HomeMy WebLinkAbout26-Public Works
_ .!Ill _
File No. 14.40-74
CITY OF SAN BERN'C)DINO - REQUEST FO COUNCIL ACTION
From:
ROGER G. HARDGRAVE, Director
Subject: Modify Engineers Report--Resolution
Ordering Work and Resolution Confirm-
ing Roll -- City Wide Assesnent Dis-
trict No. 994.
Dept:
Public WorksfEngineering
Date: July 7, 1994
Synopsis of Previous Council action:
06-04-90 --- Resolution No. 90-207 was adopted, making a finding that the public
interest, convenience and necessity require the formation of a City-wide
street lighting and street sweeping assessment district. known as AD 994
07-17-90 -- Resolution No. 90-323 adopted, creating Assessment District No. 994
01-10-94 --- Authorization to Proceed with the proposed extension and expansion of the
City Wide Assessment District was granted and matter referred to LIe.
02-07-94 --- Resolution 94-27 was adopted, authorizing the execution of agreement for
services with the fira of GFB-Friedrich and Associates, Inc., and with
the fira of Brown, Diven and Hentschke.
04-04-94 --- Resolution of Intention No. 94-88 adopted.
06-08-94 --- Public Meeting was conducted.
06-22-94 --- Public Hearing was conducted, item referred to Council Ad Hoc Committee
and matter continued to 07-18-94
Recommended motion:
1. That a finding be made that the public convenience and necessity require the
expansion and extension of City-wide Assessment District No. 994 and the Engineer's
Report be lIIIended to correct certain technical errors and to add the inclusion of a 3
year sunset clause and modify the formula as it applies to Mobile Home Parks.
2. That a finding be made that the Special Assessment, Investigation and Limitation
Act of 1931 shall not apply (4/5th Vote Required).
3. ADOPT RESOL\1l'ION (Ordering Work /Waiving 1931 Act requireae
4. ADOPT RESOL\1l'ION (Confirming 1994-95 Assessment Roll).
Contact penon: Phone:
cc: Shauna Clark, City Administrator
Jill Penman, City Attorney
Les Fogassy 5334
Supporting date attached: Wsrd:
Staff Report; Resolutions ALL
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No.1
257-672-53925 (Assessment District )
(Acct. DescriDtionl
Wide Street maintenance district.
Assessment District No. 994 --- City
Fin8l'lcs:
Council Notes:
75.0262
Aoenda Item Nn
~ftJ
-
CITY OF SAN BERNA())INO - REQUEST FO COUNCIL ACTION.
STAFF REPORT
Several concerns were raised at the Public Hearing of 6-22-94 regarding the proposed
expansion and extension of City-Wide Assessment District No. 994. The matter was
referred to a Council Ad Hoc committee for review and recommendation of these issues
and the matter continued to 07-18-94.
The co_ittee has met and has made developed lIIIendments to alleviate these concerns.
These amendments are: 1) Inclusion of a 3 year sunset clause. and 2) adjust the
assessment as it applies to Mobile Home Parks to 1/2 of the 631 formula (or 311 of a
Basic Assessment Unit) since they have non-standard street lighting and access ways
rather than standard streets.
The Engineer's Report has been llIIIended to reflect the above items. The adjustment of
the assessments for Mobile Home Parks will result in a reduction of the overall
revenue generated by the district by approxiaately $80.000. The proposed graffiti
removal budget, has been reduced by this amount. as shown in the Financial Analysis
in the Engineer's Report.
The Special Assessment. Investigation and Limitation Act of 1931 requires that a
finding be IUde that total assessments on any parcel do not exceed 501 of the
assessed value. Compliance with this Act entails the preparation of a report showing
the proposed assessments and the value of each parcel in the district. A public
hearing would also have to be held on the aatter, requiring lUiled notice to each
property owner. This is a timely and costly procedure. This process may be waived by
a four-fifths vote. Due to the relatively sllall assessllents proposed for each
parcel. in relation to its value. this report is not be necessary. Therefore, it is
reco_ended that the motion making a finding to waive this requirement be approved
in order to avoid the extra costs.
Two Resolutions are presented for approval. The first resolution orders the work
within the dis~rict. waives the 1931 Act requirellents as stated above and approves
the llIIended Engineer's Report. The second resolution confirms the assessment roll
for the 1994-95 fiscal year.
