The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About28-Parks & Rec . . . city of San Bernardino INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM 9012-212 TO: MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL/WORKSHOP ATTENDEES FROM: ANNIE F. RAMOS, DIRECTOR OF PARKS, RECREATION AND COMMUNITY SERVICES SUBJECT: PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT WORKSHOP INFORMATION DATE: DECEMBER 20, 1990 COPIES: ------------------------------------------------------------- Attached is an Open Space following is a information packet for District Workshop on list of attachments: use during the Park and January 7, 1991. The Attachment No. 1 #1 Background chronology and time line projection. #2 community, Environmental and Economic Benefits of Establishing a County Park and Open Space District. #3 community Group Support for District Proposal. Attachment No.2 #1 Minutes of the November 20, 1990 Ad Hoc committee Meeting. #2 Fact Sheet regarding the creation of a Park and Open space District. #3 Resolution of the San Bernardino county Regional Parks Advisory commission. Attachment No. 3 #1 Final Memorandum of Understanding (with changes based on comments from Ad Hoc Committee members). #2 Memorandum from Consultant Bernard Walp and Michal Moore. "Update Survey of Public opinion regarding formation of Park and Open space District." eft g(,4) , . . . 1, BACKGROUND CHRONOLOGY & TIME LINE PROJECTIONS 2, COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENTAL & ECONOMIC BENEFITS OF ESTABLISHING A PARK & OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 3, COMMUNITY GROUP SUPPORT ATTACHMENT 1 m2 May June September October lWl. January May June July September November lID. January February June PA. AND OPEN SPACE DisTRICT . BACKGROUND CHRONOLOGY AND PROJECTED TIME LINE OF FORMATION PROCESS - 11/5/90 " Board of Supervisors adopts recommendations from the Growth Management Task Force to establish an Open Space Technical Advisory Subcommittee to identify parks, trails and open space needs throughout the County, research potential funding mechanisms and research public opinion to determine support for various alternatives. Open Space Technical Advisory Committee begins meeting to accomplish above goals. Preparation of an Expanded Open Space and Trails Element of the San Bernardino County General Plan begun by consultants. Public opinion poll indicates provision of adequate parks, trails and open space is an important voter concern and reveals support for a Park and Open Space District but not for a special tax or government obligation bond approach. Regional Parks Department begins development of a proposal to establish a Park and Open Space District. Enabling legislation introduced in the Assembly by Assemblyman Gerry Eaves. Ad Hoc Committee including city managers, park directors, Building Industry Association, Inland Empire Economic Council, Sierra Club and SANBAG established to develop details of District proposal at monthly meetings. . Public opinion poll indicates strong support for the District concept and a willingness of voters within the proposed District boundaries ,to support an annual parcel assessment at the tested amounts of $29, $33 and $37. Enabling legislation passed by the State Legislature and signed by the Governor. Memoranda of Understanding defining projects and revenue apportionment developed between the Regional Parks Department and cities and recreation and park districts wishing to participate in the District. City councils and governing boards of recreation and parks districts wishing to participate in the District formation election adopt resolutions requesting to join by January 31, 1991. Board of Supervisors adopts resolution on February 4, 1991, placing the measures on the June ballot. Election to determine if a simple majority of the voters support establishment of the Park and Open Space District and approve an annual parcel assessment (anticipated as of 11/5/90 as being the $29 _ $36 per range) to fund the District. CD " COMMUNITY, .IRONMENTAL AND ECONOMIC .EFlTS OF ESTABLISHING A SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT . I. lacreased Quality of Life and Enhanced Community and Property Values. Projects accomplished through the creation of a Park and Open Space District with a benefit assessment to augment inadequate existing funding sources would increase residents' quality of life by proteoting natural open space and providing park and recreation facilities. Not only docs the provision of adequate parks, trails and open space create more attractive communities, these amenities also increase property values. 2. Protection of a Natural Open Space. Especially in rapidly urbanizing areas, protection of natural open space is an urgent need if we arc to provide future generations the same opportunities we have had to experience and appreciate significant scenic areas, wildlife habitat, archeological resources and outdoor recreation areas. In addition to maintaining environmental quality, planning for and protecting important natural open space areas also help to manage growth and provide community buffers. The District would have as one of its major missions the acquisition and protection of significant open space areas such as the Crafton Hills, the Day Creek area and significant habitat in the Bear Valley region. 3. Proylslon of a Rellonal Trail System. As the County grows, it is becoming increasingly difficult for residents to find places near their homes to hike, horse-back ride and bicycle. A major function of a Park and Open Space District would be to acquire trail rights of way and develop a regional trail system. The Santa Ana River Trail system would be a major priority, completing San Bernardino County's link in the "Crest to Coast" trail. Other trails would provide links from various communities to the Santa Ana River trail system and to the trails in the national forest. Should desert communities participate in the District, a similar reginnal trails system could be developed along the Mojave River. 4. Rellonal Park Impronments and Additions. Current funding precludes developing new regional parks and severely limits the Regional Parks Department's ability to expand and improve existing parks. The new District, with its benefit assessment, would provide for major improvements and expansions at regional parks such as Cucamonga-Guasti, Glen Helen, Yucaipa and Lake Gregory, as well as facilitate the development of the new Agua Mansa Regional Park in Colton. 5. Rellonal Cooperathe Approach to Projects. The District will provide funds for projects which benefit residents in both incorporated and unincorporated areas and which would likely be impossible to accomplish without a funding source such as the District which includes both unincorporated areas and cities which choose voluntarily to participate. These cities not only thereby contribute to regionally significant projects, but also receive a share of the assessment revenue for local park and recreation projects. I ~ . . . 6. Fundlnll for Operations and Malntenaace of New Projects. An increasingly common complaint by citizens has been the lack of proper maintaining of parks and recreation facilities, thereby diminishing user enjoyment and safety. The District would provide funds not only for construction of new local and regional parks, recreation facilities and trails, but also for the ongoing operation and maintenance of those new projects. District funds are, however, not to be used to operate and maintain already existing parks and recreation facilities. Rather they are intended to provide and maintain additional parks, trails and facilities as well as to protect natural open space. 7. MalDtenaDce of Current Fundlnll. The County will maintain its existing level of funding for the Regional Parks Department when it is incorporated into the new Park and OpeD Space District. Cities and local recreatioD and park districts are similarly committing to a maintenance of existing effort for their park systems when they join the District. This ensures that the new dollars raised through the benefit assessment will not simply offset and allow a cut in previous revenue sources, but rather will provide new facilities and projects. 8. Coupon for Use of District Facl\1tles by AllellmeDt Payers. Those who pay the assessment will, upon request, receive a coupon for free or discounted admission to regional facilities up to the value of the portion of the assessment earmarked for regional facilities. 9. IDcome Stream for Rennue Bonds. The District could use the assessment revenue to guarantee debt repayment for revenue bonds which it could issue periodically to provide large amounts of capital for projects at desired times. This would enable the District to acquire land while it is available and to complete projects in a timely manner. 10. SupplemcDtlDIl of Other Rennue Sources. In most instances, revenues generated from the District assessment will not meet all of a jurisdictions' acquisition, development and operation and maintenance needs. The assessment revenue, however, docs become an important part of a city'S or district's overall financial strategy. Elements for a comprehensive funding program normally consist of state and federal grants, user and development impact fees, landscape and lighting district assessments, general obligation or revenue bonds, and other city or district revenue sources. The assessment collected through the District supplements but docs not replace these other revenue sources to create a balanced and equitable funding program for the provision of needed park, trails and recreation facilities and the protection of significant natural open space areas. To obtain more information about the District proposal, please contact Gerry Newcombe at the Regional Parks Department (714) 387-2594. 