Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
AGENDA REPORT 1995 0607 CC REG ITEM 09A
1?SX=11E:Mn-a11 RE PORT C = TY O F MC>CORPARK TO: The Honorable City Council i FROM: Ken Gilbert, Director of Public Works DATE: May 22, 1995 (Council Meeting 6 -7 -95) SUBJECT: Consider Making Certain Changes to AD85 -1 and Confirming the Assessments for Fiscal Year 1995/96 OVERVIEW ITEM�� At- �y councu nn ©�,�: This presents for approval a Resolution making certain changes to Assessment District AD85 -1 and confirming the assessments for Fiscal Year 1995/96. Certain information in support of said proposed changes and proposed assessments is attached hereto and identified as follows: List of Exhibits Exhibit "A": Assessment Summary Exhibit "B": Fund Activity Summary Exhibit "C": Preliminary Budget for FY 1995/96 Exhibit "D ": Engineer's Report Exhibit "E": Public Hearing Notice Exhibit "F ": Resolution BACKGROUND Assessment District 85 -1 was formed in 1985 pursuant to the provisions of the "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972." This assessment district was established to allow for the funding of parks maintenance expenses through the levying of assessments as provided for in the act. As set forth in the Engineer's Report (Exhibit "D "), costs are spread to all of the lots in the City by means of a formula designed to spread said costs on the basis of benefit. The formula uses land use as a measure of "people use" in determining the relative amount of benefit received. The City must annually act to Levy the parks maintenance assessments. Said assessments have been levied each year since the formation of the district, except fr�)r FY 1987/88 and FY 1988/89. ad85_96.apr Assessment District 85 -1 June 7, 1995 Page 2 In accordance with the requirements of the above mentioned act, the City Council has taken a number of actions in recent months in preparation for considering the levy of assessments for Parks Maintenance for FY 1995/96. Those actions are summarized as follows: 1. On January 4, 1994, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 95- 1095 stating its intent to take the subject actions. 2. Also on that date, the City Counc3.1 selected the firm of Dwight French and Associates to prepare the Engineer's Reports for AD85 -1. 3. On April 5, 1995, the City Counc.i.l adopted Resolution No. 95- 1114 making certain findings and taking certain actions including the following: • approving, subject to change, the Engineers' Report for AD85 -1 for FY 1995/96; • stating intent to make certa.i..n changes to AD85 -1: • setting 7:00 p.m. on May 15, 1995, as the time and date of a Public Meeting for the purpose of allowing the public an opportunity to meet with City staff to question and discuss the proposed assessments; • setting 7:00 p.m. on June 7, 1995, as the time and date of a Public Hearing to consider the subject actions; and • directing that Notice of said meetings be sent to the owners of all affected properties, stating the amount of the assessment levied for FY 1994/95, the amount of the proposed increase in the assessment amount. and the total amount of the assessments proposed for FY '995/96, 4. On April 4, 1995, the City Council also discussed a number of possible revisions to the benefit spread formula for this assessment district. Of the alternatives discussed, Alternate #1 would leave the amount of the cost allocation to non- residential properties at twenty -five percent (25 %) of the total. Alternate #2 would change the percentage of this allocation to 33 %. Staff was directed to make provisions in the public hearing notice which would allow the City Council to consider either option prior tc levyi.ng the assessments. ad85_96.apr Assessment District 85 -1 June 7, 1995 Page 3 DISCUSSION A. Preliminary Budget for FY 199596 Attached as Exhibit 'C' is a copy of the preliminary budget for the Parks Department budget for FY 1995/96. The expenditures set forth in that Exhibit are based on the following assumptions: 1. FY 1995/96 Budget -- As shown in the Budget recap attached as Exhibit 'C', the total proposed budget for the Parks Department for FY 1995/96 is $537,312. It is anticipated that this level of expenditures will be required in order to fund parks maintenance costs next year. A summary of those costs, by park, is as follows: Note: It is anticipated that Campesina Park and Country Trail Park will not be completed and accepted for maintenance until FY 1996/97 or later, and that Poindexter Park will not be ready to accept for maintenance until Mai cry of 1996. nfl85_96.epr Maint. Park Period Budget ($) 1. Country Trail Park 0 Mos. 0 2. Glenwood Park 12 Mos. 40,534 3. Tierra Rejada Park 12 Mos. 52,598 4. Mountain Meadows Park 12 Mos. 65,125 5. Peach Hill Park 12 Mos. 73,517 6. Monte Vista Park i2 Mos. 24,698 7. Campus Park 12 Mos. 34,638 8. Campus Canyon Park I i2 Mos. 63,514 9. Griffin Park 12 Mos. 37,594 10. Virginia Colony Park i2 Mos. 17,448 11. Campesina Park 0 Mos. 0 12. Arroyo Vista Comm. Park 12 Mos. 103,015 13. Poindexter Park 4 Mos.. 24,631 Total 537,312 Note: It is anticipated that Campesina Park and Country Trail Park will not be completed and accepted for maintenance until FY 1996/97 or later, and that Poindexter Park will not be ready to accept for maintenance until Mai cry of 1996. nfl85_96.epr Assessment District 85 -1 June 7, 1995 Page 4 2. FY 1994/95 Budget Vs. Actual -- Also shown in Exhibit 'C' is the approved Budget for the Parks Department for FY 1994/95 along with the anticipated amount of the actual year -end expenditures. A summary of those figures are listed as follows: FY 1994195 Maint. Projected Park Period Budget (S) Actual ($) I., Country Trail Park 0 Mos_ 0 0 2., Glenwood Park 12 Mos. 36,473 39,228 3.. Tierra Rejada Park 12 Mos. 51,566 51,292 4.. Mountain Meadows Park 12 Mos. 64,421 63,819 5.. Peach Hill Park 1.2 Mos. 73,280 71,781 6.. Monte Vista Park 12 Mos. 22,513 23,736 7.. Campus Park 1.2 Mos.. 37,360 33,332 8.. Campus Canyon Park 1.2 Mos. 62,746 62,208 9. Griffin Park 1.2 Mos. 35,880 36,288 10. Virginia Colony Park 12 Mos. 14,857 16,142 11. Campesina Park 0 Mos. 0 0 12. Arroyo Vista Comm. Pk 1.2 Mos. 101,511 109,695 1.3. Poindexter Park 0 Mos. 0 0 'Pota9. 