We reco_end that the motions be approved and the resolutions be adopted.
5.02601
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
- ._..~""_H_
o
o
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
RESOWl'ION NO.
RESOWl'ION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO CONFIRMING THE 1994-95
ASSESSHEHT ROLL FOR ASSESSHEHT DISTRICT NO. 994. CITY-WIDE STREET LIGHTING.
STREET SWEEPING. TRAFFIC SIGNAL /'IAIHTBHANCE AND GRAFFITI 1lEHOVAL.
WHEREAS. by Resolution No.
. the Mayor and Co_on Council
found that the public interest. convenience. and necessity required the
extension of a City-wide maintenance assess.ent district; and
WHEREAS. by said Resolution No.
. the Mayor and Co.on
Council extended an assess.ent district known as Assess.ent District No. 994
for the purpose of providing City-wide street lighting. street sweeping.
traffic signal aaintenance and graffiti reaoval pursuant to the provisions of
Chapter 12.90 of the San Bernardino City Municipal Code; and
12 WHEREAS. by Resolution No. 94-88. the Mayor and Co.on Council
declared that all the land included within the boundaries of said district
will be benefited by said City-wide aaintenance ; and
WHRDR-'S. said Resolution No. 94-88 declared that an annual assess.ent
shall be levied on all laud within the district to provide funding for said
uintenance; and
WHRDR~. an Assessaent Roll has been prepared totaling $4.361.942.89.
which sets forth the individual assessaents to be levied on each of the
parcels of lend within Assessunt District No. 994 for the fiscal year 1994-
95.
BE IT RESOLVED BY THE /'IAYOR AND COflHOH COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN
BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
SECTIOH 1. That the Mayor end Co_ Council do hereby find and
deteraine that the proportionate costs to be levied against the parcels of
land within Assess_nt District No. 994 are correctly set forth on Assess.ent
Roll No. 994 for the fiscal year 1994-95. on file in the office of the City
Clerk. and do hereby confira said assess_nts.
Revised 7-12-Q4
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
Approved as to fOnl
26 and legal content:
27
28
.
RESOLUTION CONFIRMING 1994-95 ASSESSMENT ROLL NO. q94
-t-" r"
: I I
"-..... '-'
1 SECTION 2. That the City Clerk is directed to cause a cop;,' of this
2 Resolution to be transmitted to the Office of the Auditor-Controller for the
3 County of San Bernardino with the request that the individual assess.ents be
4 placed on the subject 1994-95 property tax bills for collection together with
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
all other property taxes.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted ~ the
Mayor
and
Co_on
Council
of the City of San
Bernardino
at
a
meeting
of
thereof
held
the
on
day
. 19_, ~ the following vote, to-wit:
Council Me.bers:
~
NAYS
ABSTAIN
ABSENT
NEGRETE
CURLIN
HERNANDEZ
14
OtlDRI1T ~
DEVLIN
POPE-LUDLAM
MILLER
City Clerk
The foregoing resolution is here~ approved this
, 19.,.--'
day of
TOM MINOR, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
JAMES F. PENMAN I
City Attorney
By:
07-07-94
.,
~ -L
.
-
. ~ No. 14.40-74
;po. -) a -
From:
ROGER G. HARDGRAVE, Director
Subject:
Public. Hearing for Ext..~=~~~ Nr C
ExpanS10n of City-Wide ..
District No. 994
Dept:
Public Works/Engineering
Date:
June 14, 1994
13:lTJJO -NTlfQI
Synopsis of Pl'IlVious Council action:
06-04-90 --- Resolution No. 90-207 was adopted, making a finding that the public
interest, convenience and necessity require the formation of a City-wide
street lighting and street sweeping assessment district, known as
Assessment District No. 994
07-17-90 --- Resolution No. 90-323 adopted, creating Assessment District No. 994
01-10-94 --- Authorization to Proceed with the proposed extension and expaD8ion of the
City Wide Assessment District was granted and matter referred to LRC.
02-07-94 --- Resolution 94-27 was adopted, authorizing the execution of agreeaent for
services with the firm of GFB-Friedrich and Associates, Inc., and with
the firm of Brown, Diven and Hentschke.
