HomeMy WebLinkAbout08-07-2012 b2economicdevelopmentstrategicplancounci lagenca I epoRt
Meeting Date
August 7,2012
Item Number
B 2
C I T Y O F S A N L U I S O B I S P O
FROM:
Michael Codron, Assistant City Manage r
Prepared By : Claire Clark, Economic Development Manage r
SUBJECT :DRAFT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIC PLA N
RECOMMENDATIO N
Receive a presentation of the Draft Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP), provide a foru m
for public input and give direction to staff regarding key policy issues to incorporate into the fina l
document .
REPORT-IN-BRIEF
The EDSP has been developed to guide the activities of City's Economic Development Progra m
over the next five years . The attached Planning Commission agenda report (Attachment 1) outline s
the process that was used to develop the EDSP, including the creation of a steering committee, th e
hiring of a consultant and a major public outreach effort that included three public workshops .
These efforts resulted in publication of the EDSP .
On June 21, 2012, the EDSP was unveiled at a fourth public workshop . Following this workshop ,
additional public input was sought at the Planning Commission meeting of June 27, the Touris m
Business Improvement District Board meeting on June 20, and the Promotional Coordinatin g
Committee, also on June 20 . On July 19, the City received comments on the EDSP from the
Chamber of Commerce which devoted two meetings to review of the EDSP (Attachment 2).
The City Council is now being asked to provide staff with direction on key issues so that the EDS P
can be finalized. Staff intends to create a final version of the EDSP and return to the City Counci l
for approval of the strategy in October . Four key issues are described below, with additional detai l
included in the body of this report .
1.Head of Household Job Definitio n
Staff is seeking confirmation from the City Council that the proposed head of household jo b
definition is appropriate for the community and a good foundation for the overall work on the Majo r
City Goal.
2.Permit Streamlinin g
Staff is seeking confirmation that the City Council supports an evaluation of potential permi t
streamlining activities . This would involve a fresh look at the process, workflow, an d
communication methods to optimize the City's development review process . Based on communit y
input, this would also include a review of City environmental review procedures . Staff also
proposes to develop more measureable and specific metrics for this effort than are currently
included in the draft EDSP .
B2.1
Economic Development Strategic Plan
Page 2
3.Infrastructure and Incentive s
The proposed infrastructure study is a necessary first step to identify the City 's most importan t
infrastructure projects from an economic development perspective . The study will also allow for a
more focused discussion regarding how the City can facilitate installation of this infrastructure . One
of the big issues associated with installation of infrastructure is its cost and who bears responsibilit y
for sharing in this cost .
For instance, Section 1 .7 of the EDSP attempts to identify a variety of ways financial incentive s
might result in the creation of head of household jobs . However, community input on this issue ha s
been mixed.
Staff is seeking City Council feedback on whether financial incentives for job creators should b e
included as a strategy in the Final EDSP . Based on the feedback received to date, staff recommend s
removing the discussion of direct incentives from the EDSP and increasing the focus on reducin g
infrastructure costs to make development and the creation of jobs more economically feasible .
4.Summary Matrix
The summary matrix at the end of the document includes information regarding the timeframe fo r
implementation of a particular strategy and the measurements for success . The timeframe s
identified in the matrix are intended to coincide with the budgetary decisions made with each two -
year financial plan, allowing for those decisions to be made in the context of other communit y
needs . The measurements for success include both quantifiable metrics and desirable outcomes tha t
are qualitative in nature . Staff is seeking input from the Council to ensure that these timeframes and
measurements for success are appropriate and adequate . Staff has received feedback that the metric s
need to be more specific and staff intends to refine the metrics before final approval of the EDSP .
DISCUSSION
Background
The EDSP presents four overarching strategies, including :
•Break Down Barriers to Job Creatio n
•Actively Support Knowledge & Innovatio n
•Promote the SLO Life to Enhance Business Opportunitie s
•Build on Existing Efforts with Regional Partner s
Each strategy and underlying action item is grounded in the findings presented in the report an d
supported by the information in Appendix A : Background Report which reflects the input from the
community forums, workshops and Steering Committee . The EDSP and Appendix A : Background
Report can be found on-line at www .slocity .org. Although the first strategy, Break Down Barrier s
to Job Creation, was identified as the most important based on input at workshops and vi a
community outreach, the four strategies are not in order of importance as each strategy is a leg o f
the Economic Development Program's stool .
