Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAGENDA REPORT 2016 0420 CCSA REG ITEM 10I ITEM 10.1. C iTY OF MOORPARK.CALIFORNtA. City Council Meeting at 4f-a0-20/6 ACTION: ( _ Q :at- Weedy �o/A-307. MOORPARK CITY COUNCIL By:1f , ,& e AGENDA REPORT TO: The Honorable City Council � ,� FROM: Ron Ahlers, Finance Director�e'z DATE: March 28, 2016 (CC Meeting of April 20, 2016) SUBJECT: Consider Resolution Approving the Preliminary Assessment Engineer's Report for the Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement Assessment District for Fiscal Year 2016/2017 and Providing Notice of Public Hearing on May 18, 2016 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City Council is being asked to adopt the attached resolution, approving the Assessment Engineer's Report (Report), which contains the methodology and formula for appropriating the property assessment for park maintenance. Additionally, the resolution identifies the date for the Public Hearing to consider the levy of the assessment for fiscal year (FY) 2016/2017. 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. The Improvement District includes twenty (20) improved parks, as well as, the Serenata Trail. The amount of the assessment levied to property owners may only increase by the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for the Los Angeles Metropolitan area, and not more than 3.00% in any year. In situations when the CPI exceeds 3.00%, the remaining difference can be carriedDver to a subsequent year. 255 Honorable City Council April 20, 2016 Page 2 On February 17, 2016, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2016-3479 indicating its intent to continue the park assessment for FY 2016/2017 and directing the preparation of the Engineer's Report. DISCUSSION The City Council is being presented with the preliminary Engineer's Report (Attachment B) for consideration and approval. By approving the Report, the Council will be establishing the assessment levy amount and the formula used to spread the assessment and calculation of "special" benefit versus "general" benefit. The Report sets forth certain information including the following: • Boundary Map(s); • Assessment justification; • Duration of the assessments; • Description of improvements to be maintained; • Assessment methodology; • Cost of Living factor, and • 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 2016/2017 is expected to cover 18% of the overall cost to operate and improve the City parks, well below that 75% cap. 256 Honorable City Council April 20, 2016 Page 3 Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement Budget This report was prepared in advance of the Council's discussions of the FY 2016/2017 budget. Therefore, the budget figures identified in the Report 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 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 2016/2017 is $4,300,102, of which $1,872,852 is allocated for continuing capital improvement projects including: the loop trail and sidewalk/bicycle pathway extension; water meter, backflow and fire hydrant upgrade; and lighting plan study at Arroyo Vista Community Park (AVCP); and phase two installation of central irrigation system at various parks. This proposed budget is slightly higher than the $4,295,576 initial budget used in the FY 2015/2016 Engineer's Report. The net increase of $4,526 is from additional costs for tree trimming ($74,000), and turf conversion ($65,000); offset by savings in water budget ($87,000) generated by the implementation of phase I of the turf conversion at various sites; and completion of certain capital improvement projects ($48,000), such as the AVCP the parking lot repairs and progress on the loop trail design and engineering phase. The Report estimates that the proposed assessment will generate approximately $781,777 in revenue, an increase of$21,047 over the amount generated in FY 2015/2016. 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 Improvement District was adopted with a CPI cap of 3.00%. However, the approved assessment language allowed the City to carry over any difference in the CPI that exceeds 3.00% to the following year, as long as it adheres to the cap in subsequent years. The history of the adjusted assessment levy is as follows: 257 Honorable City Council April 20, 2016 Page 4 Levy Carryover Fiscal Year CPI Period CPI Adjustment Adjustment 2003/2004 Dec 2001/2002 3.70% 3.00% 0.70% 2004/2005 Dec 2002/2003 1.80% 2.50% 0.00% 2005/2006 Dec 2003/2004 4.39% 3.00% 1.39% 2006/2007 Dec 2004/2005 4.04% 3.00% 2.43% 2007/2008 Dec 2005/2006 3.70% 3.00% 3.13% 2008/2009 Dec 2006/2007 4.16% 3.00% 4.29% 2009/2010 Dec 2007/2008 0.11% 3.00% 1.40% 2010/2011 Dec 2008/2009 1.83% 3.00% 0.23% 2011/2012 Dec 2009/2010 1.34% 1.57% 0.00% 2012/2013 Dec 2010/2011 2.17% 2.17% 0.00% 2013/2014 Dec 2011/2012 1.93% 1.93% 0.00% 2014/2015 Dec 2012/2013 1.14% 1.14% 0.00% 2015/2016 Dec 2013/2014 0.72% 0.72% 0.00% 2016/2017 Dec 2014/2015 2.03% 2.03% 0.00% The CPI increase pertaining to the FY 2016/2017 assessment (December 2014 - December 2015) is 2.03%. 