04-04-94 --- Resolution of Intention No. 94-88 adopted.
06-08-94 --- Public Meeting was conducted.
Recommended motion:
1. That the protests be overruled, the public hearing be closed and a finding be made
that the public convenience and necessity require the expansion and extension of
City-wide Assessment District No. 994 and that the Special Assessment, Investigation
and Limitation Act of 1931 shall not apply (4/5th Vote Required).
2. ADOPT RESOLUTION
JA 4r
cc: Shauna Clark, City Administrator
Jim Penman, City Attorney
Contact person:
Les Fogassy
Supporting date attached:
FUNDING REQUIREMENTS:
Staff Report <<
Phone:
Resolution Ward:
5344
ALL
Amount:
N/A
Source: (Acct. No,)
257-672-53925 (Assessment District )
(Acct. Descriotion)
Wide Street maintenance district.
Assessment District No. 994 --- City
Finance:
Council Notes:
LUUd/~
/
~ -;;Z,,? -?~ #-/
"JILn.,ll:.,
A............l...l...._ ".1_
~
CI."IftP"'_
,P..
':-' ~ ...
i -.... 1 I
STAFF REPORT
Page 1 of 2
Several issues were raised at the public meeting of 6-8-94,
relative to the extension and expansion of City-Wide Assessment
District No. 994.
One of these issues was a "sunset" clause. During. the
public hearings, for the original formation of the district in
1990, a 5-year "sunset" clause was included into the Engineer's
R,eport, in order to gain the necessary support. Inclusion of a
"sunset" clause requires public hearings to be conducted in order
to extend the term of the district. This is a very time consuming
and expensive process, which entails mailing notices to all 49,000
property owners. The cost only for postage to mail these notices
is about $14,000.
A "sunset" clause is not included in the preliminarily
approved Engineer's Report, for the extension and expansion of the
assessment District. A "sunset" clause could be incorporated into
this report if desired. We would suggest that if a "sunset" clause
is added, it be for a term of 10 years, in order to conform to the
financing plan for the 800 MH radio system.
A provision was added to the Engineer's Report in 1990 to
limit the increase in annual assessments to the Consumers Price
Index, or 5%, whichever is less. This provision was added to
assure the property owners that:f1lture increases in the assessments
would not be excessive. These increases are not automatic, since
the total amount assessed is based upon the actual budgets of the
functions financed by the assessment district.
Listed below are the amounts that would be assessed over
the next 5 years, if the CPI was 2% each year and if the CPI was in
excess of 5%. These amounts assume that the total of the budgets
are more than 2% and 5% respectively.
2% Increase in CIP 5% Maximum Increase
Fiscal Amount Amount
Year Total Assessments Per AU Total Assessments Per AU
1994-95 $ 4,460,800 $ 65.00 $4,460,800 $ 65.00
1995-96 4,550,016 66.30 4,683,840 68.25
1996-97 4,641,016 67.60 4,918,032 71. 65
1997-98 4,733,837 69.00 5,163,934 75.25
1998-99 4,828,513 70.35 5,422,130 79.00
. A single family residence is defined as a Basic Assessment
Un~t .(AU): The current annual assessment per AU is about $48.00,
and w~ll ~ncrease to about $65.00 due to the expanded functions.
6-14-94
15-02"
c:nP.0p_
.
.-R....I-g.coua.a,~
r'o'.
STAFF REPORT
Page 2 of 2
Multi-family units, (condominiums, PUD's, duplexes, tri-plexes and
four-plexes) are proposed to be assessed at 0.90 AU, apartment
units at 0.73 AU, and mobile homes at 0.63 AU. These factors are
based upon demographic data consisting of the average number of
p.eople in each type of unit. Since these factors are based upon
the average number of people per unit, we feel this formula is very
defensible.
The Engineer's Report has been amended to reflect some
adjustments in the line items for the various functions financed
through Assessment District No. 994, but no change has been made in
the total amount. Also, some corrections have been made in the
units, (such as per parcel vs. per acre) in Exhibit "B."
A resolution approving the amended Engineer's Report, and
extending and expanding Assessment District No. 994, is presented
for your consideration. This resolution is presented for
consideration at the public hearing, since the Police Department
would like to have the additional officers to be enrolled in the
academy class that will be starting on 7-4-94.