•
•
B2-2
Economic Development Strategic Plan Page 3
Community Inpu t
Community input has been collected through a variety of forums and via email . The substantia l
amount of community input received through the City's first public workshops is reflected in th e
draft strategies and action items contained in the EDSP . Workshop #4, designed to unveil th e
EDSP and facilitate input, reaffirmed that the first strategy,Break Down Barriers to Job Creatio n
and particularly permit streamlining efforts, should be the City's highest priority . Of the nineteen
participants, half indicated this to be their top priority and several individuals spoke to th e
importance of predictability in terms of timing of application processing . Individuals in the roo m
suggested other issues be addressed such as leveraging energy assets, development of internet
connectivity alongside other capital improvement projects such as bike path construction, th e
interrelationship of job creation with affordable workforce housing, and the need for greate r
marketing and political leadership in economic development .
Planning Commissio n
In general, the Planning Commission encouraged more integration of the head-of-household jo b
focus with the broader Economic Development Program . This will be addressed in changes staff
will make to Strategy #4 . They also recommended an emphasis on support for existing businesse s
over business attraction, requested more emphasis on the importance of public sector jobs and mor e
effort on development of the "SLO brand ." The Commission also suggested that the document
include more information about the importance of home-based businesses within the context o f
rules that protect the City's neighborhoods .
In addition, concerns about needs for infrastructure in other areas of the City, the lack of emphasis
on neighborhood commercial centers such as University Square, and the relationship between th e
EDSP and the Land Use update were of interest to Commissioners . These are issues that staff and
the consultant can address and clarify in the final document .
2 .Chamber of Commerc e
The Chamber of Commerce dedicated significant time to review the EDSP . Valuable suggestions
for improvements to the EDSP have been provided to the City (Attachment 2) and staff and th e
consultant intend to incorporate many of the recommendations in the final version of the EDSP .
Council Direction Sought on Four Key Issue s
On August 7, the City Council will have the opportunity to hear a staff and consultant le d
presentation of the EDSP, and will hear additional public comment on the proposed plan . The City
Council may provide staff with comments and direction on the overall plan, however, at this time ,
staff is primarily concerned with Council feedback on four key issues areas, as described in th e
following sections .
1 .Head of Household Define d
Due to the emphasis on head-of-household job creation, a definition for that term was researche d
and carefully considered as an important foundation for the creation of the EDSP .
B2-3
Economic Development Strategic Plan
Page 4
The Steering Committee considered several model income options when developing the head-of-
household job criteria . There were flaws associated with all of them and there was no evidence o f
standards in use in other jurisdictions . As a result, the Committee felt the Self-Sufficiency Standar d
(Standard) was the most appropriate benchmark option to define head-of-household job because i t
takes into account the wide variety of household types represented in the community .
The Standard was developed in the mid-1990s by the Wider Opportunities for Women and th e
founder of the Women and Poverty Project . It is a performance measure that provides realistic an d
detailed data on what individuals need to be self-sufficient such as housing, food, child care, out-of -
pocket medical expenses, transportation, and other necessary spending thereby providing a
complete picture of what it takes for families to make ends meet .
It calculates the most recent local or regional costs of each basic need and varies costs by ag e
groups of children. It assumes all adults work full-time and includes the net effect of federal an d
state taxes and tax credits, as well as any local taxes and tax credits .
The information used to develop the Standard is obtained from sources such as the U .S . Census
Bureau and U.S . Department of Agriculture . Standards are now calculated for 156 different famil y
compositions in all 58 California counties (and 35 other states). The one used for this project wa s
for the San Luis Obispo-Paso Robles Metropolitan Statistical Area . At the time the information was
compiled, the most recent data available was from 2008 . However, 2011 data is now available s o
we will update our figures accordingly . This puts the Standard for two adults, a preschool-age child ,
and a school age child at $64,342 . The Standard for other types of households can be found on th e
City's website .
Exhibit 1
During review of the EDSP, input from the public and advisory body members indicated concer n
because a specific income level was not used to define head-of-household job . While it would b e
easier to set a simple income amount as a definition, the research showed that the income neede d
for the head of a household changes with the type of household . This was also reflected i n
discussions with business owners that indicated they had a variety of self-sufficient income level s
represented in the jobs they create .
