Loading...
Item 3.1 - Public Hearing; Newly Formed LMD No. 18-1, Take Public Testimony and Tabulate Ballots\�Y OF � G '9Y Fc -.,4 W THE �� City of Poway COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT APPROVED APPROVED AS AMENDED ❑ (SEE MINUTES) DENIED ❑ REMOVED . ❑ CONTINUED I"A,� VAS ZtltoA RESOLUTION NO. DATE: May 1, 2018 TO: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council FROM: Michael Obermiller, P.E., Director of Public Works 15 CONTACT: Eric Heidemann, Assistant Dir of Public Works for Maintenance Operations eheidemann@poway.org SUBJECT: Public Hearing for Newly Formed Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1, Take Public Testimony and Tabulate Ballots Summary: Cities are authorized by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 to fund enhanced public landscape improvements and maintenance services through the levy and collection of assessments. Many assessment districts are formed at the time a developer builds a development. As a community amenity, the developer will often install landscaping and other improvements that are beyond a base level that a city would otherwise install if it were doing the installation and maintenance. Because there are costs associated with installing and continuing to maintain these enhanced improvements, a city will form an assessment district to fund expenses associated with the enhancements. The City currently has five landscape maintenance districts that were formed in this manner, including Landscape Maintenance District 83-1 (the Existing District). In 1983, the City formed the Existing District to fund enhanced landscape improvements and services within certain developments located in the western portion of the City. The maximum assessment rate for the Existing District has remained unchanged since 1998 after the passage of Proposition 218. Proposition 218 amended the California Constitution by adding Articles XIII C and XIII D. Among other things, Article XIII D established new procedural requirements for levying any new or increasing any existing assessments, and placed substantive limitations on the use of the revenues collected from assessments and on the amount of the assessment that may be imposed on each parcel. Procedurally, Article XIII D requires that in order to impose a new or increase an existing assessment on a property, a local agency must hold a public hearing, mail advance notice of the public hearing to the record owner of each parcel proposed to be assessed, and conduct a ballot protest proceeding. The assessment ballot protest proceeding is not an election or a vote for purposes of California Constitution Article II, nor is it subject to the limitations and requirements of the California Elections Code governing elections. The ballot provides affected property owners with the opportunity to indicate their support for, or opposition to, the proposed assessments. Prior to the passage of Proposition 218, it was within the City Council's authority to increase assessments, as needed, without an affirmative approval of affected property owners. The assessments imposed in the Existing District are no longer sufficient to fund its enhanced improvements and services. Reserve funds have gradually been depleted in the Existing District as expenses have grown and assessment revenues have not. Since 2013, it has been necessary to use a portion of the Existing District's reserves each year to pay for annual operations. Consequently, the level of landscape maintenance service has also gradually been reduced 1 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 • Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 2 based on available funding. Reducing the levels of maintenance has caused a significant deterioration of the condition of the landscaping improvements. This, coupled with prolonged drought conditions and rising contract labor and water costs, has further depleted fund reserves to a critical point. At this point, annual expenses exceed annual revenues and the Existing District's reserves have been used to cover essential but unanticipated expenses, like tree removal. In 2013, staff noted a downward trend in the District's Capital Improvement Reserve balance. The balance began falling below 50% of expenditures plus the Existing District's six-month operating reserve. As a result, the City began a benefit and re-engineering analysis. When increases in the maximum authorized assessments are necessary because maintenance costs of a landscape maintenance district exceed the maximum allowable assessment revenue, special balloting procedures may be implemented to give district participants the opportunity to raise the maximum allowable assessment to cover the District's maintenance needs. At the March 6, 2018, City Council meeting, the Council adopted (1) Resolution No. 18-005, initiating proceedings for the formation of Landscape District No. 18-1 (Proposed District); and directing the preparation and filing of an engineer's report; and (2) Resolution 18-007, declaring the City's intention to form the Proposed District; and to levy and collect annual assessments that complies with the requirements of Article XIII D. The following concerns were brought up at this meeting: • What authority does the City have to add properties to the Existing District? The California Constitution Article XIII D, section 4 provides guidance on the substantive requirements of identifying properties included in the Proposed District. Before imposing an assessment, a public agency must first identify all parcels that will receive a special benefit from the proposed improvements or services for which the assessment is proposed to be levied. The assessments must be supported by a detailed engineer's report prepared by a registered professional engineer certified by the State of California. Only"special benefits" are assessable, and local governments may not impose assessments to pay for the cost of providing a general benefit. The assessment engineer's report must quantify the proportionate special benefits derived by each identified parcel subject to the proposed assessment in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of the public improvements or services being provided, and must calculate the amount of the assessment to be imposed on each identified parcel. While certain properties were not included in the Existing District because they were not part of the developments that created it, they do receive special benefits from the improvements and services provided. Because the City must identify and include all properties that are specially benefitted from the improvements and services to be provided within the boundaries of the Proposed District, properties that were not in the Existing District will be included in the Proposed District and assessed for the special benefits that they receive. • • How are ballots weighted? Ballots that are timely submitted to the City are weighted according to the proportional assessment levied on the affected property. For example, if property owner "A" submits a ballot in favor of the Proposed District and the assessment levied on his property is $50, and property owner"B" submits a ballot in opposition to the Proposed District and the assessment levied on her property is $150 assessment, then property owner B's ballot counts three times more than property owner A's ballot. • How is the City's general benefit contribution calculated? The City's general benefit contribution accounts for a baseline level of service that the City would otherwise provide in the community if a landscape maintenance district did not exist. 2 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 3 The baseline level of service is calculated to be approximately 1% of the overall landscape maintenance costs within the Proposed District. In addition, it is recognized that the arterial streets within this district are routinely traveled by the public and other property owners within the City. While the landscape improvements along these arterial streets do not provide special • benefits to properties outside the District, they do provide some measure of indirect general benefit to persons and properties that are not located in the Proposed District, and the public at large. Therefore, the general benefit contribution for the Proposed District is assumed to be an additional 10% of the maintenance expenditures associated with the arterial street landscape improvements. • What are special benefits? Special benefits are benefits provided to assessed properties that affect the assessed property in ways that are particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. Assessed properties receive direct advantages from the improvements and services provided. That portion of costs of the improvements and services that are determined to be general benefit shall be funded by the City's general benefit contribution and are excluded from the amount to be assessed on properties as special benefits. • Why were properties removed from the proposed Landscape Maintenance District 18-1? It was determined these properties did not receive special benefits from landscaping maintained by the Proposed District. • Why were the properties south of Twin Peaks Road on Community Road not included within the Proposed District? Based on the proximity of the landscape improvements to the entryway, or location where parcels are accessed in this area, the assessment Engineer concluded that these properties do not receive special benefits that are distinct from the improvements effect on other parcels. The Proposed District would include additional properties that previously were not assessed, and establish different zones based on the nature and extent of the improvements and services specially benefitting the properties proposed to be assessed. The Proposed District would result in an increase in the assessments currently imposed on properties in the Existing District and the levy of assessments on properties previously not included in the Existing District. The proposed assessments and the boundaries of the Proposed District are supported by a detailed engineer's report (Report) prepared by an independent, registered professional engineer(Engineer) certified by the State of California. The Proposed District would include 1,660 assessed parcels, an increase of 222 assessed parcels from the Existing District, which the Engineer has identified will receive special benefits from the enhanced improvements and maintenance services. Recommended Action: It is recommended that the City Council: 1. Conduct the Public Hearing upon the proposed assessments, and consider all objections, whether written or oral, if any; 2. After all members of the public that wish to speak on the Proposed District have had an opportunity to speak, close the Public Hearing, direct the City Clerk to tabulate the Proposition 218 Ballots for Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1, and trail the consideration of the agenda item; and 3 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 4 3. If the City Clerk cannot complete the tabulation of the ballots by the time the City Council completes the remainder of the agenda, continue the agenda item to the May 15, 2018 City Council meeting to confirm the ballot results and approval of final report and levy of assessments for Landscape Maintenance District 18-1, if successful. If unsuccessful, confirm ballot results at the May 15, 2018 City Council meeting. In such an event, staff will bring back landscape maintenance options for City Council's consideration at a future meeting. Discussion: The Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 (State of California Streets and Highways Section 22500 and following) is a tool used by local government agencies to form Landscaping and Lighting Districts to finance the costs of operating and maintaining enhanced landscaping and appurtenant improvements, and services beyond those generally provided by the City. The City Council previously approved the formation of the Existing District pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, referred to as LMD 83-1. The purpose of a landscape maintenance district (LMD) assessment is to create a revenue mechanism to offset the expenditures related to landscaping improvements and related services within the boundaries of the district that provide special benefits to the properties in the district. Revenues generated within an LMD may only be used to fund the services and improvements of the LMD for which they were imposed. The costs are distributed by equitably assessing properties in accordance with the proportional special benefits they receive from the improvements and services. In 1983, the landscape improvements for the Existing District were initially constructed by the developer of Rancho Arbolitos. At the time, the boundary of the district included Rancho Arbolitos (975 lots), Poway Woods 1 and 2 (112 lots), and Casa Real (68 lots). A total of 1,155 lots were originally assessed for the costs to maintain the landscaping improvements located within the right-of-way adjacent to Camino del Norte, Pomerado Road, and future State Route 56. Since its initial formation, the area of the Existing District increased in size as properties along Twin Peaks Road, Community Road, and Midland Road developed. These properties were added to the district by written consent from the property owner(s) at the time. Currently, the Existing District contains 1,438 assessed properties within ten zones (A through J). Zones A and D through J have a current annual assessment of $118.48 and include the residential properties on the north and south side of Twin Peaks Road. Zone B has a current assessment of $235.75 and includes the commercial properties (Target Shopping Center) at the southwest corner of Pomerado Road and Twin Peaks Road. Zone C has a current assessment rate of $496.00 and includes the 28 residential properties on the southwest corner of Twin Peaks Road and Midland Road. The Existing District is comprised of approximately 1.26 million square feet of landscaping and 3,252 trees. In addition to the landscaping materials (trees and shrubs), the Existing District is also responsible for maintaining irrigation infrastructure (controllers, timers, pipes and emitters). The types of services that are contracted out include irrigation maintenance, litter and weed control, tree trimming and general maintenance. As expected, the cost to provide services has steadily increased over the years, increasing Existing District expenditures. However, the assessment revenues have stayed the same. When the Existing District was formed, it did not include an assessment escalation factor (e.g., cost of living index) because it was within the City Council's authority to increase assessments when costs increased. The passage of Proposition 218 removed that ability and instead made new or 4 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 5 increased assessments subject to a property owner ballot protest process. Additionally, the State of California has approved prevailing wage changes for landscape maintenance job classifications; therefore, a substantial increase in labor costs has and will continue to burden the Existing District. Furthermore, due to combined drought and aging trees, staff has observed a substantial number of dead and diseased trees, along with an increase in the number of unexpected costs due to fallen trees. Finally, without an increase in revenues, staff has had to make significant reductions to the service levels in the Existing District as costs for maintenance contracts, utilities and repairs continued to rise. This, combined with the need to replace aging infrastructure and perform expensive tree removals, has further accelerated the need for an immediate increase in district revenues. It is essential that sufficient revenues are generated to ensure the district is self-sustaining and offset the ongoing annual expenditures. Currently, ordinary annual expenses of the Existing District exceed annual revenues. Without an increase in the assessments, this gap between revenues and expenses will continue to grow, services in the Existing District will be reduced to unsustainable levels, and watering will continue to be restricted to once per week. Staff is concerned this will result in additional tree failures that will only get worse over time and require removal of trees. Recognizing the need to increase the revenues for the Existing District, and working within the parameters of Proposition 218, it was necessary for the City to engage the services of an assessment engineer to reevaluate the Existing District and identify every parcel upon which a special benefit or benefits are conferred from the enhanced landscape improvements and maintenance services. Because of the changes in the law governing assessments as a result of Proposition 218, if the City wishes to:increase the assessments to fund the improvements and services, it cannot continue with the Existing District in its current form. Rather, the Existing District and the proposed assessments must be evaluated for compliance with Article XIII D. Analysis: The City engaged the services of Willdan Financial Services (the Engineer)to perform an analysis of the existing landscape improvements, services, and assessments, and develop a recommendation to revise the assessments in line with landscape maintenance expenditures in compliance with Proposition 218 and the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972. Before imposing an assessment, a public agency must first identify all parcels that will receive a special benefit from the proposed improvements or services for which the assessment is proposed to be levied. The Engineer reviewed the Existing District and determined the assessment zones should be re- engineered and the assessments adjusted to cover the expenditures and identify all of the parcels that are specially benefited. It is recommended the best approach to bring the Existing District into Proposition 218 compliance is to form a new LMD No. 18-1 (i.e., the Proposed District) to replace the Existing District. The Proposed District would: appropriately assess all parcels that specially benefit from the improvements and services; and provide sufficient assessment revenues to allow for annual operation and maintenance of landscaping/trees and appurtenant facilities, including, but not limited to: labor, electricity, water, materials and contracted services. Notably, the option of assessing an annual inflationary adjustment is included along with the proposed assessments on an annual basis to ensure that there are sufficient revenues to maintain the improvements on a going forward basis. Accordingly, if approved, the maximum assessment rates established for the improvements and services in the previous Fiscal Year for each Zone may be adjusted by the 5 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 6 lesser of three percent (3%) or the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The CPI used for the inflationary adjustment shall be for the San Diego Area for All Items for All Urban • Consumers (CPI-U), as developed by U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The CPI used shall be as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for a similar period of time. This should allow the Proposed District revenue to keep pace with inflationary cost increases over time. The effort to re-engineer the Existing District began in 2016 by evaluating the relationship of the properties currently being assessed relative to the location, and nature and extent of the landscape improvements. In order to accurately reflect the improvements that provide special benefits to the properties proposed to be assessed, the Proposed District is divided into zones. Based on the location of the improvements and proximity to parcels in the area, the Engineer initially identified several parcels/developments located along Pomerado Road (north and south of Ted Williams Parkway), north of Twin Peaks Road (east and west of Hillndale Way), and south of Twin Peaks Road (on Budwin Lane) that are not part of the Existing District, but receive special benefits from the Existing District's landscape improvements and maintenance services, and should therefore be added to the Proposed LMD (Attachment C). These properties were not a part of any of the developments for which the Existing District was formed and, under California law existing at the time of formation, were not required to be included in the Existing District. Additionally, the Engineer identified three properties that were determined not to receive special benefits, which were removed from the District and documented in the Fiscal Year 2017/2018 Engineer's Report for the Proposed District. A special benefit means a distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property. General enhancement of property values does not constitute a "special benefit". A special benefit must affect the assessed property in a way that is particular and distinct from its effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. This is the primary reason for establishing zones, which is a means of identifying and separating the improvements that benefit various properties. Using the Engineer's preliminary analysis, staff held a series of neighborhood meetings/open houses in October and November 2017 to inform property owners of the financial condition of the Existing District, the preliminary engineering analysis, and the proposed balloting process to re- engineer the District and increase assessments. It is important to note that three adjustments were made to the preliminary engineering analysis based on resident input during the open houses. First, it was brought to staff's attention that the primary access for several residents located north of