HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 01101984 - X.7 To: ► BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
FROM: Supervisor Tom Torlakson Contra
Costa
DATE: January 10, 1984 Courty
SUBJECT:
SPECIFIC REQUEST(S) OR RECOMMENDATION(S) S BACKGROUND AND JUSTIFICATION
There is great interest in developing a park in Discovery Bay with
some viable recreational facilities and amenities.
Some important questions are raised by Mr. Harry DeVoto's letter
dated December 23, 1983 (copy attached) regarding the potential
financing available and legally intended for parks.
I recommend that this letter be referred to the County Administrator
and the Public Works. for a response as soon as possible. In addition,
I would like to receive answers to my questions--Has the M-8 Committee
looked at this? Have they formulated any recommendations? What was the
original purpose of ad valorem tax? If more than one function, at what
percentage of ad valorem to each function?
CONTINUED ON ATTACHMENT:__ YES SIGNATURE:
RECOMMENDATION OF COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION OF BOARD COMMITTEE
APPROVE OTHER
SIGNATURE(S)
ACTION OF BOARD ON January 10. 1994 APPROVED AS RECOMMENDED OTHER
VOTE OF SUPERVISORS
UNANIMOUS (ABSENT--------M ) I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS IS A TRUE
AYES: NOES: AND CORRECT COPY OF AN ACTION TAKEN
ABSENT: ABSTAIN: AND ENTERED ON THE MINUTES OF THE BOARD
OF SUPERVISORS ON THE DATE SHOWN.
CC: County Administrator ATTESTED January 10, 1984
County Assessor J.R. OLSSON, COUNTY CLERK
Public Works Director AND EX OFFICIO CLERK OF THE BOA,
Mr. Harry DeVoto (�
M3e2/7-83 BY DEPUTY
._ .. _ _a..._�....f..,.__..a-"'"'_.__...�._�i_.r. _ -r.r.s�...-.:rareeHr_�..e.� -.�.a.•.:._fd..v�rf..+rr.�.s �L_ ... �...
DEC 2 91953
Jo-
December 23. 1983
r , .
Chairman
Board of Supervisors, Contra Costa County
Martinez, California
Thrus SuperviR or, 5th District,
Subjects Petition to Enforce Division 129 County Service
Area Charge, County Code.
Sirs
This is n petition respectfully requesting: an act by
the Board which the County Code specifically enjoingg that
the Board also invalidate a well-intentioned but now_un just -
fiable procedure that is counter to the letter of that code.
The record will show that County Service Area M-8 13
a
expended funds, collected as an ad valorem arty tax and /
not as a service charre, to pqy the costs- of street licht-
inr_ services prior to and subsequent o e a op ono the
County Ordinance 79-42 on July 1, 1979.
It may be presumed that the Board, in the County Ser-
vice Area Charges ordinance, .imposed the street liehtine
service charre as the most equitable weans of collectins
funds sufficient to meet crisis situations developine in
bblieations incurred by such services. (Sections 1012.2.606)
This petition seriously questions the continuance of
usine funds venerated as a function of the ad valorem prop-
erty tax to fund an oblieation for which the Board has de- f,
liberately imposed a service charre. To dela f ement q
of the street lirhtine service charre for M- constructive- D
ly subvert is he Iei►3s a ve gems y residins in the subject -eiv- � ?
ordinance as well as the enabinr act, Ca Service Area Law
as it relates to providine parks and recreation services.
Since the first appointments in 1975. the Citizen's
Advisory Committees for M-8 have lone sousht to find ex-
pression for one of the primary authorities of the service
areal parks and recreation activities. That objective is
P4 now clearly attainable. The initial phase would be immed-
iately feasible were the street liebtinr services charre
enforced as in other areas of the county.
The capital assets (park) fund for M-8 exceeds nine-
ty four thousand dollars ($949000). The estimated property
tax revenue for PY983/984 is over fifty nine thousand dol-
lars (459,000). The wrowth of assessed valuation for Dis-
covery Bay (M-8) is now averarine about 184,' per ,year.
,. Current assessed valuation for Discovery Bay exceeds one
hundred seventy two million dollars ($172,000,000).
Residents and their offspring particularly, need not
suffer further denial of the service of a recreation facil-
ity because tax money is diverted contrary to county ord-
inance. The Board is respectfully asked to direct that the
full effect of the County Service Area -Street Liehtinir ser-
vice charge become operable in Service Area M-8.
An analysis or projection of the tax and .fundine future
. for Service Area M-8 is attached.
Y urs truly,
_ r[ r-
412
7f
y:
r -
FORECASTING FUNDS AVAILABLE for
DEVELOPING DISCOVERY BAY'S PARR
The Citizen's Advisory Committee for County Service Area
M-8 is currently in the process of developing a master plan for.
the 9.9-acre park site. An important part of that plan, in
addition to. the physical layout, is the order and scope of the
development phases. Although the processes by wLich the Coma
mitte6 may arrive at these decisions will b:, governed by pub-
lic input and the park site potential, a single basic factor
is particularly active in the creation of the phasing plan. It
is the measure of the unds av a and more to the point,
the funds that may beco avalIable in the future*.
Thus, it is "_parent that such Committee decisions need
rely on •some arm of forecaa to estimate the'expected proper-
ty tax revenues that are to .fund park development. This re- -
port provides one source of forecast information that may be
useful to the work of the Committee. The forecast is founded
on data furnished by the Contra Costa County Auditor's office.
No special analysis was applied to the. data furnished, thus
the forecast focuses entirely on trends stemming from establish-
ed fact.