•
•
•
B2-4
Economic Development Strategic Plan Page 5
Significantly, jobs that have the attributes shown on Exhibit 1 are the kinds of jobs that allo w
people to increase their standard of living over time and are the types of jobs that the City shoul d
encourage . Although the exhibit shows five attributes, these are not in order of importance wit h
income level as just one attribute . Referring back to the Standard, an income level for a particula r
type of household can be used as a factor in the determination of head-of-household job .
Staff is seeking confirmation from the City Council that the proposed head of household jo b
definition is appropriate for the community and a good foundation for the overall work on the Majo r
City Goal .
2.Permit Streamlinin g
Through the public engagement process there was an oft repeated need for more efficient and timel y
permit processing . The planning process has tremendous impacts on the financing and overal l
movement of projects . In this economy, more predictability is required to ensure projects can b e
financed and built .
The City has a Development Review Team in place with Community Development as the lea d
department. Through weekly team meetings and semi-annual Developer's Roundtables, the Cit y
continually strives to improve the process . The proposed strategy will allow for additional staff an d
consultant time to take a fresh look at the process, workflow, communication methods and modes ,
and resources for problem solving to ensure that all Development Review processes are optimized .
Much emphasis has gone into permit streamlining over the past several years with regular inpu t
from development roundtables where Community Development staff opens the doors to the
development community in an effort to improve processes . This has resulted in progress but, base d
on feedback received, City processes warrant further refinement due to the heightened need fo r
predictability and efficiency in the development world .
One known opportunity for further refinement is the time to bring an application to the "complete
application" status . This time is generally not factored into the processing timeline,is a source o f
confusion and frustration in the development community, and requires effort on the part of both
City staff and the development community to achieve time savings and predictability .
At the State level, there are efforts to address the time and expense associated with environmenta l
studies and Environmental Impact Reports . Strategies in conjunction with State level changes ar e
another source of streamlining that staff recommends adding to this section .
Staff is seeking confirmation that the City Council supports an evaluation of potential permi t
streamlining activities .
3.Infrastructure and Incentives
Infrastructure
The EDSP includes a focus on the infrastructure requirements in the City's expansion areas . Th e
interplay between available land for business expansion, and the infrastructure requirement s
B2-5
Economic Development Strategic Plan Page 6
associated with such expansion, mean that infrastructure plays an important role for job creation i n
the City.
According to feedback from stakeholders, the City may expect "Cadillac" infrastructure . The Cit y
also expects new development to pay its "fair share" of the cost of infrastructure needed to serve th e
new development . According to community input received there are two solutions to b e
considered : One, right-size the infrastructure . In other words, make sure we are no t
overbuilding .Two,reduce the percentage new development has to pay of that right-size d
infrastructure if there are larger, community-wide benefits to be gained .
Efforts are currently underway to provide the information necessary to better prioritiz e
infrastructure costs and allocation of fair share . The current Major City Goal for Economi c
Development includes funding for an infrastructure study that the EDSP will help to define . Topic s
may include the effects of:
• making targeted City-financed investments in infrastructur e
• putting more expansion area projects in the Citywide TIF in order to reduce fees withou t
impacting the General Fund
•"right-sizing infrastructure and the percentage of the infrastructure that is allocated to ne w
development .
Up to this point, the infrastructure in each expansion area (e .g . Margarita Area, Airport Area, Orcut t
Area)has been looked at separately . However, there are some projects that benefit users citywide .
This infrastructure analysis will help develop an understanding of the pieces of infrastructure in th e
City that are the most important from an economic development perspective, and how the cost o f
infrastructure might be more effectively shared .
Incentives
A possible framework for reduction in fees to incentivize head-of-household job creation i s
proposed in the EDSP . Community input on this subject has been diverse . It must be remembere d
that these types of programs have impacts on the General Fund that must be carefully considered .
Planning Commissioners recommended careful evaluation of use of incentives and cautioned tha t
any use of incentives must not jeopardize the General Fund, or needs in other areas of the City .
Other advisory body members expressed concern about the fairness of these types of fee program s
in light of the costs absorbed by developers that have already paid into the system. On the othe r
hand, the Chamber of Commerce characterizes potential fee reductions as a key stimulant t o
economic growth .
Infrastructure costs and fees are interrelated and a solution to fees may lie in addressin g
infrastructure requirements and costs, which are the basis for most impact fees . At this time, staff is
recommending removing the discussion of direct incentives from the EDSP and increasing the focu s
on reducing infrastructure costs as a way to make development and the creation of jobs mor e
economically feasible . City Council direction on whether to remove incentives from the EDSP i s
being sought as the EDSP moves to the next stage .