Twin Peaks Road was made via Midland Road, where there are no landscape improvements for the Existing District. Therefore, the Engineer reduced the number of parcels to be added in that area by moving the Proposed District boundary west to follow the original subdivision tract line and align the entrance to the neighborhoods relative to the landscape improvements that are north of Twin Peaks Road. Second, the original proposed map did not capture all of the parcels along the east side of Budwin Lane (south of Twin Peaks Road) that receive special benefits from the landscape improvements and maintenance services at the entrance of the neighborhood. As a result, those parcels were added to the Proposed District. Lastly, the cap on the proposed annual inflationary adjustment was reduced from 5% to 3%. Assessments are computed based on the number of equivalent benefit units (EBU) in the Proposed District. The Existing District divides local special benefits into ten (10) zones and the EBU has been calculated for commercial, vacant, single-family residential and multi-family 6 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 7 properties. These zones were formed based on the special benefits provided relative to the proximity, and nature and extent of the landscape improvements and services, as well as the land use classifications of the properties to be assessed. The Proposed District assessment rates for an EBU range from $49 to $378 annually. Additionally, a provision has been included to allow for appropriate adjustments in future assessments, at the discretion of the City Council, in line with the San Diego Consumer Price Index (capped annually at 3%). The table below depicts the changes in assessments (by zone) for those properties that are within the Proposed District: Zone Current Proposed Assessment Assessment A* $118.00 $227.00 B $235.75 $372.00 C $496.60 $378.00 D $118.00 $76.00 E* $118.00 $96.00 F $118.00 $263.00 G $118.00 $127.00 H $118.00 $49.00 $118.00 $141.00 $118.00 $124.00 'Zone includes parcels proposed to be added that have a current assessment of SO per year. Their maximum assessment will be the same as all other parcels within their respective Zone. General Benefit The City provides limited (as needed) weed abatement, rodent control, and erosion control services ("baseline level of service") for the landscape areas currently maintained within the Proposed District and elsewhere in the City. This baseline level of service typically provides for periodic maintenance of the improvement areas necessary to ensure public safety and essential property protection. The primary purpose of baseline services is to avoid negative impacts on adjacent roadways and potential property damage resulting from erosion or fire hazards, but results in a far less visually pleasing environment than is created with the enhanced levels of improvements and services associated with the regular landscape maintenance provided in the Existing District and Proposed District. For the purpose of the Proposed District, the City's general benefit contribution accounts for this baseline level of service. However, it is recognized that the arterial streets within this district are routinely traveled by the public and other property owners within the City. While the landscape improvements along these arterial streets do not provide special benefits to properties outside the District, they do provide some measure of indirect general benefit to properties in the City, the district and the public at large. Therefore, the general benefit contribution for the Proposed District is assumed to be an additional 10% of the overall maintenance cost to account for this indirect general benefit. The proposed annual general benefit contribution for the Proposed District is approximately $63,658. 7 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 8 Procedural Requirements: As set forth by the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Proposition 218, and the proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act (Government Code section 53750 et seq.) local agencies are required to follow these steps: 1. The City Clerk collects all ballots received prior to the close of the Public Hearing on May 1, 2018, at 7 p.m. Upon closing of the Public Hearing, the ballots will be tabulated, and the results will be presented to the City Council later in the City Council meeting that evening, or at the May 15, 2018 City Council Meeting if the tabulation cannot be completed before the City Council completes the remainder of items on the May 1, 2018 City Council agenda. 2. Adopt resolutions confirming ballot results, approval of final report and levy of assessments (May 15, 2018). 3. If a majority of the submitted ballots support the formation of the Proposed District, the City Council may elect to adopt resolutions declaring the results of the ballot protest, confirming the formation of Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1, confirming the assessment diagram and engineer's report, overruling all protests, and approving the levy and collection of the new assessments. If the Proposed District is established, the Existing District will remain in existence with an assessment rate of zero as long as the assessments for the Proposed District are imposed. Upon approval, the new assessments will be collected through the San Diego County Office of the Assessor along with annual property tax bills effective in Fiscal Year 2018/2019. 4. If a majority of the submitted ballots do not support the formation of the Proposed District, the City Council will adopt a resolution declaring the results of the ballot protest. At a subsequent City Council meeting the City Council would adopt a resolution approving an Engineer's Report and declaring the intention to levy and collect annual assessments within the Existing District (June 19, 2018). This means that the Existing District, and current assessments (without a cost escalator) would remain in effect. 5. If a majority of the submitted ballots do not support the formation of the Proposed District, adopt a resolution ordering the annual levy of assessments within the Existing District (July 17, 2018). 6. Submit levies to the County of San Diego (No later than August 10, 2018). Notices of the public hearing and ballots were mailed to the affected property owners, listed on the current County of San Diego Tax roll, pursuant to the regulations governing majority protest proceedings. This Public Hearing is being held not less than 45 days after the mailing of the requisite notices, as required by Proposition 218 and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act. Property owners have until the close of the Public Hearing to submit a signed and marked assessment ballot indicating their support for or opposition to the Proposed District and assessments therein. Ballots that were received by the City Clerk by U.S. Mail, or otherwise delivered to the City Clerk before the Public Hearing, or received during the Public Hearing itself, shall be counted, if they were properly completed and executed. Tabulation of the ballots will be 8 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 9 conducted under the supervision and direction of the City Clerk. During the Public Hearing, the City Council will consider all objections or protests, if any, to the proposed assessments, whether oral or written. Upon the close of the Public Hearing, the agenda item will be trailed, the assessment ballots received will be opened and tabulated, consistent with all applicable procedures required by Proposition 218 and its implementing statutes, weighted by the proposed assessment amount on each property, and the results announced. If the time to tabulate the ballots exceeds the time for the City Council meeting, the City Council may continue the tabulation to a different time and publicly accessible location, so long as such time and location are announced during the meeting. This agenda item will then be continued to a subsequent meeting at a specified date and time, so that results may thereafter be announced and any further action taken. All returned ballots will remain unopened and in the charge of the City Clerk until the close of the Public Hearing and direction is given to staff to tabulate the ballots. For purposes of tabulation, all the properly completed returned ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, will be tabulated and weighted according to the financial obligation of each particular parcel. Article XIII D of the California Constitution provides that a Majority Protest exists if the assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in opposition to the proposed assessments exceed the assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in favor of the proposed assessments, weighting those assessment ballots by the amount of the proposed assessment to be imposed upon the identified parcel for which each assessment ballot was submitted. If there is no Majority Protest as described above, the City Council may approve the formation of the Proposed District No. 18-1 and the levy and collection of the assessments by adopting a resolution at the May 1, 2018 meeting if the ballot tabulation is completed or the May 15, 2018 City Council meeting if it is not. Any property owner approved assessments will be submitted to the San Diego County Tax Assessor to be included on the property tax roll for each parcel for Fiscal Year 2018/2019. If a Majority Protest does exist, LMD No. 83-1 and the assessments will remain in effect at the current maximum rates for Fiscal Year 2018/2019. As stated earlier in this report, the Existing District assessments fall short of covering expenses. Without an increase in the assessments, service levels will continue to decline, and watering will be restricted to once per week. Environmental Review: This item is not subject to California Environmental Quality Act review. Fiscal Impact: The Existing District establishes the funding mechanism to provide revenue covering the operating and maintenance costs of landscape improvements and maintenance services in the district boundaries. For Fiscal Year 2017/2018, the total estimated annual assessment and general fund contribution revenues are approximately $232,208 and $63,073, respectively. It should be noted that the City has increased its General Fund contribution to the Existing District, to keep pace with inflation, notwithstanding the lack of a CPI cost escalator for the assessments imposed on property owners in the District. Anticipated annual expenses of the Existing District with the lowest level of service, as estimated at this time, are $285,824. Any further unanticipated expenses, such as tree removals, will likely result in further use of reserves this Fiscal Year. 9 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Public Hearing to Tabulate Proposition 218 Ballots May 1, 2018 Page 10 Current revenues generated by the Existing District are not adequate to fully fund landscape maintenance at an acceptable service level. In order to generate additional revenues and ensure compliance with Proposition 218, the City is proposing to form a new assessment district that will replace the Existing District. The Proposed District, if approved, will generate estimated annual assessment and general fund contribution revenues of approximately $411,196 and $63,658, respectively, in the first year, to cover the operations and maintenance expenditures at a sustainable service level and establish a rehabilitation reserve. Public Notification: Below is a summary of staff's efforts to communicate with affected property owners: • Held four (4) Open Houses at City Hall (October 24, October 26, November 14 and November 16); • Posted an interactive map showing current and proposed assessments, a fact sheet, questions and answers, and the previous year's Engineer's Report on a dedicated page on the City's website; • Met with property owners at their homes by request; • Posted information on social media sites (Nextdoor, Twitter, and Facebook); • Distributed informational door hangers on affected properties; and • Mailed a notice of the public hearing and ballots on March 14, 2018, to affected property owners. Affected property owners were also made aware of the March 6, 2018, City Council meeting by direct letter sent to all property owners within the Proposed District. Attachments: A, Sample Ballot B. Preliminary Engineer's Report No. 18-1 C. Diagram of Proposed LMD No. 18-1 D. Public Comments E. Resolution Declaring the Results of the Protest Ballot Proceeding for LMD 18-1 F. Resolution Approving the Formation, Confirming the Engineer's Report and Approving the Levy and Collection of Assessments for LMD 18-1 Reviewed/Approved By: Reviewed By: Approved By / p Wendy Kaserman Alan Fenstermacher Tina M. White Assistant City Manager City Attorney City Manager 10 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 OFFICIAL ASSESSMENT BALLOT CITY OF POWAY \ LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT No. 18-1 This Ballot is for the owner of the property designated as Assessor's Parcel Number(s): «BALLOTAPN» within Zone «BALLOTZONE» of the proposed City of Poway (City) Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 (the District). This is your official property owner assessment ballot regarding the formation of the District and the levy of annual assessments to fund the ongoing expenses associated with the maintenance of landscape improvements within the District that confer special benefits on your property as outlined in the accompanying Notice and described more fully in the Engineer's Report, which is on file with the City. «OWNERI» «OWNER2» «MailAddress» «MailCity», «MailState» «MailZip» To complete your ballot, please mark below an (X) in the voting square next to the word "YES"to indicate your support for or next to the word "NO" to indicate your opposition to the proposed assessment, sign and date the ballot, and return the entire ballot to the City Clerk of Poway. If you wrongly mark, tear, or deface this ballot, return it to the City Clerk to obtain a replacement ballot. To be counted, all ballots must be received by the City Clerk no later than the close of public testimony at the public hearing scheduled for May 1, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. Assessor's Parcel Number(s): «BALLOTAPN» Maximum Assessment Rate for Fiscal Year 2018/2019': «BALLOT_RATE» per EBU Your Parcel's Balloted Assessment Amount: «BALLOT AMID Total amount balloted for all properties within the District: $ 411,196.88 Your Parcel's Proposed Assessment for Fiscal Year 2018/2019: «FY18-19_AMT» 1 This is an annual assessment that will be collected as part of your County property tax bill. 'The Maximum Assessment Rate for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 shown above includes an inflationary adjustment that allows this rate to be increased each fiscal year by the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index(CPI) for the San Diego Area, not to exceed 3% commencing in Fiscal Year 2019/2020. However, the assessment rate applied each year shall be based on budgeted expenses (which may be less), but in no case, shall the assessments exceed the allowable adjusted maximum O, assessment rate without the approval of the property owners. -1 ' ® YES --IN FAVOR OF THE ASSESSMENT proposed for the District and the assessment for my property shown Qabove including the annual inflation adjustment applicable "Barcode_Yes» 13:1 the future assessments based on the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index(CPI), not to exceed 3%. ® NO --OPPOSED TO THE ASSESSSMENT proposed for the District and the assessment for my property shown above including the annual inflation adjustment applicable «Barcode No» to future assessments based on the percentage change in the Consumer Price Index(CPI), not to exceed 3%. I hereby declare, under penalty of perjury, that I am the record owner of the property(Assessor's Parcel Number) identified on this ballot or I am the authorized representative of that record owner. Signed Date Please see the back of this sheet for information about your assessment ballot and instructions for completion and delivery of the assessment ballot. This ballot will be accepted and tabulated pursuant to California Government Code Section 53753. 11 of 70 ATTACHMENT A May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 INFORMATION ABOUT YOUR ASSESSMENT BALLOT AND INSTRUCTIONS FOR COMPLETION AND DELIVERY OF ASSESSMENT BALLOT LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 18-1 To Cast Your Ballot: Prior to the public hearing, completed ballots may be personally delivered to the City Clerk's Office located at 13325 Civic Center Dive, Poway, California; or mailed to the City of Poway at the address indicated below. A return envelope specifically for this ballot proceeding has been provided for your convenience that is addressed to the City of Poway. You may also personally present completed ballots to the City Clerk at the public hearing on May 1 2018, at 7:00 p.m. If you return your ballot by mail, please be sure to allow time for mail delivery; the City Clerk must receive all ballots no later than the end of the public testimony portion of the public hearing on May 1, 2018. If you damagemisplace your ballot, a replacement ballot can be obtained from the City Clerk either by contacting the City Clerk's Office or by contacting,the,City's Public Works Department as indicated below. Only ballots issued by the City are considered valid ballots(copies or facsimiles are not valid ballots). Any Ballot returned unmarked or unsigned, or not received by the City Clerk before the end of,the public hearing, will be rejected and not counted. Only valid ballots received by the City Clerk before- the end/of the public hearing shall be counted. C's.. \v/ All submitted ballots must be clearly marked to indicate either"Yes --In Favor of the Assessment" or"No --Opposed to the Assessment" and signed; otherwise the ballot will be Ire ected arid,riot counted. To ensure the privacy of your / \ ballot prior to the tabulation, please return your ballot in the envelope—provided, or`n a sealed envelope that indicates that a ballot is enclosed by noting on the front of the envelope"Assessment Balla—Do Not Open,°.Athallot previously submitted may be withdrawn at any time prior to the close of the public hearing by request to the City Clerk, by the person(s)that signed the submitted ballot. An assessment ballot may be changed abany.time pno/to the close of the public hearing by requesting a withdrawal of the previous ballot and requesting <repllacemenhb`lot. Only the person(s) signing the ballot may make such a request. The replacement ballot must be received by the City Clerk,prior to the deadline set forth herein. If you have questions: Should you have any questions prior to the public.hearing, you may contact the City's Public Works Department at(858)668-4700. City of Poway Completed ballots MUST be received by the City Clerk no later than PO Box 789 the close of the public testimony portion of the public hearing which is Poway, CA 92074-9926 scheduled to begin on Tuesday, May 1, 2018 at 7:00 p.m. at City Hall located at 13325 Civic Center Dive, Poway, CA, 2\c'. How to casshyourballot: 3. � hec Return to the City Clerk on or before the Yes or No Sign and Public Hearing on, May 1, 2018 in accordance with the date it instructions referenced above 12 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 - 'Ct jI FPpi le I .,,,,y r CITY OF POWAY Engineer's Report Formation of Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Intent Meeting: March 6, 2018 Public Hearing: May 1 , 2018 CITY OF POWAY 13325 CIVIC CENTER DRIVE POWAY. CA 92064 FEBRUARY 2018 PREPARED BY WILLDAN FINANCIAL SERVICES WWI LLDAN Financial Services 13 of 70 ATTACHMENT B May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 ENGINEER'S REPORT AFFIDAVIT City of Poway Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 District Formation Fiscal Year 2018/2019 Annual Levy of Assessments Commencing in Fiscal Year 2018/2019 City of Poway, County of San Diego, State of California This Report and the enclosed descriptions, budgets, and diagrams outline the improvements, zones, and assessments being proposed for the consideration of the Poway City Council regarding the formation of Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 for Fiscal Year 2018/2019. Said District includes each lot, parcel, and subdivision of land identified as receiving a special benefit from the improvements to be funded by the District annual assessments as identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps at the time this Report was prepared. Reference is hereby made to the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of each parcel within Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1, including all subsequent subdivisions, lot-line adjustments, or parcel changes therein. The undersigned respectfully submits the enclosed Report as directed by the City Council. Dated this day of , 2018. Willdan Financial Services • Assessment Engineer On Behalf of the City of Poway By: Jim McGuire Principal Consultant By: Richard Kopecky R.C.E. # 16742 14 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Table of Contents Introduction 1 Ballot Proceedings 2 Report Content 3 Part I — Plans and Specifications 5 Description of the District 5 Zones of Benefit and Improvements 6 Part II — Method of Apportionment 13 Legislative Authority and Provisions 13 Benefit Analysis 14 Assessment Methodology 17 Part III - Estimate of Costs 24 Calculation of Assessments 24 District Budgets and Assessments 25 Assessment Range Formula 29 Part IV - District Diagram 30 Part V — Assessment Roll 32 15 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Introduction Pursuant to the provisions of the Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972, being Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code. commencing with Section 22500 (the "1972 Act"). and in compliance with the substantive and procedural requirements of Article XIIID. section 4 of the California State Constitution (the "California Constitution") and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act (the "Omnibus Act"). being Government Code section 53750 et seq.. the City Council of the City of Poway. County of San Diego. State of California (the "City"), propose to form a special benefit assessment district to be designated as• Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 (the "District"), to provide and maintain various local landscaping improvements within the boundaries of the District that provide special benefits to properties therein. To adequately provide and fund the landscaping improvements. appurtenant facilities and related expenses within the District. the City Council has determined that it is appropriate and in the public's best interest to form the District. and to levy annual assessments on the County tax rolls for the benefit of properties therein commencing in Fiscal Year 2018/2019 to fund the estimated special benefit improvement costs that are considered necessary to maintain and service the improvements. The detailed plans and specifications for the landscaping improvements to be provided and funded in whole or in part by the District assessments are on file in the Office of Public Works of the City of Poway and by reference these plans and specifications are made part of this Report. The improvements to be provided by the District and the assessments described herein are made pursuant to the 1972 Act. the provisions of the California Constitution. and the Omnibus Act: and the District shall incorporate each parcel that will receive special benefits from those improvements. This Engineer's Report (the "Report") has been prepared pursuant to Chapter 1, Article 4 of the 1972 Act and the California Constitution. and presented to the City Council for its consideration and approval of the improvements to be provided within the District and the levy and collection of the assessments related thereto to fund the special benefit costs and expenses required to service and maintain the designated improvements within the District commencing in Fiscal Year 2018/2019. If any section, subsection. sentence. clause. phrase. portion. zone, or subzone of this Report is. for any reason. held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining provisions of the Report and each section. subsection. subdivision. sentence. clause. phrase. portion. zone. or subzone thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections. subsections. sentences. clauses, phrases, portions, zones. or subzones might subsequently be declared invalid or unconstitutional. This Report outlines the District structure, the improvements. and the proposed assessments to be levied in connection with the special benefits the properties within the District will receive from the maintenance and servicing of the District improvements. In accordance with the 1972 Act. the District utilizes benefit zones ("Zones") to address variations in the nature. location, and extent of the improvements that provide special benefits to various developments and parcels within the District. The annual assessments to be levied on properties within the District will provide a funding source for the continued operation and maintenance of the landscaping improvements and appurtenant facilities within the District and each Zone established herein. The net annual cost to provide the improvements associated with each Zone are allocated to the benefiting properties within that Zone using a weighted method of apportionment (refer to Assessment Methodology in Part II. Method of Apportionment) that calculates the proportional special benefit 16 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 and assessment for each parcel as compared to other properties that benefit from the District improvements and services. The estimated cost of the improvements and the proposed annual assessments budgeted and assessed against properties each fiscal year within the District and each respective Zone may include. but are not limited to the estimated expenditures for regular annual maintenance and repair of the landscaping and related facilities: incidental expenditures related to the operation and administration of the District: the collection of funds for operational reserves: the collection of funds to support periodic maintenance projects, rehabilitation projects and/or other capital improvement projects: deficits or surpluses from prior fiscal years: and revenues from other sources as authorized by the 1972 Act. Each parcel is to be assessed proportionately for only those improvements. services and expenses for which the parcel will receive special benefits. After formation of this District. in each subsequent fiscal year. the City shall establish the District's assessments based on an estimate of the costs to maintain, operate and service the improvements, including funding needed for capital improvement projects for that fiscal year and available revenues including fund balances, general benefit contributions. any additional City contributions, and the assessment limits established herein. The word "parcel." for the purposes of this Report. refers to an individual property assigned its own Assessor's Parcel Number ("APN") by the San Diego County Assessor's Office. The San Diego County Auditor/Controller uses Assessor's Parcel Numbers and specific Fund Numbers to identify properties to be assessed on the tax roll for the District assessments. Ballot Proceedings Pursuant to the provisions of Article XIIID. Section 4 of the California Constitution and the Omnibus Act. the City shall conduct a property owner protest ballot proceeding ("Ballot Proceeding") for the proposed levy of new assessments as described in this Report. In conjunction with this Ballot Proceeding. the City Council will conduct a noticed public hearing to consider public testimonies. comments. and written protests regarding the formation of the District and the establishment of the proposed assessments. Upon conclusion of the public hearing. property owner protest ballots received will be opened and tabulated to determine whether a majority protest exists as defined in Article XIIID of the California Constitution and the Omnibus Act. "A majority protest exists if. upon the conclusion of the hearing, ballots submitted in opposition to the assessment exceed the ballots submitted in favor of the assessment. In tabulating the ballots. the ballots shall be weighted according to the proportional financial obligation of the affected property." After completion of the ballot tabulation, the City Council will confirm the results of the balloting. If a majority protest exists for the proposed assessments and the assessment range formula presented and described herein. further proceedings to form the District and implement the new assessments shall be abandoned at this time. However, the City Council may continue to levy and collect annual assessments to support the landscaping improvements currently provided and funded through Landscape Maintenance District 83-1 at the assessment rates and method of apportionment previously approved and adopted by the City Council for that District. If tabulation of the ballots indicate that a majority protest does not exist for the proposed assessments and the assessment range formula presented and described herein, the City Council may adopt this Report (as submitted or amended): approve the District Diagram contained herein: and by resolution order the formation of the District: direct the improvements to be made: and confirm and approve the levy and collection of the assessments as outlined in this Report. Upon the successful formation of the District and levy of the Fiscal Year 2018/2019 17 of 70 May 1. 2018, Item # 3.1 assessments. the City Council will discontinue the levy of assessments for Landscape Maintenance District 83-1. The assessment rates and method of apportionment described in this Report. as approved or modified by the City Council, establishes the Fiscal Year 2018/2019 maximum assessments for each Zone which include an annual inflationary adjustment (referred to as an Assessment Range Formula). and the assessments to be submitted to the San Diego County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the Fiscal Year 2018/2019 property tax roll. Each subsequent fiscal year. an annual engineer's report for the District shall be prepared and presented to the City Council to address any proposed changes to the District. Zones. improvements. budgets. and assessments for that fiscal year. The City Council shall annually hold a noticed public hearing regarding these matters prior to approving and ordering the levy of assessments for the upcoming fiscal year. The assessments as approved and ordered will be submitted to the San Diego County Auditor/Controller for inclusion on the property tax roll for each affected parcel for that fiscal year. Such assessments shall not exceed the annually adjusted maximum assessments authorized herein unless the proposed new or increased assessments are approved by the property owners in a ballot protest proceeding. Report Content This Report has been prepared in connection with the formation of Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 and the levy of assessments commencing in Fiscal Year 2018/2019. pursuant to a resolution of the City Council and consists of five (5) parts: Part I — Plans and Specifications: An overall description of the District. Zones. and the general nature, location, and extent of the improvements for which parcels will be assessed. The assessments as outlined in this Report are based on the local landscaping improvements and appurtenant facilities within the District that provide special benefits to the properties within the various Zones, including incidental expenses authorized pursuant to the 1972 Act. In conjunction with the descriptions of the improvements. a visual depiction of the landscape improvement areas is provided on the District Diagram contained in Part IV of this Report. More detailed information regarding the specific plans and specifications associated with the District improvements are on file in the Public Works Department and by reference are made part of this Report. Part II - Method of Apportionment Provides a discussion of the general and special benefits associated with the various improvements to be provided within the District (Benefit Analysis). which includes a discussion of the proportional costs of the special benefits and a separation of costs considered to be of general benefit and therefore not assessed. This section of the Report also outlines the method of calculating each property's proportional special benefit necessary to calculate the annual assessments. Part Ill — Estimate of Costs An estimate of the total annual costs to install. operate. maintain. and service the local landscaping improvements and appurtenant facilities within the District and Zones. The estimated annual expenses (budget) for each Zone includes an estimate of the maintenance costs and incidental expenses (as defined in the 1972 Act) including. but not limited to: labor. materials. 18 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 utilities, equipment. and administration expenses as well as the collection of other appropriate funding authorized by the 1972 Act and deemed necessary to fully support the improvements. Those improvements and/or costs determined to be of general benefit shall be funded by a City contribution and are excluded from the amount to be assessed as special benefit. The resulting proposed maximum assessment rate (the "Maximum Assessment Rate Per EBU") identified in the budget for each Zone establishes the maximum assessment rate for each Zone as of Fiscal Year 2018/2019 and these maximum assessment rates shall be adjusted annually by the Assessment Range Formula also described in this section of the Report. The maximum assessment amount to be balloted for each parcel is calculated based on the initial maximum assessment rate established for each Zone and the Assessment Methodology described in 'Part II — Method of Apportionment" of this Report. While not shown as a budgeted expenditure at this time. if the District assessments are approved. the City Council at its discretion. may provide a temporary advance (loan) to the District to expedite various capital improvement projects within the District (i.e., repair and rehabilitation of the improvements). Such loans shall be limited to funding that complies with the provisions of California State law and shall be paid back to the City through the annual assessments and available funds collected for CIP and Rehabilitation Funding and/or Operational Reserves. Ultimately. City staff shall make the determination of which improvements, and the extent of the services and activities that shall be provided based on available revenues. Part IV — District Diagram This section of the Report contains a diagram showing the boundaries of the District and applicable Zones within the District as of Fiscal Year 2018/2019 which incorporates each of the parcels that receives special benefits from the various District improvements. This diagram also provides a visual depiction of the location of the improvements to be maintained. The lines and dimensions of each lot. parcel. and subdivision of land contained in this diagram are inclusive of all parcels listed in "Part V – Assessment Roll" of this Report and the corresponding County Assessor's Parcel Maps for said parcels as they existed at the time this Report was prepared and shall include all subsequent subdivisions. lot-line adjustments, or parcel changes therein. Reference is hereby made to the San Diego County Assessor's maps for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of each lot and parcel of land within the District. Part V — Assessment Roll A listing of all Assessor Parcel Numbers of the properties within the District and each parcel's corresponding Fiscal Year 2018-2019 maximum assessment amount ("Balloted Maximum Assessment") and assessment amount to be levied and collected for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 ("Assessment FY 2018/2019"). The proposed assessment amounts balloted and to be levied and collected for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 for each parcel is based on the parcel's calculated proportional special benefit as outlined in the Method of Apportionment (Part II of this Report) and the annual assessment rate established by the estimated budget for each Zone (Part III of this Report). Due to the number of parcels within the District. the Assessment Roll shall be filed electronically with the City Clerk rather than displayed in this Report and by reference the listing of the Assessor's Parcel Numbers and the corresponding assessment amounts contained in that electronic file are made part of this Report. 19 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Part I — Plans and Specifications Description of the District The District is located within the City of Poway in the south central region of the City, generally east of the City limits. west of Espola Road and north of Poway Road. The territory within the District consists of the lots or parcels of land shown on the Assessment Diagram contained herein in "Part IV — District Diagram- of this Report which is inclusive of all parcels listed in "Part V - Assessment Roll- of this Report and the corresponding County Assessor's Parcel Maps for said parcels as they existed at the time this Report was prepared. The parcels within the District include all or a portion of the parcels identified on the following San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps: Book 314 Pages 04, 05, 16, 19, 24, 34, 35, 37, 38, 56, 60, 63, 66 thru 83. and 86: Book 317 Page 11: and Book 321 Pages 30 and 39 As authorized by the 1972 Act. the improvements to be provided by the District and associated with each Zone therein incorporate local landscaping improvements and appurtenant facilities that are maintained and serviced for the benefit of real property within the District. The various improvements to be maintained by the District have been installed in connection with the development of properties for the benefit of those properties and/or nearby adjacent developments, or were otherwise considered necessary or required for the development of properties within the District to their full and best use. The work to be performed within the District may include. but is not limited to (as applicable), the personnel: materials, equipment: electricity: water: contract services. maintenance. repair and rehabilitation of the improvements: and incidental expenses required to operate the District and provide the improvements and services. The annual assessments to be levied on properties within the District provide a source of funding to support the continued operation and maintenance of these improvements that provide a particular and distinct benefit (special benefit) to those properties. Each parcel shall be assessed proportionately for only those improvements, services. and expenses for which the parcel receives special benefits. The landscape improvements to be funded by the District assessments may include. but are not limited to: turf: ground cover: shrubs and plants: areas of natural vegetation: trees: irrigation systems; specific masonry walls. including sound walls and retaining walls; monuments: hardscapes, trails: and other related appurtenant facilities within the District that have been dedicated to the City for maintenance including but are not limited to: median island landscaping and hardscape improvements within the District; - designated streetscape side-panel landscaping adjacent to the streets and properties within the District. including parkways. slopes and entryways: and - designated non-street landscaping and/or vegetation management areas, including. but not limited to. open space areas. greenbelts. and landscaping on the perimeter of basins or channel ways within the District that are located adjacent to the properties or within the developments of the District. The improvement plans and specifications for the District are on file in the Office of Public Works of the City of Poway and by reference these plans and specifications are made part of this Report. 20 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Zones of Benefit and Improvements California Constitution article XIII D. section 4(a) requires that an agency which proposes to levy an assessment shall identify all parcels which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and upon which an assessment will be imposed. The 1972 Act further permits the establishment of assessment districts by agencies for the purpose of providing various landscaping and lighting improvements, including the acquisition. construction. installation, maintenance. and servicing of those improvements and related facilities. In addition, to ensure an appropriate allocation of the estimated costs to provide various improvements based on proportional special benefits. landscaping and lighting districts often times include benefit zones ("Zones") as authorized pursuant to Chapter 1 Article 4. Section 22574 of the 1972 Act: "The diagram and assessment may classify various areas within an assessment district into different zones where, by reason of variations in the nature. location. and extent of the improvements. the various areas will receive differing degrees of benefit from the improvements. A zone shall consist of all territory which will receive substantially the same degree of benefit from the improvements." While the California Constitution requires that the "proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel shall be determined in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of a public improvement or the maintenance and operation expenses of a public improvement...": it is reasonable to conclude that certain landscaping improvements may benefit most. if not all, properties within a district. while other improvements may only provide special benefits to specific parcels. developments or portions of the district (particularly in larger districts). In addition. some improvements within a district and/or a portion of the costs associated with various public improvements are identified as providing some measure of general benefit and these general benefit costs are separated. quantified. and not assessed to properties within the district. This Report has identified all parcels which will have special benefits conferred upon them by the improvements in the proposed District. In accordance with the 1972 Act, it has been determined that it is necessary to establish benefit zones (Zones and/or Sub-Zones. hereafter referred to collectively as "Zones") within this District to appropriately: (1) determine the proportionate special benefits derived by each identified parcel in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of the public improvements. and the maintenance and operation expenses of the public improvements; and (2) allocate the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefits conferred on each parcel. The boundaries of each Zone are established based on the location. extent and types of improvements being maintained through the District as well as the particular and distinct benefits the various developments and properties derive from those improvements based on proximity to those specific improvements. While some improvements may be specifically associated with specific development areas or parcels within the District, many improvements may reasonably be considered shared improvements because the overall development of the properties in the area required or facilitated the installation of those improvements. In such cases. the special benefits and cost of providing such shared improvements are proportionately allocated to parcels in each Zone. The net annual cost to provide the improvements for each Zone are allocated to the benefiting properties within that Zone using a weighted method of apportionment (refer to Assessment Methodology in Part III - Method of Apportionment) that calculates the proportional special benefit and assessment for each parcel as compared to other properties that benefit from the District improvements and services. The following is a brief description and summary of the Zones and improvements associated within each Zone. A visual depiction of the location and extent of the improvements and Zone boundaries are provided on the District Diagram provided in Part IV of this Report. 