Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 08081995 - D12 TO: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS s....... _ .. Contra FROM: Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Anne Marie Gold, County Librarian Costa August 3, 1.995County DATE: srq-couK t' .SUBJECT:' REVENUE RAISING ALTERNATIVES FOR THE COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM SPECIFIC REQUEST(S)OR RECOMMENDATION(S)&BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION RECOMMENDATIONS: PROVIDE direction to staff regarding how to proceed in regard to the following options for providing additional funding to the County Library. BACKGROUND: ❑ INTRODUCTION: On July 25, 1995, the Board of Supervisors directed that the County Administrator and County Librarian return to the Board of Supervisors on August 8, 1995 with a report on what financing options the Board has available to support the County Library. There are a variety of possible alternatives which could be utilized. In order to determine which alternative or set of alternatives seems most feasible, we have identified a number,of options from which the Board could select and have commented briefly on the advantages and disadvantages of each. We have then posed a number of questions which, as the Board is able to answer them, should narrow the options until a single course of actions becomes clear. There does not appear to be a single set of options which is clearly"best" and which staff can, therefore, readily recommend on any objective basis. We believe that it is important for the Board to be aware of all available options. CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT: YES SIGNATURE: RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE APPROVE OTHER SIGNATURE(S): ACTION OF BOARD ON August 8, 1995 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER X IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the County Librarian is AUTHORIZED to file an application with the Local Agency Formation Commission for the establishment of a County Service Area to fund library services which would include as a maximum area all of the areas currently/ served by the County Library system excluding: the incorporated( City; of Richmond; and Resolution No. 95/374 is ADOPTED. VOTE OF SUPERVISORS I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE _X UNANIMOUS(ABSENT ) AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN AYES: NOES: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD ABSENT: ABSTAIN: OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN. CC: ATTESTED August 8 , 1995 County Administrator PHIL BATCHELOR.CLERK OF THE BOARD OF County Librarian SUPERVISORS AND COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR County Counsel BYyO M382 (10/88) We have divided the following portion of our report into four sections. Each section begins with one or more questions which we believe the Board must address and a staff commentary on the relative advantages and disadvantages of selecting one alternative or another. The four section are: • The question of whether any proposed financing mechanism is to be placed before the voters before being acted on by the Board of Supervisors. • An identification and exploration of the available options for financing the County Library. • The question of the geographic boundaries of any entity which is used to finance the County Library and the relative importance of keeping the current system together under a single administration. • The question of whether the Board wishes to be able to provide additional financing for the County Library in the 1996-97 fiscal year or whether the Board prefers to wait until the 1997-98 fiscal year. ❑ ELECTION: O DOES THE BOARD INTEND TO PLACE ANY PROPOSED FINANCING MECHANISM ON THE BALLOT AS AN ADVISORY MEASURE FOR VOTER REACTION? ® IF SO, DOES THE BOARD WISH TO PLACE THE MEASURE ON THE MARCH 26, 1996 OR NOVEMBER 5, 1996 BALLOT? Of the various options which are available to the Board of Supervisors for raising additional revenue for the County Library, only a dedicated "Special Tax" presently requires a vote of the people. Such a measure, of course, requires 2/3 voter approval. All of the other available options can be imposed by the Board of Supervisors alone or by the Board of Supervisors with the consent of the city councils for the affected cities. Placing an advisory measure on the ballot has the disadvantage of delaying the implementation of any revenue raising mechanism for some period of time. Of course, placing the proposal on the ballot for an advisory vote has the advantage of providing the voters an opportunity to participate in the decision- making process in a way they would not have available otherwise and of providing elected officials with a sense of the voters' willingness to pay additional assessments to support the County Library. We understand from previous comments of Board members that it is unlikely that the Board would agree to any additional assessment unless the matter is placed on the ballot first for voter approval. Whether to then impose the assessment would probably depend to a large extent on the measure of voter support