2 i. .. Anne Dennis Sierra Club, San Gorgonio Chp. 568 N. Mt. View, Ste. 130 San Bernardino, CA 92401 Gloria Anderson League of Women Voters, San San Bernardino 568 N. Mt. View San Bernardino, CA 92401 Dennis Wood AYSO San Bernardino 4953 Pershing San Bernardino, CA 92407 Bob Galbraith, Crafton Hills College Crafton Hills Conservancy 11711 Sand Canyon Road Yucaipa, CA 92399 Little League Baseball Western Reg. HQ 6707 N. Little League Drive San Bernardino, CA Bill Sirowy 4-B Youth Program Leader Cooperative Extension 777 E. Rialto San Bernardino, CA 92415 Ruth Slanko AARP 222 S. Rancho, Sp. 96 San Bernardino, CA 92410 BSA - San Gorgonio Dist.. Redlands 470 E. Highland Redlands, CA San Bernardino Clergy Assoc. c/o Dr. Frey, President St. Paul's Methodist Church 785 N. Arrowhead San Bernardino, CA 92401 COMMUNITY GROUP SUPPORT FOR . DISTRICT PROPOSAL . Scott Simons Sierra Club, Mojave Group P. O. Box 1062 Phelan, CA 92371 League of Women Voters, Redlands 306 W. 2nd San Bernardino, CA 92401 Jim Selby Sierra Club, San Bernardino Mtns. Group P. O. Box 6606 Crestline, CA 92325-6606 Catherine Bridge Friends of Cuca/Guasti RP 8715 Banyan Alta Loma, CA 91701 Margaret Ringe Equestrian Trails, Inc. 9995 Tradepost Star Rte. 1995 Lucerne Valley, CA 92356 Carol Smith, President San Bernardino County 4-H Council 26118 Community Blvd. Barstow, CA 92371 Rodney Nadeau Chino Hills Land Conservancy 16751 Hay Drive Chino Hills, CA 91709 Glen Rojas, President CPRS District Xl Chino Park and Rec. Dept. 13200 Central Avenue Chino, CA 91710 Greg Ballmer Tri County Conservation Leagl 5894 Grand Avenue Riverside, CA 92504 Save Our Forest Association P. O. Box 598 Rim Forest, CA 92378 Bob McKernan Audubon Society 1230 Friar Lane Redlands, CA 92373 Norm Guith Friends of Cuca/Guasti RP 6215 Hellman Avenue Alta Loma, CA 91701 Art Franco Golden State Mobilehome Owner League 10961 Desert Lawn Dr., Sp. 73 Calimesa, CA 92320 Inland Valley So. California Municipal Atheltic Fed. P. O. Box 3605 823 Lexington-Gallatin Road S. El Monte, CA 91733 YMCA 1267 W. Riverside Avenue Rialto, CA PTA'S Fifth District PTA 601 N. "E" Str.eet San Bernardino, CA 92410-3093 Q) ( ~ . . 1. MINUTES OF MEETING PARK & OPEN SPACE AD HOC COMMITTEE 2. FACT SHEET REGARDING CREATION OF A PARK & OPEN SPACE DISTRICT 3. RESOLUTION OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY REGIONAL PARKS ADVISORY COMMISSION ATTACHMENT 2 . . PARK AND 0Pm SPACE DISlRIcr FClRMATIOO AD ax: aH!lTl'EE MEE1'ING November 20, 1990 MINUI'ES A.TrEND~: Bill 'lbaDaS, city of Yucaipa Annie RaIDJS, city of san Bernardino Parks, Recreation am l"'nnnInrl.ty services Kathy Gotd1, Q1ino Hills Manager's Office Jay Paul, city of HighlarXi sardy M::Kinley, city of Rialto LarrY '1hclr1'l1:m'9, city of Upl8IXi Lee Pearl, city of ontario Mike Farris, cnmty SpeCial Districts cave MeserVe, BarStow Park am Recreation Rex Hinesley, cnmty counsel steve lfes.......li, san Bernardino cnmty Rfgional Parks oepart:ment Gerry Newo"'""""', san Bernardino cnmty Rfgional Parks oepart:ment J:iJn McDill, Big Bear Valley Recreation am Park District res Kole, Rim of the WOrld Recreation am Park District Joe Sd1Ultz, city of Rardlo Ol<~"..rqa Patricia M:lSer, city of BarStow Anne Dennis, sierra Club Paul Burton, city of Fontana carlene Harada, city of Fontana Mark Taylor, Inlard D1pire n:alCllli.c ccurcil steI;:hen Ki.:mJ::lrOOgh, Q1ino Hills Manager's Office Carla s.i1Derdicb, san Bernardino cnmty oepart:ment of :InfraSl;rUctur VTNALIZE MIM'lRJOOXM OF tlND~ING Revised draftS of the ~ of urderst.an:lin:J (KXJ) were uailed out on NoveIIIber 5~ 1990. Gerry Ncwo"""he stated that there was scme t'licrolll'''''ion at the last meeti.n; ~ validity of the IAFCO ....0<;. e. After t'licrol,....ions with cmnty counsel am IAFCO, it was c:}et.ermi.ned that the IAFCO ....ooess is ~~iate. 'lberefare, that part of the M:XJ was rot c::ban)ed. HoweVer, there are scme JDi.rK:lr dlangeS in the lan;lUaqe that further defines that the. M:XJ is rot a bin:iln;J doctnnAllt until the District is farmed. Mr. Ncwo"""M requested that all final ...........ents be sutmitted to him by Frit'l",v. NoveII'hPr 30. ~ final dlangeS are made, the M:XJ's will be uailed out with the ~tections. He also suggested that durirg the month of oeo-hPr, workshops be c:x:n1uCted with city cnm::ils am Park am Recreation camd.ssians. steve ltesp<W"li am Gerry Ne\;Q"W"M will be available to make ~asentations ~ the District. LarrY 'l1'loJ:11b,1rg asked ..mat the .....::<-iIn-e is for enterirg the District at a later date. Gerry Newoanbe L~ded by statirg that a formal resolution adqlted by the ~ I:xxiy am the IAFCO ....ooedure will be required. It wooJ.d rot require voter awroval. 1 CD r--- . . Mr. MeS'......li made a brief pns<.:>ntation regardin;J the District at the City/CDJnty COnfereta! held in Lake ArJ;CJlohead On November 15-16, 1990. ~~s '10 FAcr SHEEr AND RES)T I1l'IOO AnoPl'ED BY 'lHE SAN RF.RNARDlNO _ _~ PARKS ADIIISORY CXHfiSSlOO Gerry NewCO"'~ advised that minor ~ were made to the fact sheet distrib1ted at the last meetin:J. Also, a resolution SUfP' II t.in;J the District formation was adopted I::rj the San Bernardino Q:lUI'\ty Regicnal Parlcs Advisory o-->;.....ion at their November 7, 1990 meetin:J. similar resolutians will also be adcpted I::rj the InJ.anj Dpire EbonaIIic cnmcil, variOJS dlamberS of ...............::e, the Grc7tIth ManageIIleI'It Task Faroe am the llll; Mirg In:iustrY AssoCiatiOO. Mr. ~be requested that if 1\d Hoc o:mnittee -h<>rs are aware of other o::mmmity groops, these names shcW.d be sul:lIIi.tted to him si:ooe he is OaJPiliD:J a list of ~ t groops. NOVEMBER 6 lOT ~OO RESULTS steve He5'eD"'li advised that in the Riverside Q:lUI'\ty electioo, 60% of the voters awroved formation of a Park am Open Space District. HoweVer, 57% voted against a $26 aJ'lIUlal a5'~oo"'"ll!llt. o..LrenUy, the Q:lUI'\ty's strategy is to continue with a June 4, 1991 ballot IIlI"""'Jre. We i.nterd 00 oonsolidatin;J the District farmation am the ll"~OO""""lt aDOJnt in one ballot question rather than separatin;J them. An ~UJ:'Liation limit will also be required, tut it has not yet been determined. Rex Hinesley advised that establi.s.hiD;J an ~UJ:'Liatial limit for the District will also be required as part of the ballot question. Anne Dennis stated that a ll.".eu:b.lS bank of voll.V'lteer efforts is m ~Ml, as it is very iDprtant to have SUW' II tfran every area. Awt:her fact:ar that may be beneficial for a J\II'Ie 4 special election, is that there will be less measures 00 the ballot. 1>~TIOO FOR :D.!'t~<;MENI' AM:XlNl' steve MeS'"':':""'U advised that an aQ:ii.ticnal survey of voter attitudes am dollar aDOJnts will be oon:iucted duriD:J the lla'Ith of [)eo<'m"""'". Also a dollar aDOJnt will have to be determined prior to JaralaJ:Y 1, 1991. Gerry NewcCI'llbe asked for voll.V'lteerS of the cxmni.ttee l"'""'''''rs to assist in ~ the survey. Anne Dennis stated that the Siena Club will assist. Lee Pearl feels that a dollar ~ al the ballot might be nore beneficial rather than a set dollar anamt. steve Me'-.......U will pn-sue the legal requirements with the Registrar of Voters. san:ly McKinley feels that if a dollar rarge is required, a dollar aDOJnt will still need to be stated so that the voters are not oonfused. Marlc Taylor feels that a dollar anamt caJlIXlt be determined until a specific project list is establi.she:i. 2 nPDATE FRCM CITll ~ MID- T<~I ~TICN MID PARK [\TC>'1'QT~SCRY CDlMISSICN Each ,......h:>r in attendance provided al'l update of their ~;""..ion's ar cnmcil's intereSt in participatiD;J in the District farmatien election. LIsr OF llNI'FNl'IAL IDCAL ~ FRCM U'l'.L= MID 111'r'RF.ll.TICN MID PARK DIS'IRICl'S steve u,-....rli advised that the project list needs to be finalized. M::lSt of the District projects have been identified, b.1t local park projects need to be fine tuned. Also, a five-year capital iJIprcYemeIlt plan will need to be identified. GerrY ~hI> has requested that each Ad Hoc ,.....hPr sul:Jni.t a project list far use in his lolL sentaticns to city cnmcils ani Pant ani ReCreation AdvisorY camdssicns. LIsr OF llNI'FNl'IAL rrMoroNIT'{ GROOPS lllI'FmSI'ID IN DIsnucr mRMM'ICN steve M?","""rli advised that a list of interested cnnntnU.ty grcqlS has been established to begin solicitiD;J ~ u. t far the District. GerrY ~M reviewed the list with the ccmni.ttee ani requested that -N>rs sul:Jni.t arrj additional grcqlS not menticned to hiJn as soon as possible. DATE. TlME MID TllCA'l'ICN OF NEXT MF.F.I'TNG 'Ibe next meetin; will be held en Tuesday, Ilec"""h:>r 18, 1990, at 9:00 a.m. at the city of RanChO o,...,.~ Civic Center, 10500 civic Center Drive, Rard10 01<:''''nnrga, CA. MF.F.l'ING AnJOClRNED at 11:15 a.m. 3 . FACT SHEET . REGARDING THE CREATION OF A PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT What would a Park and Open Space District do? The District would be empowered to acquire lands for parks, trail rights of way and natural resource protection; apportion funds to providers of local parkS and recreation facilities, as weIl as participate in joint regional/local projects; develop, maintain and operate regional park, trail and recreational facilities; provide nature centers and interpretive programs; and provide long term management of, or enter into management agreements with appropriate entities for, sensitive open space areas. The District would playa key role in enabling the County to meet its goal of developing and implementing an Expanded Open Space/Trails Element of the County General Plan to protect the County's natural resources and meet the park and recreation needs of its current and future residents at both the local and regional level. The District would !1:!corpo!ate the existing County Regional Parks Department functions and provide an entity which could also acquire and manage open space areas with high wildlife habitat, regional trail systems, and archeological and scenic resource values. Why Is a Park and Open Space District needed? The County's population has grown rapidly in the last decade, creating a corresponding increase in demand for park and recreation facilities and seriously impacting open space resources. Funding for park and recreation services is not keeping pace with the demands