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 2016/2017 is $58.54, an increase of$1.16. Public Hearing The continuation of the Improvement District and rate adjustment requires a public hearing to be held prior to the annual levy of assessment for the purpose of receiving input and to hear any protest to the proposed assessment. Staff recommends that the Council set the hearing date as May 18, 2016. The Hearing Notice cites the assessment amounts set forth in the Report and it will be published and posted as required by law. FISCAL IMPACT The proposed Improvement District levy is expected to generate approximately $781,777 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 258 Honorable City Council April 20, 2016 Page 5 funds needed to support the Improvement District activities by approximately $2,443,235 (General Fund - $1,051,936; Traffic Systems Management Fund $1,200,275; Park Improvement Community-wide Fund - $58,470; and Local Transportation Development Act Article 3 -$132,560). STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Set the Public Hearing date for May 18, 2016 2. Adopt Resolution No. 2016 - Attachments: A- Resolution B - Parks & Recreation Maintenance & Improvement District Engineer's Report 259 Attachment A RESOLUTION NO. 2016- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO CONTINUE ASSESSMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2016/2017, PRELIMINARILY APPROVING ENGINEER'S REPORT, AND PROVIDING FOR NOTICE OF HEARING FOR THE PARKS AND RECREATION MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK WHEREAS, on July 16, 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, the first Engineer's Report for Fiscal Year 1999/2000 described how the Assessment District would be established, determined the uses of the assessment funds, established the methodology by which the assessments would be applied to properties in the Assessment District, established that the assessment is subject to an annual adjustment tied to the 12-month change in the Consumer Price Index-U for the Los Angeles Area as of December of each succeeding year (the "CPI"), and stated that the assessment would continue year-to-year until terminated by the City Council; and WHEREAS, although the methodology by which the assessments are applied to properties in the Assessment District does not change from year to year, a new Engineer's Report is prepared each year in order to establish the CPI adjustment for that year; the new maximum authorized assessment rate for that year; the budget for that year; and the amount to be charged to each parcel in the Assessment District that year, subject to that year's assessment rate and any changes in the attributes of the properties in the Assessment District, including but not limited to use changes, parcel subdivisions, and/or parcel consolidations; and WHEREAS, on February 17, 2016 by Resolution No. 2016-3479, the City Council ordered the preparation of an Engineer's Report for the Assessment District for fiscal year 2016/2017; and WHEREAS, pursuant to said Resolution, the Engineer's Report was prepared by SCI Consulting Group, Engineer of Work, in accordance with 22565, et seq., of the Streets and Highways Code (the "Report") and Article XIIID of the California Constitution; and 260 Resolution No. 2016- Page 2 WHEREAS, said Engineer's Report was filed with the City Clerk and the City Council has reviewed the Report and wishes to take certain actions relative to said Report. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Report for "PARKS AND RECREATION MAINTENANCE AND IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT", on file with the City Clerk, has been duly considered by the Moorpark City Council and is hereby deemed sufficient and approved. The Report shall stand as the Engineer's Report for all subsequent proceedings under, and pursuant to, the foregoing resolution. SECTION 2. It is the intention of this Council to continue to collect assessments within the Assessment District for fiscal year 2016/2017. Within the Assessment District, the existing and proposed improvements, and any substantial changes proposed to be made to the existing improvements, are generally described as the installation, maintenance and servicing of public facilities, 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, senior and community centers, drainage systems, lighting, fencing, entry monuments, basketball courts, tennis courts, running tracks, other recreational facilities, security guards, graffiti removal and repainting, and labor, materials, supplies, utilities and equipment, as applicable, for property owned and maintained by the City of Moorpark. 