The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About10/17/2017 Item 1, Cooper1 From:Allan Cooper < Sent:Sunday, October 15, 2017 6:00 PM To:E-mail Council Website; Fowler, Xzandrea Subject:SS1) Preliminary Results of the Capital Facilities Fee Program Nexus Study Attachments:110_15_17...lettertocouncil.pdf Dear Xzandria - Would you kindly forward the letter attached below to the Council prior to their 4:00 P.M. meeting on Tuesday? P.S. I apologize for not organizing a time for you to meet with Save Our Downtown. I'm still out of town and the turn out to our last meeting was small because everyone seems to be having health problems. We would love to meet with you once I'm back in town. Thanks! - Allan To:SLO City Council and Xzandria Fowler, Deputy Director Re: Study Session One To Review the Capital Facility Fee Program Nexus Study From: Allan Cooper, Secretary Save Our Downtown Date:October 15, 2017 Honorable Mayor Harmon and Council Members- After a cursory review of your sta report covering in considerable detail the rationale behind this Ånexus studyÆ, we have a number of concerns. As you can see, we have emphasized an underlying contradiction that this report puts forward that the City can absorb many more jobs in San Luis Obispo while still making progress toward the CityÈs overarching goal of balancing jobs with housing. The format for our response is as follows: Each quoted passage excerpted from the report is followed by a question (ÅQÆ). Thank you for your time and consideration in this matter! ÅFor example, with single-family residential development, a rule of thumb is that the fee burden should not exceed 15 percent of the cost of the unit.Æ Q. Why the standard 15% for all developments? ArenÈt some single-family residential developments more costly to the City than others (particularly with regard to transportation impacts)? ÅTypically impact fee programs seek to balance the need for impact fee revenues with the ability of development to pay the impact fees without aecting the pace and amount of development¼The Ðnding that new impact fees are at their maximum levels from an economic feasibility perspective indicates that there could be some projects where new impact fees could delay development until other changes in revenue or costs occur. These could include multi-family, retail and oce buildings types that can be dicult to Ðnance and require high rents and process to achieve feasibility before the additional costs of new impact fees." Q. DonÈt we want to aect the pace of commercial development if job growth continues to outpace housing supply? And why is the share appropriated for aordable housing charged to retail so much less than it is to housing in general? IsnÈt retail growth the primary driver behind the unmet need for aordable housing? ÅIt estimates that the growth in the impact fee area will increase the City population by 9,900 people and will generate about 11,100 new jobs.Æ Q. What about insuring a jobs/housing balance? ÅEconomic Development Strategic Plan includes key policies relative to infrastructure Ðnancing. Policy 1.3 calls on the City to analyze infrastructure plans to ensure that they are Åright sizedÆ for the community.Æ Q. ÅRight sizedÆ also implies adequate water capacity within an environment that will become increasingly more prone to prolonged droughts and higher temperatures. "The City will consider the use of city-based funding sources to fund public facility and infrastructure improvements that provide for the health, safety and welfare of existing and future residents and/or provide measurable economic development and Ðscal beneÐts.Æ Q. There should only be an ÅandÆ included in the sentence above which stipulates provision for the existing residentÈs health, safety and welfare ÅorÆ measurable Ðscal beneÐts (to the City). The existing residentÈs health, safety and welfare should not be sacriÐced in exchange for measurable Ðscal beneÐts to the City. ÅIn evaluating whether the City will use city-based funding sources, the following evaluation criteria should be considered: (c) Head of Household Job CreationÆ Q. Why emphasize growth in jobs when it is clear that such job growth will outpace the housing supply? ÅAs population grows with new development, so does demand for the administrative services provided by these facilities.Æ Q. Has it not occurred to City sta that SLO has a bloated administrative budget and an excessively high number of City sta/capita in comparison to CA cities of comparable size (see below)? ÅJobs 52,092 (2017) 63,199 (2035) 11,107 (New Growth) 1.1% (Avg. Annual Growth Rate)Æ Q. The new job growth percentage (1.1%) is grossly underreported here. New job growth of 1 11,107 additional jobs will be on top of an estimated maximum 31,000 - not 52,092 - existing jobs. Therefore, the new job growth percentage increase per year will be roughly 2% or more per year. ÅMaximum Development Impact Fees - Police¼Retail $0.24 per square footÆ Q. Why would police impact fees for retail, particularly with regards to alcohol outlets, be less per square foot than oce ($0.44 per square foot)? Pertaining to Table S-2 ÅComparison of Estimated Maximum with Current FeesÆ we concur that maximum fees should generally be increased and assessed for the Ðrst time for new apartments and non-residential. Q. However it is not clear why Oce fees @ $3.25 per square foot should exceed Retail/ Service/Institutional @ $1.77 per square foot given that the latter require more public safety, water and sewer infrastructure. _________________________________ Based on some research we did recently, it would appear that the City of San Luis Obispo has the highest number of City employees per capita among Ðve comparably sized California cities (Azusa, Covina, Dublin & Ceres). SLO also pays its City Manager more than is paid the City Managers of the other four comparably sized cities. This is important to know in light of the CityÈs current $5million deÐcit, itÈs unfunded liabilities and corresponding decrease in its 1 According to ÅquickfactsÆ census statistics (see: https://www.census.gov/quickfacts/fact/ table/sanluisobispocitycalifornia/HSG010216#viewtop) the total number of jobs in SLO is 25,251 and the total number of residents employed in SLO is 6,500 or see: https:// factÐnder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml? pid=ACS_15_5YR_S2401&prodType=table for the 2010 U.S. Census civilian employed population 16 years and over: 23,352 reserve fund. Unfortunately my salary data is a little iy because the on-line information I procured wasnÈt always for the same year. But the order of magnitude is telling particularly when comparing our City Manager's base salary ($212,500) with the City of Ceres ($145,084) or with the California average ($66,886). No. City Employees/Capita: Comparable Size Cities San Luis Obispo400 employees for a population of 47,536 = 1 : 119 Azusa City383 employees for a population of 46,360 = 1 : 121 Paso Robles171 employees for a population of 29,838 = 1 : 175 Covina City268 employees for a population of 47,796 = 1 : 178 Dublin City237 employees for a population of 46,036 = 1 : 194 Ceres City202 employees for a population of 45,417 = 1 : 225 No. City Employees/Capita: Larger Size Cities Riverside2,500 employees for a population of 303,871 = 1 : 122 Santa Maria559 employees for a population of 103,410 = 1 : 185 BakersÐeld1,300 employees for a population of 365,000 = 1 : 281 Base Salaries Santa Maria (2014) City Manager$223,943 (total comp.: $239,337) Deputy City Mgr.$112,271 (total comp.: $140,455) Population103,410 San Luis Obispo City Manager$212,500 (total comp.: $313,031) Assistant City Mgr.$164,718 Population47,536 Covina City Manager$205,500 Assistant City Mgr.$133,034 Population47,796 Dublin (2010) City Manager$205,008 (total comp.: $289,380) Assistant City Mgr.$176,520 (total comp.: $236,136) Population46,036 Paso Robles City Manager$201,000 Assistant City Mgr.$164,861 Population29,838 San Jacinto (2014) City Manager$195,000 (total comp.: $235,915) Assistant City Mgr.(total comp.: $160,365) Population44,552 Ceres (2014) City Manager$145,084 Deputy City Mgr.$134,405 Population45,417 Source: http://payday.revealnews.org/city/ceres/ CA Average Salary City Manager$66,886 Assistant City Mgr.$37,537 Source: https://www.indeed.com/salaries/City+Manager-Salaries,-California