HomeMy WebLinkAboutBOARD STANDING COMMITTEES - 09132021 - Finance Cte Agenda Pkt
FINANCE COMMITTEE
September 13, 2021
9:00 A.M.
VIRTUAL MEETING
The Public may observe and participate in the
Virtual Zoom Meeting by using this link:
https://cccounty-us.zoom.us/j/81309719104
Meeting ID: 813 0971 9104
Or by dialing (888) 278-0254
Conference Code: 468751
1025 Escobar St., Martinez
Supervisor Karen Mitchoff, Chair
Supervisor John Gioia, Vice Chair
Agenda
Items:
Items may be taken out of order based on the business of the day and preference
of the Committee
1.Introductions
2.Public comment on any item under the jurisdiction of the Committee and not on this
agenda (speakers may be limited to three minutes).
3. CONSIDER approving the Record of Action for the June 7, 2021, Finance Committee
meeting (Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director)
4. CONSIDER accepting the semi-annual Capital Projects Report (Ramesh Kanzaria,
Capital Projects Division Manager/Public Works)
5. CONSIDER recommending a policy on the evaluation of Enhanced Infrastructure
Financing Districts (EIFDs) to the Board of Supervisors for adoption. (Timothy Ewell,
Chief Assistant County Administrator)
6.The next meeting is currently scheduled for October 4, 2021.
7.Adjourn
The Finance Committee will provide reasonable accommodations for persons with disabilities
planning to attend Finance Committee meetings. Contact the staff person listed below at least 72
hours before the meeting.
Any disclosable public records related to an open session item on a regular meeting agenda and
distributed by the County to a majority of members of the Finance Committee less than 96 hours
prior to that meeting are available for public inspection at 1025 Escobar St., 4th Floor, Martinez,
during normal business hours.
Public comment may be submitted via electronic mail on agenda items at least one full work day
prior to the published meeting time.
For Additional Information Contact:
Lisa Driscoll, Committee Staff
Phone (925) 655-2047, Fax (925) 655-2066
lisa.driscoll@cao.cccounty.us
FINANCE COMMITTEE 3.
Meeting Date:09/13/2021
Subject:Record of Action for June 7, 2021 Finance Committee Meeting
Submitted For: FINANCE COMMITTEE,
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: Record of Action
Presenter: Lisa Driscoll, County Finance Director Contact: Lisa Driscoll (925) 655-2047
Referral History:
County Ordinance requires that each County body keep a record of its meetings. Though the
record need not be verbatim, it must accurately reflect the agenda and the discussions made in the
meetings.
Referral Update:
Attached for the Committee's consideration is the Record of Action for its June 7, 2021 meeting.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
Staff recommends approval of the Record of Action for the June 7, 2021 meeting.
Fiscal Impact (if any):
No fiscal impact.
Attachments
Record of Action Finance Committee meeting of 6-7-21
),1$1&(&200,77((
5(&25'2)$&7,21)25
-XQH
6XSHUYLVRU.DUHQ0LWFKRII&KDLU
6XSHUYLVRU-RKQ*LRLD9LFH&KDLU
3UHVHQW .DUHQ0LWFKRII&KDLU
-RKQ*LRLD9LFH&KDLU
6WDII3UHVHQW 0RQLFD1LQR&RXQW\$GPLQLVWUDWRU/LVD'ULVFROO)LQDQFH'LUHFWRU/DXUD6WUREHO
6HQLRU'HSXW\&RXQW\$GPLQLVWUDWRU%ULDQ%DOEDV3XEOLF:RUNV-RDQQH%RKUHQ
,QWHUQDO$XGLW6DQGUD%UHZOH\,QWHUQDO$XGLW&KULV:LNOHU%26'LVWULFW,9&DUULH
5LFFL3XEOLF:RUNV-RH<HH3XEOLF:RUNV
,QWURGXFWLRQV
3XEOLFFRPPHQWRQDQ\LWHPXQGHUWKHMXULVGLFWLRQRIWKH&RPPLWWHHDQGQRWRQ
WKLVDJHQGDVSHDNHUVPD\EHOLPLWHGWRWKUHHPLQXWHV
1RSXEOLFFRPPHQWV
