HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 11 - Resident Focus Groups and Survey Results regarding Funding Priorities and Local Revenue Options
Department Name: City Administration
Cost Center: 1001
For Agenda of: December 3, 2019
Placement: Business
Estimated Time: 60 minutes
FROM: Greg Hermann, Deputy City Manager
Prepared By: Ryan Betz, Assistant to the City Manager
SUBJECT: RESIDENT FOCUS GROUPS AND SURVEY RESULTS REGARDING
FUNDING PRIORITIES AND POTENTIAL LOCAL REVENUE OPTIONS
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive a report on the results of two resident focus groups, a statistically relevant survey of
residents and continued public engagement and outreach; and
2. Proceed with further public engagement on funding priorities for the City, including
renewing and amending the Local Revenue Measure (LRM) with ongoing community
oversight (Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission); and
3. Provide an update to the Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission and discuss potential
roles to support and participate in public engagement and outreach efforts.
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
On February 5, 2019, the Council directed staff to conduct further public engagement efforts
regarding the Funding the Future initiative, including resident focus groups and a statistically
relevant survey of registered voters in the city (survey), and to return to the Council with the
results for consideration. This effort was originally conceived as a comprehensive review of
essential infrastructure projects identified in various adopted plans, including the 1) City’s
General Plan, 2) Bicycle Transportation Plan, 3) Downtown Concept Plan and 4) Mission Plaza
Concept Plan that will help to maintain the City’s character and quality of life for future
generations. The Council appointed an ad hoc subcommittee (subcommittee) of Vice-Mayor
Pease and Councilmember Stewart. The subcommittee explored a variety of issues related to the
feedback they had heard from the public about City services, maintenance and upgrades to
infrastructure (road improvements & safety upgrades, bridges, sidewalks, etc.) and provided
guidance on the questions for the focus groups and survey. A critical element of this effort
included evaluating the potential community interest of renewing or amending the existing, voter
approved LRM (Measure G).
An independent research firm conducted two registered voter focus groups in June 2019 and a
statistically relevant survey in September 2019. The focus groups included 18 city residents.
Staff are grateful for the time that participants took to respond, as their community perspectives
provided helpful insight on the importance of services, maintenance and infrastructure upgrades.
This insight helped draft the statistically relevant survey questions and specific areas of priority.
The survey had 442 individual responses from registered voters in the city, with a +/- 4.9%
margin of error. The results of the focus groups and survey show a majority of participants
Packet Page 179
Item 11
recognize the importance of services and maintaining and upgrading infrastructure. They also
recognize that the City needs a source of reliable, locally controlled funds to provide that level of
service, and there was community interest in renewing and amending the LRM.
Based on the results from the focus groups and the survey, the subcommittee is recommending
continuing with public outreach and education on the City’s existing and future needs for
services, maintenance and infrastructure. Continued public engagement and outreach will help
gather additional feedback from the community and together with the results from the focus
groups and survey will better inform the Council about the community’s interest in considering
these issues on the November 2020 ballot.
DISCUSSION
Background
A task of the work plan for the Fiscal Sustainability and Responsibility Major City Goal in the
2017-19 Financial Plan was to explore infrastructure financing options and present those to the
Council for consideration and implementation. On April 17, 2018, the Council received a report
which identified over 70 infrastructure projects anticipated over twenty years as identified in
various approved planning documents. These documents were adopted through extensive public
engagement, advisory body review and public hearings. The documents included the 1) City’s
General Plan, 2) Bicycle Transportation Plan, 3) Downtown Concept Plan and 4) Mission Plaza
Concept Plan and other documents that represent the community’s interest in maintaining the
City’s character and quality of life into the future.
