HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2015 0603 CCSA REG ITEM 08C ITEM 8.C.
CITY OF MOORPARK,CALIFORNIA
City Council Meeting
of (,-3-do/5 ,
c2d
ACTION: zzt. Add
L . .
MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL 40/5 -.340/
AGENDA REPORT
BY: Lj7n .
TO: The Honorable City Council
FROM: Ron Ahlers, Finance Director j '
2_k
DATE: May 18, 2015 (CC Meeting of June 3, 2015)
SUBJECT: Consider Final Review of the Assessment Engineer's Report for the
Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement Assessment
District and Resolution Confirming the Levy Amount and Ordering the
Continuation of Assessment for Fiscal Year 2015/2016
SUMMARY
The City Council is being asked to open the public hearing on the continuation of the Parks
and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement Assessment District for fiscal year (FY)
2015/2016, receive testimony, close the public hearing, approve the final Assessment
Engineer's Report (Report), and adopt the resolution confirming the assessment levy.
BACKGROUND
In July 1999, the City successfully established the Parks and Recreation Maintenance and
Improvement District (Improvement District) for the maintenance and improvement of City
parks. It was initiated by the Council to provide funding in place of Parks Maintenance
Assessment District No. AD 85-1 (AD 85-1), which was disbanded in July 1998 as a result
of Proposition 218. The Improvement District is based on a "special" assessment. This
means that the City assesses property owners for that portion of park maintenance and
improvement activities that generate a "special" benefit. All activities that generate a
"general" benefit must be funded from non-assessment revenue, typically the General
Fund and Park Improvement Funds.
On January 21, 2015, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2015-3360 indicating its
intent to continue the park assessment for FY 2015/2016 and directing the preparation of
the Engineer's Report. At the May 6, 2015 meeting, City Council adopted Resolution No.
2015-3389, which approved the preliminary Engineer's Report and set the date of the
public hearing on June 3, 2015.
98
Honorable City Council
June 3, 2015
Page 2
DISCUSSION
The Park Improvement District now covers twenty (20) improved parks, including the
Serenata Trail, Veteran's Memorial and Walnut Acres Parks. The Report established the
assessment levy amount, the formula used to spread the assessment and calculation of
"special" benefit versus "general" benefit. Moreover, it sets forth certain information
including the following:
• Boundary Map(s);
• Assessment justification;
• Duration of the assessments;
• Description of improvements to be maintained;
• Assessment methodology;
o Cost of Living factor; and
o Annual assessment rate.
The Report contains a determination regarding the percentage of benefit deemed "special"
and the percentage deemed "general", generated from the maintenance and improvement
of City parks and recreation facilities. The City can only assess for the maintenance and
improvements that confer a "special" benefit to the properties within the district's
boundaries. The Engineer has determined that the level of "general" benefit to the
properties within the districts' boundaries is 25.00% of the total activities and associated
costs, with the remaining 75.00% providing "special" benefit. This means that the City can
only assess property owners within the district no more than 75.00% of the costs of
maintaining, operating and improving the parks and recreation facilities within. When the
initial assessment was set at $39.00 for a single family equivalent (SFE) unit, the total
assessment generated approximately 52.00% of the revenue required to support the
Improvement District operations at that time. This percentage was well below the "special"
assessment cap of 75.00%. The City contributed funds to cover the remaining 48.00%,
mostly from the General Fund. Over the years, as park acreage and amenities expanded
and maintenance and utility costs increased, out pacing the increases in assessment
revenues, the percentage of the total activities funded by non-assessment revenues
(primarily General Fund and Park Improvement Funds) have increased. The Improvement
District assessment revenue for FY 2015/2016 is expected to cover 18% of the overall
cost to operate and improve the City parks, well below that 75% cap.
Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement Budget
This Report was prepared in advance of the Council's discussions of the FY 2015/2016
budget. Therefore, the budget figures identified will not be identical to those in the draft
budget, but will be closely comparable. By adopting the Report, the Council is not
approving any expenditures that will come with the adoption of the City budget. Adopting
the Report simply establishes the assessment amount for the new fiscal year and ensures
99
Honorable City Council
June 3, 2015
Page 3
that the City meets the threshold caps for assessing "special" benefit costs. Because the
City now heavily uses the General Fund for maintenance and improvements of its parks,
any variances between the Report and the final adopted Budget document will not affect
the assessment rate or the validity of the Council's actions.
The preliminary proposed budget for FY 2015/2016 is $4,295,576, of which $1,921,413
is allocated for continuing capital improvement projects including: the loop trail and
walkway improvements, sidewalk/bicycle pathway extension at Arroyo Vista Community
Park (AVCP); ADA upgrades at Villa Campesina Park; and phase two installation of
central irrigation system at various parks. This proposed budget is $169,930 less than
the initial budget used in the FY 2014/15 Engineer's Report. The decrease is the net
result of the expected completion of various capital projects ($432,500) namely: the
AVCP parking lot repairs, playground equipment replacement at Poindexter Park, and
lighting upgrades at the Campus and Poindexter parks. This decrease is offset by
$263,566 from staff cost allocation adjustments, anticipated rate hikes in water and
utilities, plus maintenance costs for newly built Walnut Acres Park.
The Report estimates that the proposed assessment will generate approximately
$760,730 in revenue, an increase of $7,145 over the amount generated in FY 2014/2015.
At the proposed rate, assessment revenue will cover approximately 18% of the total
budget for operations and improvements (or only 24% of the 75.00% cap for the "special"
benefit the City is eligible to assess).
Assessment Rate
The maximum assessment amount is subject to an increase up to 3% per year, based on
the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the Los Angeles Metropolitan area for the month of
December. In situations when the CPI exceeds 3%, the remaining difference shall be
carried over to subsequent years and used to adjust the maximum assessment rate in
years when the CR is less than 3%. The history of the adjusted assessment levy is as
follows:
100
Honorable City Council
June 3, 2015
Page 4
Fiscal Levy SFE Carryover
Year CPI Period CPI Adjustment Assessment Adjustment
2002/2003 Dec 2000/2001 2.10% 2.80% $42.20 0.00%
2003/2004 Dec 2001/2002 3.70% 3.00% $ 43.50 0.70%
2004/2005 Dec 2002/2003 1.80% 2.50% $ 44.60 0.00%
2005/2006 Dec 2003/2004 4,39% 3.00% $ 45.94 1.39%
2006/2007 Dec 2004/2005 4.04% 3.00% $ 47.32 2.43%
2007/2008 Dec 2005/2006 3.70% 3.00% $ 48.74 3.13%
2008/2009 Dec 2006/2007 4.16% 3.00% $ 50.20 4.29%
2009/2010 Dec 2007/2008 0.11% 3.00% $ 51.71 1.40%
2010/2011 Dec 2008/2009 1.83% 3.00% $ 53.26 0.23%
2011/2012 Dec 2009/2010 1.34% 1.57% $ 54.09 0.00%
2012/2013 Dec 2010/2011 2.17% 2.17% $ 55.26 0.00%
2013/2014 Dec 2011/2012 1.93% 1.93% $ 56.33 0.00%
2014/2015 Dec 2012/2013 1.14% 1.14% $ 56.97 0.00%
2015/2016 Dec 2013/2014 0.72% 0.72% $ 57.38 0.00%
The CPI increase pertaining to the FY 2015/2016 assessment (December 2013 -
December 2014) is 0.72%. From FY 2005/2006 to 2008/2009, the CPI exceeded the
3.00% cap; the balance over the cap was carried forward to subsequent years. There is
no unused CPI from prior years. The proposed SFE assessment rate and levy for FY
2015/2016 is $57.38, an increase of$0.41.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed Improvement District levy is expected to generate approximately $760,730
to offset costs associated with the "special" benefit received by properties within the
districts' boundaries as a result of the City's parks and recreation maintenance, operations
and improvement activities. If the City was able to levy an assessment to fully fund the
75.00% "special" benefit, it would decrease the amount of subsidy from non-assessment
funds needed to support the Improvement District activities by approximately $2,460,952
(General Fund - $929,008; Traffic Systems Management Fund - $1,365,944; Park
Improvement City-wide Funds - $100,000; and Local Transportation Development Act
Article 3 -$66,000).