for such an assessment. Assuming that the Board intends to place any proposed advisory benefit assessment measure on the ballot, the next question is when. We suggest rejecting any thought of a special election or even the ballot when school districts or cities have elections. A special election would cost roughly $275,000. Since school district and city elections are not countywide, there would be an additional cost of some amount to place a measure on any ballot which is not already countywide. This effectively limits the Board's options to the Primary and General elections in March and November 1996. Waiting for the November, 1996 election provides more time to generate support for the measure, but also -2- may require that steps to put any proposed new legal entity in place precede the election, if it is the Board's intent to provide funding by no later than the 1997-98 fiscal year. This is necessary since in one case (i.e., a new County Service Area) the legal mechanism must be in place by December 1 of the year preceding the year in which the assessment is to be imposed and the Tax Collector must be notified by early August of any year in which the Board wishes to impose such an assessment. Waiting until November, 1996 may require that these legal steps be taken before the election. Placing the measure on the March, 1996 ballot allows the election to precede any substantive actions to establish any new legal entity to provide for the assessments and would still allow the assessment to be implemented for the 1997-98 fiscal year. There are still seven months until the Primary, probably enough time to generate support for the measure. ❑ ALTERNATIVE REVENUE RAISING OPTIONS: ® WHICH OF THE FOLLOWING OPTIONS APPEAR TO BE BOTH FEASIBLE AND ACCEPTABLE TO THE BOARD? Staff has identified five potential sources of additional revenue raising authority which the Board of Supervisors could consider to assist in funding the County Library and one unavailable source for that proposal: 1 . Specific Benefit Assessment Legislation. 2. A General Tax. 3. A Voter-approved Special Tax. 4. Use of a Mello-Roos District. 5. County Service Area Using an Existing CSA. 6. County Service Area by Creating a New CSA. A description of the unavailable source and of each of the five alternatives and some of the issues involved with each follows: 1. Specific Benefit Assessment Legislation. Legislation was passed by the Legislature in both 1993 [SB 566] and 1994 [SB 1448] which would have clearly authorized the funding of library services as a legitimate purpose of a benefit assessment. Both bills were authored by then- Senator and Senate Majority Leader David Roberti. In 1993, the legislation would not have required a vote of the people. The 1994 legislation required a majority vote of the people. In both cases, the legislation was vetoed by Governor Wilson. Without any specific County statutory authority to directly impose a library benefit assessment, and particularly in view of the Governor's clear intent not to allow the imposition of such assessments, even with a vote of the people, it appears this general law County doesn't have that direct authority in the absence of State enabling legislation. The Board may wish to consider simply eliminating this as an option which should be explored any further at this time. -3- 1 , 2. A General Tax. The imposition of a general tax, which cannot be identified as being committed to any specific program if it is to be aeg neral tax, is legal and requires only a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors, assuming express statutory authority exists to support the proposed levy. It requires no mailed notice to property owners. However, the only available general taxing authority we are aware of that is currently available pursuant to state statute (Revenue and Taxation Code § 7284.2) to the Board of Supervisors is the utility tax, which the Board can impose only in the unincorporated area of the County. If the Board does not intend to explore the imposition of a utility tax and its utilization for library purposes, this option should be eliminated from further consideration at this time. 3. A Voter-approved Special Tax (Government Code § 53717). This was what was attempted in November, 1994 with Measure B. While the measure received overwhelming support from the voters, it fell just short of the required 2/3 vote for a special tax. This is, however, always available as an alternative. It requires no mailed notice to property owners and is clearly legal. It is, however, extremely difficult to get 2/3 of the voters countywide to approve a special tax. Without calling a special election or consolidating a countywide election with the November, 1995 city and school district election, the next regular election opportunity would be the Primary Election in March, 1996. The Board should determine whether this is an option which should be explored further or whether it should be eliminated at this time from further consideration. 