Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda 8.A 06/21/2004CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA ` U J, AGENDA BILE.. 4A ends Title: Meeting Date: Public meeting to hear, testimony regarding the annual assessments June 21, 2004 for the. Landscape Assessment Districts and the setting of the public hearing Meeti ng ❑ 3:00 PM ❑ 7:00 PM Cateeory (check one) ❑ Consent Calendar ❑ Public Hearing. ❑ New Business ❑ Unfinished, Business . ❑ 1'; es tateon 1D'eaartment Direct " c ontact Person Phone Number Parks & Recreation Jim Ca Ed. Anchordoguy 707- 778 -4321 Cost.of Proposal $0 �� ' Account,Number 25,x. Amount Budgeted FY 04 -05 Maintenance; & Administration Name of Fund: Costs $239,643 Landscape Assessment Districts Attachments to Agenda Packet Item a. Agenda Report b. Exhibit A: List of Landscape. Assessment Districts c. Exhibit. B: Landscape Assessment'District descriptions & maps d. Engineer's Report e. Resolution Describing Improvements and directing Preparation of- Engineer's report for Fiscal Year 2004 - 2005. f. Resolution of Preliminary Approval of Engineer's Report= for Landscape Assessment Districts for Fiscal year 2004 -2005. A Resolution of Intention to Ord Levy g, Order the Le and Collection of Assessments for fiscal year 2004- 2005. h. Summary of Estimated Costs' i. Subdivision Landscape ,Assessment Districts FY 04 -0.5 Assessment Summary Summary Statement Each year the City Council must initiate a process to set the annual as for the 42 Landscape Assessment Districts in the City. As required by state law, the resolutions will start this annual process with a public, meeting on June 21 2004 to hear testimony and a public hearing for July 12, 2004 to levy assessments. Staff is not recommending raising any 'assessments over prior approved. levels. Staff is recommending that eight assessment districts be given assessment' credits that will decrease their assessment. Recommended City Council Action/Suggested Motion To set a public hearing and adopt the resolutions to establish the fiscal year '2004 - 2005 annual landscape maintenance assessments for each district, to ensure `delivery to the Sonoma County Auditor- Controller by August 12' for inclusion -onthe property tax rolls for FY 2004 -2005. R iew d b Fi ante IDire Revi � ed At ' me : A ro. Ci Manage DDate• te: Date: 5 Toda ` ate: Revision 4. and Date Revised: Code: CITY OF PETAI.UMA, CALIFORNIA ? JUN 21, 2004 • AGENDA RtPORT FOR PUBLIC MEETING TO HEAR;: TESTIMONY- REGARDING THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE L ANDSCAPE ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS AND THE'SETTING OF'THE PUBLIC FEARING EXECUTIVE 'SUMMARY Each Year the City Council must initiate a process to set the annual assessments for the 42 landscape y q y assessment districts in the Cite . As °re wired b. state law the resolution s included with this staff report will start this annual process with .a public meeting June21, 2004 and , a public hearing July 12, 2004 to levy assessments. Staff is not recommending raising anyassessmerits over prior approved levels. Staff is recommending that letters and ballots 'be sent out in the next fiscal year to raise as in several districts. Staff is recommending that eight assessment districts be given credits that will decrease their assessment from last fiscal year. BACKGROUND The City has a policy to establish landscape assessment;districts (LAD )'for all new subdivision that have public landscaped areas. The requirements are identified in the tentative: map conditions prior to development of the subdivision.. These districts maintain various amenities on public land such as landscaped remnants, islands, medians, pathways, riparian mitigations souridwalls and fences. The costs are spread among all of the private parcels within the district: Ahomeowner's association maintains any . landscaping of common areas on private land. This is the annual process to set the annual landscape assessments for the•41 landscape assessment districts in the City. The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 requires that an engineer's report be completed. State Law (California Constitution, Article XII1D, Prop: 218)` requires the property owner's in the districts be given 45 days mailed notice of a hearing and, ballot -and balloting instructions if the proposed assessment will increase the amount, formula, or range of assessments already adopted. For such increased assessments, a public meeting and a public hearing must also be conducted. At the hearing, votes are tallied and a�majority of votes, weighted according t6the proportional financial obligations of the, affected ;property, must be in favor to permit the Council to levy any increase above previously approved levels. Since no .assessments are being raised for FY 03 -04 only a public meeting Js required, notification of the public meeting and the public hearing is required by publishing the meeting dates and times in :the local newspaper ten days prior to the hearing. In prior several of the LAD's were financially in trouble; With "a number of them incurring a deficit each year. The! City Council ;approved a °long -range plan to correct the