HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Statement 1988/03/15 Item 9COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
• Item 9
Meeting Date 3/15/88
ITEM TITLE: Report regarding proposed Bonita-Sunnyside Reorganization
Resolution /3 ~~~ Approving the negotiated Property Tax
Exchange and directing staff to provide LAFCO with information
needed for the proposed Bonita-Sunnyside Reorganization
SUBMITTED BY: Assistant City Manager
Director of Fi~anceoY~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager ~ ~ ~ ~' (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X )
In early 1987, a petition was filed with the Local Agency Formation Commission
proposing annexation of the area served by the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire
Protection District to Chula Vista. The territory contains approximately 7.5
square miles, 13,688 residents, 4,321 housing units and 6,919 registered
voters.
The City Council considered the proposed annexation last year but because
staff could not generate all of the information required by LAFCO to complete
• the application for reorganization in accordance with LAFCO's time schedule,
the issue was deferred to a later date.
If the election on the Bonita reorganization is to be held in November 1988,
then certain issues must be addressed and decisions made at this time in order
to meet the schedule of various public hearings and actions required leading
up to a November vote.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council accept this report and direct staff to provide
LAFCO with information needed for consideration of the proposed
reorganization. If Council concurs, then staff further recommends the
following:
1. That Council adopt resolution approving the negotiated property tax
exchange relating to the Bonita-Sunnyside reorganization.
2. Request the County Board of Supervisors to be the conducting authority for
holding the required hearing on the reorganization.
3. That election costs be equally split between the County and the City.
4. Affirm that the Sweetwater Regional Park remain under the jurisdiction and
control of the County of San Diego.
•
Page 2, Item 9
• Meeting Date~7T37$$
5. Affirm that the presently constituted Sweetwater Planning Group continue
to function as the Bonita Planning Committee for the City if the
reorganization vote is favorable.
6. Affirm the continuation of the County Library District to serve the Bonita
area.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
Discussions regarding the annexation of the Bonita-Sunnyside area to the City
of Chula Vista have taken place for several gears. In 1985 the area was
officially included by the Local Agency Formation Commission within the City
of Chula Vista Sphere of Influence which means it is considered a logical
extension of the City's physical and service boundaries.
In 1987 a petition was filed with LAFCO proposing that the Bonita-Sunnyside
community become part of the City of Chula Vista. There are several reasons
why the proposed annexation is being considered:
1. Bonita-Sunnyside is Within the City's Sphere of Influence
• Almost 60q of the Bonita-Sunnyside Community Planning Area, as defined in
the Sphere of Influence document, is already within the current City of
Chula Vista boundaries and the balance of the area is unincorporated but
within our Sphere of Influence.
The adopted Sphere of Influence is a planning tool for fostering a pattern
of orderly growth, for promoting efficient provision of organized
community services, and for preventing duplication of service delivery.
These objectives can best be met for the Bonita-Sunnyside area if the area
is actually part of the City of Chula Vista. The Sphere of Influence is
intended to determine the probable ultimate boundaries of a jurisdiction.
2. Better Land Use Planning
The Bonita-Sunnyside area is greatly impacted by decisions made by the
City of Chula Vista currently. Traffic circulation plans and commitments
to major road improvements involve the Bonita-Sunnyside Community Planning
Areas. Conversely, actions by the County in the Bonita-Sunnyside area
have an impact on Chula Vista roads and services. The City is equally
interested in preserving the rural character of the area through its
General Plan.
3. Service Boundaries
The Bonita-Sunnyside Community Planning Area consists of both incorporated
• and unincorporated territory that is served by a combination of agencies
including the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire District, the Spring Valley Sanitation
District, the County of San Diego, and the City of Chula Vista.
-,~ ;
Page 3, Item 9
• Meeting Date 3 5/88
Development in Eastlake, Bonita Long Canyon, and Rancho del Rey will
expand the capability and level of services available to the Bonita-
Sunnyside area. There is an opportunity for a logical consolidation of
urban services (roads, sewers, fire and police protection, recreation and
library services) as provided by the City of Chula Vista.
The above presents some logical reasons for considering the proposed
annexation from the City's perspective. In addition, the fiscal impact of the
proposed annexation must also be considered.
As indicated later in this report, if the proposed reorganization is
successful, it is estimated that during the first six months of operation
expenditures will exceed revenues by almost $250,000. However, projections
for the first full year's operating budget FY 1989-90 indicate a little better
than break even cash flow situation.
