Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout04-18-2017 Item 1, CarloniCouncil Memorandum APR 17 2017 COUNCIL MEETrNG: [TEM NO.; - - r SLO CITY CLERK April 17, 2017 TO: City Council FROM: Marcus Carloni, Special Projects Manager VIA: Katie Lichtig, City Manager Ok SUBJECT: Cost of Service Fee Study Agenda Report (04/18/2017 Public Hearing Item #1) Public feedback from Open City Hall web page Attached hereto is the feedback report from the Open City Hall web page for the Cost of Service Fee Study. The web page had 101 attendees with 25 statements (the equivalent of 1.3 hours of public comment) in response to the following prompt "what are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount?" The web page is located at http://www.slocity.org/opencityhall. Please contact Marcus Carloni (mcarloni@slocity.org) should there be any questions. Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM Open City Hall is not a certified voting system or ballot box. As with any public comment process, participation in Open City Hall is voluntary. The statements in this record are not necessarily representative of the whole population, nor do they reflect the opinions of any government agency or elected officials. All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM hlfp://www peakdemocracy com/4729 Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM, this forum had: Attendees: 101 All Statements: 25 Hours of Public Comment: 1.3 This topic started on March 22, 2017) 4:26 PM. All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM h[Ip://www peakdemocracy.com/4729 Page 2 of 9 Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? Diane Duenow inside Neighborhood 6 (registered) April 15, 2017, 11:46 AM Raising the appeal fee is just another way to strip residents of San Luis Obispo of their democratic rights. The average resident could not possibly afford this ridiculous increase in fees. Residents are apparently being silenced by this council, when, in fact, this council is supposed to represent citizens, not just developers in SLO. Name not available (unclaimed) April 15, 2017, 8:56 AM I oppose the new proposed fees for appeals, especially for ordinary citizens trying to protect their community. The new fees are perceived as punitive and damping of public input into the planning process. It is not wild speculation to suggest the city seems to be out of control in its expenditures and planning procedures, these fees will only alienate the public. We thought a new council with more grounded principles might avoid issues like this, were we wrong? Sandra Rowley inside Neighborhood 7 (registered) April 14, 2017, 11:21 AM During the February City Council meeting I heard the comment, "too many appeals." How many is too many? Who decides? How many applications have been processed with no appeals? Being able to file an appeal is part of the democratic process, and part of the development process. Those who say there are too many appeals; therefore, we should raise the fees are, also, saying they do not believe the process should be open to everyone. An applicant has the resources, and can recoup the cost of an appeal as a business expense. Residents do not have that luxury - even pooling resources with others is difficult with the current $281 fee. The Davis appeal fee of $200 is a more reasonable cost for residents - not low, but not high. And, no, there are no "frivolous" appeals - just appeals by residents who care about their neighborhoods and think there is additional information that should be considered. Karen Corda Adler inside Neighborhood 2 (registered) April 12, 2017, 9:09 PM As a representative of our Neighborhood Association (AVNA), we have appealed a project & our appeal was upheld. This would not have happened with the exorbitant fees that you are now proposing to charge. Appeals from residents should not be made onerous due to financial concerns. Staff is already getting paid to do their jobs but appeal fees are paid out of residents "pockets". No one is reimbursing us! Do not make the citizens of this City hesitate to file an appeal because of the cost! You should be encouraging citizen participation, not hindering it! 1 Supporter genevieve czech inside Neighborhood 1 (registered) April 12, 2017, 2:30 PM All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM http://www peakdemocracy.com/4729 Page 3 of 9 Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? The more than doubling of the applicant's appeal fee from the current $281 to $623 is hard to justify. It would certainly discourage residents from appealing a decision by the City Council, ARC, or the Planning Commission, a process that has not been abused by residents, but rather used with considerable concern, reflection, and judgment informed by by legal, architectural, and engineering expertise. Those appeals were replete with data that has been researched and presented to the above bodies with indisputable weight. If the city sincerely wishes to consult the public on the direction it should take, with due respect to input from the very residents who pay the taxes and patronize the businesses and services that comprise the city, then the city should be fair minded in its appeal costs. 2 Supporters Name not shown inside Neighborhood 1 (registered) April 12, 2017, 12:36 PM I completely agree with Camille's statement. The Council meets on a prearranged schedule, the Staff has already done its report and never changes its mind, therefore how could an appeal be so expensive? In fact, all the work is on the side of the appellant. Who appeals? Either the developer or the residents. In the case of the developer, he can deduct the fee and the extra spending as a business expense. In the case of the residents, they have to come up with the money. If it is only $200, they can do it, but if it is as high as you want to make it, they will simply be shut off the democratic process. Therefore a very serious question arises: Is the City Staff trying to run some kind of dictatorship over the residents? I am asking you to look beyond mere money, and to weigh-in the huge impact it would have on resident participation and trust in our leaders. 