of an increasing population and maintaining existing levels of service requires a greater shift to user fees each year. The District would provide an important new revenue source to meet current and future needs. Further, the County at present has no mechanism to acquire and manage key areas of rapidly disappearing wildlife habitat, regional trails rights of way and natural open space. Such acquisition and management would be an important part of the District's mission. Creation of a Park and Open Space District plays. a crucial role in implementing the vision the County is developing to create a permanent open space system and an adequate regional parks and trails system. Is there a reason for cities and recreation and park districts to Join the District? Cities and recreation and park districts which choose to join the District will have the benefit assessment coIlected on parcels within their jurisdictions. These revenues will be apportioned between the city's park and recreation department or the local recreation and park district and the new Park and Open Space District. A city's or recreation and park district's share may be used to fund local parkS and recreation projects, inCluding community parks, recreation centers, senior centers and athletic fields, and to provide operations and maintenance for new parks and facilities. The District's share would help fund acquisition, development and operation of new regional facilities and acquisition of significant open space areas within the same zone as the city or recreation and park district. Existing funding sources for city parks departments and recreation and park districts would not be affected by the formation of the District. How would tbe District be funded? The District would be financed through user fees and charges, other funds from County, State and Federal agencies, and through the benefit assessment, if approved by a majority of the voters. Significantly, the secure revenue source from the assessment would enable the District to issue revenue bonds to provide greater up-front funds for I @ . . RESOLUTION OF THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY REGIONAL PARKS ADVISORY COMMISSION WHEREAS, Section 5506.8 of the California Public Resources Code, as added by Chapter 1017 of the Statues of 1990, effective January 1, 1991, authorizes the formation of a Regional Park and Open Space District ("District") in San Bernardino County; and WHEREAS, such proposed District would be formed for the general purpose of acquiring, preserving, protecting, operating and maintaining open space, parks, recreation facilities, habitat conservation areas, as we11 as hiking, bicycle and equestrian trails; and WHEREAS, the proposed District would greatly assist with the implementation of the Regional Parks Department Strategic Master Plan, including establishment of new regional park and trail facilities, the improvement and refurbishment of existing facilities and the protection of significant wildlife habitat, historic archeological and other open space resources; and WHEREAS, the proposed District would also help meet park and recreation needs in participating cities and recreation and park districts; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the San Bernardino County Regional Parks Advisory Commission endorses the establishment of a Regional Park and Open Space District and encourages the San Bernardino County Board of Supervisors to place measures on the ba110t to establish the District and to authorize the Board to levy an annual benefit assessment for the purpose of a110wing the District to carry out its responsibilities. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the Regional Parks Advisory Commission this 7th day of November, 1990. I, SUSAN M. RAMOS, Secretary to the Regional Parks Advisory Commission of San Bernardino County, California, hereby certify the foregoing to be a fu11, true and correct copy of the record of the action taken by said Regional Parks Advisory Commission by vote of the members present as the same appears in the Official Minutes of said Commission at its meeting of November 7, 1990. SUSAN M. RAMOS, Secretary Regional Parks Advisory Commission BY.Jw~ m. {R~I (j) . . 1. FINAL MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING (WITH CHANGES BASED ON COMMENTS FROM AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERS) 2. MEMORANDUM FROM CONSULTANT BERNARD WALP & MICHAEL MOORE uUPDATE SURVEY OF PUBLIC OPINION REGARDING FORMATION OF A PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICTu ATTACHMENT 3 I ~ December 11, 1990 ,~11e .....~t~,.. ....:::- ~ - =:- ~ ...::::- ......:7. ~........ /'l111111\\\~' RECEIVED rJ..:'d..-ftO UI:.(; h 1990 ~ PK., REC. & COMM. SVC. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS GROUP . REGIONAL PARKS DEPARTMENT ~.,. B25 Eost Third Stroot. Son Bornordino. CA 92415.0833 . (7141 387.2594 TO: PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT AD HOC COMMITTEE MEMBERS SUBJECT: FINAL MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING As discussed during the last Ad Hoc meeting on November 20, 1990, attached for your review and use are the following: 1. Copy of the final Memorandum of Understanding showing all changes based on comments received from Ad Hoc committee members. vertical bars on the margin identify where changes have occurred. New language has been underlined and deleted language has been lined out. 2. signature ready copy of the final Memorandum of Understanding. The Memorandum of Understandings should be used in presenting the Park and Open space District concept to your city councils or governing boards to define how the Open Space District and the participant intend to establish their relationship, once the Open Space District is formed. please contact me with any questions. sincerely; ~~~ GERRY NEWCOMBE Interim Director GN:smr cc: Steven K. Messerli, Director, Department of Infrastructure Bill Havert, Consultant, Dangermond and Associates Attachments (i) . . MEMoRANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING RELATING TO THE PROPOSED SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PARK AND oPEN SPACE DISTRICT This Memorandum of Understandinq (hereinafter referred to as "MOU") is entered into on the date siqned below by and between the San Bernardino County Reqional Parks Department (hereinafter referred to as "Department") and the (hereinafter referred to as "participant"). RECITAIS WHEREAS, section 5506.8 of the California Public Resource code, as added by Chapter 1017 of the statues of 1990, effective January 1, 1991, authorizes the formation of a Park and Open space District in San Bernardino CountYl and WHEREAS, such proposed Park and Open Space District would be formed for the qeneral purpose of acquirinq, preservinq, protectinq, develotlina, operatinq and maintaininq open space, I parks, recreation facilities and habitat conservation areas, as well as hikinq, bicycle and equestrian trailsl and WHEREAS, the parties hereto expect that the Board of supervisors of the county of San Bernardino, as authorized in Public Resources Code Section 5506.8, will initiate proceedinqs to establish a San Bernardino county Park and open space District 1 . . (hereinafter referred to as "District") and call an election to determine whether the proposed District should be established and whether a special benefit assessment should be levied on real property within the proposed District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 5506.8, it is also expected that Participant will, by resolution of its governing body, request to be included within the proposed District for open space purposes; and WHEREAS, the Department is administering the organization of the District; and WHEREAS, Participant and Department wish to set forth in this MOU their intent and understanding of the desired relationship between the District and Participant in the event the District is formed, while recognizing that the District cannot enter into or be bound by agreements entered into prior to its establishment, and further recoanizina that this MOU is a formative document that is sub;ect to final aDDroval bv District (once formed) and ParticiDant. NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 2 IS . . 1. Revenue generated within the Participant's boundaries shall be divided 50% to the participant and 50' to. the District. 1'",",,0 (Where t:cw Partici'Dants' iurisdictional boundaries overla'D (i.e. a 'Dark and recreation district whose boundaries include an incor'Dorated citv as well as unincor'Dorated land). revenue collected bv the District from 'Darcels within the citv shall be disbursed. accordina to the a'D'Dortionment aareed U'Don for that zone. entirelv to the citvl. Such amounts shall be determined after deducting the costs identified in paragraph 9. participant's share is intended for use under the sole control of participant for park and open space purposes as defined in Division 5, Chapter 3, Article 3 of the Public Resources Code and in accordance with the terms of this MOU. 2. The District's share of revenues generated in the participant's Zone shall be expended within that zone. A zone is a geographic subdivision of the District established for administrative purposes. It is anticipated that the District's zones shall substantially correspond to the planning districts identified in the San Bernardino County Regional Parks Department strategic Master Plan, dated October 31, 1988. 3. During the first five years following the establishment of the District, no more than 50' of the Participant's cumulative 3 lie . . . share for that five vear "Deriod, and no more than 50% of District's cumulative share for that five vear "Deriod, may be used for operations and maintenance of projects authorized and funded after the date of establishment of the District. A project is defined as land acquisition, capital improvement, rehabilitation, program(s) for park and open space purposes, and includes planning, such as master plans, for such projects. Operations and maintenance costs include salaries, benefits, materials, services, supplies, equipment, and administrative overhead associated with the daily operation of the project. At no time may revenues derived from the benefit assessment be used for operation and maintenance for projects authorized and funded prior to the establishment of the District. 