6WDIIUHFRPPHQGVDSSURYDORIWKH5HFRUGRI$FWLRQIRUWKH0DUFK
PHHWLQJ
$SSURYHGDVSUHVHQWHG
6WDIIUHFRPPHQGVDSSURYDORIWKH5HFRUGRI$FWLRQIRUWKH0D\PHHWLQJ
$SSURYHGDVSUHVHQWHG
$FFHSWDWWDFKHGUHSRUWUHJDUGLQJWKH&RXQW\ZLGH6LQJOH$XGLWIRUWKH)LVFDO<HDU
(QGLQJ-XQHDOVRDWWDFKHG
$SSURYHGDVSUHVHQWHG7KH&RPPLWWHHGLUHFWHGWKH3XEOLF:RUNV
'HSDUWPHQWWRFDUHIXOO\IROORZXSRQ)LQGLQJUHJDUGLQJZDJH
UDWHUHTXLUHPHQWVWRYHULI\WKDWDOOFRUUHFWLYHDFWLRQVDUHIROORZHGDQGWR
UHWXUQWRWKH)LQDQFH&RPPLWWHHZLWKDUHSRUWLQ'HFHPEHU
$<( &KDLU.DUHQ0LWFKRII
9LFH&KDLU-RKQ*LRLD
7KHQH[WPHHWLQJLVFXUUHQWO\VFKHGXOHGIRU-XO\ZKLFKLVD&RXQW\KROLGD\
7KHPHHWLQJZLOOLVFDQFHOHG
7KH-XO\PHHWLQJZDVFDQFHOHG7KHQH[WUHJXODUO\VFKHGXOHGPHHWLQJLV
$XJXVW
$GMRXUQ
7KHPHHWLQJZDVDGMRXUQHGDWDSSUR[LPDWHO\
)RU$GGLWLRQDO,QIRUPDWLRQ&RQWDFW/LVD'ULVFROO&RXQW\)LQDQFH'LUHFWRU
3KRQH)D[
OLVDGULVFROO#FDRFFFRXQW\XV
FINANCE COMMITTEE 4.
Meeting Date:09/13/2021
Subject:SEMI-ANNUAL CAPITAL PROJECTS REPORT
Submitted For: FINANCE COMMITTEE,
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: 1/6/2009 SD.2
Referral Name: Capital Projects Report
Presenter: Ramesh Kanzaria, Capital Projects
Division Manager
Contact: Brian Balbas (925)
313-2284
Referral History:
On January 6, 2009, the Board of Supervisors approved recommendations for Board Member
appointments to local, regional and statewide boards, committees and commissions for the 2009
calendar year. One of the adopted recommendations was to combine the Capital Facilities
Committee with the Finance Committee.
On December 3, 2018, the Committee asked that future reports be presented semi-annually.
Referral Update:
Semi-annual update. Per Committee request the report elements have been updated. The Capital
Projects report is now broken-out by stages - feasibility, design and estimates. Projects under
construction are also identified. The FLIP Projects report now break-outs the “in progress”
projects for both Capital projects and Facilities Maintenance, and “completed” projects for both
Capital projects and Facilities Maintenance are identified and include a completion date.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
ACCEPT semi-annual Capital Projects update.
Attachments
Capital Projects Update
FINANCE COMMITTEE 5.
Meeting Date:09/13/2021
Subject:POLICY REGARDING EVALUATION OF ENHANCED
INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING DISTRICTS (EIFDs)
Submitted For: Monica Nino, County Administrator
Department:County Administrator
Referral No.: N/A
Referral Name: POLICY REGARDING EVALUATION OF ENHANCED
INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING DISTRICTS (EIFDs)
Presenter: Timothy Ewell, Chief Assistant
County Administrator
Contact: Timothy Ewell, Chief Assistant
County Administrator
Referral History:
In 2015, Senate Bill 628 (Chapter 785, Statutes of 2014) created Enhanced Infrastructure
Financing Districts (EIFDs) effectively modifying the structure of already existing Infrastructure
Financing Districts (IFDs). Following the dissolution of redevelopment, EIFDs serve as a
financing mechanism to use tax-increment financing, similar to former redevelopment projects,
but with greater collaboration between cities and counties for economic development, housing
and other large-scale projects throughout the State. Subsequent to the creation in 2015, statutes
authorizing EIFDs have been modified on a regular basis, including broadening the listing of
eligible project types and modifying the process for the EIFD to issue bonds to fund those
projects.