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 said improvements, including repair, removal, or replacement of all or part of any improvement; providing for the life, growth, health and beauty of landscaping; and cleaning, sandblasting and painting of walls and other improvements to remove or cover graffiti. Servicing means the furnishing of electric current or energy for the operation or lighting of any improvements, and water for irrigation of any landscaping or the maintenance of any other improvements. SECTION 3. The Assessment District consists of the lots and parcels shown on the boundary map of the Assessment District on file with the City Clerk, and reference is hereby made to such map for further particulars. SECTION 4. Reference is hereby made to the Engineer's Report for a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of the Assessment District and the proposed assessments upon assessable lots and parcels of land within the Assessment District. The Engineer's Report identifies all parcels which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and upon which an assessment will be imposed. 261 Resolution No. 2016- Page 3 SECTION 5. 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 2014 to December 2015 was 2.03%. Therefore, the maximum authorized assessment rate for fiscal year 2016/2017 is increased by 2.03% which equates to $58.54 per single family equivalent benefit unit. The estimate of cost and budget in the Engineer's Report proposes assessments for fiscal year 2016/2017 at the rate of$58.54. SECTION 6. Notice is hereby given that on May 18, 2016, at the hour of 7:00 o'clock p.m. in the Council Chambers, located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, California 93021, the Council will hold a public hearing to consider the ordering of the improvements and the continuation of the proposed assessments. SECTION 7. Prior to the conclusion of the hearing, any interested person may file a written protest with the City Clerk, or, having previously filed a protest, may file a written withdrawal of that protest. A written protest shall state all grounds of objection. A protest by a property owner shall contain a description sufficient to identify the property owned by such owner. Such protest or withdrawal of protest should be mailed to SCI Consulting Group, 4745 Mangels Blvd., Fairfield, CA 94534. SECTION 8. The City Clerk shall cause a notice of the hearing to be given by publishing a copy of this resolution once, at least ten (10) days prior to the date of the hearing above specified, in a newspaper circulated in the City of Moorpark. SECTION 9. 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 20th day of April, 2016. Janice S. Parvin, Mayor ATTEST: Maureen Benson, City Clerk 262 ATTACHMENT B CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS& RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT ENGINEER'S REPORT FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 APRIL 2016 PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 AND ARTICLE XIIID OF THE CALIFORNIA CONSTITUTION ENGINEER OF WORK: SCIConsultingGroup 4745 MANGLES BOULEVARD FAIRFIELD, CALIFORNIA 94534 PHONE 707.430.4300 FAX 707.430.4319 www.sci-cg.com • 263 PAGE III (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.) CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 264 S 9 Z L1.-91.0Z Ad'laod3a S,d33NIDN3 dnoao6ul;lnsuoolog lomfSIQ 1N3w3A021d11l g 3ONVNRINIVW Nol1VJao3a g sNavd NavdaoolnJ JO A113 6Z 110U 1N3WSS3SSV L L 9 LOZ-V XION3ddV LZ WVdOVIQ IN3WSS3SSV yZ 1N3WSS3SSV CZ NOI1V136da3INIONVS1V3ddy EZ 1N3WSS3SSy JO NOI1V2110 ZZ S31183dOad 83H10 ZZ ONVI 1VILN30IS3a 1NVOVA OZ S311a3dOad IVIa1SnGNI/1VI3a3WWOQ OZ S311a3dOad 1VI1N9OIS3a 61. SII33N39 AlIWIXOad 91. 1N31AISS3SSy 3O QOH13N 91. 1Id3N381Va3N3Q 9NI1Vln31VQ 11d3N381VI33d3 SnSa3A 1V83N30 9NIONI j 1133N38 SHOIOV j 1133 N38 L L 1133N38 3O NOISSnOSIQ 1N3INNOI LNOddy 3O OOH13IA1 9 SNVId 1N3113AO8dINI JO AUVWWOS g NOIIOnO0a1NI $ ming ONV!SOQ JO 31VWIIS3 L L-91OZ aV3A 1VDSl j 9 SNOI1V313133dS ig SNVId E SISAIVNy1V93l S1N3INSS3SSy 3O NOI1VPNI1NO0 ONV 1a0d3a S,H33NIDN3 SS330ad 1N]WSS3SSy ONnOa9NDV8 1N3WSS3SSy M3IAa3A0 l NO113n00211NI SIN31NO3 j0 31811j Al 3OVd PAGE V LIST OF FIGURES TABLE 1 -COST AND BUDGET FY 2016-17 • 9 TABLE 2-RESIDENTIAL ASSESSMENT FACTORS 20 TABLE 3-COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ASSESSMENT FACTORS 21 TABLE 4-SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE 24 • CITY OF MOORPARK - PARKSBRECREATIONMAINTENANCEBIMPROVEMENTDISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup . ENGINEERS REPORT,FY 2016-17 266 PAGE VI (THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK.) CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 267 PAGE 1 INTRODUCTION OVERVIEW The City of Moorpark (the "City")currently provides park facilities and recreation programs for its service area of over 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 CITU OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 268 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 February 17, 2016. CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 269 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 2016-17 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 California Constitution (the"Article"). If the Council approves this Engineers 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 Engineers 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 May 18, 2016. At this hearing, the Council would consider approval of a resolution confirming the continuation of the assessments for fiscal year 2016-17. 