21 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Zone A Parcels and Improvements Zone A Parcels: Zone A is comprised of that portion of the parcels within the District located north and south of Twin Peaks Road between the City limits (western boundary of the District and Zone A) and Community Road that are within developments adjacent or directly accessed from the streets where the District improvements are located. including Twin Peaks Road. Camino Del Norte. Ted Williams Parkway. and Pomerado Road. The properties in Zone A are primarily identified as residential properties, but the Zone also incorporates a high school. a private recreational facility, and public recreational areas. Zone A incorporates parcels within the developments identified as Parcel Maps 05716, 11344, 16262, 16786. 16904. & 18833: Tracts 00536. 07523, 07795, 07801. 07818. 08000. 08885. 09243. 09255. 09256. 09981, 11065, 11350. 11507, 11508, 11641. 11695, 11744. 11745. 11958, 11981. 12043, 12082. 12270. 12356. 12447. 12463. 12557, 12660. 12753, & 12880: and various other surrounding parcels. The parcels in Zone A include all or a portion of the parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps Book 314 Pages 04. 05. 16, 34, 35, 37, 38. 56, 60. 63. 66. 67, 68. and 70 through 82. Zone A Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels in the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone A are proportionately assessed. in whole or in part. for the special benefits they receive from the improvements. The improvements include. but are not limited to. the following: Zone Specific Improvements (proportionately benefiting parcels in Zone A only) The following improvements provide special benefits to properties in Zone A only, including approximately: 112.980 square feet of non-streetscape landscaping, including improvement areas on or near Malabar Drive. Levita Court. Pomerado Road, La Manda Drive. Amso Street, and Twin Circle Way at Twin Circle Court: 97.110 square feet of non-arterial streetscape landscaping improvements within the Zone, including improvement areas on Deerwood Street. Carriage Road. Saddlewood Drive. Beachwood Street. and Pomerado Road north of Twin Peaks Road; 123.830 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on both sides of Camino Del Norte. northwest of Pomerado Road. This landscape area incorporates the small landscape segment between Camino Del Norte and the intersection of Morningside Drive and Morningside Court, which is all part of the same parcel that comprises the landscape improvements along the southwest side of Camino Del Norte: 14,000 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on Pomerado Road at Colony Drive: 36.740 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements (slope area) on Ted Williams Parkway between Twin Peaks Road and Pomerado Road: 415,560 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the north side of Twin Peaks Road between Pomerado Road and Hillndale Way: and 154.060 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the south side of Twin Peaks Road from Ted Williams Parkway to approximately 400 feet southeast of Wood creek Road. 22 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Shared Improvements (proportionately shared by parcels in Zone A and Zone B) The following improvements provide special benefits to properties in Zone A. but because of their proximity to properties in Zone B. these improvements also proportionately benefit properties in Zone B. The entirety of the cost of these shared improvements are allocated to Zone A and Zone B and parcels therein based on each parcel's proportional special benefits (calculated Equivalent Benefit Unit. "EBU") as outlined in the Method of Apportionment (Part II of this Report). in relationship to the total (collective) EBU of all parcels in Zone A and Zone B that receive special benefits from those improvements. These shared improvements include. but are not limited to. the following: 30.370 square feet of arterial median island improvements on Camino Del Norte between the City Limits (Western Boundary of the District) and Pomerado Road; • 11.040 square feet of arterial median island improvements on Twin Peaks Road between Pomerado Road and Ted Williams Pkwy; 21,190 square feet of arterial median island improvements on Pomerado Road between Camino Del Norte/Twin Peaks Road and Ted Williams Parkway: 55.950 square feet of arterial median island improvements on Ted Williams Parkway between Twin Peaks Road and the City Limits (Western Boundary of the District): and 71,210 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on both sides of Ted Williams Parkway between Twin Peaks Road and the City Limits (Western Boundary of the District). Zone B Parcels and Improvements Zone B Parcels: Zone B is comprised of that portion of the parcels within the District located south of Twin Peaks Road between the City boundary and Ted Williams Parkway that primarily comprise the Twin Peaks Plaza. The properties in this Zone are identified as non-residential properties. Zone B incorporates parcels within the developments identified as Parcel Maps 15808 & 16904; and Tract 08885. The parcels in Zone B include a portion of the parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps Book 314 Pages 63. 67, and 71. Zone B Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone B are proportionately assessed. in whole or in part. for the special benefits they receive from the improvements. The improvements include, but are not limited to, the following: Zone Specific Improvements (proportionately benefiting parcels in Zone B only) The following improvements provide special benefits to properties in Zone B only. including approximately: 14.810 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the southwest corner of Camino Del Norte (Twin Peaks Road) and Pomerado Road. 23 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Shared Improvements (proportionately shared by parcels in Zone A and Zone B) The following improvements provide a special benefit to properties in Zone B. but because of their proximity to properties in Zone A. these improvements also proportionately benefit properties in Zone A. The entirety of the cost of these shared improvements are allocated to Zone A and Zone B and parcels therein based on each parcels proportional special benefits (calculated Equivalent Benefit Unit. -EBU-) as outlined in the Method of Apportionment (Part II of this Report). in relationship to the total (collective) EBU of all parcels in Zone A and Zone B that receive special benefits from those improvements. These shared improvements include. but are not limited to, the following: 30,370 square feet of arterial median island improvements on Camino Del Norte between the City Limits (Western Boundary of the District) and Pomerado Road: 11.040 square feet of arterial median island improvements on Twin Peaks Road between Pomerado Road and Ted Williams Pkwy: 21.190 square feet of arterial median island improvements on Pomerado Road between Camino Del Norte/Twin Peaks Road and Ted Williams Parkway; 55.950 square feet of arterial median island improvements on Ted Williams Parkway between Twin Peaks Road and the City Limits (Western Boundary of the District): and 71.210 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on both sides of Ted Williams Parkway between Twin Peaks Road and the City Limits (Western Boundary of the District). Zone C Parcels and Improvements Zone C Parcels: This Zone is comprised of the twenty-six (26) single-family residential parcels within Tract 13872 located on the south side of Twin Peaks Road. generally east of Community Road and west of Midland Road. This Zone includes all the parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps Book 314 Page 83. Zone C Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone C. are proportionately assessed. in whole or in part. for the special benefits they receive from the Zone-Specific Improvements (Zone C only improvements). The Zone C only improvements include. but are not limited to. approximately: 8.750 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the southeast side of Twin Peaks Road adjacent to Tract 13872: The sound wall adjacent to the landscaping improvements on the southeast side of Twin Peaks Road adjacent to Tract 13872; and. 7.860 square feet of non-arterial streetscape landscaping improvements along the west of Midland Road adjacent to Tract 13872 between Twin Peaks Road and Kentfield Drive. Zone D Parcels and Improvements Zone D Parcels: This Zone is comprised of fourteen (14) residential properties identified as Tract 14360 located on the east side of Midland Road. generally south of Twin Peaks Road and north of Norwalk Street. The benefiting parcels in this Zone include thirteen (13)developed single-family residential parcels and one subdivided residential lot. This development includes all the residential parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps Book 314 Page 86. 24 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Zone D Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone D. are proportionately assessed. in whole or in part. for the special benefits they receive from the Zone-Specific Improvements (Zone D only improvements). The Zone D only improvements include. but are not limited to. approximately: 4.330 square feet of non-arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the east side of Midland Road adjacent to Tract 14360. Zone E Parcels and Improvements Zone E Parcels: This Zone is comprised of the twenty-nine (29) single-family residential parcels within Tract 09431(15 residential parcels). Tract 14767 (12 residential parcels). and two adjacent residential parcels, each located on the south side of Twin Peaks Road. generally east of Midland Road and west of Tierra Bonita Road. This Zone includes all the parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Map Book 314 Page 69 and two parcels within Book 314 Page 19. Zone E Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone E are proportionately assessed. in whole or in part. for the special benefits they receive from the Zone-Specific Improvements (Zone E only improvements). The Zone E only improvements include. but are not limited to. approximately: 8.080 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the south side of Twin Peaks Road adjacent to the Zone. Zone F Parcels and Improvements Zone F Parcels: This Zone is comprised of the fifty-one (51) single-family residential parcels within Tract 11603 located on the south side of Twin Peaks Road and the west side of Tierra Bonita Road. This Zone includes all the parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps Book 321 Page 39. Zone F Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone F are proportionately assessed. in whole or in part, for the special benefits they receive from the Zone-Specific Improvements (Zone F only improvements). The Zone F improvements include. but are not limited to. approximately: 14.520 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the south side of Twin Peaks Road adjacent to Tract 11603: 5,280 square feet of non-arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the west side of Tierra Bonita Road adjacent to Tract 11603; and. 28.270 square feet of non-streetscape landscaping improvements within Tract 11603 located along the southern and western boundary of the Tract. 25 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Zone G Parcels and Improvements Zone G Parcels: This Zone is comprised of the twelve (12) single-family residential parcels within Tract 11852 located on the north side of Twin Peaks Road and the west side of Espola Road. This Zone includes a portion of the parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps Book 321 Page 30. Zone G Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone G are proportionately assessed, in whole or in part. for the special benefits they receive from the Zone-Specific Improvements (Zone G only improvements). The Zone G only improvements include, but are not limited to, approximately: 4.300 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the west side of Espola Road adjacent to Tract 11852. 3.320 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the south side of Espola Road adjacent to Tract 11852, extending from Espola Road to approximately 450 feet west of Espola Road (A point which is approximately 160 feet east of Roberto Rio Road). Zone H Parcels and Improvements Zone H Parcels: This Zone is comprised of the eighteen (18) condominiums of Tract 12352 located on Peachtree Lane, on the north side of Adrian Street just east of Midland Road. These eighteen condominiums are all part of a single San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Number (314-193-38-18). Zone H Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone H are proportionately assessed. in whole or in part. for the special benefits they receive from the Zone-Specific Improvements (Zone H only improvements). The Zone H only improvements include. but are not limited to. approximately: 1.770 square feet of non-arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the north side of Adrian Street adjacent to Tract 12352. Zone I Parcels and Improvements Zone I Parcels: This Zone is comprised of the ten (10) single-family residential parcels within Tract 12711 located on the east side of Midland Road between Somerset Road and Janette Lane. This Zone includes a portion of the parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps Book 314 Page 24. Zone I Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefit) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone I are proportionately assessed, in whole or in part. for the special benefits they receive from the Zone-Specific Improvements (Zone I only improvements). that the Zone I only improvements include, but are not limited to. approximately: 3.220 square feet of non-arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the east side of Midland Road adjacent to Tract 12711 between Somerset Road and Janette Lane. 26 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Zone J Parcels and Improvements Zone J Parcels: This Zone is comprised of the sixteen (16) single-family residential parcels within Tract 12031 located on Little Dawn Lane. on the east side of Community Road south of Ketron Avenue and north of Hilleary Park Drive. This Zone includes a portion of the parcels identified on the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps Book 317 Page 11. Zone J Improvements: The improvements within this Zone provide direct advantages to parcels within the Zone (i.e.. special benefits) that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. The parcels within Zone J are proportionately assessed. in whole or in part, for the special benefits they receive from the Zone-Specific Improvements (Zone J only improvements). The Zone J only improvements include. but are not limited to, approximately: 5,220 square feet of arterial streetscape landscaping improvements on the east side of Community Road adjacent to Tract 12031. This landscape square footage includes the narrow landscape area along the south side of Tract 1203. extending east approximately 250 feet from the landscaping along Community Road. 27 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Part II — Method of Apportionment Legislative Authority and Provisions 1972 Act The 1972 Act permits the establishment of assessment districts by agencies for the purpose of providing certain public improvements. including the acquisition. construction. installation and servicing of landscaping and lighting improvements and related facilities. The 1972 Act requires that the cost of these improvements be levied according to benefit rather than assessed value: Section 22573 defines the net amount to be assessed as follows: "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.- Section mprovements."Section 22574 provides for zones as follows: 'The diagram and assessment may classify various areas within an assessment district into different zones where, by reason of variations in the nature, location. and extent of the improvements, the various areas will receive differing degrees of benefit from the improvements. A zone shall consist of all territory which will receive substantially the same degree of benefit from the improvements.- The formulas used for calculating assessments and the designation of Zones as established herein reflect the composition of parcels within the District and the improvements and activities to be provided. and have been designed to fairly apportion the cost of providing those improvements based on a determination of the proportional special benefits to each parcel. consistent with the requirements of the 1972 Act and the provisions of Article XIII D of the California Constitution. California Constitution The costs to operate and maintain the District improvements are identified and allocated to properties within each Zone of the District based on the special benefits conferred. The improvements provided and for which properties are to be assessed are identified as local landscaping improvements and related amenities that were installed in connection with the development of the properties and/or would otherwise be required for the development of properties within each respective Zone. The District assessments and method of apportionment are based on the premise that these improvements would otherwise not have been installed and maintained by the City. The improvements were installed as part of the development or planned development of the parcels within the District. The types of improvements and level of maintenance of the improvements are greater than what the City otherwise installs. maintains. and funds elsewhere in the City. Article XIII D Section 2(d) defines District as follows: "District means an area determined by an agency to contain all parcels which will receive a special benefit from a proposed public improvement or property-related service": Article XIII D Section 2(i) defines Special Benefit as follows: "Special benefit"means a particular and distinct benefit over and above general benefits conferred on real property located in the district or to the public at large. General enhancement of property value does not constitute "special benefit." 