4. Both the Participant and the District shall make a good faith effort to maintain the existing level of funding for parks, trails, recreation and open space purposes. 5. :It is the intent of both the Participant and the District that in the event of annexation of unincorporated territory within the District by the Participant, the same share of revenue from the annexed area committed to the funding of District projects prior to annexation shall continue to be committed to those projects until indebtedness incurred by the District for said projects is retired. When this indebtedness is retired, 4 \' . . the apportionment formula then in effect with the Participant shall be in effect in the annexed area. It is further the intent of both the Participant and the District that should the Participant annex territory that encompasses a park, trail or open space improvement planned by the District, assessment funds accumulated for the planned improvement will be transferred to the Participant if the District elects not to proceed with the proj ect. The aforesaid notwithstanding, final determination regarding the status and apportionment of revenues generated wi thin the annexed area shall be determined by the Local Agency Formation commission (LAFCO) in conjunction with its approval of the proposed annexation. LAFCO's determination shall be binding on both the District and the Participant. 6. Both the District and the Participant shall be bound, upon detachment from the District by the Participant, by the final determination of LAFCO regarding the amount of revenue to continue to be committed to debt retirement by the Participant for debts incurred by the District. 7. The District shall prepare or cause to be prepared an annual audit of revenues and expenditures by the District and deliver a copy to the Participant. The Participant shall conduct an equivalent annual audit regarding its expenditure of revenues derived from the District and deliver a copy to the District. 5 It . . Each entity shall bear the cost for preparation and distribution of its audit from its share of the District revenues. 8. The District and the Participant shall each prepare a multi- year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the acquisition and development of parks, recreational facilities, trails and open space areas within two years of establishment of the District and shall periodicallY revise and update said plan. The CIP will include project titles, brief project descriptions and project cost estimates. 9. The Participant's share of the revenues collected within its boundaries shall be disbursed to the Participant within thirty (30) days after the revenues are disbursed to the District by the Auditor/controller-Recorder's Office (A/C-RO). The AC- RO's costs associated with the collection and disbursement of revenues, including the necessary updating of information regarding the number and status of parcels within the District, shall be deducted from all revenues prior to division of ,the revenues between the Participant and the District. The amount deducted for the District's administrative costs associated with collection and disbursement of revenues (but not including the A/C-RO'S costs) shall be limited to a maximum of one and one-half percent (1.5%) of the total revenue generated by the benefit 6 Ie . . assessment. 10. No obligation or other indebtedness shall be incurred by the District for any project within the Participant's boundaries until the substance of this MOU is approved and executed by the participant and the District. 11. It is the intent of the parties to this MOU that it's substance shall be submitted to the Governing Board of the District, once established, for approval in the form of a binding agreement between the District and the participant. The parties recognize that the substance of this MOU is not binding unless and until such an agreement is approved and executed by the Participant and the District. SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY REGIONAL PARKS DEPARTMENT PARTICIPANT Interim Director (Name aHa Tl$le) I 7 2 . . BERNARD WALP & MICHAL MOORE PUBliC Of'lNlON RESEAIlCH &. ECONOMIC ANAlYSIS 400 MONTGOMERY STREET, SUITE:1OO SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104.1211 TELEPHONE (41S) 394.700s , FACSIMILE (41S) 98\.1592 MEMORANDUM 18 I>eceOlber 1990 TO: Gerry Newcombe San Bernardino County Regional Parks District Steve Messerli San Bernardino County DepartOlent of Infrastructure Ad Hoc COOlmillee Relating to ForOlation of Park & Open Space Dirtrict Bernie Walp Update Surve). of Public Opinion Re&ardln& Formation of Park" Open Space District FROM: SUBJECT: Attached is a summary of observations from the survey cOOlpleted last week. Its 1bjective was an update of observations of public opinion made in July 1990. Since the July 19 0 research - _ which indicated a willingness to forOl a district and incur a parcel tax -- Kuwait invaded Iraq, the national econoOlY began to weaken, and California voters rejected a long lis of spending Oleasures on the NoveOlber statewide ballot. SoOle observers were startled by the election results. Might the world developOlents of late 1990 have rendered the July research out of date? The data below would suggest little change in public sentiOlent, if any. We believe the OlOSt iOlportant attractions that a potential district has for San Bernardino County residents persist. The survey involved interviews of 606 randoOlly selected active voters throughout the currently contemplated district boundaries. The confidence interval ("margin of error") for observations froOl a saOlple of 606 is ;t4.0 percentage points. However, two versions of this survey questionnaire were employed, for purposes of exploring reactions to two different annual taxation rates (529 and 536). The confidence interval for each subset of 303 respondents is j;S.6 percentage points. This poll is an indication of voter disDosition to support the formation and funding of a district for certain purposes, provided the right inforOlation is put into their hands, anll provided any OlisinforOlation is effectively countered. Actual voter support for a measure ofl this type will depend on the competence of an election caOlpaign yet to be waged. i Note: One iOlportant saOlple characteristic distinguishes this study from the July research. First. while the latter drew ;~S sample from the current list of all registered voter!" the Decem~er research saOlpled only voters who had voted in at least one of the last two ounty elections (November 1987 or NoveOlber 1989). This Olodification was Olade in ord r to ensure that our opinions were being gathered froOl the set of most active voters, those OlOSt likelv to participate in an eleC'!ion on a local issue such as contemplated here. . @2 "---. . . San Beraardlno County Realoaal Park. December 1990 Bernard Wain II. MI~h.1 Moore Frequencies WIth cooportlona, wh.r. pooltbl., to July 1990 r....rch ISBD90EI P. 1 Respondent's gender: MALE ------ 49% FEMALE ---- 51% 1. Introduction Hello, my name is for American opinion Research. May I speak to and I'm calling , please? We are working on a brief PUBLIC OPINION pOLL, to study some factors about the quality of life for people who live in San Bernardino County. We are not selling anything, I will not ask you for a contribution, and your responses are confidential. Do you have several minutes for me to ask your opinions on some local issues? 2. Aided recall This survey is very short -- it has to do with parks, recreation, and open space. First, I'd like to ask whether you have heard any discussion recently, about possiblY creating a County Park and Open space District: this agency would PURCHASE LAND to preserve as open space, and it would DEVELOP PARKS AND TRAILS where they are needed, and it would PROTECT WILDLIFE HABITATS where they are endangered. Do you recall hearing anything recently, about possibly creating this Park and open Space District? Julv Dec. YES, RECALL ------ 16% NO, DON'T RECALL - 83% 26% 73% 2 .... ", . . . Saa Beraa~lao Couat)' Realoaal Parka December 1990 B~rn.rd W.ID " MI~h.1 Moore , Frequencies With campert.ana, where po..ibl., to July 1990 r....rch ISBD90El P. 2 3. 1st ballot If there were an election today, would you vote FOR or AGAINST creating a district like that in San Bernardino County? Collapsed: Julv Dec. ~ FOR (definitely) ------ 29% For (probably) ------- 28% dkjnajneutral - 32% Against (probably) --- 6% AGAINST (definitely) -- 6% 66% 27% 7% 57% 32% 12% And would you vote FOR or AGAINST creating such a district if you knew it would cost each property owner 00 dollars a year to pay for it? December $29: $36: FOR ----------- AGAINST ------- dk/na --- 49% 45% 23% 26% 28% 28% :L3 . SaD BeraardlDO COUDty RealoDal Park. Dec:ember 1990 B~rnard WalD II. Michal Moore 4. How life is changing . Frequencies With camper' lone, where po..ibll, to July 1990 r..e.rch ISBD90EI P. 3 I'm going to read you a list ot several ASPECTS ot lite in San Bernardino County. As I read each item on my list, please tell me whether you consider that ASPECT of lite in San Bernardino County to be BETTER or WORSE than 5 years ago. Here's the first one: . " [ ROTATE] tl Traffic congestion tl The crime situation tl Availability of open space lands Park and outdoor recreation opportunities The Inland Empire economy tl tl tl The quality of the air [ PROMPT if necessary: . Compared to 5 ,.Iara "0, ia better or wone now ado>",?' ] [Vol.] Stayed BETTER the same WORSE dk/na 2% 8% 88% 1% July 0% 3% 94% 3% Dec. 4% 15% 75% 7% July 1% 9% 84% 5% Dec. 10% 17% 64% 9% July 3% 20% 62% 15% Dec. 36% 35% 22% 7% July 22% 33% 25% 19% Dec. 23% 17% 40% 20% Dec. 8% 15% 75% 1% July 21% 18% 58% 4% Dec. I." / /. . ",---",. - .;2.'