•
•
B2-6
•
Economic Development Strategic Plan Page 7
4 .Summary Matri x
The Summary Matrix beginning at page 30 of the EDSP includes information regarding th e
timeframe for implementation of a particular strategy and its measurements for success . Th e
timeframes identified in the matrix are intended to coincide with the budgetary decisions that ar e
made with each two-year financial plan, allowing for decisions on EDSP implementation strategies
to be made in the context of other community needs .
For example, strategies that would be accomplished in the current financial plan period ar e
considered short term, strategies that would be implemented during the 2013-15 Financial Plan
period are medium term, and the 2015-17 Financial Plan period is considered long term . If approve d
in this form, staff would bring forward a detailed work program for EDSP implementation items t o
be considered alongside other funding proposals .
The Measurements for Success column in the matrix includes sub-columns for both quantifiabl e
metrics and qualitative outcomes that are intended to be achieved through implementation of th e
strategy. The intent of the matrix is for the metric column to be very specific and measureable an d
for the outcome column to be descriptive of the end-state that is sought by implementing the
strategy. Staff intends to make substantial revisions to this section before a final EDSP i s
recommended for approval . Staff is now seeking input from the Council to ensure that thes e
timeframes and the proposed direction for revising the measurements for success are appropriat e
and adequate .
With City Council input in these four areas and with the benefit of significant community input staf f
will work with the consultant to produce another draft of the EDSP . This final draft will be
presented to the City Council in October. In the meantime, staff will continue to move forward wit h
the work program for the current fiscal year, which includes preparation of a detailed infrastructur e
analysis . A Request for Proposals will be provided to the City Council for review and approval t o
initiate this next phase of the work program .
CONCURRENCE S
The Steering Committee gave valuable input on the Administrative Draft Economic Developmen t
Strategic Plan helping to inform the development of the EDSP . The Community Developmen t
Depaitcnent has been involved in the development of the EDSP via service on the Steering
Committee, service on the committee evaluating consultant proposals, review of the scope of wor k
for the request for proposals, and review of the EDSP . All department heads were provided a cop y
of the EDSP and several have provided input .
FISCAL IMPAC T
The EDSP will require fiscal allocations throughout implementation as is evidenced in the time -
frames outlined in the Matrix under the "Resources" heading . Funding and/or staff resources abov e
those available in the existing Financial Plan will be needed to implement aspects of the EDSP,and
will be requested through future financial plans . There are no immediate budgetary action s
requested with adoption of the EDSP .
B2-7
Economic Development Strategic Plan Page 8
ALTERNATIVE
1.Adopt the Economic Development Strategic Plan : The Council may adopt the EDSP wit h
direction on changes to be incorporated into the final document . This alternative is no t
recommended because the proposed changes are significant and staff would like to prepare a
final draft for review by the Council and community prior to adoption .
2.Continue review : The Council may continue the item and direct staff to take a differen t
approach with the EDSP or include additional information .
ATTACHMENT S
1.Planning Commission Agenda Report of June 27, 201 2
2.Chamber of Commerce Recommendation s
LINKED DOCUMENT S
1.DraftEconomic Development Strategic Plan
2.A ..endix A : Backround Re . ort
3.Self-Sufficiency Standard (2011).
ne:nr 't :K .oun2Ufen(i .'o2UKe . ortsV[uiLALU1L-ua-uiEC nomc `'oL Lev'/GUJtrd
B2 —8
CITY OF SAN LUIS OBISPO
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA REPORT
BY : Claire Clark, Economic Development Manager
MEETING DATE :June 27, 2012
FROM : Michael Codron, Assistant City Manage r
FILE NUMBER : Economic Development Strategic Plan - Public Review Draft
PROJECT ADDRESS :Citywide
SUBJECT : Draft Economic Development Strategic Pla n
RECOMMENDATION : Receive a presentation of the Draft Economic Development Strategi c
Plan, provide a forum for public input,and provide staff with comments on the plan .
BACKGROUND
With the 2011-13 Financial Plan, the City Council adopted a Major City Goal for Economi c
Development .
"Increase focus on economic development . Support creation of head-of-househol d
jobs through developing strategies for infrastructure, focusing on promising growth
sectors, and expediting desired economic activity. Expand collaboration with Cal
Poly, Cuesta, business community and responsible agencies ."