On February 5, 2019, Council received an update on this effort and directed staff to conduct
further public engagement efforts regarding continued Funding the Future analysis and research
including resident focus groups and a statistically relevant community survey. Council also
directed staff to return to the Council with the results for consideration. Council appointed an ad
hoc subcommittee of Vice Mayor Pease and Councilmember Stewart to guide and assist with
these efforts. An additional item for consideration and direction by Council was to explore the
feasibility of renewing the existing LRM. The LRM was renewed for eight years by voters in
2014, at a ½ cent rate and will expire in 2023 if not renewed by voters. The LRM is critical in
providing the funding for a basic level of services and maintenance of existing infrastructure in
the City.
Focus Group Results
Staff retained an independent survey and research firm, FM3, through a Request for Proposal
(RFP) process to assist in these efforts. In consultation with the subcommittee, FM3 conducted
two focus groups on June 19, 2019. The participants were almost evenly split on gender and
generally reflected the demographic and geographic composition of the City’s electorate. The
objective was to examine the knowledge and perceptions about City-related services from voters
who live in San Luis Obispo. Specifically, the discussions were focused on the City’s need for
services, maintenance and infrastructure and the participants’ priority for the use of City funds. It
should be noted that focus groups are qualitative in nature and provide a valuable opportunity to
have an in-depth discussion on various issues facing the City and understand the reasons behind
opinions that are held. This work was then used to help inform the survey to determine the
preferences and opinions held by the broader population.
Packet Page 180
Item 11
The results of the focus groups showed several general, broad themes:
1) General View of the City
a) Overall, most had favorable opinions of living in the City.
b) Like many California cities, concerns about maintaining the City’s character and quality
of life into the future.
2) Perceived Additional Funding Needs and Support for a Proposed Measure
a) There is a general sense that the City has a need for additional funds.
b) A general-purpose measure that could fund City services as well as infrastructure projects
was principally supported in the groups.
c) Participants primarily focused on the need for additional, locally controlled revenue for
City services and some infrastructure projects.
d) Support for a 1-cent general purpose, simple majority sales tax was slightly lower than
support for a 1 ½-cent sales tax. This may be attributed to the 1-cent sales tax focusing on
infrastructure only while the 1 ½ cent sales tax includes services, maintenance and
infrastructure.
e) Most participants agreed that the City did need to ensure there was enough funding to
provide the services, maintenance and infrastructure they value and rely on.
3) Perceived Funding Priorities
a) Maintaining the City’s quality of life, character and the need for road improvements,
safety upgrades and cross-town connections were the leading reasons the participants
would consider additional, locally controlled funding.
The results from the focus groups provided helpful insight to the subcommittee on the
importance of services, maintenance and infrastructure. This insight helped draft the statistically
relevant survey and specific areas of priority.
Survey Results
The survey of registered voters took place between September 15 and 22, 2019, and included
442 individual responses with an overall margin of error of +/- 4.9%. For the survey, FM3 used
a dual-mode approach (telephone and online) to produce an all-inclusive, representative sample
of the registered voters in the City. Similar surveys have been conducted in the past and have
helped inform the Council on decisions to place measures on an upcoming ballot. The survey
built upon the feedback received in the focus groups and asked residents’ preferences on a
variety of topics including services, maintenance of existing infrastructure, replacement/upgrades
of infrastructure and overall spending priorities. The survey asked participants to respond to a
sample ballot measure that renewed the existing LRM at a 1 ½ cent rate that focused on
maintenance, essential services and infrastructure. The sample ballot measure language was
based upon the input from the focus groups. The following is a summary of the survey results:
Packet Page 181
Item 11
1) Need for Additional Funds for Services and Infrastructure
a) Almost six in ten survey respondents perceive the City needs additional funds to provide
the level of services and infrastructure residents need and want, though only about two in
ten indicate there is a great need.
b) A majority of survey respondents initially support a conceptual local ballot measure at 63
percent. This is an increase from a previous survey conducted in April 2018 which had an
initial support of 57 percent. The language in the 2018 survey focused solely on upgrades
to infrastructure. Based on the input from the focus groups regarding the importance of
services and maintenance, the 2019 survey was broadened to include City services,
maintenance and infrastructure.
