HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/03/17 Additional Information
i! ..
D1ZA~'rI' ~-~evn I I ~
City of Chula Vista
City Council
Community Meeting - Prop A Advisory Committee (PAAC)
March 12, ?009 4:00 I'.M.
Background of Proposal:
CONC1/RN: Members of the commututy want some guarantees of oversight of Prop A monies. When
they go to vote, they would like to l.now what the oversight would lool: like.
Question: Can the advisory committee go beyond the scope of the intent listed in the ballot measure to
include i~frastructttre needs ~ building reserves?
(t1-Miesfield) Yes -The language in the ballot measure is loose. The funds will go into the General
Fund, not specific areas. The committee is an advisor-=. Therefore there should be no problem with
this scope of purpose.
Creation of Committee:
CONC1r12N: The make-up of corrunittee membership is VERY inportuit, as much as ot: mote than the
function of die conunittee. The goal is fora "bottom up" committee representing many categories of
interest gt:oups and Chula Vista crtizens.
P13 The committee should be large ltke the F3ayfront CAC or the General Plan Update Committee - so
there will be many voices heard and not excessive competition for member seats.
Question: What would the duration of service be? Terms Ivnits?
Reconuncndattons from attendees: 2yr/3vr staggered terms with 2 term service.
Question: When would the cotrunittce start? If Prop A passes, the new tam money wouldn't arrive until
Nov. In 2010, the city would be only treading water and the funds t:eally wouldn't come full play'until
2011.
(Tulloch) The City= \~lanager would consider borrowing against projection and start using die funds
imrnedtately, so he recommends that the Oversight Cotnnvttce be in place immediately.
Question: The committee will need to oversee the total General Fund budget working with the City
Manager and hiiance Oept they would make cotntnent on c~pected standards of ser-~=ice and die Ciry
should set an expected standard of service. The PAt\C would be aslung ehe City: Flow arc your dov~g
generally? Are important ser-~=ices being cut:? Arc reser-~=es adequate?
Staff Answer: Separations of funds (General hand vs Prop t1) would be difficult and the best
benchmarks would be whether or not the cirl~ is functioning as citizens want it to function.
CONCT'RN: People do not trust the City= if Prop t1 funds just go tnto the General Fund. There is a
general lack of confidence in the City. if the PAAC has "teeth", it would build community confidence.
PB l lus is the reason for adopting principals now to give the PAAC as many "teeth" as an oversight
committee can legally have.
February 18, 2009
Energy Subcommittee Meeting (DRAFT) Paqe 2 of 2
CONCERNS: The City doesn't need a Prop A oversight committee -because the funds aren't
separated and, but we do need aBudget-General Fund oversight Committee. Reinforced that it
would be very difficult to separate the sale's tax monies from the Budget & General ]~ trnd.
There is precedent for budget oversight committees in many cities throughout the US
Tlus coiruiuttee must have:
a. A Broad charge
b. Meet "in time" before the budgets are finalized and be part of the budgeting process, in
sync with the budgetary development cycles. (proactive not reactive)
c. Report to the City ivlanager
d. Be able to preview the General Fund
e. Be "bottom-up" and appointed by the comrnunit}'
£ Meeting should be scheduled around the budget cycle
g. There should be a website for community interaction and mformahon
h. Re-vote on tax in 5 years
CONCE12iN: The PAAC should work with the City Manager and Finance but should report
independently to Council. The report to Council would be a Public platform with the Council
accountable, which places power ii die hands of the people.
Additional Concerns: Recommends that members of the PAAC have a financial background
Tt's important that the PAAC have a roll in the budget cycle.
Members should be from the business community and should be residents, not just have a busiless or
work in CV.
It will be important to hear fiom not only the areas of the commumry who will be the "source" of the
tax money, but &~om those affected by the Budget ii its entilet3>.
Citizens applauded the ilitiative of developing the PAAC )/tll2LY.
Comments received by email:
Reconnnendation that GMOC be the Oversight Conunittee
The organizational members of committee must have been active and in existence for at least 5 years
The group must have a mininnun of 300 active, dues paying members
The group must have a tax ID number and file retw-ns or present a financial statement
The group must publish and/or make available a membership roster
The group must have regular meetings that are publicized and open to the general public.