The work program for the first year of the Major City Goal dictated completion of a strategy t o
guide the City's economic development efforts for the next five years .To help engage the
community and inform the strategic plan, a Steering Committee was formed with representatives o f
community groups and the business and non-profit sectors .
The process proceeded in three phases . The first phase included engaging a Steering Committee ,
completion of a strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats (SWOT) analysis, and developmen t
of a definition of "head-of-household" jobs. The consultant also engaged community leaders ,
residents and elected officials in small group interviews to gather insider perspective and prioritiz e
key issues. The second phase consisted of civic engagement including three public workshops
informing the strategies proposed in the draft strategic plan . The third, and current, phase include d
preparation of the draft document and background report for public comment and consideration b y
the City Council .
The purpose of this report is to provide the Commission and the public with an opportunity t o
review and comment on the strategies .The Commission may wish to provide comments o r
suggestions; however, this is an information item and no formal action is recommended .
B2-9
Economic Development Strategic Plan — Public Review Draft
Page 2
DISCUSSIO N
Strategic Plan Developmen t
Development of the strategic plan started with research into a definition for "head-of-household "
jobs . Given the direction from Council, staff researched a variety of resources including the IR S
filing status definition, the Census definition for a variety of types of households, and a simpl e
income threshold. Findings from this research provided a few definitions and highlighted the fac t
that a simple income level did not capture the variety of household types and the variety of need s
associated with these household types .
Ultimately, head-of-household job criteria were developed using the self-sufficiency standard fo r
San Luis Obispo County and other factors such as job stability, education level/technical skill ,
career ladder, employer-sponsored benefits, and income level . Inclusion of these broad factors ,
particularly the self-sufficiency standard for particular household types, allowed the Steering
Committee to arrive at a broad definition of the term .
Stakeholder interviews further refined and focused a list of trends, advantages and challenges . Th e
City's top five most commonly cited trends and advantages, challenges and obstacles were :
Trends and Advantage s
1.Arts, lifestyle and environmen t
2.Telecommutin g
3.Alternative energy and sustainable business practice s
4.Cal Poly faculty and student s
5.High speed data connectivity/fiber optic cabl e
Challenges and Obstacles
I . Development review process and fees
2.Cost of living
3.Airport servic e
4.Trailing spouse/relocation
5.Aging population/lack of "life-building" age grou p
Background Report, Appendix A
The Background Report,referenced in the strategic plan, provides the data which informe d
development of the plan's strategies . Included in the Report is a comparison of benchmar k
communities 'development review timelines and fees . The benchmark cities were chosen for
qualities that made them similar to the City of San Luis Obispo such as size, location and attribute s
such as quality of life, college town and employment center of the region . In addition, competito r
jurisdictions were also included . The benchmark jurisdictions studied include the City of Davis ,
City of Paso Robles, City of Santa Barbara and San Luis Obispo County .
B2-10
O
Economic Development Strategic Plan — Public Review Draft
"' Page 3
The comparison data shows that the City of San Luis Obispo's permit processing times fall among
the fastest of the jurisdictions studied .However,community member interviews and feedbac k
during workshops indicated need for improvement in keys areas associated with the permit process ,
such as communication with applicants and predictability of the process . As a result, strategies are
recommended to address these issues. In addition to highlighting issues with the permit process, th e
Background Report shows that the City's fees per square foot exceeded all benchmark jurisdiction s
where the low was $2 per square foot, and the City represented the high of $43 per square foot .
Strategies are also recommended to address fees where they are a barrier to job creation .
Public Participation
Throughout the strategic planning process, the public has been engaged through email notifications ,
a dedicated web page on the City website, press releases and community workshops . Three
workshops were held between March and May offering opportunities for discussion . The three
workshops included lively discussion of three topic areas :
«Future of Jobs in SLO
•A Strong SLO Economy : Green, Innovative and Resilient
+The Economics of Plac e
The first workshop provided an overview of the strategic planning process and included facilitate d
discussions at table groups designed to draw out expectations regarding job growth in the City.
Workshop two focused on Knowledge and Innovation including a presentation by the head of th e
Cal Poly Technology Park regarding technology transfer and innovation . In addition, Digital West (a
local communications company) gave a presentation about the possibilities for expansion of th e
broadband infrastructure to benefit job growth . The third workshop explored the value that SL O
Life concepts (cultural activities, access to open space, healthy lifestyles) add to products an d
companies manufactured and located in San Luis Obispo . The fourth and final workshop was hel d
following release of the Draft Strategic Plan to get feedback on the strategies . Results from thi s
workshop will be presented to the Planning Commission as part of the presentation .