/ . . Saa Beraardlao Coval)' Realoaal Parks December 1990 Bernard W.tD II. Michal Moore 5. Willingness to pay . Frequencies With comper',one, where poeltble, to July 1990 r....rch ISBD90EI P. 4 I'm going to read you some additional county services that could pecome availaple if voters were to approve a tax increase -- a yearly assessment of 30 dollars per San Bernardino county household. As I read each one, please tell me whether you think it would pe worth this additional tax. WORTH THE ADDITIONAL $30.00 TAX 73% 74' Here's the first one: [ ROTATE J l:l Increase the level of law enforcement [ PROMPT i/ necessary: -II 'bat worth the additional SO-dollar taxI or not?- ) NOT WORTH THE ADDITIONAL $30.00 TAX dk/na 5' July 4t Dec. 79% 67% 22% 22% 23% 27% 15% 24% l:l protect wildlife hapitats ~~: 7% July at Dec. l:l Increased services for senior citizen programs l:l Buying land to preserve open space l:l Development of rapid tr~nsit services Develop more places for camping, fiShing and water sports l:l l:l Trails for hiking, piking and riding More neighPorhood athletic fields, parks and playgrounds l:l 63% 61% 71% 67% 28% 25% 10% 14% 6% 9' 6' 9% July Dec. 23' 24% 65% 52% 30% 34t 5% 15% July Dec. July Dec. July Dec. July Dec. 5% 9% July Dec. 62% 57% 31% 30% 7% 13' 74t 61' 21% 30% lS 1-- , . . San Benardlno County Realoual Park. December 1990 Bernard W.ID " Mlcha' Moore Frequencies With c~rt.ona, where poeltble, to July 1990 r....rch ISpD90EI P. 5 6. Open-ended probes This past June, California voters said YES to a number of statewide spending measures and tax increases. That was ~. But LAST MONTH, in November, voters said NO to nearly every statewide spending measure that was on the ballot. Do ~ have any ideas or opinions as to what might be the reason voters' feelings chanaed so much in just 5 months? IV bl" J er a 1m responses Dec. Antigovernment/-politician / Enough! ----------- 34% Bad economy / Middle East ---------------------- 21% Long, confusing ballot ------------------------- 17% can't afford ___________________________________ 8% Miscellaneous _______________~__________________ 7% Don't know / No answer ---------~--------------- 13% Now even though california voters defeated every statewide spending measure last month, at the same time people in many communities around california voted IN FAVOR of spending more money for parks and open space. What would you say was the reason voters were willing to be taxed for more parks and open space, but not for so many other things? IV b " J er allm responses ~ Alternatives to growth/crowding -------- 15% people want it: it's needed ------------ 13% Local/tangible/direct issue/benefit ---- 11% Good environmental cause --------------- 8% Children/family life ------------------- 7% Quality of life ------------------------ 5% Miscellaneous -------------------------- 11% Don't know / No answer ----------------- 31% Had there been a local measure on last month's ballot to provide funds for parks and open space in San Bernardino County, do you think it would have passed, or not? YES, would have passed --- 17% NO, wouldn't have passed - 50% dk/na -------- 33% .2.~ '. . . Saa Beraardtao Couat)' Reatoaat Parks December 1990 Bf'rnard Wain" Michal Moore Frequencies With c~rt.~. wh.r. poalibll, to July 1990 r....rch 18B090[1 P. 6 7. Aspects of the ballot proposition Imagine that there is an election today, and that you will vote on a proposition to establish a County district that would provide recreation and parks facilities, ~ purchase land to preserve as open space. I'd like to qet your opinions about several aSDects of this proposition: ~, bad, or no oDinion. Here's the first one: [ ROTATE] [ PROMPT if necessary: 'Would thia be a GOOD ASPECT or a BAD ASPECT of the propo.ition?' ] The county would create a parcel tax on all property in the a district -- about 00 dollars per lot per year. July ~ December ll.i..t $36: GOOD aspect ------- 51% BAD aspect -------- 34% neutral/dk/na -- 14% 38% 40% 21\ 39% 39% 22% property owners who ~ the new OO-dollar annual tax will be a allowed 00 dollars of credit toward county park admission fees. July $30/ ill..;.. December $29/ $36/ $15: $18: GOOD aspect ------- 72% BAD aspect -------- 19% neutra1/dk/na -- 9% 63% 19% 17\ 56% 25% 19% About half the money for this new district would be used for local parks and community facilities, and the money raised from a each specific zone within the district will be spent in that same zone. Ju1v Dec. GOOD aspect ------- 72% 68% BAD aspect -------- 19% 15% neutra1/dk/na 9% 17% Some of the land to be purchased will be used to help complete a continuous trail for a hikers, bicycles and horses, to connect the mountains with the Pacific Ocean. GOal aspect ....... 5n BAD aspect ........ 20X neutral/dk/na .. 23% ?-7 ". . . SaD BeraardlDO COUDt)' RelloDal Park. December 1990 Bernard W.la &: Michal Moore Frequencies WIth comporl.ono, where poo.lbl., to July 1990 r....rch ISBD90EI P.7 Aspects of the Ballot Proposition (continued) The money for the new district will be spent on specific projects clearly identified to a the voters when they voted on whether or not to create the district. Some of the money for this new district would a be spent to protect wildlife habitats and open spaces in the zones where the money is collected. GOOD ..peet ....... 66X lAD ..peet ........ l1X neutr.l/dIt/no .. 23X GOOD ..peet ....... 66X lAD .speet ........ 16X neutr.l/dIt/no .. 18% Some of the money for the new district will a be used to develop new regional parks, and improve existing ones. Real estate developers will be charged extra fees to buy land for a new county parks, open space and trails. GOOD .speet ....... 671 lAD .speet ........ 15% neutr.l/dk/no .. 18X .!l!U: ~ GOOD .speet ....... 671 53% BAD .spect ........ 21% 171 neutr.l/dk/no .. 12% 30X ~f6 ---,-- - . . . Saa Beraarellao Couat)' Relloaal 'ark. December 1990 Bernard WaIn &: Michal Moore Frequencies WIth caoporlaono. wh.r. poaatbl.. to July 1990 r....rch ISBD90El P. 8 8. Polemics Now here are some statements that various people have made regarding recreation and open space in San Bernardino County. As I read each one, please tell me whether you AGREE or DISAGREE with each statement. If you have no opinion, that's okay too. Here's the first one: [PROMPT as necessary: .Would you AGREE or DISAGREE with that? J [ ROTATE J ouring these times of tight money and budget deficits, there is a dangerous tendency to cut TOO MUCH out of parks and open space spending. a Julv Dec. AGREE .................... 64" 60S Meutral/dk/no ............ 20X 21" DISAGREE .................161 191 a Taxes are high enough -- and with the budget deficit, and recent tax hikes by congress and the state Legislature, I oppose any new taxes for parks and open space in San Bernardino county. Julv Dec. AGREE .................... 431 41" Meutral/dk/no ...... 151 181 DISAGREE ................. 421 40X a Local government is just looking for another way to get more money even though they cannot properly manage the millions of dollars they already collect each year. AGREE ....................... 581 Neutral/dk/no ............... 211 DISAGREE .................... 211 a Unless San Bernardino takes steps NOW to preserve open space, the opportunity to acquire it will disappear and we'll become another L.A. July Dec. AGREE .................... 741 711 Meutral/dk/no ............ 8l 131 DISAGREE ................. 171 161 ;2.'1 " . . . . SaD BeraardlDo COUDty Rea100al 'arb December 1990 Bernard W.ID .. MIchal Moore " Frequencies With comporllont. wh.r. polllbl., to July 1990 r....rch ISBD90El .. 9 9. 2nd ballot Now that we have been discussinq these issues a bit, I'd like to ask a 2nd time: Imaqine there is a local ballot proposition, to create a San Bernardino Park and Open Space District. It would preserve open space, develop parks, and protect wildlife habitats, and it would cost each property owner a parcel assessment of 00 dollars per year. If that election were today, do you think you would vote FOR or AGAINST the proposition? July July July Dec. Dec. $29/vear $33/vear $37/vear $29/vear $36/vear VOTE FOR ------- 62% 66% 64% 47% 48% VOTE AGAINST --- 20% 20% 20% 24t 24% dk/na ----- 18% 18% 18% 28% 28% Reasons for voting YES It's needed / good cause / worth it ---- 38% Antidote to crowding/growth ------------ 28% Environmental/preservation concerns ---- 13% Family/children/quality life ----------- 10% Miscellaneous / Don't know --------------1Q1 100% = 47% of all respondents Reasons for voting NO Can't/won't pay more taxes ------------- 53% Antigovernment/-politician ------------- 20t Enough open space already -------------- 9% There are higher priorities ------------ 6% Miscellaneous / Don't know -------------~ 100% - 24% of all respondents 10. Demographics And now we finish with several questions purposes. . . First, are there children under 18 in your home? for statistical ~ YES ------- 44% NO -------- 55% Dec. 36% 64% Julv Dec. 30 . . San Bernardino Couoty Realonat Parb December 1990 Bernard Wain Ii M'cha' Moore Frequencies WIth comporl'0n0, wh.r. poo.lbl., to July 1990 r....rch ISBD90El P. 10 Do you OWN or RENT the home where you currently live? OWN ------------- 75' RENT ------------ 22' 90' B' That's all the questions I have. My supervisor MIGHT be calling just to verifY that we did reach you. May I have your first name or your initials? Respondentia name or initt.ls CONFIRM TELEPHONE NUMBER and THANK RESPONDENT Respondent's telephone number: Sample sheet no.: Time interview com Dieted: 9 am n 3 pm 5% 10 am 12' 4 pm 0% 11 am 10% 5 pm 6% { nearest hour J Noon ----- 12% 6 pm 14% 1 pm 7% 7 pm 9% 2 pm ---- 9% 8 pm 10% 9 pm 3% Dale of interview: Friday, December 7 ---------- 21% Saturday, December 8 -------- 38% sunday, December 9 ---------- 20% Monday, December 10 --------- 21% Party Reaistration Democrat - GOP - Other = Julv 42% 48% 9% Dec. 41% 51% 8% 31 , v CITY OF SAN BERNaDINO - REQUEST F. COUNCIL ACTION From: Annie F. Ramos, Director Subject: RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RELATIVE TO THE PROPOSED SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT. Dept: Parks, Recreation & Community Services Date: December 14, 1990 Synopsis of Previous Council action: None. I;; '.."', , , Recommended motion: Adopt Resolution. -"1', a.w 1. L Signature Contact person: Ann; e F. Remo~ Phone: 5030 Supporting data attached: St eff Report, Rf'~O lilt; on & MOil. Ward: N/A FUNDING REQUIREMENTS: Amount: N / A Source: (Acct. No.) (Acct. DescriPtion) Finance: Council Notes: 75-0262 Agenda Item NO.