The Advisory group should PREVIEW the spending planned for the fiends NOT REVIEW
i~ ~~ ~
Committee Makeup/Appointments
In order for the PAAC to be t,:uly independent and broaclly represent the interests of the people of Chula
Vista, the appointment process should be largely "bottom up" as opposed to the political (mayoral~cow7cil)
"top down" appointment process.
Wide representation from interest groups and geographical areas is desired, as well as some skill sets such as
familiarity with city planning, infrasu:uctute, financing and the budget process. T o accomplish this goal it is
recorwnended that delegates to the PAAC be nominated frovl various interests groups, with the addition of
several "at large" members who would be self-nominated.
The "interest group" delegates could be drawn fiom such categories as local business, community,
educational, professional, and worker organizations to widely reflect the stakeholder interests in the City. A
list of "member organizations" would be detcrntined by pubhcizusg the intent to form the Comtruttec and
requesting submittal of applications of interest. Upon deternunation of a balanced list of member
organizations, each would then appoilt then: delegate to become a "member" or "alternate member" to the
PAt~C.
Additionally, one delegate each could be appoilted fiom the following volunteer citizen covlrnisstons:
GMOC, Planning Cotrunission, and Resource Conser-~~ation Conunisston. Members of these conviussions
would already have fatniharitp with the cit~%'s planning, budget, and i~frastructucc needs.
Filally, members representing the four major geographical areas of Chula Vista (Notth~vest, Southwest,
Southeast, and Northeast) would be ilvitcd to apply. "]"hese "at large" applications would be reviewed and
applicant iitervie~vs conducted in public by the CitS~ Council.
As with the case of other Chula Vista commissions, members would be required to be residents of Chula
Vista. Such matters as terms, meeting venues, and frequency would need to be determined.
Thus, the Cotnrnittee could be formed of:
• tluee members from each broad category of interest groups selected (one delegate per group)
• one delegate appointed by each of the three commssions, R.C.C., Plantung and G.t~~.O.C.
• four "at large" members from the city's major geographical areas
The goal is to assemble a well diverse group, representing broad interests.
Committee Mectin~s and Format
All meetings would be noticed, held in public, and subject to the Brown Act requirements. Meetings should
take place often enough (monthly, quarterly?) in order for the Cotnniittee Co be able to operate pro-actively
and effectively.
"1'he comnvttee would work with the office of the City Manager and the Deparnncnt of Fiance to develop
an effective method of monitorilg (preview and review). 1'he developed procedure shot>Id allow for pt:o-
active participation by the comnvttee in the allocation of Prop t~ funds. The cotrunittee would present
quarterly annual reports to Council summat:izi~g espendihu:es and whether or not the goals are being met.
Five Year Study
Five years alto the tax increase period, the commnittee shall deliver a comprehensive report to Council.
"1 he specific purpose of this mid-teen report is to examine whether or not the tax increase period should
continue, be shortened, be ended or remain wid~out adjustment.
276 .Fourih Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 97.910 ~ www.ch« lavistaca.gov ~ (G19) 6915044 ~ P'a~ (G19)li91-5379
~E~~
Office of Councihnember Pamela Bensoussan
UA"f L: Thursday, March 12, 2009
EVENT: Public Meeting to lliscuss Prop A Oversight
LOCATION: City of Chula Vista Council Chambers
~~~//
.~~.
CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
SUB.IECT: Proposed Outline for Establishment of an Independent Advisory Board
aka: Prop A Advisory Committee or (PAAC)
Noze: This [opic »~ill be oi~ the agenda al a Ciiy Cozr~2cil n~eeUrzg on Taresday, 6pna, Alarch 17, ?009
Background
After declaring the city in a state of fiscal emergency, Chula Vista's City Council decided to conduct a special
mail election on May 5, 2009, for ~*otees to decide ~vhedier to enact a 1% ten-year sales tas increase. A
unique aspect of the City Council's ballot measw:e was to install an independent oversight/advisory board to
guarantee drat moiues resulting fiom the taY increase would be spent as promised and to issue reports and
rcconvnendations to Council.