The single most imp. rtant element in the funding picture
is the lin -) of all property on the tax roll
In Discovery�Bay. Any significant change in that total, in
terms of divergenge from the trend, would be a turning point.
Because this forecast is primarily a tread projection, it does-
not predict when turning points will occur. Major turning
points do exist in Discovery Bay's future. The new residential
and commercial phases, the marina expansion, the pro osed •golf
course, and eventual enforcement of the ery ce c
ordinance (street lighting) are powerful orces a e
funds available for park development.
In the interest of the most conservative forecast, those
impending upward pressures are only minimally treated. However,
previosly insignificant -Lexpense category in the M-8 budget,
"Professional/Specialized Services", has shown an appetite for
ollars in the 3 to 4K range over the last few years. 'The fore-
cast includes this itgm because the amounts are greater than 2%
of the tax money not going to park development and median main-
tenance.
Lastly, the forecast assumes a 10% growth in AV for Ilia
covery Bay for FY '8 ' through 985-186. This figure is con-
siderablyy below the 4� Qwth in AV in the county estimate of
FY '82-'83. a period FY 186-087 to the end of the
decade is assumed o be about 15%. These assumptions are well
below the average for growth (17%) recorded in years previous
to the periods c vered in this report.
Harry J. oto
Discovery Bay, Ca.
-V Fr ucu '
f
4.13
E
TABLE 1. Growth of Assessed Valuation (AV)
Actual and Predicted for '
-� piscovery Bay.
FY -- Assessed Valuation Growth Rate M-8 Share*
180-181 =1269389046+ 135078+ s
181-182 156,5269222+ 24% 450886+ "
182-183 1729 515,115+ 17% 549145+
183-184 189,000,000 10% . 59,559
• 084-185 20890009000 " 65.515
185-186 22990009000 -" 729066
*86-187 263,0009000 Ip 82,877 I
X987-188 302.000.000 95008
188-189 34800000000 " 109,604 ;(
189-190 40090000000 " 1269045 '(
*The property tax revenue allocation to M- ti
•
*Data furnished by Contra Costa Co. Auditor tI
- 'I
,
At
TABLE 2. Projected Budget for M-8 Based on Table 1,
FY Street Ltg. Median Maint. Park Park Fund •*
� . i
180-181 :119965+ =50525+ $16,088 S 69.698+
181—+82 17,256+ 16,676+ 3,063 72,761+
482-983 250055+ 14,766+ 229198 94.959+
183-184 30,000* 159000 10054 1059513
'84—'85 350000* 16,000 10,515 1209028 ;
185-186 40,000* 179000 11066 1350094 ':'
186-187 450000* 189000 15,877 1500971
187-'88 50,000* 200000 21,308 172,279
_. 188-089 550000* 219000 299604 2019883
189-190 60,000* 229000 400045 2410928
♦ Data furnished by Contra Costa Co. Auditor +'
" An increase of 55,000/year is used in this table.
However, the trend indicated by actual costs is in
excess of $10,000/year increase. If that proves
out, the street lighting bill could consume all of �-;
M-8 funding in six years. That would mean that all
other services would terminate. Enforcement of the
county service charge ordinance would release the
(*) amaunts topark use.
@ These amounts"'iUruced by =4,000 to cover the cost
of "Pro fessiogal/Specialized Services".
414
f
717
r - -- : - t-aw-Fl� opt Esse ss�d I/a lua��'o✓� =-=--=-�;
-41 F,
Actual € Prnecl ; c ted
400 _
T--_
- - - � cW
-- o h 1
_
21,3 --- -
X73
Qj OD
'Y3 ' 'X6 'fib '*7
LIM
-30
415
��i I I�■I I I I _
Nn1■I� _ "��NI�®■I��■INR '■I®�4`■I®1®
N1n■I��� . I�im■I■nln■tN!�■IN�■I■��■INuI
■N1®■i■�.. _ �!■►,'1�!�I■�n1■I■� ■1N. , ■I��INIn
min■i ,. : ► �■i■um■1■111 ■IN. .■■a6"■INm
oil 11 ■1■ui`�1�1 ��� !� ll�'�l A■I 4■I� ■ININ
NIn■IN nwl ► n1■�Illn■i■IIm■I■�In■I■A�1■i■Ilnl
■qnl■II,i� �I��ii __ ���!!�I■a111■INIi ■1■1 �1I■f1' -MINE
=M10111111
. min■!■uI�l 111■I■Ilul■1N�1■INm■1N�1■►Nu1
N111■I�i�- � IE���!►.I�� � Illil�f�'■I�'!1�■I®�■ISIim
N111■1 1001101n1■I m■I n1■Inm■i nl
■X111■I�11!■I■�ui■IN■■INIm■I■I�NI■i■N■■IB1
_19
■Nni 1 AV
�1i�ln
NI ■I ■I■AI mi 9n1■INIm■IMIn■I■III
■IOM
■® imm INS®■I®■■Im ■I ■
■® I ■N n Imm ININ■IMEN iN■ MM
MEW
III = INW■I■ MMIN111■I ■■IN■
® I IN■I tIl■I� ■I■11 ■I■N■■I■N■■I®al •
■i■N Elm ■IN■■I ■■IW■
I■ ■ ■■INIM IN■■I i
i I ■I■�■ I® ■i
■I MIME I■■ ■I
I Elm■
IN■I t 1 ■I I■I■N I M I
W■I
N1�1 ■■I ■I■i8■IN ■IMMMI i■
■I 111 IN ■IN■■INIQ■I
1 1 Rl I N ■I 111■I
■I ■ I ■ I
i
f i t
i
• � I I I I I I
1 I _I