STAFF RECOMMENDATION (Roll Call Vote)
1. Open the public hearing, take public testimony, and close the public hearing.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 2015 -
Attachments: A- Resolution
B - Parks & Recreation Maintenance & Improvement District
Engineer's Report
101
Attachment A
RESOLUTION NO. 2015 -
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ENGINEER'S
REPORT, CONFIRMING DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENT AND
ORDERING THE CONTINUATION OF ASSESSMENT FOR
FISCAL YEAR 2015/2016 FOR THE PARKS AND
RECREATION MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT
DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK
WHEREAS, on July 15, 1999, by its Resolution No. 99-1625, after receiving a
weighted majority of ballots in support of the proposed assessment, this Council
ordered the formation of and levied the first assessment within the City of Moorpark
Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District (the "Assessment
District") pursuant to the provisions of Article XIIID of the California Constitution, and the
Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (the "Act"), Part 2 of Division 15 of the California
Streets and Highways Code (commencing with Section 22500 thereof); and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 2015-3360, the City Council ordered the
preparation of an Engineer's Report for the Parks and Recreation Maintenance and
Improvement District (the "District") for fiscal year 2015/2016; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to said Resolution, the Engineer's Report was prepared by
SCI Consulting Group, Engineer of Work, in accordance with Section 22565, et. seq., of
the Streets and Highways Code (the "Report") and Article XIIID of the California
Constitution; and
WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 2015-3389, the City Council preliminarily
approved the Engineer's Report for said District and set a date for a Public Hearing; and
WHEREAS, said report was duly made and filed with the City Clerk and duly
considered by this Council and found to be sufficient in every particular, whereupon it
was determined that the report should stand as the Engineer's Report for all subsequent
proceedings under and pursuant to the aforesaid resolution, and that June 3, 2015, at
the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 799 Moorpark Avenue,
Moorpark, California 93021, were appointed as the time and place for a hearing by this
Council on the question of the levy of the proposed assessment, notice of which hearing
was given as required by law; and
WHEREAS, at the appointed time and place the hearing was duly and regularly
held, and all persons interested and desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to
be heard, and all matters and things pertaining to the continuation were fully heard and
considered by the Council, and all oral statements and all written protests or
communications were duly heard, considered and overruled, and this council thereby
acquired jurisdiction to order the confirmation of the diagram and the continuation of the
assessment prepared by and made a part of the Engineers Report to pay the costs and
expenses thereof.
102
Resolution No. 2015 -
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK
DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The public interest, convenience and necessity require that the
continuation be made.
SECTION 2. The Assessment District benefited by the improvements and
assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof, and the exterior boundaries thereof,
are as shown by a map thereof filed in the office of the City Clerk, which map is made a
part hereof by reference thereto.
SECTION 3. The Engineer's Report as a whole and each part thereof, to wit:
(a) the Engineer's estimate of the itemized and total costs
and expenses of maintaining the improvements and of the
incidental expenses in connection therewith;
(b) the diagram showing the assessment district, plans
and specifications for the improvements to be maintained and the
boundaries and dimensions of the respective lots and parcels of
land within the Assessment District; and
(c) the assessment of the total amount of the cost and
expenses of the proposed maintenance of the improvements upon
the several lots and parcels of land in the Assessment District in
proportion to the estimated special benefits to be received by such
lots and parcels, respectively, from the maintenance, and of the
expenses incidental thereto;
are finally approved and confirmed.
SECTION 4. Final adoption and approval of the Engineer's Report as a whole,
and of the plans and specifications, estimate of the costs and expenses, the diagram
and the assessment, as contained in the report as hereinabove determined and
ordered, is intended to and shall refer and apply to the report, or any portion thereof as
amended, modified, or revised or corrected by, or pursuant to and in accordance with,
any resolution or order, if any, heretofore duly adopted or made by this Council.
SECTION 5. The assessment to pay the costs and expenses of the maintenance
of the improvements for fiscal year 2015/2016 is hereby levied. For further particulars
pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, reference is
hereby made to the Resolution Directing Preparation of Engineer's Report.
SECTION 6. Based on the oral and documentary evidence, including the
Engineer's Report, offered and received at the hearing, this Council expressly finds and
103
Resolution No. 2015 -
Page 3
determines (a) that each of the several lots and parcels of land will be specially
benefited by the maintenance of the improvements at least in the amount if not more
than the amount, of the assessment apportioned against the lots and parcels of land,
respectively, and (b) that there is substantial evidence to support, and the weight of the
evidence preponderates in favor of, the aforesaid finding and determination as to
special benefits.
SECTION 7. Immediately upon the adoption of this resolution, but in no event
later than the third Monday in August following such adoption, the City Clerk shall file a
certified copy of the diagram and assessment and a certified copy of this resolution with
the Auditor of the County of Ventura. Upon such filing, the County Auditor shall enter on
the County assessment roll opposite each lot or parcel of land the amount of
assessment thereupon as shown in the assessment. The assessments shall be
collected at the same time and in the same manner as County taxes are collected and
all laws providing for the collection and enforcement of County taxes shall apply to the
collection and enforcement of the assessments, After collection by the County, the net
amount of the assessments, after deduction of any compensation due the County for
collection, shall be paid to the City of Moorpark Parks and Recreation Maintenance and
Improvement District.
SECTION 8. Upon receipt of the moneys representing assessments collected by
the County, the County shall deposit the moneys in the City Treasury to the credit of the
improvement fund previously established under the distinctive designation of the
Assessment District. Moneys in the improvement fund shall be expended only for the
maintenance, servicing, construction or installation of the improvements.
SECTION.9. The assessments levied are in conformance with Proposition 218.
SECTION 10. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution and
shall cause a certified resolution to be filed in the book of original resolutions.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of June, 2015.
Janice S. Parvin, Mayor
ATTEST:
Maureen Benson, City Clerk
104
Attachment B
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS& RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
t.
ENGINEER'S REPORT
3 FISCAL YEAR 2015-16
APRIL 2015
£ Y�
Ju'
t ws
?Skz`
PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972
AND ARTICLE XIIID OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION
{
„F+,
z Y 1
A. ENGINEER OF WORK:
SCOConsultingGroup
4745 MANGLES BOULEVARD
FAIRFIELD,CALIFORNIA 94534
•
PHONE 707.430.4300
FAX 707.430.4319
www.sci-cg.com
105
PAGE III
(THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.)
CITY OF MOORPARK ,.e►. ^�.
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
106
PAGE IV
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION 1
OVERVIEW 1
ASSESSMENT BACKGROUND 2
ASSESSMENT PROCESS 2
ENGINEER'S REPORT AND CONTINUATION OF ASSESSMENTS 2
LEGAL ANALYSIS 3
PLANS&SPECIFICATIONS 6
FISCAL YEAR 2015-16 ESTIMATE OF COST AND BUDGET - 8
INTRODUCTION 8
SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENT PLANS 8
METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT 11
DISCUSSION OF BENEFIT 11
BENEFIT FACTORS12
BENEFIT FINDING 14
GENERAL VERSUS SPECIAL BENEFIT 14
CALCULATING GENERAL BENEFIT 15
METHOD OF ASSESSMENT 18
PROXIMITY BENEFITS 19
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES 20
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES 20
VACANT RESIDENTIAL LAND 22
OTHER PROPERTIES 22
DURATION OF ASSESSMENT - - 23
APPEALS AND INTERPRETATION 23
ASSESSMENT - 24
• ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM 26
APPENDIX A-2015-16 ASSESSMENT ROLL 28
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC I ConsultingGroup
ENGINEERS REPORT,FY 2015-16
107
PAGE V
LIST OF FIGURES
TABLE 1 -CosT AND BUDGET FY 2015-16 9
TABLE 2-RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT FACTORS 20
TABLE 3-COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ASSESSMENT FACTORS 21
TABLE 4-SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE 24
Cm'OF MOORPARK .
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC i ConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
108
PAGE VI
(THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.)
CRY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Sc IConsulting Group
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
109
PAGE 1
INTRODUCTION
OVERVIEW
The City of Moorpark (the "City") currently provides park facilities and recreation programs
for its service area of 11,000 parcels. The City currently owns, operates and maintains 20
neighborhood parks and one community park, which are located throughout the developed
areas of the City. (For general locations of the City's park facilities, see the Diagram
following in this Report.) The City's parks are summarized as follows:
• Arroyo Vista Community Park and Recreational Center, (69 developed acres),
located near the intersection of Countrywood Drive and Tierra Rejada Road.
• Campus Canyon Neighborhood Park, (6 acres), located at Collins Dr. and
Hearon Drive.