1 Supporter Kenneth Schwartz inside Neighborhood 3 (registered) April 12, 2017, 11:31 AM Fact: appeals are most often made by residents of the city. Frequently they are made because the applicants who are for the most part "developers" are seeking to intensify the use of a particular parcel of neighborhood land for financial profit. It is this proposed alteration of neighborhood land use that participates appeals, neighborhood outrange, and loss of faith in the goals of the PC, the ARC and the City Council. Too much emphasis has been placed by staff on the financial loss to the City because of these appeals, and not enough concern is expressed by the City Council on the outrage being expressed my community members on the erosion of democratic representation before the City Council. Appeals costs are a legitimate cost of a city doing its proper business. There should be absolutely no attempt to recover staff costs via the appeal process. This is democracy at work and if staff or councilmembers can't stand the heat, they are wrongly employed. I would accept the idea of a flat $100.00 fee to discourage frivolous appeals with the proviso that staff be required to do better professional work or seek employment elsewhere. 2 Supporters Name not shown inside Neighborhood 8 (registered) April 12, 2017, 9:49 AM This is quite a complex subject but if we are trying and intending to be a Community, I believe that costs should All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM hltp://www peakdemocracy.com/4729 Page 4 of 9 Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? not be increased for making Appeals. This is the only time where the citizens get the opportunity to express their viewpoints about very important City issues and furthermore, to get to express themselves to the ones who are making the decisions about OUR TOWN!!! And, it is not even a discussion with each other. I believe we could also do better about that ... after all, don't we want a cohesive town? Also, it is apparent that the Council Members are not interested in what the citizens of the town wish to say at these Appeal gatherings. It is quite clear that they are bored to death and not at all interested in what the citizens have to say as they have already lined up with the Developers, perhaps receiving remuneration from them, certainly attempting to line their pockets and definitely with their more than ample pensions in their minds. With the Staff fully behind the Developers as they present their side of the project, the Council has 7 people on it. The developers and their architects should be the ones that present their work. As far as the Council is concerned, it appears that they are not even interested in the beliefs of the citizens, that in good faith make presentations, expecting that the Council is working for those that live in the town, but they have already made up their minds, as they never make reference to the true, factual and professional information presented to them, never refer to it in their talks, never ever thank those citizens that find it hard to speak 3 minutes in a Public forum, never thank any of the speakers. Fortunately, our new Mayor, Heidi Harmon, is making an effort to support those citizens who speak and has made mostly the proper votes on the issues. This is a question of the meaning of our Democracy. If the Appeal cost is increased this will make it probably impossible for Appeals to be made. At this time there is a solid group of citizens that are actually paying attention to matters that the City is involved in. To continue our Democratic way of life please do not raise the prices for public Appeals, they are necessary for our way of life, and apparently necessary to protect OUR TOWN, since the Council Members have lost the rationale for why they have been elected as they appear to literally look down on the people they are to represent. It is clearly apparent that they do not intend to continue to serve as they will not be re-elected in 2018. Name not shown inside Neighborhood 1 (registered) April 12, 2017, 9:12 AM This raising of appeals fees for aggrieved residents is just a way to remove our constitutional right to appeal, and limit it to those with a lot of money. Another way the city sticks it to normal people, and makes the place more rich -friendly (i.e., developer friendly). Given how corrupt the development review process has become, in effect denying ordinary people the right to appeal is sick. Appeals should be free. The constitution doesn't say we only have the right to appeal for redress of grievances if we're rich, does it? 1 Supporter Camille Small inside Neighborhood 1 (registered) April 12, 2017, 1:24 AM *Let's start by asking whether "cost of service' for an Appeal is actually as high as the figure shown. *The Council is in session (no additional cost, right?). *The written Staff report is the same as the original presented to Advisory Bodies, right? Then where is the additional cost? * Do we pay Staff overtime for appearing at the meeting? What is that total amount? Perhaps the City Employees would like to operate without hearing from the public? The rate increase appears to discriminate against residents. It casts doubt on whether residents' voices are welcomed at all. Consider the following regarding the process: * Residents