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 2016-17. 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 CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 270 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 421 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 SC I Consulting Group ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 271 PAGE5 the court found that the City had failed to record the basis for the assessment on its own parcels. COMPLIANCE WITH CURRENT LAW This Engineers Report is consistent with the requirements of Article XIIIC and XIIID of the California Constitution and with the SVTA 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 Hill 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. CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC I ConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 272 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 ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 273 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 SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 274 PAGE 8 FISCAL YEAR 2016-17 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. CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC I ConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2018-17 275 PAGE 9 TABLE 1 —COST AND BUDGET FY 2016-17 CITY OF MOORPARK Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District Estimate of Cost Fiscal Year 2016-17 Total Budget Installation, Maintenance&Servicing Costs Capital Improvements $1,872,852 Property Maintenance $553,183 Tree Trimming $96,200 Landscaping Services $281,856 Water $368,500 Utilities $33,976 Supplies and Materials $9,500 Equipment and Vehicle Operation and Maintenance $37,600 Graffiti Abatement $45,000 Maintenance and Operation of Grounds and Recreational Facilities $834,844 Equipment and Repair $0 Equipment Rental $6,500 Subtotal-Installation, Maintenance and Servicing $4,140,010 Administrative Costs and Incidentals $160,093 Totals for Installation, Maintenance, Servicing and Administration $4,300,102 Less: Court Light Fees ($13,500) Less: City Contribution for General and Special Benefits' ($3,510,429) Net Cost of Installation, Maintenance, Servicing and Administration $776,173 (Total Amount to be Assessed) Contributions to/(from)Reserve Fund $5,604 Net Amount to Assessment2 $781,777 Budget Allocation to Property Total Assessment Budget` $781,777 Single Family Equivalent Benefit Units 13,354.58 Assessment per Single Family Equivalent Unit $58.54 `All assessments are rounded to lower even penny. Therefore,the budget amount slightly differs from the assessment rate CITY OF MOORPARK - PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 276 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$4,300,102, the City must contribute at least$1,075,026 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 kind for contingencies and special projects as well as a capital improvement fund for accumulating funds for larger capital improvement projects or capital renovation needs. My 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 SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 277 PAGE 11 METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT This section of the Engineer's 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: CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 278 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 20) & 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 -CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 279 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 FACILITIES 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 SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 280 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: TotalGeneral 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 SC IConsuttingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 281 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., pro*imity 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 CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 282 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 SO 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 INSIDETHE DISTRICT THAT IS INDIRECT AND DERIVATIVE 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. CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 283 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 City1. 