Loading...
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