HomeMy WebLinkAbout01-08-2013 pc christieGoodwin, Heather
RECEIVE D
JAN 03201 3
SLO CITY CLER K*From:
Sent :
To :
Subject :
Attachments :
Grimes, Maev e
Thursday, January 03, 2013 4 :38 P M
Goodwin, Heathe r
FW : Comments on City Goal Setting/2013-2015 Financial Pla n
SLOCC-goalsettingsurvey.doc
Please post as public correspondence for the Community Forum .
Thank yo u
macve kenneOy q time s
City Cler k
city of san tuts osisp o
990 Palm Stree t
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 1
phone : (805) 781-710 2
email mgrimes@slocitv .org
From :Carter, AndrewSent:Thursday, January 03, 2013 4 :36 P MTo:Grimes, Maev e
*Cc :Lichtig, Katie ; Codron, MichaelSubject:FW : Comments on City Goal Setting/2013-2015 Financial Pla n
FYI . Public Fil e
Andrew Carter
Council Membe rCity of San Luis Obisp o
From :Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club [sierraclub8@gmail .com ]Sent :Thursday, January 03, 2013 4 :29 P MTo:Council_AL L
Subject :Comments on City Goal Setting/2013-2015 Financial Pla n
Attached .
Andrew Christie, Directo r
Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Clu b
P .O . Box 1575 5
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 6
805-543-8717
1
SIERItA
CLU B
FOUNDED 1892
Santa Lucia Chapte r
P .O . Box 1575 5
San Luis Obispo, CA 9340 6
(805) 543-871 7
www .santalucia .sierraclub .org
January 4, 201 3
Re : Goal Setting and the 2013-2015 Financial Plan
Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council ,
The Santa Lucia Chapter of the Sierra Club and its members who reside in the City of San Luis Obispo hav e
supported the City's Open Space program for decades . It was therefore with great interest that we read of the mor e
than 2,100 responses to the detailed survey the City sent to 25,000 city residents and business owners as part of it s
LUCE update process . Respondents were asked this question, which is also at the heart of your goal setting/budge t
process :
On a scale of I to 5 with I being less and 5 being more, do you think the city should provide less, about the same ,
or more of each of the following services? If you think the city should provide more or less of a certain service ,
indicate whether you would be willing to pay more for it or whether you would divert funds from that use to othe r
services.
When staff collated the more than 2,000 responses received, they found that just four service areas were supporte d
by a majority of respondents who approved of seeking additional facilities and services : 58% support acquiring an d
•
maintaining open space for peaks and hillsides, 54% support acquiring and maintaining more open space land fo r
the city's greenbelt, 53% support more open space land for creeks and marshes, and 50% would like more bik e
lanes.
Further : "Despite support for some services, only a slight majority of respondents said they would support payin g
more for just two ; 54% for open space for peaks and hillsides, and 52% for open space for the City's Greenbelt ."
To a survey question seeking input on the most and least important aspects of "quality of life," respondent s
overwhelmingly rated the natural environment (air quality, open space) as having the highest impact on quality o f
life (71 .1%). This was true for all categories of respondents, including the employed (74 .7%), retired (69 .2%),
students (69%), and owners of businesses in the city (73 .4%). The "runner up" was "crime levels," at a significantl y
lower 62 .9%. Even "job opportunities" rated only 38 .2%, and "housing opportunities" 35 .3%. At the bottom of th e
list were "Shopping opportunities," rated a mere 15 .7 %; and "entertainment opportunities, at 16 .9%.
That's what we call a mandate . Natural open space is clearly the top priority of city residents, and the role th e
results of this survey should play in your Goal Setting process is obvious .
Thus we were more than a little puzzled to hear that Staff proposes that these 2,100 responses from residents and
business owners be excluded from the Goal Setting process . This would be disrespectful to the thousands o f
residents and business owners who responded to this survey at the City's request, and would represent an obviou s
waste of city funds at a time of painful budget cuts .
We support Staff's proposal to use the 279 responses it received from the separate Community Priorities Surve y
(SLO City 2013 Financial Plan, Goal-Setting Agenda Packet). In addition to these responses,we strongly urge that
the City Council not exclude the 2,100+ LUCE Update survey responses from residents and business owners ,
specifically the responses to the question of which services the city should increase or decrease, and for whic h
residents and business owners are willing to pay more .
Thank you for your attention to this matter ,
/~'zr•iw-~--ur
•
Andrew Christie
Chapter Director