28 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Article XIII D Section 4(a) defines proportional special benefit assessments as follows: "An agency which proposes to levy an assessment shall identify all parcels which will have a special benefit conferred upon them and upon which an assessment will be imposed. The proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel shall be determined in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of a public improvement, the maintenance and operation expenses of a public improvement, or the cost of the property related service being provided. No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel." Benefit Analysis The improvements provided by this District and for which properties will be assessed have been identified as necessary, desired and/or required for the orderly development of the properties within the District to their full potential, consistent with the development plans and applicable portions of the City's General Plan. Special Benefits The ongoing maintenance of landscaped areas within the District will provide aesthetic benefits to the properties within the District and each respective Zone therein. and are intended to provide a more pleasant environment to walk, drive, live. and work. The primary function of these improvements and related amenities is to serve as an aesthetically pleasing enhancement and green space for the benefit of the immediate surrounding properties and developments for which the improvements were constructed and installed. and/or were facilitated by the development or potential development of properties within the District. These improvements are an integral part of the physical environment associated with the parcels in the District and while some of these improvements may in part be visible to properties outside the District and/or the respective Zones. collectively, if these improvements are not properly maintained. it is the parcels within the District and/or the respective Zones that would be aesthetically burdened. Additionally. these landscape improvements provide visually pleasing open space areas and green spaces that serve as an extension of the physical attributes of the parcels assessed, such as their front or rear yards and may also provide a greater opportunity for recreation as well as serving as a physical buffer and/or sound reduction buffer between the roadways and the properties in the District. Thus. the maintenance of these landscaped improvements provides advantages to the assessed properties that affect the assessed parcels in a way that is particular and distinct from their effect on other parcels and that real property in general and the public at large do not share. Collectively these landscaping improvements and related amenities which are funded by the special benefit assessments, enhance the overall use. presentation. enjoyment. recreational access. and marketability of the properties, and ensure the long-term cost-efficiency of services that are obtained through the City provided maintenance (economy of scale). General Benefit Calculated(Direct) General Benefit In reviewing the location and extent of the specific landscaped areas and improvements to be funded by District assessments and the proximity and relationship to properties to be assessed, it is evident these improvements have been installed as part of the development of properties within the District or are improvements that would otherwise be shared by and/or required for development of those properties. Although the District improvements are located on public streets or public areas that are typically visible and/or accessible to the general public, it is evident that 29 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 the ongoing maintenance of these improvements are only necessary for the appearance and advantage of the properties within the District that are directly associated with those improvements and these improvements (particularly the level of maintenance and servicing) are not required nor associated with any properties outside the District and/or the respective Zones. It is also evident that: (1) the maintenance of these improvements and the level of maintenance provided. has a direct and particular advantage (i.e.. special benefit) only on those properties in close proximity to those improvements including those developments and properties that are directly accessed from the streets where the improvements are located: and (2) such maintenance beyond that which is required to ensure the safety and protection of the general public and property in general, limits any indirect or incidental benefit that the public at large or properties outside each respective Zone receive from the improvements. In the absence of a special funding Zone. these types of improvements would not have been installed by the City and the City's maintenance of these improvements would for the most part. be limited to tree management services necessary to ensure public safety and protection of property. weed abatement. rodent control. and erosion control services for the various landscape areas that are provided elsewhere in the City. This basic or baseline level of service would typically provide for periodic servicing of these areas on an as-needed basis. This baseline level of service. which is provided elsewhere in the City. would provide for public safety and essential property protection to avoid negative impacts on adjacent roadways and vehicles traveling on those roadways and potential property damage. However, this baseline level of service results in a far less visually pleasing environment than is created with the enhanced levels of services associated with the regular landscape maintenance that can be provided through the District assessments. On average. the cost to provide this baseline level of service for the District's streetscape landscape areas is estimated to be approximately $1,120 per acre (approximately $0.0257 per square foot) and approximately $670 per acre (approximately $0.0154 per square foot) for non- streetscape landscape areas. including a five percent (5%) cost factor for City overhead and administration. Indirect (Incidental) General Benefits In addition to the general benefit identified above. it is recognized that there are indirect or incidental general benefits to properties within the District as well as the general public that are associated with regular landscape maintenance services. including: Minimization of dust and debris: and Decreased potential water runoff from both properties and the landscaped areas. Although these types of benefits might best be characterized as indirect consequences of the special benefits of the landscape maintenance provided to assessed parcels, for the purposes of calculating proportional benefits. we assume these types of benefits to be general benefits. It is apparent that trees. shrubs. plants. and other vegetation and groundcover reduce dust. debris. and potential water runoff that might otherwise occur if such landscape improvements did not exist. However, it is also recognized that with the regular maintenance of the landscape improvements. the effort and cost to monitor and address these issues are reduced to isolated areas and/or less frequent servicing, and these activities. generally represent less than one percent (1%) of the overall landscape maintenance costs. Therefore. conservatively. we estimate that the costs associated with these indirect and incidental benefits do not exceed one percent (1%) of the annual maintenance expenditures for the landscaping improvements. 30 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Likewise, it is recognized that the arterial streets within the District are routinely traveled by the general public and other property owners within the City. While the landscape improvements along these arterial streets do not provide a special benefit to properties outside the District,these particular improvements inherently reflect the overall aesthetic appearance of that region of the City and thus provide some measure of indirect general benefit to properties in the City. It is estimated that the arterial landscape improvements in this District represent approximately fifteen percent (15%) of the overall landscaping maintained by the City on its arterial streets and main thoroughfares. However, it is also recognized that traffic on these arterials and main thoroughfares tend to be regional in nature, largely serving the properties that directly access those streets (such as the properties within the District), and to a lesser extent, properties in the various regions of the City where the arterial streets are located (i.e., persons from outside of the District that might regularly drive by the District improvements on Twin Peaks Road, Pomerado Road, and Ted Williams Parkway and persons whose property is located in the south central portion of the City not the northern portion of the City or outside of the City). Therefore, it is reasonable to conclude that less than fifty percent (50%) of the persons who own properties in or outside of the City would routinely drive past the District improvements and derive some measure of indirect general benefit from the District improvements. Based on these facts, we have determined that approximately seven and a half percent (15% x 50%= 7.5%) of the cost to maintain the arterial landscape improvements within the District would be considered an indirect and incidental benefit (i.e. general benefit). However, for purposes of quantifying the proportional general benefit costs, ten percent(10%)of the annual maintenance expenditures for these arterial landscape improvements shall be applied as general benefit costs and not assessed to properties in the District. Therefore, in addition to the one percent indirect or incidental general benefit costs identified above, the City will contribute an additional ten percent (10%) of the annual maintenance expenditures associated with the arterial landscape improvements. The baseline general benefit costs and the indirect/incidental general benefit costs identified above shall be excluded from the special benefit assessment funding and not assessed to the parcels within the District. The total calculated general benefit cost for the landscaping improvements associated with each Zone is summarized in the following table and is also identified in the budgets contained in Part Ill of this Report. 31 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Estimated General Benefit Costs (Not Assessed) Total Annual Calculated Indirect Total General Benefit Zone (Direct) General (Incidental) Expenses Cost Benefit General Benefit Zone A $395,481 ($25,739) ($28,435) ($54,174) Zone B $42,911 ($2,733) ($3,507) ($6,240) Zone C $10,465 ($346) ($301) ($647) Zone D $1,094 ($67) ($8) ($75) Zone E $3,231 ($208) ($264) ($472) Zone F $14,868 ($946) ($540) ($1,486) Zone G $1,769 ($110) ($146) ($256) Zone H $744 ($46) ($5) ($51) Zone I $1,515 ($96) ($11) ($107) Zone J $2,131 ($134) ($16) ($150) Total $474,209 ($30,425) ($33,233) ($63,658) As with many maintenance costs, the General Benefit Costs shown above may be impacted by inflation in subsequent fiscal years, and the General Benefit Cost contributions may be adjusted for inflation accordingly Assessment Methodology Upon the successful formation of this District, the City proposes to annually levy and collect special benefit assessments commencing in Fiscal Year 2018/2019 to fund the operation. maintenance and servicing of the improvements that provide special benefits to parcels within the District. The estimated annual cost to operate. maintain. and service each of the District improvements for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 are identified in the budget section of this Report (Part III of this Report). To calculate and identify the proportional special benefit received by each parcel and ultimately each parcels proportionate share of the improvement costs it is necessary to consider not only the improvements and services to be provided. but the relationship each parcel has to those improvements as compared to other parcels in the District Article XIIID Section 4(a) reads in part: "...The proportionate special benefit derived by each identified parcel shall be determined in relationship to the entirety of the capital cost of a public improvement or the maintenance and operation expenses of a public improvement or for the cost of the property related service being provided. No assessment shall be imposed on any parcel which exceeds the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefit conferred on that parcel. Landscaping improvements like most public improvements. provide varying degrees of benefit (whether they be general or special) based largely on the nature and extent of such improvements, and the location of the improvements in relationship to properties associated with those improvements. To establish the proportional special benefit and ultimately the assessment obligation for each parcel. these factors need to be addressed and formulated in the method of 32 of 70 May 1, 2018. Item # 3.1 apportionment by the use of benefit zones that reflect the extent and location of the improvements in relationship to the properties. as well as the specific use of the property and characteristics that reflects each parcels proportional special benefit as compared to other properties that benefit from those same improvements. The method of apportionment (method of assessment) developed for this District is based on the premise that each property to be assessed receives a particular and distinct benefit (special benefit) from the improvements. services and facilities to be financed by the District assessments and to proportionately assess benefits it is necessary to calculate each property's relative share of the special benefits conferred by the funded improvements and services. The Equivalent Benefit Unit (EBU) method of assessment apportionment is utilized in this District and establishes a basic unit of benefit (base value) and then calculates the benefit derived by each assessed parcel as a multiple (or a fraction) of that basic unit. This EBU method of apportioning special benefits is typically seen as the most appropriate and equitable assessment methodology for districts formed under the 1972 Act. as the benefit to each parcel from the improvements are apportioned as a function of comparable property characteristics. The base value and assessment formula utilized in each Zone may be different. but is established for each Zone to reflect the improvements and properties that benefit from those improvements utilizing property characteristics that may include. but is not limited to. the type of development (property land use). property's development status. the proximity of the property to the improvements, and size of the property (acreage or units). For the purposes of this Engineer's Report. an EBU is the quantum of benefit derived from the various Zone improvements by a single family residential parcel. The single family residential parcel has been selected as the basic value for calculation of assessments since this land use represents over 97% of the benefiting parcels in the District. Thus, the "benchmark" property (the single family residential parcel) derives one EBU of benefit and is assigned 1.00 EBU The following outlines the land use classifications that are associated with or may be associated with the parcels in the District and the proportional EBUs established for those land use classifications. Land Use Classifications Residential Single-Family -- This land use classification is defined as a fully subdivided developed residential property assigned an Assessor's Parcel Number with a single residential unit on the property. As previously noted, the single family residential parcel has been selected as the basic value for calculation of assessments and each is assigned 1.00 EBU. Multi-Family Residential -- This land use classification is defined as properties that are residential. but contain more than a single residential unit on the parcel (parcels with more than one dwelling), including apartments. duplexes, or other multi-unit structures. Due in part to the development and population densities associated with these types of dwelling units (reduced unit size compared to the typical density and size of single-family properties). studies have consistently shown that the average multi-unit development (apartments) impacts infrastructure approximately 75% as much as a single-family residence. (Sources: Institute of Transportation Engineers Informational Report Trip Generation. Fifth Edition, 1991; Metcalf and Eddy. Wastewater Engineering Treatment, Disposal. Reuse, Third Edition. 1991). Therefore. it is reasonable to conclude that the proportional special benefits these properties receive from the public improvements funded by the District assessments has a similar proportionality and these parcels shall be assigned a weighted proportional special benefit of 0.75 EBU per unit. 33 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Residential Condominium -- This land use classification includes a fully subdivided condominium residential unit assigned its own Assessor's Parcel Number by the County. and multiple residential units on a single parcel that the County has identified as condominium development rather than as multi-family residential, presumably because each residential unit has a separate owner. Similar to multi-family residential parcels, Residential Condominium parcels and developments typically have a greater unit density and/or reduced unit size compared to the typical residential single-family property. but the unit density and/or unit size, and impact on public infrastructure is different than that associated with multi-family residential parcels. Therefore, Residential Condominium parcels are assigned a weighted proportional special benefit of 0.80 EBU per unit which is less than a Residential Single-Family property. but more than a Multi-Family Residential property. Non-Residential Developed -- This land use is defined as a parcel and/or development (group of parcels) that has been developed primarily with a non-residential use including. but not limited to, both publicly owned and privately owned commercial retail or service, office or professional service. hotel or motel, manufacturing. warehousing, parking lot. and/or institutional facilities including hospitals or other medical facilities, private schools or education centers. churches or other non-profit organizations. Based on the overall residential development within this District. it has been determined that on average single-family residential developments yield approximately four dwelling units per acre of land. Therefore, since the single family residential parcel (the base value for calculation of assessments) is assigned 1.0 Equivalent Benefit Unit it is reasonable and appropriate to assign the developed non-residential properties a weighted special benefit that reflects a similar and proportional development density. Therefore. the EBU assigned to each developed non-residential property is established by multiplying the parcel's applied acreage by 4.0 EBU per acre (e.g., a developed non-residential parcel of 4.25-acres would be assigned 17.00 EBU. 4.25 acres x 4.0 EBU/acre = 17.00 EBU). Public Schools -- This land use classification is defined as properties identified specifically as public-school sites. On average. approximately 1/41' (25%) of a school site's total acreage is developed with structures. which is similar to what is associated with non-residential developments. The remaining parcel acreage(approximately 75%) is generally playground areas. sports fields and/or undeveloped or minimally developed area which is similar to park improvements. Recognizing the overall development of this parcel as compared to other properties in the District. it reasonable to conclude that proportional special benefit EBU calculated for such parcels is accurately reflected by treating that portion of the parcel with structures similar to the EBU calculated for Non-Residential Developed properties (25% of acreage x 4.0 EBU/acre). with the remaining portion of the parcel's acreage being excluded (treated similar to the public areas and landscaping in the District. although this area is not part of the improvements being maintained by the District). In this District. there is currently one Public School property (Abraxas High School). This 9.70-acre school site parcel shall be assigned 9.70 EBU to reflect its proportional special benefit ([9.70 acres x 25% = 2.425 applied acre]; x 4.00 EBU/acre = 9.70 EBU). Vacant Single-Family -- This land use classification is defined as a fully subdivided residential lot within a tract or residential subdivision which does not have a residential structure. While such properties clearly receive substantially similar special benefits from the improvements as adjacent developed Residential Single-Family parcels, it is also recognized that in part the aesthetic benefits of the District improvements to properties in the District is related to the use of those properties (people related) and Vacant Single-Family parcels have less immediate utilization of those improvements. Therefore. parcels identified as Vacant Single-Family parcels shall be assigned a proportional EBU that is 50% of that assigned to developed Residential Single-Family parcels. which is 0.5 EBU per parcel. 34 of 70 May 1. 2018. Item # 3.1 Vacant Undeveloped Property -- This land use classification includes undeveloped properties that are identified as parcels with no development. including non-residential properties and residential properties that have not been fully subdivided with the potential to be developed with more than one residential unit. Although it is recognized that most of the improvements within the District and various Zones have been constructed and accepted for maintenance in large part as a direct result of the development of the properties within the District and these developments clearly receive particular and distinct benefits (direct special benefits) from those improvements, it is also recognized that the various improvements within the District are considered improvements shared by multiple developments or parcels within a specific development rather than being specifically associated with an individual parcel. Collectively the various improvements were installed and constructed as part of the overall development of properties within the District and Zones to their full and best use. including vacant undeveloped properties in the vicinity of those improvements. However, it is also recognized that in part the aesthetic benefits of the District improvements to properties in the District is related to the use of those properties (people related) and undeveloped properties have less immediate utilization of those improvements and because the near future development of such properties is less than that of a fully subdivided residential lot within a tract or residential subdivision the proportional special benefit to such properties is considered to be less than that of subdivided lot. Therefore. parcels identified as Vacant Undeveloped Property shall be assigned a proportional EBU that is 25% of that assigned to developed properties. which is 1.0 EBU per acre (25% of the 4.0 EBU per acre assigned to Developed Non-Residential properties). Exempt Properties -- Within most districts. there are lots or parcels of land that because of their size. the nature of their use. and/or the types of improvements being maintained by a district. do not receive a special benefit from the improvements (i.e.. exempt from assessment). These parcels may include. but are not limited to. public streets and other roadways (typically not assigned an APN by the County): dedicated public easements. public rights-of-way. or utility rights-of-way: common areas, bifurcated lots: sliver parcels or any other parcel that has little or no assessed value and cannot be developed independently; parcels that are part of the improvements being maintained by the District and/or public property that provides substantially similar landscape improvements for the benefit of parcels in the district or the public at large such as parks and dedicated open space areas. These types of parcels are considered to receive no special benefit from the improvements and are therefore exempted from assessment and are assigned 0.00 EBU. Special Case Parcels -- In many landscaping and lighting districts (particularly districts that have a wide range of land uses. multiple developments, and/or diversity in the location and type of improvements) there may be one or more parcels to be assessed that the standard land use classifications and proportionality identified above do not accurately identify the use and special benefits received from the improvements. Properties that are typically classified as Special Case Parcels usually involve partial or mixed use development of the property or development restrictions whether those restrictions are temporary or permanent and affect the properties proportional special benefit. Examples of such restrictions may include situations where only a portion of the parcel's total acreage is or can be developed. In such a case. the net acreage of the parcel that is utilized rather than the gross acreage of the parcel may be applied to calculate the parcel's proportional special benefit similar to how the Public School parcels are treated. Each such parcel shall be addressed on a case-by-case basis by the Assessment Engineer. The EBU assigned to such parcels shall be based on the specific issues related to that parcel and its proportional special benefit compared to other properties that receive special benefits from the improvements. 