• Campus Park Neighborhood Park, (2.5 acres), located on the corner of Hartford
St. and Harvard Street.
• Community Center Park, (.5 acres), 799 Moorpark Avenue.
• Country Trail Neighborhood Park, (8 acres), located off Countrywood Drive and
Mountain Trail.
• Glenwood Neighborhood Park, (4.5 acres), located on the corner of Tierra
Rejada Rd. and Harvester Street.
• College View Park, (5 acres), located on at the intersection of Campus Park Drive
and College View Avenue.
• Magnolia Street Park, (.5 acres, vacant), located on the south west corner of
Magnolia Street and Charles Street.
• Mammoth Highlands Neighborhood Park, (6.5 acres), 7000 Elk Run Way
• Miller Neighborhood Park, (6.5 acres), located on Miller Parkway, near Peach
Hill Road.
• Monte Vista Nature Park, (5 acres), located on Spring Road.
• Mountain Meadows Neighborhood Park, (8 acres), located off Mountain
Meadow Street, near Tierra Rejada Road.
• Peach Hill Neighborhood Park, (10 acres), located on Peach Hill Rd. and
Christian Barrett Drive.
• Poindexter Neighborhood Park, (9.5 acres), located on Poindexter Ave., west of
Chaparral Middle School.
• Serenata Trail, (1.5 acres), trail entrance located at Miller Parkway and Southfork
Road. The trail is a linear 1.5-mile hiking trail
• Tierra Rejada Neighborhood Park, (8 acres), located at the intersection of Tierra
Rejada Road and Mountain Trail.
• Veterans Memorial, (.5 acres), located at the Southeast corner of Flinn Avenue
and Spring Road.
• Virginia Colony Park, (1 acre), located at the intersection of Los Angeles Place
and Condor Drive.
• Villa Campesina Park, (1.5 acres), located at Liberty Bell Road.
• Walnut Acres Park, (0.34 acres), located at 161 Second Street
Cm,OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
110
PAGE 2
ASSESSMENT BACKGROUND
Prior to 1997, the City funded the majority of the costs for maintenance and improvement
of park facilities with an assessment supported by property owners. With the passage of
Proposition 218 on November 6, 1996, such an assessment could not be continued unless
the continuation of the assessment was approved by a weighted majority of ballots
submitted in an assessment ballot proceeding. As a result, the City did not levy the park
maintenance assessment for two years and funded a reduced level of park maintenance
with reserve funds. Therefore, in absence of a new local revenue source, the baseline
level of park and recreation facilities in the City (the "Baseline Service") would be a
deteriorating level of maintenance and upkeep of the park and recreation facilities.
ASSESSMENT PROCESS
To address the City's shortfall in park maintenance and improvement funding, in 1999 the
City proposed to reinstate an assessment for improved park maintenance services. In May
and June of 1999, the City conducted an assessment ballot proceeding pursuant to the
requirements of Article XIIID of the California Constitution ("The Taxpayer's Right to Vote
on Taxes Act") and the Landscaping the Lighting Act of 1972. During this ballot
proceeding, property owners in the City were provided with a notice and ballot for the
proposed parks assessment ("the Parks Maintenance and Recreation Improvement
District" or the "Improvement District"). A 45-day period was provided for balloting and a
public hearing was conducted on June 16, 1999. At the public hearing, all ballots returned
within the 45-day balloting period were tabulated.
It was determined at the public hearing that the assessment ballots submitted in opposition
to the proposed assessments did not exceed the assessment ballots submitted in favor of
the assessments (with each ballot weighted by the proportional financial obligation of the
property for which ballot was submitted). In fact, the final balloting result was 71.5%
support for the City of Moorpark Parks Maintenance and Recreation Improvement District
assessment.
As a result, the Council gained the authority to reinstate the levy of the assessments for
fiscal year 1999-00 and to continue to levy them in future years. The authority granted by
the ballot proceeding includes an annual adjustment in the assessment levies equal to the
annual change in the Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles Area, not to exceed 3%.
ENGINEER'S REPORT AND CONTINUATION OF ASSESSMENTS
In each subsequent year for which the assessments will be continued, the Council must
direct the preparation of an Engineer's Report, budgets and proposed assessments for the
upcoming fiscal year. After the Engineer's Report is completed, the Council may
preliminarily approve the Engineer's Report and proposed assessments and establish the
date for a public hearing on the continuation of the assessments. This Report was
prepared pursuant to the direction of the Council adopted on January 21, 2015.
CRY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC I Consulting Group
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
111
PAGE 3
This Engineer's Report ("Report") was prepared to establish the budget for the continued
improvements and services that would be funded by the proposed 2015-16 assessments,
determine the benefits received by property from the improvements and services within the
Improvement District and the method of assessment apportionment to lots and parcels
within the Improvement District. This Report and the proposed assessments have been
made pursuant to the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the
California Streets and Highways Code (the "Act) and Article XIIID of the Califomia
Constitution (the"Article").
If the Council approves this Engineer's Report and the continuation of the assessments by
resolution, a notice of assessment levies must be published in a local paper at least 10
days prior to the date of the public hearing. The resolution preliminarily approving the
Engineer's Report and establishing the date for a public hearing is used for this notice.
Following the minimum 10-day time period after publishing the notice, a public hearing is.
held for the purpose of allowing public testimony about the proposed continuation of the
assessments. This hearing is currently scheduled for June 3, 2015. At this hearing, the
Council would consider approval of a resolution confirming the continuation of the
assessments for fiscal year 2015-16. If so confirmed and approved, the assessments
would be submitted to the County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the property tax rolls
for Fiscal Year 2015-16.
LEGAL ANALYSIS
PROPOSITION 218
This assessment is levied consistent with Proposition 218, The Right to Vote on Taxes Act,
which was approved by the voters of California on November 6, 1996, and is now codified
as Articles XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution. Proposition 218 provides for
benefit assessments to be levied to fund the cost of providing services, improvements, as
well as maintenance and operation expenses to a public improvement which specially
benefits the assessed property.
Proposition 218 describes a number of important requirements, including property-owner
balloting, for the imposition, increase and extension of assessments, and these
requirements are satisfied by the process used to establish this assessment.
SILICON VALLEY TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION,INC.V SANTA CLARA COUNTY OPEN SPACE
AUTHORITY
In July of 2008, the California Supreme Court issued its ruling on the Silicon Valley
Taxpayers Association, Inc. v. Santa Clara County Open Space Authority ("SVTA vs.
SCCOSA"). This ruling is the most significant legal document in further legally clarifying
Proposition 218. Several of the most important elements of the ruling included further
emphasis that:
• Benefit assessments are for special, not general, benefit
Crrr OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsuitingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 21115-16
112
PAGE 4
• The services and/or improvements funded by assessments must be clearly
defined
• Special benefits are directly received by and provide a direct advantage to
property in the assessment district
This Engineer's Report is consistent with the SVTA vs. SCCOSA decision and with the
requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution because the
• improvements to be funded are clearly defined; the benefiting property in the Improvement
District enjoys close and unique proximity, access and views to the Improvements; the
Improvements serve as an extension of usable land area for benefiting properties in the
Improvement District and such special benefits provide a direct advantage to property in
the Improvement District that is not enjoyed by the public at large or other property.
DAHMS V.DOWNTOWN POMONA PROPERTY
On June 8, 2009, the 40 Court of Appeal amended its original opinion upholding a benefit
assessment for property in the downtown area of the City of Pomona. On July 22, 2009,
the California Supreme Court denied review. On this date, Dahms became good law and
binding precedent for assessments. In Dahms the Court upheld an assessment that was
100% special benefit (i.e. 0% general benefit) on the rationale that the services and
improvements funded by the assessments were directly provided to property in the
assessment district. The Court also upheld discounts and exemptions from the
assessment for certain properties.
•
BONANDER V.TOWN OF TIBURON
On December 31, 2009, the 1st District Court of Appeal overturned a benefit assessment
approved by property owners to pay for placing overhead utility lines underground in an
area of the Town of Tiburon. The Court invalidated the assessments on the grounds that
the assessments had been apportioned to assessed property based on in part on relative
costs within sub-areas of the assessment district instead of proportional special benefits.
BEUTZ V.COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE
On May 26, 2010 the 4th District Court of Appeals issued a decision on the Steven Beutz
v. County of Riverside ("Beutz") appeal. This decision overturned an assessment for park
maintenance in Wildomar, California, primarily because the general benefits associated
with improvements and services was not explicitly calculated, quantified and separated
from the special benefits.