500,607 507,521 Upon determination of actual Year End Revenues and Expenses, if required, a budget amendment and /or an additional appropriation from the Genera] Fund will be requested. 3. Significant Budget Variances Between FY 1994/95 and FY 1995/96 -- The proposed FY 1995/96 Budget of $537,312 is $36,705 more than the approved FY 1994/95 Budget. A significant portion of this cost increase is due to the addition of the PoindextE�r P,ik to the areas maintained. B. Fund Activity Attached for your information as Exhibit 'B', is a summary of Fund Activity for AD 85 -1 for the last several fiscal years, including FY 1994/95 an(I FY 1995/96. ad85_96.apr Assessment District 85 -1 June 7, 1995 Page 5 C. Alternative Benefit Spread Formulas The Assessment Engineer was asked to evaluate and present to the City Council possible alternative Benefit Spread Formulas which would reduce the amount of the assessments to residential properties. 1. Alternative 11: The benefit spread formula used in past years allocates and then spreads twenty -five percent (25 %) of the total costs to non - residential properties. The remaining seventy -five percent (75 %) of the total cost is spread to residential properties. The figures presented in the Engineer's Report (Exhibit 'D") are based on this formula. A summary of the required assessments for FY 1995/96 using this formula is attached as Exhibit A -1. Exhibit A -1.1 lists typical assessment amounts using this formula, for a number of residential and non - residential land uses. 2.. Alternative #2: An alternative benefit spread formulas has been developed for consideration by the City Council. Alternative #2 increases the proportion of total costs allocated to non - residential properties to thirty -three percent (33 %). A summary of the assessment amounts using this formula is attached as Exhibits A -2 and A -2.1. 3.. Comparison: A summary comparison of these two alternative formulas is as follows: As the above chart shows, 1n that the number of non- residential properties comprise less than four percent (4 %) of the total lots in the City, any change to the percentage of the total assessment allocated to non - residential properties has a dramatic effect on the amount assessed to a given non - residential lot. ad85_96.apr ,kmount ($) of Example Percent Fund Transfer of Non- Percent Increase Allocated Required to Residential to the Non -Res. to Non- Reduce S. F. Assessment ($) Assessments Residential S. F. Res. Res. Assmnt [Neighborhood Generated by Alt Properties Exhibit Assmnt . to $33.20 Shopping CntrI Alternate 11 1 25% A -1 49.3": 1751500 752.10 N/A A -1.1 2 33% A -2 43.8? 130,400 1,002.80 33% A -2.1 As the above chart shows, 1n that the number of non- residential properties comprise less than four percent (4 %) of the total lots in the City, any change to the percentage of the total assessment allocated to non - residential properties has a dramatic effect on the amount assessed to a given non - residential lot. ad85_96.apr Assessment District 85 -1 June 7, 1995 Page 6 D. Tentative Assessment Summary At the bottom of pages 1 (Alt #1) and 2 (Alt #2) of Exhibit 'A' is a chart showing the amount of the Single - Family Residential assessment required for FY 1995/96. Also shown on these charts is a number of alternative assessment amounts based on varying levels of funding from sources :ether than assessment revenues. E. Engineer's Report The above described expenditure information was provided to the Assessment Engineer to be used as the basis for the preparation of the attached Engineer's Report (Exhibit 'D'). As stated above, the figures in said report are based on the benefit spread formula described above as Alternate #1. Should the City Council select the benefit spread formula described above as Alternate #2, the final report be revised. F. Public Hearing 1.. The "Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972" (Streets and Highways Code) requires a public hearing to be held prior to the annual levy of assessments for the purpose of receiving input and to hear any protests to the proposed assessments. 2. If the amount of the assessments are to remain the same, the law does not require a Notice of the public hearing to be mailed to each property being assessed. However, consistent with past practice, a notice of the public hearing was mailed to the owners of all of the affected properties. 3.. Notwithstanding the above mentioned policy, State law requires that prior to considering any new or increased assessment, a public hearing notice must be mailed to the owners of the properties to be assessed. Said notice shall state the amount of the existing assessment, the amount of the proposed assessment and the amount of the proposed increase in the assessment The approved amount of the approved estimated assessments MAY NOT EXCEED the amounts stated in the notice. Said notice must be mailed at least forty -five (45) days prior to the date of the hearing. In order to meet this deadline, : : :,a id Notices were postmarked and mailed prior. to April. 