~ i A . . CITY OF SAN BERNADINO - REQUEST F. COUNCIL ACTION RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING THE STAFFREPPRT EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RELATING TO THE PROPOSED SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT. The San Bernardino County Regional Parks Department has developed a Park and open Space District concept in an effort to respond to the increased demand for park and recreation facilities. The proposed district would provide an important revenue source to meet current and future needs for regional and local needs. The amount of funding available to the city of San Bernardino is forecasted to be approximately $400,000 to $500,000 annually. The funds may be used for maintenance of current parks and recreation facilities as well as for acquisition and development of new facilities and rehabilitation of older parks and recreation areas. A task force comprised of county, city and special districts representatives was formed to work cooperatively to create the district concept. Regular meetings have been held to develop an equitable revenue allocation formula and identify projects for which those revenues would be used. A draft district proposal was formulated and each city and special district governing body will have the option of being includ- ed. Voters in each jurisdiction will have the opportunity to vote on whether or not to establish the district and assess the parcel fee in the amount proposed. Attached is a draft of the proposed MOU outlining the provisions for participating in the proposed district. It should be noted that this MOU will be the document which enables participation if the voters approve formation of the district. , If the Mayor and Common council choose to participate, the issue will be brought before the voters of the City of San Bernardino on June 4, 1991 for approval. If the Mayor and Common Council choose not to participate, the matter will not go before the voters of the City of San Bernardino and the city will not be a part of the district. Attachment AFR:u (RESO:CO.MOU) 12/14/90 75-0264 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 NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RELATING TO THE PROPOSED SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT. BE IT RESOLVED BY THE MAYOR AND COMMON COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Mayor of the city of San Bernardino is hereby authorized and directed to execute on behalf of said City a Memorandum of Understanding with the County of San Bernardino relating to the proposed San Bernardino County Park and Open Space District a copy of which is attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A" and incorporated here- in by reference as fully as though set forth at length. SECTION 2. The authorization granted hereunder shall expire and be void and of no further effect if the agreement is not executed by both parties and returned to the office of the city Clerk within 60 days following effective date of the resolution. . 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 , 1991, by the follow- ing vote, to wit: 12/14/90 -1- c . . . 1 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF A MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING WITH THE COUNTY 2 OF SAN BERNARIDNO RELATING TO THE PROPOSED SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT. 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 11/28/90 (RES011/28/90) COUNCIL MEMBERS AYES NAYS ABSTAIN ESTRADA REILLY FLORES UDSLEY City Clerk The foregoing resolution is hereby approved this day of , 1991. W.R. Holcomb, Mayor city of San Bernardino pproved as to form nd legal content: ames F. Penman ity Attorney /) l~) , .~ /~/}-Y'~....... - 2 - 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 . . MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING RELATING TO THE PROPOSED SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY PARK AND OPEN SPACE DISTRICT This Memorandum of Understanding (hereinafter referred to as "MOU") is entered into on the date signed below by and between the Bernardino County Regional Parks San Department (hereinafter referred to as "Department") and the city of San Bernardino, Parks, Recreation and community Services Department. (hereinafter referred to as "participant"). RECITALS WHEREAS, Section 5506.8 of the California Public Re source Code, as added by Chapter 1017 of the Statues of 1990, effective January 1, 1991, authorizes the formation of a Park and open Space District in San Bernardino County; and , WHEREAS, such proposed Park and open Space District would be formed for the general purpose of acquiring, preserving, protecting, operating and maintaining open space, parks, recreation facilities habitat and conservation areas, as well as hiking, bicycle and equestrian trails; and . 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 . . . WHEREAS, the parties hereto expect that the Board of supervisors of the county of San Bernardino, as authorized in Public Resources Code Section 5506.8, will initiate proceedings to establish a San Bernardino county Park and Open Space District (hereinafter referred to as "District") and call an election to determine whether the proposed District should be established and whether a special benefit assessment should be levied on real property within the proposed District; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 5506.8, it is also expected that participant will, by resolution of its governing body, request to be included within the proposed District for open space purposes; and WHEREAS, the Department is organization of the District; and administering the WHEREAS, Participant and Department wish to set forth in this MOU their intent and understanding of the desired relationship between the District and Participant in the event the District is formed, while recognizing that the District cannot enter into or be bound by agreements entered into prior to its establishment. - 2 - 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 . . NOW THEREFORE, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Revenue generated within the Participant's boundaries shall be divided 50% to the participant and 50% to the District. Such amounts shall be determined after deducting the costs identified in paragraph 9. participant's share is intended for use under the sole control of participant for park and open space purposes as defined in Division 5, Chapter 3, Article 3 of the Public Resources Code and in accordance with the terms of this MOU. 2. The District's share of revenues generated in the Participant's Zone shall be expended within that zone. A zone is a geographic subdivision of the district established for administrative purposes. It is anticipated that the District's zones shall substantially correspond to the planning districts identified in the San Bernardino County Regional Parks Department Strategic Master Plan, dated October 31, 1988. 3. During the first five years following the establishment of the District, no more than 50% of the participant's share, and no more than 50% of - 3 - , 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~ 23 24 25 26 27 28 . . . District's share, may be used for operations and maintenance of projects authorized and funded after the date of establishment of the District. A project is defined as land acquisition, capital improvement, rehabilitation, program(s) for park and open space purposes, and includes planning, such as master plans, for such projects. operations and maintenance costs include salaries, benefits, materials, services, supplies, equipment, and administrative overhead associated with the daily operation of the project. At no time may revenues derived from the benefit assessment be used for operation and maintenance for projects authorized and funded prior to the estab- lishment of the District. 4. Both the participant and the District shall make a good faith effort to maintain the existing level of funding for parks, trails, recreation and open space purposes. 5. It is the intent of both the Participant and the Dis trict that in the event of annexation of unincor- porated territory within the District by the Participant, the same share of revenue from the - 4 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 ~ ~ 24 25 26 27 28 . . . annexed area committed to the funding of District projects prior to annexation shall continue to be committed to those projects until indebtedness incurred by the District for said projects is retired. When this indebtedness is retired, the apportionment formula then in effect with the partici pant shall be in effect in the annexed area. It is further the intent of both the Participant and the District that should the Participant annex territory that encompasses a park, trail or open space improvement planned by the district, assessment funds accumulated for the planned improvement will be transferred to the Participant if the District elects not to proceed with the project. The aforesaid not- withstanding, final determination regarding the status and apportionment of revenues generated within the annexed area shall be determined by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) in conjunction with its approval of the proposed annexation. LAFCO's determination shall be binding on both the District and the Participant. 