The 1931 Debt Limitation Act was enacted to assure that the
total amount of assessments imposed upon any parcel does not exceed
50% of the assessed value. Due to the small amount of the
assessments, it is obvious that they will not approach 50% of the
assessed value. Therefore, we recommend that this Act be waived.
A 4/5ths vote of the Mayor and Council is required to waive this
Act.
We recommend that the protests be overruled and the public
hearing closed.
6-14-94
75-026A
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
o
o
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF TIlE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO FINDING AND DETEllMINING
THAT THE PUBLIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE TIlE EXTENSION OF CITY-
WIDE STREET LIGHTING AND STREET SWEEPING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 994, Ai'IEND
TIlE BOUNDARIES THEREOF BY EXPA.>iDING TIlE BOUNDARIES TO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL
TERRITORY IN TIlE DISTRICT, EXPAND TIlE SCOPE OF WORK WITHIN SAID DISTRICT TO
INCLLDE CITY-WIDE TRAfFIC SIGNAL 1'!AINTENANCE AND GRAFFITI REMOVAL; ORDER1:-iG
THE EXTENSION, AMENDMENT Mm EXPANSION OF WORK OF TIlE DISTRICT AND THAT THE
SPECIAL ASSESSMENT, HiVESTIGATION AND LIMITATION ACT OF 1931 SHALL ~OT APPLY
AN~ APPROVING k~ENDED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT DIAGRAM MAP NO. 994.
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 90-323 adopted July 17, 1990, the 1'!ayor
and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino created Assessment District
No. 994 for the City-wide street lighting and street sweeping: and
lillEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
Bernardino have preliminarily found that the public interest, convenience,
and necessity require the extension, amendment of the boundaries, and
expansion of the scope of work of Assessment District No. 994 by the
expansion thereof to include additional territory and additional work; and
WHEREAS, the Mayor and Common Council of the City of San
llcrnardino have, on the 4th day of April, 1994, passed and adopted
Resolution No. 94-88 entitled:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PRELIMINARILY DETER~INING
THAT TIlE PL~LIC CONVENIENCE AND NECESSITY REQUIRE THE EXTENSION OF
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 994 TO PAY FOR THE COST OF EXISTING AuTHORIZED
MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS WHICH INCLLnE STREET SWEEPING AND STREET LIGHTIXG
AND OF PROPOSED MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS WHICH INCLUDE GRAFFITI REMOVAL
AN~ TRAFFIC SIGNAL MAINTENANCE, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO PROCEED TO ORDER
SUCH MAINTENANCE AND OPERATIONS AND LEVY ASSESSMENTS WITHIN THE DISTRICT,
AND SETTING A~n DIRECTING PUBLICATION OF A NOTICE OF A TIME AND DATE OF
PL~LIC HEARINGS.
24
25 which said resolution duly and legally was published and notice of
26 improvement has been given in the manner required by Chapter 12.90 of the
27 San Bernardino ~unicipal Code; and written objections and protests to the
28
06/16/')4
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOL~TrON ~NDING AND ~~ENDING ASSESSMENT<:)STRICT ~O. 994
extension. amendment and expansion of the proposed district. the work to be
done. or the extent of the district to be assessed were heard and
considered.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF SAN BER.'lARDINO AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. That full and fair public hearings having been held on June
8, 1994 and June 22, 1994, as stated in the recitals herein, and the nayor
and Common Council, having heard and considered any and all comments
received thereon and being fully advised in the premises, hereby overrules
any and all protests received.
SECTION 2. That the public convenience and necessity require, and the
Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino hereby declares by
not less than a 4/5ths vote as defined in Section 12.90.040D of the San
Bernardino Municipal Code, that the public interest, convenience. and
necessity requires and hereby orders, the extension of the district, the
amendment of the boundaries, and scope of Assessment District No. 994 by
expanding the boundaries and scope thereof to include additional territory
in the district and to include the maintenance and operation of traffic
signals and cost of graffiti removal in the district; the work described in
said Resolution No. 94-88 to be done as provided in said Resolution and that
the Special Assessment, Investigation and Limitation Act of 1931 shall not
apply.
SECTION 3. Reference hereby is made to said Resolution No. 94-88 for a
description of the work, the extent of the assessment district, and the
extent of the additional scope of the assessment district, the financing
,.lternatives and for further particulars.