Pzouosed Stratezies
The draft strategic plan presents four overarching strategies, including :
• Break Down Barriers to Job Creatio n
• Actively Support Knowledge & Innovatio n
•Promote the SLO Life to Enhance Business Opportunitie s
• Build on Existing Efforts with Regional Partner s
Each of the four main strategies is supported by underlying actions to improve the economic climate
for job creation over the five-year life of the document .
•
Economic Development Strategic Plan – Public Review Draf t
Page 4
Break Down Barriers to Job Creatio n
Barriers to job creation in the City include the development review process and the lack of backbon e
infrastructure in the expansion areas of the City. The development review process is an importan t
component of the "open for business" welcome mat (see www .openforbusinessinslo .com)as
investors look for speed and predictability in permit processing. Furthermore, while nonresidentia l
land is available throughout the City, many development sites require subdivision and supportin g
infrastructure .
The actions in this section call for specific and proactive steps to create shovel-ready sites in th e
Margarita and Airport planning areas . Among the actions proposed is establishing a "Streamlinin g
Team." to improve processing of development permits .
Production of a key sites portfolio is also proposed to provide information for commercial brokers ,
businesses and developers about potential development opportunities along with detailed
explanations of city development requirements for those sites .
An infrastructure study is proposed as a major, early strategy to better understand the priorities, fee s
and financing options for infrastructure. that drives job creation . This infrastructure study is funde d
in the 2012-13 Administration Department budget . Ultimately, an incentive program for job creators
is proposed in the later years of the strategic plan .
2. Actively Support Knowledge & Innovatio n
Knowledge and Innovation related industries are some of the fastest growing industries in th e
region . With this strategy, the City aims to spur opportunities for job growth and build awareness o f
the City's competitive advantage . Action sections include Entrepreneurship and Access t o
Broadband . Cal Poly continues to be the hub for the entrepreneurial ecosystem with the Center fo r
Innovation and Entrepreneurship,the Tech Park C 3 RP, and the Small Business Development Cente r
for Innovation. City efforts in facilitating entrepreneurial activity in conjunction with efforts of th e
Economic Vitality Corporation and Chamber of Commerce should continue . Access to broadban d
was highlighted by the Google contest to choose a city to "light up". Building on that enthusiasm ,
the City entered into a public-private partnership for use of public infrastructure by a private entity .
This effort highlights the need to systematize public-private partnerships, explore other
opportunities for expansion of the broadband network with existing partners (Cal Poly and th e
County) and look for ways to facilitate use of public conduit . In addition, future opportunitie s
associated with the cable landings in the County are ripe for exploration and quantification . Thi s
strategy suggests working in partnership with economic development partners county-wide t o
quantify opportunities and plan for the future .
B2-12
Economic Development Strategic Plan -- Public Review Draft
Page 5
3.Promote the SLO Life to Enhance Business Opportunitie s
Throughout the public outreach process, the quality of life in San Luis Obispo, lifestyle advantages ,
and access to outdoor recreation opportunities were cited as attractors commonly referred to as th e
SLO Life. Industries in the cultural sector also add value by leveraging SLO's "sense of place"for
job creation .
The actions in this section improve coordination between the City's economic development effort s
and tourism efforts in order to achieve an integrated approach to support the SLO life attributes .
4.Build on Existing Efforts with Regional Partner s
The City's Economic Development Program has many areas of focus.This section recommends
where existing efforts should be built upon to help achieve the goal of head-of-household jo b
creation . These recommended actions strive to strengthen the alignment of local and regional goal s
and efforts leveraging City resources to encourage business investment and expansion of jobs . Thi s
section recommends a focus on data collection through a variety of sources, a focus on identificatio n
and support for small businesses, and a renewed effort for business retention and expansion .
CONCLUSIO N
The draft Economic Development Strategic Plan has been built on a wide variety of public input
including the business community and residents . With the short timeframe set out in the work
program, achieving the Council's goal has been challenging . However, the well-informed populac e
and stakeholders have all helped to bring forward a balanced approach for the Economi c
Development Program .
Following this hearing, staff will continue to receive input that will inform the Final Strategic Pla n
going to Council on August 7, 2012 for adoption .