21 11J'ar ndB5_96.apr Assessment District 85 -1 June 7, 1995 Page 7 4. State law also requires that prior to considering any new or increased assessment a PUBLIC MEETING shall be convened to allow the public an opportunity to discuss the proposed increased assessment. Such a meeting was convened on Monday, May 15, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers. This informal meeting was conducted by staff for the purpose of providing answers to questions regarding projected program costs and the methods used to spread those costs to the properties assessed. Only a few people were in attendance. Staff responded to the quest :ions asked. 5.. Attached as Exhibit 'E' is a copy of the Public Hearing Notice mailed for AD85 -1. Also attached to the hearing notice is a chart showing the amount of the assessment required by both of the benefit formula alternatives, as well as the amount indicated on the hearing notice. G. Deferred Action The attached resolution (Exhibit. "F ") making certain changes to Assessment District AD85 -1 and confirming the assessments for Fiscal Year 1995/96 must be adopted no later than June 30, 1995, in order for the assessments to be levied. In prior years the City Council has adopted such resolutions concurrently with the adoption of the budget. ' i,LY�Y'• , , Staff recommends that the City Council oRen the public hearing, receive testimony and continue these matters to the date of the Budget Workshops. Subsequent to the budget workshop meetings, but no later than June 30, 1995, staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions: a) select the benefit spread formula to be used (either Alternate #1 or Alternate #2); and, b) adopt the attached Resolution No. 95- (Exhibit "F ") making certain changes to AD85 -1 and confirming the assessments for Fiscal Year 1995/96. ad85_96.apr EXHIBIT "A" (Page 1) Fiscal Year 1995/96 AD 85-1 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY ------------------------------ FY 1995/96 Description Proposed Remarks 20- Nay -95 Page 1 of 3 TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENSES 537,312 See Exhibit 'C' for Total FY1995/96 Cost Projection LESS CARRY OVERS 0 Less Carryover iSee Exhibit B') LESS TRANSFERS IN 0 TOTAL ASSESSMENTS 537,312 Total Assessment Detail PRESENT FORMULA: Non - Residential Allocation = 25% of Total (See Exhibit 'A' Pg 1.1) 1994/95 Budget Assessment 357,200 142,78( 1 499,981 500,981 ------------------ - - - - -- Plus Total 145,74 507,521 SF Res 0 Trans -1n Plus Funds Less Total Remaining Fiscal Year Amount ($) Total ($) & Other Carryover Available Expenditures Carryover 1991/92 Actual 33.20 373,319 1,5h 54,915 429,797 429,797 0 1992/93 Actual 33.20 354,475 38,5,4 393,066 393,066 0 1993/94 Actual 33.20 355,247 .1.46,866 502,113 502,113 0 1994/95 Budget 33.20 357,200 142,78( 1 499,981 500,981 (1,000) Est. Actual 33.20 361,780 145,74 507,521 507,521 0 1995/96 Budget Options 49.31 537,312 J 537,312 537,312 0 47.47 517,312 20,00( J 537,312 537,312 0 45.64 497,312 40,00(` 0 537,312 537,312 0 43.80 477,312 60,001:: J 537,312 537,312 0 41.97 457,312 80,001: ) 537,312 537,312 0 40.13 437,312 100,00(. 537,312 537,312 0 38.30 417,312 120,00( 1) 537,312 537,312 0 36.46 397,312 1.40,00(; ) 537,312 537,312 0 34.55 376,512 1.60,80( ) 537,312 537,312 0 Prior Years' Assessment >>>> 33.20 361,812 1,75,50E i 537,312 537,312 0 32.79 357,312 180,00( :, 537,312 537,312 0 30.95 337,312 !00,0()( 537,312 537,312 0 Exhibit 'A' (Page 1.1) Alternate A: Present Formula 20- May -95 FY 1995/96 Non - residential share ........ 25% AD85 -1 Parks Maintenance ASSESSMENT ALLOCATION INFONATION Element Total FY 95/96 Assessments (Est.) Allocation to: Non - Residential: Percent of Total Non - Residential: Total Assessment Residential: Percent of Total Residential: Total Assessment ---------------------- ---------------------- ASSESSMENT CALCULATION Costs Remarks i $537,314 j 25% $134,328 75% $402,984 -- ---------- ----- - - - - --- Land People Use Allocated Total Unit Use Assessment Typical Land Use Catagories Code Cost ($� Units Cost ($) Factor Amount ($) Remarks Non - Residential Bank 24 134,328 .,786 75.21 3 225.63 Unit Cost for Retail 19 134,328 1,786 75.21 6 451.26 Non - Residential Lite Mfg. 31 134,328 L,786 75.21 12 902.52 6.1 times the Neighborhood Cntr. 15 134,328 :,786 75.21 10 752.10 residential rate. Regional Cntr. 16 134,328 1786 75.21 30 2,256.30 Residential Single - Family 1 402,984 32,688 12.33 4 49.32 Condo 3 402,984 32,688 12.33 3 36.99 Apartment 5 402,984 32,688 12.33 3 36.99 REMARKS Land Use Comparison ----------------------------------- Non- Residential Number of lots 274 Percent of total Lots 3.42% Residential Number of lots 7,743 Percent of total Lots 96.58% Vacant Number of lots 0 Percent of total Lots 0 EXHIBIT "A" (Page 2) Fiscal Year 1995/96 AD 85 -1 ASSESSMENT SUMMARY ------------------------------ ------------------------------ Description TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENSES LESS CARRY OVERS LESS TRANSFERS IN TOTAL ASSESSMENTS 20- Hay -95 Page 2 of 3 FY 1995/96 Proposed Remarks 537,312 See Exhibi 'C' for Total FY1995/96 Cost Projection 0 Less :arriover (See Exhibit 'V) 0 537,312 Total Assessment Detail ALTERNATE 12: Non - Residential Allocation = 33% of Total (See Exhibit 'A' Pq 2.1) 51.88 Assessment ------------------ - - - - -- Plus Total SF Res Trans -Ir Plus Funds Less Total Remaining Fiscal Year Amount (S) Total ($) & Other Carryover Available Expenditures Carryover 1991/92 Actual 33.20 373,319 1,5t 54,415 429,797 429,797 0 1992/93 Actual 33.20 354,475 38,514 393,066 393,066 0 1993/94 Actual 33.20 355,247 146,&,e 502,113 502,113 0 1994/95 Budget 33.20 357,200 142,78( l 499,981 500,981 (1,000) Est. Actual 33.20 361,780 145,74 ? 