GOLDEN HILL NEIGHBORHOOD ASSOCIATION V.CITY OF SAN DIEGO
On September 22, 2011, the San Diego Court of Appeal issued a decision on the Golden
Hill Neighborhood Association v. City of San Diego appeal. This decision overturned an
assessment for street and landscaping maintenance in the Greater Golden Hill
neighborhood of San Diego, California. The court described two primary reasons for its
decision. First, like in Beutz, the court found the general benefits associated with services
were not explicitly calculated, quantified and separated from the special benefits. Second,
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16 •
113
PAGE 5
the court found that the City had failed to record the basis for the assessment on its own
parcels.
COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT LAW
This Engineer's Report is consistent with the requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the
California Constitution and with the SV7A decision because the improvements to be
funded are clearly defined; the improvements are directly available to and will directly
benefit property in the Improvement District; and the improvements provide a direct
advantage to property in the Improvement District that would not be received in absence of
the assessments.
This Engineer's Report is consistent with Buetz, Dahms and Greater Golden Hi//because,
the improvements will directly benefit property in the Improvement District and the general
benefits have been explicitly calculated and quantified and excluded from the
assessments. The Engineer's Report is consistent with Bonander because the
assessments have been apportioned based on the overall cost of the improvements and
proportional special benefit to each property.
•
•
CRY OF MOORPARK _
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsuftingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
114
PAGE 6
PLANS& SPECIFICATIONS
The City of Moorpark maintains park facilities throughout the City.
The work and improvements (the "Improvements") proposed to be undertaken by the City
of Moorpark Parks & Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District(the "District") and
the cost thereof paid from the levy of the annual assessment provide special benefit to
Assessor Parcels within the District as defined in the Method of Assessment herein.
Consistent with the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, (the "Act") the work and
improvements are generally described as follows:
Installation, maintenance and servicing of public recreational facilities and improvements,
including but not limited to landscaping, sprinkler systems, park grounds, park facilities,
landscape corridors, ground cover, shrubs and trees, street frontages, playground
equipment and hardcourt areas, water, drainage systems, lighting, fencing, entry
monuments, basketball courts, tennis courts, running tracks, swimming pools, restroom
facilities including sewage systems, other recreational facilities, security patrols to protect
the Improvements, graffiti removal and repainting, and labor, materials, supplies, utilities
and equipment, as applicable, for property owned and maintained by the City of Moorpark.
Plans and specifications for these improvements have been filed with the Director of
Community Services of the City of Moorpark and are incorporated herein by reference.
As applied herein, "Installation" means the construction of recreational improvements,
including, but not limited to, land preparation (such as grading, leveling, cutting and filling),
sod, landscaping, irrigation systems, sidewalks and drainage, lights, playground
equipment, play courts, recreational facilities and public restrooms.
"Maintenance" means the furnishing of services and materials for the ordinary and usual
maintenance, operation and servicing of any improvement, including repair, removal or
replacement of all or any part of any improvement; providing for the life, growth, health,
and beauty of landscaping, including cultivation, irrigation, trimming, spraying, fertilizing, or
treating for disease or injury; the removal of trimmings, rubbish, debris, and other solid
waste, and the cleaning, sandblasting, and painting of walls and other improvements to
remove or cover graffiti.
"Servicing" means the furnishing of electric current, or energy, gas or other illuminating
agent for any public lighting facilities or for the lighting or operation of any other
improvements; or water for the irrigation of any landscaping, the operation of any
fountains, or the maintenance of any other improvements.
Incidental expenses include all of the following: (a) The costs of preparation of the report,
including plans, specifications, estimates, diagram, and assessment; (b) the costs of
printing, advertising, and the giving of published, posted, and mailed notices; (c)
compensation payable to the County for collection of assessments; (d) compensation of
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCiConsultingGroup
ENGINEERS REPORT,FY 2015-16
115
PAGE 7
any engineer or attorney employed to render services in proceedings pursuant to this part;
(e) any other expenses incidental to the construction, installation, or maintenance and
servicing of the Improvements; (f) any expenses incidental to the issuance of bonds or
notes pursuant to Streets & Highways Code Section 22662.5; and (g) costs associated
with any elections held for the approval of a new or increased assessment. (Streets &
Highways Code§22526).
The assessment proceeds will be exclusively used for Improvements within the
Improvement District plus Incidental expenses. Reference is made to the Summary of
Improvement Plans section in the following section of this Report and the more detailed
budgets and improvement plans of the Improvement District, which are on file with the
Department of Public Works of the City of Moorpark.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEERS REPORT,FY 2015-16
116
PAGED
FISCAL YEAR 2015-16 ESTIMATE OF COST AND BUDGET
INTRODUCTION
Following are the proposed Improvements, and resulting level of improved parks and
recreation facilities, for the City. As previously noted, the baseline level of service included
a declining level of parks and recreation facilities due to shortages of funds for the City.
Improvements funded by the assessments are over and above the previously declining
baseline level of service. The formula below describes the relationship between the final
level of improvements, the existing baseline level of service, and the enhanced level of
improvements to be funded by the proposed assessment.
Final Level of _ Baseline Level of Enhanced Level of
Improvements — Improvements + Improvements
SUMMARY OF IMPROVEMENT PLANS
Projects have been chosen throughout the Improvement District in order to ensure that all
properties in the narrowly drawn City boundaries will receive improved access to better
maintained and improved parks in their area. A detailed project improvement plan has
been developed and is available for review at the office of the Parks, Recreation and
Community Services of the City of Moorpark.
Cm OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEERS REPORT,FY 2015-16
117
PAGE 9
TABLE 1—COST AND BUDGET it*2015-16
CITY OF MOORPARK
Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District
Estimate of Cost
Fiscal Year 2015-16
Total
Budget
Installation, Maintenance& Servicing Costs
Capital Improvements $1,921,413
Property Maintenance $488,465
Tree Trimming $26,600
Landscaping Services $284,916
Water $456,050
Utilities $38,339
Supplies and Materials $9,500
Equipment and Vehicle Operation and Maintenance $37,800
Graffiti Abatement $45,000
Maintenance and Operation of Grounds and Recreational Facilities $797,328
Equipment and Repair $7,500
Equipment Rental $3,250
Subtotal- Installation, Maintenance and Servicing $4,116,161
Administrative Costs and Incidentals $179,415
Totals for Installation, Maintenance, Servicing and Administration $4,295,576
Less: Court Light Fees ($8,100)
Less: City Contribution for General and Special Benefits' ($3,526,746)
Net Cost of Installation, Maintenance, Servicing and Administration $760,730
(Total Amount to be Assessed)
Contributions(to)/from Reserve Fund $0
Net Amount to Assessment2 $760,730
Budget Allocation to Property
Total Assessment Budget* $760,730
Single Family Equivalent Benefit Units 13,257.75
Assessment per Single Family Equivalent Unit $57.38
•All assessments are rounded to lower even penny. Therefore,the budget amount slightly differs from
the assessment rate
CRY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
118
PAGE 10
Notes to Estimate of Cost:
As determined in the following section, at least 25%of the cost of Improvements must be funded from
sources other than the assessments to cover any general benefits from the Improvements. Therefore,
out of the total cost of Improvements of$4,295,576, the City must contribute at least$1,073,894 from
sources other than the assessments. The City will contribute much more than this amount,which more
than covers any general benefits from the Improvements.
The Act requires that proceeds from the assessments must be deposited into a special fund that has
been set up for the revenues and expenditures of the Improvement District. Moreover,funds raised by
the assessment shall be used only for the purposes stated within this Report. Any balance remaining at
the end of the fiscal year, July 1, must be carried over to the next fiscal year. The City may also
establish a reserve fund for contingencies and special projects as well as a capital improvement fund for
accumulating funds for larger capital improvement projects or capital renovation needs.Any remaining
balance would either be placed in the reserve fund,the capital improvement fund, or would be used to
reduce future years'assessments.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultiingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16 •
119
PAGE 11
METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT
This section of the Engineers Report explains the benefits to be derived from the
Improvements to park facilities throughout the City, and the methodology used to apportion
the total assessment to properties within the Parks Maintenance and Recreational
Improvement District.