situation, and over the 1999 -2000 fiscal year„ the plan was implemented. Corrective action included: a. Homeowners in al l„landscape.assessment districts are now responsible for maintenance of planter strips, including street trees in front or adjacent to their homes_ Letters were sent to 16 LAD's notifying horneownersof the change in policy. Homeowners were encouraged to contact department staffregarding the shift in maintenance responsibility, and also given the LAD Hotline phone number; 778 -4520. Overall reaction was regarding the change of maintenance responsibility. On four occasions public meetings were advertised for specific LAD's, with mailers sent to,the homeowner with attendance very poor on. all occasions. b. For those LAD's having sufficient funding, the LAD continued to maintain common areas, continuous irrigation; systems, cul -de -sac islands and entry medians. a. Those LAD'S having : insufficient: funds,, maintenance of common areas, cul -de -sac islands; and medians was reduced as the individual situations warranted. The homeowners were again notified by mail.. d. The total deficit; for all LAD's of $'116,605 was absorbed by the General Fund, to be paid off over a period"'.often years. e. The City took over maintenance o f street frontages and islands that benef t the community as a • whole. Included are: Sonoma Mountain portions of Rainier, portions: of Ely Boulevard South, Casa Grande and McDowell Boulevard. It has become apparent :to staff that the corrective actions ;P im posed in some LAD's in addition to the General Fund bailout is not woiking as planned. Two examples of these. _areas. arel the;Landscape. Assessment Districts of Sonoma. Glen and .Cader Farms. Their deficits are not ;decreasing as proposed. The primary reasons are the cost of water; the cost of irrigation repairs and tplant replacement. In FY 03- 04 the City Council - ;approved thetransfer of . $250,000 from.,Assessinent District #21 into an unallocated p reserves that were unable deficit Landscape, Assessrnent,Distnct Fund. These,! eflected in the individual L budgets for Cader Farms, to recover. This. is Cader Farms Highlands.,'She'lter Hills, Glenbrook, Kingsmi_ll, Park Place,, Sonoma Glen, Sequoia Estates,, Crane Glen, Judith;Ct., Village Meadows, and Westridge Knolls: To remain,in the black. several Of these districts will either have to increase °their assessments or decrease the: maintenance service, in. some cases, severely: The following districts'will receive. letters of explanation, notice of a public hearing; ballot: instructions, and a ballot giving them the option of increasing their assessment or g p � districts are Sonoma. Glen, Glenbrook; and. Judith Ct'. Cader decreasing the'serviees rovided. These di'str Farms Highlands will be asked to officially make themselves :a Landscape Assessment !District which they have »not been to this point. In the past Cader Farms Highlands was, separated in the City accounting but, are not a legal assessment district.. In the future any district showing at deficit, from which recovery is doubtful will go through the'ballotmg process. Staff is `recommending that eight. LAD's be given assessment credits to reduce their annual . assessment,' from FY03 =04 .levels. All of these district's operations are adequately funded and have , stiff cient reserves. These LAU& are Cross Creek, Corona "Greek II, McNear Landing, Willowgl'en,, Twin Creek, Stoneridge, Westyiew Estates and Lansdowne. The new assessment amounts are reflected'inthe individual budgets for each district. ALTERNATIVES l Do not set and, levy the-annual assessments. This alternative is not recommended since. the various' assessment districts have a substantial amount of landscaping By not setting the assessments the County Auditor- Controller cannot collect the required funds needed to maintain the various.landscape responsibilities. FINANCIAL IMPACTS Delay in approving the recommended resolutions may prevent. assessment collections by Sonoma County (deadline for submission o f assessments is August 12`"). Not acting may require the city to use general , funds to maintain the landscape assessment districts. CONCLUSION The public meeting, being held the, evening .of June 21, 26,04 and the public hearing on' July.12, -2004 have been posted and published according to,' state law requirements. The public meeting being held the evening of June, 21 is to hear comments from any property owner who owns property in a landscape assessment district. The public hearing to'beheld on July ' .12 is to adopfthe annual assessments. The resolutions and assessments will ,be submitted to the Sonoma County Auditor - Controller to be added to the 2004 -2005 property tax .bill ,sent to the property owner in ,the fall. Payments of the assessments are due December 10, 2004, and.April' 1:0, 2005 1with the property tax bills. L'Alff" Public satisfaction "with the landscape maintenance will be.measured'through the positive or negative feedback received through phone calls, letters, and emails. RECOMMENDATION • Adopt the Resolutions to set and le "Y 'the annual landscape maintenance assessments for the 42 separate districts in the City. g: /forms/2003 agenda bill •