507,521 507,521 0 1995/96 Budget Options 43.83 537,312 0 537,312 537,312 0 42.20 517,312 20,00(, 0 537,312 537,312 0 40.57 497,312 40,00( 0 537,312 537,312 0 38.94 477,312 60,000 0 537,312 537,312 0 37.31 457,312 80,00( k1l 537,312 537,312 0 35.68 437,312 1.00,00( 0 537,312 537,312 0 Prior Years' Assessment >>>> 33.20 406,912 `30,40( 0 537,312 537,312 0 32.41 397,312 ,.40,00( () 537,312 537,312 0 30.78 377,312 ;.60,00( 3 537,312 537,312 0 29.96 367,312 .70,00( 0 537,312 537,312 0 29.15 357,312 80,00( :'! 537,312 537,312 0 27.52 337,312 ?00,00( 537,312 537,312 0 51.88 Exhibit 'A' (Page 2.1) Alternate #2: Increase 20- Nay -95 FY 1995/96 Non - residential share to ........ 33% AD85 -1 Parks Maintenance ASSESSMENT ALLOCATION INFOMATION Element Total FY 95/96 Assessments (Est.) Allocation to: Non - Residential: Percent of Total Non - Residential: Total Assessment Residential: Percent of Total Residential: Total Assessment -------------------------------------- -------------------------------------- ASSESSMENT CALCULATION ------------------ - - - - -- Typical Land Use Catagories ---------------------------- Non- Residential Bank Use Retail Total Lite Mfg. Use Neighborhood Cntr. Regional Cntr. Cost ($ Residential Cost ($) Single - Family Amount ($) Condo 24 Apartment L,786 REMARKS 3 Land Use Comparison Unit Cost for Non - Residential 179,102 Number of lots 274 Percent of total Lots 3.42$ Residential 31 Number of lots 7,743 Percent of total Lots 96.58° Vacant 9.1 times the Number of lots 0 Percent of total Lots 0 Costs Remarks ----------- i _,. - - - -- - - -------------------------------------------- $537,312 33% $179,102 67% $358,204 Land People Use Allocated Total Unit Use Assessment Code Cost ($ Units Cost ($) Factor Amount ($) Remarks 24 179,102 L,786 100.28 3 300.84 Unit Cost for 19 179,102 1,786 100.28 6 601.68 Non-Residential 31 179,102 L,786 100.28 12 1,203.36 9.1 times the 15 179,102 1,786 100.28 10 1,002.80 residential rate. 16 179,102 ;,786 100.28 30 3,008.40 1 358,204 32,688 10.96 4 43.84 3 358,204 2,688 10.96 3 32.88 5 358,204 52,688 10.96 3 32.88 EXHIBIT "B" Fiscal Year 1994/95 Assessment District 85 -1 Fund Activity (025) Description BEGINNING BALANCE REVENUE ASSESSMENTS INTEREST MISCELLANEOUS TRANSFER IN GANN GENERAL fUND AVAILABLE FUNDS EXPENSES Personnel 0 &N Capital Improvements Adjustment Less TOTAL EXPENSES YEAR END BALANCE 20- Nay -95 FY 1994/95 FY 1995/965 FY FY FY - -------- ----- - - - - -- Proposed 1991/92 1992/93 1993/94 Budget Proj Actual Budget Notes: 54,915 0 0 0 373,319 354,475 355,24 357,200 361,780 537,312 1,204 1,000 2,89. 67,170 67,170 1,563 38,591 142,765 74,610 78,571 0 The Projected FY1994/95 _ -_____ _ === = = = = == ========= Transfer is slightly 429,797 393,066 502,11, 499,981 507,521 537,312 more than the budget. If required, subsequent to determination of 111,000 118,043 1.27,3K 147,931 148,952 155,705 Year End Actual Revenues and Expenses, 318,797 275,023 ;74,7" 353,050 358,569 381,607 an additional appropriation will be 0 0 l 0 requested. 429,797 393,066 502,1; 500,981 507,521 537,312 (} 0 ;1,0007 ) 0 EXHIBIT "C" Department 147 Budget Summary FY 1995/96 Code Description SALARIES & BENEFITS MAINTENANCE & OPERATIONS 623 Supplies 626 629 Special Supplies 632 Meetings 633 Publications 634 Membership / Dues 636 Education 637 Travel & Milage 638 Uniforms 641 Professional Services 642 Contractual Services 648 Insurance 651 Equip. Maint. 652 Utilities 654 Vehicle Maint 655 Fuel 656 Lubricants 657 Small Tools 658 Maint & Repair 661 Equip Rental M &O Total 903 Capital Projects Total FY 94/95 FY 92/93 FY 93/94 Estimated ACTUAL ACTUAL BUDGET Actual 118,043 127,388 L4 ,931 148,952 i I 2,837 7,130 =,700 9,500 i 423 1,951 8,800 ;)00 5,000 520 2F. 0 365 34, 300 300 0 (1 0 80 48" 0 0 49 w 0 0 1,490 1,730 1,400 1,400 3,267 4,861 5,000 3,840 is I 163,522 219,642 2; "2 756 222,756 I 20,000 20,434 3 250 26,249 26 223 300 2,524 I 52,116 88,261 -5.514 65,500 2,865 2,272 3.000 3,000 1,917 1,952 1,700 1,000 0 0 0 0 1401 1,460 830 1,000 18,482 13,459 2,000 12,000 3,712 3,640 2,500 4,500 275,023 374,725 353,050 ',58,569 0 0 393,066 502,113 500,981 107,521 05/20/95 FY 95/96 BUDGET 155,705 10,000 5,000 0 300 1 i i 0 400 �! 0 1,500 5,000 235,457 26,250 3,000 I' 69,000 I' 3,500 1,200 0 1,000 �! 15,000 5,000 l ----- - - - - -- 381,607 537,312 Remarks PRELIMINARY ENGINEER'S REPORT CITY OF MOORPARK PARKS MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. AD -85 -1, LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972 Prepared By: DWIGHT FRENCH & ASSOCIATES, INC. 1470 S. Valley `,,'ista Drive Suiter?9C Diamond Bar, A 91765 March Y 9 ID 4"' 00273 0 • TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1 Authority for Report Section 2 Description of Improvements to be MaintainF�,3 Section 3 Assessment Rol... Section 4 Estimate of Co,--,-- Section 5 Method of Assessment Appendix "A" Parks Maintenance Formula Appendix "B" Budget Estimate Appendix "C" Boundary Map Appendix "D" Assessment Rol -. Appendix "E" Resolutions Appendix "F" Rebate Procedure Page 1 1 2 2 3 b-Z 0 0Ti 4 CITY OF MOORPARK Engineer's Report Parks Maintenance Assessment District No. AD -85 .1 Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 For Fiscal Year 1995 -96 SECTION 1 AUTHORITY FOR REPORT This report is prepared pursuant t;) City Council action taken at their regular meeting of January 4; 1995 to extend this District for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1995 and ending June 30, 1996 in compliance with the requirements of Article 4, Chapter 1, "Landscaping Act of 1972 ", being Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Cote This report is an update of an existing City -wide Assessment District. The purpose for the district is to provide operating funds for the continued maintenance and improvements of existing and planned City operated publ i , p :j rh:s . SECTION 2 DESCRIPTION OF THE IMPROVEMENTS TO BE MAINTAINED The District is proposed to adjust the benefit formula. The assessments shown in the appendix are based on the current formula. These assessments will be changed iF;on further directions of the City Council. The following City Parks are to be maintained under this District effective July 1, 1995: 1. Country Trail Park 3 Campus Canyon Park 2. Glenwood Park 3 Griffin Park 3. Tierra Rejada Park A Virginia Colony Park 4. Mountain Meadows Park :l Campesina Park 5. Peach Hill Park ? Arroyo Vista Recreation Ctr. 6. Monte Vista Park Downtown Park 7. Campus Park The maintenance and improvement of all above mentioned parks shall include but not be limited to the E- ()llowing: 1. Mowing and edging of all .L,.rf areas. 