�t�� SGC�� Anda C. Lowry, City Clerk approved this fith _ day of rf,