Similar to financial impacts from former redevelopment agencies, the County's share of the ad
valorem property tax is impacted by a redirection of those revenues from the County to an EIFD.
The difference is that the County must opt-in to become a partner in the EIFD formation process
and pre-negotiate the share of ad valorem property tax to be reallocated to the EIFD. Due to the
size of the County and the number of cities within the County there is potential for significant
requests of County participation in EIFD development at a commensurate financial cost to the
County. As an example, the County Administrator's Office has been approached by the cities of
Pittsburg and Brentwood to gauge interest in the participation of the County in EIFDs located
within each city. Both cities are in the exploratory phase of EIFD development.
Referral Update:
On September 7, 2021, the Board of Supervisors referred to the Finance Committee the
development of a policy related to evaluation of EIFD proposals submitted for review from
jurisdictions within the County. Recall that the County took a similar approach to evaluation of
Compensation Agreements being requested by cities as part of the redevelopment dissolution
process. Adopting and subsequently distributing a policy sets a minimum bar for cities to meet
when it comes to submitting proposals to the County for review and evaluation. It also
communicates to cities what projects the County is interested in partnering on, consistent with
stated Board of Supervisors policy goals, and acceptable rates of financial participation for such
projects by the County.
Today's action is requesting that the Finance Committee review the draft policy assembled by
staff related to County participation in joint EIFDs with cities within the County and consider
recommending a version of the EIFD policy to the full Board of Supervisors for adoption.
Following action by the Finance Committee, the County Administrator's Office will share the
proposed final draft version of the policy with our municipal advisor, KNN Public Finance, for
any additional input that may be beneficial to development of the policy and include the outcome
of the review in the board order transmitting the draft policy to the full Board for consideration.
Recommendation(s)/Next Step(s):
REVIEW draft County Policy on evaluation of joint Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts
with cities within the County; PROVIDE feedback to staff and markups to proposed policy; and
DETERMINE whether to forward to the full Board of Supervisors for review and adoption.
Attachments
DRAFT Policy - County Participation in Enhanced Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFDs)
As of September 8, 2021
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
POLICY ON PARTICIPATION IN
ENHANCED INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING DISTRICTS
Contra Costa County supports economic development projects benefiting the residents of the County
and will review proposals from cities seeking financial partnership with the County through an Enhanced
Infrastructure Financing Districts (EIFD), pursuant to this Policy. The County will prioritize Commercial
and Industrial development that promotes creation of above minimum wage jobs within the region. In
addition, projects that offer private investment to complement investment of public funds will be
viewed favorably by the County.
Proposals shall be submitted to the Department of Conservation and Development and include the
following components for County review:
1. Contribution of Tax Increment
a. Minimum City Contribution. The City shall contribute at least the same percentage share of
tax increment that the County, excluding Affected Taxing Entities as defined by Government
Code section 53398.51(a) governed by the County Board of Supervisors.
b. Maximum County Contribution. The County will contribute no more than 50% of the County
share of future ad valorem property tax increment generated in the proposed geographic
area of the EIFD, as defined further in Section 1(d) below.
c. Correlation of Contributions. In the case that the actual dollar amount share of the percent
contributions outlined in Section 1 (a) and (b) above result in the City contributing a lower
dollar amount than the County, then the City will increase its dollar amount contribution to
be at least equal the County dollar amount contribution.
d. Limitations on Tax increment. The County tax increment contribution to the EIFD will only
be composed of future ad valorem property tax increment growth within the proposed
geographic area of the EIFD (the “Future Increment”), excluding the base tax increment of
the area (the “Base Increment”). The Base Increment is equal to the ad valorem property tax
increment of the EIFD area for the fiscal year property tax assessment roll in which the EIFD
was created.