2. Removing Litter. 1 A -� 0 02'75 II 3. Weeding as required. 40 4. Irrigating as required. 5. Fertilizing of all vegetation as each species requires. 6. Pruning so as to nor inhibit the natural growth characteristics of the ,>l.ar.t . 7. Cleaning existing facilrt:ies to be clear and free of all debris. Minor repairs j, needed. 8. Eradicating vector at th- �'-rst indication of existence. 9. Maintaining lights, play,:,,rround equipment, playcourts and public restrooms. 10. Installing park or recreational improvements, including but not limited to drains and sidewalks. Maintaining and servicing said improvements. Plans and specifications for the irrigation, landscaping, and other authorized improvements within the City are on file in the Department of Public Works. Reference is hereby made to said plans and specifications for the exact location and nature of the landscape improvements. Said plan, and specifications by reference are hereby made a part of this red art SECTION 3 ASSESSMENT ROLL All parcels of real property affected are listed on the "Assessment Roll ", Exhibit "A ", which will be on file in City Hall with the City Clerk, and is made a part hereof by reference. These parcels are more particularly described in maps prepared in accordance with Section 327 of the Revenue and Taxation Code which are on file in the office of the Ventura County Assessor in the County Government Center Administration Building, 800 South Victoria Avenue, Ventura, California and which are also made a part: hereof by reference. SECTION 4 ESTIMATE OF COST The City staff recommendation `nor °J.e District budget is shown in Appendix "B" of this report. 9 J 002 6 -b -5 SECTION 5 METHOD OF ASSESSMENT The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, in Section 22573, states that "The net amount to be assessed upon the lands within an assessment district may be apportioned by any formula or method which fairly distributes the new amount among all assessable lots or parcels in proportion to the es�..mated benefits to be received by each such lot or parcel from trie improvements." The method and formula of benefit spread recognizes that every property within the City of Moorpa, - benefits from public parks and recreation facilities. The method of spreading maintenance costs is based upon the "people use" attributed to each land use within the City. This method was chosen because the benefit received by having park facilities is directly proportionate to the number of people generated by each land use. Recognizing that residential land uses within the City derive a higher degree of benefit r.han non - residential land uses, the formula was subdivided into two main groups, with residential land uses contributing in 75% of the assessment and non - residential uses being assessed for the remain:ir;g 25% of the maintenance costs. The benefits to residential land uses are clear. The residents of the City utilize the parks during ttleir leisure hours. Benefits to non - residential property include such items as offering employees the opportunity to utilize the parks during lunch time and after hours, as well as providing an aestr,e~ ,_c environment which attracts potential employees into the area The "people use" factors utilized ::u .tie assessment district spread formula are shown in Appendix " "A " The City,Council approved a rebate procedure for disadvantaged citizens on November 1989. The T_rocedure shall be followed as described in Appendix "F.'" In conclusion, it is our opinion that the assessments within Parks Maintenance Assessment District No. AD -85 -1 are apportioned by a formula that fairly distributes the net cost to each lot or parcel in accordance with the benefits th<tat are received. 3 00 ;1 0 v I* APPENDICES I "it 0027 8 A -1 6 0 0?79 APPENDIX "A" CITY OF MOORPARK Parks Maintenance Assessment District No. AD -85 -1 Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 Table 1 Parks Maintenance Formula Use Peop1,� Annual Code Description Use Assessment 0 Residential Vacant J $ 0.00 1 Single Family - 4.0 $ 49.31 Level 1 2 Mobile Home ) $ 0.00 3 Condo 3.V $ 36.98 4 Residential Income 3.0; $ 36.98 (2 -4 Units) 5 Apartments (5 +) 3.01 $ 36.98 ` 6 Single Family - 4.0' $ 49.31 Level 2 9 Mobile Home and 3.0' $ 36.98 Trailer Parks 10 Commercial Vacant 0 $ 0.00 11 Retail Stores, 3.Oc! $ 225.63 Single Story 12 Store & Office f.00 $ 225.63 (Combination) 15 Shopping Centers 10 . NCO $ 752.12 (Neighborhood) 16 Shopping Centers 30.0i $2,256.35 (Regional) 17 Office Building 3.0C $ 225.63 (1 Story) A -1 6 0 0?79 J 00.80 Use Peop e Annual Code Description Use Assessment 18 Office Stores 6.00 $ 451.27 (Multi - Story) 19 Retail Stores 6.00 $ 451.27 (Multi - Story) 21 Restaurants & 3.00 $ 225.63 Cocktail Lounge 24 Banks, Savings & 3.00 $ 225.63 Loans 25 Service Stations 3.00 $ 225.63 26 Auto Sales, Repair 1.00 $ 75.21 30 Industrial Vacant 0 $ 0.00 Land 31 Light Manufacturing 12.00 $ 902.54 32 Warehousing 4.00 $ 300.85 33 Industrial Condos, 3.00 $ 225.63 Co -Ops, PUD's 38 Mineral Processing 3.00 $ 225.63 44 Truck Crops 2.00 $ 150.42 46 