4. Use of a Community Facilities District. A Mello-Roos Community Facilities District can be created for specified purposes, which clearly include library services, pursuant to Government Code § 53313 (c). In addition, Los Angeles County has used a rather obscure provision near the end of the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act to extend the use of the Mello-Roos funds from strictly capital expenditures for facilities to operational costs of libraries. This section, Government Code § 53342, reads as follows: For any community facilities district or zone thereof, a legislative body may fix and collect charges in the same manner as for miscellaneous extended services in county services areas. Since miscellaneous extended services in county service areas include operational costs, Los Angeles has, thus far successfully, created a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District for library operations and is considering the levying of a district benefit assessment for the 1995-96 fiscal year. The use of a Mello-Roos District has the advantage that it is exempt from action by LAFCO and the tax code areas do not have to be place by December 1 of the year preceding the one in which the assessment is imposed, as is the case with Community Service Districts as is described in the following section. This means that a Mello-Roos District can be imposed on shorter notice. The assessment can be imposed by a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors and does not require a vote of the people. However, in order to impose a Mello-Roos assessment within a city the County would have to have the consent of the city council. -4- The biggest drawback to the use of a Community Facilities District may be the controversy which has been generated by the use of this funding mechanism in other jurisdictions in the County, to the point that this factor alone may make it impossible to seriously consider the use of this option. Absent this problem, a Community Facilities District remains an available mechanism for considering the imposition of a benefit assessment for library services. 5. County Service Area Benefit Assessments Using an Existing CSA. County Service Areas (CSA's) are allowed by State Law to be established to provide specific types of services and can clearly impose benefit assessments to fund some of those services. There is express authority for a CSA to impose a benefit assessment for"miscellaneous extended services" (Government Code §§25210.4a and 25210.77a). This definition of miscellaneous services does not specify library services. However a change to the law in 1991 [SB 767, Chapter 1226, Statutes of 1991, effective January 1, 1992], provides what some see as a possible exception by which library services could be provided. This section, Government Code § 25210.8, reads as follows: Notwithstanding any other provision in this chapter, the board of supervisors may establish zones within any county service area with tax rates, service charges, benefit assessments, fire suppression assessments, or connection charges varying with the extent of benefit to each zone derived from services provided to the property within each zone or with the availability of other funds within a zone. Santa Clara County has decided to use this language as justification to impose a library benefit assessment under a CSA for the 1995-96 fiscal year. Unless or until the formation of a new CSA for library services is pursued, there are distinct advantages to using an existing CSA for this purpose. The law requires that in order to add a benefit assessment to the tax roll in a given tax year, tax code areas must have existed on December 1 of the year preceding that in which the assessment is imposed (Government Code § 54902). The County has CSA EM-1 available for this purpose. EM-1 was initially established to fund emergency medical services and an assessment is currently imposed for this purpose. However, EM-1 can also provide library services and a very small amount of funds have been provided by EM-1 to create and maintain an emergency medical library so that the tax code areas for EM-1 could be used for at least one fiscal year to impose a benefit assessment for library services. Because CSA EM-1 has already been approved by LAFCO and the cities and its tax code areas are in place, an assessment can be imposed by the Board of Supervisors after appropriate notice. The legal question here is whether the addition of the words "benefit assessment" to § 25210.8 effective January 1, 1992 were intended to or had the effect of extending "miscellaneous extended services"to include library services. No lawsuit has been brought against Santa Clara County on this point. The imposition of the benefit assessment would require only a majority vote of the Board of Supervisors after a noticed public hearing as discussed below. The Board of Supervisors would have to provide 45 days advance notice to the public of the date, time and place for a public hearing on whether the Board should impose the assessment. (Government Code Section 54954.6.) 