SECTION 4.
That Amended Assessment District Diagram Map No. 994 is
hereby apprcved.
SECTION 5. The amended Engineer's Report, on file in the Office of the
Cicy CleeK, is hereby approved.
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
RESOLUTION ~ING Ah~ AMENDING ASSESSMENT <:)STRICT NO. 994 .L~20
..
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by-the
Mayor and Common Council of the City of San Bernardino at a
meeting thereof held on the
day
of
. 19_____, by the following vote, to-wit:
Council Members:
AYES
NAYS
ABSTAIN
NEGRETE
CURLIN
HERNANDEZ
OBERHELMAN
DEVLIN
POPE-LUDLAM
MILLER
ABSENT
City Clerk
The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this
, 19_____
day of
TOM MINOR, Mayor
City of San Bernardino
Approved as to form
and legal content:
JAMES F. PENMA~,
City .\ttorney
a~':
06-16-94
I.
.
~
o
o
{draft - Dreoared without ben.~it of erovernaent code. city buderet.
or review by City Attorney's office}
CITY OF SAR BBRRARDIRO
IR'l'BROPFICB MBMORAIfDUJI
CITY ADMIRISTRATOR'S OFFICB
DATB: JUly 17, 199.
TO: Councilwoman Rorine Miller
FROM: Shauna Clark, City Administrator
SUBJBCT: Taxes and other fo~ of revenue
COPIBS:
Kayor Minor; members of the C~n Council; City
Attorney; City Clerk; Director of Finance
-------------------------------------------------------------------
The fOllowing is a comprehensive list of revenue options available
to the Hayor and Council of the city of San Bernardino. This list
has been segmented in three parts: taxes that require an election;
taxes that do not require an election; other forms of revenue.
TAXBS THAT REQUIRB AM ELBCTIOR
PROPBRTY TAXBS
Property taxes are ad valore. (taxation in proportion to value of
the property) Prior to Proposition 13, property taxes were the
method used by most cities to fund city services as they could be
adjusted each year to acc~odate service levels. Prop 13
eliminated. ad valorem taxes with the exception of paying interest
on two kinds of indebtedness:
a. Indebtedness approved by the voters before July 1, 1978.
(does not apply to city of San Bernardino)
b. Indebtedness for the acquisition and improvement of real
property (must be approved by a 2/3rds vote)
One way to use method "b" for police services would be to ask the
voters to fund the new police facility and thereby relieve the
general fund and IDA of this burden. This wou1d9no~ generate
sufficient funds to match the Clinton grant.
-'. .....
.
,?,
3.
o
o
Hemo to Councilwoman Hiller re:
Revenue and taxation
July 17, 1994 Page 2
Pros of an ad valorem tax
The tax is based on value. It is generally held that those who
have most valuable property can afford to pay more taxes better
than those with less valuable property.
All those who own property in San Bernardino pay.
Neqatives of ad valorem tax
It is not necessarily true that those with the most expensive
property have the means to pay most taxes - those on fixed incomes
would surely Object. .
Tax is based on value of property therefore not correlated to
services received.
Voters .are not necessarily property owners and.therefore are not
voting to taxing themselves.
Certain organizations are exempt from property taxes even though
they derive the same services as those who are not exempt.
Imposition of tax requires a super majority.
SALES AND USE TAXES
The California legislature has preempted the field of sales and use
taxation in the name of statewide uniformity. The city's sales tax
rate cannot exceed l' and a city may only collect sales taxes if
the county in which it is in, collects a sales tax. The recent
increase in sales tax for pUblic safety services was accomplished
through a ballot measure sanctioned by the state legislature. A
previous county-wide measure, requiring a 2/3rds vote, failed. The
measure passed the second time around because the counties
guaranteed a pass through to cities. That pass through is not a
percentage of the sale tax but is based on a complicated formula.
SPECIAL ~AX FOR POLICE AND FIRE PROTECT lOB
A local agency which provides fire or pOlice services can adopt an
ordinance by a 2/3rds vote of the Council, to place a measure on
the ballot for the levy of a special tax which must be approved by
a 2/3rds vote of the electorate. The tax must be levied on a
parcel class of improvement to property, or use of property basis,
or a combination thereof to which specific fire protection or
prevention services or pOlice protection services are made
available. The ordinance submitted for voter approval must specify
the amount of each such special tax or the maximum a.oud! than can
be annually levied. The amount of each tax may be varied to each
parcel, improvement or use based on the availability of pOlice and
fire services in the area.