35 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 At the time this Report was prepared. no parcels within the District are designated as Special Case Parcels. However. this Special Case designation may be applicable to one or more parcels in subsequent fiscal years due to parcel changes. property development, and/or annexation of territory to the District. A summary of the applied Equivalent Benefit Units (EBUs) described above for the various land use classifications within the District is shown in the following table: Assessment Land Use Equivalent Benefit Unit Calculation Residential Single-Family 1.00 EBU per Parcel Residential Multi-Family 0.75 EBU per Unit Residential Condominium 0.80 EBU per Unit Non-Residential Developed 4.00 EBU per Acre Public School 4 00 EBU per Adjusted Acre Vacant Single-Family 0.50 EBU per Parcel Vacant Undeveloped 1 00 EBU per Acre Special Case Varied EBU per Parcel Exempt 0.00 EBU per Acre Equivalent Benefit Unit Summary The following is a summary of the Equivalent Benefit Units applicable to the various land use classifications identified in each District Zone: Zone A Equivalent Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Residential Single-Family 1,464 - 1,464 1,464.00 Residential Multi-Family 2 - 4 3.00 Non-Residential Developed 1 7.130 28.52 Public School 1 2.425 9.70 Vacant Single-Family 1 - 1 0.50 Eempt 34 84296 - - Totals 1,503 93.851 1,469 1,505.72 Zone B Equivalent Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Non-Residential Developed 15 24.680 - 98.72 Totals 15 24.680 - 98.72 36 of 70 May 1. 2018, Item # 3.1 Zone C Equivalent Total Applied Applied ' Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels I (EBU) Residential Single-Family 26 - ' 26 26 00 Totals 26 - 26 26.00 Zone D Equivalent ' Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Residential Single-Family 13 - 13 i 13.00 Vacant Single-Family 1 - 1 0.50 Exempt 2 0.750 - - Totais 16 0.750 14 13.50 Zone E Equivalent Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Residential Single-Family 29 - 29 29.00 Totals 29 - 29 29.00 Zone F Equivalent Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Residential Single-Family 51 - 51 51.00 Totals 51 - 51 51.00 Zone G Equivalent Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Residential Single-Family 12 - 12 12.00 Totals 12 - 12 12.00 Zone H Equivalent Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Residential Condominium 18 - 18 1 14.40 Totals 18 - 18 14.40 37 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Zone I Equivalent Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Residential Single-Family 10 - 10 10.00 Totals 10 - 10 10.00 Zone J Equivalent Total Applied Applied Benefit Units Assessment Land Use Parcels Acreage Units/Parcels (EBU) Residential Single-Family 16 - 16 16.00 Totals 16 - 16 16.00 38 of 70 May 1. 2018. Item # 3.1 Part III — Estimate of Costs Calculation of Assessments An assessment amount per Equivalent Benefit Unit (Assessment per EBU) is calculated by: Taking the "Total Annual Expenses" (Total budgeted costs) and subtracting the "Total General Benefit Expenses" (Landscaping General Benefit Expenses), to establish the "Total Special Benefit Expenses", Total Annual Expenses— General Benefit Expenses = Special Benefit Expenses To the resulting "Special Benefit Expenses-, various "Funding Adjustments- may be applied that may include. but are not limited to: "Reserve Fund Transfer/Deduction". represents an amount of available existing funds from the "Operational Reserve Fund Balances- being applied to pay a portion of the Special Benefit Expenses for the fiscal year. "Additional City Funding-, represents an adjustment that is typically used to address any funding gap between the amount budgeted to provide the improvements and services ("Special Benefit Expenses"): and the amount that will be collected through the assessments. This funding may be addressed by an additional City contribution or loan from the City which is intended to be recovered in future fiscal years. These adjustments to the Special Benefit Expenses result in the net special benefit amount to be assessed "Balance to Levy": Special Benefit Expenses - Funding Adjustments = Balance to Levy The amount identified as the "Balance to Levy" is divided by the total number of EBUs of parcels that receive special benefits to establish the Assessment Rate ('Assessment Per EBU"). This Assessment Rate is then applied back to each parcel's individual EBU to calculate the parcel's proportionate special benefits and assessment amount for the improvements. Balance to Levy / Total EBU = Assessment Per EBU (Assessment Rate) Assessment Per EBU x Parcel EBU = Parcel Assessment Amount Note: The maximum assessments outlined in this Report are intended to fully support the expenses identified as -Special Benefit Expenses-. Consequently, there are no "Funding Adjustments" reflected in the budgets establishing the maximum assessment rates. and therefore, the "Balance to Levy" is equal to the total "Special Benefit Expenses". 39 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 District Budgets and Assessments The budgets and assessments for each Zone outlined on the following pages are based on the City's estimate of the expenses and related funding necessary for the operation. maintenance and servicing of the District improvements as identified for each Zone in Part I of this Report. The budgets provided herein establish the initial Maximum Assessment per EBU (Maximum Assessment Rates) for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 which shall be presented to the property owners of record within the District as part of the Ballot Proceeding. This Maximum Assessment Rate is identified in the budgets for each Zone as the "Balloted Maximum Assessment Rate Per EBU". In addition, the proposed assessment rate to be applied for the calculation of the parcel assessments to be levied and collected for Fiscal Year 2018/2019 are identified in the budgets as the "Assessment Per EBU'. Reference is hereby made to the assessment roll included herein as Part V for the individual maximum assessment amounts balloted for each parcel and the proposed assessment for Fiscal Year 2018/2019. 40 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Budgets Establishing Maximum Assessments (Zones A through D) Zone A Zone 8 Zone C Zone D F�'C:-.f T rF•.3 Caiteieae al have Paw 140s 15169 a Tact 12472 Tract 14350 M .21 Tracts,NM 10904.and Lab 235 a 234 W.Va.anis taros d Trad 06916 • ANNUAL OPERATION I MAINTENANCE EXPENSES Landscape Maintenance leo 214 f 17099 5 2.147 $ 411 Tree Maintenance 18,711 2,033 176 Landscape irrigation(Water.Electncry,Maintenance a Repair) 114.$49 11,637 1,706 362 Graffiti Abatement 1.129 26 20 7 TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATION a MAINTENANCE EXPENSES $ 295,027 $ 31,883 $ 4,048 S 810 REHABUTATIONIRENOVATION FUN0N0 i CAPITAL EXPENDITURES Landscape Improvement Rehabilitation/Renovation Funding 68,790 7,627 6,607 190 Planned Capital Expenditures(For Current Fiscal Year) S $ - $ • $ - TOTAL REHABILITATION/RENOVATION FUNDING a CAPfTAL EXPENDITURES $ 68.790 $ 7,627 $ 5,507 $ 190 NCOBITAL EXPENSES Operational Reserves(Collection) $ 16,462 $ 1,663 $ 446 $ 46 pat rct Administration Expenses 1 16,710 S 1,44 6 442 8 lie County Administration Fee 502 69 23 2 Annual Administration Expenses 16,162 1,738 466 48 TOTAL INCIDENTAL EXPENSES $ 31,664 $ 3,401 $ 910 $ 94 TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENSES $ 395,461 $ 42.911 $ 10,465 S 1,094 GENERAL BENEFfT EXPENSES Landscaping General Benefit-City Funded $ (54,174) $ (6,240) $ (647) $ (75) TOTAL GENERAL BENEFIT EXPENSES $ (54,174), 5 (6,240) $ (647) $ (76) TOTAL SPECIAL BENEFIT EXPENSES S 341,307 $ 36,671 $ 9.818 $ 1,019 FUNOPOG ADJUSTMENTS Reserve Fund Transfer/Deduction $ - $ • $ - $ - Additional City Funding and/or Service Reductions' - - - • TOTAL FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS/CONTRIBUTIONS $ • S • $ - $ - BALANCE TO LEVY $ 341,307 $ 36,671 $ 9,818 $ 1,019 DISTRICT STATISTICS Total Parcels 1,503 16 21 16 Assessed Parcels 1.469 16 26 14 Equivalent Benefit Units(EBU) 1,505.72 1 98.72 26.00 13 50 Assessment Per EBU' 3226.681 $371.47 $377.62 $75.49 I Balloted Maximum Assessment Rate Per EBU $227.00' $372.00 $378.00 $76.00 Balloted Amount $ 341,798.44 $ 36,723.64 $ 9,828.00 $ 1,026.00 FUND BALANCE Estimeted Beginning Fond Balance S - 6 - 5 • 6 - Operationat Reserve a Rehabilitation Funding Collected $4,272 9,210 5,962 236 Estimated Ending Fund Babnce S 64,212 S 9.290 5 5,952 2 236 11) The "Assessment Per EE311 shown above for Zones A. B. C. and D represent the proposed Zone assessment rate to be applied for the levy and collection of assessments for Zone Fiscal Year 2018/2019 41 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Budgets Establishing Maximum Assessments (Zones E through H) Zone E Zone F Zone G Zone H baCS 00631 a 14107 and Tran 11003 Test 11052 Tract 111.: .armse dem some ANNUAL OPERATION&MAINTENANCE EXPENSES Landscape Maintenance 8 1202 S 1.556 S 703 1 2u Tree Maintenance 169 418 ft 7s Landscape Irruption(Water,Electricity.Maintenance S Repair) 536 4,814 522 226 Graffiti Abatement 7 36 3 7 TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATION&MAINTENANCE EXPENSES S 2,406 S 10,993 S 1,319 S 554 RENABLITATIONAtENOVATON FUNDING 8 CAPITAL EXPENDITURES Landscape improvement Rehabilitation/Renovation Funding 670 2,634 309 126 Planned Capital Expenditures(For Current Fiscal Year) S - 6 • S • S - TOTAL REHABILITATION/RENOVATION FUNDING&CAPITAL EXPENDITURES $ 570 S 2,634 S 309 $ 126 INCIDENTAL EXPENSES Operational Reserves(Collection) S 126 S 607 S 69 S 31 District Adnsnistration Expenses f 124 S 003 1 14 8 11 County Admnrstratan Fee 6 31 4 2 Annual Administration Expenses 130 634 72 33 TOTAL INCIDENTAL EXPENSES $ 255 ' $ 1,241 S 141 S 64 1 TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENSES S 3,231 $ 14,868 S 1,769 S 744 GENERAL BENEFIT WEN$ER Landscaping General Benefit—City Funded $ (472) $ (1,466) S (266) S (51) TOTAL GENERAL BENEFIT EXPENSES $ (472) $ (1,486) $ (256) $ (51) TOTAL SPECIAL BENEFIT EXPENSES $ 2,759 $ 13,382 $ 1,513 S 693 FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS Reserve Fund Transfer/Deduction $ • S • $ • $ - Additional City Funding and/or Service Reductions' - TOTAL FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS CONTRIBUTIONSS - S • $ - $ - BALANCE TO LEVY S 2,759 S 13,382 S 1,513 $ 693 DISTRICT STATISTICS Total Parcels 29 61 12 18 Assessed Parcels 29 51 12 16 Equivalent Benefit Units(EBU) 29.00 51.00 12.00 14.40 Assessment Per EBU $95.14' 5262.40 $126.09 $48.13 Balloted Maximum Assessment Rate Per EBU $96.00 $263.00 $127.00 $49.00 Balloted Amount $ 2.784.00 $ 13,413.00 $ 1,524.00 $ 705.60 FUND BALANCE Estimated Beginning Fund(Minn. S • 8 • S • 6 - Operational Reserve a Rehabilitation Funding Collected _ 886 3,241 376 157 Estimated Ending Fund Balance S 066 5 3241 $ 378 8 157 (1) The Assessment Per EBU' shown above for Zones E. F G. and H represent the proposed Zone assessment rate to be applied for the levy and collection of assessments for Zone Fiscal Year 2018/2019 42 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Budgets Establishing Maximum Assessments (Zones I, J, and District Totals) Zone I ZoneJ TOTAL BUDGET Establishing Maximum BUDGET!TEAssessments Tract 12711 Tract 12031 LanOscape Marnteriaice District No.18.1 Fecal Year 20152019 ANNUAL OPERATION&MAINTENANCE EXPENSES Landscape Maintenance 5 595 t 636 9 190.407 Tree Maintenance 76 117 21,630 Landscape Irrigation(Water.Electricity.Maintenance 6 Repair) 446 515 136,252 Graffiti Abaten.iv 5 6 1,249 TOTAL ANNUAL OPERATION&MAINTENANCE EXPENSES $ 1,123 $ 1,575 $ 349,738 REHAINILRATIONIRENOVATK N FUNDING&CAPITAL EXPENDITURES Landscape Improvement Rehabilitation/Renovation Funding 262 372 86.387 Planned Capital Expenditures(For Current Fiscal Year) S - S - S - TOTAL REHABILITATION/RENOVATION FUNDING&CAPITAL EXPENDITURES S 262 $ 372 $ 86,387 INCIDENTAL EXPENSES Operational Reserves(Collection) S 84 $ 90 S 18,622 Drstnct Administration Expenses S 53 $ el 6 16.496 County Administration Fee 3 6 964 Annual Administration Expenses 88 94 19,462 TOTAL INCIDENTAL EXPENSES $ 130 5 184 $ 38,084 TOTAL ANNUAL EXPENSES S 1,515 $ 2,131 $ 474,209 GENERAL BENEFIT EXPENSES Landscaping General Benefit—City Funded $ (107) S (150) $ (63,658) TOTAL GENERAL BENEFIT EXPENSES $ (107) 5 (150) $ (63,658) TOTAL SPECIAL BENEFIT EXPENSES $ 1,408 $ 1,981 $ 410,551 FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS Reserve Fund Transfer/Deduction S - S - $ - Additional City Funding and/or Service Reductions' - - - TOTAL FUNDING ADJUSTMENTS/CONTRIBUTIONS $ - $ - S - BALANCE TO LEVY $ 1,408 $ 1,981 $ 410,551 DISTRICT STATISTICS Total Parcels 10 16 1,696 Assessed Parcels 10 16 1,680 Equivalent Benefit Units(EBU) 10.00 16.00 1,776.34 Assessment Per EBU l" $140.80 $123.82 Balloted Maximum Assessment Rate Per EBU 5141.00 $124.00 Balloted Amount $ 1,410.00 S 1,984.00 $ 411,196.88 FUND BALANCE Estimated Beginning Fund Balance 3 - 6 - 6 , Operational Reserve&Rehabilitation Funding Collected 326 482 106,009 Estimated Ending Fund Balance S 326 3 462 3 106,009 (1) The Assessment Per EBU' shown above for Zones I and J represent the proposed Zone assessment rate to be applied for the levy and collection of assessments for Zone Fiscal Year 2018/2019 43 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Assessment Range Formula Any new or increased assessment requires certain noticing and meeting requirements by law. The Omnibus Act defines the terms"new or increased assessment'to exclude certain conditions. These certain conditions included "any assessment that does not exceed an assessment formula or range of assessments previously adopted by the agency or approved by the voters in the area where the assessment is imposed." Recognizing that the cost of maintaining the improvements will increase over time due to inflation, the maximum assessments (initial maximum assessment amounts and maximum assessment rates established herein for fiscal year 2018/2019). shall include an annual inflationary adjustment (Assessment Range Formula) The Assessment Range Formula for this District is defined by the following: Commencing in fiscal year 2019/2020 and each fiscal year thereafter. the maximum assessment rates established for the improvements in the previous fiscal year for each Zone may be adjusted by the lesser of three percent(3%) or the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI). The Consumer Price Index used for the inflationary adjustment shall be for the San Diego Area for All Items for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U), as developed by U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. The CPI used shall be as determined by the Bureau of Labor Statistics for a similar period of time. Each fiscal year the City shall identify the percentage change in the CPI. using the difference over a 12-month period between the current year and of the previous year (Annual Average). This annual percentage change is generally established based on the average percentage change from the prior year. but a similar 12-month time period may be used if the data for the annual average is not available. This percentage difference shall then establish the range of increase to the maximum assessment rates allowed. but the adjustment applied to the maximum assessment rates shall not exceed 3%. If the percentage change in the CPI-U is negative. the maximum assessment rates may not be adjusted from the previous fiscal year (unchanged). If the percentage change in the CPI-U is greater than 3% then the maximum assessment rates may be adjusted by 3%. Should the Bureau of Labor Statistics revise such index or discontinue the preparation of such index. the City may use the revised index or comparable system as approved by the City Council for determining fluctuations in the cost of living. This annual adjustment to the authorized maximum assessment rates (adjusted maximum assessment rates) will provide for an appropriate and reasonable increase to the maximum assessment rates to address normal cost increases anticipated over the years as a result of inflation. This Assessment Range Formula shall be identified in the assessment ballots being presented to the property owners as part of the protest ballot proceeding conducted for the formation of the District. In subsequent fiscal years. any proposed annual assessment (rate per EBU) less than or equal to the calculated (adjusted) Maximum Assessment Rate for that fiscal year is not considered an increased assessment. even if the proposed assessment is significantly greater than the assessment applied in the prior fiscal year. Changes in land use or size of an individual property resulting in an assessment increase, is not considered an increased assessment. To impose a new or increased assessment other than the annual inflationary adjustment provided by the preceding Assessment Range Formula or as a result in change in land use or size of an individual property, the City must comply with the provisions of the California Constitution Article XIIID Section 4. that requires the preparation of an assessment engineer's report. a public hearing and certain protest procedures, including mailed notice of the public hearing and property owner protest balloting. Property owners. through the balloting process. must approve a proposed new or increased assessment before such an assessment may be imposed. 44 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Part IV — District Diagram The District Diagram provided on the following page provides a visual depiction of the boundaries of the District and the applicable Zones established therein for Fiscal Year 2018/2019. This diagram also provides a visual depiction of the location and approximate extent of the improvements to be maintained as part of the District improvements. The combination of this Diagram and the Assessment Roll referenced in Part V of this Report constitutes the Assessment Diagram for this District and encompasses all the lots. parcels and subdivisions of land that receive or will receive a special benefit from the improvements to be provided in the District at the time this Report was prepared. Reference is hereby made to the San Diego County Assessor's Parcel Maps for a detailed description of the lines and dimensions of each parcel within Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 including all subsequent subdivisions. lot-line adjustments. or parcel changes therein. 45 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 District Diagram _ I _i_ j j ; ' City Of Poway-LMD 18-1 . stle:-./. \ , ' � l _. 6 \ 1 P a� — — ��-^ i "I it u� __1 i • , ;t - .`r, , ; ! 1-`-�' , i i~ 1 / i _ • Ire. , „, Nov' .. ' , ' .*:. • '........' 10 1111 dk , % v,...-4,4t..001,.:,\ j . .1 i tic . . i ...I I i I 1 • siMMI OM .— MI� �. .�... _+We ice' i Zen. 1I�i+e,vs= ` ll -� J N • _.f 46 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item #3.1 Part V — Assessment Roll Due to the number of parcels within Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1, the Assessment Roll containing the maximum assessment amounts to be balloted and the proposed new assessment amount to be levied and collected for fiscal year 2017/2018 has been filed with the City Clerk in an electronic format and is. by reference, made part of this Report. The proposed Assessment Roll shall be available for public inspection in the City Clerks Office during normal office hours. Each parcel listed on the Assessment Roll is currently shown and illustrated on the San Diego County Assessor's Roll and reflective of the Assessor's Parcel Maps at the time this Report was prepared and shall incorporate all subsequent parcel changes. lot-line adjustments. and subdivisions of land identified by the San Diego County Assessor's Office. These records are, by reference. made part of this Report and shall govern for all details concerning the description of the lots or parcels. All assessments presented on the assessment roll are subject to change pending the outcome of the Ballot Proceedings and/or as a result of parcel changes made by the County including parcel splits, parcel merges or development changes that occur prior to the County generating tax bills for the fiscal year. 47 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 District Diagram mini -� �R � Citypt Poway -LMD 18-1— + 1 �=wtie �f�{r- ��YiG � tit �(_".' ^ Com. ,--_,, ��j a�'-�.