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. . 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 OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 284 PAGE 18 The City's total budget for maintenance and improvement of its parks and recreational facilities is $4,300,102. Of this total budget amount, the City will contribute $3,523,929 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 SC IConsurtingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 285 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 SCIConsulting Group ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 286 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 District 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 commerciaVindustrial 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 CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,Fr'2016-17 287 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-COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL ASSESSMENT FACTORS Average SFE Units Type of Commercial/Industrial Employees per Land Use Per Acre I 1/5Acre 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 SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 288 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 W0 SFE'35%, which equals 35 SFE. Atter 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 M00RPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 289 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 M00RPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SCIConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 290 PAGE 24 ASSESSMENT WHEREAS, on February 17, 2016 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 2016-17 is generally as follows: TABLE 4-SUMMARY COST ESTIMATE F.V. 2016-17 Budget Parks Maintenance and Improvement $4,140,010 Incidentals,Allowance and Administration Expenses $160,093 TOTAL BUDGET $4,300,102 Less: Court Light Fees -13,500 City Contribution for General and Special Benefits -$3,510,429 Contribution (to)/from Reserve Fund $5,604 NET AMOUNT TO ASSESSMENTS $781,777 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 CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT Sc IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 291 PAGE 25 each parcel or lot of land in the Improvement District is its Assessor Parcel Number appearing on the Assessment Roll. 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 CR plus any Unused CPI as described above. The change in the CPI from December 2014 to December 2015 was 2.03%. Therefore, the maximum authorized assessment rate for fiscal year 2016-17 is increased by 2.03% which equates to $58.54 per single family equivalent benefit unit. The estimate of cost and budget in this Engineers Report proposes assessments for fiscal year 2016-17 at the rate of$58.54. 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 2016-17. 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 2016-17 for each parcel or lot of land within the said Parks and Recreation Maintenance and Improvement District. CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 292 PAGE 26 Dated: April 4, 2016 Engineer of Work op9,0FESSIONq l 44, o\N W. Bli�Fyc C 52091 W, �✓ EXP.12-31-16 ry clv1�� By 'FoF cnuF° John W. Bliss, License No. C052091 CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 293 PAGE 27 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 Sc IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 294 x Y I— E wOr O . w W4 W V x ¢,i ,rNWx,, Uz QR. I- w 2N wwO .2N~O _.4.R w O. oat d 0 Y� N Up O • dli IX 2•,- `� dwZ 2 UH w ¢u - Vlzijy0 w� = W pr p �oc��- �•-J+w w�wv> "• w`cH0ZwLLzzza� way w SO U o }-i0.3 ~ 9y a nmaWY �y 0 „0 Stc4i8z O W wo u•O0 OOOw owrrp=ww0 dwwpdz 0 �az�aw U Mmm W w wr> coo_lw C<ww>fAN¢ oo0o2a U 1 �O'Nw ow w 00,t za' .1,-w.¢ONwwO<-N mmomw' ,15t zNw z 2 Q o wwz o x zapw x •.,.. o LLz a mzo'a 0 i z"~ia Twp 0w00 00=°0 0 °���Jo� o wO • Y Om p �0 • I LI II-Ozpi>Z 5 Tj¢�w Y N2,10V0 ] !I;P 'a Q w2.2 IX wa¢ p vi>,O 4 ,w0ce wz w ¢ wo �3u� w p0¢ w 2m oZ O >yy wp Q w c > " �N za w Q0p U OU= ZVZ NwWd �R h dm u OQOOH z w =01..2 U �Lix › waON Z ¢¢W4OJw OsUOioWO4p4 �o oa= O °5 y��ww �w Q mo., U wain w <0mo wowOrNMaw U wN I�mr U Xa�Su�Suu41c Z W I- Z cQ i Z co O U W rii! w � / w Z 4�i' Ir f Y W • � a , ATh....--......., II U • -1 ,;. :-- .117 y' 094aC4.1.--'75,(11'6,. '''' 1?)./C...----iri .. -on - , 1 4..a,' i' 7''. ' I _ _� l • 11 •• r. i • l Lo = W \ r. n ` I�n I L, t" a \ I'_ 2 r Z U m I �1.! Em N A s el b I ep@(8 en el ,. � oz n � ad 1 T n � L —,..........,,............\\ ',......_../ co 0 I% . "0E 295 ov. PAGE 29 APPENDIX A-2016-17 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. CITU OF MOORPARK PARKS&RECREATION MAINTENANCE&IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT SC IConsultingGroup ENGINEER'S REPORT,FY 2016-17 296