Staff estimates $300,000 will be available on an annual basis to fund capital
improvement projects in the Bonita-Sunnyside area. While this does not
represent a great deal of funding considering the size of the area to be
annexed, the area's residents have given strong indications that they wish to
maintain a rural environment. Consequently, somewhat limited funding for
capital projects may coincide with their desires.
• PROPERTY TAX EXCHANGE
Because the proposed area for annexation has a 1987/88 assessed valuation of
$498 million, and because the proposal entails the dissolution of the Bonita-
Sunnyside Fire Protection District, the Master Property Tax Agreement does not
apply to the proposal. Therefore, pursuant to Revenue and Taxation Code
Section 99, it was necessary for the County and City of Chula Vista to
negotiate a property tax exchange in order to allow LAFCO to further process
the proposal.
Negotiations with the County regarding the property tax exchange were
concluded last year and the County Board of Supervisors approved the proposed
agreement on April 28, 1987.
Exhibit "A", attached, summarizes the current tax distribution among the
various taxing agencies, and the proposed tax distribution if the
jurisdictional change occurs. As indicated in Exhibit "A", the City will
receive all of the property taxes currently allocated to Lighting Districts
No. 1 and No. 3, San Diego County Flood Control, and the Bonita-Sunnyside Fire
Protection District. The City will receive 44% and the County will receive
56% of the pooled property tax base. This division (44%/56%) will continue to
apply to the annual property tax increments. From the City standpoint, the
44%/56% exceeds the 41%/59%, City/County formula provided under the County-
wide Master Property Tax Agreement. The 41%/59% formula was used in the
Montgomery annexation.
•
Page 4, Item 9
• Meeting Date-~71T-j$$
The County Library District will continue to receive annual property tax
revenues for County operation of the Bonita library, with the City
contributing about $57,500 annually to meet the projected operating costs.
The tentative agreement, similar to that executed with the County for
providing library service in the Montgomery area, provides the City with the
option of withdrawing the area from the County Library District in the
future. In the event the City takes over the library services, the annual
property tax amount allocated to the County Library District will be
reallocated to the City of Chula Vista.
FISCAL IMPACT
Staff has gone through a Bonita annexation budget process in order to estimate
the revenues to be received by the City as a result of the annexation and to
determine what the operating costs will be and how many additional staff will
be needed in order to provide City services to the area.
Assuming the annexation is approved and effective as of December 31, 1988,
Exhibit "B" indicates the fiscal impact to the City for the first six months
of operation. With initial, one-time start-up costs, it is anticipated that
expenditures will exceed revenues by approximately $247,000 in the initial six
month period.
• Exhibit "C" contains the estimated fiscal impact on the City for the first
full fiscal year that the area would be part of the City (July 1, 1989 through
June 30, 1990). Total operating revenues for that year are projected at
$2,522,572 with total operating expenditures projected at $2,506,119 for a
positive fiscal impact of $16,453.
When looking at the operating expenditures on Exhibits B & C, it is important
to know that initial equipment capital costs (excluding police vehicles) are
allocated over a five year period using a lease purchase financing method.
Equipment in the amount of $380,960 has been requested in the first eighteen
months, however only the lease purchase financing costs of $124,750 are
reflected in the operating expenditures. The purpose of financing the
equipment over a five year period is to diminish the initial fiscal impact on
the Bonita budget. Lease purchase financing is frequently used by government
agencies when they do not have the cash needed to make an acquisition or for
other reasons do not wish to make a large cash outlay all at once.
As can be seen from the estimated operating revenues, property taxes would be
the main source of revenue to the City if the annexation is successful. Sales
taxes, a major revenue source in the ~1ontgomery annexation, play a relatively
minor role in the proposed Bonita annexation. It should be pointed out,
however, that most of the commercial/retail area of Bonita has previously
annexed to Chula Vista. The current sales tax revenue generated in that area
that is now a part of the City is estimated to be $260,000 per year.
In the first full year of operation, there is approximately $300,000 in Gas
• Tax and Proposition 'A' Transportation funds available for capital improvement
projects in the Bonita-Sunnyside area. Staff estimates $300,000 will be
i= ~ ;
Page 5, Item g
• Meeting Date~JT37~$
available annually on an ongoing basis to meet capital needs. Although this
is a limited amount and certainly will not support as extensive a capital
improvement program as planned for Montgomery, it may be adequate to meet the
needs of a community area that desires to retain its rural ambience.