Packet Page 182
Item 11
c) The survey asked respondents if they would support the potential ballot measure at a 1-
cent rate. The results show there is no statistical difference in support between an
extension of the current voter approved LRM at a 1½-cent rate or at a 1-cent rate. 63
percent of respondents would vote yes on an LRM at a 1 ½-cent rate while 60 percent of
respondents would vote yes on a 1-cent rate.
d) The more a survey respondent perceived a need for additional funds for City services, the
more one is likely to vote yes in support of a ballot measure. This suggests that additional
public education and outreach will help inform residents about the City’s needs for
additional services, maintenance and infrastructure.
Packet Page 183
Item 11
2) Voter Priorities
a) Voters continue to rate with greater importance maintaining (68 percent) rather than
improving (42 percent) essential City services. This is consistent with the 2018 survey,
when voters rated maintaining (64 percent) rather than improving (42 percent) essential
City services.
b) The same can be said of maintaining rather than improving City infrastructure, with 61
percent ranking maintaining City infrastructure as extremely/very important rather than
48 percent ranking improving City infrastructure.
Packet Page 184
Item 11
c) Voters rated requiring all funds used locally; protecting creeks from pollution; addressing
homelessness; and maintaining police, fire/emergency response as the most important
features of a possible measure.
Rating by Extremely/Very Important
Requiring all funds used locally 79%
Protecting creeks from pollution 73%
Addressing Homelessness 71%
Maintaining police, fire/emergency response 71%
Keeping public areas safe and clean 67%
Helping ensure children have safe places to play 67%
Preserving open space and natural areas 66%
Requiring all funds to benefit the community 66%
Protecting long-term fiscal stability 65%
Preparing for wildfires and other natural disasters 62%
Repairing streets and potholes 62%
Increasing affordable housing supplies 59%
Replacing fire stations that have been determined by structural
engineers to not meet current seismic earthquake standards 59%
Retaining and attracting local businesses 55%
Maintaining and improving parks 55%
Expanding open space and natural areas 54%
Public Engagement and Outreach
Additional public engagement and outreach is recommended to both inform the community of
the needs for the City and receive additional feedback on services, maintenance and
infrastructure. This effort will fall into the following overall approach:
Informing and consulting residents/stakeholders on the services, maintenance and infrastructure
needed to help maintain the City’s character and quality of life into the future.
Additional public engagement and outreach is intended to educate residents, businesses and other
community stakeholders about the need for maintaining/improving services and infrastructure,
assist in identifying priorities, and the funding options to support them. The information
collected from the community will help inform Council on the community’s receptivity of
potentially placing a measure on the November 2020 ballot. The strategy involves a multi-
channel communications outreach approach with community feedback opportunities. Examples
include presentations to community organizations, neighborhood groups, advisory bodies, City
staff, an online survey (Open City Hall) and facility tours/information sessions. Public
engagement and outreach will continue into the spring.
Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee
On February 5, 2019, Council formed a Council Ad Hoc Subcommittee (subcommittee)
comprising of Vice-Mayor Pease and Councilmember Stewart. The committee, with the support
of staff, have met bi-monthly since May 2019. The subcommittee observed the participants
during the focus groups’ discussions, reviewed the survey questions, and provided guidance on
the public engagement and outreach plan.
Packet Page 185
Item 11
Based on the research and input from the focus groups and survey, the subcommittee is
recommending to Council to continue public outreach and education on the City’s needs for
services, maintenance and infrastructure, including the potential to renew and amend the LRM
with ongoing community oversight. The subcommittee also recommends continuing the
established subcommittee with Vice Mayor Pease and Council Member Stewart and to request
the support and participation of the Revenue Enhancement Oversight Commission (REOC) to
help guide further public engagement and outreach efforts.