6. County Service Area Benefit Assessments by Creating a New CSA. The creation of a new CSA for the purpose of imposing a library benefit assessment would require majority approval of each involved city council, a majority approval by the Board of Supervisors and approval by LAFCO. The advantage of creating a new CSA is that it could be tailored specifically for -5- library services with boundaries and zones which reflect the needs of the County Library and the wishes of the cities. A hearing with 45 days advance notice to the public would also be required. ❑ BOUNDARY OF THE REVENUE RAISING ENTITY. ® DOES THE BOARD WISH TO KEEP THE EXISTING COUNTY LIBRARY SYSTEM INTACT? Because either a new CSA or a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District requires that the city council of each city to be included consent to its inclusion in the entity, it is essential that the cities continue to be an integral part of the planning for any mechanism for raising additional revenue for the County Library, if retaining the County Library system as a system is important to the Board of Supervisors. If it is, then it will take time to continue to work with 17 separate cities, understand and address their individual concerns, answer their questions and insure that their input has been taken into consideration in planning for the CSA or other revenue raising entity. These consultations and discussions necessarily will involve discussion of organizational alternatives for the governance and operation of the County Library. However, the Board of Supervisors need not make any decisions on these governance issues at this time. It will also be necessary to discuss with the cities the amount of the benefit assessment and the resource allocation formula which will determine the distribution of the additional revenue. It is probably necessary to indicate to the voters what the resource allocation formula will be so the voters have this information available when they vote. In order to do this, it will be necessary to work closely with the cities over the next several months. If the Board believes that keeping the existing system together in one organizational entity is important, this criteria should be clearly stated and should influence other decisions, particularly regarding the speed with which a new CSA is established, if that is the chosen option. ❑ TIMING: ® DOES THE BOARD WISH TO HAVE THE BENEFIT ASSESSMENT IN PLACE FOR THE 1996-97 FISCAL YEAR OR FOR THE 1997-98 FISCAL YEAR? OPTIONS FOR THE 1996-97 FISCAL YEAR: A. Creation of a new CSA. As the Board can see from the discussion of individual options above, one of the controlling conditions for a benefit assessment which is imposed through a County Service Area (CSA)which does not already exist is that the CSA must have been formed and the tax code areas must be in existence and the State Board of Equalization must be notified of the existence of the CSA by December 1 of the year preceding the year in which the assessment is to be imposed. Therefore, in order to impose an assessment by use of a new CSA for the 1996-97 fiscal year, all of the preliminary steps must have been completed by December 1, 1995, including approval of the CSA by LAFCO. In addition, those cities which want to be a part of the CSA would have to indicate their consent to be a part of the CSA before the application is acted on by LAFCO. LAFCO -6- would have to act on the application at its October 11, 1995 meeting. The deadline for the agenda for the October 11, 1995 meeting is September 1, 1995, meaning that a Resolution of Application must be submitted by the County by September 1, 1995. Since the Board is not meeting again until September 12, 1995, it would be essential that the Board of Supervisors act on August 8, 1995 to authorize staff to submit a Resolution of Application to LAFCO if this proposal is to be immediately pursued. Aside from the fact that it would be necessary for the Board to act today to authorize the Resolution of Application to LAFCO, there is a very real disadvantage to trying to establish a new CSA in this timeframe. Each city which wants to be a part of the new CSA would have to have acted to adopt a Resolution and submit it to LAFCO prior to the October 11, 1995 LAFCO meeting. This may mean that some cities would opt not to join the CSA, thereby beginning the dismemberment of the existing County Library system. It has also been argued that the election should be held first and that no substantive actions to implement a CSA or Mello-Roos Community Facilities District should be taken until after the election results are known since establishing the CSA or district before the election could be interpreted as trying to second-guess the election results. To the extent that this is true, it may be unwise to press for creation of the CSA prior to the election. B. Mello-Roos Community Facilities District. There is more time available if a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District is used since LAFCO approval is not required and the tax code areas do not have to be in place by December 1. However, each city must still consent to be included in the District. Therefore, it is possible that the formation of the Mello-Roos District could actually be delayed until after the election, with the consent of the cities being provided between April and July, 1996. C. Use CSA