The Parks & Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District consists of all Assessor
Parcels within the boundaries of the City of Moorpark. The parcels include all privately or
publicly owned parcels within said boundaries. The method used for apportioning the
assessment is based upon the proportional special benefits conferred to properties over
and above the general benefits conferred to real property in the Improvement District or to
the public at large. Special benefit is calculated for each parcel in the Improvement District
using the following process:
1. Identification of all benefit factors derived from the Improvements
2. Calculation of the proportion of these benefits that are general
3. Determination of the relative special benefit within different areas within the
Improvement District
4. Determination of the relative special benefit per property type
5. Calculation of the specific assessment for each individual parcel based upon
special vs. general benefit; location, property type, property characteristics,
improvements on property and other supporting attributes
DISCUSSION OF BENEFIT
In summary, the assessments can only be levied based on the special benefit to property.
Any and all general benefit must be funded from another source. This special benefit is
received by property over and above any general benefits from the Improvements. With
reference to the requirements for assessments, Section 22573 of the Landscaping and
Lighting Act of 1972 states:
"The net amount to be assessed upon lands within an assessment district
may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the
net amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the
estimated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from the
improvements."
Proposition 218, as codified in Article XIIID of the California Constitution, has confirmed
that assessments must be based on the special benefit to property and that the value of
the special benefits must reasonably exceed the cost of the assessment:
Cm•OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEERS REPORT,FY 2015-16 -
120
PAGE 12
"No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the
reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that
parcel"
Since assessments are levied on the basis of special benefit, they are not a tax and are
not governed by Article XIIIA of the California Constitution.
The SVTA v. SCCOSA decision also clarifies that a special benefit is a service or
improvement that provides a direct advantage to a parcel and that indirect or derivative
advantages resulting from the overall public benefits from a service or improvement are
general benefits. The SVTA v. SCCOSA decision also provides specific guidance that
park improvements are a direct advantage and special benefit to property that is proximate
to a park that is improved by an assessment:
The characterization of a benefit may depend on whether the parcel
receives a direct advantage from the improvement (e.g. proximity to a
park) or receives an indirect, derivative advantage resulting from the
overall public benefits of the improvement(e.g. general enhancement of
the district's property values).
Finally, Proposition 218 twice uses the phrase "over and above" general benefits in
describing special benefit. (Art. XIIID, sections 2(i) & 4(f).) The SVTA v. SCCOSA
decision further clarifies that special benefits must provide a direct advantage to benefiting
property and that proximity to a park is an example of a special benefit.
BENEFIT FACTORS
The special benefits from the Improvements are listed below:
EXTENSION OF A PROPERTY'S OUTDOOR AREAS AND GREEN SPACES FOR PROPERTIES WITHIN
CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE IMPROVEMENTS
In large part because it is cost prohibitive to provide large open land areas on property in
the Improvement District, the residential, commercial and other benefiting properties in the
Improvement District do not have large outdoor areas and green spaces. The parks and
recreation areas in the Improvement District provide these larger outdoor areas that serve
as an effective extension of the land area for proximate properties because the
Improvements are uniquely proximate and accessible to property in close proximity to the
Improvements. The Improvements, therefore, provide an important, valuable and desirable
extension of usable land area for the direct advantage and special benefit of properties
with good and close proximity to the Improvements.
According to the industry-standard guidelines established by the National Park and
Recreation Association (the "NPRA"), neighborhood parks in urban areas have a service
area radius of generally one-half mile and community parks have a service area radius of
approximately two miles. The service radii for neighborhood parks and neighborhood
green spaces were specifically established to give all properties within this service radii
Cm'OF MOORPARK 1
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
121
PAGE 13
close proximity and easy walking access to such public land areas. Since proximate and
accessible parks serve as an extension of the usable land area for property in the service
radii and since the service radii was specifically designed to provide close proximity and
access, the parcels within the service area radii clearly receive a direct advantage and
special benefit from the Improvements - and this advantage is not received by other
properties or the public at large.
Moreover, most neighborhood parks in the Improvement District do not provide a parking
lot. Such public amenities were specifically excluded from neighborhood parks because
neighborhood parks are designed to be an extension of usable land area specifically for
properties in close proximity, and not the public at large or other non-proximate property.
The occupants of proximate property do not need to drive to their local park because they
can easily reach their local neighborhood park. This is further tangible evidence of the
effective extension of land area provided by the Improvements to proximate parcels in the
Assessment District and the unique direct advantage the proximate parcels receive from
the Improvements.
An analysis of the service radii for the Improvements finds that all properties in the
Improvement District enjoy the distinct and direct advantage of being close and proximate
to one or often multiple parks within the Improvement District. The benefiting properties in
the Improvement District therefore uniquely and specially benefit from the Improvements.
PROXIMITY TO IMPROVED PARKS AND RECREATIONAL FACILMES
Only the specific properties within close proximity to the Improvements are included in the
Improvement District. Therefore, property in the Improvement District enjoys unique and
valuable proximity and access to the Improvements that the public at large and property
outside the Improvement District do not share.
In absence of the assessments, the Improvements would not be provided and the parks
and recreation areas in the Improvement District would be degraded due to insufficient
funding for maintenance, upkeep and repair. Therefore, the assessments provide
Improvements that are over and above what otherwise would be provided. Improvements
that are over and above what otherwise would be provided do not by themselves translate
into special benefits but when combined with the unique proximity and access enjoyed by
parcels in the Improvement District, they provide a direct advantage and special benefit to
property in the Improvement District.
ACCESS TO IMPROVED PARKS,OPEN SPACE AND RECREATIONAL AREAS •
Since the parcels in the Improvement District are nearly the only parcels that enjoy close
access to the Improvements, they directly benefit from the unique close access to
improved parks, open space and recreation areas that are provided by the Assessments.
This is a direct advantage and special benefit to property in the Improvement District.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16 •
122
PAGE 14
IMPROVED VIEWS
The City, by maintaining the landscaping at its park, recreation and open space facilities
provides improved views to properties with direct line-of-sight as well as other local
properties which benefit from improved views when property is accessed. Therefore, the
improved and protected views provided by the Assessments are another direct and
tangible advantage that is uniquely conferred upon property in the Improvement District.
BENEFIT FINDING
In summary, real property located within the boundaries of the Improvement District
distinctly and directly benefits from closer proximity, access and views of improved parks,
recreation facilities, landscaped corridors, greenbelts, trail systems and other public
resources funded by the Assessments. The Improvements are specifically designed to
serve local properties in the Improvement District, not other properties or the public at
large. The public at large and other properties outside the Improvement District receive
only limited benefits from the Improvements because they do not have proximity, good
access or views of the Improvements. These are special benefits to property in the
Improvement District in much the same way that sewer and water facilities, sidewalks and
paved streets enhance the utility and desirability of property and make them more
functional to use, safer and easier to access.
GENERAL VERSUS SPECIAL BENEFIT
Article XIIIC of the California Constitution requires any local agency proposing to increase
or impose a benefit assessment to "separate the general benefits from the special benefits
conferred on a parcel." The rationale for separating special and general benefits is to
ensure that property owners subject to the benefit assessment are not paying for general
benefits. The assessment can fund special benefits but cannot fund general benefits.
Accordingly, a separate estimate of the special and general benefit is given in this section.
In other words:
Total General Special
Benefit — Benefit + Benefit
There is no Widely-accepted or statutory formula for general benefit. General benefits are
benefits from improvements or services that are not special in nature, are not "particular
and distinct" and are not"over and above" benefits received by other properties. SVTA vs.
SCCOSA provides some clarification by indicating that general benefits provide "an
indirect, derivative advantage° and are not necessarily proximate to the improvements.
In the 2009 Dahms case, the court upheld an assessment that was 100% special benefit
on the rationale that the services funded by the assessments were directly provided within
the assessment district. It is also important to note that the improvements and services
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEERS REPORT,FY 2015-16 -
123
PAGE 15
funded by the assessments in Pomona are similar to the improvements and services
funded by the Assessments described in this Engineer's Report and the Court found these
improvements and services to be 100% special benefit. Also similar to the assessments in
Pomona, the Assessments described in this Engineer's Report fund improvements and
services directly provided within the Assessment District and every benefiting property in
the Assessment District enjoys proximity and access to the Improvements. Therefore,
Dahms establishes a basis for minimal or zero general benefits from the Assessments.
However, in this Report, the general benefit is more conservatively estimated and
described, and then budgeted so that it is funded by sources other than the Assessment.
The starting point for evaluating general and special benefits is the current, baseline level
of service. The assessment will fund Improvements "over and above" this general,
baseline level and the general benefits estimated in this section are over and above the
baseline.