Pasture (Permanent) 2.00 $ 150.42 48 Poultry 2.00 $ 150.42 49 Flowers, Seed 2 00 $ 150.42 Production 51 Orchards 2.00 $ 150.42 53 Field Crops, Dry 2 00 $ 150.42 54 Pasture of Graze, 2 00 $ 150.42 Dry 55 Feed Lots 2.00 $ 150.42 57 Tree Farms 2.00 $ 150.42 A -2 00.80 -`9 Use People Annual Code Description _ Use Assessment 61 Theater —0; $ 150.42 69 Parks $ 0.00 70 Institutional $ 0.00 Vacant Land 71 Churches, C` $ 0.00 Convent, Rectory 72 Schools $ 0.00 73 Colleges $ 0.00 78 Public Bldgs., C $ 0.00 Firehouses, Museums, etc. 79 Flood Control t $ 0.00 80 Misc. Vacant Land C $ 0.00 81 Utility Water C' $ 0.00 Company 83 Petroleum & Gas 1.0( $ 75.21 86 Water Rights, Pumps C? $ 0.00 88 Highways & Streets C' $ 0.00 91 ,Utility Edison 0 $ 0.00 92 Telephone 0 $ 0.00 93 S.P.R.R. 0 $ 0.00 94 Undedicated C' $ 0.00 Community Condo Development 95 State Property 0 $ 0.00 96 County Property 0 $ 0.00 97 City Property 0 $ 0.00 99 Exempt 0 $ 0.00 Actual Assessment amount may vary due to di!�crepancies between use codes and actual Property uses. A -3 00181 y APPENDIX "B" CITY OF MOORPARK Parks Maintenance Assessment District No. AD-85-1 Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972 BUDGET ESTIMATE FY 1995 96 Park Sites Maintenance and Operati q: $ 381,607.00 Maintenance and Operation Personne osts 155,705.00 Total Annual Expenses 537,312.00 • Total Amount to be Funded by District (FY 1995 -96) $ 537,312.00 B -1 00989 APPENDIX "C" BOUNDARY MAP 00283 L-1 0 _. .w g•040 I a --�-- ---�- .------f------L- -- n J 1 1 1 1 , 1 .- 1 - 1 •y- , , 1 + List o _ "+ I t City Parks •� ►'� •t�: :� � -- +- - -� �- - --° - 1 1• Unassigned I t , I f 1 2• Glenwood 'Park 3• Tierra Rejada Park ' 4• Mountain Meadows Park r:• • ' d ---- - - --J- i S. Pasch Bill Park 1 j-"41 6. Monte Vista Park � 7. calftPus Park I : ' i B • Cmpus Canyon Park 9 • Griffin Park 10' Virginia Colony Par k �, ` 1 I -/ I -- i _ - -- - - q - _ - l�"�S�•O ' V-- '`C " . - R " = P ' - ? . - � � , _ •" CA- Pesina Park Arroyo Vista Recreation Center ' Sikh / VA _ • _ jJii J r- LLEY EtES � �' ` � � �` w '.•• �' .� ` r• 1 , •� � cal. ANGELES 1 T+ Lo - s wnGEIES .= v i 1 1 - -� 1 i` • - - - - -- - -- +- N .` 1 1 17 '�' r, 1 ilk 1 I t�J l: •—i ,- I • ?� 6 1 / ' b Boundary Map, City of Moorpark Lightir ' ObRPARK `�" Maintenance Assessment District No. AG " MOOR • - 1 Boundary Moo. A ! -- CRES April 1, 199 QOM A - � �� -- �� 1; ti. 1 t I � r q APPENDIX `D" Appendix "D ", the Assessment Roll, shows the assessment upon each lot or parcel (approximately 7893 parcels) within this District and is on file in the Office of the (::'ity Clerk and County Assessor. The Ventura County Assessor's offic( no longer lists public utility easements on the Assessor's Roll. 00285 /1 ,J 0 APPENDIX "E" RESOLUTIONS • I+ 00286 APPENDIX "F" REBATE PROCEDURE 0 0?8'7 o \J, ;s 0 is 1 JOINT NOTICE OF A PUBLIC MEETING AND A PUBLIC HEARING PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Moorpark, California, on April 5, 1995, adopted Resolution No. 95 -1114 fixing the date and time of a public meeting to be held on the 15th day of May, 1995, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Moorpark City Hall, located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark. The purpose of said public meeting is to allow the ublic an opportunity to meet with City staff to question and discuss the proposed annual assessments for the "MOORPARK ARK MAINTEN NCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. AD -85 -1" for the fiscal year commencing on July 1? 1995 and ending on June 30, 1996, which would provide for the maintenance and improvement of parks and recreational facilities within the said City, and to question and discuss the proposed increases in said assessments over those levied for said District in FY 1994/95. PUBLIC NOTICE IS ALSO HEREBY GIVEN that said Resolution No 95 -1114 also fixed the date and time of a public hearing of the Moorpark City Council to be held on the 7th day of June, 1995, at the hour of 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of the Moorpark City Hall, located at 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark. The purpose of said public hearing is to consider making certain chargges in, and to order the annual assessments for the "MOORPARK PARK MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT' DISTRICT NO. AD -85 -1" for the fiscal year commencing on July 1, 1995, and end in on June 30, 1996, which would provide for the maintenance and improvement of parks and recreational facilities within the sairty. A y of Resolution No. 95 -1114, which is captioned as follows: "A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR, AND DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO MAKE CERTAIN CHANGES AND TO ORDER THE ANNUAL ASSESSMENTS FOR THE "PARKS MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. AD -85 -1" FOR THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 1995, AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1996, PURSUANT TO THE LANDSCAPING AND LIGHTING ACT OF 1972, AND FIXING THE TIME AND PLACE FOR A PUBLIC MEETING TO DISCUSS AND A PUBLIC HEARING TO RECEIVE OBJECTIONS THERETO," is on file with the City Clerk and open to inspection. A summary of said Resolution is as follows: 1. That the Engineer's Report prepared for Assessment District No. AD85 -1 for FY 1995 /1)0 .s approve~: 2. That said Engineer's Report may be further modified or changed, pursuant to applicable State law 3. That the amount of the assessments for Assessment District No. AD85 -1 for FY 1,1+1)1.,,9( are proposed to increase from the amount of the assessments levied for said district in FY 1994/95. 