{_.*1_i 'I _ ,_ 1 � ter--1•- mum,+ S +S n tt+ , + {I // I�/� PI II:A : ..7 Iamm t� mur rn r4 ale 01111%. �• - �G\� r—� �y -E '+wry . :-AmiiErnuu a%mgp. ::�.3� 'd\ / ^I CI-� - �,',� q 1 ,,,",........„.„..4,,, ,,,; ,.,„ ....-.11.0..trsam--z - -' -- '40 Y1j555� _�� � \ •f biz i F V2,� IE'". �" / .�+r�i,�t +.,`611 � ,r - 1 .��. 4 3 ' _-rower*A.Si e -4=- P -- I1j.t y =1 .-mss ` fir c`�`..–s%Cri \t'V' /"...e.„%" f; ''''' _ �=1 l. f +hf o' `*ate ��� �– �'- f H/wlu�,woJ j >i �tl r ! .t 1 r 5 �.l �...nw �s .E?4� c `. '.�+P. �j:G.l% i/' 1� r if , r__- I 48 of 70 ATTACHMENT C May 1,2018, Item#3.1 RECEIVED FEB 132018 L�7 7�T 1 all 7*�,�T tG� n v'�n CITY OF POWAY PEA'FO to Cancel any and efforts to expand TWIN PEAKJUSTOMER SERVICES DEPT LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LW) 83-1) and rename it (LMD 18-1). To the attention of: POWAY Mayor Steve Vaus, City Council members Jim Cunningham, John Mullin, Dave Gmsch, Barry Leonard and City Manager Tina White. Whereas: LMD 83-1 was formed 34 years ago when Rancho Arbolitos was built. The assessment hasn't changed since 1998, and now the City Maintenance Department says it does not have sufficient funds to maintain the landscape. Whereas: Homes in Upper Windmill and east to the school district headquarters were built approximately 10 years before Rancho Arbolitos, and have never been part of that sub-division or LIVID 83-1. Whereas: The City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 speaks of `re-engineering'the LMD by arbitrarily changing the boundaries of LMD 83-1 and renaming it LMD 18-1. This is discrimination by another name unless all Poway homeowners are included in the new boundaries. Whereas: The same letter cited above also speaks of `benefit analysis' for only a select group of residents(again discrimination) and not all users of Twin Peaks Road; ie, obviously left out were: school buses and teachers, church congregations, workers going to and from the Poway Industrial Park, and homeowners east of the school district Whereas: Throwing more money at Twin Peaks LMD does not solve the basic landscape maintenance problem. The proposed first year assessment amount of$235 for the newly created LMD 18-1 exceeds the limitations of PROP 13 for many of us making it therefore illegal. The City recently announced a surplus of$4,000,000. The City does not have a shortage of funds problem. It has a shortage pf management problem. Therefore: I (we) petition you as my (our) elected representatives to stop/cancel the ill conceived plans for Proposed Prop 218 and Proposed LMD 18-1, and seek a better, more permanent solutipn to gre problem of landscape maintenance. C /J Signed: `-11:7-"r- Address: /`/7c5 P "y Me tctiii. r t (Printed) o- TClac ' Poway, CA Date r/ i`% //l9 4� + SignedAddress:Jil5 Pr.ct. 1lP5c Uv (Printed) �17Y/& c�: lYa vt Poway, CA Date V 2/i i/it9 (page 1 of 2-over for page 2) 49 of 70 ATTACHMENT D May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 '(Continued from page 1) Subj: PETITION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAKS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT(LIVID 83-1) and rename it(LMD 184) Signed: A dress: / 14 .� a c _S cult/^n e sa. r Vei (Printed)Tao nal?cl . 4.S-&nn eGr prier Poway, CA Date ct/// //8 • Signed:Ali_% �,> • / , ,dress: PAT Al9 Po u3 cu .r/l es I e�■_n�i�wr ; �r� v e, (Printed) r iR/Ma.r�■S • .: Poway,CA Date .2./r t/18 Signedt7/ �a2&C Address: /r?4'9. /c,vµy /'/!SA O (Puntedw-, Poway, CA Date ,zz/iyi Signed: Address: (meted) Poway,:CA Date - Signed: Address: (Printed) • Poway, CA Date (Additional signatures by write in): (page 2 of 2- over for page 1) 50 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 RECEIVED PE ITTION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAKS FEB I 3 P018 LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LMD 83-1) and '� FPOWAy (LMD 18-1) sERv+ccs Deur To the attention of: POWAY Mayor Steve Vaus, City Council members Jim Cunningham, John Mullin, Dave Grosch, Barry Leonard and City Manager mm White. Whereas: LMD 83-1 was formed 34 years ago when Rancho Arbolitos was built. The assessment hasn't changed since 1998, and now the City Maintenance Department says it does not have sufficient funds to maintain the landscape. Whereas: Homes in Upper Windmill and east to the school district headquarters were built approximately 10 years before Rancho Arbolitos, and have never been part of that __ sub-division or LMD 83-1. Whereas: The City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 speaks of `re-engineering'the LMD by arbitrarily changing the boundaries of LMD 83-1 and renaming it LMD 18-1. This is discrimination by another name unless all Poway homeowners are included in the new boundaries. Whereas: The same letter cited above also speaks of `benefit analysis' for only a select group of residents (again discrimination) and not all users of Twin Peaks Road; ie, obviously left out were: school buses and teachers, church congregations, workers going to and from the Poway Industrial Park, and homeowners east of the school district Whereas: Throwing more money at Twin Peaks LMD does not solve the basic landscape maintenance problem. The proposed first year assessment amount of$235 for the newly created LMD 18-1 exceeds the limitations of PROP 13 for many of us making it therefore illegal. The City recently announced a surplus of$4,000,000. The City does not have a shortage of funds problem. It has a shortage of management problem. Therefore: I (we) petition you as my (our) elected representatives to stop/cancel the ill conceived plans for Proposed Prop 218 and Proposed LMD 18-1, and seek a better, more permanent solution to the problem of landscape maintenance. / /� Signed: De h& �'Ol J Address: /3?bo POw e y ITS�IS Pj-. /'dGt*y (Primed) l�t46ie G .va/z�al1 r Poway, CA Date 'Li I/i/ �,2a Signed: Address: (Printed) Poway, CA Date (page 1 of 2-over for page 2) 51 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 (Continued from page 1) Subj: PETITION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAKS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT(LMD 83-1) and rename it(LMD 18=1) Signed: Address: (meted) Poway, CA Date Signed: Address: (Printed) Poway, CA Date Signed: Address: (Printed) Poway, CA Date Signed: Address: (meted) Poway, CA Date Signed: Address: (Printed) Poway, CA Date (Additional signatures by write in): (page 2 of 2- over for page 1) 52 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 r-'• i c, S I(NC-t 14-P r° -977E4-g /3 in-- v.)4-1" 4nr cy,zCrD : 171/5 ./5' 11,05/ c.-r�n y kry-vi .r rrn x-07 7e) f,.q, W, 2Ei/volt 4- W A7' TALKING POINTS For City Council meeting Tuesday 23 Jan 2018 7pm 1 o 1. The procedures outlined in City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 to expand LMD 83-1 and rename it LMD 18-1 are arbitrary, capricious, autocratic, discriminatory, in violation of the intent of Prop 13, and it is noted not signed by the Mayor, the City Council Members or the city manager. Nothing in the letter identifies what legal (or illegal) theory was used to include Upper Windmill, Victoria Estates and Treasure Homes in LMD 83-1 or LMD 18-1. These three sub-divisions were here 10 years or more before Rancho • Arbolitos and other newer sub-divisions were built, and they have never been part of an LMD. Considering any of these three sub-divisions part of LMD 83-1 or attempting to include them in proposed LMD 18-1 appears to be a mistake that needs to be corrected now. 2. The new arbitrarily drawn boundaries of LMD 18-1 originally included Victoria Estates, Treasure Homes and Upper Windmill sub-divisions. Victoria Estates has been removed from the arbitrary boundaries by someone for some reason. We were told that after a verbal complaint from an owner at the OPEN HOUSE 11/16/17 the Treasure Homes sub-division was removed from the arbitrarily drawn boundaries of proposed LMD 18-1. If all it takes is a complaint to get removed from the arbitrarily drawn boundaries of proposed LMD 18-1, then you may consider this a complaint for that purpose and remove Upper Windmill as well. 3. The proposed prop 218 and proposed LMD 18-1 perpetuate the current high maintenance costs in LMD 83-1. They do not identify or solve the problem ... they merely 'kick the can down the road'. 4. Eucalyptus trees appear to be the basic problem in LMD 83-1 and costs can only increase as the trees get older, require more water and get more unstable in high winds causing traffic jams, property damage and personal injury. 5. With proper drought resistant replacement landscape in LMD 83-1 the current assessment may create excess funds, and could possibly be reduced (we were told other LMD's in the city have excess funds). 6. Therefore, we respectfully request that Upper Windmill receive the same treatment offered to Victoria Estates and Treasure Homes, specifically, removal from within the proposed arbitrarily redrawn LMD 18-1 boundaries. We request immediate implementation of this change, prior to the March election. Thanks for your attention. Donald Stampfli (Upper Windmill). 53 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 PETITION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAKS • LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LMD 83-1) and rename it (LMD 18-1). To the attention of: POWAY Mayor Sieve Vaus, City Council members Jim Cunningham, John Mullin, Dave Grosch, Barry Leonard and City Manager Tina White. Whereas: LMD 83-1 was formed 34 years ago when Rancho Arbolitos was built. The assessment hasn't changed since 1998,and now the City Maintenance Department says it does not have sufficient funds to maintain theiandscape. Whereas: Homes in Upper Windmill and east to the school district headquarters were built approximately 10 years before Rancho Arbolitos, and•have never been part of that sub-division or LIVID 83-1. Whereas: The City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 speaks of `re-engineering'the LMD by arbitrarily changing the boundaries of LMD 83-1 and renaming it LMD 18-1. This is discrimination by another name unless all Poway homeowners are included in the new boundaries. Whereas: The same letter cited above also speaks of `benefit analysis' for only a select group of residents (again discrimination) and not all users of Twin Peaks Road;.ie, obviously left out were: school buses and teachers, church congregations, workers going to and from the Poway Industrial Park, and homeowners east of the school district. Whereas: Throwing more money at Twin Peaks LIVID does not solve the basic landscape maintenance problem. The proposed first year assessment amount of$235 for the newly created LMD 18-1 exceeds the limitations of PROP 13 for many of us making it therefore illegal. The City recently announced a surplus of$4,000,000. The City does not have a shortage of funds problem. It has a shortage of management problem. Therefore: I (we) petition you as my (our) elected representatives to stop/cancel the ill conceived plans for Proposed Prop 218 and Proposed LMD 18-1, and seek a better, more permanent solution to the problem of landscape maintenance. Signed: 7IL.,,.„4.,, . easy,241, Address: 1332 Can on �c Line (Printed) T orne h Tennct Poway, CA bate ar 113 /2018 Signed: '41 — Address: t337-q CM— 6 lac (Printed) .z. e.:4_ �p • . e,vt Poway, CA Date ;' I ICI (page 1 of 2-over for page 2) 54 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 (Continued from page 1) . Subj: PEIm0N to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAKS LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE (LMD 83-1)and rename it(LMD 18=1) Signed: 0-x.5` , Address: ( 3 J 2 2_ C/1luv)pfl4 I L L.r�i /C (Printed) /1-1_ -c,11 P5OP Poway, CA Date a -/ - /d Signed: I .. Address:,?-3 a-9- e/< -dr`"`-' 1 (Printed " crollo D-oriu o& Poway, CA D -i-/ 8 Signed: V Address: 133'49 Pi; AV oA M LO-012-- (Printed) Va( .� N eft Poway, CA Date i L( !Z Signed: 'co:L ) .4Address: /33 a I C'/ia Yo ,-.136( 1-4 LR//F (Printed) GR R _Icy 1510 j Poway, CA Date aj//// 15r Signed: Address: (Printed) Poway, CA Date (Additional signatures by write in): (page 2 of 2- over for page 1) 55 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 PETITION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAK' LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LMD 83-1) andeiiame t (LMD 18-1). n' r- To the attention of: POWAY Mayor Steve Vans, City Council members o rn Cunningham, John Mullin, Dave Grosch, BarryLeonard and CityManag etma White. Whereas: LMD 83-1 was formed 34 years ago when Rancho Arbolitos was built. The assessment hasn't changed since 1998, and now the City Maintenance Department says it does not have sufficient funds to maintain the landscape. Whereas: Homes in Upper Windmill and east to the school district headquarters were built approximately 10 years before Rancho Arbolitos, and have never been part of that sub-division or LMD 83-1. Whereas: The City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 speaks of `re-engineering'the LMD by arbitrarily changing the boundaries of LMD 83-1 and renaming it LMD 18-1. This is discrimination by another name unless all Poway homeowners are included in the new boundaries. Whereas: The same letter cited above also speaks of `benefit analysis' for only a select group of residents (again discrimination) and not all users of Twin Peaks Road; ie, obviously left out were: school buses and teachers, church congregations, workers going to and from the Poway Industrial Park, and homeowners east of the school district. Whereas: Throwing more money at Twin Peaks LIVID does not solve the basic landscape maintenance problem. The proposed first year assessment amount of$235 for the newly created LMD 18-1 exceeds the limitations of PROP 13 for many of us making it therefore illegal. The City recently announced a surplus of$4,000,000. The City does not have a shortage of funds problem. It has a shortage of management problem. Therefore: I (we) petition you as my (our) elected representatives to stop/cancel the ill conceived plans for Proposed Prop 218 and Proposed LMD 18-1, and seek a better, more permanent solution to the problem of landscape maintenance. Signed: s i ddress: /`T7�Z enS61 k✓ft/ (Printed) 7,aN -y qA1 PSI Poway, CA Date iJ 0 fl Signed: Zc 46fl .. fl Address: /41 �Ra (Printed) yN E. 1., CM ,;H Poway, CA Date yvyit (page 1 of 2-over for page 2) 56 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 PETITION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAK LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LIVID 83-1) and%etlame it m (LMD 18-1). '" c � n � to m To the attention of: POWAY Mayor Steve Vaus, City Council members.&n o , m Cunningham, John Mullin, Dave Grosch, Bany Leonard and City ManaWegna White. 0 c Whereas: LIVID 83-1 was formed 34 years ago when Rancho Arbolitos was built. The assessment hasn't changed since 1998, and now the City Maintenance Department says it does not have sufficient funds to maintain the landscape. Whereas: Homes in Upper Windmill and east to the school district headquarters were built approximately 10 years before Rancho Arbolitos, and have never been part of that sub-division or LIVID 83-1. Whereas: The City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 speaks of `re-engineering'the LMD by arbitrarily changing the boundaries of LMD 83-1 and renaming it LMD 18-1. This is discrimination by another name unless all Poway homeowners are included in the new boundaries. Whereas: The same letter cited above also speaks of `benefit analysis' for only a select group of residents (again discrimination) and not all users of Twin Peaks Road; ie, obviously left out were: school buses and teachers, church congregations, workers going to and from the Poway Industrial Park, and homeowners east of the school district. Whereas: Throwing more money at Twin Peaks LMD does not solve the basic landscape maintenance problem. The proposed first year assessment amount of$235 for the newly created LMD 18-1 exceeds the limitations of PROP 13 for many of us making it therefore illegal. The City recently announced a surplus of$4,000,000. The City does not have a shortage of funds problem. It has a shortage of management problem. Therefore: I (we) petition you as my (our) elected representatives to stop/cancel the ill conceived plans for Proposed Prop 218 and Proposed LIVID 18-1, and seek a better, more permanent solution to the problem of landscape maintenance. Signed: s �d Address: 11-''7�i� 945 N 6- (Print _ . . I a 2/ Poway, CA Date J—6— I r Signed: Address: (Printed) Poway, CA Date (page 1 of 2-over for page 2) 57 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 PETITION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAK LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LMD 83-1) and$ealimej m (LMD 18-1). $ • To the attention of: POWAY Mayor Steve Vaus, City Council members Fo Jin 9 w Cunningham, John Mullin, Dave Grosch, Barry Leonard and City Manager Zina White. N Whereas: LMD 83-1 was formed 34 years ago when Rancho Arbolitos was built. The assessment hasn't changed since.1998, and now the City Maintenance Department says it does not have sufficient funds to maintain the landscape. Whereas: Homes in Upper Windmill and east to the school district headquarters were built approximately 10 years before Rancho Arbolitos, and have never been part of that sub-division or LMD 83-1. Whereas: The City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 speaks of `re-engineering'the LIVID by arbitrarily changing the boundaries of LMD 83-1 and renaming it LMD 18-1. This is discrimination by another name unless all Poway homeowners are included in the new boundaries. Whereas: The same letter cited above also speaks of `benefit analysis'for only a select group of residents (again discrimination) and not all users of Twin Peaks Road; ie, obviously left out were: school buses and teachers, church congregations, workers going to and from the Poway Industrial Park, and homeowners east of the school district. Whereas: Throwing more money at Twin Peaks LMD does not solve the basic landscape maintenance problem. The proposed first year assessment amount of$235 for the newly created LMD 18-1 exceeds the limitations of PROP 13 for many of us making it therefore illegal. The City recently announced a surplus of$4,000,000. The City does not have a shortage of funds problem. It has a shortage of management problem. Therefore: I (we) petition you as my (our) elected representatives to stop/cancel the ill conceived plans for Proposed Prop 218 and Proposed LMD 18-1, and seek a better, more permanent solution to the problem of landscape maintenance. Signed: i//' � Address: N73° Diff (Printed) 'th ^l CU/f-i2./✓i Poway, CA Date/./ /.2a Signed: Address: (Printed) Poway, CA Date (page 1 of 2-over for page 2) 58 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 ro PE ITIION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAKS_ • LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT(LMD 83-1).ancl.ktmei = m (LMD 18-1). .. . rn To the attention of: POWAY Mayor Steve Vaus, City Council members Jinn o p Cunningham, John Mifflin,Dave Grosch, Barry Leonard and City Manager Tha White. Whereas: LMD 83-1 was formed 34 years ago when Rancho Arbolitos was built. The assessment hasn't changed since 1998, and now the City Maintenance Department says it does not have sufficient funds to maintain the landscape. Whereas: Homes in Upper Windmill and east to the school district headquarters were built approximately 10 years before Rancho Arimlitos,and have never been part of that sub-division or LMD 83-1. Whereas: The City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 speaks of `re-engineering'the LMD by arbitrarily changing the boundaries of LMD 83-1 and renaming it LMD 18-L This is discrimination by another name unless all Poway homeowners are included in the new boundaries. Whereas: The same letter cited above also speaks of`benefit analysis'for only a select group of residents (again discrimination) and not all users of Twin Peaks Road;ie, obviously left out were: school buses and teachers, church congregations,workers going to and from the Poway Industrial Park, and homeowners east of the school district. Whereas: Throwing more money at Twin Peaks LMD does not solve the basic landscape maintenance problem. The proposed first year acc'3ssment amount of$235 for the newly created LMD 18-1 exceeds the limitations of PROP 13 for many of us making it therefore illegal The City recently announced a surplus of$4,000,000.The City does not have a shortage of funds problem. It has a shortage of management problem. Therefore: I (we)petition you as my(our) elected representatives to stop/cancel the ill conceived plans for Proposed Prop 218 and Proposed LMD 18-1, and seek a better, more permanent solution to:,• problem of landscape maintenance. AI Signer. Irr��C Address/ ?i ` Q. " e-O� (Printed) , - 0n Poway, CA Date 9/R Signed: Address: (Printed) _ Poway, CA Date (page 1 of 2-over for page 2) 59 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 PETITION to Cancel any and all efforts to expand TWIN PEAKS g c-‘ LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT (LMD 83-1) and renagit 2 (LMD 18-1). o t Ra o Ci a To the attention of: POWAY Mayor Steve Vaus, City Council members Jim Cunningham, John Mullin, Dave Grosch, Barry Leonard and City Manager Tina White. Whereas: LMD 83-1 was formed 34 years ago when Rancho Arbolitos was built. The assessment hasn't changed since 1998, and now the City Maintenance Department says it does not have sufficient funds to maintain the landscape. Whereas: Homes in Upper Windmill and east to the school district headquarters were built approximately 10 years before Rancho Arbolitos, and have never been part of that sub-division or LMD 83-1. Whereas: The City of Poway letter of 11/7/17 speaks of 're-engineering' the LMD by arbitrarily changing the boundaries of LMD 83-1 and renaming it LMD 18-1. This is discrimination by another name unless all Poway homeowners are included in the new boundaries. Whereas: The same letter cited above also speaks of `benefit analysis' for only a select group of residents (again discrimination) and not all users of Twin Peaks Road; ie, obviously left out were: school buses and teachers, church congregations, workers going to and from the Poway Industrial Park, and homeowners east of the school district. Whereas: Throwing more money at Twin Peaks LMD does not solve the basic landscape maintenance problem. The proposed first year assessment amount of$235 for the newly created LMD 18-1 exceeds the limitations of PROP 13 for many of us making it therefore illegal. The City recently announced a surplus of$4,000,000. The City does not have a shortage of funds problem. It has a shortage of management problem. Therefore: I (we) petition you as my (our) elected representatives to stop/cancel the ill conceived plans for Proposed Prop 218 and Proposed LMD 18-1, and seek a better, more permanent solution to the�� problem of landscape maintenance. Signed:/a, 3 a-�,�,'.' Address: i 179'6 Lisp' Ady� y,(f1. 