A formula to estimate the general benefit is listed below:
Benefit to Real Benefit to Real
General Property Property Inside the Benefit to
Benefit = Outside the + Assessment District + the Public
Assessment that is Indirect and at Large
District Derivative
Special benefit, on the other hand, is defined in the state constitution as "a particular and
distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the
district or to the public at large." The SVTA v. SCCOSA decision indicates that a special
benefit is conferred to a property if it "receives a direct advantage from the improvement
(e.g., proximity to a park)." In this assessment, as noted, properties in the Improvement
District have close and unique proximity, views and access to the Improvements and
uniquely improved desirability from the Improvements and other properties and the public
at large do not receive significant benefits because they do not have proximity, access or
views of the Improvements. Therefore, the overwhelming proportion of the benefits
conferred to property is special, and is only minimally received by property outside the
Improvement District or the public at large.
CALCULATING GENERAL BENEFIT
In this section, the general benefit is conservatively estimated and described, and then
budgeted so that it is funded by sources other than the assessment.
BENEFIT TO PROPERTY OUTSIDE THE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
Properties within the Improvement District receive almost all of the special benefits from
the Improvements because properties in the Improvement District enjoy unique close
proximity and access to the Improvements that is not enjoyed by other properties or the
public at large. However, certain properties within the proximity/access radius of the
Cm,OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
124
PAGE 16
Improvements, but outside of the boundaries of the Improvement District, may receive
some benefit from the Improvements. Since this benefit is conferred to properties outside
the Improvement District boundaries, it contributes to the overall general benefit calculation
and will not be funded by the Assessments.
The properties outside the Improvement District and within the proximity radii for
neighborhood parks in the Improvement District receive benefits from the Improvements.
Since these properties are not assessed for their benefits because they are outside of the
area that can be assessed by the City, this is form of general benefit to the public at large
and other property. A 50% reduction factor is applied to these properties because they are
all geographically on only one side of the Improvements and have over twice the average
proximity to the Improvements as properties in the Improvement District. The general
benefit to property outside of the Improvement District is calculated as follows with the
parcel and data analysis performed by SCI Consulting Group.
Assumptions:
1,272 parcels outside the City but within either 0.5 miles of a neighborhood park or 2.0
miles of a community park within the Improvement District
10,966 parcels in the Improvement District
50%relative benefit compared to property within the improvement district
Calculation of General Benefit to Property Outside the Improvement District
1,272/(10,966+ 1,272).0.5=5.2%
Although it can reasonably be argued that Improvements inside, but near the Park District
boundaries are offset by similar park and recreational improvements provided outside, but
near the Park District's boundaries, we use the more conservative approach of finding that
5.2% of the Improvements may be of general benefit to property outside the Improvement
District.
BENEFIT TO PROPERTY INSIDE THE DISTRICT THAT IS INDIRECT AND DERIVATNE
The "indirect and derivative" benefit to property within the Improvement District is
particularly difficult to calculate. A solid argument can be presented that all benefit within
the Improvement District is special, because the Improvements are clearly "over and
above" and "particular and distinct" when compared with the baseline level of service and
the unique proximity, access and views of the Improvements enjoyed by benefiting
properties in the Improvement District.
Cm OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
125
PAGE 17
Nevertheless, the SVTA vs. SCCOSA decision indicates there may be general benefit
"conferred on real property located in the district" A measure of the general benefits to
property within the Assessment area is the percentage of land area within the
Improvement District that is publicly owned and used for regional purposes such as major
roads, rail lines and other regional facilities because such properties used for regional
purposes could provide indirect benefits to the public at large. Approximately 1.0% of the
land area in the Improvement District is used for such regional purposes, so this is a
measure of the general benefits to property within the Improvement District.
BENEFIT To THE PUBLIC AT LARGE
The general benefit to the public at large can be estimated by the proportionate amount of
time that the City's parks and recreational facilities are used and enjoyed by individuals
who are not residents, employees, customers or property owners in the Cityt. A survey of
park and recreation facility usage conducted by SCI Consulting Group found that less than
5% of the City's facility usage is by those who do not live or work within City boundaries.
When people outside the Improvement District use parks, they diminish the availability of
parks for people within the Improvement District. Therefore, another 5% of general
benefits are allocated for people within the Improvement District. Combining these two
measures of general benefits, we find that 10% of the benefits from the Improvements are
general benefits to the public at large.
TOTAL GENERAL BENEFITS
Using a sum of these three measures of general benefit, we find that approximately 16.2%
of the benefits conferred by the Improvements may be general in nature and should be
funded by sources other than the assessment.
General Benefit Calculation
5.2% (Outside the Assessment District)
•
+ 1.0% (Property within the Assessment District)
+ 10.0% (Public at Large)
=16.2% (Total General Benefit)
Although this analysis finds that 16.2% of the assessment may provide general benefits,
the Assessment Engineer establishes a requirement for a minimum contribution from
sources other than the assessments of 25%. This minimum contribution above the
measure of general benefits will serve to provide additional coverage for any other general
benefits.
•
1 . When District facilities are used by those individuals, the facilities are not providing benefit to property
within the City. Use under these circumstances is a measure of general benefit.For example,a non-resident
who is drawn to utilize the City facilities and shops at local businesses while in the area would provide
special benefit to business properties as a result of his or her use of the Improvements. Conversely, one
who uses City facilities but does not reside,work,shop or own property within the City boundaries does not
provide special benefits to any property and is considered to be a measure of the general benefits.
CITY Or MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
126
PAGE 18
The City's total budget for maintenance and improvement of its parks and recreational
facilities is $4,295,576. Of this total budget amount, the City will contribute $3,534,846
from sources other than the assessments for park maintenance and operation. This
contribution by the City equates to approximately 82% of the total budget for maintenance
and improvements and constitutes far more than the amount attributable to the general
benefits from the Improvements.
METHOD OF ASSESSMENT
As previously discussed, the assessments provide specific Improvements that confer
direct and tangible special benefits to properties in the Improvement District. These
benefits can partially be measured by the occupants on property in the Improvement
District because such parcel population density is a measure of the relative benefit a
parcel receives from the Improvements. Therefore, the apportionment of benefit is partially
based the population density of parcels.
It should be noted that many other types of "traditional" assessments also use parcel
population densities to apportion the assessments. For example, the assessments for
sewer systems, roads and water systems are typically allocated based on the population
density of the parcels assessed. Moreover, assessments have a long history of use in
California and are in large part based on the principle that benefits from a service or
improvement funded by assessments that is enjoyed by tenants and other non-property
owners ultimately is conferred directly to the underlying property.2
The next step in apportioning assessments is to determine the relative special benefit for
each property. This process involves determining the relative benefit received by each
property in relation to a single family home, or, in other words, on the basis of Single
Family Equivalents (SFE). This SFE methodology is commonly used to distribute
assessments in proportion to estimated special benefit and is generally recognized as
providing the basis for a fair and appropriate distribution of assessments. For the
purposes of this Engineer's Report, all properties are designated a SFE value, which is
each property's relative benefit in relation to a single family home on one parcel. In this
case, the "benchmark" property is the single family detached dwelling which is one Single
Family Equivalent or one SFE.
2 For example,in Federal Construction Co. v Ensign(1922)59 Ca/App.200 at 211,the appellate court
determined that a sewer system specially benefited property even though the direct benefit was to the
people who used the sewers: "Practically every inhabitant of a city either is the owner of the land on
which he resides or on which he pursues his vocation,or he is the tenant of the owner,or is the agent or
servant of such owner or of such tenant. And since it is the inhabitants who make by far the greater use
of a city's sewer system,it is to them,as lot owners or as tenants,or as the servants or agents of such
lot owners or tenants,that the advantages of actual use will redound. But this advantage of use means
that, in the final analysis, it is the lot owners themselves who will be especially benefited in a financial
sense."
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT - SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
127
PAGE 19
In the process of determining the appropriate method of assessment, the Engineer
considered various alternatives. For example, an assessment only for all residential
improved property was considered but was determined to be inappropriate because
commercial, industrial and other properties also receive direct benefits from the
Improvements.
Moreover, a fixed or flat assessment for all properties of similar type was deemed to be
inappropriate because larger properties receive a higher degree of benefit than other
similarly used properties that are significantly smaller. (For two properties used for
commercial purposes, there is clearly a higher benefit provided to the larger property in
comparison to a smaller commercial property because the larger property generally
supports a larger building and has higher numbers of employees, customers and guests
that would benefit from proximity and improved access to well maintained and improved
parks and recreational facilities. So the potential population of employees or residents is a
measure of the special benefits received by the property.) Larger parcels, therefore,
receive an increased benefit from the assessments.