ADDITIONAL PERSONNEL
Exhibit "D" indicates the estimated number of additional staff that will be
required to serve the new area. This is based on the first full year of
operation and totals 49.5 full-time equivalent persons including 3 sewer
maintenance staff that are funded from the Sewer Revenue Fund. The total also
includes 14 Fire Department staff that will be absorbed from the Bonita
Sunnyside Fire Protection District, which will be dissolved on the effective
date of the annexation.
CONDUCTING AUTHORITY
State statute requires that a public hearing must be set within 35 days after
LAFCO has held their hearing. The County Board of Supervisors or the Chula
Vista City Council could conduct the hearing. Following the procedure
utilized in the Montgomery reorganization, it is staff's recommendation that
the County Board of Supervisors be designated as the conducting authority.
• ELECTION COSTS
For the election involving the Montgomery reorganization, the City and County
shared the basic election costs and, in addition, the City paid the full cost
for the Planning Committee election. Staff recommends that the election costs
relating to Bonita be equally shared with the County and, based on this, the
County has indicated a willingness to be conducting authority for the
election. Election costs are estimated to total $5,000 which would mean a
$2,500 share each for the City and County.
As an alternative, if the City wishes to be the conducting authority,
Government Code Section 57.150 provides that in the case of a reorganization
(unless otherwise provided for by an agreement), the full cost of the election
would be the responsibility of the City if the annexation was successful, but
the responsibility of the County if the annexation was not successful.
SWEETWATER. REGIONAL PARK
Staff recommends that the Sweetwater Regional Park remain under the
jurisdiction and control of the County of San Diego for the following reasons:
1. The Sweetwater Pegional Park is a regional facility and, as such, it is
generally assumed that the development and maintenance costs of such
facilities should be shared on a regional basis. The County of San Diego
provides the most logical agency to spread those costs over the entire
region.
•
-,,°~
Page 6, Item 9
• Meeting Date-~7T57$$
2. The development and ongoing maintenance costs would in all likelihood
extend beyond the financial capability of the City in the foreseeable
future. While the City, like the County, could evaluate
"commercialization" of some of the regional park lands to help offset
development and maintenance costs, it is difficult to project that the
revenue generating capabilities of the park would provide more than a
small percentage of the total cost of maintenance, not to mention initial
capital costs.
3. In the past Supervisor Bilbray and the County Parks and Recreation
Department have indicated they would oppose transferring title to the City
and it is clear that the City does not have a legal basis to require
transfer of publicly owned property lying within the annexing area. A
transfer can occur only through negotiation.
JURISDICTIONAL CHANGES
In the event that the election is favorable and the Bonita-Sunnyside area
annexes to Chula Vista as of December 31, 1988, then the following
jurisdictional changes will occur:
- The Bonita-Sunnyside Fire Protection District will be dissolved as of
December 31, 1988.
• - The area will be detached from the County Lighting District and the
San Diego County Flood Control District.
- The area will withdraw from the Spring Valley Sanitation District as
of July 1, 1989.
- The Sweetwater Regional Park will remain under control of the County.
- The County Library District will continue to serve the area until a
future time when, by mutual agreement between the City and County,
the City will assume this service.
BONITA PLANNING COMMITTEE
The Sweetwater Community Planning Group is an elected body consisting of 15
members and currently constitutes an in-place planning committee that could
effectively continue to serve as planning committee if the community votes in
favor of joining the City. The knowledge the present members have gained will
be very beneficial to the City and it is staff's recommendation that they
continue to serve in that capacity.
LAFCO SCHEDULE
LAFCO has tentatively scheduled a hearing regarding the proposed annexation
for May 2, 1988, and the conducting authority hearing would need to be held
• within 60 days of LAFCO's hearing. Prior to the LAFCO hearing the issue and
information is also considered at the Cities and Special Districts Advisory
Committee meeting which is scheduled for April 15, 1988.
„, : ,,:
•
•
by ~i:~ Ci ~,, t; ~~ ~:i! of
Chula Ul;;i~, C~~lir.~rria
Page 7, Item 9
Meeting Date 3 15/88
FISCAL IMPACT: If the Council accepts staff's recommendations contained in
this report, there would be no direct fiscal impact on the City at this time.
The fiscal impact on the City if a favorable election occurs in November has
been covered earlier in this report.
WPC 0504G
Dated
i ~' :.; ,