Attachments :
1 .Public Draft Economic Development Strategic Plan (attached and linked) or go t o
www.slocity.org/economicdevelopment/strategicplan/SLO%20EDSP Strategic%20Plan_P R
D_LWC 6-15-12 .pd f
Enclosure :
1 .Public Draft Appendix A : Background Report (click on link) or go t o
www.slocity.orgeconomicdevelopment/strategicplan/SLO%20EDSPBackground%2oRe o.
rt PRD LWC46-15-12 .pdf
B2-13
ATTACHMENT 2
Cha ber of Co erce De ailed Inpu t
1 .Break Down Barriers to Job Creatio n
General Comments :
The metrics in this section need to be more measurable and specific . Please explain mor e
clearly where there is an expectation that the community plays a role in efforts t o
accomplish/complete strategies .
For example, for the metrics associated with strategy 1 .1, "establish new procedures or revis e
current procedures as appropriate through implementation of this strategy . Solicit communit y
input and seek City Council approval" it is not clear how this will be accomplished by tha t
description alone . More detail is needed on how the new/current procedures will b e
approached . What will the solicitation of community input look like? Will it include publi c
meetings, outreach to organizations and/or gathering of feedback from developers as the y
work through this process? Setting very clear timelines for each of these processes is vital t o
the success of the businesses involved . More directly stating that would greatly enhance thi s
section .
Missing :
The overall processing of environmental studies, ElRs and planning documents needs to se e
significant change . Strategies for decreased timeframes for planning and CEQA review an d
creating greater certainty in the review process should be incorporated .
PG 30, 1 .1
Project management specific to permit processing and development applications an d
requirements needs to be much more efficient and timely . Predictability particularly in th e
area of planning has tremendous impacts on the financing and overall movement of a project .
More specific guidelines, training, accountability for assigned staff are important additions t o
improve the process .
In addition, significant improvements to interdepartmental coordination need to b e
undertaken . This is a key element in the efficient delivery of public services for the City. Wher e
multiple departments have review and decision-making authority, a system of management i s
needed to create a head department and a "point" person who is responsible for deliverin g
review, resolution of issues, and conflict resolution between city departments .
PG 32, 1 .4
While we appreciate that financing infrastructure is a key provision of the draft more focu s
must be made to more fairly distributing the costs of infrastructure improvements wher e
1
B2-14
•community needs are being met . The current problem stems from a deferral of pas t
investments in roads/traffic, drainage, water and sewer . These costs of community-wide need s
should not just be borne by new development .
PG 32, 1 .4 (a )
More emphasis needs to be made on the successful annexation of developable land in th e
airport area as an economic driver . The Chevron/Tank Farm project, in particular, represent s
critical future inventory of commercial/office space . More energy needs to be directed a t
collaboration between the city and county in planning the area (not enough to reference it as a
metric).
PG 32, 1 .4 (c )
Broaden the base of possible funding mechanisms . For example, explore options for a genera l
obligation bond .
PG 34,1 .7
The description of the strategy needs to be more specific about potential fee reductions as thi s
is a key stimulant to economic growth . The city's fee structure has long been referenced as a
barrier to desired development . There are significant variations in fees when compared t o
other cities even within the County . An effort needs to be made to meaningfully address thes e
costs to ensure that San Luis Obispo's economy continue to healthily evolve .
The Chamber suggests changing the time frame for this strategy from long to medium . I n
addition, a first step effort could be to do a fee analysis and the underlying components tha t
drive the fees . It's important we deal with the one of the most significant barriers to busines s
development as soon as possible .
2 .Actively Support Knowledge and Innovatio n
PG 35,2 .1
The Chamber of Commerce would like to see more specific description of the implementatio n
and deliverables on this strategy, including the allocation that would be needed from the city .
For example, a business incubator, innovation marketplace, co-location workspaces, support o f
home based businesses all have costs attached . What will the timeline be for these and what i s
the plan for financing ?
PG 35, 2 .1
The Chamber would also like to see Cuesta College called out in this section as thei r
entrepreneurship programs greatly enhance economic development .
PG 35, 2 .1 (a )
In addition to Cal Poly and the community, assist startups and spin-offs from Cuesta College .
PG 35, 2 .1 (d)
2
B2-15
Be more specific about how the City will "support" home-based businesses . What resources ca n
be used to connect them such as the incubators or co-location options mentioned previously?