Finally, the special benefits derived from the assessments are conferred on property and
are not based on a specific property owner's use of the improvements, or a specific
property owner's occupancy of property or the property owner's demographic status such
as age or number of dependents. However, it is ultimately people who value the special
benefits described above and use and enjoy the City's park and recreational facilities. In
other words, the benefits derived to property are related to the average number of people
who could potentially live on, work at, or otherwise could use a property, not how the
property is currently used by the present owner. Therefore, the number of people who
could or potentially live on, work at or otherwise use a property is one indicator of the
relative level of benefit received by a property.
In conclusion, the Assessment Engineer determined that the appropriate method of
assessment apportionment should be based on the type and use of property, the relative
size of the property, its relative population and usage potential and its proximity to parks
and recreational facilities. This method is further described below.
PROXIMITY BENEFITS
The City's park facilities are easily accessible by anyone within a neighborhood or the City.
Therefore, benefits from the proposed improvements do not vary based on proximity of the
parcels to the improvements because the increased benefits of greater proximity to the
improvements are generally offset by a parallel increase in negative factors such as higher
levels of traffic, noise, etc. that comes with increased proximity. Consequently, since all
parcels in the City have good access and proximity to the City's grounds and recreational
facilities and the benefits to relatively closer proximity are offset by other factors, proximity
is not considered to be a factor in determining benefit within the Parks Maintenance and
Improvement District.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
128
PAGE 20
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES
Certain residential properties in the Improvement District that contain a single residential
dwelling unit are assigned one Single Family Equivalent or 1.0 SFE. Traditional houses,
zero-lot line houses and townhomes are included in this category of single family
residential property.
Properties With more than one residential unit are designated as multi-family residential
properties. These properties benefit from the improvements in proportion to the number of
dwelling units that occupy each property and the average number of people who reside in
multi-family residential units versus the average number of people who reside in a single
family home. The population density factors for the City of Moorpark, as depicted below,
provide the basis for determining the SFE factors for residential properties. Using the total
population in a certain property type within the City of Moorpark from the 1990 Census and
dividing it by the total number of such households, finds that approximately 3.54 persons
occupy each single family residence, whereas an average of 2.78 persons occupy each
multi-family residence. Using the ratio of one SFE for each single-family residence, which
equates to one SFE for every 3.54 persons, 0.78 SFE would equate to one multi-family
unit or 0.78 SFE for every 2.78 residents. Likewise, using the average population density
ratios for other types of residential property, each condominium unit receives 0.80 SFE
and each mobile home receives 0.65 SFE.
TABLE 2-RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT FACTORS
Total Occupied Persons SFE
Population Households per Household Factor
Single Family Residential 20,105 5,679 3.54 1.00
Condominium 2,361 835 2.83 0.80
Multi-Family Residential 2,155 776 2.78 0.78
Mobile Homes 672 292 2.30 0.65
Source: 1990 Census,City of Moorpark Census(the most recent data available when the Improvement
Oistdct was established)
COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES
SFE values for commercial and industrial land uses are based on the equivalence of
special benefit on a land area basis between single family residential property and the
average commercial/industrial property. The SFE values for various commercial and
industrial land uses are further defined by using average employee densities because the
special benefit factors described previously can be measured by the average number of
people who work at commercial/industrial properties.
In order to determine employee density factors, the findings from the San Diego
Association of Governments Traffic Generators Study (the "SANDAG Study") are used
CRY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
129
PAGE 21
because these findings were approved by the State Legislature for use in justifying
commercial and industrial school facilities fees and are considered to be a good
representation of the average number of employees per acre of land area for commercial
and industrial properties. As determined by the SANDAG Study, the average number of
employees per acre for commercial and industrial property is 35.
In comparison, the average number of people residing in a single family home in the area
is 3.54. Since the average lot size for a single family home in Moorpark is approximately
0.17 acres,the average number of residents per acre of residential property is 21.3
The employee density per acre is generally 1.7 times the population density of single
family residential property per acre (35 employees per acre / 21 residents per acre).
Therefore, the average employee density can be used as the basis for allocating benefit to
commercial or industrial property since a property with 1.7 employees receives generally
similar special benefit to a residential property with 1 resident. This factor of equivalence
of benefit between 1 resident to 1.7 employees is the basis for allocating
commercial/industrial benefit. Table 2 shows the average employees per acre of land area
or portion thereof for commercial and industrial properties and lists the relative SFE factors
per fifth acre for properties in each land use category.
Commercial and industrial properties in excess of 5 acres generally involve uses that are
more land intensive relative to building areas and number of employees (lower coverage
ratios). As a result, the benefit factors for commercial and industrial property land area in
excess of 5 acres is determined to be the SFE rate per fifth acre for the first 5 acres and
the relevant SFE rate per each additional acre over 5 acres.
Institutional properties that are used for residential, commercial or industrial purposes are
also assessed at the appropriate residential, commercial or industrial rate.
TABLE 3-COMMERCIALflNDUSTRIAL ASSESSMENT FACTORS
Average SFE Units
Type of CommerciaUlndustrial Employees per
Land Use Per Acre r 1/5 Acre 2
Commercial 24 0.7
Office 68 1.9
Shopping Center 24 0.7
Industrial 24 0.7
Self Storage or Parking Lot 1 0.03
3 . Average lot size determined by an analysis of real property maps and Ventura County assessor
parcel data.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
130
•
PAGE 22
1. Source: San Diego Association of Governments Traffic Generators Study.
2. The SFE factors for commercial and industrial parcels are applied by the fifth acre of land area or
portion thereof. (Therefore, the minimum assessment for any assessable parcel in these categories is
the SFE Units listed herein.)
VACANT RESIDENTIAL LAND
The benefit to vacant properties is determined to be proportional to the corresponding
benefits for similar type developed properties; however, at a lower rate due to the lack of
improvements on the property. It is reasonable to assume that approximately 25% of the
benefits are related to the underlying land and 75% are related to the improvements and
the day to day use of the property. Using this ratio, the SFE factor for vacant parcels is
0.25 per parcel.
As properties are approved for development, their value increases. Likewise, the special
benefits received by vacant property increases as the property is approved for
development, or becomes closer to being improved. When property moves from vacant
status to the point at which a development application and engineering plans have been
submitted to the City for approval, such property is deemed to receive 35% of the relative •
benefits that would be received by the property after it is fully improved or developed.
Thus the SFE factor for property with proposed development applications is 35% of the
rate that would be applied to the property when it is fully developed.
At the second stage towards development, tentative parcel maps and site development
plans are approved for the property. At this point, the property is at the final stage and can
shortly undergo construction. Since the property is nearing the point of development, its
special benefits increase. The Engineer has determined that the relative level of benefit
for approved property is 65% of the rate for similar developed property. Therefore, all
approved property is assigned an SFE factor that is equal to 65% of the SFE factor that
would be applied to the property after it is fully developed.4
OTHER PROPERTIES
Article XIIID stipulates that publicly owned properties must be assessed unless there is
clear and convincing evidence that those properties receive no special benefit from the
assessment.
Church parcels, school parcels and other properties used for educational purposes
typically generate a lower number of employees than other non-residential parcels.
Moreover, many of these parcels provide some degree of on-site amenities that serve to
offset some of the benefits from the Parks Maintenance and Improvement District.
Therefore, these parcels receive minimal benefit and are assessed an SFE factor of 1.
4. For example, if a property is proposed for development of 100 single family homes,the SFE factor
would be 100 SFE*35%, which equals 35 SFE. After the property is approved for development, the
SFE factor would be 65 (100 SFE upon completion * 65%). The rates for commercial and industrial
property are applied similarly.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SGIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
131
PAGE 23
Publicly or institutionally owned property that is used for residential, commercial, office or
industrial purposes benefits from the assessments at the same level as any other similarly
used property that is privately owned. Therefore, such publicly or institutionally owned
property is assessed at the same rate as other similarly used property.
Miscellaneous, small and other parcels such as roads, right-of-way parcels, and common
areas typically do not generate significant numbers of employees, residents, customers or
guests and have limited economic value. These miscellaneous parcels receive minimal
benefit from the Improvements and are assessed an SFE benefit factor or 0.