6. Both the District and the Participant shall be bound, upon detachment from the District by the Participant, by the final determination of LAFCO regarding the amount of revenue to continue to be committed to debt retirement by the Participant for debts incurred by the District. 5 - 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 . . 7. The District shall prepare or cause to be prepared an annual audit of revenues and expenditures by the Dis trict and deliver a copy to the Participant. The Participant shall conduct an equivalent annual audit regarding its expenditure of revenues derived from the District and deliver a copy to the District. Each entity shall bear the cost for preparation and distri- bution of its audit from its share of the District revenues. 8. The District and the Participant shall each prepare a multi-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) for the acquisition and development of parks, recreational facilities, trails and open space areas within two years of establishment of the District and shall periodically revise and update said plan. The CIP will include project titles, brief project descriptions and project cost estimates. 9. The Participant's share of the revenues collected within its boundaries shall be disbursed to the Participant within thirty (30) days after the revenues are disbursed to the District by the AUditorjController-Recorder's Office (AjC-RO) . The AC-RO's costs associated with the collection and - 6 - 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 . . . disbursement of revenues, including the necessary updating of information regarding the number and status of parcels within the District, shall be deducted from all revenues prior to division of the revenues between the Participant and the District. The amount deducted for the District's administrative costs associated with collection and disbursement of revenues (but not including the A/e-RO's costs) shall be limited to a maximum of one and one-half percent (1.5%) of the total revenue generated by the benefit assessment. 10. No obligation or other indebtedness shall be incurred by the District for any project within the Participant's boundaries until the substance of this MOU is approved and executed by the Participant and the District. 11. It is the intent of the parties to this MOU that its substance shall be submitted to the Governing Board of the District, once established, for approval in the form of a binding agreement between the District and the participant. The parties recognize that the substance of this MOU is not binding unless and until such an agreement is approved and executed by the Participant and the District. - 7 - 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 ~ RESO: AUTHORING EXECUTION OF SAN BE RDINO RELATING OPEN SP CE DISTRICT SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY REGIONAL PARKS DEPARTMENT Director Approved as to form and legal content: James F. Penman city Attorney /' ~;:,,/ n'lt ~ I~.~. .'--'" irrJ"......-c"' ? - 8 - (MEMOOFUNDERSTDG) AN MOU WIli,. COUNTY OF TO PROPOS'" COUNTY PARK AND CITY OF SAN BERNARDINO PARTICIPANT W.R. Holcomb, Mayor city of San Bernardino . building industry association of southern california, inc. ......... - ..... .u_ no _ eo.p., __It. ""._._ __.It. _l0oi_ a..p r%l=.. _1.011: no 1.011: eo.p., ~wur;:. 'C,.., T.., ..... _ .......... c:-p., _ 00lIo -- eo.p., LC.__Jr. TIll ,..., (' I Illy =!l'y", 1loIo_ ...... - _T_ ..... A. T.... ~ .,111. 111. ....... ... 01...... ~vE;;l Fir Coop. ,..- 111__ IondaIpIIIlaII. It. Qoooarilla ~ Coop. .... - ..._ 0.. . . . Coop. -- ~.-... t.- Coop. LB._.1t. . LB. _. c:-p., a.,r .....~ -- ...- -~ JooI ... .... I'IooooW a..p -- c... Cudo._ -- _ PiIw _.111 _ P. I..-htII November 14, 1990 Mr. Bob Holcomb Mayor, City of San Bernardino City Hall 300 North "D" Street San Bernardino, CA 92418 Dear Bob, . RD-<, v It was my pleasure to meet you yesterday and speak before your distinguished group of homeless service providers and advocates. I enjoyed the dialogue and questions that they posed and admire your leadership in developing a countywide response to this most important problem. As you requested, I have enclosed a copy of the City of Long Beach SRO contract for your information. It includes both scope of work, cost and timeframe. Should you care to replicate the SRO program in San Bernardino we would be very happy to ass~s'C you .i.h any way we can. Thank you for the invitation to come to San Bernardino. I respect your commitment against homelessness and look forward to working with you in the future. Should you have any questions please don't hesitate to call me at (714) 396-9993. f?;lY' Judith ;~ President, HomeAid Enclosures HomeAld II a non.prollt ho"~OI\ whidI UUII the cammunil7', bumeleu. 1330 Valley Villi,' Bar. CA 91765 (714) 396-9993 t52~ . . CONSOLTAN'l' AGUZMBNT This Consultant Agreement this day of BEACH HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, corporation ("Company"), and HomeAid, ("Consultant") . ("Agreement") is entered into on , 1990, between THE LONG a California non-profit a non-profit corporation Recitals: A. The Company has as one of its primary purposes the encouragement of the construction and rehabilitation of housing affordable to low-and very low-income households; including Single Room Occupancy (S~) dwellings. ~- ---- B. The Company has determined that an effective systematic approach to providing such dwellings must be established and a SRO Housing Development Strategy must be developed. C. The Company desires the assistance. of a qualified Consultant to develop a SRO Housing Development Strategy and Ordinance for purposes of Planning Commission and City Council adoption. The Strategy and Ordinance will also guide the Company in the development of a model SRO project. D. Consul tant possesses the unique skills and necessary expert and professional capabilities to perform the services as described in this Agreement. THE PARTIES AGREE as follows: 1. Company agrees to employ Consultant and Consultant shall furnish professional services in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and as provided in the "Scope of SErvices" attached hereto as Attachment No 1, and Company shall pay for these services from time to time, in due course of payments" as provided in "Schedule of Fees and Payments" attached hereto as Attachment No. 2 and incorporated by reference, in an amount not to exceed $48,500. 2. The work activities described in Attachment No.1, Scope of Services, shall be the responsibility of the Consultant except for those agreed upon activities to be performed jointly with the Company, as so noted in the Scope of Services attached hereto as Attachment No.1. . . . Page 2 3. Consultant may select the time and place of performance, provided, however, that access to City documents, records, City/Company staff, and the like, if needed b y Consultant, shall be available in a timely fashion. Company acknowledges and agrees that if Consultant's failure to access needed information timely, after due diligence, results in delays in completion of services under this Agreement, Consultant shall not be held responsible and any payments to Consultant that would otherwise be due will not be unreasonably withheld. 4. The term of this Agreement shall commence on the date it is signed by duly authorized representatives of the company and Consultant and shall terminate upon completion and submission, in a form acceptable to the Company, of the two reports as described in the Scope of Services, Attachment NO.1, of this Agreement, or after five months following execution, whichever occurs first, unless extended as agreed to by both parties. 5. In performing services under this Agreement, Consultant is and shall act as independent contractor and not an employee, representative, or Agent of the Company. Consultant shall have control of Consultant's work and the manner in which it is performed. Consultant shall be free to contract for similar services to be performed for others during the term of this Agreement. Consultant acknowledges and agrees that a) Company will not withhold taxes of any kind from Consultants' compensation, b) Company will not secure Worker's compensation or pay unemployment insurance to, for, or on Consultant's behalf, and c) Company will not provide and Consultant is not entitled to any of the usual and customary rights, benefits or privileges of Company employees. Consultant expressly warrants that neither Consultant nor any of Consultant's employees or agents shall represent themselves to be employees of the Company. 6. Company agrees to pay Consultant for the services to be performed under this Agreement, in the amount described in Section 1 of this Agreement. Consultant will also be reimbursed for actual direct out-of~pocket costs incurred in connection with the services rendered under this Agreement, with the exception of mileage charges for travel within Consultants normal area of operation. Reimbursable may include, but not limited to, and out of area travel. a. Payment will be made to Consultant in Accordance with the payment schedule shown as Attachment No.2. . . . Page 3 b. Consultant will submit invoices certifying to the work performed pursuant to the terms and conditions of the Agreement and Company will make payments in a timely manner. 