Several years ago, when the City Council approved the Redevelopment Corporation (CVRC), it tools almost
a year to decide on the process for establislvng a citizen's review board or "Redevelopment Advisory
Covmtittee" (RAC). This proposal addresses the purpose and logistics of setting up an Independent
Advisory Board, in order to have a vehicle in place to facilitate and expedite its creation, u1 the event that
voters approve the sales tax measure. An open meeting will be hosted by Councilwoman Pamela
]3ensoussan to converse with the public on dais outline and to receive corrunents and suggestions.
Pur osc
"1 he Prop A Advisory Coirunittee (PAAC) will be tasked with overseeing allocation of funds received fiom
the sales taz increase (Prop t\) assuring drat d~ese funds are spent according to the stated intent of the May 5
ballot measure and to make recommendations and regular reports to City Council.
Additionally, the Coininittee will report annually on the overall effectiveness of Prop A in addressing the
following goals in stages throughout the 10-year period of the assessment:
• Maintainilg inportant public ser-~rices that would odlerwise be at risk (such as public safety, libraries,
after school programs, park & cecreadon services, etc. as stated in the ballot measure )
• Nleedng iifiastructure maintenance needs ii Western Chula Vista and other areas where deferred
maintenance has created serious problems.
• Slowly rebuilding the city's budget reserves.
Termination of Tax Measure
At any time, in the event of sufficient economic recovery, whereby the Conmuttee determines that these
Prop A funds are no longer critical to the organization, die Committee will recorrunend to Council that the
Proposition A 1% sales tal be teriniiated. When Proposition A is ended the Coirunittee will be dissolved.
2^6 Poureh Avenue, Chula Vrst~, CA 91910 ~ svww.cinilavisiaca.gov (679) 691-SO4~i ~ Fax (619) (i9t-_5379
IMPLEMENT FEE REFORM
• Fees Should Be Reduced To Reflect The Fact That Land, Labor And Material
Costs Have Fallen By 25% Or More.
• Implement A Minimum Three-Year Moratorium On Fee Increases.
• Do Not Create Or Adopt New Fee Programs.
• Ease Rules Governing Inclusionary Housing Requirements.
IMPLEMENT REGULATORY REFORM
• Delay Moving Forward With A Mandatory Requirement To Exceed The New
Title 24 Code By 15%.
• Extend Approved Building Permits For A Minimum Of Two Years.
• Automatically Extend Tentative Maps And Land Use Entitlements For A
Minimum Of Five Years.
• Automatically Toll The Life Of Land Use Entitlements For Projects That Are
Subject To Appeals Or Legal Challenges.
• Implementation Permit Process Reform Measures That Reduce Permit
Approval Times By 30% Or More.
• Expedite All Projects In The System (If Typical Approval Time Is 6 Months To
A Year, Reduce That By 30% Or More).
• Limit Plan Checks To A Maximum Of Three Reviews.
IMPLEMENT CEQA REFORM
• Create A Master EIR With The General Plan Update That Individual Projects
Can Tier Off Of.
• Streamline The CEQA Review Process With The Goal Of Reducing
Environmental Review And Processing Times By 50% Or More.
FACILITATE INFILL AND SMART GROWTH DEVELOPMENT
• Implement Parking Standard Of 1.0 Space Per Unit For Areas Planned For
Infill And Smart Growth Development And Waive Parking Requirements For
Onsite Affordable Housing Units.
• Allow By-Right Private Tandem Garage Parking With All New Multi-Family
Residential Units And Reduce Guest/Visitor Parking Requirements For Mixed-
Use And Transit-Oriented Development Projects.
• Pursue Community-Wide Parking Reform Measures In Parking-Impacted
Communities Including The Creation Of Parking Districts, Shared Parking And
Offsite Public Parking Alternatives.
EXPAND AFFORDABLE HOUSING SUBSIDIES AND INCENTIVES
• Support The Establishment Of A Permanent Statewide Funding Source For
Affordable And Workforce Housing.
• Provide City-Owned Land For Affordable Housing Sites.
SUPPORT STIMULUS FUNDING FOR THE SAN DIEGO REGION
Support Local, State, And Federal Level Initiatives To Assist The Revitalization Of The
Housing Industry And The Creation Of Jobs In The San Diego Region. This Must
Include The Necessary Efforts To Ensure That Chula Vista Receives Its Fair Share Of
Stimulus Funding For Housing And Infrastructure.