DURATION OF ASSESSMENT
It is proposed that the Assessment be levied for fiscal year 1999-00 and continued every
year thereafter, so long as the parks and recreational areas need to be improved and
maintained the City of Moorpark requires funding from the assessments for its
Improvements in the Improvement District. As noted previously, the Assessment can
continue be levied annually after the City of Moorpark City Council approves an annually
updated Engineer's Report, budget for the assessment, Improvements to be provided, and
other specifics of the assessment. In addition, the City Council must hold an annual public
hearing to continue the assessment.
APPEALS AND INTERPRETATION
Any property owner who feels that the assessment levied on the subject property is in error
as a result of incorrect information being used to apply the foregoing method of
assessment, may file a written appeal with the Finance Director or her or his designee.
Any such appeal is limited to correction of an assessment during the then current or, if
before July 1, the upcoming fiscal year. Upon the filing of any such appeal, the Finance
Director or his or her designee will promptly review the appeal and any information
provided by the property owner. If the Finance Director or her or his designee finds that
the assessment should be modified, the appropriate changes shall be made to the
assessment roll. If any such changes are approved after the assessment roll has been
filed with the County for collection, the Finance Director or his or her designee is
authorized to refund to the property owner the amount of any approved reduction. Any
property owner who disagrees with the decision of the Finance Director or her or his
designee, may refer their appeal to the City Council of the City of Moorpark and the
decision of the City Council of the City of Moorpark shall be final.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SGIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
132
PAGE 24
ASSESSMENT
WHEREAS, on January 21st, 2015 the City Council of the City of Moorpark, County of
Ventura, California, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972
and Article XIIID of the California Constitution (collectively "the Act"), adopted its
Resolution Initiating Proceedings For the Levying of Annual Assessments for "Moorpark
Parks&Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District";
WHEREAS, said Resolution directed the undersigned Engineer of Work to prepare and file
a report presenting an estimate of costs, a diagram for the Improvement District and an
assessment of the estimated costs of the improvements upon all assessable parcels within
the Improvement District, to which Resolution and the description of the improvements
therein contained, reference is hereby made for further particulars;
NOW, THEREFORE, the undersigned, by virtue of the power vested in me under said Act
and the order of the City Council of said City of Moorpark, hereby make the following
assessment to cover the portion of the estimated cost of said improvements, and the costs
and expenses incidental thereto to be paid by the Improvement District.
The amount to be paid for the Improvements and the expense incidental thereto, to be
paid by the Parks & Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District for the fiscal year
2015-16 is generally as follows:
TABLE 4-SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE
F.Y.
2015-16
Budget
Parks Maintenance and Improvement $4,116,161
Incidentals, Allowance and Administration Expenses $179,415
TOTAL BUDGET $4,295,576
Less:
Court Light Fees -8,100
City Contribution for General and Special Benefits -$3,526,746
NET AMOUNT TO ASSESSMENTS $760,730
•
As required by the Act, an Assessment Diagram is hereto attached and made a part hereof
showing the exterior boundaries of the Improvement District. The distinctive number of
each parcel or lot of land in the Improvement District is its Assessor Parcel Number
appearing on the Assessment Roll.
CRY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16 -
133
PAGE 25
And I do hereby assess and apportion said net amount of the cost and expenses of said
improvements, including the costs and expenses incident thereto, upon the parcels and
lots of land within said Improvement District, in accordance with the special benefits to be
received by each parcel or lot, from the improvements, and more particularly set forth in
the Cost Estimate and Method of Assessment hereto attached and by reference made a
part hereof.
The assessment is subject to an annual adjustment tied to the Consumer Price Index-U for
the Los Angeles Area as of December of each succeeding year (the "CPI"), with a
maximum annual adjustment not to exceed 3%. Any change in the CPI in excess of 3%
shall be cumulatively reserved as the "Unused CPI" and shall be used to increase the
maximum authorized assessment rate in years in which the CPI is less than 3%. The
maximum authorized assessment rate is equal to the maximum assessment rate in the
first fiscal year the assessment was levied adjusted annually by the minimum of 1) 3% or
2)the change in the CPI plus any Unused CPI as described above.
The change in the CPI from December 2013 to December 2014 was 0.72%. Therefore,
the maximum authorized assessment rate for fiscal year 2015-16 is increased by 0.72%
which equates to$57.38 per single family equivalent benefit unit. The estimate of cost and
budget in this Engineer's Report proposes assessments for fiscal year 2015-16 at the rate
of$57.38.
The assessment is made upon the parcels or lots of land within the Improvement District in
proportion to the special benefits to be received by the parcels or lots of land, from said
improvements.
Each parcel or lot of land is described in the Assessment Roll by reference to its parcel
number as shown on the Assessor's Maps of the County of Ventura for the fiscal year
2015-16. For a more particular description of the property, reference is hereby made to the
deeds and maps on file and of record in the office of the County Recorder of said County.
I hereby place opposite the Assessor Parcel Number for each parcel or lot within the
Assessment Roll, the amount of the assessment for the fiscal year 2015-16 for each parcel
or lot of land within the said Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District.
Dated: April 17, 2015 Engineer of Work
�ooko Essioii
w C 52091 m W
ce
41 /
EXP.12
OF 2-31-1 �`P* By John W. Bliss, License No. C052091
Cny OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16 -
134
PAGE 26
ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM
The Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District includes all properties
within the boundaries of the City of Moorpark. The area within the boundaries of the City
encompasses approximately 12.4 square miles, the majority of which is developed for
urban use, or planned or approved for development.
The boundaries of the Parks Maintenance and Improvement District are displayed on the
following Assessment Diagram.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
135
i ¢vi NFryW pZa r2 uF a' UQ
z- LLOUz .Ew"z as z aKC'
oSa U O )a0 NrtOz Nw< Y O "' °SrS,^ � (AQ
YO Z �` FLL y2Ww wain U a OY�O UD
wi i 00,72N¢�LL'� �~w ,r„w, m ooay°ter 0 ❑ ❑
ow LL e o�Qa pyo wow OD OD z „,°, w�om �Z2
=o - focwiie "'iii ,�`z oOw¢o > f..a7oa ll-al
o LLo - ._,Luz Z$.i° . W>i� o ?awY¢io }Wy
Fz wuj zz 2 co WAN rOFV °FraoiH F > y
p UOLL �'IN--N LLWWx VET O O�QY Z 'Z��U82d UOW
OU LLFO NOUN �NLLLLO WN2 QLLWJQQ 0 ft W0
Y' O OU <) N ryQ >NNQJ 0°902LL U V�NNWLL cd CO
LL WZ0 O �F_'<0 W.=RK< w1- ]LLUR'o K Yu 2a�.-z ma
$ -,O°a . i"z_aa.-3o ?NQO z.„2 o �w�2i<'o� ❑
u0¢ O z,. w .,„Oyp wNwU Zwr Z 110,144
woQ Y O o Er z z¢° cc wxLLau O 4ow€J°d 2
roil w w°¢ o y,¢O �awQ LLwow z NF=O'�O ¢ wo0xz°p Q
zLL� �0a 0 000-z LLScz rcazn o 0Q _w0 z �oow�a g° W
WOj-N r WON 6 Q50 ) �U' UgWh8OU 0 u ' OFW zj
wW zDwC) Z
,iUUti U KOH ti ZWOLL OQN02o WRQ LL 7HS O =pyo.OWS rc zO GU�n
6 fO OLLO-N2QW 0 [v QNF 0 OUFSUWQ Z
W
I-
Z
rtC
11/4 a
0
•� W
w
0
W
ce
P i
, to
s 7 NC
W
r =r Q
a
a
IPir 1.1 r ,i
�4
A, gir
atm 1
99a
ti
-TE”
B 9 1 i,.
- glee.414/1.
1-re i! a 2I p
4 Inim PlAn `ry 4 A
if7 7—
t I
'j! 1 �n I ,!a'( d -_
L
_ _ m € –
`= ' s m -2 e s
Eda �, eu 3.S `-y\4 m
ninic
� _ � . -3All,
tl
1
oma
c.a.
m<
cO
All
a,a 136
PAGE 28
APPENDIX A-2015-16 ASSESSMENT ROLL
Each lot or parcel listed on the Assessment Roll is shown and illustrated on the latest
County Assessor records and these records are, by reference made part of this report.
These records shall govern for all details concerning the description of the lots or parcels.
CITY OF MOORPARK
PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup
- ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2015-16
137