Existing Local Revenue Measure
The existing LRM was passed by 70 percent of voters in November 2014. The LRM was a
renewal of the City’s half-cent sales tax approved in 2006 that focused on the protection and
maintenance of essential services and facilities in the following priorities:
1. Open Space Preservation
2. Bicycle and Pedestrian Improvements
3. Traffic Congestion Relief/Safety Improvements
4. Public Safety
5. Neighborhood Street Paving
6. Code Enforcement
7. Flood Protection
8. Parks and Recreation/Senior Programs and Facilities.
9. Other Vital Services and Capital Projects
The funding is split with 70 percent supporting capital projects and 30 percent supporting
operations. The LRM has an eight-year sunset, scheduled to expire in spring of 2023. In 2014,
the Council established a citizen advisory body, REOC, to review the half-cent sales tax
revenues and expenditures, report on the City’s stewardship of this general purpose tax and
provide recommendations directly to the City Council regarding expenditures of these tax
revenues as an integral part of the budget process. As an advisory body, comprising of five
residents, the REOC provides important citizen oversight of local sales tax revenues and
expenditures and serves as a venue for citizen engagement on the highest priority for the use of
the funds.
Previous Council or Advisory Body Action
1. June 18, 2019 - Adoption of the 2019-21 Financial Plan and the Major City Goal: Fiscal
Sustainability and Responsibility
2. February 5, 2019 - Potential Next Steps Regarding the Funding the Future Initiative
3. April 17, 2018 - Future SLO Capital Improvement Program
4. January 16, 2018 - Council review of 10-Year Capital Improvement Plan and funding options
5. December 12, 2017 - Budget Foundation: Fiscal Health Response Plan
Packet Page 186
Item 11
Policy Context
The Major City Goals for the 2017-19 and 2019-21 Financial Plans include the Fiscal
Sustainability and Responsibility goal. Specifically, the 2019-21 goal states to ‘Continue to
implement the City’s Fiscal Responsibility Philosophy with a focus on efficiencies, strategic
economic development, unfunded liabilities, and infrastructure financing (Funding the Future).’
Specifically, the workplan directs staff to “Begin efforts for Funding the Future.” (Pg. 68).
In the 2017-19 Major City Goal workplan, it states, ‘develop a creative financing plan for
development of critical public safety facilities," and, "develop creative infrastructure financing
options (grants, land-based funding, local revenues) for Council consideration and implement as
directed." (Pg. 432).
Public Engagement
There were two public engagement efforts completed including two resident focus groups and a
statistically relevant survey. Both efforts involved registered voters within the City. Additional
public engagement efforts will use the City's Public Engagement Manual and follow an inform
and consult model (as previously described) whereby the public will have an opportunity to share
feedback on priorities and needs for the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The review of the Funding the Future of SLO for potential funding options or public engagement
process is exempt from environmental review as a Statutory Exemption under Section 15262 of
the CEQA Guidelines, feasibility and planning studies. Each project listed as part of the 10 Year
CIP and Funding the Future of SLO will need future authorization and environmental review
prior to actual funding or construction.
FISCAL IMPACT
Budgeted: Yes Budget Year: 2018-19
Funding Identified: Yes
Fiscal Analysis:
Funding Sources Current FY Cost
Annualized
On-going Cost
Total Project
Cost
General Fund $99,000
State
Federal
Fees
Other:
Total $99,000
Packet Page 187
Item 11
As part of the adopted 2017-19 budget, funding for this work was appropriated. The funding has
been encumbered to a survey/research firm and communications consultant to complete the
research and continue community outreach and engagement efforts.
ALTERNATIVES
1. The Council may direct staff to not proceed with further public engagement on this
item. Staff does not recommend this approach based upon results from the focus groups and
survey.
2. Form a citizen task force to further public engagement efforts. A citizen task force could
be formed to continue public engagement and outreach efforts. The subcommittee
recommends requesting the REOC, a citizen advisory body with knowledge and oversight on
the use of the existing LRM, to help support and participate in this effort.
Packet Page 188
Item 11