7. Consultant shall procure and maintain at Consultant's expense for the duration of this Agreement the following insurances against claims for injuries to persons, or damage to property which may arise from or in connection with the performance of the work by the Consultant, its agents, representatives, employees or subcontractors: a. Commercial General Liabilitv: $1,000,000 combined single limit for each occurrence ($2,000,000 General Aggregate) for bodily injury, personal injury and property damage. The Long Beach HOusing Development company, the City of Beach and their officials, agents and employees shall be covered as additional insured with respect to liability arising out of or in any manner connected with Consultant's operations or performance under this Agreement. b. Automobile Liabilitv: $500,000 combined single limit per accident for bodily injury and property damage covering owned, non- owned and hired vehicles. c. Professional Liabilitv: single limit. $1,000,000 aggregate combined d. Workers' Compensation: the State, of California and $1,000,000 per accident. As required by the Labor Code of Employers Liability limits of Any self-insurance program and self-insured retention must be separately approved by the Company. Each insurance policy shall be endorsed to state that coverage shall not be cancelled by either party, reduced in coverage, or in limits except after thirty (30) days prior written notice has been given to the Company. Acceptable insurance coverage shall be placed with carriers admitted to write insurance in California or carriers with a rating of or equivalent to A:VIII by A.M. Best & Company. Any deviations from this rule shall require specific approval in writing. '. . . . Page 4 Consultant shall furnish the Company with certificates of insurance and with original enforcement affecting coverage as required above. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy are to be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. 8. Consultant shall defend, save and keep the Company, its officers and employees, free and harmless from and against all claims, demands, action or causes of action which may be asserted against the Company, its officers and employees, arising out of or in any manner connected with or attributable to work negligently performed by Consultant pursuant to the Agreement. 9. During the performance of the Agreement, no person, shall be subjected to discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, sexual orientation, AIDS, AIDS- related condition, age, marital status, disability or handicap, or Vietnam Era Veteran status. 10. Formal notices, demands and communications between the parties will be sufficiently given if dispatched by Registered mail or Certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested to the principal offices of the Company and the Consultant. Such notices shall be addressed as follows: To Company: The Long Beach Housing Development Company 230 pine Avenue Long Beach, CA 90802 To Consultant: HomeAid 1330 ,South Valley Diamond Bar, CA vista 91765 11. This Agreement contemplates the personal services of Consultant and Consultant's employees, an the parties acknowledge that a substantial inducement to Company for entering into this Agreement was and is the professional reputation and competence of Consultant. Consultant shall not assign its rights or delegate its duties under this Agreement, or any interest in it, or any portion of it, without the prior written consent of the Company. Furthermore, Consultant shall not sub-contract any portion of the performance required hereunder without the prior written consent of the President of the Company or his designee. Nothing stated in this Section 11 shall prevent the Consultant from employing as many employees and Consultant deems necessary for performance of this Agreement. . . Page 5 12. In the event that any action or arbitration is brought by either party against the other for the enforcement of any right or remedy in the Agreement or for the breach of any obligation of the Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable fees and costs of such action, including attorneys' fees. 13. This Agreement may be terminated by the Company, or by Consultant at any time upon service of a thirty (30) days written notice. Any notice will be addressed to Consultant at the address previously stated and to the Company at its mailing address as follows; c/o Diane V. McNeel, Vice President 333 West Ocean Blvd., 3rd Floor Long Beach, CA 90802 COMPANY AND CONSULTANT have executed this Agreement as of the date first stated above. The Long Beach Housing Development Company, a California non-profit corporation By By company ,HomeAid By By Approved as to form this 1990 day of JOHN R. CALHOUN, City Attorney of the City of Long Beach Attorney for the Long Beach Housing Development Company By Deputy . . Attachment No. 1 Scope of Services Consultant agrees to develop a Single Room Occupancy (SRO) Housing Development Strategy. This document will be used to educate City/Company staff and non-profit/for profit development companies in how to develop quality new SRO, residential housing in Long Beach. Along with the Strategy, a new City SRO ordinance will be drafted for planning Commission and City Council adoption. The Strategy and Ordinance will assist the City and The Long Beach Housing Development Company (Company) officials in evaluating future SRO proposals. It will also guide the Company in the development of a model SRO project. The SRO Housing Development Strategy will include the following: I. The Need for a New Affordable HOusing Project in Long Beach and the SRO Solution. A. *Impacts of the housing crisis B. *Homelessness in Long Beach C. SRO's - a definition of both Old and New D. How SRO's meet affordable housing requirements for Cities and make a profit for developers. II. New SRO's: A Variety of Experiences Nationwide A. San Diego, CA B. Atlanta, GA C. Berkeley, CA D. Richmond, VA E. Lexington, Kentucky F. Seattle, Washington G. Honolulu, HI H. Phoenix, Arizona I. San Jose. CA J. Orange County, CA III. New A. B C. D. E. F. G. SRO Development: Is This For You? Supply and demand: Who is your client? *Site availability Political and regulatory climate *Economic climate of the City (Market Analysis) Construction and management costs NIMBY -- Not in My Back Yard! For profit and non-profit developers: Is this for you? . . Page 2 IV. How to Get Started and a Suggested Development Schedule A. Local assessment and technical resources: names of point people and alternates B. Creating the Constituency C. Cheek-lists in development (developer and City) D. suggested development schedule E. pitfalls and obstacles and how to overcome them V. Financing A. Prospective lenders B. Public financial participation: Indirect and direct techniques C. Federal Programs D. State Programs E. Local Programs F. Sample Project Proformas * Represents a combined effort between HomeAid and Company for data collection purposes. The SRO ordinance will address the following issues: I. planning and Land Use Decisions A. zoning designations and permit procedures B. Site selection: The well-located SRO C. Parking requirements D. Development standards: Height, setback, landscaping; density II. Architectural Guidelines A. How to select an SRO architect B. Exterior facades and urban design considerations C. Floor plans D. Unit lay-outs E. Common area requirements F. Mixed-use possibilities III. Management, Security, and Operations A. Management plans B. Staffing C. Equal and fair housing D. Internal security and security hardware E. operational expense F. SRO management training G. SRO management software , . . Page 3 IV. Building and Fire Codes A. Authority B. Definitions C. Development standards D. Unit requirements E. Project requirements F. Fire codes To facilitate the development of the SRO strategy and ordinance, a series of consensus building workshops will be held with City staff and community organizations. The following organizations will be invited to attend and participate in the Workshops: o Chamber of Commerce o Apartment Owners Association o Long Beach Board of Realtors o Long Beach Homeless Coalition o Business and Merchants Associations o Homeowner Associations o Building Industry Association - Local Chapter o Council of Long Beach Neighborhood Organizations o Council of Seniors o Long Beach Area Citizens Involved o Legal Aid o Long Beach Housing Activist Association o Long Beach Planning and Building Departments o Long Beach Planning Commission o Long Beach City Council Key representatives from each group will be invited to join an SRO Housing task force to work with the Consultant and Company in community consensus building and to provide feedback into the development of the strategy and the ordinance. The most important component of a SRO program, tailored to the specific needs of the City of Long Beach, is the City's ultimate capacity to evaluate proposals and build its own SRO housing. To this end, the Company will maintain high visibility throughout the entire process and will work closely with the Consultant in data collection, consensus building and strategy/ordinance adoption. If determined to be more cost effective, the Company may assume some responsibility in document preparation. In this case, consultant fees will be reduced accordingly. Upon adoption of the SRO Strategy and ordinance, a special training and information seminar will be held for non-profit and for profit developers. Company will act as host for this seminar' and consultant will act as facilitator. l. 2. 3. 4. . . . Attachment 2 Schedule of Fees and Payments 5. 6. 7. 8. Staff Time Costs (*1) support Staff Costs (*2) Telephone @ $120.00 per month Duplicating, Fax, postage, etc. @ $150 per month Computer Time @ $100.00 per month Legal Consultation Administration Overhead Costs (*3) Margin for HomeAid (*4) TOTAL: $26,000 4,000 600 750 500 8,000 2,200 6.450 $48.500 NOTES: *1. Actual staff costs for the President and Secretary /Administrati ve Assistant. Over 5 months, actual time projected to be spent on this project is 520 hours (50% of the staff time). Hourly charge is only $50.00! *2. This represents support services of receptionist, mailroom clerk, messenger services, etc. *3. This is pro-rated rent, use of conference room facilities for meetings, food, parking facilities, etc. *4. HomeAid is always working on its own fundraising effort. This margin which is only 13% of the total contract is to compensate for "lost opportunity" for fundraising activities and also represents a nominal contingency for miscellaneous costs. . Page 2 (Continued) Payment of fees will be billed as follows: 25% contract execution 25% strategy report (draft) 25% strategy report (final) 25% ordinance final . Attachment 2