are kept in the dark until a short time before a particular Item is presented. All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM http://www peakdemocracy.com/4729 Page 5 of 9 Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? * The Item is heard before an Advisory Body of 5 to 7 people who make a decision about something they often know little about. Residents appearing to "testify" know the In's and Out's of the project because they have been studying the details AND they know how residents' lives will be negatively, dramatically... and permanently changed... AND THEY CARE DEEPLY. NOW consider the sad truth that most serving on advisory bodies are hand picked by certain Council members. There are several on Advisory Bodies who are a breath of fresh air, who ACTUALLY care about well- meaning residents. Outside of those special people who are fair and open minded, rational and reasonable, many others are just "company people" who essentially go along with Staff who lobbies them, feeds them information, coerces them by saying a certain project "HAS TO GO THROUGH".(Yes, this has been done). The number of people involved in a final vote --between 10 to 14, perhaps, affect the lives of hundreds of residents in huge sections of the City. When the vote goes against the residents which is common, residents want to Appeal. City Staff doesn't like this so perhaps they think increasing fees will limit the number of Appeals? Discriminatory. Unfair. Undemocratic. Self Serving. We are trying SO HARD TO PROTECT NEIGHBORHOODS AND THE RESIDENTS IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS because we have many on Staff and several on Council who do not see the importance of this. Too bad for San Luis Obispo. Clearly it is not the city it once was.... 3 Supporters Dodd inside Neighborhood 7 (registered) April 11, 2017, 5:54 PM Consistent with the court system in California and San Luis Obispo County, a reasonable flat fee (such as $200) should be charged for a citizen of SLO to appeal a decision of an city employee or advisory body. It is unfair to make lack of affordability a component of filing an appeal. The higher fees also discourage community members from ensuring advisory bodies (who are made up of volunteer citizens) are correct in their decision. These types of checks and balances are necessary in a democratic system. I also feel that fee waivers for appeal fees should be available for low-income citizens just like the court system. The city should not encourage obstacles such as affordability be placed in the way of a citizen ensuring their rights. 3 Supporters Name not available (unclaimed) April 11, 2017, 5:31 PM High fees discourage citizen participation. $300 or 10% of cost is high enough. Name not shown inside Neighborhood 1 (registered) April 11, 2017, 5:21 PM Raising appeal fees for residents' appeals is obstructing our participation in the democratic principles of our City All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM hltp:1twww peakdemocracy.com14729 Page 6 of 9 Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? government. Please do not raise the residents' cost to appeal. The appeal cost is already a hardship and we are not profiting from appeals. Raise appeal costs to developers, not local residents. Residents seem to always lose appeals anyway. Thank you. 4 Supporters William Cochran inside Neighborhood 3 (registered) April 11, 2017, 1:39 PM Whatever the stated purpose of the appeal fees, the net result will be a decrease in public participation and debate of important issues. Shame for even considering such a thing. 3 Supporters Name not shown inside Neighborhood 5 (registered) April 1, 2017, 11:29 AM SLO keeps doing its best to become unaffordable. All we keep doing is increasing the cost of government then go back to the electorate and say: "See, our costs are high and we are not recovering the costs. Please help us by supporting us in increasing fees." And thus the merry-go-round continues... Raise the cost of government and go back for more money. We cannot expect young people to afford to live in this city, and we desperately need young people living in the city to create a vibrant community. SLO must look internally at its high costs (Pensions, vacations, the ever present conflict of interest of public employee unions that use taxpayer dollars to support unions that support candidates that support unions which support even higher pensions and more vacations, etc.). That is where need need to start, looking internally at cost cutting --not with an analysis of costs and then going to the trough again and again. 2 Supporters Name not shown inside Neighborhood 7 (registered) March 29, 2017, 1:47 PM I believe all appeals should pay 100% of the associated costs of appeal. I prefer not to subsidize any appeals as this raises the cost of City services for those of us who do not have a need to appeal. Name not shown inside Neighborhood 8 (registered) March 29, 2017, 11:09 AM 6th most expensive City in the country and growing, Look out number 1 we are coming. Before talking about raising fees you need to drag the overpaid management salaries back to reality. Stop offering retirement benefits we cannot afford. Stop buying overpriced un -needed busses. Stop replacing the entire fleet of City Vehicles, and join the real world. Though I am rapidly getting pushed from the middle class to the lower class with all your fees I am not planning on moving and will continue to vote out incumbents each time they fail to listen to us just like the last election. The last episode with the dots which were completely ignored by the City is a classic example. To those of you promising us the moon and delivering us rocks, enjoy your short stay. I am tapped out and fed up. All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM http:F/www peakdemocracy corn/4729 Page 7 of 9 Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? 