~
-
tJ,
o 0
Memo to Councilwoman Miller re:
Revenue methods
July 17, 1994 Page 3
Pros of sDecial Dolice and fire Drotection tax
Voters would be voting "yes" or "no" to a particular service level
of a particular department (police or fire).
Out-of-town property owners share burden of service costs.
Neqatives of sDecial Dolice and fire Drotection tax
The equitable allocation of the tax would be very difficult. For
example, if the tax were varied to each parcel on availability of
police or fire services and facilities in the area there may be
different rates for different neighborhoods or classes of
properties, eg: businesses v. commercial. As a voter, you may not
be able to ascertain exactly what your rate will be.
A parcel tax would be paid by each property owner in the city but
property owners who do not live in the city can neither vote on the
tax nor submit a protest. Property owners absorb tax burden but
are given no protest rights as with the Street Lighting and
Sweeping District.
Imposition of the tax requires a super majority.
TAXBS NOT REQUIRING AN BLBC!IOR
BUSINESS LICBNSB TAXBS
San Bernardino charges a business license tax based on gross
receipts. Taxes average about $4,000,000 per year. By law,
business license taxes must be used for general fund purposes only
and cannot be designated to a particular service.
UTILITY USER'S TAX
To impose or increase utility users tax, a public hearing and
majority vote of the Council is required. Like business license
taxes, utility users taxes are for general fund purposes and cannot
be designated to a particular service. The city collects about
$17,000,000 per year at the 8.5' rate.
Perhaps (I wasn't able to ask the Attorney's Offi~e) the Council
could place a measure on the ballot to raise utility users taxes by
2' ($4,000,000) to fund police services. As a special tax, the
measure would have to pass by a 2/3rds vote.
Pros of increasinq the utility users tax
Wi th 213 vote, might be able to dedicate strictly to police
services. ~ ~
Generally, those voting are those who pay.
Can lessen burden by conserving on utility usage.
~.
~
8.
o
o
Memo to Councilwoman Miller re:
Revenue and financing methods
July 17, 1994 Page 4
Neqatives of increasinq the utilitv users taz
Relative to surrounding cities, San Bernardino utility tax is high
and may serve to drive away businesses that have high utility
operational costs.
Cannot correlate tax to specific services levels.
Cannot always estimate how much utility tax increase will generate
from year to year because weather affects utility usage levels.
TRANSIBNT OCCUPANCY TAXBS
It would be unwise to increase transient occupancy taxes for
several reasons:
With a high tax rate currently existing, San Bernardino
hotels/motels are at disadvantage to surrounding cities.
Tax is paid by occupants. Generally, they are not the ones who
receive most police services.
A percentage of the transient occupancy tax is already dedicated to
Convention and Visitor Bureau. Remainder is for general fund
purposes.
DBVBLOPHBN'l' 'fAX
A development (or bedroom) tax is an excise tax on the privilege or
activity of development and/or the availability or use of municipal
services. It is not the same as an impact -fee, a landscape
district or a Mello Roos district. Generally, development taxes
are imposed only on new construction and are based on number of
units, number of bedrooms or square footage. This city has never
explored development taxes but if considered, they should be tied
to service levels increased as the result of new development rather
than as a result of a rising crime rate. This tax would discourage
development in an already difficult market.
ADMISSIONS TAX
An admissions tax is a tax imposed on the consumer for the
privilege of attending a show, performan~e, display or exhibition.
The tax rate may be a flat rate per ticket or a percentage of the
admission price. Admissions tax has been debated in this city for
at least ten years. Admissions taxes must have broad application
because if the tax burden falls primarily on fi~st"'amendment
protected businesses, the tax can be struck down.
~
/{J,
//,
/~.