EM-1 only for the 1996-97 Fiscal Year. As has been noted above, CSA EM-1 is in place and can be used to provide a mechanism by which an assessment for library services could be imposed. LAFCO approval has already been obtained. The tax code areas are in place. Therefore, it would be possible to wait until after the election in March, 1996 and then decide whether to impose an assessment for the 1996-97 fiscal year, based on the election results. This would clearly be a short-term, transitional mechanism while action is being taken to put in place a new CSA solely for library services. The County and the cities would have about eight months from the date of the March, 1996 election to have the new CSA created in time to advise the State Board of Equalization by December 1, 1996 and about 16 months to advise the Tax Collector of the assessments by August 1, 1997. It would even be possible to place the matter on the ballot in November, 1996 by taking action to form the CSA during the spring and summer of 1996 - prior to the election - and still have the new CSA effective in time for the 1997-98 fiscal year. Action to form any new CSA would have to precede the election in this case because the tax code areas have to be in place and the State Board of Equalization advised of the new CSA three weeks after the November, 1996 election (December 1, 1996). -7- OPTIONS FOR THE 1997-98 FISCAL YEAR: A Mello-Roos Community Facilities District or a new CSA are both available alternatives for the 1997-98 fiscal year, regardless of whether or not some other mechanism is used for the 1996-97 fiscal year, such as EM-1. The same requirements identified above for the 1996-97 would impact the 1997-98 fiscal year, except that there would be more time available in which to put the legal structure in place and undertake full consultation with the cities and obtain their approval. ❑ FINAL STAFF COMMENTS: We would note that the continued imposition of any prior voter-approved local tax might now be subject to a subsequent voter initiative effort to repeal the authority to continue the tax. (Leo Rossi et al. v. Thad Brown et al., 95 Daily Journal D.A.R. 2966) In addition, we need to caution that there is a slight lingering Constitutional question over benefit assessments for library services. State Constitutional standards require that any benefit assessment applied to real property have a "special" benefit to real property. In other words, a benefit assessment is only Constitutional if it can be shown that the imposition of a benefit assessment "benefits" the real property against which it is levied. This is easier to demonstrate with streets, sewers or street lights. In case of a challenge, it may be more difficult to demonstrate this "benefit" in the case of library services. But it should be noted that the California Supreme Court has upheld benefit assessments for local park program and maintenance services. (Knox v. City of Orland [1992] 4 Cal. 4th 132.) Based on the questions outlined above and the options identified, if the Board of Supervisors can provide some policy direction to staff, we can proceed accordingly. -8- BOARD OF SUPERVISORS, CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA Adopted this resolution on August 8, 1995, by the following vote : AYES : Rogers, Smith, Bishop, DeSaulnier, Torlakson NOES : None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None SUBJECT: LAFCO Application ) RESOLUTION NO. 95/374 For Approval of County Service) (Gov. Code §§ 25210 .4 (e) , Area No. LIB-15 to provide ) 25210 . 15, 25210 . 78, extended library facilities ) 56426 , 56652 , 56653 , and services . ) 56700 & 56800 . ) RESOLUTION OF APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO INITIATE PROCEEDINGS FOR FORMATION OF COUNTY SERVICE AREA NO. LIB-15 AND FOR ESTABLISHMENT OF SPHERE OF INFLUENCE OF CSA LIB-15 The Board of Supervisors of Contra Costa County Resolves that : I . Proposal . (a) This proposal is made pursuant to the Cortese-Knox Act, Government Code section 56000 et seq. (b) The nature of this proposal is a change of organization for the formation of a new "LIB-15" County Service Area. Said formation to be initiated by this Application to the Local Agency Formation Commission for approval of the new Service Area. (c) The exterior boundaries of the area to be formed into County Service Area No. LIB-15 are all of the unincorporated and incorporated territory contained within Contra Costa County except for the area of the City of Richmond. A map showing such boundaries for the proposed service area are set forth in Attachment "A" . (d) Terms and conditions proposed for the change of organization are as follows : 1 . Should any involved city not adopted a resolution of consent in a timely manner, that city shall be excluded from this proposal . 2 . Services to be provided by County Service Area LIB- 15 are to be limited to extended library facilities and services . (Gov. C. § 25210 . 