4 Supporters Name not available (unclaimed) March 29, 2017, 11:00 AM 6th most expensive City in the country and growing, Look out number 1 we are coming. Before talking about raising fees you need to drag the overpaid management salaries back to reality. Stop offering retirement benefits we cannot afford. Stop buying overpriced un -needed busses. Stop replacing the entire fleet of City Vehicles, and join the real world. Though I am rapidly getting pushed from the middle class to the lower class with all your fees I am not planning on moving and will continue to vote out incumbents each time they fail to listen to us just like the last election. The last episode with the dots which were completely ignored by the City is a classic example. To those of you promising us the moon and delivering us rocks, enjoy your short stay. am tapped out and fed up. Name not available (unclaimed) March 29, 2017, 8:19 AM I am a native, 3rd generation in SLO. I have seen many changes to SLO. I love this city. What you are doing is wrong. You are increasing fees that will allow only the rich to live here in SLO. SLO needs families and to have rich and poor people work together. Every time the city needs money they always increase rates because it's an easy fix. It's time to think outside the box and find better solutions. Name not shown inside Neighborhood 6 (registered) March 29, 2017, 8:00 AM SLO is scandalously unaffordable. This pushes workers and families out of town, and pushes people out of their homes and on to the streets. Part of the blame for this is with the cost of government. So, rather than finding ways to recover increased costs of regulation, inspection, and bureaucracy by further increasing the cost of homes & apartments & businesses, I would urge the city to reduce the costs and impacts of these regulations, inspections, and bureaucracies. 4 Supporters Stephen Peck outside Neighborhoods (registered) March 25, 2017, 4:59 AM The division of tiers for appeal fees is appropriate. Overall cost recovery perhaps could be higher than the recommended 25 percent for applicants and others. The current fees and fees set at 25 percent recovery are an incentive or disincentive to filing a legitimate appeal. Setting the overall cost recover across the board to something like 35-50 percent also would not discourage legitimate appeals. The City not provide appeal fees that are so high that it discourages legitimate involvement, nor should it subsidize (as I believe the current fee structure does) malicious and unfounded appeals. Tim Jouet inside Neighborhood 6 (registered) March 24, 2017, 7:59 PM All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM http://www peakdemocracy ccm/4729 Page 8 of 9 Cost of Service Fee Study and Appeal Fees What are your thoughts about recommended fee amounts including the appeal fee amount? I still don't see a fee for parking a private vehicle on public streets. Seems like a service provided by the city... 1 Supporter Todd Katz inside Neighborhood 7 (registered) March 24, 2017, 2:55 PM 1 have previously written to Council regarding the review. In looking at the revised recommendations, it's not clear what falls into the "Tier 4" camp. Some examples should be provided. For example, my feedback related to an error made by City Planning in requiring me to have a sewer inspected as part of a simple lot line adjustment which did not involve any physical work to the properties, nor any change in below ground lateral ownership or path. Would an appeal related to this ruling be Tier 4? If so, then I think this is an improvement. Similarly, if I had a room remodel and was somehow required to do some work on my house which I thought was not germaine to the project, could I appeal as a Tier 4? Is everything Tier 4 unless otherwise noted? Finally, I'd like to emphasize that there should be room for an informal appeal / clarification before processes become formal. If this actually exists, I think it should be made known to everyone involved w/ City permit processes. Let's make this system work for our city which doing all we can to encourage folks to get permits for the work they have done. In the end this will lead to better properties, high property values and higher City revenues Lee Bren inside Neighborhood 6 (registered) March 24, 2017, 12:44 PM I disagree the proposed fees should be different from an applicant versus a non applicant appeal. The larger fee should be the same for each situation. Why should the city pick up undue overhead costs for a non applicant situation, yet be fully reimbursed from an applicant appeal situation? Everything in life has a true cost, and the burden cost to appeal a decision should not discriminate depending upon the category of appeal classification. 1 Supporter Name not shown inside Neighborhood 8 (registered) March 24, 2017, 12:38 PM The appeal fee increase will discourage most residents' participation in our government process, therefore, do NOT increase the appeal fees for the residents. Developers can absorb and write off the cost of an appeal into their project budget, however, many residents cannot afford the proposed exorbitant fee increase. This creates an imbalance of affordability which discourages the less affluent from being able to participate in this part of the development process. If an increase is absolutely necessary, it would be more fair if there were two fees --one for developers' appeals and one for residents' appeals. 7 Supporters All Statements sorted chronologically As of April 17, 2017, 9:55 AM http:/hvww peakdemocracy.com/4729 Page 9 of 9