4. That it is the intention of the City Council a) to make certain changes, including the benefit formula, to Assessment District No. AD 85 -1, which consists of a single city -wide district for the maintenance and improvement of parks and recreational facilities within the City, b) to order the extension of the annual assessment for said district for FY 1995/96; and, e) to levy and collect assessments for such parks maintenance and improvement, 5. That said parks maintenance assessment district includes the park sites with all imp, dements located therein, described by and included within Assessment District No. AD 85 -1. 6. That the foregoing described work is to be located within Assessment District h A) 85 -1, the noundary of which is described on a map on file in the City Clerk's office. 7. That said proposed maintenance and improvement is of benefit to, and expense for which are chargeable upon, the district. 8. That a full and detailed description of the improvements, the boundaries of the District and any zones therein, and the proposed assessments upon assessable parcels within said District, is set forth in a „ <rp` of the aforementioned Engineer's Report on file with the City Clerk and open to inspection. 9. That the existing assessments, the proposed assessments and the proposed increase r thw assessment amounts are set forth in Exhibit 'A' attached hereto and made a part hereof. 10. That a public meeting shall be convened on May 15, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the Moorpark City Hall to allow the public an oppppoortunity to meet with City staff to question and discuss the proposed annual assessments for Assessment District No. AD85-1 for FFY 1995/96., and the proposed increases to said assessments over those levied in FY 1994/95. 11. That a public hearing of the Moorpark City Council shall be held on June 7, 1995 , at "1:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at the Moorpark City Hall to consider making certain changes in, and to order the annual assessments for Assessment District No. AD85 -1 for FY 1995/96. 12. That this Joint Notice of Public Meeting and Public Hearing is given, in order that any persons having any objections to the work or extant of the assessment district may appear and show cause why said work should not be done or carried out or why said district should not be extended for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1995, and ending June 30, 1996. Protests must be in writing and must be filed by the property owner with the City Clerk prior to the conclusion of the hearing. Protests may be mailed to the City lerk City of y , ty Moorpark, 799 Moorpark Avenue, Moorpark, CA 93021. Protest shall state all grounds for the objection and shall contain a description sufficient to identify the property being assessed. A majority protest will cause the assessment increase to be abandoned. For additional information about these proceedings or assessments contact Ken Gilbert at (805) 529-6864, Ext. 256. 13. That all the work proposed shall be done in accordance with the Landscaping and i..ighting Act of X972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code of the State of California. 14. That the City Clerk shall cause notice of said public meeting and public hearing to be given by causing this summary of the Resolution of Intention to be published and mailed in the manner required by Pact 2 of Division 15 of the Streets and Highways Code and Section 54954.6 of the Government Code of the State of California 15. That the City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this resolution. ATTEST: �. n r., syor C -z athibit 'A' 1D 85 -1 Summary of Assessments Proposed Jse FY 1994/95 FY 1995/96 Proposed ode Description _ Assmnt ($) Assmnt Increase 0 Residential Vacant 0.00 0.00 0.00 I Single Family - Level 1 33.20 49 31 16.11 2 Mobil Home 0.00 0.00 0.00 3 Condo 24.90 36.98 12.08 4 Residential Income 24 units 24.90 36.98 12.08 5 Apartments (5 +) 24.90 36.98 12.08 6 Single Family - Level 2 33.20 49.3 i 16. l 1 9 Mobil Home & Trailer Park 24.90 36.98 12.08 10 Commercial Vacant 0.00 0,00 0.00 11 Retail Store, single; story 151.92 297 84* 145.92* 12 Store & Office Combination 151.92 297.84* 145.92* 15 Shopping Centers (Neighborhood) 506.40 992 79* 486.39* 16 Shopping Centers (Regional) 1,519.20 2 978 38* 1,459.18* 17 Office Building (one story) 151.92 297 84* 145.92* 18 Office Building (multi -story) 303.84 595 68* 291.84* 19 Retail Stores (multi -story) 303.84 595 68* 291.84* 21 Restaurants & cocktail lounges 151.92 297 84* 145.92* 24 Banks, Savings & Loans 151.92 297 81* 145.92* 25 Service Stations 151.92 :97 81* 145.92* 26 Auto sales, repair, storage & rental 50.64 99 2u* 18.64* 30 Industrial Land Vacant 0.00 C 01 0.00 31 Light Manufacturing 607.68 1,191 3�* 583.67* 32 Warehousing 202.56 39'; 1 '* 194.56* 33 Industrial Condos, Coops, PUD's 151.92 297 84* 145.92* 38 Mineral Processing 151.92 297 84* 145.92* 44 Truck Crops 101.28 198.56* 97.28* 46 Pasture (permanent) 101.28 198 56* 97.28* 48 Poultry 101.28 198 56* 97.28* 49 Flowers, seed production 101.28 198 56* 97.28* 51 Orchards 101.28 19S 5"* 97.28* 53 Field crops, dry 101.28 198 56* 97.28* 54 Pastures of graze, dry 101.28 198 56* 97.28* 55 Feed lots 101.28 198 56* 97.28* 57 Tree farms 101.28 198 56* 9728* 61 Theater 101.28 198 56* 97.28* 70 Institutional vacant land 0.00 1, Cti 000 71 Churches, convent & rectory 0.00 (; 01 „ 0.00 78 Public Bldg. Fire Houses, Museums, etc. 0,00 (, 00 000 80 Misc, Vacant land 0.00 ( of a 0.00 81 Utility Water Company 0.00 0 00 000 83 Petroleum & gas 50.64 99 28* 48.64* 91 Utility Edison 0.00 0 a s 0.00 92 Telephone 0.00 0 00 0.00 93 SPRR 0.00 0 011 0.00 94 Undedicated Community Condo Development 0,00 0 00 000 99 Exempt 0.00 G 011 0.00 * Assessment Amount based on Alternate Formula I1: 33 % Allocation