2. Term of County Participation in EIFD
a. Maximum term. The County will participate in joint EIFDs for a period not longer than 25
years. This allows consistency with County policy on the issuance of municipal securities for
As of September 8, 2021
a period not longer than 20 years, but also includes an additional five-years for project
development and closeout over the life of the EIFD.
b. Procedures for Extension.
i. The County plans to enter into partnerships with cities for specific projects requiring
a regional funding approach best suited for an EIFD model with a duration
consistent with Section 2(a) above with the assumption that future extensions will
be unnecessary.
ii. The County will review scenarios for extending its participation in an existing EIFD,
at the discretion of the Board of Supervisors, upon receipt of an updated proposal
from a City as outlined in Section 3 below and may decide to extend its participation
in the EIFD for a period longer than the term in Section 2(a) on a case-by-case basis.
c. Termination Prior to End of Term.
i. Non-Performance. If project construction has not commenced within two-years
following creation of a joint EIFD, then the County, City and EIFD Governing Board
shall identify whether the project is likely to commence within one-year. If project
construction has not commenced within three-years following creation of a joint
EIFD, then the County, City and EIFD Governing Board shall immediately begin
proceedings to dissolve the EIFD.
ii. Change in Project Feasibility. If following creation of an EIFD and prior to the
timeline established in Section 2(c)(i) above the County and the City determine that
the project is no longer feasible, then the County, City and EIFD Governing Board
shall immediately begin proceedings to dissolve the EIFD.
iii. Mandatory Acknowledgement. The City agrees to the terms set forth in Section
2(c)(i-ii) above as a condition of submitting its project proposal to the County for
review.
3. Required Elements for City Proposals
a. Executive Summary. This section should provide an overview of the City’s proposal in a
summary form easily understood by members of the public outlining the proposed project,
including financial impacts and social benefits to the community, as outlined further below.
b. Project Description. This section should provide details related to the proposed project,
including at least the following aspects:
i. Proposed Project Details.
1. Discuss Commercial, Industrial and Residential aspects of the project
As of September 8, 2021
2. Related metrics, including number of permanent jobs above the minimum
wage, access points to public transit, number and type of housing units
(affordable and market rate), business park square footage, etc.
3. Stage of current planning efforts (status of approved entitlements or
Disposition and Development Agreements (DDAs) with developers, actions
taken by the City Council, etc.)
ii. Demonstration of Social Benefits.
1. Qualitative analysis of why a joint EIFD model is the best approach to
implement the City’s proposed project within the City limits, such as:
a. Why City and developer finances alone are insufficient to
finance the project
b. Why the County is best suited to partner with the City on the
proposed project
2. How are the project goals of the City consistent with the stated goals of the
County Board of Supervisors in one or more policy areas, such as:
a. Workforce development/job creation
b. Transportation improvements
c. Homeless Prevention
d. Sustainability
3. Projects including a Residential development component should include an
affordable housing commitment of 50%; however, a lower percentage may
be considered for units made available to households with an Area Median
Income (AMI) of 50% or lower, in which case the commitment shall be no
less than 20%.
c. Financial Analysis. This section should provide a comprehensive analysis of the project
economics, including financial impacts to the County and the City over the course of the
project life and beyond, including at least the following aspects:
i. Financial Details Related to Project
1. Summary of assumptions, including backup context for selecting those
assumptions
2. Anticipated net growth in ad valorem property tax in the EIFD area,
both with and without development of the proposed project
3. Proposed tax increment contributions from each jurisdiction (as
percentage and dollar amount)
4. Plan of finance for any municipal securities to be used for the project
5. Assessment of other one-time revenue sources being used to finance
the project
6. Related Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), Sales Tax or other revenues to
be generated from proposed project
As of September 8, 2021
7. Estimated new ongoing expenditures related to the project area for the
provision of municipal services, including a sustainable plan of finance
8. Sensitivity analysis illustrating how market forces may change the above
analyses
a. Impacts of cost escalation
b. Impacts of other assumptions of project feasibility that may not
materialize over the term of the EIFD project and beyond
ii. Ongoing Administrative Responsibilities
1. Proposed budget to staff the EIFD over the life of the District
2. Continuing disclosure responsibilities related to the issuance of
municipal securities or other loan instruments
3. Ongoing grant reporting responsibilities
iii. Positive Net Impact to the County. The project proposal must determine that
there is a positive net financial impact to County finances.
4. County Analysis of City Proposal. In the course of evaluating the City’s proposal, it may be
necessary for the County to hire consultants to assist in the evaluation. The City shall
compensate the County for reasonable costs of outside consultants assisting the County with it’s
evaluation of the City’s proposal.
5. Miscellaneous Provisions.
a. The County shall not participate in any EIFD that uses eminent domain.
b. For projects with an affordable housing component, the County will be interested to
explore crediting some of the new housing toward the County’s Regional Housing Needs
Allocation.
c. [PLACEHOLDER] Other items?