Lowering fees could be an option to evaluate as well . Gather creative options/input to hel p
home based businesses truly succeed .
PG 35, 2 .1 (e) (Add )
Support, use, maintain and update openforbusinessinslo .com . Partner to keep the site curren t
and fresh .
PG 35,2 .1 Metric :
"Establish systems, entities and/or tools that foster and support business start-ups" is not clear .
What kind of systems/tools will be looked for? How will that be measured ?
PG 36,2 .2
The Chamber agrees that access to broadband is a top priority . This section should b e
strengthened with a strategy to identify the kind of potential investment that the City ma y
make in this area that supports the efforts of the private sector and enhances San Luis Obispo's
competiveness and attractiveness for business growth . This is an important asset that coul d
distinguish San Luis Obispo .
PG 36, 2 .2 Metrics :
Access to broadband : can be measured by number of customers being served, miles installed ,
capacity of broadband and cost ."City council approval "is not a metric .
The goal for this should be to increase San Luis Obispo's cost competitiveness versu s
metropolitan areas . Building out broadband will exponentially bring costs down over time .
3 .Promote the SLO life to enhance Business Opportunitie s
Missing :
This section would benefit from greater emphasis on outreach to residents about th e
significance that a robust local economy has on the ability to deliver on quality of life
investments and quality of life benefits of tourism to our community .
The City should continue to strengthen the brand of the City and the role of tourism as a n
economic development tool . Options to utilize existing resources, such a s
www .o ._enforbusinessinslo .com or new marketing tools should be explored .
The Chamber also believes that focused efforts to encourage the development of large, state -
of-the-art, green conference facilities would allow San Luis Obispo to accommodate mor e
events, business, and tourism to enhance the community and stimulate the local economy .
3
B2-16
•
The sense of safety in San Luis Obispo is a significant draw for tourists and potentia l
businesspeople looking to relocate to the region . This should be referenced in the document.
PG 37, 3 .1 Metrics :
The term "SLO Life" is a tourism brand that may actually be communicating the wrong messag e
for business development and attraction . An alternate marketing slogan may be a mor e
positive way to phrase what we're trying to communicate .
PG 37,3 .2
The role of the tourism manager should be empowered to collaborate with other regiona l
tourism efforts as well as with various stakeholders throughout the city and county .
The Chamber believes that one new role a tourism manager could take on is proactive effort s
to recruit events and organizations to the area (city and county). This section should b e
expanded to include local attractions, such as active support of the SLO Botanical Garde n
Concert venue, City-to-sea multimodal path connection, Octagonal Barn Project and othe r
historic/cultural activity enhancements as significant community assets .
PG 38,3 .3, 3 .4 Metrics :
Incorporate the analysis that organizations of all city-funded events provide to understan d
which events drive the most economic impacts .
4 .Build on Existing Efforts with Regional Partner s
General Comments :
Title is confusing . It should be changed to something along the lines of "Identify and Increas e
collaboration with Partners Throughout the Region ."
Missing :
The Chamber believes that the active recruitment of new businesses to SLO is an importan t
element of economic development and that active recruitment should start with connections t o
alumni at Cal Poly and Cuesta College .
Although "partners" are referenced many times in this section they are not identified clearly i n
this section . A few suggestions of those entities which we believe should be included are : EVC ,
SLO County, large and small businesses, SLO Chamber, etc . There needs to be more explanatio n
of who the partners are and how they coordinate .
There are many references to strategies that deal with data collection in this section . Gatherin g
data and maintaining accurate data about our community is not a strategy it is a tactic . We
recommend that resources be allocated to purchase data from known and reliable sources fo r
our use in creating a viable strategy .
B2-17
If included in the final document, the data collection and use from these strategies should b e
consolidated . More specific description should be included on how the data will be used . Th e
data collected should be made available to other entities to promote business growth .
Look at opportunities to build on partnerships as an outcome of the data collection in strategie s
4 .2 and 4 .4 .
PG 40, 4 .6
Support related efforts to grow and retain businesses in the area . Organizations like th e
Chamber, the EVC and others are already working to have more collaboration on this front an d
bring attention to the great efforts of our existing local businesses .
PG 40, 4 .7
Business retention should be moved up in the list of priorities . Keeping businesses here an d
helping them grow should be outlined as a primary goal of the Economic Developmen t
Strategy .
Take more of a proactive role in recruiting and retaining businesses .
5
•
B2-18