to Non - Residential Properties All other Proposed Assessments are based on Alternate Formula 1: 25% Allocation to Non - Residential Properties AD 85 -1 Assessments C [for Alternative Benefit Spread Formulas] Use .It. 11 Alt #2 Code Description Assmnt Assmnt 0 Residential Vacant 0.00 * 0.00 1 Single Family - Level 1 49.31 * 44.05 2 Mobil Home 0.00 * 0.00 3 Condo :6.98 * 33.04 4 Residential Income 2 -4 units 36.98 * 33.04 5 Apartments (5 +) 6.98 * 33.04 6 Single Family - Level 2 49.31 * 44.05 9 Mobil Home & Trailer Park 6.98 * 33.04 10 Commercial Vacant 0.00 * 0.00 11 Retail Store, single story 225.63 297.84 12 Store & Office Combination 225.63 297.84 15 Shopping Centers (Neighborhood) '52.12 992.79 16 Shopping Centers (Regional) 2,256.35 2,978.38 17 Office Building lone story) 225.63 297.84 18 Office Building (multi- story) 151,27 595.68 19 Retail Stores (multi- story) 451.27 595.68 21 Restaurants & cocktail lounges 225.63 297.84 24 Banks, Savings & Loans °25.63 297.84 25 Service Stations 225.63 297.84 26 Auto sales, repair, storage & rental 5.21 99.28 * 30 Industrial Land Vacant 0,00 * 0.00 * 31 Light Manufacturing 402.54 1,191.35 * 32 Warehousing 300.85 397.12 * 33 Industrial Condos, Coops, PUD's 225,63 297.84 * 38 Mineral Processing 225,63 297.84 * 44 Truck Crops 60.42 198.56 * 46 Pasture (permanent) 50,.42 198.56 * 48 Poultry .50.42 198.56 * 49 Flowers, seed production 50.42 198.56 * 51 Orchards 50.42 198.56 * 53 Field crops, dry 50.42 198.56 * 54 Pastures of graze, dry 5f0,42 198.56 * AD 85 -1 assessments Comparison (cont.) 55 Feed lots L50.42 198.56 * 57 Tree fares 1.50.42 198.56 * 61 Theater L50.42 198.56 * 70 Institutional vacant land 0.00 * 0.00 71 Churches, convent & rectory 0.00 * 0.00 78 Public Bldg. Fire Houses, Museums, etc. 0.00 * 0.00 80 Misc, Vacant land d).00 * 0.00 81 Utility Water Company 0.00 * 0.00 83 Petroleum & gas . +5.21 99.28 91 Utility Edison 0.00 * 0.00 92 Telephone 0.00 R 0.00 93 SPRR 0100 * 0.00 94 Undedicated Community Condo Developsent )'00 * 0.00 99 Exempt ).00 0.00 Note: * = The assessment shown in the Public Hearing Notice. Fi RESOLUTION NO 95- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, MAKING CERTAIN CHANGES TO THE "MOORPARK PARKS MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. AD- 85 -111; AND CONFIRMING THE ASSESSMENT FOR SAID DISTRICT THE FISCAL YEAR COMMENCING JULY 1, 1995 AND ENDING JUNE 30, 1996. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Moorpark, by Resolution No. 95 -1095, adopted January 4, 1995, declared its intention to make certain changes to the "MOORPARK PARKS MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. AD- 85 -111, and to order the extension of the annual assessments for said district for the fiscal year commencing July 1,. t995 and ending June 30, 1996; and, WHEREAS, said "MOORPARK PARKS MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. AD -85 -1" consists of a single city -wide zone for the maintenance and improvement of parks and recreational facilities within the City; and, WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Moorpark, by Resolution No. 95 -1114, adopted April 5, 1995, approved the Engineer's Report pertaining tc such matters; and, WHEREAS, said Resolution No. 95 -1114 also set 7:00 p.m., May 15, 1995, as the time and date of a public meeting to allow the public an opportunity to discuss the proposed increased assessment with City staff; arid, WHEREAS, said public meeting was convened on May 15, 1995, at 7:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers for the purpose of allowing the public an opportunity to discuss with City staff the proposed increased assessments; and, WHEREAS, said Resolution Na. 95 -1114 also set 7:00 p.m., June 7, 1995, as the time and date of a public hearing to consider such matters; and, WHEREAS, on June 7, 1995, the City Council held a public hearing to determine whether said changes to said district should be made, and whether the annual assessments should be ordered and confirmed for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1995 and ending June 30, 199E and, FI- Resolution No. 95- Page 2 WHEREAS, the City Council finds that written protests against the proposed work or assessment have not been made by owners representing more than one -half of the area of land to be assessed: and, WHEREAS, the City Council, having duly received, considered evidence, oral and documentary, concerning the jurisdictional facts in this proceeding and concerning the necessity for the contemplated work and benefits to be derived therefrom, and the City Council having now acquired jurisdiction to order the proposed assessments for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1995 and ending June 30, 1996 NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF MOORPARK, CALIFORNIA, DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The Engineers Report for "MOORPARK PARKS MAINTENANCE ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. AD- 85 -111, filed with the City Clerk on March 24, 1995, as amended or revised by action of the City Council, is hereby approved and adopted, and the improvements, changes to, and extension of the annual assessments in the Assessment District, in accordance with said report, as revised, and in accordance with Resolution No. 95 -1114 approving said Engineer's Report, is hereby levied for the Fiscal Year 1995/96. SECTION 2. The City Clerk shall cause the diagram and assessment, or a certified copy thereof, to be filed with the County Auditor. SECTION 3. The City Clerk :shall. certify to the adoption of this resolution. APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS __ _ _ day of _ , 1995. Paul W. Lawrason Jr., Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk