HomeMy WebLinkAboutStaff Report 09 06/18/2001 , ilt' i
CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
Agenda Title: McDowell Blvd./E. AGENDA BILL
Intersection
• Transportation Improvement Project Assessment District #2000-01 Meeting Date: June 18, 2001
(Project No. 9863, Ph. 3): Adopt Resolution confirming unpaid
assessments, authorizing issuance of improvement bonds, and
directing actions with respect thereto for Assessment District 2000-
01
Department: Director:
Contact Person
Rick Skladzien Phone Number:
Public Facilities and
Services Mike Evert 707-778-4439
Cost of Proposal: $20,000 to,be paid from the proceeds of bonds Account Number:
213=9863
Name of Fund:
Attachments to A enda Packetliem: Special Assessment
Exhibit A - List of unpaid assessments for Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell/E. Washington).
Exhibit B - Map of Assessment District 2000-01.
Exhibit C -Recommended final assessments.
Exhibit D - Total assessment district costs.
Exhibit E—Copy of the City Council Agenda'Bill and Report of February 20, 2001 (w/o attachments).
Resolution authorizing issuance of bonds, confirming the unpaid assessments and directing
actions with respect thereto—Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell/E. Washington)
Summary Statement:
Assessment District 2000-01.(McDowell/E. Washington) provides one of several finding sources for the
McDowell Blvd./E. Washington Street Transportation Improvement Project: The Council began
proceedings to fours the Assessment District in October of 2000 and successfully completed the
assessment balloting process on February 20, 2001. During the balloting process, the Council committed
to the property owners within the District that the City would purchase the assessment bond for the
district, saving the property owners approximately $440,000.
Since February 20, 2001, the City has received bids for the improvement project and awarded a
construction contract to North Bay Construction. The City has also mailed notices to all property owners
within the District, informing them that they have the option to pay their assessment in cash prior to the
issuance of bonds. One property owner has made a cash payment.
The attached Resolution authorizes the issuance of a Limited Obligation Improvement Bond through the
Assessment District and authorizes the City's Finance Director to purchase the bond. The Resolution
invoices the City's charter powers to modify Government Code Section 53601 and allow City to purchase
its own bond on September 2, 2001. Full compliance of Government Code Section 53601 would mean
that bond would not be purchased until September 18, 2001. This date would not allow City to collect
assessments for the FY 2001-02 tax roll.
Council action on this item,will allow Assessment District funding to be available for the project and will
allow the City to begin collection of assessments on the tax roll in Fiscal Year 2001-2002.
Council Priority: THIS AGENDA ITEM IS CONSIDERED TO'BE PART OF, OR NECESSARY To,ONE OR
MORE OF THEI..2000-01 PRIORITIES ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON MARCH 18, 2000.
Priority(s): Regional Transportation Plan, and the Bicycle Plan.
Recommended City Council Action/Suggested Motion:
Approve Resolution confirming unpaid assessments, authorizing the issuance of improvement bonds, and
directing actions with respect_thereto:
Reviewed by Finance Director: Reviewedsb'6ity Attorney: Approved by.City Manager:
Date: 'late' / , Date:
Today's Dat Revision#an_1= it Revised: itd oC de
May 1,6, 2001 # Agenda bill/pf&s/s/me/mcdowell
•
•
• PETALUMA CITY.COUNCIL
PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
June 18, 2001
AGENDA REPORT
FOR
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF PETALUMA AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE
OF IMPROVEMENT BONDS, CONFIRMING THE UNPAID ASSESSMENTS AND
DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2000-01 (MCDOWELL/E. WASHINGTON)
1, EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
Assessment District 2000.01 (.McDowell/E. Washington) provides one of several funding
sources for the McDowell Blvd./E. Washington Street Transportation Improvement
Project. The Council began proceedings to form the,Assessment District in October of
2000 and successfully completed the assessment balloting process on February 20, 2001.
During the balloting process, the Council committed to the property owners within the
District that the City would purchase the assessment bond for the district, saving the
property owners approximately $440,000.
• Since February 20, 2001 the City has received bids for the improvement project and
awarded a constniction contract to North Bay Construction. The City has also mailed
notices to all property owners within the District, 'informing them that they have the
option to pay their assessment in cash prior to the issuance of bonds. One property owner
has made a cash payment.
The attached Resolution authorizes the issuance of a Limited Obligation Improvement
Bond through the Assessment District and authorizes the City's Finance Director to
purchase the bond. The Resolution invokes the City's charter powers to modify
Government Code Section 53601 and allow City to purchase its own bond on September
2, 2001. Full compliance of Government Code Section 53601 would mean that bond,
would not be purchas ed until September 18, 2001. This date would not allow City to
collect assessments for the FY 2001-02 tax roll.
Council action on•this item will allow Assessment;Distiict funding to be available for the
project and will allow the City to begin collection of assessments on the tax roll in Fiscal
Year 2001-2002:
2. BACK G D:
On February 20, 2001, Assessment District No. 2000-01. (McDowell/E.Washington) was
formed by the City to finance a portion of the construction of the McDowell Blvd./E.
• Washington Street'Transportation Improvement Project. During the process of forming
the District, the City committed to purchase its own.Assessment Bond in order to reduce
•
the cost of the assessment district financing,to the property owners by approximately.
$440,000.
This agenda item authorizes'the sale and purchase of a Limited Obligation Improvement
Bond,by the City in an amount of$1,048,216.00. This maximum amount represents the
total approved value of Assessment District 2000-01 ($1,310,270) as shown on Exhibit C
and D,less the City's share of the.assessment &istrict ($262,054) This agenda item also
invokes the, City's Chaer powers to modify the City investment policy, allowing the
Finance Director to purchase-the bond. The sale of the bond will provide a net amount of
$,988,000 for construction and right=of-way purchase for the McDowell Blvd./E.
Washington-St. Intersection Improvement Project.
The Assessment District includes 18 parcels owned by the following (See map, ExhibitB):
• Petaluma Properties Inc.
Ann Morrissey
• Washington Square Assoc:
• Morton L. and Marcine Freidman
• Chevron USA, Inc.
• Martha Thorup Trust
• Syers Properties
City of Petaluma
The approved Assessment Roll.is provided in Table I,
Table 10
Summary of Assessment Roll and Unpaid List
Assessment Assessor's Owner
Number Parcel Current Use Assessment , Payment
Number 'Status
1 1 007,210-030 Petaluma Properties I Best Western Inn
$36,939.44 Unpaid
2 j 007=280-038 Ann Morrissey i GoodGuy's Plaza $12;939s14 Unpaid
3
007:280-046 Washington Square Assoc. Washington,Square $24,537:88 Unpaid
4 007-280-049 _Freidman; Morton L. and. Washington S uare
Marcine
q $0.00 Unpaid
5 007-280-052 Washington Square.Assoc., Washington Square
6 007-280-054 CheJron USA,Inc. $3,123.03 Unpaid
7 .007,280-055 Washington'Square.Assoc. Washington Square $3,623.03 - Unpaid
8 007-280-069 . Washington,Square Assoc. WashingtonSquare $$41,961126 Unpaid
9 007-280-070 Washington:Square Assoc. Washington'Square, $17,829:78 Unpaid
10 007-280'071 Washington Square,Assoc. Washingtonisquare 27'801.50 Unpaid
11 007.280-072 Washington Square Assoc. Washin•ton Square $$7,026.26 Unpaid
12 Square $7,020.00 Unpaid
007-280=073 Washington Square Assoc Wasfiington`Sgdaie $0.00 Unpaid
13 007-340:006 Thorup,Martha et al.,Trt st `Petaluma Plaza
14 007-340-007 Thomp, Martha et al. Trust Petaluma Plaza 281;984.62 Unpaid.
15 .007-340-008 $_$5,556.62 Unpaid,
Thorup; Martha et. al.Trust Petaluma Plaza $5,556.15' Unpaid
16 007-350-008 Sye?s-Properties.Inc. Plaza North
17 007-350-009 $31385:67 Unpaid
I Syers Properties Inc.I . Plaza North $331,385:67 Unpaid
13 436.110-218 1 City f Petaluma
tS Con n3uni y Center $262;054:00 See'Note I
Note 1: Bond,Resolution assumes that Me-City's assessment will not be included in the •
Bond.
•
3, ALTERNATIVES:
At this point in time 'the.City has few alternatives to the proposed action. The financing
plan for the projectincludes the assumption,that the City would purchase its own bond.
Alternative actions will not allow the project to be completed effectively. Alternatives
are as follows:
Alternative A (Recommended):
Resolution authorizing the issuance of a Limited. Obligation Improvement Bond
through the Assessment District and authorizing` the City's Finance Director to
purchase the bond: The Resolution invokes the City's charter powers to modify the
City's investment policy and allows the City to purchase the bond without having to wait
for three months.
Alternative B:
Attempt to Issue the Bond to Private Investors: The City's Financial Advisor and
Underwriter typically market the City's limited obligation improvement bonds to
investors. This type of bond issuance typically adds 15 percent to 30 percent to the cost
of the financing. Currently the Assessment District budget does not include these types of
• financing-costs. If the City were to choose to pursue this alternative, it would need to pay
the costs of financing from the bond issue, which would result in substantially less
funding available for the construction project.
Alternative C:
Use the Provisions outlined in Government Code 53601, rather than Charter
Powers, to modify the City's investment policy: Currently the City's investment policy
does not include the purchase of its own bonds. Under general law (Government Code
53601),the City must give90 days notice of its intent to,rnodify its investment policy. In
this case a 90-day notice period would end in the first: week of September. Limited
obligation improvement bonds are typically dated September 2 of any given year, in
order to allow the City to.collect assessments with the taxes in December and April and
make payments_on March 2 and September 2. If the City uses general law provisions, it
will not have the appropriate authority in its investment policy by September 2, 2001,
which would hinder attempts to collect assessments with the property taxes this fiscal
year. By using its charter powers (Alternate-A above), the City is able to time is bond
issuance and purchase to coordinate with the tax roll cycle.
4. FINANCIAL I_MPACTS:
The proposed action will result in an approved funding source being available for the
• McDowell Blvd./E. Washington Street Intersection Transportation Improvement project
and will allow the City to collect assessments to service bonded debt starting in Fiscal
Year 2001-02. Adopting the resolution in this Council packetauthorizes°°the bonds to be
issued in the form of a single,.fullyregistered-bond (avoiding pnnting and related costs). •
It:authorizes the Finance Director to act as the bond-paying agent (saving the.usual,
annual bank fees). Finally, subject to certain parameters, it permits certain City officials
to complete the issuance process. This allows the final rates,and'tei ms to be placed in the
resolution.
bi order to start collecting for the cost of the Assessment District in Fiscal Year 2001-02,
the terms of the bond mustbe known (interest rate and length of bondy.and the
assessments must be recorded with the County by the end of this July. Assessments tax
bills will be mailed to the properties owners in September and April ofeach year The
property owners pay their assessment;payments with their taxes in December and July.
Bond payments for the Assessment District are due semiannually on the 2'd day of March
and September, commencing on March 2, 2002.
The.cost:of theBond Counsel to oversee this process is included in the;$20,000 fee for
the City's Bond Counsel (Jones Hall),to handle the Assessment District's,formation.. This •
cost will be paid from the proceeds of bonds and has been budgeted for throughout the.
Assessment District formation process:
5.' CONCLUSION.
The proposed action completes the plan for financing the McDowell Blvd./E.Washington
Street Transportation Improvement Project as-approved by the Council on February 20, •
2001. This assures that funding will be available for construction of the project, and is
necessary in'order to allow assessments to be,collected on the tax.roll in fiscal year 2001-
2002.
6. OUTCOMES OR.PERFOMANCE.MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL.IDENTIE:'SUCCESS OR
COMPLETION:
Record assessments with the County bythe end of July in order to-collect the cost of the
assessment District in Fiscal Year 2001-02.
7. RECOMMENDATIONS:
Approve Resolution confirming unpaid assessments, authorizing the issuance of
improvement bonds, and directingtactions with:respect thereto:
•
Mcdowell agenda report authorizing issuance of bonds for 6-1'8-01 cc mtg./pf&s/n'ie/mcdowell •
•
EXHIBIT A
•
•
LIST OF UNPAID ASSESSMENTS
•
CITY OF PETALUMA
Assessment District 2000-1 (McDowell/E.Washington)
The undersigned is the Director of Finance of the City of City of Petaluma,(the "City "),
County of Sonoma,State of California and declares and certifies as follows:
1. The City has conducted proceedings under its Resolution of Intention No 2000-
192, N.CS. adopted October 16, 2000, and the Municipal`Improvement Act of 1913, Division 12
of the California Streets and Highways Code (the"Act"),in and for its Assessment District,2000
01 (McDowell/E: Washington) (the "Assessment District') and in such proceedings has
evidenced its intention to issue improvement bonds to be secured by unpaid assessments (the
"Assessments") levied and unpaid within the Assessment District under the Improvement
Bond Actbf1915, Division 10 of the California Streets and (
y e Code s wa Hi h the "Bond Law");
Highways
2. An assessment and assessment diagram were recorded in the office ofthe.official
who is the Superintendent of Streets of the City as part of the proceedings of the City under the
Act for the Assessment District;
3'. Under the Act, I was designated:as the Collection Officer for the Assessment
District and.provision was made for the recordings, filings and the giving of notices as required
by the Act, and all such recordings,filings and notices have been duly completed; and',
4. Exhibit "A" attached hereto, and by this reference.made a part hereof, is a true,
correct and complete list of all the assessments remaining unpaid upon the lands within the
Assessment'District as of the date hereof and a copy of this List of Unpaid Assessments, with
Exhibit Aattached thereto, is on file in my office,as the official who is the chief financial officer
of the City.
The total amount of Assessments unpaid is$`1,048,216.00
Dated as of May 4, 2001.
saLl 1, t
Title: Finance Director ,1
EXHIBIT A
• LIST OF UNPAID ASSESSMENTS
CITY OF PETALUMA
Assessment District 2000-1 (McDowell/E. Washington)
5-16-01
Assessment Assessor's Assessment Amount of
Number Parcel As Confirmed Unpaid
Number and Recorded Assessment
1 007-213-030 $36,032.13 $36,032.13
2 007-280-038 $12;939.14 $12,939.14
3 007-280-046 $24,537.88 $24,53748
4 007-280-049 $0.00 $0.00
5 007-280-052 $4,122.08 $4,122.08
6 007-280-054 $3,623.03 $3,623.03
7 007-280-055 $241,851.24 $241,851.24
8 007-280-069 $12,964.36 $12,964.36
0 9 007-280-070 $7,829.78 $7,829.78
10 007-280-071 $27,701.50 $27,701.50
. $0.00
11 007-280-072 $7,026.26 $7,026.26
007-280-073 $0.00 $0.00
007-340-006 $3;104.17 $3,104.17
$0.00
14 007-340-007 $281,985.62 $281,985.62
15 007-340-008 $5;55615 $5,556.15
16 -- 007-350-008 $47,557.00 $47,.,557.00
17 007-350-009 $331,385.67 $331,385.67
18 136-110-022 $262,054.00 $0.00
Total Unpaid Assessments $1,048,216
• List of unpaid assessm tints/pf&s/me/mcdowell/agenda reports
A-1
EXHIBIT •
•
‘., , . . --1,_ 1 awl. 0RNt 1/4-1-4 .1 -I 1' ,/ 9W U o
•
ucxEN2lE AKNVE u<xEN2lE AK pCf
' }�}�. 389
t7 3" c ) ,A 3 0 gi
•
�Y 4. S O 3.M I 33T 38 3371 ] 6Sc °Cr uj
�J1-• T 332 1 339 32 1 333 $Sc I SSr ' w O
•
• ry ) �}� SCI Y O
f 33. ^3294 ® Oh OSC t Y 2
fp -GVy} 321 1. 32'1 l ]2937 329 �• erC
"J K ° JA 321 320 22112� 5$m +�Gx}}r�� �¢
W "u: �. � bed Jn 212 7171 z,. 20 SCC lyl� ua
�� 373 0' 7 1]u� v]I 312 LJO® Ic[.af0r
69 lvx0 �• �y l _ ,xa ]091- 30d 1 309 01122 cr.s °I•�ial
NcxEa.AKUxE
..J Gilgit":�; ZJ5 wa L __
ttW `g i� m
' Sr< w� 219 y- 23
331 eue 3 zoJ_, g ri.g uninildi g- ti
R N F (\"----2.01 p '?'O i
' l n•
CASI IIASENCON STREEi.'er
16\0II _ y
4
LAUREN DRIVE lo' los 109 121 117 I•I d 2_
LAUREN DIRT ® 151 N
0
$ vm
III 22 Q. j ITO IS) q V
I1 ® Y.R • JEF.FEY.:• n ~® 110 ® 1. f
Ile I ® 11F Oa 151 S (n
'ix ® ®® 120 I I16 Jo_ 155 S fi
116 �1 Y[¢' N S o E fig® � 130 En z W
_RTff
/ ® ®adllegesa IMO c91 321 231
.�_.. .,...,�..., a..,... ...�I 2n ?
EMI W W O
tn W
j n N, G FAST uI0150• SIHEEI j EAST Iu013GM STREET l r.s°RI I � I I � � I �_I l 251 ¢ W a i . 0 m O
0 N ¢
a 211 z �= W 4 4 a
is i 5 iu �. Iw
W 3 5 O '� i (;S II II 0-
h E 251 x
si: 67,-.) I
� AI
/ill
20 •
w 1 O311 291 The 271
T
207
ER
14
III x �' It �.1' �%
li :2 C
.
I •
�y H39.7
Ca"a% ass >21 8 1
le' 1
0 CITY OF PETALUMA
BOUNDARY MAP FOR PROPOSED ASSESSMENT DISTRICT
2000_ - 01
' (MCDOWELL BOULEVARD.& EAST -WASHINGTON STREET)
•
EXHIBIT C
•
•
• ar ro o• • 3 ti
CZ
CO `"
N
LL 0 m
ft > a
O 'L r
F- m CF.
a a ^ c m o m 'N o co m o v v m o ro o. co co r '0 CO N o° N a r o O CO r a E E N CO N O N M r V m c0 O V N D to V N
O M co co "9 N N h' m N 0 N F9 0 CO tO N m tO
0 0 0 N
o en ,- U? CO m N O 0 ' N N CO O
O co- N N `V M V ^ ^ N n (7 N fir" en N r
C o CO N 69 69 N 63 N f9 V3 CO 69 V N CO M CO N N Y Hi Y
E Q N 69
v3 e3 69 19 !» 69 T
0 (A
O co N co: O 0 O CO V CO CO m 0 0 ,IM N CO r O O
N O r N O 'Ol
O M -O V r N':'O N m n .N- n CO O O r 47 O CJ
Q C 0 N CO N c9 O CO V O 7 co
E Q N N CO o CO V m CO 'V, CO CV Q N N o.
CO• N N N O
O a.V co b3 69 N r O c0 01,r CO a a 69 69 19 N W 69 69 H3 Cr,"f9 CO V C
4 V CO
N 69 f9 63 T
Q e
C 0 0 r 'O V N O N Gi
0) O N
0 O N m r r r N N N .m CO'. N r ON m m
E N n - m O
U C Q7
y 0 N
0 o
0 Z
Q -
NO .0 O'. O i0 0 03 0 0 0 0 0 .0 0 0 0 0
L.. N N N N
•
N N
C
O
v
CD
z
0
C .
0
CM C O CO N CO,. CO N CO CO 'CO O O''M CO r
O CO N O N r M N 0 N m CO Cr) CO
L O `3 pt 0 r CO N' N V r V 0 CO N O C CO Cu
N 'a M CO N CO N N CO CO r a
CO � a 0 N Z
C
I11
a
C o
•
3 ca
o CO al
LI
D • ti 2 0 0 0 0 ti o o — '- oo
o O 0 O 0 0 O VUI 0 = = =
C U V) a N N to N -,
C � Q M Q Q Q Q Q Q. ¢ 1-. 'F- H N
T W C ry O J O 0 N 0 0 0 N. M M M
C co
ta O .O Z a ° o a. c > > > O > 0 `w •`m d o m
p T O -0 0- 0- 0- 0- 0- 0 O M
0 N G v N o N Q N N V) CO 0 CO t L Co t a >,, E d
O, C - a`. ) -c c Cl) c c c c c C t a a 0 a ? c
N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 c o M M M 0. C. M U
N M 'C C
U E 0 !m E m o m m m C .m o: d a a. a a T
L y M u� 0 a 0 > N L N .c _. ..0 =
= N 41 O C
N C
0 a Q 3 LL 3 o 3 3 3 3 3 3 i= o` `w i
0 - o
=— C Q 0, U
CO E f0 0 ,N ,° co '.mV V U)) VV) 0 CO N r N N CO 0 CO CO 0 N r C)0).0 E 0 m L a 'O 0 do 0 0 -0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 °0 0 0 o f4) N
y E .05 0 0 0 o o o o 0 0 0 o o OO o" o •o o'. " 4• _
C0.,LL M M o co co co co m co co m m
C) '.a M a z '.N N ,N' N N N N N N N N co ry' CO N CO CO {7 N C) Q
Q 0 y '00 Q 0 0 0 N N N N N 0 N 0 0 0 0 0. 0 0 0O E LL
a .0 0 '0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 0 0 r 00 0 N r
• C L
d N a C) C tE M ci N
Ea 'a E a = co
L r.. E a O w
U O. a 0- E N CO v N CO n CO m ° �i N V N m n m Q N Q. N
N. « O 0 w. Z r •- — r r ..
U a •:C
0 0 o 0
•
EXHIBIT
S
•'
•
City of Petaluma, California
• Proposed Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell Washington
Recommended Final Engineer's,Cost Estimate
Description Preliminary Costs (Suggested Final
Costs "
City Adminstration and Inspection $4354000 $435,000
Planning and Design $435,000 $435,000
Land Acquisition 5803,000 $803,000
Intersection Improvements
Alternative 1 at the Intersection $2,022,000 $2,022,000
Contingency $421,000 $421,000
Total Construction Costs $4,116;000 $4,116,000
Contribution for General Benefits $2;881;200 $2,881,200
Balance to Assessment..District $1,234,800 $1,234,800 ,.
Incidentals
Filing Fees $1,000 51,000
Bond Counsel $55;000 520,000
Assessment Engineering $54,470 $54,470
• Total Incidental Costs .5110,470 575,470
Bond Costs
Underwrite r's Discount $43,750 $0
Bond Reserve $175,000 $0
Funded Interest'" $140,000 $0
Official Statement $5,000 SO
Printing, Registering-3, Servicing $15,000 SO
Incidental Contingency $25,980 S0
Total Bond Costs $404,730 $0
Total Assessment District Costs $1,750;000 $1,310,270
'Assumes that the City buys its own Assessment Bond
2. - 1 - 01
•
E --t ibI S
CITY OFPETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
AGENDA BILL
Agenda Title: I _Meetind Date: February 20, 2001
• McDowell Boulevard/E. Washington Street Intersection
Transportation Improvement Project Assessment District #3000- '
01(Project No. 9863, Ph3): A. Public Hearin° 'and' receiving.
ballots, ,B. Adopt resolution adopting Engineer's Report,
confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions and
directing actions with respect thereto, and C. Adopt resolution
waiving up to 25% of the traffic mitigation fees for property
owners within Assessment District 2000-01.
Department: Director: Contact Person: Phone Number:
Public Facilities and Rick Sk .d ien Mike Evert 778-4439
Services 0� �_
Cost of Proposal: _ Account Number:
$4,116,000 (Cost estimate as used for Alternate 1 improvements in 213-9863
Assessment District Feasibility Study, and Final Engineer's Name of Fund:
Report) PCDC
Amount Budgeted: (Amount budgeted in 5-Year CIP for Alter. 1)
PCDC 1.300;000 Traffic Mitigation Fee
Traffic Mitigation Fee 2,387.000
$3.687,000
Attachments to Agenda Packet Item:
Exhibit A - Agenda Bill and Agenda Report.
•Exhibit B-- Agenda for Public Hearing.
Exhibit C - Memo from Bond Counsel,discussing Public Hearing process.
Exhibit D - Final Engineer's Report.
Exhibit E - Proposed assessment district boundary map.
Exhibit F:- Listing of property owners, businesses, and estimated annual assessment costs per property
per square foot.
Exhibit G - Assessment district property owners mailing list
Exhibit H - Project mailing list of interested parties.
Exhibit I - Assessment district property owner meeting notice for the November 8, 2000 meeting. ,
Exhibit I - Property owner meeting-presentation material—update.
Exhibit K - Summary of traffic mitigation fee waiver for 25%.expansion•of existing facilities.
Exhibit L - Map of intersection improvements for Alternative 1. "
Exhibit M - Map of project Alternatives 1, 8-1, and C.
Exhibit N - Assessment district schedule.
Exhibit 0 -Project schedule;from design engineer.
Exhibit P - Assessment district ballot and procedure.
Exhibit Q - Copy of the City Council Agenda Bill and Repon of October 16, 2000 (w/o attachments).
Exhibit R - Design engineer's project cost estimate.
Exhibit S — Recommended Final Engineer's Cost Estimate.
Resolution adopting Engineers,Report, confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions
and directing actions with respect thereto.
Resolution waiving traffic mitigation fees for property owners within Assessment District 2000-01.
i
•
SummarvStatement:
•
The formation of an assessment district for the McDowell Blvd./E. Washington St. Transported
Improvement Project would provide one of several, potential funding sources for the project.
• December 4, 2000, a public=hearing is scheduled'for public comment and to,receive ballots from t e
•
property owners within the proposed assessment district. If a majority of the property owners vote in
favor of the assessment district and if the City Council wishes to proceed with the assessment process,
the ,City Council will: consider adopting a resolution adopting Final Engineer's Report, confirming the
assessments, ordering, the work and acquisitions and directing actions with respect thereto. This
resolution confirms the assessments as shown in the Final Engineer's Report and directs the various
recordings and filings required'by the assessment .laws to establish the assessment liens. The City
Council will be considering a;recommendation by City personnel to adopt,.a,resolution waiving future
• traffic mitigation fees.for any development expansion of up to 25% of existing facility square footage on
properties within the proposed assessment district. This waiver would be for life of the bonds for
assessment district.2000-01.
•
•
Council Priority: THIS AGENDA ITEM IS CONSIDERED To BE PART OF, OR NECESSARY To, ONE OR
MORE OF THE 1999-2000 'PRIORITIES.ESTABLISHED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON JANUARY 30;1999
AND MARCH 18, 2000.
Priority(s): Regional Transportation Plan, and the Bicycle Plan.
Recommended Citv Council Action/Suaaested:Motion:
A. Hold, a Public Hearing and receiving ballots, B.- Adopt resolution adopting Engineer's Report,
confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions and directing actions with respe�
thereto, and C. Adopt resolution waiving up to 25% of the traffic mitigation fees for, property
owners within Assessment District 2000:-01. It is also recommended that advertising for
construction bids be contingent on the property owners_ approving the assessment district as
outlined in the Final Engineer's Report for Assessment District 2000-01.
Reviewed by Finance Director: Reviewed by Citv.Attorney: " Anproved'by City Manager:
r
Date: --'
Date_
Today's Date: Revision # a t ea e• '•vised: File Code:
2/9/01 -
# Mcdowe1127/pf&sstaff folder:me
9
• CITY OF PETALUMA, CALIFORNIA
FEBRUARY 29, 2001
AGENDA REPORT
FOR
THE IYICDOWELL BOULEVARD/E. WASHLNGTON STREET INTERSECTION
TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT PROJECT ASSESSMENT DISTRICT #2000-
01(PRoJECT.No. 9863, Pa #3)
1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY;.
The formation of an assessment district for the McDowell Blvd./E. Washington St.
Transportation Improvement Project would provide one of several potential funding
sources for the project. On December 4. 2000, a public hearing is scheduled for public
comment and to receive ballots from the property owners within the proposed assessment
district. If a majority of the property owners vote in favor of the assessment district and
if the City Council wishes;to proceed with the assessment process. the City Council will
consider adopting a resolution adopting Final Engineer's Report, :confirming, the
assessments, ordering. the work and acquisitions and directing actions with respect
• thereto. This resolution confirms the assessments ,as shown in the Final Engineer's
Report and directs the various recordings and filings required by the assessment laws to
establish the assessment hens. The City Council will be considering a recommendation
by City personnel to adopt a resolution waiving :future traffic mitigation fees for any
development expansion of up to 25% of existing facility square 'footage on properties
within the proposed assessment district. This waiver would be for the life of bonds for
assessment district 2000-01.
2 BACKGROUND:
The McDowell Blvd./E. Washington St. Intersection Transportation Improvement Project'
is composed of three alternatives that were chosen by the City Council on October 4.
1999. Alternative 1 includes transportation improvements in the area of the intersection
(see Exhibit L), Alternative B-1 includes bicycle and pedestrian,improvements,over
Highway 101 from the northbound off-ramp of Highway 101 to Ellis Street on the west.
and Alternative C is being studied,for bicycle improvements from McDowell Blvd. to
Adobe Road on the.east(see Exhibit M). The project has continued to use Alternatives I.
F3-1. and C.for identifying the specific improvements because each Alternative has its
own funding, design, and construction scheduling issues. The'.City'Council has directed
City personnel to complete the contract documents to construct the Alternative I
intersection,improvements in 2001(see Exhibit L). Alternative B-1 and C are scheduled
for construction in 2002 because these Alternatives have Federal hinds. The Federal
• hinds require an.NEPA environmental document, which could take approximately 13
months to complete and approve.
1
Assessment District Formation: •
The fotn ation of an assessment;district to,fund a portion of this project must
follow the guidelines of State;Proposition 218. The law has specific guidelinesthat must
be met inorder for an assessment district to be viable. Two of the most important are
1) The properties being assessed must receive a direct `special benefit" from the
improvements; and 2) in order for the district to Sbe,formed, 50% of the properties based
on the dollar amount being assessed, must vote in favor of the assessment district:
• One of the first steps,in the formation of an assessment district was the preparation of an
assessment district feasibility,study to determine if a district is feasible. The Assessment
District Feasibility Study, which was presented to the City Council on October 2.a 2000,
discussed which aspects of the project result in "special benefit" to specific property
owners versus the "general benefit" to the community, outlines which properties receive
the "special benefit", provided an estimated assessment district cost and several
alternative methods for spreading:costs'tothe benefiting parcels, and made a
recommendation for apportioning the costs that works best for the property owners and
the City.
The.Assessment District.Feasibility Study recommended. funding only a°portion of
Alternative I improvements at the intersection; and not the bicycle and pedestrian
improvements in Alternatives B-1 or C. This-is for two reasons: One the feasibility •
study'found little to no "specific:benefit' for the bicycle'and pedestrian improvements in
Alternatives B-1 and C for the properties being considered in the assessment district; and
Two the final:cost of the assessment district, once established, should be set following
the acceptance of construction bids within a reasonable time period. Bids for Alternative
1 improvements:are due in the spring of 2001.
Because the Assessment District Feasibility Study recommended that an assessment
district be based on the costs for Alternative 1 only and not all three alternatives of the
project, the potential finding from an assessment district is reduced from previous
estimates, The Feasibility Report recommended that 30%, or.S1,23d 800 of the;total cost ,.
of Alternative i1 ($4,116,000),,:be funded by the assessment district. Of the.30%,24% is
being assessed against private parcels within,the proposed boundary, and.6% is assessed .
against the City's Community Center property. The 30% share came from a destination
survey; which showed'that 24%.of the drivers entering the intersection during the peak
hours were there to go shopping or to a restaurant. The other 6% were there to attend.
City recreation facilities. These percentages were confirmed by the City's traffic model.
The,Assessment Engineer felt:that;the Community Center should be part of the
assessment district because it receives a special benefit. and its main entrance is served
by the same signalized intersection as the Plaza Nonh Shopping Center. which is also in
the proposed assessment district. The properties that are recommended to be included in
the Assessment District are(see proposed assessmentdistrrct boundary map. Exhibit'E):
• The Petaluma Community Center
• Best Western Petaluma Inn •
• • Plaza Shopping Center
• Plaza North Shopping Center
• Washington Square Shopping Center
• Chevron Service Station
• The Wherehouse Store Shopping Center
A detailed listing of these properties and the proposed assessments are shown on pages
13 and 14 of the Final:Engineer's Report, Exhibit D. A listing of the properties with
owner, square footage, and estimated annual cost per square foot is shown on page 3 of
Exhibit F. The boundary map for the proposed,assessment district, assessment numbers
and property owner addresses are shown in the Final Engineer's Report (Exhibit D). The
report follows the recommendation in the Assessment District Feasibility Study, is the
formal document that approves the estimate of project costs, and spreads those costs to
the benefiting properties. The assessments as shown in.the Final Engineer's Report
represents the highest assessment that can be placed on a given property, without a new
notice and ballot to each property owner.
In order to keep the property owners informed during the development of the assessment
district, and allow their input on how the assessment formula is applied to their specific
situation, City personnel, the Assessment Engineer, Bond Counsel, Design Engineer. and
Right-of-Way Agent'met with most of the property owners or their representatives on
July 19, 2000. The Assessment Engineer has attempted to address their comments in the
Assessment District Feasibility Study and in the attached Final Engineer's Report. City
personnel hosted additional meetings with the propery"owners on September 20, and
November 8, 2000. A copy of the November 8,.2000,rrieeting notice, and assessment
district information is attached as Exhibits I and J.
The net funding to the project from the assessment district is the total contribution from
all assessed parcels of 31,234,800, minus the Community Center's contribution of
3246,960, or 5987,840. In order to form and administer the assessment district for twenty
years, it was estimated that approximately 3515,200 must'be added to the assessment
district to cover these costs. The costs include the expense of the Assessment Engineer,
Bond.Counsel, and incidental expenses such as the bond reserve, funded interest. etc.
However, by farther examination by the assessment engineer and City personnel, it has
been determined that the City could purchase the assessment bonds itself. This would
eliminate the financing costs(underwriter's discount, bond reserve, printing costs, and
most of the prepaid interest and contingency) associated with'a market rate bond sale_. and
save the assessment district approximately$400.000. It is reasonable for the City to
purchase the assessment bonds because of the relatively small size of the'assessm,nt
district. The City would receive the same interest on the bonds as a private investor,
while reducing. the cost of the assessment district. A comparison of the districts
preliminary and current costs is shown on page 4 of the Final Engineer's Report, Exhibit
D. The `'preliminary costs"column shows the previous assessment district cost. The
"confirmed costs` column represents the proposed assessment district costs. The effect
• of this cost reducing measure is the reduction of the annual square foot cost from S0.21 to
50.16 as shown on page 3 of Exhibit F. The total Final Assessment District cost was
3
further reduced to $1,310,270 by changing.the:bond counsel's cost and eliminating the
•funded interest (see Exhibit 5).
Response to Property Owner Requests:.
• Several of the property owners within the proposed assessment district-have requested
that the City consider waiving future traffic mitigation fees for future development on
their properties, and the Best Western Petaluma Inn have requested thatthe.City
reimburse the Inn•for lost revenue caused:by the anticipated construct on(discussed
below), The waiving of a portion of future traffic mitigation fees can beconsidered an
assessment district issue. The Final Engineer's Report(Exhibit D) mentions'on page 7,
that one of the special benefits recerved:bythe properties in the proposed assessment
district is,that the intersection improvements anticipate future development:conditions on
their properties. One of the future'development.conditions is the contribution.of traffic
mit igation fees. The property owners have requested that the City waive>future traffic
mitigation fees equal to the amounts of their assessments; however, City personnel
recommend to the City Council that-if the property p p rtY owners agree to.an:assessment
district, the City will waiver the traffic-mitigation fee for development expansion of up to
25%of existing;square footage; within a period of ten years from the establishment of
Assessment District 2000-01 A 25% increase in existing facilities for all the parcels
within the proposed assessment district amounts to 145,456 square feet. The-potential
loss.of traffic mitigation fees for this waiver is 5361_$94 (See Exhibit K) if all the
properties were to exercisethis option.
Property OwnerReimbursement for Construction Impacts
The construction of the improvements will impact two properties. One of the properties
is the Best Western Petaluma Inn. 'The Inn'has twelve rooms that are situated along
McDowell Blvd. So., where°pavement replacement at the intersection is expected to
occur at night for approximately one month. The-work will involve replacing-the'asphalt
with concrete in both,directions on E. Washington S_t.,.and on.McDowell Blvd. So. The
asphalt will'be removed'by grinding between 7 p.m. to 10_p.m., concrete poured between
10 p.m. to 2 a.m.; and the road opened'.at*6°a:m. It,is felt that this work`would create
noise levels.to high to rent the rooms duringahe pavenientareplacement work. The
estimated cost to compensate the Inn'for theFrooms for one month is 535,2.30(six rooms
at $95 per night, and six rooms at$101 per nightior 30 nights).
•The second;property impacted by the:constriction is the Beacon'Service Station located
at the,northwest comer of the intersection. It is envisioned that the City's contractor and
the utility companies would use most of the service:station property for approximately
two months. The City's contractor would use the service station property-to widen both
McDowell Blvd. No. and E. Washington St.,'lengthen the box culvert for Washington
Creek. rehabilitate Washington Creek, and the utility companies could relocate their
utilities. The advantage of this work plan is that it would provide a staging;area for the
contractor and utility companies to work, while minimizing the impacts to the traffic
using the intersection. City personnel recommend that the City Council authorizes the
4 •
City Manager to negotiate compensation,agreements with the Best Western Petaluma Inn
• and the Beacon service station owners for construction impacts, The cost of the Beacon
Station package isnot known;atthis time.
Assessment District Process
It is estimated that the•formation of an assessment district would require at least four City
Council meetings. The steps are outlined in the schedule from the Assessment Engineer,
Exhibit E. It,is recommended that the assessmentdistrict,be formed in December 2000,
so that the City knows whether assessment district funds are•secure before authorizing the
acceptance of construction bids in the Spring of 2001. Because assessment amounts
cannot be raised once an,assessment district is formed, 20% or 5337,000 was added to the
design engineer's estimate for improvements, and $500,000 was added to the estimated
cost for right-of-way acquisition. These adjustments are reflected in the Final Engineer's
Report cost estimate in'Exhibit D, table 1, page 4. Once bids are received, and the
project's actual costs are known, the assessments may be adjusted downward.
The adoption the resolution in this Council packet: adopting the Final Engineer's Report,
confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions and directing
actions with respect thereto, confirms the assessments as shown in the Final Engineer's
Report and directs the various:recordings and filings required by the assessment laws to
establish the assessment liens. This resolution should be adopted only if there is a
• majority approval of the assessment district and if the Council wishes to proceed with the
assessment process.
For the assessment district-to be established, 50% of the property owners, based on the
• dollar value of the assessments, must vote in favor of the assessment.district. The ballots
will be counted beforertheclose of the public hearing. The City-Council will have the
option to close or continue the public hearing. If the public hearing is closed on
December 4, 2000, and:assuming that the property owners approve the assessment
•
district, the Council will adopt a resolution approving==the Final Engineer's Report. The
Council will also be approving the assessments based on.estimates. Once bids are
received in the spring of 2001, assessments will be set based on the bids.
The adoption of this resolution does not commit the Council to issuing any bonds. Also.
the adoption of this resolution does not prevent the Council from lowering assessments at
a later meeting. Please remember that assessments cannot be increased without further
assessment notices and ballots. This resolution also directs the giving of published notice
of assessment confirmation and of written notice to the property owners of their cash
payment opportunity. Please note that the Finance Director is the official designated to
collect any cash payments. Upon adoption of this resolution. the Bond Counsel will
provide the required instructions and forms of notices needed to carry out these tasks.
The next step in the process is scheduled to take place at the City Council:meeting in
• Nlay, 2001. when the City Council is scheduled to adopt a resolution authorizing the
issuance of bonds and directing various actions and possibly a resolution of change and.
modifications. With this action the Council will be authorizing the issuance of bonds.
which may be purchased by the City. The date of this meeting=will be finalized after
construction bids are received; favorable bids Will allow the Council to reduce
• •
assessments by approving the resolution of change and modifications.
Project Schedule:
Several key project tasks are being tracked simultaneously in order to meet the City_
Council's goal of constructing the intersection transportation improvements in
Alternative 1, in the summer of 2001. The bicycle and pedestrian improvements in.
Alternatives•B-1 and C are scheduled for 2002 in order to complete the environmental
documents necessary for securing;Federal funds. The-schedule-for the two phases of the
improvements is shown on Exhibit 0.. Right-of-way acquisition continues to be the key
issuein the schedule. To insure that the project has the necessary right-of-way for
construction in the summer of 2001, City personnel will be requesting in a few months
that the City Council implement eminent domain proceedings to secure right-of-entry.
This action will follow the approval of the appraisal report by the City Council in
December 2000, or January 2001.
2. ALTERNATIVES:'
I. Hold a Public Hearing and receive ballots, B. Adopt resolution adopting Final.
Engineer's.Report, confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions and
directing actions with respect thereto, and C. Adopt resolution waiving•traffic mitigation
fees for property owners within Assessment District 2000-01.
2 Hold a Public Healing and receive ballots, and B. Adopt resolution adopting Final
Engineer's Report, confirming the assessment; ordering the work and acquisitions and
directing actions with respect thereto.
3. Do not hold.a Public Hearing or receive ballots, or B. Adopt resolution adopting Final
Engineer's Report, confirming the assessment. ordering the work and acquisitions and.
directing actions with respect thereto. or C. Adopt resolution waiving traffic mitigation ;
fees for property owners within Assessment District 2000-01.
4. Postpone the City project and require of the properties, as a condition of approval for any,,,
expansion or change in use that the properties dedicate the required right-of-way and
construct their share of the proposed improvements as a condition of a permit. At this
time three of the largest properties have submitted plans to the City to expand their
facilities.
5. Other combinations or options resulting from the discussion by the City Council.
3. FINANCIAL IA(PA @TS:
An update of the project's estimated,costs by-the design engineer,for the three •
Alternatives 1. B-1, and'C is shown on Exhibit R. The project's•cost estimate in October
6
•
1, 1999 is shown in the top bldek. The revised project cost as,of September 5, 2000 in
shown in the middle.block The..project's budget:as:shown'in the,5-Year Capital
Imorovement-Plan, is shown:in;the bbrtom block;
The cost of the intersection transportation improvements in Alternative 1 was increased
from the October 1, 1999 estimate by $704,000. This increase was to include the
Landscape Conceptual Design A improvements for $335,000, the special concrete paver
crosswalks for$134;000, and to include repladingthe'approach lanes on East Washington
St. and McDowell Blvd. So. with concrete instead of asphalt for an added cost of
$235,000. His proposed that these improvements be funded by the Traffic Mitigation
Fund, PCDC, and an assessment district.
The estimated cost for the'bicycle.and pedestrian'improvements in Alternative B-1
(bicycle and pedestrian improvements over Highway 101) has remained the same.
The estitated cost:forthe bicycle and pedestrian improvements in Alternative C
(McDowell Blvd. to Adobe Rd'.) has increased by $671,000 because of the cost of the
improvements along Washington Creek from McDowell Blvd. to Sonoma Mountain
Parkway.
Estimated costs for Alternative 1 improvements at the intersection:
• Two project cost estimates are noted below. The cost estimate shown below and on the
left is the Design Engineer's estimate. The cost estimate shown below and on the right is
the cost estimate as.used in the Assessment District Feasibility Study, and in the Final
Engineer's Report.
Estimated cost for Alternate 1
intersection improvements, as used
in the Assessment District
Feasibility
Design Engineer's revised estimated cost Study, and in the Final
for Alternate 1 intersection improvements Engineer's Report
Admin/Inspection $435.000 $435,000
Planning/Design 435,000 435,000
Land Acquisition 303,000 803.000 (1)
Improvements 1,685,000 2.022,000 (2)
Contingency 421.000 421.000
Estimated Cost 53,463.000 $4.1 I6.000
(I) It is anticipated that the assessment district will be founed prior to receiving
construction bids. Because the amount of the bonding for an assessment district
• carmor.be raised after a district is fowled. the estimated costs for land acquisition
was increased by 5500.000 to insure that there is adequate funding to purchase
7
• needed right-of-way. Once the;appratsals,are completed and,accepted. and bids
are received, the surplus funds,wiil,be returned to the properties,being assessed. •
(2) As in (1), 20% or 3337,000 was added to the Design Engineer's estimated cost for
the.improvements.
• Estimated•funded sources for Alternative.1 improvements at the intersection when using
the,estimated costshown in the Assessment District Feasibility Study. and Final
Engineer's Renort:
PCDC 3.1,300,000
Special Assessments 987,840 (3)
Traffic Mitigation Fund 1.828.160
Total proposed;funding $4 T16 000
3) The estimated funds generated by the.assessmenrdistrict are based on a substantial
contingency-. The actual funding will be determined after a property appraisal is
completed and construction bids are received.
The proposal to waive the traffic mitigation fee to those properties within the proposed
assessment district for future expansion of up to 25% (145,456 square:feet) within ten
years of the formation Of the assessment'district could result in the potential loss of traffic
mitigation fees of 3361,394 (See Exhibit K).
•
Total estimated cost and proposed funding sources for all Alternates l (construction in
2001). B-1, and C (construction.in 2002) when using the Design Engineer'scostestimate
(see Exhibit R):
Uses:
Admin./Inspection 3955.000
Planning/Design 323.000
Land Acquisition 303.000
Improvements 3,656,000
Contingency 977.000
Total Cost 36,719000 (Design Engineer s"project cost estimate -
see Exhibit R).
Potential Funding Sources:
•
PCDC 31.300.000
Special Assessments 987.840
Traffic.Mitigation_Fees 2.337.000
TEA-21 & TDA funds 1.050,000
Safe Routes to School _rant 500,0001
8
• Un'determined funds 494.160.(4)
Total funding $6.719,000
(4) This shortfall in funding will affect the bicycle and'pedestrian improvements in
Alternatives B-1 and C, scheduled for construction in 2002. An alternative of installing
5-foot wide bike lanes on both sides of E. Washington St. from McDowell Blvd. to
Sonoma Mountain Parkway (Alternate C) is to turn Lauren Drive into a bike boulevard.
This would reduce the cost of Alternate C to $2;292,000 (a reduction in cost of
approximately$753,000).
4. CONCLUSION:
The Assessment District Feasibility Study has determined that the properties within the
proposed assessment district receive the following special benefits from the
improvements: Improved:access for their properties,dimproved.aesthetics at the
intersection and in frontof the properties, frontage improvements that anticipate future
development conditions, and the properties continue.to'be provided non-confounin
access conditions.
6. OUTCOMES OR PERFORMANCE MEASUREMENTS THAT WILL IDENTIFY SUCCESS OR
COMPLETION:
• Start the construction of the intersection transportation improvements for Alternative 1 in
the summer of 2001.
7. RECOMMENDATION:
Hold a Public Hearing and receiving ballots, B. Adopt resolution adopting Engineer's
Report, confirming the assessment, ordering the work and acquisitions and directing
actions with respect thereto, and C. Adopt resolution waiving up to 25% of the traffic
mitigation fees for property owners within Assessment District 2000-01. It is also
recommended that advertising for construction bids be continent on the property owners
approving the assessment district as outlined in the Engineer's Report for Assessment
District 2000-01.
Mcdowei l2 r/s:pas ioider/me
•
9
•
RESOLUTION
S
•
Resolution No N.C.S.
of the City of Petaluma, California
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PETALUMA
CONFIRMING UNPAID ASSESSMENTS, AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF
IMPROVEMENT BONDS,,AND DIRECTING ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO
Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell/E. Washington)
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
Section 1. DEFINITIONS. 2
Section 2. LIST OF UNPAID ASSESSMENTS. 3
Section 3. ISSUANCE OF BONDS. ................ ,.•
Section4. FORM OF BOND. 4
Section 5. PAYMENT OF BONDS...................
Section 6. DESIGNATION OF AGENT.................................
Section 7. EXECUTION 4
Section 8. AUTHENTICATION. ...............................................................
Section 9. PREPARATION SALE AND DELIVERY OF BOND. 4
Section 10. IMPROVEMENT FUND. ......................
Section 11. REDEMPTION FUND................ .....
Section 12. COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS 5
Section 13. REDEMPTION PRIOR TO MATURITY 6
Section 14. EXCHANGE OF BOND. ....................................................
Section 15. NEGOTIABILITY, REGISTRATION AND TRANSFER OF BOND 6
Section 16. OWNERSHIP OF BOND.................................................
Section 17. ADVANCES FROM AVAILABLE SURPLUS FUNDS 6
Section 18. COVENANT TO FORECLOSE. 7
Section 19. INVESTMENT OF FUNDS..............
Section 20. AUTHORITIES OF FINANCE DIRECTOR.
7
Section 21. CERTIFIED COPIES................................
EXHIBIT A Form of Bond
•
•
RESOLVED, by the City Council (the "Council") of the City of Pe'talutna (the "City"), County.
of Sonoma, the "County") California: •
WHEREAS; on October 16, 2000, this Council adopted its Resolution, of Intention to Make
Acquisitions and Improvements, (the "Resolution of Intention") under theMunicipal Improvement Act of
• 1913, Division 12 of the Streets and Highways Code of California, (the 'Act") to initiate proceedings
under the Act in and for the City's Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell/E. Washington) (the
"Assessment District").
WHEREAS, notice of the recordation of the assessment and of the time within which
assessments+were duly waived by all.owners of property subject to such proceedings and a List
of Unpaid Assessments has been filed with the City;
• NOW, THEREFORE,IT IS ORDERED •as follows:
Section 1, DEFINITIONS. Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms defined in this
Section I shall, for all purposes of this Resolution, have the meanings herein specified and-shall be ''
equallyapplicable to both the singular and plural forms of any of the terms herein defined.
"Act"means the Municipal Improvement Act of 1913, Division 12 of the Streets and,Highways
Code as supplemented;by the City's charter powers.
`-`Advances" means the amounts advanced by.the City for the purchase price of the.Bonds and
placed in the respective Improvement Accounts to pay or reimburse the costs of issuing the bonds and
making of the improvements to each of the Assessment Parcels, as such amounts are endorsed'.on each of ,
the Bonds.
"Anent"means the;Finance Director of the City acting as the Agent under the.Section 6 hereof.
"Assessment or:Assessments" means the unpaid •amounts of the special assessments levied
against the Assessment Parcels within the-boundaries of the Assessment District pursuant to the Act and
the proceedings of the Council under the,Resolution of Intention, for the purpose of paying Debt Service
on the Bonds.
"Assessment District" means that portion of the District designated' "Assessment District," as
established in proceedings.under the Act andResolution of Intention.
"Bond" or "Bonds" means,the Improvement.Bond, City of Petaluma,,Assessment District 2000-
01 (McDowell/E. Washington) Series 2001-1.
"Bond Date"means September 2, 2001.
"Bond Law" means the Improvement Bend:Act of 1915, Division 10 of the California Streets
and Highways Code, as'niodified under the chartercity powers,of the Cityas herein provided.
"Bond Year" means the one year period beginning on September 2..-in each year and ending on
the September 1 in the following year except that the first Bond Year shall begin on the Closing Date
and end on September 1;2001.
•"Clerk" means the official who is the city clerk or deputy or assistant city clerk.
_2_
•
• "City'means the Ctty,of Petaluma; County of Sonoma, California.
"Closing Date" means the date upon-which there is a.physical;delivery of the Bonds in exchange
for the first Advance for the Bonds.
"County"means the County of Sonoma, State of California.
"Debt Service"-means=the scheduled amount of interest and amortization of principal payable on
the Bonds during the period 'of computation, excluding amounts scheduled during such period which
relate to principal which has been retired before the beginning of such period.
"Finance Director"'means the Administrative Services Director or other official of the City who
is the chief financial officer deputy thereof
"Improvement Fund" means the City of Petaluma„ Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell/E.
Washington), Improvement Bonds, Improvement Fund established under Section 10 hereof
"Interest Payment Date" means.the second days of Marchand September in each year, being the
dates upon which interest on the Bonds is payable, connnencingon March 2, 2002.
"Interest Rate" means the actual rate of interest;of the Bonds which is not to exceed 8% per
annum.
• "Original Purchaser"means the City as first purchaser-of the Bonds.
"Project"means the acquisitions and improvements described-in the Resolution of intention.
"Redemption Fund" means the City of Petaluma„ Assessment District 2000-01 (McDowell/E.
Washington), Improvement Bonds, Redemption Fund established under Section 11 hereof
"Registered Owner" means the person or entity in whose name any Bond is registered by the
Agent.
"Resolution" or "Resolution of Issuance" means this Resolution as adopted or hereafter
amended.
"State"means the State of California.
Section 2. LIST OF UNPAID ASSESSMENTS. The Assessments now remaining unpaid on
the Assessment parcels'are as shown on the list thereof(the List Unpaid Assessments") and on file
with the Finance Director and by this reference is hereby approved and made a part hereof. For a
particular description of the lots`or parcels of land bearing the respective assessment numbers set forth in
said list, reference is hereby made to the assessment and to the diagram heretofore recorded in the office
of the Engineer of the City afterconfirmation thereof by this Council.
Section 3. ISSUANCE OF'BONDS.
•
• (A) Authority. The Bonds are authorized under the provisions of the Bond Law, except
that, pursuant to the charter city powers of the City, the proceeds of the bonds shall be used to
•
-3-
finance certain public streetimprovements and related costs, all as provided in theproceedings •
.• under-the Resolution of Intention.
(B) Series. The Bonds shall be issued in single series of bonds designated"Series
2001-1."
(C) Terms. The Bonds shall be dated as of September 2,-2001 and,shall mature and be
payable on each September 2 in each year beginning on September 2, 2002, until
maturity as provided in the foniimf the Bond in Exhibit A hereto. Interest on the Bonds
shall be at the Interest Rate, computed on •a 360-day year, payable on each Interest
• Payment:Date.
Section 4. FORMS OF BOND. ,The Bonds shall be issued only-as single, fullyregistered bond
and shall he substantially in the form set forth in Exhibit "A" hereto. The Bond shall be registered
initially imtthename of the City as the owner thereof
•
Section 5. PAYMENT OF BONDS The Bond shall bear interest at the Interest Rate, payable
on each Interest Payment Date. The principal of the Bonds shall be payable in lawful money of the
United States of America,at the office of the Finance Director in Petaluma, California. Interest on the
Bond shall be paid to the registered owner byi check or draft mailed to the address;entered in the registry
book provided for herein:as of the fifteenth'(15th) day of the calendar month immediately preceding each
Interest Payment Date. If the City is the owner of the Bond, any payments shall be made by book entry
only.
Section 6. DESIGNATION OF AGENT The Finance Director is hereby designated to
perform the actions and duties required under this Resolution.for the management of'funds and accounts •
herein provided for the Bond and provide for the'registration, authentication and transfer of the Bond.
Section 7. EXECUTION. The Bond shall be executed on behalf of the City and under.its
official seal by manual signatures the Finance Director and the City Clerk, and the official seal may be
placed on the Bond in like manner; such signing and sealing shall constitute and he a sufficient and
binding execution of the Bond. The Bond shall'then be authenticated by the Finance Director, If any
officer whose signature appears on the Bonds ceases to be such officer before the authentication and
delivery of the Bond to the purchaser thereof, such:signature shall be as valid as if'such,officer had
remained in office until the authentication and delivery of the'Bond.
Section 8. AUTHENTICATION Only the :Bond as shall bear thereon a certificate Sr
authentication substantially in the form on.the Bond, manually-executed by the Finance Director, shall be
valid or obligatory for any purpose,or entitled to the benefits of this Resolutiont.and such certificate of
the Finance Director shall be conclusive evidence that the Bond+so authenticated has been,duly executed,
authenticated and delivered hereunder and are entitled to the benefits of this resolution. The Finance
Director's certificate of authentication on the Bond,shall be deemed to be executed by it.if signed by an
authorized oficer or signatory of theFinanceiDirector, but it!shall not be necessary that the same officer
of signatory;sign the_certificate of authentication'on the Bond issued'hereunder.
Section 9. PREPARATION SALE AND DELIVERY OF BOND. The Finance Director is
hereby directed to cause the Bond to be prepared in accordance with this Resolution and to authenticate
and deliver the Bond to the Original Purchaser thereof; and upon the performance of the conditions
applicable to the delivery thereof and the City hereby acknowledges that it shall be the Original
Purchaser of the.Bond.
-4-
The City shall bethe•original purchaser'of:the Bond and the Finance.Director and the City Clerk
• are hereby authorized and directed to take all actions required'to complefe the sale and delivery of the
Bond provided that the aggregate principal amount of.the Bond does not exceed the amount of unpaid
assessments as shown on the list thereof herein approved, the-term of years,to.maturity of the Bond does
not exceed 25 years and the rate of net interest cost of the Bond does not exceed the Interest Rate per
annum. Pursuant to the authority of the charter of the City, this.Council.hereby finds and determines that
the provisions of Section 53601.(a) of the California Government Code shall not apply to the purchase by
the City of the Bond for investment.
Section 10. IMPROVEMENT FUND. The Finance Director shall establish the Improvement
Fund, into which shall be placed the proceeds received from the sale of the Bond, together with the
proceeds received from any cash payment of Assessment attributable to each ofthe Bond. All moneys in
the Improvement Fund shall be withdrawn only upon checks or warrants of the City and shall be applied
exclusively to the payment of the costs of issuing the Bond and the costs of the acquisitions and/or
construction of the Project and iinprovenients described in the proceedings under and pursuant to the
Resolution of Intention, as now or hereafter changed or modified by appropriate legal proceedings, and
all expenses incidental thereto. It is hereby specifically provided that the Finance Director be authorized
to make deposits to the Improvement Fund from time to time as may best serve the financial interests of
the City. -
Section 11. REDEMPTION FUND. The Finance Director shall establish the Redemption
Fund, into which shall be placed:allaums received from the collection of Assessments provided for in
Section 12 hereof, and of the interest and penalties thereon. Moneys in the Redemption Fund shall be
used at such times'and in such'amounts;as"are required to make timely payments of the principal and the
interest due on the Bond. Within,the Redemption Fund, the Finance Director may establish a separate
Prepayment Account to be used to collect and disburse the proceeds of any prepayments of assessments
and penalties, interest and costs thereon, as provided in the applicable.provisions of the Bond Law.
Section 12. COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS. The Assessments shown on the List of
Unpaid Assessments,together with the interest thereon at the Interest Rate, shall be payable in annual
series corresponding in number to the-number of serial maturities of the Bond as finally determined by
the Finance Director. An annual proportion of each Assessment shall be payable in each year preceding
the date of maturities of represented by the Bonds, sufficient to pay the Bond when due, and such
proportion of each Assessment coming due in any year, together with the annual interest thereon, shall be
payable at the.same time as the general taxes on real property are payable. The Bonds shall become
delinquent at the same times and in the same proportionate amounts and bear the same proportionate
penalties and interest after delinquency as do the general taxes on real property. The Finance Director is
hereby authorized and-directed to cause.the Assessments to be collected by the County upon the regular
property tax bills. All sums;received from the collection of the Assessments and of the interest and any
penalties thereon shall be placed in the Redemption Fund.
In addition,to any amounts authorized pursuant to section 8682 of the Bond Law to be included
with the annualsamounts of installments as aforesaid, the City, pursuant to section 8682.1 of the Bond
Law, may cause to be•entered on the assessment roll on which taxes will next become due, opposite each
lot or parcel of land within the Assessment.District in the manner set forth in said section 8682, each
lot's pro rata share of the estimated:annual expenses of the City in connection with the administrative
duties thereof for the Bond, including, but not limited to the costs of registration, authentication, transfer
and compliance with the provisions hereof Delinquent assessments shall be subject to foreclosure
pursuant to Section 18 hereof.
•
-5-
Section 13. REDEMPTION PRIOR TO MATURITY. The Finance Director shall
cause the Bond to be called for redemption as herein provided upon prepayment of assessments.'
in amounts sufficient therefor, or whenever sufficient surplus funds are,available`therefor in the
Redemption Find. The provisions of Part 11.1 of the Bond Law are applicable to the advance
payment of Assessments and to the calling of.the Bond. For any Bond,registered in the:name of
the City, the Bond, shall be subject to call and redemption, at par and without penalty or
premium, on any date at the principal amount thereof and accred interest to the date of
redemption plus the City's reasonable costs of processing and notice of advanced maturity shall
not be published. in the event of partial redemption only, the Finance Director shall endorse
thereon a:notation of such partial redemption-in the four provided on the,Bond..
Section 14 . EXCHANGE OF BOND. The Bond, upon surrender thereof at the office.of'the
Finance Director, together with an assignment duly executed by the registered owner thereof or attorney
or legal representative'in.such form as shall be satisfactory to the Finance Director, may, at the option,of
such owner, be exchanged;for an aggregate principal amount-of Bond equal to the principal=-amount of
the Bond;so surrendered, and of any authorized denomination or denominations: The City shall make'
provision for the exchange of the Bond atthe office;of the Finance Director.
Section 15., NEGOTIABILITY, REGISTRATION AND TRANSFER OF BOND. The
Finance Director shall keep books for the registration, and•for the registration of'transfers, of the Bond as
provided in this resolution which shall at,all times be open to inspection by, the City: The'transfer of the
Bond may be registered only upon such books upon surrender thereof to the Finance Director together
with an assignment duly executed by the:owner or.attorney or legal representative-in such form as shall
be satisfactory to the Finance Director. Upon any such registration of transfer, the City shall execute and
the Finance Director shall authenticate and deliver in exchange for such Bond a new Bond'registered
the name of the transferee, and in an aggregate principal,amount equal to the-principal amount of such
Bond so surrendered.
hi all cases in which Bond shall be exchanged, the City shall execute and the Finance Director
shall authenticate and deliver at the earliest practicable time a Bond in accordance with the provisions of
this resolution. The Bond surrendered in any such exchange or registration-of transfer shall forthwith be
cancelled by the Finance Director: The City or the Finance Director may makma charge for every such
exchange or. ;registration of transfer of the Bond sufficient to reimburse it for any tax or other
governmental charge required to be paid with respect to such exchange or registration of transfer, but no
other charge shall be made to any owner for the privilege of exchanging or`registering the transfer of
Bonds under the provisions of this resolution. Neither the City nor the Finance Director shall be required
to make such,exchange or registration of transfer of the Bond during the fifteen (15) days of the calendar
month immediately preceding any Interest.Payment,Date.
Section 16. OWNERSHIP OF BOND. The Registered Owner'shall be deemed and regarded as '
the absolute owner thereof for all, purposes, and payment of or on account of the principal,
redemption premium, if any, of the Bond, and the interest on the Bond, shall be made only to,or upon the
order of the Registered Owner thereof or such owners legal representative. All such;payments shall be
valid and effectual to satisfy and'discharge'the liability upon the-Bond, and interest thereon to the extent
of the SLIM or sums so paid.
Section 17. ADVANCES FROM AVAILABLE, SURPLUS FUNDS. The City. shall be the
purchaser of property upon which payment of an annual installment of principal;and,interest due upon
any of said unpaid assessments is delinquent, in like manner in-which it becomes or may become-the •
purchaser of property sold for the nonpayment of general taxes, and shall transfer from available surplus
• -6-
funds into the Redemption Fund for the Bond, as an advance recoverable upon sale or redemption of the
• property, the amount of the delinquent unpaid assessment installment upon which said sale is made. The
City shall also payand transfer from available surplus funds'into the Redemption Fund, as an advance
recoverable upon sale or redemption of the property, the amount of any future delinquent unpaid
assessment installments on such property pending redemption.
Section 18. COVENANT TO FORECLOSE.. The City hereby covenants with and for the
benefit of the Registered Owner of the Bond that it will order, and cause to be commenced within 90
days following the date of delinquency, and thereafter diligently prosecuted, an action in the superior
court to foreclose the lien of any assessment'or installment thereof not paid when due, pursuant to and as
provided in Sections]8830 through 8835, inclusive; of the Bond Law. The Finance Director shall notify
the City Attorney of any such delinquency of which the Finance Director is aware, and the City Attorney
shall commence, or cause to be commenced, such foreclosure proceedings. The City Attorney is hereby
authorized to employ counsel to conduct any such foreclosure proceedings without further action of the
Council..
Section 19. INVESTMENT OF'FUNDS. Moneys in the Improvement Fund and Redemption
Fund, shall, whenever practicable, be invested in legal investments for the City under applicable law and
consistent with the City established investment policies for the moneys held pursuant to this Resolution
at the time when any of such'moneys are to be invested therein.. ,Any income therefrom or interest
thereon shall accrue to and be deposited in the fund from which such,honeys were invested.
Section 20. AUTHORITIES OF FINANCE DIRECTOR. All actions mandated by this
Resolution to be performed by the.Finance Director may be performed by the designee of thereof or such
other official of the City or independent contractor, contractor or trustee duly authorized by the City
• Council of the City to perform such action or actions in furtherance Of all or a.specific portion of the
requirements hereof. The provision of all notices of assessment including by publication and mailing to
owners of properties within the Assessment District, is hereby approved and ratified. The Finance
Director and the Clerk are authorized to complete Exhibits A to this Resolution to assure the timely
delivery of the Bond.
Section 21. CERTIFIED COPIES. The City Clerk shall furnish a certified copy of this
resolution to the Finance Director.
Under the and authority conferred upon this Council by the Charter of said City.
REFERENCE. I hereby certify the
foregoing Resolution was introduced and adopted by the
Approved as to
Council of the City of Petaluma.at a Regular meeting on, 2001,. form:
by the following vote:
AYES: City Attorney
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
City Clerk Mayor
Resolution No. N.C.S
. _�_
EXHIBIT A .
FORM OF BOND
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
COUNTY OF':SONOMA
IMPROVEMENT'BOND
CITY OF'PETALUMA
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2000-01 (McDOWELL/E.WASHINGTON)
SERIES 2001
Under and by virtue of the Improvement Bond Act of 1915, Division 10 of.the Streets and
Highways Code of the State of California ;(the `-`Act"), •the City of Petaluma (the "City"), County of
Sonoma, State of California, will, on the 2nd day',of each September as set forth below, out of the
redemption fund for the payment of the bonds isssued'upon the unpaid portion of the assessments made
for the acquisition,-work'and improvements more fully`described in the proceedings taken pursuant to
Resolution,of Intention'No. 2000-192 adopted by the City Council of the City of:Petaluma on October
16, 2000 pay to the City of Petaluma, or assigns, the sum of not to exceed
***
Dollars,***
Maturity Date (September 2) Maturity Date(September 2) ill
•
together with interest thereon from the date of this Bond being September 2, 2001,, at the rate of
percent( %5 per annum, all as,is hereinafter specified, and at the office of the Finance Director
•arid as'.the paying agent..
This bond is issued by the City under for the purpose of providing means for paying for the
acquisition,work:and improvements'described in said proceedings, and is.secured by the moneys in such
redemption fund and by`the:unpaid portion of the assessments made for the payment of said acquisition,
work'and improvements, and, including,principal.and interest,is payable exclusively Out of said fund.
The interest is payable hereon commencing on the 2nd day of March, 2002, and semiannually
thereafter On the 2nd days of September and March. This bond will continue to bear interest after, the
respective maturity dates at the, rate above stated, provided there is not sufficient money in said
redemption fund to pay same on their due dates, subject to the terms of the resolution providing for the
issuance hereof.
Both.principal and interest shall be paid to the registered owner hereof by check or warrant
mailed to the.address ,entered in the book maintained by the'Finance Director for the registration and
Exhibit A
-1-
transfer of this bond, except that the final installment due thereon will`be paid only upon the surrender of
• this bond to the-Finance Director.
The principal of this bond may be redeemed and paid in advance of maturity by paying the
• principal amount thereof and-accrued interest and certain costs of the City, as provided in the resolution
of the Council of the City authorizing the issuance of this bond (the "Resolution of Issuance") adopted by
the City Council.
This bond shall not become valid or obligatory for anypurpose under the Act or the Resolution
of Issuance until authenticated and registered as to principal and interest in said registry book and in the
space provided on this bond. This bohd,may be transferred by the registered owner, in person or by duly
authorized attorney in writing,upon.surrender of this bond for registration of such transfer, together with
a duly executed written instrument of-transfer in form approved by the Finance Director. No transfer
shall be valid until entered in said book and endorsed upon the back of this bond.
Any owner of this bond subsequent to its original owner is hereby placed on notice of all
payments of both.principal of and interest on this bond prior to its transfer to such owner, and all
subsequent owners hereof hereby'acknowledge that they have ascertained the actual unpaid principal
amount of this bond as of the date of transfer to them and hereby release the City from all obligation as to
all principal and interest paid by the City prior to such date.
•
•
•
•
f
Exhibit A
-2-
•
IN WITNESS:WHEREOF,said City has caused this`bond,tobe signed by'its Finance Director,
and by its CityClerk, all on the 2nd clay of September,:2001.
Finance Director City Clerk
City of Petaluma City of Petaluma
Certificate of Authentication
This is,one of the Bonds described-in the'Resolution Authorizing Issuance of Bonds, which has
been authenticated on , 2001.
Finance Director of the City
of Petaluma of the County ofSonoma,,as
• Transfer Agent,Registrar and Paying Agent
By
•
•
Exhibit
-3-
REGISTRATION
• This bond is registered in the name of the registered owner last entered below and both, the
principal of and interest on this bond are payable only to such Owner.
NOTE: No writing below except by the Finance Director.
REGISTRY NAME AND ADDRESS OF SIGNATURE OF
DATE REGISTERED OWNER FINANCE DIRECTOR
CITY OF PETALUMA
, 2001
•
•
•
•
Exhibit A
-4-
ENDORSEMENT OF ADVANCES OF PAYMENT
The City of Petaluma has duly paid for the purchase hereof, on dates and in amounts, as follows: •
AMOUNT OF FINANCE`DIRECTOR
ADVANCE DATE SIGNATURE
S
S
S
$
Total Advanced: S as of
•
Exhibit A
-5-
FORM OF RECORD OF PARTIAL REDEMPTION
• The record of redemption...in advance of maturity,oh the!registered bond shall be substantially as
follows:
RECORD OF REDEMPTION IN ADVANCE OF MATURITY OF BONDS
REPRESENTED BY THIS BOND
DATE OF PRINCIPAL DATE AUTHORIZED
MATURITY AMOUNT REDEEMED SIGNATURE
•
•
Exhibit A
-6-
•
S
•
ENDORSEMENT OF ADVANCES OF PAYMENT
• The City of Petaluma has duly paid for the purchase hereof, on dates and in amounts, as follows:
AMOUNT OF FINANCE DIRECTOR
ADVANCE DATE SIGNATURE
S
S
S
S
S
Total Advanced: $ as of
•
Exhibit A
-5-
FORM OF RECORD OF PARTIAL REDEMPTION
• The record of redemption in advance of maturity on the registered bond shall be substantially as
follows:
RECORD OF REDEMPTION IN ADVANCE OF MATURITY OF BONDS
REPRESENTED BY THIS BOND
DATE OF PRINCIPAL DATE AUTHORIZED
MATURITY .AMOUNT REDEEMED SIGNATURE
•
•
•
Exhibit A
-6-