78 . ) (e) The reason for this proposal is to form a county service area to provide extended library facilities and services both within and without cities . This provision of extended services is more fully presented in the "plan for providing services" to be concurrently filed together with this resolution of application by the County Librarian with the LAFCO Executive Officer. (f) The Board of Supervisors hereby requests that the Local Agency Formation Commission take action to accomplish the aforestated formation and hereinafter mentioned sphere of influence establishment, by proceeding under the Cortese-Knox Act . (g) This proposal is consistent with the sphere of influence of any affected city or district . II . Sphere of Influence . It is hereby requested that a sphere of influence for the new county service area be established co-terminus with the boundaries of the new Service Area. RESOLUTION NO. 95/374 1 III . Miscellaneous . (a) The funding for the Service Area is to be from yet to be approved and established benefit assessment charges obtained from those benefiting from the facilities and services, from user fees or charges in accordance with Gov. C. §§ 25210 . 66a and 25210 . 77a, or from special taxes authorized pursuant to Gov. C. H 25210 . 6a and/or 50075 et seq. Therefore, there are currently no property tax revenues that are subject to the provisions of Gov. C. § 56842 . (b) The persons to be informed as to any notice of proceedings and to receive copies of any reports of the Executive Officer are : Anne Marie Gold, County Librarian 1750 Oak Park Blvd. Pleasant Hill, CA 94523 Phil Batchelor, County Administrator Attn: C.L. Van Marter 651 Pine Street, 11th Floor Martinez, CA 94553 (c) The County Librarian (with the assistance of the Clerk of this Board) is hereby directed to file a certified copy of this Resolution of Application and its Attachment "A" (together with the "plan for providing services" ) with the Executive Officer of LAFCO. I hereby certify that the foregoing is a true and correct copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATTESTED: Phil Batc e r, Clerk of the Board of Superv'sors d County Administrator By AU L-1 _, L Deputy CC : LAFCO Executive Officer County Librarian County Administrator County Counsel Auditor-Controller vjw-1:\a:\bdorder.vjw RESOLUTION NO. 95/374 2 ` 1 o tO + 1 00 , S � 9 m4ft's AD o � m RD p G sa � aro Sow tt / om Qu \ Y � die 1 DATE: REgUEST TO SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT J) Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing the Board. NAME: PHONE: 22-0-5-7-f-'O ADDRESS: e;)� .Qj� ,�� 'T' CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: �� ✓r-+,�O�r� 5� . Check one: (NAME OF ORGANIZ-XTION) I wish to speak on Agenda Item #�)Q 12- My comments will be: general x for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. DATE: !S E REQUEST To SPEAK FORM (THREE (3) MINUTE LIMIT) ` Complete this form and place it in the box near the speakers' rostrum before addressing a Board. NAME: � PHONE: ADDRESS: ` ef-- CITY: I am speaking formyself OR organization: NAME OF 0RC.AN1Zk1-1ON) Check one: I wish to speak on Agenda Item # My comments will be: general tZ for against I wish to speak on the subject of I do not wish to speak but leave these comments for the Board to consider. Transcription of motion on item D. 12 from August 8, 1995 Supervisor Rogers : So, if I can just make sure that I understand correctly what our staff is telling us, the maximum area of cities that we would want to consider for being part of this we do need to decide that and the other decisions about do we break it up into zones, which I continue to think is a bad idea, and the amount of the tax and how long it lasts, those things can be put off till some other time . Am I understanding that correctly. Okay. I would then move that we direct staff to file such an application which would include as a maximum area all of the areas currently served by the County Library system which does exclude the incorporated City of Richmond and also that we have some kind of process, I don' t know exactly what we do, but some kind of a process to be out fairly quickly for trying to talk to cities and engage in the kind of full court press that Supervisor Bishop was just describing. Supervisor Bishop: Is there a second to that motion? Did you second. . Supervisor DeSaulnier: Yes . Supervisor Bishop: Okay, all those in favor. . .basically that we are moving forward with our application to LAFCO, that would be a Countywide CSA and we to be able to meet the time constraints, LAFCO deadlines, those areas in defining zones it will be understand that there will be created zones, that the determinations of how those zones are configures will be done at a later time . Phil : Is Richmond in our out . Supervisor Rogers : Out . Supervisor Smith: Richmond' s out . Supervisor Torlakson: And in supporting the motion, I think that we should move ahead but communicate very closely in whatever the right form is with the Mayors' Conference all of the citeis and the task force especially. Supervisor Bishop: Absolutely, and I think the workshop on September the 14th, clear your calendars and we' re going to have it in Central County, not here but looking at Annmarie, Lafayette? Annmarie Gold: I have a commitment to use the cafeteria at Accalanes High School on September 14th if that' s okay.