'TIm
o 0
Hemo to Councilwoman Hiller re:
Revenue and finance methods
July 17, 1994 Page 5
OTHER FORMS OF RBVDUB
SPECIAL BENEFIT ASSESSMENTS AND DISTRICTS
Special Assessments, such as Assessment District 994, are charges
levied to pay for public improvements which are imposed upon land
within a pre-determined district according to the benefit received
from the improvement. There are two key reasons for the level of
special assessments:
a. To equitablY distribute costs of public improvements to
the benefitted parcels of real property
b. To provide owners of benefitted properties with the means
for paying over time, their share of the costs of
financing pUblic improvements at relatively low interest'
rates, or the costs of maintaining certain improvements
Pros of special benefit assessment districts
There is a one person one vote rule for property owners. All
property owners receive mailed notice and may submit a protest.
Property owners may stop the district with a simple majority
protest.
Assessment is levied in proportion to special benefits received.
Out-of-town property owners pay, but unlike with special taxes for
police and fire. have a buy-in to the process.
Neqatives of an assessment district for police purposes
Cannot be tied to city services other than those of maintaining a
pUblic improvement such as streets therefore cannot be dedicated
for police services. The pass through is too confusing.
FIns AND FORFEI'l'URES
The distribution of municipal court fines and bail forfeitures is
determined by state law. Parking citations fines must be based on
ticketing and collection costs.
FRANCHISE FEES
Franchise fees are negotiated through agreement between the city
and the utility. Until expiration of the agreement, fees remain a
fixed percentage of gross receipts for business conducted within
the City limits. Franchise fee percentages are often capped by
state law.
. ...
DBVBLOPMBHT FEES
Development fees are imposed for the purpose of defraying all or a
portion of the cost of public facilities (sewers, storm drains.
parks, etc). Development fees cannot be used to fund services.
.
/.3.
/~
-
/~.
o
o
Hemo to Councilwoman Hiller re:
Revenue and finance
JUly 17, 1994 Page 6
CHARGES FOR SERVICBS
Cities may charge the user for services rendered as long as the
charges do not exceed the cost of providing the service. Some
examples of service charges relating to policing are: fees for
extraordinary services, false alarm fees, towing fees. The city
routinely reviews fees to keep them in line with services rendered.
In spite of this effort, the general fund subsidizes many city
services.
SUBVBIft'IONS
Various taxes and fees are levied by the state and county
governments and are "subvened" to cities. These subventions
include gas tax and motor vehicle license fees. Cities have little
or no control over the subventions and are always in danger of
losing them when the state is experiencing budgetary problems.
ADVISORY ELECTION
San Bernardino may hold an advisory election to determine if the
voters favor the continuation of Assessment District 994. The
election could be held on any election date authorized by state
law. If held on a date other than a regular city election date
(November 95), the election would be very costly.
Pros of an advisory election
The Hayor and Council are not bound by the results of the election.
Neqatives of an advisory election
The election could be quite costly.
People voting on the advisory measure would not necessarily be the
ones paying the assessment.
Assessment District 994 is not for policing. As many have expressed
their desire for a "police only" measure but do not understand the
difficulty of putting a police measure to the voters, the measure
would probably fail. If so, the Mayor and Council would be faced
with continuing on with something that does not express the "will
of the voters".
The issue of a pass through
money is lost on most people.
confusion.
to police of freed-up general fund
An advisory measure may add to the
. 'I
~~
~City Administrator
o
o
Survcy Results
~tk>-Zc;cU~
List:
Highpropensityvoters, random selection, all wards
Time: July 12 through July 16 I ,~'\ '-f
No. Successful Cal1s: 1119
Results:
Question 1: Is crime in San Bernardino of major concern to your family?
] 00% of residents feel impact of crime.
~-
Question 2: Did you receive a notice from the city that your property would be assessed for
maintenance to add ] 7 police personnel?
66% ofthose called said they had not received notice
] 2% said they had
22% did not remember ifthey had
Question 3: Would you like the opportunity to vote on adding such assessments?
77% wou Id like opportunity to vote
14% felt it was alright for council to proceed without voting
9% were undecided
Qucstion 4: The council has authorized a police department management audit.
Would you like to see a strategic plan with police, public and professional input
devc,19ped to address the crime problems in San Bernardino?
97% would like to see such a plan.
3% were undecided or felt it would not help
Question 5: If you saw a good strategic plan to solve crime problems would you vote to
fund it properly'!
.
64% would vote to properly fund police services
28 % were undecided
8% would not vote for any mOre taxation.
-UA