72069 (Prin[t /A t . �, n)c' Poway, CA Date //12011 Signed: gait, ^'e— Address: /7`7YJ Co-.8 h w (Printed) S-Fo rt.e Poway, CA Date i/47 aot't (page 1 of 2-over for page 2) 60 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 STEVE VAS�A1�yoi'8t ; J I CITY OF POWAY ,�-of_ BARRY LEONARD,Deputy Mayor Hp JIM CUNNINGHAM,Councilmember -'''" DAVE GROSCH,Councilrnember ( :;: JOHN MULLIN,Councibnember \'3F �_—{ • \ DJ THE - j , November 7, 2017 Dear Poway Resident: , , b The Cityl•of Poway would like 'to invite you to join us for in informational Open'House on Thursday, - 1 November 16, 2017,where we will share.important details on a proposal.to include your property in a newly re-engineered Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) 18-1. The proposed LMD 18-1 will`allow the City td • • • provide.the.funding necessaryto maintain the landscape improvements within your community generally located along Twin Peaks Road and at the entrance to your neighborhood. There-engineered LMD 18-1 would; - require you to pay an estimated annual assessment of approximately$235.00 that would be collected annually on your property tax bill. Atthe Open House we'will be sharing information regarding LMD48-1, what.the, - , , assessments are proposed to fund, and the ballot process the City will use to allow you to indicate your support for or opposition to the proposed assessment on your property, including the timeline for the ballot that will be , . , •mailed to you in March 2018. There is currently an LMD,initially established in 1983that pays the cost for water,electricity,and contracted • laborfor tree trimming;gardening and upkeep along Twin Peaks•Road and neighborhood entryways in your , , community and neighborhood. The LMD is known as (MD 83-1'and is funded by an assessment collected on '• your neighbors' property tax,bills.. Unfortunately, there are no longer sufficient funds being collected to adequately maintain the landscape improvements within 83-1 CMD'area. I • -,• The City has evalu ted the current LMD 83-1, in luding a "benefit analysis" and has determined that your property shares in the "�"9 Odirect etka en from ylt'e land cape i prtpvemcR� s th surroun�jr' 4 / properties that currently4rassessed l.pt ty h -'f1 ,reforedetermiltedth�•t'Sap gpi�a(e fourpr periy; to be included in tit newrfe-e'Ngi trred Or osed'�,,Mir 18-1 and`•to'sh in4fani #gE e c sts o Ihes` ! / i important community amenities. r •r. "� %of Y a '. Please attend the Open House any time between 6 p.m. and 8 pm. on Thursdayy,j4ovember 16, in the Poway City Council Chamber's at 13325 Civic Center Drive, where we will share informational materials about the proposed LMD 18-1. City staff will be there to answer questions, receive input, and provide details about next steps. We look forward to seeing you at this important meeting. If you are not able to attend and would like to learn more about the proposed LMD 18-1, please feel free to call (858) 668-4705 or visit http://poway.org/206/Landscape-Maintenance-Districts. Information provided at the Open House is also available on this website. 1 a Sincerely VT hitst n 5 o dte ''''''", 0 Er' . Heideman, Assistant Director of Public Works for Maintenance Operations City Hall Located at 13325 Civic Center Drive i. Mailing Address: P.O. Box 789, Poway, California 92074-0789 www.poway.org 61 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 roar Z`35 'Per- tc' rtR FL2t EtousE -17--tAT 3t P op CR-Jt Pears 5t-toou0 13E I,INern tilt GOLi� tars O Cowl 0 PIPAic ` rz -ri Y L Ps0 I ES vvv-i o w c. 0t 91- �12 3i\F2'(juC_,ICS CCFF-E slaty flO12^J The RoA 3 0n) MY wf pun OP -OWN frit° OPP 70 (.wore. To Pot,' (`torE Cf2AZ`J Th)ceS J Live I , tOo SQauAt C Foci \ a73 TACT T-tooSC ©N I-t � PA►'L l_ E. �-iiw TIME 1131lo '13s to PLC, 1 t fdZ C 1....1 TOS --n-tc, PALASF OeS 2k-rd Rn Cr; T. went Tb STT 7' O hurt t-t -i,v c a- c c3Lo '66 T1 E Gucci w fl11 N T3 I G Sc Thacr SPAYSNo NEAM TAXES . . . . . 1 J1L- FT Cwt vZtCpl 1 OPAL cowNOt 1 • , 62 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 RESOLUTION NO. 18- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, DECLARING THE RESULTS OF THE PROPERTY OWNER PROTEST BALLOT PROCEEDING CONDUCTED FOR THE LEVY OF ASSESSMENTS RELATED TO THE FORMATION OF THE CITY OF POWAY LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 18-1, FISCAL YEAR 2018/2019, AND APPROVING CERTAIN RELATED ACTIONS WHEREAS, on March 6, 2018, the City Council of the City of Poway (the "City") adopted Resolution No. 18-005 initiating proceedings to form Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 ("District") and directing the preparation and filing of an assessment engineer's report pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972 being Part 2, Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code ("1972 Act"), and in compliance with the substantive and procedural requirements of Article XIII 0, section 4 of the California State Constitution (the "California-Constitution") and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act (the "Omnibus Act"), being Government Code section 53750 et seq., (collectively, the "Assessment Law"); and WHEREAS, the City Council did receive an Assessment Engineer's Report (hereafter referred to as the "Engineer's Report") prepared by Willdan Financial Services in accordance with the Assessment Law; and WHEREAS, on March 6, 2018, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 18-007 declaring its intention to form the District, preliminarily approving the Assessment Engineer's Report, and calling for a property owner ballot protest proceeding to levy and collect assessments within the District in accordance with the Assessment Law; and WHEREAS, the Engineer's Report has been made a part of the record of these proceedings and is on file in the office of the City Clerk (the "City Clerk"); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 18-007, the City Council; (a) set the time and place for conducting a public hearing for the purpose of hearing property owner protests to the proposed formation of the District, maintenance and servicing of the improvements, ,and the assessments proposed to be levied on land within the District; and (b) ordered that the record owner of each parcel proposed to be assessed have the right to submit an assessment ballot in favor of or in opposition to the formation of the District and the assessment proposed to be levied on such parcel; and WHEREAS, in accordance with the Assessment Law, the City Council duly held a property owner ballot protest proceeding for the formation of the proposed District for the purpose of presenting to the qualified property owners within the proposed District, the annual levy of assessments for the improvements connected therewith. The annual levy of assessments, as presented to the affected property owners of record in this ballot protest proceeding, included and identified the initial maximum assessment rate for Fiscal Year 2018/2019, the proportional assessment amount balloted for each benefiting property as well as the annual inflationary adjustment applicable to future assessments and the total amount balloted for the District. These assessments as presented are intended to fund in whole or in part, the special benefit costs and expenses related to the ongoing maintenance, operation and servicing of the local landscaping improvements, and appurtenant facilities related thereto and as more fully described in the Engineer's Report; and -65- 63 of 70 ATTACHMENT E May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 WHEREAS, the owners of record of identified parcels within the proposed District as of the close of the Public Hearing held on May 1, 2018 did cast their ballots, weighted by the proportional financial obligation of each property for which a ballot was submitted and not withdrawn. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Poway as follows: Section 1: That the foregoing recitals are true and correct. Section 2: The ballot protest proceedings for the proposed District were conducted pursuant to the provisions of the Assessment Law, with ballots presented to the affected property owner(s) for receipt by the City Clerk prior to the conclusion of the Public Hearing on May 1, 2018, with each ballot weighted according to the proportional financial obligation of the affected property. Section 3: The tabulation and canvass of the property owner protest ballots was conducted by the City Clerk or her designee, with all valid protest ballots returned by the affected property owners being counted and confirmed. The City Clerk has prepared and submitted to the City Council a Certificate of Tabulation Official and Statement of Assessment Ballots Submitted (the "Certificate of the Tabulation Official"), a copy of which is attached as Exhibit A hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, which reflects the results of the tabulation of the assessment ballots submitted and not withdrawn. Section 4: The City Clerk is hereby directed to enter this Resolution into the minutes of the City Council, which shall constitute the official declaration of the results of such property owner ballot protest proceeding. Section 5: This Resolution shall become effective immediately upon its adoption and the City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Resolution. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Poway, California, at a regular meeting this 1st day of May 2018. Steve Vaus, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Neufeld, CMC, City Clerk 64 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) SS COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) I, Nancy Neufeld, City Clerk of the City of Poway, California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No. 18- was duly adopted by the City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the 1st day of May 2018, and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DISQUALIFIED: Nancy Neufeld, CMC, City Clerk City of Poway 65 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Exhibit A Certificate of Tabulation Official and Statement of Assessment Ballots Submitted for City of Poway Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss. CITY OF POWAY The undersigned, the duly authorized tabulation official appointed by the City Council of the City of Poway, DOES HEREBY CERTIFY that pursuant to the provisions of Article XIII D of the Constitution of the State of California and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act (Government Code Section 53750 and following), I did tabulate the assessment ballots timely submitted, and not withdrawn, in the assessment ballot proceedings pertaining to City of Poway Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1. I FURTHER CERTIFY that this Statement of Assessment Ballots Received shows the assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in favor of the proposed assessment and the assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in opposition to the proposed assessment, each total weighted according to the financial obligation of the affected properties for which the assessment ballots were submitted. Total assessment ballots distributed Total assessment ballots submitted and not withdrawn Assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in favor of the proposed assessment Weighted value of assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in favor of the proposed assessment Assessment ballots submitted, and not withdrawn, in opposition to the proposed assessment Weighted value of assessment ballots submitted, and not with- drawn, in opposition to the proposed assessment This certification is executed this _ day of , 2018 in California. By: Title: A-1 66 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 RESOLUTION NO. 18- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF POWAY, CALIFORNIA APPROVING THE FORMATION OF THE CITY OF POWAY LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 18-1, CONFIRMING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT, THE ASSESSMENT DIAGRAM AND ASSESSMENTS RELATED THERETO, OVERRULING ALL PROTESTS CONCERNING THE ASSESSMENTS, AND APPROVING THE LEVY AND COLLECTION OF ASSESSMENTS COMMENCING IN FISCAL YEAR 2018/2019 WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of the Landscaping and Lighting Act of 1972, Part 2 of Division 15 of the California Streets and Highways Code (the "1972 Act"), and in compliance with the substantive and procedural requirements of Article XIII D, section 4 of the California State Constitution (the "California Constitution") and the Proposition 218 Omnibus Implementation Act (the "Omnibus Act"), being Government Code section 53750 et seq., (collectively, the "Assessment Law"), the City of Poway (the City) City Council by Resolution No. 18-005 initiated proceedings and ordered the preparation of an Engineer's Report in connection with the proposed formation of the City of Poway Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1 (the "District"), to fund in whole or in part, the special benefit costs and expenses for the ongoing maintenance, operation and servicing of the landscaping improvements and appurtenant facilities related thereto; and WHEREAS, after fully considering the Engineer's Report presented, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 18-007 preliminarily approving said Engineer's Report, declared its intention to form the District, to conduct a property owner ballot protest proceeding regarding the proposed assessments in compliance with the substantive and procedural requirements of the Assessment Law, and set the Public Hearing to be noticed pursuant to applicable law for May 1, 2018 at 7 p.m.; and WHEREAS, notices and ballots were mailed to the affected property owners of record within the proposed District regarding the formation of the District and the proposed new assessments as described in the Engineer's Report pursuant to the provisions of the Assessment Law for return receipt prior to the close of the public hearing on May 1, 2018; and WHEREAS, on May 1, 2018, the City Council held the duly noticed Public Hearing not less than 45 days after the mailing of the notices and ballots, to consider all oral statements, objections, and communications made or filed by any interested person regarding the formation of the District and the proposed new assessments; and to receive and accept all protest ballots from the affected property owners of record within the proposed District; and WHEREAS, at the conclusion of the Public Hearing, a tabulation and canvass of the property owner protest ballots was conducted by the City Clerk or her designee, with all valid protest ballots returned by the affected property owners being counted; and WHEREAS, by Resolution No. 18-_ the City Council confirmed the results of the ballot tabulation and property owner protest proceeding conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Assessment Law, the results of which indicated that a majority protest did not exist for the assessments as presented and to be levied on properties within the District-commencing -67- 67 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 Fiscal Year 2018/2019. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Poway as follows: Section 1: That the foregoing recitals are true and correct. Section 2: Following notice duly given, the City Council has held a full and fair public hearing regarding the formation of the Landscape Maintenance District No. 18-1, the levy and collection of assessments, and has considered all public testimony and written statements, protests and communications made or filed by interested persons, and ballots submitted and not withdrawn by affected property owners. Section 3: In accordance with the provisions of the Assessment Law, the City Council has evaluated the results of the property owner ballot protest proceedings and has determined that a Majority Protest of the proposed new assessments did not exist, and hereby overrules all oral or written protests that may have been presented concerning the annual assessments for the District. Section 4: Based upon its review of the facts presented and the Final Engineer's Report that has been prepared and filed with the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds and determines that: Section 4a: The land within the District will receive special benefits from the operation, maintenance and servicing of the improvements to be provided by the District as described in the Engineer's Report; and, Section 4b: The proportionate special benefits derived by each assessable parcel from the maintenance and servicing of the improvements has been determined in relationship to the entirety of the cost of such maintenance and service expenses; the assessments do not exceed the reasonable cost of the proportional special benefits conferred on each parcel; only special benefits have been assessed, and the general benefits have been separated from the special benefits; and all publicly owned parcels within the District that derive special benefits from the maintenance and servicing of the improvements have been assessed for such special benefits; Section 4c: The District as defined by the Assessment Diagram contained in the Engineer's Report, includes all lands receiving such special benefits; and, Section 4d: Pursuant to the Assessment Law, the net amount to be assessed upon the lands within the District has been apportioned by a formula and method which fairly distributes the net amount among all eligible parcels in proportion to the special benefits to be received by each parcel from the improvements and services to be provided. Section 5: The adoption of this Resolution constitutes the formation of the District, the boundaries of the District and the Zones therein as contained in the Assessment Diagram presented in the Engineer's Report; the establishment of the maximum assessment rates and assessment range formula connected therewith as described in the Engineer's Report and adopted by the City Council. Subsequent annual assessments, in amounts not to exceed an established maximum annual assessment may be confirmed and levied without further -68- 68 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 assessment ballot proceedings pursuant to the Assessment Law. Each Fiscal Year, beginning Fiscal Year 2019/2020, the maximum amount of each assessment (the "Maximum Assessment") may be increased by the lesser of 3% or the percentage increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI) in the San Diego Area for All Items for All Urban Consumer. Section 6: The City Council hereby orders the District improvements to be made as outlined by the Engineer's Report and by these proceedings. The diagram and assessments shall be filed in the Office of the City Clerk. Said diagram and assessments, and the certified copy thereof, shall be open for public inspection. Section 7: Pursuant to applicable law, City staff or their designee is hereby authorized and directed to file as may be required the annual levy of assessments for the District commencing in Fiscal Year 2018/2019 as approved herein with the San Diego County Auditor/Controller along with a certified copy of this Resolution; and/or other Resolutions and documents as may be required by the County Auditor/Controller or County Assessor, including copies of the Engineer's Report or Assessment Diagram confirmed by this Resolution. Section 8: The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Resolution, and the minutes of this meeting shall so reflect the City Council's approval and confirmation of the formation of the District; the Engineer's Report and Assessment Diagram prepared in connection with the District formation; and the establishment of the maximum assessment rates, assessment range formula, and the related assessments so authorized commencing in Fiscal Year 2018/2019 as outlined in the Engineer's Report. PASSED, ADOPTED AND APPROVED by the City Council of the City of Poway, California, at a regular meeting this 1st day of May 2018. Steve Vaus, Mayor ATTEST: Nancy Neufeld, CMC, City Clerk -69- 69 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) SS COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) I, Nancy Neufeld, City Clerk of the City of Poway, California, do hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoing Resolution No. 18- was duly adopted by the City Council at a meeting of said City Council held on the 1st day of May 2018, and that it was so adopted by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: DISQUALIFIED: Nancy Neufeld, CMC, City Clerk City of Poway -70- 70 of 70 May 1, 2018, Item # 3.1